GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE TRANS MOUNTAIN PIPELINE ULC TRANS MOUNTAIN EXPANSION PROJECT NEB CONDITION 72

March 2018 REV 3 01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 R3

Prepared for:

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC

Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. Suite 2700, 300 – 5th Avenue S.W. Calgary, Alberta T2P 5J2 Ph: 403-514-6400

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Links to other Trans Mountain Environmental Plans ...... 1 1.2 Regulatory Guidance ...... 2 1.3 Definitions ...... 2 2.0 CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT ...... 3 3.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE ...... 4 3.1 Aquifers ...... 4 3.2 Preliminary Assessment of Potential Groundwater Concerns ...... 4 3.3 Water Wells and Springs ...... 6 3.3.1 Water Well Monitoring and Testing ...... 6 3.4 Springs ...... 8 4.0 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION STRATEGIES ...... 9 4.1 Vulnerable Aquifers ...... 12 4.1.1 Concerns ...... 13 5.0 SUMMARY ...... 14 6.0 REFERENCES ...... 15 6.1 Literature Cited ...... 15 6.2 GIS Data and Mapping References ...... 15

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Legislation ...... A-1 Appendix B Aquifers ...... B-1 Appendix C Potential Groundwater Related Issues ...... C-1 Appendix D Consultation and Engagement ...... D-1 Appendix E Record of Stakeholder Notifications of Plan ...... E-1 Appendix F Aboriginal Groups to be Engaged on the Groundwater Management Plan ...... F-1

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.2-1 Potential Groundwater-Related Issues ...... 5 Table 3.2-2 Potential Groundwater Issues Related to Specific Construction Activities ...... 6 Table 4.0-1 Proposed Mitigation of Groundwater-Related Issues ...... 9 Table B-1 Classification Component ...... B-2 Table B-2 Ranking Component ...... B-3 Table D-1 Summary of Appropriate Government Authority Consultation Activities Related to the Groundwater Management Plan (July 2015 to February 2017) ...... D-4 Table D-2 Summary of Aboriginal Concerns Regarding the Groundwater Management Plan ..... D-13 Table E-1 Record of Notification ...... E-2

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page i

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.0 INTRODUCTION The Groundwater Management Plan (GMP or the Plan) was prepared to address the requirements of NEB Condition 72. The Plan was submitted to Appropriate Government Authorities, potentially affected Aboriginal groups, species experts and public stakeholders on September 16, 2016 for a review and feedback period which concluded on December 16, 2016. Trans Mountain incorporated any feedback into the final Plan or has provided rationale for why input has not been included, as summarized in Appendix D.

Since the September 14, 2016 release of the draft Plan, engineering design has continued to progress and there have been changes that are described in detail in Trans Mountain Expansion Project (the Project or TMEP) Fall 2016 Project Updates (www.transmountain.com/environmental-protection-plans). All of the changes have been reviewed, and the relevant Project design updates have been incorporated into this Plan.

This GMP has been prepared as part of the Environmental Protection Plan (EPP) required for the Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC (Trans Mountain) Project. This Plan has been developed to outline the environmental procedures for identifying potential groundwater related effects of the Project, the criteria for implementing those procedures, planned mitigation measures, and monitoring of groundwater quantity and/or quality; with particular emphasis on protecting identified vulnerable aquifers encountered by the pipeline corridor.

This GMP is primarily focused on mitigation strategies for the construction phase of the Project, but also outlines key aspects considered and data collected during the pre-construction phase of the project, as follows:

• pre-construction: preliminary feasibility level identification of areas of potential risk along the pipeline corridor and the collection of desktop and field baseline data; and

• construction: develop mitigation strategies, define the criteria to be used during construction to implement mitigation strategies to protect groundwater resources.

This GMP has been prepared based on the detailed assessment of available information on groundwater conditions along the pipeline corridor described in the Groundwater Technical Report for the Project (Waterline 2013) (Groundwater Technical Report) that was submitted as part of the Facilities Application (Application), and updated with new publicly available data and project specific data collected since 2013.

Trans Mountain has prepared a Contamination Identification and Assessment Plan to address the requirements of NEB Condition 46. The Contamination Identification and Assessment Plan provides the locations of known or suspected pre-existing contamination within the Project footprint and potential mitigation measures for preventing mobilization of pre-existing contamination during construction. The Contamination Identification and Assessment Plan should be referred to for all issues with respect to pre-existing contamination.

1.1 Links to other Trans Mountain Environmental Plans The Groundwater Management Plan is not meant to replace or contradict mitigation measures presented elsewhere in the Environmental Plans, but rather to be used in association with the following plans:

• Project EPPs (Volumes 1-5, 9, and 10 of the Environmental Plans respectively);

− Temporary Construction Lands and Infrastructure EPP;

− Pipeline EPP (Volume 2 of the Environmental Plans);

− Facilities EPP;

− Reactivation EPP;

− Facilities EPP;

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Water Crossing Construction Monitoring Management Plan (Volume 6 of the Environmental Plans);

• Wetland Survey and Mitigation Plan (Volume 6 of the Environmental Plans) (NEB Condition 41);

• Watercourse Crossing Inventory (NEB Condition 43);

• Environmental Alignment Sheets (Volume 8 of the Environmental Plans);

• Contamination Identification and Assessment Plan (NEB Condition 46); and

• Access Management Plan (Volume 6 of the Environmental Plans) (NEB Condition 47).

1.2 Regulatory Guidance A listing of applicable federal and provincial acts, regulations and guidelines is provided in the Groundwater Technical Report (Waterline 2013), an updated version has been included in Appendix A of this report. Since 2013 there have been considerable changes to the legislation governing groundwater in BC. BC’s new Water Sustainability Act received Royal Assent on May 29, 2014, and came into force on February 29, 2016.

1.3 Definitions Groundwater Quality: Groundwater quality depends on the source of the water and the material through which it flows (e.g., clay tills containing sulphate versus clean sand and gravel), as well as whether the groundwater encounters contamination along its flow path. Both natural and human influences can affect groundwater quality. Surface water that recharges into the ground can affect groundwater quality; and conversely, groundwater may affect surface water quality.

Groundwater Quantity: Groundwater quantity is controlled by the source of groundwater recharge, and the rate of groundwater flow. Groundwater flow in turn, is governed by gravity and the physical characteristics of the materials through which it flows. Changes to groundwater quantity caused by changes in recharge include increasing recharge (heavy rainfall, decreased groundwater use), decreasing recharge (drought, increased groundwater use), changing the timing of recharge (storing water in reservoirs), or location of recharge (drainage ditches). Changes in the physical characteristics of the aquifer that can affect groundwater flow include aquifer siltation and changes in bedrock fracture size or connectivity. Groundwater flow patterns can be affected as a result of natural (e.g., drought, surface water flooding) or human influences (e.g., dewatering, construction of reservoirs, blasting).

Hydrogeological Professional: A professional engineer or geoscientist registered in the province of Alberta or British Columbia, depending on the location of interest along the pipeline corridor, whose area of practice is primarily hydrogeology.

Hydrogeological Resource Specialist: May be, but is not required to be, a Hydrogeological Professional. Hydrogeological Resource Specialists may include a hydrogeological professional in training or a hydrogeological technician working under the direct supervision of a Hydrogeological Professional.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

2.0 CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT Consultation and engagement activities related to the GMP were conducted from September 2016 to February 2017 with Appropriate Government Authorities and potentially affected Aboriginal groups. Opportunities to discuss the GMP and identify issues or concerns were provided to public stakeholders through the Trans Mountain website, workshops, meetings and ongoing engagement activities during the reporting period. Appendix D includes a comprehensive record of these engagement activities, stakeholder feedback and Trans Mountain responses.

The draft Plan was released on September 16, 2016 for review and feedback. Feedback was requested by December 16, 2017, although additional Appropriate Government Authority feedback was considered up until February 2017. Trans Mountain incorporated any feedback into the final Plan or has provided rationale for why input has not been included, as summarized in Appendix D.

Engineering design changes were issued in the TMEP Fall 2016 Project Update document (www.transmountain.com/environmental-protection-plans ) along with a request for feedback. All of the design updates have been reviewed, and the Project design updates that are relevant have been incorporated into this Plan.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

3.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE As part of the Groundwater Technical Report (Waterline 2013) feasibility level groundwater risk mapping was undertaken along the entire pipeline corridor. To date three phases of groundwater risk mapping have been or are being undertaken:

• The first phase of the mapping project involved a comprehensive literature, map and data review. Aquifers along the pipeline corridor were identified and a preliminary feasibility level assessment of locations where there is an increased risk of encountering groundwater or effecting the groundwater system (quantity and/or quality) along the pipeline corridor were mapped.

• The second phase, undertaken in 2012, was a field program to ground-truth select locations along the pipeline corridor to verify and assess the effectiveness of the desktop mapping exercise.

• The third phase, undertaken in 2015, 2016 and 2017, was a field verified survey to confirm the location of and collect information about water wells within 150 m of the pipeline centreline.

Following the field verified survey, wells will be selected for baseline testing. Testing on select wells and springs will collect information on the pre-construction water quality and/or productivity of the wells/springs.

All collected groundwater-related data was and will be consolidated into a geographic information system (GIS) based geo-database that will identify the locations of all known aquifers, water wells and community water supplies relying on groundwater along the pipeline corridor. In addition, a preliminary feasibility level assessment of locations where there is an increased risk of encountering groundwater or effecting the groundwater system along the pipeline corridor have been mapped and have been incorporated into the geo-database, allowing Trans Mountain and Hydrogeological Professionals to anticipate and quickly develop mitigation strategies for potential groundwater-related concerns during project construction.

3.1 Aquifers Groundwater aquifers located along the pipeline corridor were identified and an assessment of the vulnerability of each aquifer was made. A table showing the following information is presented in Appendix B:

• the reference kilometre posts (KPs) at which the pipeline corridor is overlying each aquifer;

• the aquifer type (unconsolidated, buried channel and bedrock aquifer);

• the inferred aquifer material if available;

• he aquifer name or designation if applicable; and

• the assessed vulnerability of the aquifer.

Also included in Appendix B, is the explanation of how aquifer vulnerability was determined.

3.2 Preliminary Assessment of Potential Groundwater Concerns A feasibility level assessment was undertaken to map areas along the pipeline corridor where there is a greater potential to encounter groundwater related concerns during construction. Details of the sources reviewed and mapping procedures are provided in the Groundwater Technical Report (Waterline 2013) submitted as part of the Application.

Table 3.2-1 provides a list of the groundwater issues mapped as well as a brief description of the nature of the concern. The locations along the p pipeline corridor where each of these issues is anticipated based on the feasibility level mapping are incorporated into the groundwater geo-database. The locations of potential groundwater concerns 1 through 4 are provided in Appendix C. The locations of potential shallow aquifer concerns (5) are provided in Appendix B.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE 3.2-1

POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER-RELATED ISSUES

Concern Number Potential Type of Groundwater Concern Description of Issues 1 Proximity to watercourse alluvial/fluvial Increased potential for: materials in channel • requiring dewatering during trench excavation • there to be a direct hydraulic connection between the saturated, coarse grained alluvial deposits and the river, providing a potential pathway for a spill to enter the surface water body. 2 Shallow groundwater Increased potential for: • requiring dewatering during excavation • changing the groundwater flow pattern: – by intersecting the water table or comprising the integrity of a shallow confining unit, or • by redirecting groundwater through higher permeability backfill material in the pipeline trench, potentially discharging as a new spring at lower elevations. 3 Water wells(s) Increased potential for: • susceptibility to changes in groundwater flow patterns caused by pipeline construction (groundwater mounding or the backfilled trench acting as a drain) • vulnerability to possible future contamination of accident from a malfunction • susceptibility to blasting effects (see Table 2.2-2) • shallow wells (<10 m deep) are more susceptible to damage (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or quality) as a result of pipeline construction activity than deeper wells. 4 Spring Increased potential for: • encountering artesian conditions during excavation • groundwater to discharge in the open excavations by intersecting the water table or comprising the integrity of a shallow confining unit. • susceptibility to changes in groundwater flow patterns caused by pipeline construction activities that may affect natural spring flow. 5 Unconfined aquifer Increased potential for: • susceptibility to changes in groundwater flow patterns caused by pipeline construction (groundwater mounding or the backfilled trench acting as a drain) • vulnerability to possible future contamination of accident from a malfunction • susceptibility to sedimentation in the aquifer.

In addition to the mapped groundwater issues listed in Table 3.2-1, there are groundwater issues that are related to specific terrain, contamination concerns, or construction activities that were not mapped as part of this GMP; some were mapped as part of other, related, studies and where possible are shown on the alignment sheets. These groundwater issues include locations, where:

• there is known or suspected pre-existing potential contamination within the Project footprint;

• the pipeline trench will cut-across a slope;

• the potential for Acid Rock Drainage (ARD) generation has been identified;

• blasting will be required during pipeline construction;

• underground trenchless crossing of watercourses will occur; and

• unplanned releases are possible.

The concerns identified above are described in Table 3.2-2.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 5

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE 3.2-2

POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER ISSUES RELATED TO SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

Concern Number Potential Type of Groundwater Concern Description 6 Pre-existing potential contamination Increased potential for: • pipeline construction to cause a redistribution of existing subsurface contamination (See NEB Condition 46) 7 Pipeline corridor cut-across slope Increased potential for: • disrupting near surface drainage • may affect groundwater flow in areas of shallow groundwater 8 Acid rock drainage (ARD) Increased potential for: • high concentrations of dissolved metals in surface runoff • may affect groundwater quality in areas of shallow and/ or vulnerable aquifers 9 Blasting Increased potential for: • damage to shallow water wells • changes in groundwater flow patterns, altering well or spring performance • short term siltation of aquifer 10 Underground trenchless crossing Increased potential for: • encountering artesian conditions during drilling • a loss of circulation that could result in drilling fluids entering the creek bed or discharging to surface along the valley slope 11 Unplanned releases Increased potential for: • shallow aquifer contamination • affecting water quality in shallow wells

3.3 Water Wells and Springs Trans Mountain is committed to protecting groundwater supplies and water wells along the pipeline corridor. Trans Mountain will adhere to applicable federal, provincial and municipal regulations pertaining to groundwater supplies, including the BC Drinking Water Protection Act, Section 23 that prohibits the contamination of drinking water. Trans Mountain’s commitments to protecting water wells and springs include:

• conducting a field verified survey of water wells and springs;

• testing select water wells and springs prior to pipeline construction;

• consulting with municipalities, communities and Aboriginal groups regarding the protection of their water sources; and

• addressing any groundwater related complaints and concerns from stakeholders.

Details on these commitments are given in the following sections. The inventory of field verified water wells and springs, collected from November 30, 2015 to January 26, 2016 and February 24 to 26, 2017, located within 150 m of the pipeline centerline are provided in Volume 7 of the Pipeline EPP (Table 7.3-1 and 7.3-2). This inventory is not an exhaustive water well/spring list. The wells and springs listed belong to well owners who granted permission to make their information publicly available. The full water well and spring inventory collected during the field-verified survey is stored in the Kinder Morgan Canada GIS database.

