Company Name •••DRAFT••• Month/Year Project Title Project Number APPENDIX C Page C-1 TRANS MOUNTAIN EXPANSION PROJECT Minutes of Meeting Meeting Location: Travelodge, Duncan, BC; Team & Discipline: AET TERMPOL Meeting DOCUMENT NUMBER: DATE: January 17, 2014 TIME (24 hour): 1100 to 1400 MEETING TYPE: Internal (send record to [email protected]) Aboriginal (send record to [email protected]) PARTICIPANTS Full Name, Title, Organization Email Phone Additional Al Grove; Hwlitsum First Nations Jack Smith; Halalt First Nations Ruth Sauder; Penelakut Tribe Myrus James; Penelakut Tribe Ronda Jordan; Stz’uminus First Nations Eamon Gaunt; Cowichan Tribes Helen Reid: Cowichan Tribes Larry George; Cowichan Tribes David Robbins; Legal Counsel Celina Albany; Cowichan Tribes Denise James; Penelakut Tribe Bob Gowe; Transport Canada [email protected] Katherine Beavis; Transport Canada [email protected] Michael Davies; Kinder Morgan, Canada [email protected] Madhvi Russell; Transport Canada [email protected] Hart MacKinnon: Transport Canada [email protected] Stafford Reid; Guest Chris Badger; TMEP [email protected]>, Bikram Kanjilal; TMEP [email protected] Georgia Dixon; TMEP [email protected] Gary Youngman; TMEP [email protected] Max Nock; AET; TMEP [email protected] Jamie Andrews; TMEP [email protected] MEETING MINUTES Introductions A distinction was made that there are five different tribes within the Cowichan Nation Alliance and not solely the Cowichan Nation. These Tribes are Halalt, Stz’uminus, Hwiltsum, Cowichan and Penelakut. Al Grove explained that the TERMPOL reports were found to be lacking as there was no reference to Section 35 and various other categories including fishing rights. It was also found that there was silence on First Nations issues. Overview of TERMPOL Process Katherine (Transport Canada) explained that: • the TERMPOL process is voluntary and the process is driven by the proponent; • Transport Canada recommends that proponents seek local and traditional knowledge to inform the studies and enhance the marine safety assessment; • there is an opportunity for input at this time on the TERMPOL surveys and studies; and • these surveys and studies have also been provided to the National Energy Board (NEB) in support of the marine volume of the facilities application. Ideally, comments should be provided to the NEB, Transport Canada and Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. (KMC). Please send records to [email protected] (internal) or [email protected] (external). Page 1 Transport Canada Explained the Timeline for Upcoming Events • Input opportunities in regards to environmental impacts and impacts to Aboriginal rights, these would be best captured through the NEB’s Environmental Assessment and Aboriginal consultation process. • If information is provided to Transport Canada regarding traditional knowledge relevant to the technical review of marine safety (e.g., navigational hazards), it can be considered by the TERMPOL Review Committee during the review of the studies. • Comments on surveys and studies will also be reviewed by Trans Mountain Expansion Project (TMEP). • There is no formal information request system for TERMPOL, however, Transport Canada intends to submit the TERMPOL Report to the NEB and it would be subject to the same rules there as other evidence filed. • It is anticipated that the TERMPOL report will be finalized in the spring 2014. • Information requests should best be directed to the NEB. • The TERMPOL recommendations are not legally binding. Q: Who sits on the TERMPOL review committee? Who gives direction for the reports? A (Transport Canada): The TERMPOL Review Committee is constituted by Transport Canada and includes various branches of federal agencies: the Canadian Coast Guard; BC Coast Pilots; Environment Canada; Port Metro Vancouver; and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). The proponents are responsible for the studies and the surveys. The TERMPOL Review Committee does not have involvement in producing the studies and surveys, but reviews them once they are submitted. C: With respect to Aboriginal engagement, as this group has been excluded from the report, there is concern that it is too late to be involved in the scoping of these studies. This is a problem at this point. R (Transport Canada): The TERMPOL manual is outdated (2001) and there is duplication with other processes and programs that have started since that time, like environmental assessments. Transport Canada acknowledges that early engagement is better, but beyond discussing with TMEP which surveys and studies would be conducted from the list in the TERMPOL manual, Transport Canada has not been involved in the development of the surveys and studies. Transport Canada can provide more information about how the scoping was done (i.e., which surveys and studies were identified for the TERMPOL). Most of the surveys and studies were included and those that were not were deemed not