View
213
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1206
IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT REVIEW PANEL ("JOINT PANEL")ESTABLISHED TO REVIEW THE JACKPINE MINE EXPANSION,FORT MCKAY, ALBERTA, ("PROJECT") PROPOSED BY SHELL
CANADA LIMITED ("SHELL")
AND IN THE MATTER OF ALBERTA ENERGY RESOURCESCONSERVATION BOARD ("ERCB") APPLICATION NO. 1554388
AND IN THE MATTER OF CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAGENCY ("AGENCY") CEAR NO. 59540
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATIONACT R.S.A. 2000 C. E-10
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE OIL SANDS CONSERVATION ACT,R.S.A. 2000, C.0-7
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT ACT, 2012, S.C. 2012, C. 19, S. 52
BY THEALBERTA ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATION BOARD AND THE
GOVERNMENT OF CANADA
_______________________________________
PROCEEDINGS AT HEARING
NOVEMBER 5, 2012
VOLUME 7
PAGES 1206 TO 1470
________________________________________
C o p y
________________________________________
Held at:MacDonald Island Park151 MacDonald Drive
Fort McMurray, AlbertaT9H 5C5
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1207
APPEARANCES
JOINT PANEL:
Mr. Jim Dilay, Panel ChairMr. Alex Bolton, Panel MemberMr. Les Cooke, Panel Member
CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY (CEAA):
Charles Birchall, Esq., CEAA CounselMs. Jill Adams, Joint Review Panel ManagerMs. Lucille Jamault, Manager of Communications
ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATION BOARD (ERCB):
Gary Perkins, Esq., Board CounselMs. Meighan LaCasse, Board CounselRobert J. Mueller, Board Counsel
Ms. Amanda Black, Hearing CoordinatorMr. Bob Curran, Section Leader, Public Affairs,ERCB Communication
PANEL SECRETARIAT:Mr. Paul AguasMs. Gladys OnovwionaMr. Yetimgeta MihiretuMs. Tara WangMs. Krista BoychukMs. Erin ToughMr. Steven van LingenMr. Don SouthMr. Michael BevanMs. Afshan MahmoodMr. Daniel MartineauMs. Courtney TrevisMr. Jean-Pierre ThonneyMs. Deborah Austin
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1208
APPLICANT
Shawn Denstedt, Q.C. ) Shell Canada Ltd.Sander Duncanson, Esq. )Dan Kolenick, Esq. )
INTERVENERS (in alphabetical order):
Eamon Murphy, Esq. ) Athabasca ChipewyanMs. Jenny Biem ) First Nation
Kirk Lambrecht, Q.C. ) Attorney GeneralJames Elford, Esq. ) of Canada
Ms. Donna Deranger ) Donna Deranger) (Self-represented)
Ms. Karin Buss ) Fort McKay First Nation) and Fort McKay Métis) Community Association
Rangi Jeerakathil, Esq. ) Fort McMurray #468 First) Nation
Ms. Anna Johnston ) John Malcolm, the) Non-Status Fort) McMurray/Fort McKay) First Nation and the) Clearwater River Paul) Cree Band #175
Ms. Cynthia Bertolin ) Métis Nation of AlbertaMs. Debbie Bishop ) Region 1 and the
) individuals and groups) named together with) Region 1
Don Mallon, Q.C. ) Mikisew CreeMs. Daniela O'Callaghan ) First Nation
Thomas Rothwell, Esq. ) Minister of Justice and) Attorney General of) Alberta) (No further) participation)
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1209
Ms. Karin Buss ) Oil Sands EnvironmentalMs. Melissa Gorrie ) Coalition
Ray Purdy, Q.C. ) Regional Municipality ofMs. Katherine Morianos ) Wood BuffaloTore Purdy, Esq. )
Ms. Chelsea Flook ) Sierra Club Prairie(Registering on its behalf) )
Ms. Melissa Gorrie ) Keith Stewart(Registering on his behalf) )
Ms. Sheliza Ladha ) Syncrude Canada Ltd.
Ms. Kellie Johnston ) TOTAL E&P Canada Ltd.