3.3.1 Water Well Monitoring and Testing • Monitoring and testing of water wells will be carried out on selected wells. Assuming the well owner provides consent, Trans Mountain will carry out the following activities.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 6

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Monitor potable water wells located in close proximity of any blasting prior to and following blasting. The Hydrogeological Resource Specialist, in consultation with the Construction Manager will determine, which water wells will be monitored. This determination will made in consideration of site-specific blasting plans. Monitoring will include measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels as well as water sampling.

• Where a trenchless crossing (i.e. horizontal directional drill or Direct Pipe) is undertaken within an aquifer and the possibility of encountering artesian conditions has been established by the Hydrogeological Professional, monitoring before, during and after the trenchless crossing installation will be evaluated for water supply wells located within 150 m of the pipeline centerline by the Hydrogeological Resource Specialist. Monitoring will include measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels as well as water quality sampling.

In addition, Trans Mountain has made the following commitments to water well monitoring and testing:

• testing the water quality in existing water wells on the Peters Band First Nation lands in areas of the reserve where the potential for soil contamination has been identified; and

• testing the water quality in water wells in Langley, BC identified as less than 10 m deep, within 150 m of the pipeline centerline.

The well yield testing will consist of:

• the selection of an appropriate flow rate for the well test;

• monitoring of water levels using a level logger data collection system capable of collecting and storing data during 2-hour pumping and 2-hour recovery test to determine well performance; and

• the collection of a water sample for water quality testing could include the following parameters, where applicable:

− physical parameters (pH, EC, TDS, etc.);

− major anions (i.e., bicarbonate, carbonate, chloride, sulfate, fluoride);

− major cations (i.e., calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium);

− microbiology (total coliforms, E.coli, Heterotrophic bacteria, etc.);

− nutrients (i.e. nitrate, nitrite, etc.);

− dissolved and total metals (including mercury and arsenic); and

− hydrocarbon compounds, (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX) and PHC Fractions F1 and F2 in Alberta; or BTEX, volatile petroleum hydrocarbons (VPH) and extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPHwc10-19) in British Columbia).

For each well test, a brief factual, tabular report will be prepared by a Hydrogeological Professional including:

• a description of the test;

• water withdrawal rates used and water level data collected during the test (if applicable); and

• the water quality analytical results from the water sample(s) taken (if applicable), along with a comparison of the results to the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Health Canada 2014).

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 7

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

As per commitment #2344 Trans Mountain commits to sharing any water quality data from an owner’s well with that owner and any relevant regulatory official, such as the NEB or provincial agencies, if requested.

3.4 Springs

Monitoring and testing of springs will be carried out on selected springs. Assuming the spring owner provides consent, Trans Mountain will carry out the following activities.

• Monitor registered or known springs located within 200 m of any blasting prior to and following blasting. The Hydrogeological Resource Specialist, in consultation with the Construction Manager will determine, which springs will be monitored. This determination will made in consideration of site-specific blasting plans. Monitoring will include estimation of spring flow rate, were possible, as well as water sampling.

• Where a trenchless crossing (i.e. horizontal directional drill or Direct Pipe) is undertaken within an aquifer and the possibility of encountering artesian conditions has been established by the Hydrogeological Professional, monitoring before, during and after the trenchless crossing installation will be evaluated for water supply springs located within 150 m of the pipeline centerline by the Hydrogeological Resource Specialist. Monitoring will include estimation of spring flow rate as well as water quality sampling.

• The spring testing will consist of:

• measurement, if possible, otherwise an estimate of the spring flow rate; and

• the collection of a water sample for water quality testing could include the following parameters, where applicable:

− physical parameters (pH, EC, TDS, etc.),

− major anions (i.e., bicarbonate, carbonate, chloride, sulfate, fluoride),

− major cations (i.e., calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium),

− microbiology (total coliforms, E.coli, Heterotrophic bacteria, etc.),

− nutrients (i.e. nitrate, nitrite, etc.),

− dissolved and total metals (including mercury and arsenic), and

− hydrocarbon compounds, (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX) and PHC Fractions F1 and F2 in Alberta; or BTEX, volatile petroleum hydrocarbons (VPH) and extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPHwc10-19) in British Columbia).

For each spring test, a brief factual, tabular report will be prepared by a Hydrogeological Professional including:

• flow rate measurement or estimate; and

• the water quality analytical results from the water sample(s) taken (if applicable), along with a comparison of the results to the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Health Canada 2017).

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 8

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

4.0 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION STRATEGIES Table 4.0-1 presents the proposed mitigation strategy for each groundwater related concern presented in Table 3.2-1 and 3.2-2. A description of the potential location where each groundwater concern could arise is provided, cross-referencing the geo-database data presented in Appendix B and C. Applicable measures from several industry, provincial and federal guidelines have been incorporated into the mitigation strategies presented in Table 4.0-1.

TABLE 4.0-1

PROPOSED MITIGATION OF GROUNDWATER-RELATED ISSUES

Potential Type of Potential Location Concern Groundwater Where Concern Could Number Concern Arise Proposed Mitigation 1 Proximity to Watercourse channels • Dewater the trench, if warranted and practical, when laying pipe in areas with high watercourse with alluvial/fluvial fill water table: alluvial/fluvial materials material, (presented in – Place pumps on a containment tray or within an excavated sump lined with in channel Appendix C.) polyethylene sheeting above the ordinary high water level of the water body. Pump water onto stable and well vegetated areas, tarpaulins or sheeting at least 50 m from the nearest waterbody in a manner that does not cause erosion or any unfiltered or silted water to re-enter a waterbody. – Use floating suction hose and elevated intake, or other measures approved by the Environmental Inspector(s), to prevent sediment from being sucked from the bottom of the trench. – Pre-determine water discharge locations prior to dewatering. – Additional information and procedures for water discharges from trench dewatering are set out in The Water Withdrawal and Discharge Procedure Management Plan 2 Shallow groundwater Locations where • Assess the need for well points or other dewatering methods, prior to commencing groundwater is observed trench excavation, to intercept groundwater at site-specific locations before it enters seeping in to excavated the trench. trench. These conditions • Monitor water encountered in the trench during trench excavation, if springs and are anticipated in areas groundwater are encountered, the Environmental Inspector(s) will review and mapped as shallow determine the appropriate mitigation (e.g., installation of subdrains, trench breakers, aquifers as presented in etc.) Where warranted, the Environmental Inspector will seek the advice of the Appendix C. Hydrogeological or Geotechnical Resource Specialist. • Prevent the pipeline trench and bedding from becoming a conduit for increased groundwater flow by installing subdrains and trench breakers. Install trench breakers, where warranted, at the edge of perched wetlands to prevent the pipeline trench from acting as a drain. • Install subdrains in association with trench breakers where there is evidence of seepage or a flowing spring on a slope once the trench is excavated. • Backfill trench to maintain cross drainage: – Backfill clay/mineral soil first, if salvaged separately from organic material in shallow peatland areas, to ensure that cross drainage is maintained. – Ensure that the lower lift of subsoil is backfilled before the upper lift of subsoil where three lift soils handling has been conducted. – Additional information of trench backfill procedures are presented in Reclamation Management Plan the and Soil Handling Contingency Plan. • Dewater the trench, if warranted or practical, when laying pipe in areas with high water tables: – Place pumps on a containment tray or within an excavated sump lined with polyethylene sheeting above the ordinary high water level of the water body (if a waterbody is present). Pump water onto stable and well vegetated areas, tarpaulins or sheeting at least 50 m from the nearest waterbody in a manner that does not cause erosion or any unfiltered or silted water to re-enter a waterbody. – Use floating suction hose and elevated intake, or other measures approved by the Environmental Inspector(s), to prevent sediment from being sucked from the bottom of the trench. – Pre-determine water discharge locations prior to dewatering. – Additional information and procedures for water discharges from trench dewatering are set out in The Water Withdrawal and Discharge Procedure Management Plan.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 9

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE 4.0-1 Cont’d

Potential Type of Potential Location Concern Groundwater Where Concern Could Number Concern Arise Proposed Mitigation 3 Water well(s) Locations where wells • Water wells identified in the field verified survey which are located within the are located within 150 m construction foot print will be flagged, and fenced prior to pipeline construction, to of the pipeline centerline. avoid well damage during construction. The wells with publicly • Provide an alternative potable water supply should monitoring indicate that a water available location data well has been damaged (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or quality) as a result of are listed in Volume 7 of pipeline construction activity. the Pipeline EPP, Table 7.3-1 and 7.3-2. • Proposed mitigation related to blasting are set out below. 4 Spring Locations where springs • Springs, used as water supplies, identified during the field verified survey which are are located within 150 m located within the construction footprint will be flagged, and fenced prior to pipeline of the pipeline centerline. construction, to avoid damage during construction. The springs with publicly • Assess the need for well points or other dewatering methods, prior to commencing available location data trench excavation, to intercept groundwater at site-specific locations before it enters are listed in Appendix C. the trench. – Where recommended by a Hydrogeological or Geotechnical Resource Specialist, consider measures to depressurize an aquifer in the vicinity of the construction area or subsurface crossing area prior to excavation or an underground trenchless crossing construction, through, for example, drilling wells and then extracting water in order to locally reduce, the pressure in the aquifer. – Pre-determine water discharge locations prior to dewatering. – Pump water onto stable and well vegetated areas, tarpaulins or sheeting at least 50 m from the nearest waterbody in a manner that does not cause erosion or any unfiltered or silted water to re-enter a waterbody. – Additional information and procedures for water discharges from aquifer depressurization are set out in The Water Withdrawal and Discharge Procedure Management Plan. • Monitor water encountered in the trench during trench excavation, if springs and groundwater are encountered, the Environmental Inspector(s) will review and approve the appropriate mitigation (e.g., installation of subdrains, trench breakers, etc.) Where warranted, the Environmental Inspector will seek the advice of the Hydrogeological or Geotechnical Resource Specialist. • Re-create the confining layers if disturbed during construction (e.g., place seal/cement in annular space around pipeline). • Provide an alternative potable water supply should monitoring indicate that a spring water supply has been damaged (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or quality) as a result of pipeline construction activity. Additional information for spring sampling is set out in the Groundwater Management Plan Section 3.4 5 Unconfined aquifer Locations where the • a Hydrogeological Resource Specialist will assess the permeability of aquifer pipeline corridor overlies materials to determine the potential for sediment migration during trench excavation or cuts into an over unconfined aquifers. Where poorly graded and coarse material is observed, unconfined aquifer. The filter fabric will be installed at the base of the trench to prevent migration of fine locations of all named sediment into the aquifer, where feasible. and numbered • Assess permeability of trench materials in aquifer areas to determine the potential vulnerable unconfined for sediment migration during trenching. Where coarse materials are observed and aquifers in BC, as well sediment migration anticipated, use pumps and/or install filter fabric in the trench to as, the inferred locations of unconfined aquifers in avoid or reduce sediment migration, where feasible. Alberta have been • Provide an alternative potable water supply should monitoring indicate that a spring mapped and are or well water supply has been damaged (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or presented in Appendix B. quality) as a result of pipeline construction activity. 6 Pre-existing potential Areas of potential pre- • Mitigation measures and procedures are set out in the Contamination Identification Not contamination existing contamination and Assessment Plan (NEB Condition 46) Mapped within the Project footprint are identified and assessed in NEB Condition 46.

Please note: Pre-existing potential contamination is not restricted to the locations identified in NEB Condition 46

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 10

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE 4.0-1 Cont’d

Potential Type of Potential Location Concern Groundwater Where Concern Could Number Concern Arise Proposed Mitigation 7 Pipeline corridor cuts Locations where the • Assess the need for well points or other dewatering methods, prior to commencing Not across slope pipeline trench will be trench excavation, to intercept groundwater at site-specific locations before it enters Mapped excavated perpendicular the trench. or near -perpendicular to – Where recommended by a Hydrogeological or Geotechnical Resource a slope. Specialist, consider measures to depressurize an aquifer in the vicinity of the construction area or subsurface crossing area prior to excavation or an underground trenchless crossing construction, through the use of dewatering techniques. – Pre-determine water discharge locations prior to dewatering. – Pump water onto stable and well vegetated areas, tarpaulins or sheeting at least 50 m from the nearest waterbody in a manner that does not cause erosion or any unfiltered or silted water to re-enter a waterbody. – Additional information and procedures for water discharges from aquifer depressurization are set out in The Water Withdrawal and Discharge Procedure Management Plan. • Monitor water encountered in the trench during excavation, if springs and groundwater are encountered, the Environmental Inspector(s) will review and approve the appropriate mitigation (e.g., installation of subdrains, trench breakers, etc.) Where warranted, the Environmental Inspector will seek the advice of the Hydrogeological or Geotechnical Resource Specialist. • Backfill trench to maintain cross drainage: – Backfill clay/mineral soil first, if salvaged separately from organic material in shallow peatland areas, to ensure that cross drainage is maintained. – Ensure that the lower lift of subsoil is backfilled before the upper lift of subsoil where three lift soils handling has been conducted. – Additional information of trench backfill procedures are presented in the Pipeline Reclamation Management Plan and Soil Handling Contingency Plan. 8 Metal Leaching (ML) In areas where • Refer to the ML/ARD Construction Management Plan Not and Acid Rock potentially acid Mapped Drainage (ARD) generating geological materials have been identified. 9 Blasting Areas where blasting will • The Hydrogeological Resource Specialist, in consultation with the Construction Not be used during pipeline Manager will determine if wells located within the vicinity of the construction Mapped constriction. footprint will be monitored. • This determination will made in consideration of site-specific blasting plans whereby controlled blasting undertaken adjacent to foreign lines and utilities, etc. is anticipated to have a reduced range of effect than blasting undertaken in less congested areas. • Monitoring may be necessary prior to, during and following construction at select wells. • Monitoring will include measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels as well as water sampling in accordance with Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (Health Canada 2014). 10 Underground Watercourses crossing • Design the crossing and pipeline installation to prevent damage caused by artesian Not Trenchless Crossing where trenchless flow. crossings will be used Mapped • Where a trenchless crossing (i.e. horizontal directional drill or Direct Pipe) is during pipeline undertaken within an aquifer and the possibility of encountering artesian conditions construction. has been established by the Hydrogeological Professional, monitoring before, during and after the trenchless crossing installation may be evaluated for water supply wells located within 150 m of the pipeline centerline by the Hydrogeological Resource Specialist. Monitoring will include measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels as well as water quality sampling. • Plan for and use the procedures for an underground trenchless crossing in accordance with those provided in the Horizontal Directional Drilling/Trenchless Planning and Procedures Management Plan • Ensure that drilling mud composition is limited to bentonite mud drilling systems, fresh water and, if warranted, other inert additives as approved by the Environmental Inspector. No toxic additives will be allowed. Provide MSDS to the Environmental Inspector upon request. • Cease trenchless crossing work immediately and refer to the Bentonite Fluid

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 11

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE 4.0-1 Cont’d

Potential Type of Potential Location Concern Groundwater Where Concern Could Number Concern Arise Proposed Mitigation 10 Not See above See above Release Contingency Plan in the event that an inadvertent release of drilling mud Mapped has occurred and the material is entering or may enter the waterbody or affect other (Cont’d) sensitive environmental or land use features. • Ensure that surficial materials are hydraulically isolated before drilling to deeper depths. • Use current drilling technology to ensure mud or casing seal is effective. • The Hydrogeological Resource Specialist in consultation with the Environmental Inspector will determine if it is necessary to depressurize the aquifer in the vicinity of the underground trenchless crossing area during the subsurface crossing and casing installation operations. For example, drilling wells and then extracting water in order to reduce locally, the pressure in the aquifer. – Pump water onto stable and well vegetated areas, tarpaulins or sheeting at least 50 m from the nearest waterbody in a manner that does not cause erosion or any unfiltered or silted water to re-enter a waterbody. – Additional information and procedures for water discharges from aquifer depressurization are set out in The Water Withdrawal and Discharge Procedure Management Plan. • Seal/cement annular space around pipeline • Re-create the confining layers if disturbed during construction (e.g., place seal/cement in annular space around pipeline). • Depressurization wells and/or exploratory boreholes must be decommissioned according to the relevant provincial legislation upon completion of the underground trenchless crossing. 11 Unplanned Releases All areas within • Utilize acceptable Management Practices for spill prevention outlined in the Not construction footprint. Pipeline EPP Mapped Areas of particular • Handle, store and monitor the use and equipment use of fuel, lubricating fluids, concern would be work hydraulic fluids, methanol, antifreeze, herbicides, biocides, or other chemicals in a areas around water manner that will avoid spills on the ground or into waterbodies. bodies, shallow or • Follow the notification and reporting guidance of the Spill Contingency Plan, vulnerable and unconfined aquifers.