relevant to the project. C: The communities have a difficult time dealing with [review of TERMPOL studies] as there is a lack of technicians to review these studies. There are only 6 references in 200 pages with no citations (referring to the Quantitative Risk Assessment report from DNV). This report is not a valid academic study and we need to gather and put forward new information. R (Transport Canada): If there are specific concerns relevant to the TERMPOL review process, we encourage CNA to submit them in writing to TMEP and the TERMPOL Review Committee. If concerns are related to environmental impacts, they should be submitted to the NEB. C: It does a dis-service to state that there will be no risk. I think that there will be a spill in the next 100 years. A (Trans Mountain): The consequences of a spill are often considered so dire that the probability side is lost. The report does identify various probabilities that are outlined within the report. The small ones are more probable than a larger one. Q: In terms of the scope of the TERMPOL process and the recommendations, I believe that spill response is not adequately developed. Which process is this likely to come out of? TERMPOL or NEB? A (Transport Canada): It is not crystal clear at this point as to how spill response will be addressed in the TERMPOL report as the regime is currently changing. The Federal Tanker Expert Safety panel recently released a report discussing this. Q: What is the protocol for traditional fishing within shipping lanes? It’s an issue in the communities as the fishing is Please send records to [email protected] (internal) or [email protected] (external). Page 2 important in the communities. A: Every opening is broadcast to shippers. A part of this process is to review the opportunities to improve the current practices. Trans Mountain Expansion Project TERMPOL Process Overview C: It should be noted for this group that once the oil is on the tanker, the oil is no longer owned by KMC. R (Trans Mountain): As a part of the vessel acceptance program, there are requirements and criteria that must be met if shippers want to use the Westridge Terminal. Q: Would communities be compensated if there were a loss to fisheries? A (Trans Mountain): The SOPF provides compensation. Please see additional explanation provided separately. Q: On Page 96 it says that all the vessels will be double-hulled. This says that the majority will be double-hulled. A (Trans Mountain): The tankers will all be double-hulled. Please see additional explanation provided separately. Q: You spoke of workshops (Hazard Identification), who were they done with? A (Trans Mountain): Many experts, however, I think you are referring to the lack of Aboriginal-specific workshops. We did have First Nations attendees at our second hazard meeting in Vancouver. Q: When KMC is asking their experts to develop their report regarding workshops, what is the direction as to who is involved in these workshops? A (Transport Canada): Transport Canada was there as an observer. Q: If increased traffic continues to grow, there will be an increase in accident probability. A (Trans Mountain): There is a traffic forecast in the report. The vessels and tonnage have gone up so, therefore, it’s not necessarily shipping numbers going up. TERMPOL 3.2 has this information. Accident probability in the risk assessment is specific to Trans Mountain’s traffic. Q: Escort tugs were used when transporting coal in the same scenario that Trans Mountain is proposing. This coal was spilled and it was devastating for the community (reference is to an incident that occurred at Westshore Terminals). A (Trans Mountain): The tug practices are different for TMEP. Multiple tugs will be secured to the vessel far before it reaches the berth, and in this example, the coal was spilled as a result of the vessel striking the loading conveyor; the coal was not spilled from the vessel. Q: This probability model is based on averages (referring to weather). What about the abnormalities? The worst-case scenario? A: Computer models have inherent limitations. Averages are used because they mathematically account for a range of potential probabilities. Please see the additional explanation provided separately. C: The pipeline crosses the Fraser River and the Halalt First Nations has an interest in that area. David Robbins showed two maps. One of the Fraser River and the other of the shipping lanes. C: TERMPOL will have conclusions at the federal level. It will be a piece of evidence and these timelines need to be more flexible if we are to have input. R (Transport Canada): We have indicated to Trans Mountain that we are willing to incorporate input provided that is relevant to the TERMPOL review. We have also indicated that we expect our review will take approximately 4 months. As such, input would need to be received by late March or early April. Please send records to [email protected] (internal) or [email protected] (external).