Ms. Melissa Gorrie ) Clinton Westman(Registering on his behalf) )
Ms. Melissa Gorrie ) Anna Zalik and(Registering on their behalf) Osume Osuoka
REALTIME COURT REPORTING:
Realtime Connection, Inc.Nancy Nielsen, RPR, RCR, CSR(A)Stephen Gill, OCR
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1210
INDEX OF PROCEEDINGS
DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
SHELL WITNESS PANEL (RESUMING)(WITNESSES PREVIOUSLY SWORN ORAFFIRMED):
LINDA HAVERSMITCHEL GOODJOHNJASON PLAMONDONDAVID SCHAAFBART KOPPECANDACE BELLMARTIN JALKOTZYGETU BIFTUJERRY VANDENBERGJOAO KUPPERKASEY CLIPPERTONMARK SAWYERMICHAEL MARGERUMMURRAY FITCHROSEMARY BLOISECOLIN MIDDLETONBROCK SIMONSPETER CHAPMANLINDA JEFFERSONWAYNE SPELLERBILL KOVACHDARRELL MARTINDALEJOHN BROADHURSTJEFF ROBERTSMALCOLM MAYES
1215
HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS AND UNDERTAKINGSSPOKEN TO:
1216
QUESTIONS BY ERCB BOARD STAFF, BYMR. PERKINS:
1225
(FIRE ALARM SOUNDS) 1227(10:10 A.M. TO 10:15 A.M.) 1227
(THE LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT)(11:55 A.M. TO 1:00 P.M.)
1287
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1211
INDEX OF PROCEEDINGS
DESCRIPTION
UNDERTAKING SPOKEN TO, BYMR. DUNCANSON:
PAGENO.
1288
QUESTIONS BY ERCB BOARD STAFF, BYMR. MUELLER
1342
(THE AFTERNOON ADJOURNMENT) 1365
UNDERTAKING SPOKEN TO, BYMR. DUNCANSON:
1365
QUESTIONS BY CEAA, BY MR. BIRCHALL: 1367
(THE DINNER ADJOURNMENT)(5:00 P.M. TO 6:30 P.M.)
QUESTIONS BY CEAA, BY MR. BIRCHALL(CONTINING):
1424
1424
(THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT) 1468
(THE HEARING ADJOURNED AT 8:00 P.M.)(THE HEARING TO RECONVENE AT 8:30 A.M.ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6TH, 2012)
1469
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1212
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
EXHIBIT 001-083: RESPONSE TOUNDERTAKING NO. 11 GIVEN BYMR. JALKOTZY TO MS. GORRIE WITH RESPECTTO UPDATED MOOSE POPULATION ASSESSMENTSFOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "MOOSEPOPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS" -SUBMITTED BY SHELL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012
1217
EXHIBIT 001-084: RESPONSE TOUNDERTAKING NO. 13 GIVEN BYMR. JALKOTZY TO MS. BIEM, AND THAT WASFOR THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION FORDISTURBANCE MAPPING IN THE RSA, DATASOURCES FOR RSA SCALE DISTURBANCEMAPPING - SUBMITTED BY SHELL ONNOVEMBER 5, 2012
1217
EXHIBIT 001-085: RESPONSE TOUNDERTAKING NO. 16, GIVEN BYMR. BROADHURST TO PROVIDE COPIES OF THESHELL JACKPINE MINE LEASES FOR THEJACKPINE MINE EXPANSION - SUBMITTED BYSHELL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012
1218
EXHIBIT 001-086: RESPONSE TOUNDERTAKING NO. 17, GIVEN BY MR.BROADHURST TO PROVIDE THE EXHIBIT LIST- ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION - SUBMITTEDBY SHELL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012
1219
EXHIBIT 001-087: RESPONSE TOUNDERTAKING NO. 21 GIVEN BYMR. ROBERTS - PROVIDIONG A MAP/DRAWINGWHICH SHOWS THE SETBACKS FROM THE TOEOF THE SAND CELLS TOWARDS THE SOUTHLEASE BOUNDARY AND THE EAST LEASEBOUNDARIES
1221
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1213
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
DESCRIPTION
EXHIBIT 009-002: FORT MCKAY SPECIFICASSESSMENT (FROM SHELL ON BEHALF OFFORT MCKAY FIRST NATION INDUSTRYRELATIONS CORPORATION TO ENERGYRESOURCES CONSERVATION BOARD (EXHIBITMOVED - PLEASE REFER TO EXHIBIT#001-088
PAGENO.