4.1 Vulnerable Aquifers To protect vulnerable aquifers during construction all mitigation measures set out in Table 4.0-1 will be followed. In addition, a Hydrogeological Resource Specialist will be notified by the Environmental Inspector when to be on site during trench excavation and select trench/trenchless crossing construction in areas where the pipeline right-of-way overlies a mapped vulnerable aquifer (Appendix B).

The Hydrogeological Resource Specialist will:

• confirm whether the pipeline trench has intercepted groundwater during construction;

• provide recommendations on maintaining groundwater flow patterns through the use of trench breakers, subdrains etc.;

• assess permeability of aquifer materials to determine the potential for sediment migration during trench excavation and assess the need for site-specific mitigation and provide recommendations to the Environmental Inspector and Construction Manager;

• consult directly with the Environmental Inspector, Construction Manager and supervising Hydrogeological Professional if unexpected conditions are encountered during construction; and

• collect baseline water quality and quantity data that will be used to support a post- construction monitoring program, where applicable.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 12

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

Pertinent groundwater data collected during construction activities will be incorporated into the geo-database, and used to develop a post-construction monitoring plan, where applicable.

4.1.1 Concerns Relevant groundwater related complaints or concerns received by Trans Mountain will be reviewed by a Hydrogeological Professional. A response will be drafted by the Hydrogeological Professional and reviewed by Trans Mountain to both address the concern and outline the steps Trans Mountain will take to investigate and or mitigate the concern; or explain why no further action is required. All letters of groundwater related complaints and response letters will be kept on file by Trans Mountain.

Trans Mountain has committed to re-establish or replace a potable water supply as required should a water well be damaged (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or quality) by the Project during pipeline installation. The replacement or re-establishment of a water well will be done under the supervision of a Hydrogeological Professional. Trans Mountain uses a consistent approach in addressing all groundwater-related concerns, including those located on/beneath Aboriginal reserves.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 13

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

5.0 SUMMARY

In summary, the Groundwater Management Plan, which focusses primarily on mitigation strategies for the construction phase of the project, was developed to:

• outline environmental procedures for identifying potential groundwater-related effects of the Project;

• establish criteria for implementing those procedures, planned mitigation measures; and

• monitor groundwater quantity and/or quality.

Eleven types of groundwater concern have been identified. Concerns 1 through 5 were mapped and their locations are provided in Appendices B and C. The remaining concerns, 6 through 11, were not mapped. Mitigation strategies are presented for each groundwater-related concern in Table 4.0-1.

In the case of vulnerable aquifers, all aforementioned mitigations should be followed. In addition, recommendations should be provided for maintaining groundwater flow patterns (trench breaks, sub-drains, etc).

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 14

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

6.0 REFERENCES 6.1 Literature Cited Health Canada. 2017. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality, Summary Table. Prepared by the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Drinking Water of the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Health and the Environment.

R. Kreye, K. Ronneseth, and M. Wei. 1994. An Aquifer Classification System for Ground Water Management in British Columbia. In Proceedings, 6th National Drinking Water Conference, Victoria, B.C.

Waterline Resources Inc. 2013. Groundwater Technical Report for the Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC, Trans Mountain Expansion Project. Prepared for Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC. Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. Calgary, AB.

6.2 GIS Data and Mapping References Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resources Development (ESRD). 2013. Alberta Water Well Information Database, (On-line 2013) http://groundwater.alberta.ca/WaterWells/.

Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation - Parks Division. 2012. Protected Areas (pashape_ocsites_10tm) (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: http://albertaparks.ca/albertaparksca/library/downloadable- data-sets.aspx. Acquired: February 2013. Last Update Check: May 14, 2013.

AltaLIS. 2010. Alberta Settlements (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://www.altalis.com/prod_base_bound.html. Acquired: February 2011. Last Update Check: May 15, 2013.

AltaLIS. 2012. Alberta Provincial Parks (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://www.altalis.com/prod_base_bound.html. Acquired: August 2012. Last Update Check: May 15, 2013.

AltaLIS. 2013. Alberta Municipal Boundaries (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: http://www.altalis.com/prod_base_bound.html. Acquired: August 2012. Last Update Check: May 15, 2013.

Andriashek, L.D. and S. Lyster. 2012a. Distribution of the Haynes Aquifer, Alberta. URL=http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publications/abstracts/DIG_2012_0027.html.

Andriashek, L.D. and S. Lyster. 2012b. Distribution of the Sunchild Aquifer, Alberta. URL=http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publications/abstracts/DIG_2012_0028.html.

ARC Hydrogeology Bulletins (text and maps) in Alberta (Edmonton - Hinton and Hinton Edson Segments).

Armstrong, J E and S.R. Hicock. 1980. Surficial Geology, New Westminster, West of Sixth Meridian, British Columbia; Geological Survey of Canada, "A" Series Map 1484A, 1 sheet, doi:10.4095/108874NRCAN GEOSCAN http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi- bin/starfinder/0?path=geoscan.downloade.fl&id=fastlink&pass=&format=FLDOWNLOADE&searc h=R=108874 (accessed: April 2013).

Armstrong, J E. 1961. Surficial Geology, Chilliwack, Sumas and Kent Municipalities, New Westminster and Yale Districts, British Columbia Geological Survey of Canada, Preliminary Map 39-1960, 1 sheet, doi:10.4095/108739 NRCAN GEOSCAN http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/starweb/geoscan/servlet.starweb?path=geoscan/geoscan_e.web ftp://ftp2.cits.rncan.gc.ca/pub/geott/ess_pubs/108/108739/gscprmap_39-1960_e_1961_mn01.pdf ftp://ftp2.cits.rncan.gc.ca/pub/geott/ess_pubs/108/108739/gscprmap_39-1960_e_1961_mn01.jp2 (accessed April 2013)

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 15

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

Armstrong, J E. 1980a. Surficial Geology, Chilliwack (West Half), West of Sixth Meridian, British Columbia; Geological Survey of Canada, "A" Series Map 1487A, 1 sheet, doi:10.4095/108877 NRCAN GEOSCAN http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi- bin/starfinder/0?path=geoscan.downloade.fl&id=fastlink&pass=&format=FLDOWNLOADE&searc h=R=108877 (accessed April 2013).

Armstrong, J E. 1980b. Surficial Geology, Mission, British Columbia; Geological Survey of Canada, "A" Series Map 1485A, 1 sheet, doi:10.4095/108875 NRCAN GEOSCAN http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/cgi- bin/starfinder/0?path=geoscan.downloade.fl&id=fastlink&pass=&format=FLDOWNLOADE&searc h=R=108875 (accessed April 2013).

Barnes, R.G. 1977. Hydrogeology of the Mount Robson - Wapiti area, Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Science Report 76-05.

Berardinucci, J. and K. Ronneseth. 2002. Guide to Using the BC Aquifer Classification Maps for the Protection and Management of Groundwater. BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 54 pp.

BGC Engineering Inc. 2013. Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Expansion Project Terrain Mapping and Geohazard Inventory. Prepared for Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC. Calgary, AB.

British Columbia Ministry of Energy and Mines. 2013 MapPlace online database - http://webmap.em.gov.bc.ca/mapplace/minpot/bcgs.cfm.

British Columbia Ministry of Environment. 2013. BC Water Resources Atlas (online) - http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/data_searches/wrbc/index.html.

British Columbia Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. 2008. Freshwater Atlas Lakes (digital file). Victoria, BC. Available: Hhttps://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/dwds/home.soH. Acquired: August 2011. Last Update Check: October 10, 2013.

British Columbia Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. 2012. Digital Road Atlas (DRA) - Master Partially Attributed Road Data (digital file). Victoria, BC. Available: Hhttps://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/dwds/home.soH. Acquired: December 2012. Last Update Check: December 17, 2012.

British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. 2008a. Tantalis Conservancy Areas (digital file). Victoria, BC. Available: Hhttps://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/dwds/home.soH. Acquired: May 2013. Last Update Check: May 21, 2013.

British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. 2008b. Tantalis Parks, Ecological Reserves and Protected Areas (digital file). Victoria, BC. Available: Hhttps://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/dwds/home.soH. Acquired: August 2013. Last Update Check: August 1, 2013.

Ceroici, W.J. 1979. Hydrogeology of the southwest segment, Edmonton, Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Science Report 78-05.

J.J. Clague, R.J. Fulton, and J. M. Ryder. 1982, Quaternary of Canadian Cordillera. Geological Survey of Canada Open File 837. Vancouver NM 9/10 (map and legend). Website: http://geogratis.gc.ca/api/en/nrcan-rncan/ess-sst/d6b7270f-20a7-5deb-9034-4c37753d0fe2.html. Accessed: September 2013.

Digital Gazetteer of British Columbia, BC Geographical Names Information System (BCGNIS), URL= Downloaded: 2013-Oct-03.

ESRD, 2012b. Alberta Environment and Water, Authorization/Approval Viewer, (On-line 2013) http://envext02.env.gov.ab.ca/pls/xedp_apv/avwp_avwh1000_02.startup?Z_CHK=0.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 16

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

ESRI. 2005. US State Boundaries (digital data). Redlands, CA. Available: Hhttp://www.esri.com/data/data-mapsH, data came with ArcGIS software. Acquired: September 2006. Last update check: N/A.

ESRI Inc. 2013. World Shaded Relief map service (digital file). Redlands, CA. Available: via ArcGIS Online, visit Hhttp://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=9c5370d0b54f4de1b48a3792d7377ff2H. Acquired: June 2013. Last Accessed: October 2013.

Fulton, R.J. 1986. 82M, Surficial Geology, Seymour Arm, British Columbia, Geological Survey of Canada, "A" Series Map Issue: 1609A, http://geogratis.gc.ca/api/en/nrcan-rncan/ess-sst/b4ba1a1c-4e29- 59bc-8740-dbc50ceeb3a3.html.

Google Earth. 2013. Version 7.0.3.8542, Build date - February 26, 2013 by Microsoft Windows.

Gough N. 1987. FRBC_11 (92P): Louis Creek, Criss Creek, Bridge Lake, Chu Chua Creek, Clearwater, Deka Lake, Canim Lake, Mahood Lake Soils and Surficial Geology.

Government of Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). 2013. Alberta Groundwater Information Centre Water Well Information Database. Downloaded 2013-Jan.

Government of Alberta, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. 2011. Alberta water features.

Government of British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Lands and Parks Fisheries Branch. YYYY. British Columbia Watershed Atlas 50K.

Government of British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Water Protection and Sustainability Branch Data date = 2008-02-11 (revision) Downloaded=2013-Aug. On line Source Metadata: https://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/geometadata/metadataDetail.do?recordUID=49998&recordSet=ISO19 115.

Government of British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Water Protection and Sustainability Branch Date of Data 2013-03-01 (revision). Aquifers in British Columbia. Metadata Online url: https://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/geometadata/metadataDetail.do?recordUID=3841&recordSet=ISO191 15.

Government of Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Earth Sciences Sector, Mapping Information Branch, GeoAccess Division, published March 1, 2007 Downloaded=2013-Aug.

Holland, W.D. and Coen, G.M., 1982. Ecological (Biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper National Parks. Alberta Institute of Pedology, Publication SS-82-44, Map Supplement, 1: 50,000 scale.

Hydrogeological Consultants Ltd. 1988. Regional Groundwater Assessment, Parts of TP 050 to 054, R 25, W4M to R 08, W5M. Parkland County. Part of the North Saskatchewan and Athabasca River Basins.

Hydrogeological Consultants Ltd. 2004. Regional Groundwater Assessment, TP050 to 057, R 07 to 26 W5M, Yellowhead County, Part of the Athabasca River Basin.

IHS Inc. 2004a. IHS Hydro Line Data (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: October 23, 2013.

IHS Inc. 2004b. IHS Hydro Region Data (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: October 23, 2013.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 17

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

IHS Inc. 2010. IHS Provincial Boundaries (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: June 2011. Last Update Check: July 31, 2013.

IHS Inc. 2013a. IHS Cities and Towns (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: October 2013. Last Update Check: October 23, 2013.

IHS Inc. 2013b. IHS First Nations (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: October 2013. Last Update Check: October 23, 2013.

IHS Inc. 2013c. IHS Road Segments (digital file). Calgary, AB. Available: Hhttp://energy.ihs.com/Solutions/Regions/Canada/H. Acquired: October 23, 2013. Update Interval: Monthly.

Government of Canada. 2013. Aboriginal Lands, Canada (digital file). Edmonton, AB. Available: Hhttp://www.geobase.caH. Acquired: November = 2013. Last Update Check: November 7, 2013.

Kinder Morgan Canada. 2012. Baseline Routing (digital file). Calgary, AB. Received via FTP. Acquired: May 9, 2012. Last Update Check: N/A.

Natural Resources Canada. 2003. Canadian Geographical Names (digital file). Ottawa, ON. Available: Hhttp://geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/cgn/index.htmlH. Acquired: June 2013. Last Update Check: June 13, 2013.

Natural Resources Canada. 2010a. North American Atlas – Hydrography (digital file). Ottawa, ON. Available: Hhttp://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/download/northamerica.htmlH. Acquired: June 2012. Last Update Check: January 3, 2013.