1222
EXHIBIT 002-038: LETTER AGREEMENTDATED NOVEMBER 10, 2011 ENTITLED "RE:OIL SANDS MINING WATER MANAGEMENTAGREEMENT FOR THE 2011-2012 WINTERPERIOD"
1308
EXHIBIT 002-039: MEMORANDUM DATEDOCTOBER 1, 2012, SUBJECT: CEMARECOMMENDATION TO ALBERTA GOVERNMENT -END PIT LAKES GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 2012
1321
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1214
INDEX OF UNDERTAKINGS
DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
(UNDERTAKING NO. 11 SATISFIED) 1217
(UNDERTAKING NO. 13 SATISFIED) 1218
(UNDERTAKING NO. 16 SATISFIED) 1218
(UNDERTAKING NO. 17 SATISFIED) 1219
(UNDERTAKING NO. 18 SATISFIED) 1220
(UNDERTAKING NO. 21 SATISFIED) 1221
UNDERTAKING 22: MR. BROADHURST TOCONFIRM WHETHER SHELL IS WILLING TOCOMMIT TO AN ASPHALTENE REJECTIONTHRESHOLD OF 10 PERCENT ON AN ANNUALBASIS
1246
UNDERTAKING 23: GIVEN BY MR. MAYES TOPROVIDE THE ORIGINAL PLAN FOR TSRUTAILINGS DEPOSITION
1267
(UNDERTAKING NO. 22 SATISFIED) 1289
UNDERTAKING 24: MR. SCHAAF TO UPDATEFIGURE 6-1 WITH THE CHANGED DATES ASWELL AS PROVIDE OVERLAPS OR ANYOVERLAPS WITH PIERRE RIVER MINE
1293
UNDERTAKING 25: MR. MARTINDALE TOPROVIDE THE ACTUAL POST-CONSTRUCTIONMONITORED NOISE EMISSIONS FOR JACKPINEMINE - PHASE I
1348
(UNDERTAKING SATISFIED) 1367
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1215
Monday, November 5, 2012
(10:00 a.m.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Good morning, everyone. Is
there any housekeeping? Mr. Duncanson?
MR. DUNCANSON: Good morning, Mr. Chairman,
we have a few matters, all of the housekeeping
variety, and a number of undertakings from last
week, which I can speak to.
SHELL WITNESS PANEL (RESUMING) (WITNESSES PREVIOUSLY
SWORN OR AFFIRMED):
LINDA HAVERS
MITCHEL GOODJOHN
JASON PLAMONDON
DAVID SCHAAF
BART KOPPE
CANDACE BELL
MARTIN JALKOTZY
GETU BIFTU
JERRY VANDENBERG
JOAO KUPPER
KASEY CLIPPERTON
MARK SAWYER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1216
MICHAEL MARGERUM
MURRAY FITCH
ROSEMARY BLOISE
COLIN MIDDLETON
BROCK SIMONS
PETER CHAPMAN
LINDA JEFFERSON
WAYNE SPELLER
BILL KOVACH
DARRELL MARTINDALE
JOHN BROADHURST
JEFF ROBERTS
MALCOLM MAYES
HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS AND UNDERTAKINGS SPOKEN TO:
MR. DUNCANSON: The first I believe, it was
undertaking number 11. That was an undertaking
given by Mr. Jalkotzy to Ms. Gorrie, and that was
with respect to updated moose population
assessments for the Project. That's been completed
and it's being filed I believe right away this
morning and hard copies will be available later in
the day. So if we could have an exhibit number for
that, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: 001-083.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1217
EXHIBIT 001-083: RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING NO. 11
GIVEN BY MR. JALKOTZY TO MS. GORRIE WITH RESPECT
TO UPDATED MOOSE POPULATION ASSESSMENTS FOR THE
PROJECT ENTITLED "MOOSE POPULATION VIABILITY
ANALYSIS" - SUBMITTED BY SHELL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you.
(UNDERTAKING NO. 11 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: The second undertaking is I
believe undertaking 13 given by Mr. Jalkotzy to
Ms. Biem, and that was for the source of
information for disturbance mapping in the RSA.
And again, that's something that I understand has
been completed and it's being filed right away this
morning and hard copies will be available as well.
So could we have an exhibit number for that,
Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: 084.
EXHIBIT 001-084: RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING NO. 13
GIVEN BY MR. JALKOTZY TO MS. BIEM, AND THAT WAS
FOR THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR DISTURBANCE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1218
MAPPING IN THE RSA, DATA SOURCES FOR RSA SCALE
DISTURBANCE MAPPING - SUBMITTED BY SHELL ON
NOVEMBER 5, 2012
(UNDERTAKING NO. 13 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: And the next undertaking, I
believe it was undertaking No. 16, that was given
by Mr. Broadhurst to Mr. Lambrecht last Friday, and
that was for copies of the leases for the Jackpine
Mine Expansion. I understand that those are not
confidential and those have been filed this
morning. Again, hard copies will be available
later in the day. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that
will be Exhibit 085?
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir.
EXHIBIT 001-085: RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING NO. 16,
GIVEN BY MR. BROADHURST TO PROVIDE COPIES OF THE
SHELL JACKPINE MINE LEASES FOR THE
JACKPINE MINE EXPANSION - SUBMITTED BY SHELL ON
NOVEMBER 5, 2012
(UNDERTAKING NO. 16 SATISFIED)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1219
MR. DUNCANSON: Next, Ms. Jefferson gave an
undertaking to Mr. Lambrecht for exhibit numbers
for various consultation records. Again, that's
something that I understand has been prepared in
writing. It's filed this morning and hard copies
will be available later in the morning. So,
Mr. Chairman, I suspect that will be
Exhibit 001-086.
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir.
EXHIBIT 001-086: RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING NO. 17,
GIVEN BY MR. BROADHURST TO PROVIDE THE EXHIBIT
LIST - ABORIGINAL CONSULTATION - SUBMITTED BY
SHELL ON NOVEMBER 5, 2012
(UNDERTAKING NO. 17 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: The next undertaking was
undertaking 18, that was from Mr. Broadhurst to
Mr. Lambrecht last Friday. That was for the size
of the mine disturbance in terms of Townships. And
I understand that that's something that
Mr. Broadhurst can speak to this morning.
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, thank you. Good
morning.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1220
In response, the JPME mine disturbance area
is 13,291 hectares. And the equivalency is 1.425
Townships. And just to give the source, this is
based on the Muskeg River Diversion Alternative
Mine Plan footprint. And the source is the May
2012 Submission, Section 2, Errors and Omissions,
page 2-1. Thank you.
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you, Mr. Broadhurst.
(UNDERTAKING NO. 18 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: Two more undertakings,
Mr. Chairman. The first was given by Mr. Sawyer to
Mr. Perkins and that was for revised tables and
figures showing overburden disposal areas within
the mine pit. Last Friday, Mr. Sawyer indicated
that he believed that that would be ready by the
end of this week. And we can confirm that that
remains the estimated time that that will be
completed is this Friday.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. DUNCANSON: And finally in terms of the
undertakings, Mr. Chairman, there was an
undertaking provided by Mr. Roberts to Mr. Perkins
last Friday with respect to the setback distance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1221
for the south External Tailings Disposal Area, and
that's an undertaking that Mr. Roberts can speak to
this morning.
A. MR. ROBERTS: Yes, we're undertaking to
have a drawing provided which shows the setbacks
from the toe of the sand cells towards the south
lease boundary and the east lease boundaries. And
that should be ready by the end of today.
MR. DUNCANSON: Okay, thank you, Mr. Roberts.
That will be a map that will be filed on the
Registry this morning or later today and hard
copies will be provided. And, Mr. Chairman, I
believe that takes us to Exhibit 001-087.
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir.
EXHIBIT 001-087: RESPONSE TO UNDERTAKING NO. 21
GIVEN BY MR. ROBERTS - PROVIDING A MAP/DRAWING
WHICH SHOWS THE SETBACKS FROM THE TOE OF THE SAND
CELLS TOWARDS THE SOUTH LEASE BOUNDARY AND THE
EAST LEASE BOUNDARIES
(UNDERTAKING NO. 21 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: So, Mr. Chairman, just two
other matters: The first, it's come to our
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1222
attention that one of the filings that Shell made
about a year-and-a-half ago is the Fort McKay
Specific Assessment. And that was Registry
number 51. That document was too big to be loaded
onto the Registry, but it's a document that we
believe should be uploaded. And it should be
assigned an exhibit number. So we've spoken with
the Registry folks this morning and they are going
to undertake to upload that, if possible. And we
were hoping to get an exhibit number for that
submission as well. And that I believe would take
us to 001-088.