Natural Resources Canada. 2010b. North American Atlas – Hydrography (digital file). Ottawa, ON. Available: Hhttp://geogratis.gc.ca/api/en/nrcan-rncan/ess-sst/4a778c9f-00b1-5fce-aa2f- 42a90d19eb24.htmlH. Acquired: June 2012. Last Update Check: June 20, 2013.

Natural Resources Canada. 2012. CanVec -Transportation - 1020009 Railway (digital file). Sherbrooke, QC. Available: Hhttp://geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/download/topographic.htmlH. Acquired: June 2012. Last Update Check: November 2012.

Natural Resources Canada. 2013a. Canada Lands Administrative Boundaries Level 1 (digital file). Ottawa, ON. Available: Hhttp://geogratis.gc.ca/api/en/nrcan-rncan/ess-sst/eb3757cc-d08b-5e62- 9a44-3a8534ff3249.htmlH. Acquired: June 2013. Last Update Check: June 13, 2013.

Natural Resources Canada. 2013b. National Road Network – Alberta (digital file). Sherbrooke, QC. Available: http://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/nrn/index.htmlH. Acquired: June 2013. Last Update Check: September 6, 2013.

Natural Resources Canada. 2013c. National Road Network - British Columbia (digital file). Sherbrooke, QC. Available: Hhttp://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/nrn/index.htmlH. Acquired: September 2013. Last Update Check: September 6, 2013.

Ozoray, G.F. 1972. Hydrogeology of the Wabamun Lake area, Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Science Report 72-08.

Pawlowicz, J.G., M.M Fenton, and L.D. Andriashek. 2007. Bedrock Thalwegs, 1:2,000,000 scale. Alberta Geological Survey Map No. 226. URL=http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publications/abstracts/DIG_2007_0026.html.

Roed, M.A. Surficial Geology, Edson, NTS 83F (GIS data, polygon features) http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publications/abstracts/DIG_2008_0363.html Digital Data 2008-0363.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 18

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

Shetsen, I. 1990. Quaternary Geology of Central Alberta - Deposits, Alberta Research Council, Map 213, Scale 1:500,00.

Shetsen, I. 2002. Quaternary Geology of Central Alberta - Deposits (GIS data, polygon features) http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publications/abstracts/DIG_2007_0018.html DIG 2007-0018.

Stein, R. 1982. Hydrogeology of the Edmonton area (southeast segment), Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Science Report 79-06.

TERA Environmental Consultants. 2008. Hillshade. Derived from Natural Resources Canada, Earth Sciences Sector, Centre for Topographic Information. 2000-2008. Canadian Digital Elevation Data 250k (digital files). Sherbrooke, QC. Available: Hhttp://www.geobase.ca/geobase/en/data/cded/index.htmlH. Acquired: 2008. Last Update Check: December 2010.

Tipper, H.W. 1971. 92P, Surficial geology, Bonaparte Lake, British Columbia, Geological Survey of Canada, "A" Series Map Issue: 1293A, http://geogratis.gc.ca/api/en/nrcan-rncan/ess- sst/474d8f28-e9d2-5818-98b1-70216570c580.html.

UniversalPegasus International. 2013. Rev 6 Routing (digital file). Calgary, AB. Received via FTP. Acquired: August 23, 2013. Last Update Check: N/A.

Vogwill, R.I.J. 1983. Hydrogeology of the Edson area, Alberta. Alberta Research Council Earth Science Report 79-07.

Young G. 1983. FRBC_25 (92I): Douglas Lake, Merritt, Mamit Lake, Stump Lake, Kamloops, Hefley Creek, Cherry Creek, Tranquille River Soils and Surficial Geology, B.C. Ministry of Energy and Mines.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page 19

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX A

LEGISLATION

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page A-1

1.0 FEDERAL STANDARDS The National Energy Board (NEB) Filing Manual (2013) provides guidance with respect to groundwater quantity and quality assessment to determine the anticipated effects from the Project. The NEB Filing Manual requirements include:

 project-specific water use assessment that identifies and describes the water resources and quality of those resources potentially affected by the Project to meet withdrawal or discharge needs for the Project;

 descriptions of interactions between the Project and groundwater that may impose a potential change in groundwater flows and any subsequent effects, and any wells that may be located nearby for which the quantity or quality of groundwater extracted from these wells may be affected;

 contaminant descriptions that may be potentially associated with the Project and that may affect water quality;

 mitigation measures for any potential effects on groundwater or well water quantity or quality, including pre- and post- construction monitoring; and

 groundwater management plans that may be appropriate.

The Project is also a designated project under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.

1.1 Provincial Standards in Alberta Provincial standards, guidelines and best management practices related to groundwater in Alberta include:

 Water Act and Water (Ministerial) Regulation;

 Guide to Groundwater Authorization (2011);

 Code of Practice for Pipelines and Telecommunication Lines Crossing a Water Body (2013);

 Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings (2013);

 Code of Practice for the Temporary Diversion of Water for Hydrostatic Testing of Pipelines (No. 205, 1999); and

 Water (Ministerial) Regulation for dewatering, diversion for dust control and facility/staff needs.

 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act:

 Interim Guide to Content for Industrial Approvals (2013);

 Alberta Tier 1 Soil and Groundwater Remediation Guidelines (2010);

 Alberta Tier 21 Soil and Groundwater Remediation Guidelines (2010);

 Code of Practice for Compressor and Pumping Stations and Sweet Gas Processing Plants (1996);

 Activities Designation Regulation (No. 276, 2003); and

 Interim Guide to Content for Industrial Approvals (2013).

 Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB):  Directive 055 - Storage Requirements for the Upstream Petroleum Industry.

1.2 Provincial Standards in British Columbia BC provincial standards, guidelines and best management practices related to groundwater include:

 Water Sustainability Act - came into effect February 29, 2016

 Groundwater Protection Regulation outlines the requirement for well construction, well decommissioning, regulation of artesian flow and driller qualifications

 Groundwater Sustainability Regulation outlines the requirements for drilling and flow test authorisations, temporary water use authorizations, exceptions for dewatering wells and ditches.

 Oil and Gas Activities Act ([SBC 2008] CHAPTER 36

 Environmental Protection and Management Regulation B.C. Reg. 200/2010 - includes amendments up to B.C. Reg. 148/2012, June 25, 2012;

 BC Environmental Assessment Act (BC EAA) [SBC 2002] also covers many of the similar groundwater requirements as the NEB Filing Manual.

 Environmental Management Act last updated March 18, 2013. Outlines spill prevention and reporting procedures and provides approval for groundwater discharges to surface from oil and gas activities.

 Drinking Water Protection Act [SBC 2001] Section 23 prohibits the contamination of drinking water

 Public Health Act [SBC 2008] outlines the mandatory reporting of public health hazards

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX B

AQUIFERS

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page B-1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.0 BC AQUIFER MAPPING SYSTEM Explanation of aquifer classification, reproduced from:

Kreye, R., Ronneseth K., and Wei, M., 1994. An Aquifer Classification System for Ground Water Management in British Columbia. In Proceedings, 6th National Drinking Water Conference, Victoria, B.C.

1.1 Classification Component The classification component categorizes aquifers according to level of development and vulnerability to contamination: Level of Development and Vulnerability subclasses are designated. The composite of these two subclasses is the Aquifer Class (Table B-1).

• Development subclass: The level of development of an aquifer is determined by assessing demand verses the aquifer's yield or productivity. A high (I), moderate (II), or low (III) level of development can be designated.

• Vulnerability subclass: The vulnerability of an aquifer to contamination from surface sources is assessed based on: type, thickness and extent of geologic materials overlying the aquifer, depth to water (or top of confined aquifers), and the type of aquifer materials. A high (A), moderate (B), or low (C) vulnerability can be designated.

• Aquifer Class: The combination of the three development and three vulnerability subclasses results in nine aquifer classes (Table B-1). For example, a class IA aquifer would be heavily developed with high vulnerability to contamination, while a IIIC would be lightly developed with low vulnerability.

Table B-1

Classification Component

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page B-2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.2 Ranking Component A numerical measure of an aquifer's priority is provided by the aquifer's ranking value. The ranking value is determined by summing the point values for each of the following hydrogeologic and water use criteria: productivity, size, vulnerability, demand, type of use, quality concerns (that have health risk implications), and quantity concerns. (Table B-2). All criteria have arbitrarily been assigned equal weight. Values range from a minimum of "1" to a maximum of "3", except for quality and quantity concerns which are assigned a minimum of "0" if concerns are not evident. Possible ranking scores range from a low of 5 to a high of 21; the higher the ranking score, the greater the aquifer's priority.

TABLE B-2

RANKING COMPONENT

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page B-3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE B-3

AQUIFER MAPPING DATA

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Aquifer Confined/Unconfined Aquifer KP From KP To Information Source Classification Status Materials Demand Vulnerability Un-named KP 0033.8 KP 0034.1 AB aquifer mapping Thalweg Unconfined to Confined Unconsolidated unknown Moderate

KP 0036.6 KP 0057.5 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-1 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0037.1 KP 0038.3 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-23 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0062.4 KP 0066.1 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-12 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High Drayton KP 0067.5 KP 0067.9 AB aquifer mapping Thalweg Unconfined to Confined Unconsolidated unknown Moderate

KP 0069.3 KP 0079.4 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-3 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0083.4 KP 0085.1 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-4 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0086.5 KP 0089.9 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-5 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0091.5 KP 0093.0 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-6 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0094.5 KP 0095.8 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-7 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0097.7 KP 0099.2 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-8 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0102.0 KP 0110.6 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-9 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0111.9 KP 0116.3 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-10 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High Onoway KP 0120.0 KP 0120.4 AB aquifer mapping Thalweg Unconfined to Confined Unconsolidated unknown Moderate

KP 0120.6 KP 0122.5 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-11 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0123.8 KP 0124.7 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-12 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0129.1 KP 0132.7 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-13 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0160.4 KP 0164.3 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-14 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High

KP 0169.3 KP 0173.2 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-15 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0176.8 KP 0187.4 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate

KP 0183.9 KP 0185.3 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-16 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High ERCB/AGS Bulletin Haynes KP 0190.5 KP 0216.5 66 Mapped Extents Member Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0195.1 KP 0195.6 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate

KP 0197.3 KP 0199.2 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-17 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High Aquifer- KP 0210.8 KP 0228.8 AB aquifer mapping 18,19,20 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0221.0 KP 0222.9 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate

KP 0230.5 KP 0337.7 AB aquifer mapping Aquifer-21 Potential Unconfined Unconsolidated unknown High ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0255.5 KP 0255.9 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0258.7 KP 0258.7 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate ERCB/AGS Bulletin Haynes KP 0259.2 KP 0279.5 66 Mapped Extents Member Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate ERCB/AGS Bulletin Sunchild KP 0269.9 KP 0297.7 66 Mapped Extents Aquifer Confined Bedrock unknown Moderate

KP 0514.1 KP 0518.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 799 IIIC (9) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low Low

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page B-4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE B-3 cont’d

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Aquifer Confined/Unconfined Aquifer KP From KP To Information Source Classification Status Materials Demand Vulnerability

KP 0521.6 KP 0525.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 800 IIB (9) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0608.0 KP 0613.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 825 IIA (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0694.1 KP 0713.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 807 IIB (12) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High

KP 0716.8 KP 0717.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 772 IIB (8) Partially Confined Bedrock Moderate High

KP 0718.8 KP 0721.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 770 IA (13) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel High High

KP 0721.4 KP 0724.7 BC Mapped Aquifer 769 IIA (12) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High Trans Mountain Well Un-named KP 0726.3 KP 0726.9 Data Review Aquifer Unconfined Sand and Gravel Unknown High

KP 0744.1 KP 0752.9 BC Mapped Aquifer 296 IIB (9) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0753.6 KP 0764.561 BC Mapped Aquifer 293 IIIB (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0806.47 KP 0817.0 BC Mapped Aquifer 283 IIIB (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0840.9 KP 0842.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 282 IIIA (12) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 0843.2 KP 0843.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 284 IIA (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High

KP 0847.9 KP 0853.1 BC Mapped Aquifer 276 IIIB (10) Partially Confined Bedrock Low High

KP 0862.0 KP 0868.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 274 IIIB (9) Partially Confined Bedrock Low High Trans Mountain Un-named KP 0937.1 KP 0938.2 Geophysical Mapping Aquifer Unconfined Sand and Gravel Moderate Moderate

KP 1038.7 KP 1040.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 1009 IIA (8) Partially Confined Bedrock Low High

KP 1038.9 KP 1040.3 BC Mapped Aquifer 1005 IIB (9) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High

KP 1042.4 KP 1048.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 1 IIA (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High

KP 1051.8 KP 1060.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 3 IIIA (11) Unconfined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1074.3 KP 1091.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 6 IIIA (13) Unconfined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1091.6 KP 1105.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 8 IA (15) Unconfined Sand and Gravel High High

KP 1105.6 KP 1112.7 BC Mapped Aquifer 21 IIIB (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate High

KP 1119.7 KP 1127.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 22 IIIB (11) Unconfined to Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1128.6 KP 1129.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 16 IIIA (11) Unconfined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1129.3 KP 1137.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 27 IIC (14) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel High Low

KP 1135.9 KP 1144.1 BC Mapped Aquifer 32 IIC (12) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate Low

KP 1143.4 KP 1143.8 BC Mapped Aquifer 35 IA (19) Unconfined Sand and Gravel High High

KP 1147.4 KP 1149.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 59 IIC (11) Unconfined to Confined Sand and Gravel Moderate Low

KP 1158.3 KP 1165.5 BC Mapped Aquifer 61 IIIC (11) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low Low

KP 1165.6 KP 1166.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 48 IIIB (8) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1167.7 KP 1173.6 BC Mapped Aquifer 46 IIIA (9) Unconfined Sand and Gravel Low High

KP 1173.7 KP 1179.8 BC Mapped Aquifer 49 IIIB (9) Partially Confined Sand and Gravel Low High

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page B-5

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX C

POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER RELATED ISSUES

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE C-1

POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER CONCERNS

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Concern Potential Type of Groundwater KP From KP To Number Concerns Comments KP 0017.9 KP 0017.9 2 Shallow Groundwater Shallow well, Alluvium, shallow groundwater

KP 0024.1 KP 0024.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Deep Blackmud Creek crossing - alluvial deposits

KP 0028.1 KP 0028.3 1 Watercourse Proximity Deep Whitemud Creek crossing - alluvial deposits

KP 0033.5 KP 0033.8 1 Watercourse Proximity North Saskatchewan River Crossing - Alluvial and Fluvial deposits

KP 0033.6 1 Watercourse Proximity North Saskatchewan River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0037.0 KP 0037.3 1 Watercourse Proximity Deep un-named creek crossing - Alluvial deposits

KP 0064.6 KP 0065.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0088.6 KP 0089.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0089.6 KP 0093.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0097.1 KP 0097.8 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0107.0 KP 0107.0 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0119.0 KP 0120.0 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0129.5 KP 0129.5 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0133.9 KP 0134.6 1 Watercourse Proximity Pembina River Crossing - Fluvial deposits