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir.
EXHIBIT 009-002: FORT MCKAY SPECIFIC ASSESSMENT
(FROM SHELL ON BEHALF OF FORT MCKAY FIRST NATION
INDUSTRY RELATIONS CORPORATION TO ENERGY
RESOURCES CONSERVATION BOARD (EXHIBIT MOVED -
PLEASE REFER TO EXHIBIT #001-088)
MS. BLACK: Just a moment, sorry. The
Fort McKay Specific Assessment has already been
assigned an exhibit number. It's in the Fort McKay
prefix, 009-002. But you are correct in that it
hasn't been uploaded to the Registry. So we will
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1223
work on that. We'll make sure that one's available
here.
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you very much.
THE CHAIRMAN: The indication from staff is
that the file is too big to be uploaded onto the
Registry, so we'll have to find other means for
access to that, but we have an exhibit number.
That's acceptable, I assume. And we have a
Registry number for it as well. So if there are
problems, we'll manage those at the time.
MR. DUNCANSON: Yes, no, that sounds great,
Mr. Chairman.
Just finally in terms of housekeeping, I
believe that the witnesses have had an opportunity
to review the transcripts from Friday and
Mr. Jalkotzy would like to make a clarification to
one of the statements that he made.
A. MR. JALKOTZY: Thank you. Mr. Chairman,
I was talking about future seismic in the RSA. And
I referred to data developed by a Dr. Petter
Komers. And in actual fact, it was data from an
OSEC filing to the Joint Review Panel, it's called
the Submission of OSEC on Adequacy of Environmental
Impact Statement before the Panel. I think the
CEAA reference number is 10-05-59540. And it's,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1224
let me just check, I think it's Table 1. Yes,
that's correct. It's Table 1 on page 31.
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Chairman, we have no further housekeeping
matters this morning.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Ms. Buss?
MS. BUSS: Yes, good morning Mr. Chair.
I had a matter arising from marking of
Exhibit 009-002 that we just did the Fort McKay
Specific Assessment. That document was part of
Shell's filings. And I'm hoping that it would be
more appropriate to mark it with the prefix for
Shell's documents, 001.
THE CHAIRMAN: Leave it with us, Ms. Buss.
We'll have a look at it and get back to you at the
break.
MS. BUSS: Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: I have a little housekeeping
of my own. The Panel needs to break from 12:00
until 1:00 for lunch today for another commitment.
Also, I'm advised that staff have quite a few
questions and such that we might not complete the
examination of Shell by the usual 5:00 p.m. We'll
keep taking readings on that during the day, but I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1225
think we are going to go ahead and make
preparations to sit a little bit into the evening
so that we can try to, as much as possible,
complete the examination of Shell.
Mr. Perkins?
MR. PERKINS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
QUESTIONS BY ERCB BOARD STAFF, BY MR. PERKINS:
Q. Good morning, panel. Mr. Broadhurst, I trust you
and your group had a restful weekend?
A. MR. BROADHURST: We did, thank you.
Q. Enjoyed the extra hour?
A. We did.
Q. I've got some questions or I'd like to move to some
questions on process.
First off, Shell stated in the SIR Responses
from June of 2010:
"Shell will incorporate
improvements currently being made
at the Muskeg River Mine, as well
as those included in the new
Jackpine Mine design to help
improve bitumen recovery
performance for all oil sands
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1226
grades. The knowledge gained from
these two operations will be used
to improve the performance of the
Jackpine Mine Expansion
facilities."
I wondered if you could describe for me the
improvements, modifications or changes that have
been made since 2010 to improve bitumen recovery at
the Muskeg River Mine.
A. MR. MAYES: Yes, just give me one second.
So your question was specific to the improvements
made since 2010 and not related to improvements
that we're planning for the future; is that
correct?
Q. No, I would be interested in those as well,
Mr. Mayes.
A. Okay, so since 2010, we've widened the focus of our
improvement efforts at the Muskeg River Mine to
incorporate the whole business, including the mine.
And that surpasses our previous focus, which was
really just on the extraction plant itself at the
Muskeg River Mine. So we've devoted quite some
time since 2010 to optimize the blending of
feedstocks that reach our extraction plant, and, in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1227
particular, seeking to marginalize in our process
the volumes of marine-type ores that can arrive at
our extraction plant en mass. So we have now a
blending protocol which seeks to even out the
blends that reach the plant.