KP 0134.0 KP 0134.0 1 Shallow groundwater; artesian Pembina River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 0144.4 KP 0144.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0152.0 KP 0157.5 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0161.0 KP 0162.0 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0170.4 KP 0170.5 2 Shallow Groundwater Lake Crossing - glacial sediments but top of bedrock 7.1 m - potential GW concerns KP 0175.0 KP 0180.0 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0184.3 KP 0184.3 2 Shallow Groundwater Shallow Lobstick River Crossing - Fluvial deposits may cause potential GW issue KP 0184.4 KP 0184.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0187.9 KP 0188.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0190.9 KP 0190.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0197.9 KP 0212.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0216.9 KP 0219.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0219.5 KP 0219.5 2 Shallow groundwater; artesian Wolf Creek crossing in fluvial deposits- potential GW concern conditions KP 0219.5 1 Watercourse Proximity Wolf Creek - potential artesian conditions

KP 0222.6 KP 0223.0 1 Watercourse Proximity McLeod River crossing in fluvial deposits- potential GW concern

KP 0222.8 KP 0222.8 1 Shallow groundwater; artesian McLeod River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 0228.4 KP 0228.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE C-1 cont’d

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Concern Potential Type of Groundwater KP From KP To Number Concerns Comments KP 0233.9 KP 0234.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0237.9 KP 0238.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0264.7 KP 0264.7 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0271.1 KP 0274.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0290.1 KP 0290.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and wetlands KP 0307.7 KP 0309.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Trail Creek and unknown ephemeral creek crossing in Fluvial/alluvium deposits. Full section passes near Athabasca River KP 0313.6 KP 0317.6 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Based on occurrence of flowing seismic shotholes, springs and conditions wetlands KP 0318.4 KP 0319.1 1 Watercourse Proximity Hardisty Creek crossing in Till near fluvial deposits - potential GW concern (~20m elevation change) KP 0326.0 KP 0326.3 2 Watercourse Proximity Shallow Maskuta creek crossing in Fluvial - most wells deep, but there is spring in area - potential concern KP 0335.8 KP 0336.1 1 Watercourse Proximity 2 Shallow unknown creek crossings in fluvial. Well 485176 in fluvial sediments with no confining layers - potential GW concern KP 0509.9 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0511.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0513.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0517.6 KP 0518.2 1,2 Watercourse Proximity; Shallow Creek crossing; potential shallow groundwater in terrace; unconfined Groundwater KP 0519.2 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek and marsh crossing

KP 0524.7 KP 0525.7 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions conditions KP 0525.2 KP 0526.9 1,2 Watercourse Proximity; Shallow Canoe River crossing; groundwater at, or above river level Groundwater KP 0528.0 KP 0528.5 2 Shallow Groundwater Generally swampy area, shallow groundwater

KP 0530.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0540.7 KP 0542.0 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions conditions KP 0541.3 KP 0541.4 2 Shallow Groundwater Shallow groundwater

KP 0555.0 KP 0555.0 2 Shallow Groundwater Stream crossing, groundwater in alluvium

KP 0556.0 KP 0563.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions conditions KP 0557.5 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0559.6 KP 0559.8 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0562.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0563.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0568.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0569.6 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0572.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE C-1 cont’d

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Concern Potential Type of Groundwater KP From KP To Number Concerns Comments KP 0576.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Deeply incised creek

KP 0577.1 KP 0577.1 2 Shallow Groundwater North Thompson River crossing

KP 0577.2 1 Watercourse Proximity North Thompson River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0586.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0589.0 KP 0589.1 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek crossing, alluvial fan

KP 0596.3 KP 0596.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Thunder River crossing

KP 0603.9 KP 0609.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions conditions KP 0607.7 KP 0607.8 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing; very close to N. Thompson River

KP 0608.0 KP 0613.7 2 Shallow Groundwater Sand deposits hosting water table aquifer may be used locally - potentially sensitive to contamination ("825 IIA") KP 0609.9 KP 0609.9 2 Shallow Groundwater Blue River Crossing

KP 0609.9 1 Watercourse Proximity Blue River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0611.8 KP 0613.8 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0615.9 1 Watercourse Proximity unnamed channel - potential artesian conditions

KP 0616.0 KP 0616.0 2,4 Shallow Groundwater, artesian North Thompson River crossing; alluvial terrace, shallow conditions groundwater KP 0616.0 1 Watercourse Proximity North Thompson River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0617.1 KP 0619.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to River in alluvial terrace

KP 0619.0 KP 0621.6 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to NT River in alluvial terrace. Highly sensitive area KP 0621.6 KP 0631.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to NT River in alluvial terrace. Sensitive area

KP 0622.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Froth Creek crossing; potentially seasonal high flow

KP 0632.9 KP 0663.2 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0633.8 KP 0633.8 2 Shallow Groundwater Finn Creek crossing; sand and boulders aquifer, shallow groundwater KP 0637.1 KP 0638.6 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to braided N. Thompson R., and one creek crossing there. KP 0640.5 KP 0641.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to N. Thompson R., and one creek crossing there. Alluvium in stream KP 0642.1 KP 0643.5 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor close to N. Thompson R., and one creek crossing there. Alluvium in stream KP 0644.3 KP 0644.3 2 Shallow Groundwater Tumtum Creek crossing; Alluvium in stream

KP 0646.6 KP 0647.1 1 Watercourse Proximity N. Thompson River crossing; alluvial terraces. Alluvium in stream

KP 0646.9 KP 0646.9 2,4 Shallow groundwater, artesian North Thompson River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 0655.1 KP 0656.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline corridor very close to N. Thompson R. in alluvial(?) deposits

KP 0658.7 KP 0659.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline in creek bed

KP 0663.9 KP 0664.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline very close to N. Thompson R. - alluvium in stream

KP 0664.5 KP 0666.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline close to very close to N. Thompson R. Alluvium in stream

KP 0678.3 KP 0679.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Pipeline close to N. Thompson R. Alluvium in stream

KP 0701.4 KP 0716.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0705.3 KP 0705.3 2 Shallow Groundwater Alluvium in stream, R.O.W. close to river

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE C-1 cont’d

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Concern Potential Type of Groundwater KP From KP To Number Concerns Comments KP 0711.3 KP 0711.3 2 Shallow Groundwater R.O.W. in river deposits; alluvium in stream

KP 0713.4 KP 0713.4 1,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Raft River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 0721.2 KP 0721.4 1 Watercourse Proximity Clearwater River crossing; wells in corridor 30 to 40 m deep; poorly protected by dirty sand/gravel. KP 0721.2 KP 0721.2 2,4 Shallow groundwater, artesian Clearwater River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 0725.3 KP 0728.3 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0730.3 KP 0730.5 1,4 Watercourse Proximity; artesian Mann Creek crossing; apparently alluvial terrace shallow, water table conditions aquifer - potential artesian conditions KP 0735.3 KP 0736.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0736.1 KP 0736.2 1 Watercourse Proximity ROW extremely close to Lake Lemieux; check geology for material permeability; KP 0745.4 KP 0745.4 2 Shallow groundwater Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions

KP 0753.1 1 Watercourse Proximity ROW near North Thompson River

KP 0842.6 KP 0843.5 2,4 Shallow Groundwater, artesian N. Thompson R. crossing, including river terrace with shallow conditions groundwater. KP 0842.9 1 Watercourse Proximity Thompson River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0853.2 KP 0853.2 2 Shallow groundwater Shallow groundwater or artesian conditions

KP 0854.4 KP 0854.7 2 Shallow Groundwater Ravine crossing, shallow groundwater. ROW west of the old mapsheet 184 KP 0863.2 KP 0866.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0866.0 KP 0866.4 2 Shallow Groundwater Corridor encroaching Menanteau Lake; wetland, shallow groundwater KP 0877.9 KP 0884.1 2 Shallow Groundwater Pipeline very close to Anderson Lake; high groundwater table and connection to lake KP 0905.1 KP 0907.6 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0906.5 KP 0906.8 1 Watercourse Proximity Encroaches Wetland

KP 0907.1 1 Watercourse Proximity Creek Crossing

KP 0924.4 KP 0924.9 1,2 Watercourse Proximity, Shallow Crossing Nicola River & alluvial terraces; groundwater shallow and Groundwater connected to river KP 0924.7 KP 0924.7 2 Shallow Groundwater Potential Artesian

KP 0947.2 KP 0955.6 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 0952.8 KP 0952.8 4 Shallow Groundwater Shallow well; aquifer confined but not deep; bc dbase well 72558

KP 0954.4 KP 0954.5 1,2 Watercourse Proximity, Shallow Coldwater River crossing; possible terraces with shallow Groundwater groundwater. KP 0954.5 KP 0954.5 1,2 Watercourse Proximity, Shallow Coldwater River - potential artesian conditions Groundwater KP 0959.7 KP 0960.2 2 Shallow Groundwater ROW very close to Fig Lake; possible shallow groundwater

KP 0967.0 KP 0967.0 1,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Coldwater River crossing; along the whole mapsheet ROW is close conditions to river KP 0967.0 1 Watercourse Proximity Coldwater River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0976.7 KP 0976.9 1,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Coldwater River crossing conditions KP 0976.7 1 Watercourse Proximity Coldwater River - potential artesian conditions

KP 0986.9 KP 0986.9 1,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Coldwater River - potential artesian conditions conditions

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-5

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE C-1 cont’d

SSEID005.1 SSEID005.1 Concern Potential Type of Groundwater KP From KP To Number Concerns Comments KP 1019.0 KP 1019.0 1,2 Watercourse Proximity; Shallow Coquihalla River crossing; shallow groundwater in alluvial terraces Groundwater GW shallow, Alluvium in stream KP 1020.1 KP 1020.1 2 Shallow Groundwater Dewdney Ck (major) crossing; shallow groundwater in alluvial deposits KP 1023.7 KP 1023.7 2 Shallow Groundwater Coquihalla River crossing

KP 1025.8 KP 1026.0 2 Shallow Groundwater Coquihalla River crossing; shallow groundwater in alluvium

KP 1029.9 KP 1029.9 2 Shallow Groundwater Coquihalla River crossing

KP 1030.5 KP 1032.4 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 1033.3 KP 1036.6 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 1040.3 KP 1040.3 1,4 Watercourse Proximity; artesian Coquihalla River - potential artesian conditions conditions KP 1042.1 KP 1062.1 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 1100.4 KP 1100.4 1,2,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Chilliwack/Vedder River - potential artesian conditions conditions; shallow groundwater KP 1112.7 KP 1112.9 1,2,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Sumas River crossing - potential artesian conditions conditions; shallow groundwater KP 1114.7 KP 1115.2 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 1153.6 KP 1166.5 2,4 Shallow groundwater; artesian conditions KP 1166.5 KP 1167.8 1 Watercourse Proximity Fraser River Crossing

KP 1167.2 KP 1167.2 1,4 Watercourse Proximity, artesian Fraser River - potential artesian conditions conditions

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page C-6

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX D

CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.0 CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT Consultation and engagement activities related to the Groundwater Management Plan were completed with Appropriate Government Authorities, Aboriginal groups and affected landowners/tenants. Opportunities to discuss the Groundwater Management Plan and identify issues or concerns were also provided to public stakeholders during meetings, workshops and ongoing engagement activities.

Consultation and engagement opportunities began in May 2012 with the Project announcement and are ongoing.

1.1 Consultation and Engagement Overview: Draft Plan Development Reports on public consultation activities completed between May 2012 and June 30, 2015 were filed with the National Energy Board (NEB) and are available in the Application (Volume 3A: Stakeholder and Volume 3B: Aboriginal; Filing ID A55987) as well as in Consultation Update No. 1 and Errata, Technical Update No. 1 (Filing ID A59343) / Consultation Update 2 (Filing IDs A62087 and A62088), Consultation Update 3 (Filing IDs A4H1W2 through A4H1W8) and Consultation Update 4 (Filing ID A72224). These reports include results of consultation conducted to date, identification of issues and concerns as well as Trans Mountain’s response and are included below. Where appropriate, Trans Mountain’s response has been updated to reflect information developed since the original response was provided during the NEB proceeding for the Project.

Consultation and engagement activities completed between July 1, 2015 and February 17, 2017 have not been filed on the public record with the NEB. Any new issues and concerns identified during this period, as well as Trans Mountain’s response, are described below.

1.2 Consultation and Engagement Overview: Draft Plan The draft Plan was released for review and feedback on September 14, 2016. The comment period closed on December 16, 2016, although additional Appropriate Government Authority feedback was considered up until February 17, 2017. Email or mail notification regarding the Plan was sent to 101 public stakeholders, 59 regulatory authorities, 122 Aboriginal groups and all affected landowners. The notification included a summary description of the Plan, a request for review, the timing of the comment period and contact information. Aboriginal groups were offered the opportunity for an in-person meeting to review the Plan. See Appendix E for a complete list of notified stakeholders.

In addition to direct notification, the online posting of each Plan was promoted through Trans Mountain's weekly e-newsletter, Trans Mountain Today, which provides Project updates, regulatory information, stories and interviews to more than 6,000 subscribers. Each week Trans Mountain Today included a focus on a specific plan, or group of plans, as well as a reminder of all plans available for review.

2016

• September 22 - Wildlife Mitigation and Habitat Restoration Plans

• September 29 - Pipeline Environmental Protection Plans

• October 6 - Air Quality Management Plans

• October 13 - Watercourse and Water Ecosystems Plans

• October 20 - Vegetation Management Plans

• October 27 - Air Quality Plans

• November 3 - Socio-Economic Effects Monitoring Plan

• November 10 - Access Management Plan

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• December 22 - General promotion all plans

• December 29 - General promotion all plans

2017

• January 5 - General promotion all plans

• January 12 - General promotion all plans

Trans Mountain is committed to ongoing engagement throughout the life of the Project. The start and end date for the review and comment period for each environmental management plan is defined. These timelines are required to allow time for preparation of the final Plan in order to meet regulatory requirements and NEB submission dates.

1.3 Consultation and Engagement: Activities and Feedback Consultation and engagement activities completed with identified stakeholder groups are described below, including: public stakeholders (Section 3.1); regulatory authorities (Section 3.2); Aboriginal groups (Section 3.3); and landowner/tenants (Section 3.4).

Feedback on the draft Plan, Trans Mountain’s response, and where each issue or concern is addressed in the Plan has been outlined in each section according to stakeholder group.

1.4 Public Consultation 1.4.1 Public Consultation Summary - May 2012 to June 2015 No feedback regarding the GMP was received during public consultation and engagement activities between May 2012 and June 2015.

New Interests, Issues, Concerns and Response – July 2015 to February 2017 No feedback regarding the GMP was received during public consultation and engagement activities between July 2015 and February 2017.

1.5 Appropriate Government Authority Consultation 1.5.1 Appropriate Government Authority Consultation Summary – May 2012 to June 2015 No feedback regarding the GMP was received from Appropriate Government Agencies between May 2012 and June 2015.