We have also modified the internal designs of
our primary separation chambers at the Muskeg River
Mine to include new feed-well designs. We've
increased the level of caustic addition to our
process up to a pH of 8.4. We no longer use sodium
citrate as an extraction aid. We've installed a
water treatment plant to aid in the removal of
calcium and magnesium ions. And we have increased
our focus on processing ores that are outside
Directive 2001-7 categorization. So those are ores
that have a higher TV to BIP ratio than 12 or a
grade of less than 7 percent.
And of course --
(Fire alarm sounds)
THE CHAIRMAN: We're adjourned.
(10:10 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1228
THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Black?
MS. BLACK: Just to give everyone an
announcement, we haven't figured out what happened,
but in the event that the alarm gets pulled again,
everyone needs to exit out the back door, down the
stairs and to the Fox Den, there's a sign that says
muster point B. You need to make sure that you're
not gathering at the bottom of the stairs to ensure
the firemen can get in. Muster point B. We will
have a sign at the entrance as well advising
everyone who is late coming in and who hasn't heard
this, where they should be heading.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Ms. Black.
Mr. Perkins?
MR. PERKINS: Thank you.
Q. I don't know where you want to pick this up,
Mr. Mayes. It's a challenge for sure. Do you want
to just launch back into your response? Is that
okay?
A. MR. MAYES: Sure. I think I remember
where I stopped. So what I was about to say is
that there are some differences also between the
design of our Jackpine Mine Phase I plant and
between our Muskeg River Mine plant. And year to
date in 2012, those differences have really started
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1229
to show marked improvements in recovery of Jackpine
Mine and we believe the Jackpine Mine will be
recovery-compliant in 2012. So those differences
really comprise three areas:
Firstly, we have a significantly longer
conditions slurry line in place at Jackpine Mine
relative to the Muskeg River Mine. The
conditioning slurry line is 3 kilometres in length
versus 1.9 kilometres in length for the Muskeg
River Mine.
Secondly, we have significantly more primary
and secondary flotation capacity at Jackpine Mine,
around about twice the amount of primary and
secondary flotation capacity.
And then thirdly, we have froth underwash
nipple structures in place at Jackpine Mine that
allow us to improve the separation of the froth as
it forms.
So relative to Muskeg River Mine, we've made
changes at Jackpine Mine, but as we reflect on the
processes that we have installed, there are three
areas at the Muskeg River Mine that really warrant
further change. And those three are, in order of
priority:
Is increasing the length of the Muskeg River
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1230
Mine conditioning slurry line, so making that line
three kilometres in length, and we actually have an
active project at the moment to execute that
change;
The second change is to provide the capacity
within both the Muskeg River Mine and Jackpine Mine
to be able to operate when necessary the process at
higher temperature; both assets currently operate
around 40 degrees into our primary separation
chambers, and we think that a more optimum position
would be to provide the capacity to operate it up
to 50 degrees into those vessels;
And then thirdly, we've come to understand
that, particularly Muskeg River Mine, the loading
on our primary separation chamber may be a little
high and so we're considering ways to lower that
loading.
All three of the last things that I just
mentioned are actively under consideration at the
moment for progress at the Muskeg River Mine.
So hopefully that continued the train of
thought.
Q. And you touched on this, Mr. Mayes, you've
described for me the changes. Can you say more,
though, about the effects on bitumen recovery that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1231
Shell's observed as a result of the changes,
whether at Muskeg River or Jackpine?
A. So, again, I'll break it down into a couple of
sections. So if I talk about the changes that we
made at Muskeg River Mine from today back to the
beginning of 2010, what we've really been trying to
do is even out the quality of the mine feed that
reaches our extraction process. In particular,
we're trying to even out the levels of calcium and
magnesium ions that are present in our ore feed,
the level of salt, residual salt in our ore feed,
and generally try to optimize the quality of the
ore rather than just the grade. And we're seeing
significant improvements in our processability of
those ores. We have, over the course of 2012,
improved the recovery performance at Muskeg River
Mine, so it has materially improved through those
efforts, but we don't believe that those will be
sufficient into the medium- and long-term to
provide a robust plant that can accommodate all
types of ore grades and ore qualities over time.