1.5.2 Appropriate Government Authority Consultation Summary – July 2015 to February 2017 A summary of appropriate government authority consultation related to the draft Plan between July 2015 and February 2017 is described in Table D-1.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-3

TABLE D-1

SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (JULY 2015 TO FEBRUARY 2017)

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan Forestry, Lands Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the In areas were groundwater aquifers have not yet been mapped; groundwater concerns such as shallow groundwater, Section 1.0 and Natural Trans Mountain Pipeline proximity to watercourse alluvial/fluvial materials in channel, water wells and springs will help to identify areas where Appendix B Resource 1.0 Introduction aquifers may exist that are not yet mapped. Appendix C Operations The plan states there is “particular emphasis (FLNRO) on protecting vulnerable aquifers The vulnerable aquifers were identified in BC by BC MOE. See above response for second part of question. encountered by the pipeline corridor.” FLNRO has concerns regarding the areas where groundwater aquifers have not yet been mapped which may be overlooked by this GMP. – Please clearly outline how the vulnerable aquifers were identified, and suggest including how any potentially

Page D Page unmapped aquifers along the project corridor are taken into consideration FLNRO Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the The GMP is focussed on the construction phase of the project. Prior to commencing operations, groundwater N.A. Trans Mountain Pipeline monitoring plans will be designed for all Trans Mountain facilities as part of NEB Condition 130. -

4

1.0 Introduction/ Pre-Construction Phase The plan is focused on mitigation strategies During operations, Trans Mountain will continue to allocate extensive resources to its pipeline integrity program, which for the pre-construction and construction is used to identify and repair anomalies in the pipe before leaks occur. A computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) phase of the Project. system is used in combination with other monitoring methods, such as surveillance patrols, regular in-line inspections – Where are groundwater mitigation using smart tools, Control Centre Operator (CCO) monitoring using the supervisory control and data acquisition strategies for the operations phase of (SCADA) system, and scheduled line balance calculations. In the unlikely event that released petroleum impacts the Project addressed? groundwater, Trans Mountain will implement a remediation program to recover petroleum and treat contaminated water to meet stringent government criteria. 2.0 Pre-Construction Phase Mitigation strategies for potential Groundwater resources are protected through detailed emergency response plans. The most critical aspect of the groundwater-related concerns during project Trans Mountain emergency management strategy is to prevent a spill from happening at all. If a spill occurs, Trans construction are developed by Mountain is fully prepared to respond to any type of incident anywhere along the pipeline and has developed a Hydrogeological Professionals. comprehensive program based on a combination of regulatory compliance, operational excellence, industry best practices, and lessons learned through regular exercises and actual incidents. Spill response efforts aim to reduce – Where are groundwater mitigation strategies for the operations phase of potential for groundwater contamination by removing pooled oil and affected surface materials as quickly as possible, the Project presented? and as deeply as needed to remove contamination so that aquifers are not affected. With this focus on timely cleanup activities, impacts to aquifers can be minimized. Trans Mountain would commit to work with the Township of Langley to identify surplus capacity from other wells in the system, while suitable replacement alternatives were established and implemented.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan FLNRO (cont’d) Email 12-Jan-17 See above Additionally, prior to commencing operations, groundwater monitoring plans will be designed for all See above Trans Mountain facilities in order to fulfill NEB Condition 130. Trans Mountain will consider installation of monitoring wells in strategic locations, such as highly vulnerable aquifers, along the pipeline route where and if it is deemed beneficial to monitoring and protecting groundwater FLNRO Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the Trans Mountain In areas where groundwater aquifers have not yet been mapped; groundwater concerns such as Table 4.0-1 Pipeline shallow groundwater, proximity to watercourse alluvial/fluvial materials in channel, water wells and 2.0 Pre-Construction Phase springs will help to identify areas where aquifers may exist that are not yet mapped. The plan mentions a literature, map and data review to identify aquifers along the pipeline corridor where there is an increased risk of affecting the groundwater system. Aquifer mapping in British Columbia is an on-going process with many mapsheets containing no mapped aquifers although there are groundwater wells present and thus indicated groundwater resources. FLNRO has concerns that Trans Mountain may have only considered mapped aquifers with available online information. – Suggest outlining how consideration was made for identifying any unmapped aquifers along the pipeline corridor.

Page D Page FLNRO Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the Trans Mountain The 150 m corridor was chosen to be consistent with: Volume 5A of the EIA which states the proposed N.A. Pipeline pipeline will generally require a construction right-of-way of 45 m, it was decided to study and apply for 2.0 Pre-Construction Phase a wider corridor (150 m) to accommodate locations where field information was unavailable

-

5 There was a field verified survey to confirm the location of and collect information about water wells within 150 m of Glossary definition of the “proposed pipeline corridor”: Generally, a 150 m wide corridor encompassing the proposed pipeline corridor. the pipeline construction right-of-way and temporary workspace – Please outline or identify where rationale is provided for the 150 m corridor selection. The 150 m corridor has been addressed in several IRs (Peters Band IR No.2(b).3.06d, FVRD IR 2, PIPEUP Network IR No.2 and Recommendation 2.2.2 Findings of the Fraser Health and Coast Mountain Health Authority project review

“…The 150 m offset distance selected for this field verification effort is considered more than sufficient considering the depth of the pipeline construction activities, and potential hydrogeologic influences of the shallow pipeline construction…” FLNRO Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the Trans Mountain Based on water well database reports and geology mapping the lithology and extent of the aquifers can Table 4.0-1 Pipeline be estimated. 2.1 Aquifers (Table in Appendix B) There is potential for unmapped aquifers to be missed in When unmapped aquifers are encountered during pipeline construction, the appropriate mitigation this summary table of vulnerable aquifers. strategies will used be based on the aquifer characteristics encountered (i.e. Proximity to watercourse – Please identify how vulnerability can be assessed in alluvial/fluvial materials, shallow groundwater or unconfined aquifer). unmapped aquifers if aquifer type, boundary, materials, and designation are unknown. Mitigation strategies for shallow groundwater and alluvial materials outlined in table 4.0-1 of the Groundwater Management Plan are also applicable.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan FLNRO Email 12-Jan-17 Groundwater Management Plan for the Trans Mountain Trans Mountain is committed to protecting groundwater supplies and water wells along the proposed N.A. Pipeline pipeline corridor and will adhere to applicable federal, provincial and municipal regulations pertaining to 3.1.1 Concerns groundwater supplies, including the BC Drinking Water Protection Act, Section 23. Trans Mountain has committed to re-establish or replace a potable water supply as required should a registered or In addition, Trans Mountain is bound by EAO Condition 26 which states “In the event that a spill known water well be damaged by the Project during originating from the Project is confirmed to have contaminated drinking water, as determined by a pipeline installation. Qualified Professional, the Holder must provide one or more alternate source(s) of drinking water for all – What commitments are made by Trans Mountain if a persons who use water for human or animal consumption from the contaminated water source for the well is impacted during operations such as during period of time during which contamination exists” maintenance work or from a spill or leak?

Ministry of Webinar 16-Feb-17 How will springs be monitored during construction to All efforts were made to identify springs, used as drinking water sources, during the field verified survey Section 3.0 Environment ensure they aren’t impacted? should we say who this (NEB Condition 93). During construction springs located within the construction right-or-way will be comment was from?) flagged, and fenced prior to construction, to avoid damage during construction. If a spring has the potential to be impacted, as determined by a hydrogeological resource specialist, pre-construction monitoring will be evaluated, which could include testing of flow rates and/or water quality. The specific monitoring requirements, will be contingent upon the site setting, and local conditions. Specifications on spring monitoring have been added to Section 3.0 Township of Letter 19-Dec-16 Risk to Wells Managing Risk to Wells Section 3.3.1 Page D Page Langley Concern regarding only wells within 150 m of the As a requirement of National Energy Board (NEB) Condition 93, Trans Mountain field verified and centreline and shallow wells (<10 m deep) are considered mapped the locations of water wells within 150 m on either side of the pipeline. This search area was

-

6 for sampling, monitoring, remediation, compensation, deemed appropriate by the NEB, given that the impact of pipeline construction activities and potential inventory, and susceptibility to damages from trenchless hydrogeological influences of the shallow pipeline construction is anticipated to be minimal. During crossings during pre-construction and construction construction, water wells identified in the field-verified survey within the construction right-or-way will be phases. GMP does not indicate how sampling, monitoring, flagged and fenced prior to pipeline construction. Specific attention will be paid to evaluating water mitigation and compensation are handled for wells that do wells within 150 m of the pipeline centerline near blasting sites and in areas where trenchless crossings not meet above criteria. with artesian conditions may be encountered. These wells will be evaluated by a Hydrogeology Resource Specialist, and if deemed necessary, monitoring of these water wells will include Vulnerable water supplies and aquifers within Aboriginal measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels as well as water quality sampling of these territories need to be stated in GMP that they are dealt wells. with in a similar manner during construction phase. Trans Mountain has committed to re-establishing or replacing a potable water supply as required, should a water well be damaged (i.e., diminishment in quantity and/or quality) by the Project during pipeline installation.

Regarding the Township’s comment about water supplies and aquifers within Aboriginal lands, Trans Mountain uses a consistent approach in treating all wells, including the aquifers located beneath Aboriginal reserves. Trans Mountain will clarify this in the GMP.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan Township of Letter 19-Dec-16 Risk to Aquifers Managing Risk to Aquifers Appendix B Langley Hopington GMP recognizes some Langley aquifers are at risk, With respect to the Township’s concerns about incorporating local vulnerability mapping, the Aquifer especially unconfined aquifiers. However, GMP ranks Comprehensive Modelling Report (Golder, 2005) created for Langley was reviewed by Trans adjusted to some aquifers as low vulnerability, when they are Mountain’s hydrogeological consultants, and it was determined to be unlikely that pipeline construction reflect new identified as locally high vulnerability, due to GMP using a activities would extend deep enough to encounter any potentially vulnerable aquifers in this area. Trans aquifer provincial aquifer classification system that lumps the local Mountain recognizes that the Fort Langley and Hopington Aquifers are present in the vicinity of the boundaries. aquifers into one class. pipeline, and mitigation strategies have been put in place if shallow groundwater is encountered during pipeline construction in the area. The BC government recently updated the mapping for the Hopington Langley believes it is necessary to consider and Aquifer boundary, extending it further to the north and, subsequently, it is now mapped as being incorporate local vulnerability mapping at the construction present under the pipeline route, and it will be added to the GMP. The Fort Langley Aquifer is not phase. Believe this will assist in identifying type and included in the GMP, as the pipeline does not cross this aquifer. vulnerability, so the hydrogeological resource specialist can be well advised prior to construction. During construction, pertinent groundwater data will be collected, which will be used to develop post- construction monitoring plans. GMP also seems to imply mitigation measures for those aquifers are only considered during trench/construction phase. Langley insists that these measures should be in place long term, in the event that mitigation and Page D Page compensation is necessary beyond construction phase, especially activities with pipeline, trench or pipeline construction. A long term impact monitoring, mitigation,

- and compensation strategy should be developed.

7 Township of Letter 19-Dec-16 Risk to Water Supply Managing Risk to Water Supply Table 4.0 Langley Langley agrees that as the pipeline does not pass through In terms of the Township’s concerns regarding impacts to its local water supply, the GMP outlines how Fort Langley well capture zones, there is less risk to groundwater impacts are minimized during construction. Specifically, the GMP outlines that during drinking water supply. However, Langley is still concerned construction if contaminants are encountered, the pipeline trench will be prevented from being a about risks to high capacity water supply that have not conduit for potentially contaminated groundwater from areas adjacent to the construction right-of-way been considered. The GMP outlines only generic strategy by installing clay berms and/or ditch plugs to contain water to the site, and/or backfilling the trench with to address groundwater concerns. imported clay material to prevent potential contaminant migration. Construction contractors will be made aware of potentially contaminated sites as per NEB Condition 46 Contamination Identification There should be specific strategies to identify emergency and Assessment Plan, which characterized properties as resulting in a low, moderate, or high risk for measures for safeguarding waterworks. Strategy should encountering contamination within the Project footprint.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan Township of See above See above include interim emergency response measures in the With respect to the concerns raised about the well capture zones, the modelling conducted by Golder See above Langley (Cont’d) event that trench or pipeline construction causes in 2005 was reviewed by Trans Mountain’s hydrogeological consultants. The Golder report indicates groundwater contamination, especially in capture zones or that the majority of the capture zones of the Fort Langley municipal wells are limited to the boundary of where surface water features can act as conduits for the aquifer and there appears to be a minimal amount of water being captured from a second aquifer transporting contaminated groundwater to well capture present in the area. Therefore, water being drawn into the capture zones is likely coming from a deeper zones or close to waterworks. Plan should also include aquifer present in the area, as there are no other unconfined aquifers that we are aware of contributing long term strategies to prevent contaminants from to this system. The capture zones for the municipal wells within the Hopington Aquifer are located migrating over long distances through pipeline trench, long approximately 4 km south of the pipeline, and the modelling for these wells indicates that these wells term impact monitoring/assessment, and a compensation pull their water from the south, even further away from the pipeline. Therefore, the potential influences plan in case waterworks have to be shut down. of the shallow pipeline are anticipated to be minimal, as the capture zones do not appear to interact with the pipeline corridor. Langley suggests development of a "Quick Response" plan, that can be used in an expedited manner if risk to Groundwater resources are also protected through detailed emergency response plans. The most high risk infrastructure can result in significant public critical aspect Trans Mountain’s emergency management strategy is to prevent a spill from occurring. health concerns. Plan should be used for construction and Over the past 60 years, a comprehensive program based on a combination of regulatory compliance, operational phases of the project. operational excellence, industry best practices, and lessons learned through regular exercises and actual incidents. Township of Letter 19-Dec-16 Trenching Trenched Construction Table 4.0-1 Langley Page D Page Mitigation measures proposed in the GMP are focused on In terms of the Townships concerns about trenching causing impacts to groundwater conditions, construction phase. GMP does not make it clear on how mitigation measures outlined in the GMP are long-term solutions for trenched construction. concerns are managed long term and if any permanent

-

8 solutions will be implemented. If concerns are unmitigated, Installing trench breakers prevents impacts to groundwater in the long term. Groundwater flow patterns

groundwater may be transported to other areas creating will also be maintained by using backfill materials that mimic existing soil conditions. The risk of additional issues such as water quality and shallow water changing the chemical composition of the aquifer as a result of construction of the pipeline is very low. table. Solids such as silt and mud are immobile in aquifers due to the natural filtering characteristics of the aquifer materials. GMP also does not explicitly identify measures implemented to prevent trench from becoming a conduit to The management of a concern depends on site-specific conditions that are not be predictable, as such transport pipeline contents over long distances. With no and as necessary, site-specific plans would be developed to manage that concern and implement an permanent measures, migration can take place, and appropriate solution. impact is likely to be more than 15 m of construction RoW. A plan needs to be in place to establish strategies for prevention and migration on a long term basis, with discussion on compensation.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan Township of Letter 19-Dec-16 Long Term Monitoring and Mitigation Long-Term Monitoring and Mitigation N.A. Langley GMP focuses on mitigation and compensation that arise During operations, Trans Mountain will continue to allocate extensive resources to its pipeline integrity during construction. No information on long term program, which is used to identify and repair anomalies in the pipe before leaks occur. A computational problems on how they are dealt with or handled or pipeline monitoring (CPM) system is used in combination with other monitoring methods, such as addressed. Needs to be a clear strategy to manage surveillance patrols, regular in-line inspections using smart tools, Control Centre Operator (CCO) problems and concerns that arise after construction phase monitoring using the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and scheduled line and into operational. Little detail is in post construction balance calculations. In the unlikely event that released petroleum impacts groundwater, Trans monitoring program. Plans need to account for local Mountain will implement a remediation program to recover petroleum and treat contaminated water to groundwater concerns, problems during construction, with meet stringent government criteria. consideration of local hydrogeology and groundwater and surface water resources. Groundwater resources are protected through detailed emergency response plans. The most critical aspect of the Trans Mountain emergency management strategy is to prevent a spill from happening at all. If a spill occurs, Trans Mountain is fully prepared to respond to any type of incident anywhere along the pipeline and has developed a comprehensive program based on a combination of regulatory compliance, operational excellence, industry best practices, and lessons learned through regular exercises and actual incidents. Spill response efforts aim to reduce potential for groundwater contamination by removing pooled oil and affected surface materials as quickly as possible, and as deeply as needed to remove contamination so that aquifers are not affected. With this focus on timely Page D Page cleanup activities, impacts to aquifers can be minimized. Trans Mountain would commit to work with the Township of Langley to identify surplus capacity from other wells in the system, while suitable replacement alternatives were established and implemented.

-

9

In addition, prior to commencing operations, groundwater monitoring plans will be designed for all Trans Mountain facilities as part of NEB Condition 130. Trans Mountain will consider installation of monitoring wells in strategic locations, such as highly vulnerable aquifers, along the pipeline route where and if it is deemed beneficial to monitoring and protecting groundwater.

Further consultation on this topic is being conducted as a component of NEB Condition 94 - Protection of municipal water sources.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan City of Chilliwack Letter 23-Jan-17 Draft Groundwater Management Plan Mitigation of Risks and Protection of the Sardis Vedder Aquifer Appendix B

Only covers pre-construction and construction, and not To address feedback from stakeholders about protecting the Sardis Vedder Aquifer, and a request from long term operations. Table in Appendix C includes all the City to employ the same protection measures afforded to watercourse crossings, Trans Mountain locations of potential groundwater related issues, but does provided a comprehensive response to the City in Technical Memos dated May 26, 2015 and October not contain unconfined aquifers, such as Sardis-Vedder 16, 2015 from Trans Mountain’s engineering contractor, Hatch Mott MacDonald. aquifer As the City of Chilliwack is aware, additional measures include installation of an additional mainline isolation valve, use of heavier wall pipe and use of biodegradable hydraulic fluids in construction machinery between Silverthorne Road and Watson Road. These measures exceed already stringent regulatory requirements.

The Commitments to protect the aquifer fall under NEB Condition 3, an overarching Condition, which states: Trans Mountain must implement or cause to be implemented, at minimum, all of the policies, practices, programs, mitigation measures, recommendations, and procedures for the protection of the environment included or referred to in its Project application or to which it otherwise committed on the record of the OH-001-2014 proceeding.

Groundwater Management Plan Page D Page In response to your comments related to the Groundwater Management plan, it is important to highlight that each phase of TMEP has groundwater protection measures in place. An analysis of potential

-

10 groundwater impacts has been evaluated and strategies for mitigation have been established for all

phases of the project including design, construction and operations.

During the operations Trans Mountain will continue to allocate extensive resources to it’s pipeline integrity program, which is used to identify and repair anomalies in the pipe before leaks occur. A computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) system is used in combination with other monitoring methods, such as surveillance patrols, regular in-line inspections using smart pigs and smart ball tools (acoustical leak detection technology), Control Centre Operator (CCO) monitoring using the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and scheduled line balance calculations. In the unlikely event that released petroleum impacts groundwater, Trans Mountain will implement a remediation program to recover petroleum and treat contaminated water to meet stringent government criteria.

Groundwater resources are also protected through detailed emergency response plans. The most critical aspect Trans Mountain’s emergency management strategy is to prevent a spill from happening at all. If a spill occurs, Trans Mountain is prepared to respond. Over the past 60 years, a comprehensive program based on a combination of regulatory compliance, operational excellence, industry best practices, and lessons learned through regular exercises and actual incidents.

TABLE D-1 Cont’d

Invited Stakeholder Date of Where Group/ Method of Consultation Addressed in Agency Name Contact Activity Feedback / Stakeholder Response Trans Mountain Response the Plan City of Chilliwack Letter 23-Jan-17 See above Prior to commencing operations groundwater monitoring plans will be designed for all Trans Mountain See above (cont’d) facilities in order to fulfill NEB Condition 130. Trans Mountain will consider installation of monitoring wells in strategic locations, such as highly vulnerable aquifers, along the pipeline route where and if it is deemed beneficial to monitoring and protecting groundwater. Pertinent groundwater data collected during construction activities will be incorporated into the KMC geo-database, and used to develop a post-construction monitoring plan, where applicable. Also, to clarify, the BC aquifer classification maps were used to help define the aquifers in the Groundwater Management Plan. According to the BC aquifer classification system the aquifers in the Chilliwack area are the Vedder River Aquifer 8 IA (15) and the Chilliwack-Rosedale Aquifer 6 IIIA (13). Both of these aquifers have been mapped as a unconfined aquifers, as referenced in Appendix B of the Groundwater Management Plan. Township of Email April 11, 2017 2. Hydrogeology It is assumed that this Stakeholder feedback is referring the Hydrogeology section of Condition 72 Groundwater Langley Pipeline EPP. As outlined in the letter provided to the ToL on March 15th, 2017, as a requirement of Management Section 7, Items 10 and 11 - see comments on National Energy Board (NEB) Condition 93, Trans Mountain field verified and mapped the Plan Groundwater Management Plan locations of water wells within 150 m on either side of the pipeline. This search area was deemed appropriate by the NEB, given that the impact of pipeline construction activities and potential hydrogeological influences of the shallow pipeline construction is anticipated to be minimal. During construction, water wells identified in

Page D Page the field verified survey within the construction right-or-way will be flagged and fenced prior to pipeline construction. Specific attention will be paid to evaluating water wells within 150 m of the pipeline centerline near

-

11 blasting sites

and in areas where trenchless crossings with artesian conditions may be encountered. These wells will be evaluated by a Hydrogeology Resource Specialist, and if deemed necessary, monitoring of these water wells will include measurement of well yields, static and pumping water levels, as well as water quality sampling of these wells. Langley’s comments on the Groundwater Management Response provided in a letter to ToL March 15th 2017 Plan are summarized in a document dated December 19, 2016, previously provided to TMEP.

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.6 Aboriginal Engagement Since April 2012, Trans Mountain has engaged with Aboriginal groups who might have an interest in the Project or have Aboriginal interests potentially affected by the Project, based on the proximity of their community and their assertion of traditional and cultural use of the land along the pipeline corridor to maintain a traditional lifestyle. The objectives of Aboriginal engagement are to:

• have an open, transparent and inclusive process that seeks to exchange information in a respectful manner;

• address concerns shared by those who might have an interest in the Project or have Aboriginal interests potentially affected by the Project;

• incorporate feedback into Project planning and execution; and

• provide opportunities to maximize Project benefits to Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal groups.

A comprehensive Aboriginal engagement process is led by experienced engagement advisors in Alberta and BC, specialized in the areas of Aboriginal relations, law, economic development, education, training, employment and procurement. Trans Mountain’s engagement process for the Project is flexible, allowing each community and group to engage in meaningful dialogue in the manner they choose and in a way to meet their objectives and values.

Each community has the opportunity to engage with Trans Mountain, depending on Project interests and potential effects. The following opportunities to engage have been provided:

• Project announcement;

• initial contact with Aboriginal community or Aboriginal group;

• meetings with Chief and Council and meetings with staff;

• host community information session(s);

• conduct TLU studies and socio-economic interviews;

• identify interests and concerns; and

• identify mitigation options.

Issues and concerns specific to the Groundwater Management Plan raised during Aboriginal engagement between early 2012 to February 2017 are summarized in Table D-2.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-12

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE D-2

SUMMARY OF ABORIGINAL CONCERNS REGARDING THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

Issue or Concern Aboriginal Where Summary Community Summary Trans Mountain Response Addressed Construction will alter quantity and/or Coldwater Indian The groundwater management plan contains mitigation methods for Table 4.0-1 quality of water in the aquifer Band ensuring water quality/quantity are maintained during construction. Accidents or malfunctions during Groundwater protection has been considered during each stage of the construction or operations will affect the project. quality of the aquifer Environmental Management Coldwater Indian Aquifer delineation will be addressed in NEB Condition 39. The N.A. Shortcomings Band Condition 39 report was not prepared during Coldwater’s review of the Groundwater Management Plan groundwater management plan. Mitigation requirements specific to the describes how TMEP plans to monitor Coldwater aquifer will be evaluated in the NEB Condition 39 plan and and mitigate groundwater impacts. Trans Mountain will consult with Coldwater on this plan. Proposed in the Plan to test existing water wells for contamination and replace wells that are contaminated. But aquifer is not delineated and is the only source of potable water for Coldwater, so how this mitigation measure to replace contaminated well is unclear. Until aquifer is delineated, it is not possible to evaluate mitigations proposed for groundwater.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-13

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE D-2 Cont’d.

Issue or Concern Aboriginal Where Summary Community Summary Trans Mountain Response Addressed The Pipeline EPP and Groundwater Management Coldwater Indian The EPP and Groundwater management plan are not the only Section 4.3 Plan Band documents designed to provide aquifer protection. There are a – Risk of the Project to water supply cannot suite of other programs and plans that offer aquifer protection. be appropriately managed by a plan, as the Trans Mountain is undertaking a hydrological assessment of the contamination of the aquifer would be coldwater aquifer under NEB Condition 39 to understand the permanent, there are no other sources of specific aquifer characteristics. This plan, was not prepared domestic water for most reserve residents, during the Coldwater Indian Band’s review of the groundwater and viable alternative pipeline routes are management plan or the Pipeline EPP. available to avoid this risk altogether. Trans Mountain allocates extensive resources to it’s pipeline integrity program, which is used to identify and repair anomalies – NEB's condition, or management plans, are in the pipe before leaks occur. A computational pipeline not satisfactory to address our serious monitoring (CPM) system is used in combination with other concerns, comments are provided on both monitoring methods, such as surveillance patrols, regular in-line below, and a third-party review of the inspections using smart pigs and smart ball tools (acoustical leak Pipeline EPP by PGL Environmental detection technology), Control Centre Operator (CCO) monitoring Consultants is included. using the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and scheduled line balance calculations. In the unlikely event that released petroleum impacts groundwater, Trans Mountain will implement a remediation program to recover petroleum and treat contaminated water to meet stringent government criteria. Groundwater resources are also protected through detailed emergency response plans. The most critical aspect Trans Mountain’s emergency management strategy is to prevent a spill from happening at all. If a spill occurs, Trans Mountain is prepared to respond. Over the past 60 years, a comprehensive program based on a combination of regulatory compliance, operational excellence, industry best practices, and lessons learned through regular exercises and actual incidents. Prior to commencing operations groundwater monitoring plans will be designed for all Trans Mountain facilities in order to fulfill NEB Condition 130. Trans Mountain will consider installation of monitoring wells in strategic locations, such as highly vulnerable aquifers, along the pipeline route where and if it is deemed beneficial to monitoring and protecting groundwater. Pertinent groundwater data collected during construction activities will be incorporated into the KMC geo-database, and used to develop a post-construction monitoring plan, where applicable. In the unlikely event an aquifer is impacted, Trans Mountain has committed to re-establish or replace a potable water supply as required should a water supply be (diminishment in quantity and/or quality) by the Project during pipeline installation. The replacement or re-establishment of a water well will be done under the supervision of a Hydrogeological Professional. The Pipeline EPP and Groundwater Management Coldwater Indian The risk to groundwater contamination by the Project comes from Section 4.3 Plan Band a potential spill. The spilled contaminant would have to migrate (continued from previous page) through the materials above the aquifer and then would require time to migrate into and through the aquifer, to impact a certain portion of an aquifer. The extent of impact to any aquifer would be related to the aquifer setting, and the response time and remedial efforts that followed a release. Depending on the nature of the setting and the contamination, hydrocarbons can be remediated; and natural degradation processes will break down and eliminate hydrocarbon contamination in typical fresh water aquifer settings, albeit over long periods of time. Studies currently underway are designed to gain more information regarding the extent of the aquifer and its properties. Site-specific plans would be developed to manage any issues related to potential contamination and implement an appropriate management solution.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-14

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE D-2 Cont’d.

Issue or Concern Aboriginal Where Summary Community Summary Trans Mountain Response Addressed Pipeline EPP Coldwater Indian The Hydrogeological Study, which is specific to Coldwater’s N.A. Band Aquifer, as a part of NEB Condition 39, was not prepared during – Does not refer to the requirement of a the Coldwater Indian Band’s review of the groundwater hydrogeological study for Coldwater IR1, which would presumably require the management plan or the Pipeline EPP. Pipeline EPP to be updated. The Groundwater Management Plan is designed to mitigate impacts during construction, and the programs during operations – Does not refer to our aquifer, meaning to are listed in the above response. specific mitigations in the Resource Specific Prior to commencing operations groundwater monitoring plans Mitigation Table do not apply to Coldwater, will be designed for all Trans Mountain facilities including the resulting in the same errors as Trans pipeline as part of NEB Condition 130 Mountain’s Project Application which failed to identify our aquifer. – Is limited to environmental management during construction only, and does not address environmental management during the lifetime of the Project. The Environmental Response Plan, which applies to pipeline Operations, has not yet been completed. Groundwater Management Plan Coldwater Indian The Hydrogeological Study, which is specific to Coldwater’s N.A. Band Aquifer, as a part of NEB Condition 39, was not prepared during – the plan does not mention Coldwater’s the Coldwater Indian Band’s review of the groundwater aquifer, community wells and private wells management plan or the Pipeline EPP. that stand to be impacted by the Project currently proposed. As a result, the Groundwater Management Plan does not even apply to Coldwater. A Coldwater specific Groundwater Management Plan would be needed for our community, however while this is necessary, we are not suggesting it is sufficient to address our concerns about locating the pipeline through the recharge zone of our aquifer. Hydrogeological Study Coldwater Indian The Hydrogeological Study, which is specific to Coldwater’s N.A. Band Aquifer, as a part of NEB Condition 39, was not prepared during – Completion of a hydrogeological study is a the Coldwater Indian Band’s review of the groundwater critical step and needs to be completed management plan or the Pipeline EPP. These plans will address before construction begins in the Coldwater Valley. This was intended to be discussed each of these concerns. during a meeting scheduled on October 17, 2016 however Ian Anderson canceled and has not rescheduled. – We want to work with Trans Mountain to choose the appropriate consultant, and develop the terms on which that consultant is retained. Specifically, data should be shared between Trans Mountain and Coldwater at the same time. We would also require our own independent consultants to advise us on the work, including designing the study, and funding commitments for that purpose. We anticipate using BC Groundwater in that capacity, given their in- depth knowledge of our water supply needs and local hydrogeology, as well as PGL as necessary.

Trans Mountain continues to liaise with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, the Government of Canada’s Major Projects Management Office, the BC Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, and the Alberta Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs to provide updates regarding Trans Mountain’s engagement activities with Aboriginal groups.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-15

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

1.6.1 Identifying Aboriginal Groups for Consultation Appendix F lists the Aboriginal groups identified for consultation. Throughout regular engagement with TMEP, any Aboriginal groups would have been added to the list if they had identified water quality monitoring management as a concern.

1.6.2 Consultation Activities A letter was sent to the Aboriginal groups listed above with a copy of the draft Plan in September 2016. Where appropriate and upon request, a follow up meeting was arranged to discuss this Plan in more detail and address any concerns. No feedback specific to this Plan was received.

Trans Mountain has summarized the feedback received through Trans Mountain’s engagement on this Plan in Table B-4 and the summary includes how Trans Mountain responded to and addressed the concern or issue. It should be noted that although the engagement process also provided for opportunity for general discussion about Project construction and associated Aboriginal issues and opportunities; only feedback/issues directly related to the topic are provided in this Plan. Other issues and topics raised have been captured in the corresponding mitigation plan as appropriate.

This final Plan will be shared with the Aboriginal groups at the same time as the Plan is filed with the NEB in 2017.

1.7 Landowners/Tenants Trans Mountain has implemented a comprehensive landowner engagement process for the TMEP to:

• ensure landowners are informed of the Project and how it may affect them;

• enable landowners to gain an understanding of their rights under the NEB Act, and the regulatory process and their opportunities for comment within the NEB regulatory process; and

• have a number of opportunities to discuss the Project, identify my concerns or questions they may have with the project, and have those questions and concerns addressed by Trans Mountain.

In addition to these opportunities for engagement, Trans Mountain is required to provide formal notifications of landowners under Sections 87 and 34 of the NEB Act, and Trans Mountain has or will, at the appropriate time, provide such notices.

Individual landowners and tenants have different preferences with respect to communications, and Trans Mountain tailors its communications as requested. Land representatives working for Trans Mountain have been in discussions with landowners for over three years and issues or concerns raised with land agents have been documented in the Project landowner database, addressed within site specific construction plans and documented within the land rights agreements. Trans Mountain has filed reports with the NEB providing details on the landowner engagement program and results to date. In accordance with NEB Condition 99, records of engagement and consultation with landowners and tenants will be filed with the NEB at least two months prior to commencing construction and every six months thereafter until five years after commencing Project operations.

Trans Mountain’s landowner/tenant consultation strategy includes the activities described as follows:

• Prior to Project approval - obtain landowner permission for survey, provide information on the project and landowner rights, provide copies of land agreement documents to the landowners for their review and consideration, dialogue with each landowner to answer questions and address concerns raised by landowners, provide Project updates, and disseminate any other information necessary to satisfy landowner requests and regulatory requirements. After addressing outstanding questions and issues, obtain land agreements from landowners voluntarily. Land agreements have and will address specific landowner concerns regarding construction and reclamation activity.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-16

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• After obtaining a CPCN from the NEB, Trans Mountain will provide Section 34 notices indicating the detailed route for the pipeline and the specific lands affected by the Project, and complete any additional regulatory procedures required prior to commencement of construction, including providing reasonable notice through land agents of commencement date and activities. Trans Mountain land representatives will continue to maintain contact with landowners through construction to answer questions and address any issues that may arise. Following construction, maintain communication with landowners to discuss reclamation activities and timing. Upon completion of reclamation, Trans Mountain will transition the Project land program to operations.

Respecting this report, Trans Mountain notified landowners by letter in September 2016 that NEB Condition plans were being released for consultation and feedback. The landowner notification letter requested that landowners review the reports available on the TMEP website, or alternatively contact their assigned land representative or Trans Mountain directly if they wished to receive hard copies of the reports to review. No responses or requests for copies of the reports were received by Trans Mountain and no concerns or questions about the reports were expressed by landowners.

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page D-17

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX E

RECORD OF STAKEHOLDER NOTIFICATIONS OF PLAN

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page E-1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE E-1

RECORD OF NOTIFICATION

Regulator/Stakeholder Group Contact Name (if applicable) Date Method of Contact Landowners N/A September 11, 2016 Letter Aboriginal Groups N/A April 28, 2017 Letter Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Tim Blair December 22, 2016 Email Jasper National Park of Canada Mayabe Dia December 22, 2016 Email Alberta Environment and Parks Corinee Kristensen December 22, 2016 Email Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Lisa Gow December 22, 2016 Email BC Parks Ken Morrison December 22, 2016 Email BC Oil and Gas Commission Brian Murphy December 22, 2016 Email Ministry of Natural Gas Development Linda Beltrano December 22, 2016 Email Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Andrea Mah December 22, 2016 Email Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Susan Fitton December 22, 2016 Email FVAQC Roger Quan October 21, 2016 Email ECCC Phil Wong October 21, 2016 Email ECCC Rachel Mayberry October 28, 2016 Email ECCC Coral Deshield December 21, 2016 Email ECCC Phil Wong December 21, 2016 Email Vancouver Fraser Port Authority Patrick Coates January 31, 2017 Email Department of Fisheries and Oceans Sandra Hollick-Kenyon December 3, 2016 Email Department of Fisheries and Oceans Alston Bonamis December 3, 2016 Email City of Edmonton N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Spruce Grove N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Municipality of Jasper N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Parkland County N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Strathcona County N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Town of Edson N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Town of Hinton N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Town of Stony Plain N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Village of Wabamun N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Yellowhead County N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Kamloops N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Kamloops RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Merritt N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Merritt RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Clearwater Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter District of Clearwater N/A November 29, 2016 Letter District of Clearwater RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Interior Health N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Merritt Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Northern Health N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Regional District of Fraser Fort George N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Thompson Nicola Regional District N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Town of Blue River N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Venture Kamloops N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Village of Valemount N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Village of Valemount RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Nicola Stock Breeder's Association - on behalf of the BC N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Cattlemen's Association Grassland's Conservation Council N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Thompson Rivers University N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Southern Interior Weed Management Committee N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Fraser Basin Council N/A November 29, 2016 Letter

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page E-2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE E-1 Cont’d

Regulator/Stakeholder Group Contact Name (if applicable) Date Method of Contact Northwest Invasive Plant Council (NWIPC) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Grassland’s Conservation Council N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Abbotsford Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Abbotsford Police Department N/A November 29, 2016 Letter ASCA N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Invasive Species N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Ministry of Children and Family Development N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Ministry of Social Development N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Nature N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Wildlife Federation N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Burnaby Board of Trade N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Burnaby RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Chilliwack Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Chilliwack Economic Partners N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Abbotsford N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Burnaby N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Chilliwack N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Coquitlam N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of New Westminster N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Port Coquitlam N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Port Moody N/A November 29, 2016 Letter City of Surrey N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Coquitlam RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Corporation of Delta N/A November 29, 2016 Letter District of Hope N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Eagle Creek N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Fraser Valley Invasive Plant Council N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Fraser Valley Regional District N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Glen Valley Watershed Society N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Hope Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Hope Community Policing Office N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Langley Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter LEPS N/A November 29, 2016 Letter LFVAQCC N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Metro Vancouver N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Newton RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter RCMP Division ‘E’ N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Sapperton Fish and Game N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Stoney Creek N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Surrey Board of Trade N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Surry Environmental Partners N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Surrey RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Township of Langley N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Township of Langley RCMP Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter TriCities Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Upper Fraser Valley Regional Detachment N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Village of Anmore N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Village of Belcarra N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Yorkson N/A November 29, 2016 Letter ACGI Shipping N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Barnett Marine Park N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Ambulance N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BC Chamber of Shipping N/A November 29, 2016 Letter

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page E-3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

TABLE E-1 Cont’d

Regulator/Stakeholder Group Contact Name (if applicable) Date Method of Contact BC Coast Pilots (BCCP) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter BROKE (Burnaby Residents Opposed to Kinder Morgan Expansion) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Canadian Pacific (CP) Rail N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Canexus- Ero- Newalta-Univar Community Advisory Panel (CAP) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Canexus Chemicals N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Chevron N/A November 29, 2016 Letter CN Rail N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Council of Marine Carriers N/A November 29, 2016 Letter District of North Vancouver N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Empire Shipping N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Erco Worldwide N/A November 29, 2016 Letter First Nation Emergency Services Society (FNESS) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter First Nation Health Authority N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Fraser Health Authority N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Inchcape Shipping N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Island Tug and Barge N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Kask Brothers N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Ledcor Resources and Transportation Limited Partnership N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Mason Agency (Shipping Service) N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- Burnaby Lougheed N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- Burnaby North N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- Coquitlam – Burke Mountain N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- North Vancouver Lonsdale N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- North Vancouver Seymour N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MLA- Port Moody- Coquitlam N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- Delta N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- North Burnaby Seymour N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- North Vancouver N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- Vancouver Centre N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- Vancouver East N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- Vancouver Quadra N/A November 29, 2016 Letter MP- West Vancouver – Sunshine Coast – Sea to Sky Country N/A November 29, 2016 Letter North Shore NOPE N/A November 29, 2016 Letter North Vancouver Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Pacific Coast Terminal N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Pacific Pilotage Authority N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Pacific Wildlife Foundation N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Peter Kiewit Infrastructure Co. N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Seaspan N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Shell Terminal N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Simon Fraser University N/A November 29, 2016 Letter SMIT Marine N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Suncor Terminal N/A November 29, 2016 Letter UBC Stellar Sea Lion (Marine Mammal) Research Centre N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Vancouver Aquarium N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Vancouver Board of Trade N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Vancouver Coastal Health Authority N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Vancouver Pile and Dredge N/A November 29, 2016 Letter West Vancouver Chamber of Commerce N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Westward Shipping N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Wild Bird Trust N/A November 29, 2016 Letter Metro Vancouver Regional District Ali Ergudenler November 29, 2016 Email Metro Vancouver Regional District Roger Quan November 29, 2016 Email

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page E-4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

APPENDIX F

ABORIGINAL GROUPS TO BE ENGAGED ON THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-1

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

ABORIGINAL GROUPS TO BE ENGAGED ON THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN • Adams Lake Indian Band

• Aitchelitz First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Alexander First Nation

• Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation

• Aseniwuche Winewak Nation

• Ashcroft Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Asini Wachi Nehiyawak

• Boothroyd Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Boston Bar First Nation (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• British Columbia Métis Federation

• Canim Lake Band (Tsq’escenemc’)

• Canoe Creek (Stswecem'c Xgat'tem) First Nation

• Chawathil First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Cheam First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Coldwater Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Cook’s Ferry Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Cowichan Tribes

• Enoch Cree Nation

• Ermineskin First Nation

• Foothills Ojibway Society

• Halalt First Nation (CNA)

• High Bar First Nation

• Horse Lake First Nation (Treaty 8)

• Hwlitsum First Nation (CNA)

• Kanaka Bar Indian Band

• Katzie First Nation

• Kelly Lake Cree Nation

• Kelly Lake First Nation

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-2

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Kelly Lake Métis Settlement Society

• Ktunaxa Nation

• Kwantlen First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Kwaw-kwaw-Apilt First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Kwikwetlem First Nation

• Lake Cowichan First Nation

• Leq’a:mel First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Lheidli-T’enneh First Nation

• Lhtako Dene Nation

• Little Shuswap Indian Band

• Louis Bull Tribe

• Lower Nicola Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Lower Similkameen Indian Band

• Lyackson First Nation

• Lytton First Nation (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Matsqui First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Métis Nation of Alberta Gunn Métis Local 55

• Métis Nation of British Columbia

• Métis Regional Council Zone IV of the Métis Nation of Alberta

• Michel First Nation

• Montana First Nation

• Musqueam Indian Band

• Nakcowinewak Nation of Canada

• Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council

• Neskonlith Indian Band

• Nicola Tribal Association ***

• Nicomen Indian Band (NTA)

• Nooaitch Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• O’Chiese First Nation

• Okanagan Indian Band

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-3

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Oregon Jack Creek Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Paul First Nation

• Pauquachin First Nation

• Penelakut First Nation

• Penticton Indian Band

• Peters Band (Stó:lō)

• Popkum First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Qayqayt First Nation (New Westminster)

• Saddle Lake Cree Nation

• Samson Cree Nation

• Scowlitz First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Seabird Island Band (Stó:lō)

• Sechelt (Shishalh Nation)

• Semiahmoo First Nation

• Sencoten Alliance

• Shackan Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Shuswap Indian Band

• Shuswap Nation Tribal Council

• Shxwha:y Village (Skway First Nation) (Stó:lō)

• Shxw’owhamel First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Simpcw First Nation

• Siska Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Skawahlook First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Skeetchestn Indian Band

• Skowkale First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Skuppah Indian Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Skway First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Snaw-Naw-As (Nanoose)

• Soowahlie Indian Band (Stó:lō)

• Splatsin First Nation

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-4

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Spuzzum First Nation (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Squamish Nation

• Squiala First Nation (Stó:lō)

• St'at'imc Chiefs Council

• Stó:lō Collective

• Stoney Nakoda First Nation

• Sts'ailes Band (Chehalis Indian Band) (Stó:lō)

• St'uxwtews (Bonaparte Indian Band)

• Stu'zuminus First Nation (Chemainus)

• Sucker Creek First Nation

• Sumas First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Sunchild First Nation

• Tk'emlups te Secwepemc (Kamloops)

• Toosey Indian Band

• Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta

• Tsartlip First Nation

• Tsawout First Nation

• Tsawwassen First Nation

• Tseycum First Nation

• Tsilhoqu'tin National Government

• Ts'kwaylaxw (Pavilion Indian Band)

• Tsleil-Waututh Nation

• Tsuut'ina First Nation

• Tzeachten First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Union Bar Indian Band (Stó:lō)

• Upper Nicola Band (Nlaka'pamux Nation)

• Upper Similkameen Indian Band

• Westbank First Nation

• Whispering Pines/Clinton Indian Band

• Whitefish (Goodfish) Lake First Nation #128

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-5

Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC Groundwater Management Plan Trans Mountain Expansion Project 687945/March 2018

• Williams Lake (T'exelc) Indian Band

• Xat’sull First Nation (Soda Creek Indian Band)

• Yakweakwioose First Nation (Stó:lō)

• Yale First Nation (Stó:lō)

01-13283-GG-000-CHE-RPT-0001 Page F-6