In terms of the latter three changes that I
talked about, so that's increasing the length of
our conditioning slurry lines, lowering the loading
on our primary separation chambers, and then
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1232
increasing the temperature, those are all
significant changes to the process that are in the
general direction of academic research and industry
practice, and we believe that they will have a very
material impact on recovery improvement.
Q. Mr. Mayes, can I ask you now to relate Shell's
experiences at Muskeg River and Jackpine to the
Expansion Project, that is, is Shell incorporating
or intending to incorporate design improvements
into Jackpine Mine Expansion that are designed to
help improve bitumen recovery, and, if you are, can
you describe that?
A. So I might just pass that across to Mr. Roberts to
talk about what's proposed for JPME.
A. MR. ROBERTS: At this point in time, the
Jackpine Mine Expansion train, horses (sic) train,
will have very similar process characteristics to
the Jackpine Mine train 1 and the train 2 train in
terms of slurry conditioning length, the design of
the feed well, and the froth underwash, as well as
the additional flotation capacity. So it's
essentially the JPME will be a mirror of the
existing train that's in operation and the next
train that will go into service. The reason we're
not making substantial changes to those at this
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1233
time is our performance to date in 2012 from a
recovery perspective at Jackpine Mine we think is
we will be recovery compliant. So we have
confidence in the design that we have at Jackpine.
Q. And when you say "recovery compliant," just
describe what that is.
A. That is meeting ID-7, Directive.
Q. So I think you told me, Mr. Roberts, that the
Expansion Project will mirror what's going on at
Jackpine Phase I?
A. That's correct.
Q. I take from that, then, what Shell has applied for,
the facilities Shell has applied for, you don't
anticipate that to change materially between the
Application stage and, if you are approved,
construction stage?
A. Fundamentally you're correct. However, if we find
subtle nuances in how we may change the operation
between now and when the Jackpine Mine Expansion
facilities go into operation, we will incorporate
those.
You know, it's in our best interests to
maximize recovery, so we will do what we can to
continue to improve our recovery.
Q. And in terms of incorporating improvements down the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1234
line, I'm interested in Shell's flexibility to do
that. You know, one of the things may be, is your
facility going to be sufficiently-sized going into
this to incorporate improvements that may come
along down the line?
A. So one of the benefits I think that we have in this
business is that we need points in time to relocate
our crushers and relocate our infrastructure to
keep up with the mine advances. Those are discrete
points where we can make capital investments and
incorporate improvements. The other part is from a
maintenance perspective, this is a
material-handling facility which has significant
wear of the equipment and does present
opportunities when we do a, we undergo maintenance
and replacement of equipment, we can upgrade from
time to time as new equipment or new equipments and
operations present themselves.
Q. Panel, what is Shell's understanding of the
relationship between the blend of ore sent from the
mine of the processing plant and bitumen recovery
rates?
A. MR. MAYES: Could you just restate the
question so I get it exactly right, please.
Q. Sure. I guess the question assumes there's a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1235
relationship between the blend of ore that gets to
the processing plant and the bitumen that actually
gets recovered, and I'm interested in your
understanding in that relationship.
A. So there's two main relationships between ore and
recovery; so that the first of which is the higher
the grade, all other things aside, the more you
would expect there to be recovered from the
extraction plant. Or, conversely, the lower the
grade, the less you would expect to be recovered
from the extraction plant. And in fact, that
relationship is mirrored in the bitumen recovery
equations that are shown in Directive 2001-7. So
that's the obvious first one.
In a more practical sense for us, relative to
our plant designs, we have a very strong
relationship between the percentage of fines, so
the percentage of clay fines that are in the feed,
the size of those fines, the level of calcium and
magnesium or other metal ions that are present in
the ore, to some extent the amount of residual salt
that's in the ore, so marine-type ores.
Those sort of qualities have a very direct
relationship to the amount of recovery that we can
generate from our extraction plants.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1236
Q. And in Shell's opinion, does it have sufficient
geological data to enable it to develop and execute
a Mine Plan for the Expansion Project that will
supply an acceptable plant feed?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So, yes, our current Muskeg
River Mine models that we've been using for,
recently, and in previous years, for blending
purposes, were predominantly looking at grade.
Going forward at Muskeg River Mine, we're looking
at grade and fines and facies and blending
appropriately. For Jackpine Mine Expansion and
Jackpine Mine mine, we are doing the same, we're
looking at grade, fines, and facies. And that's
part of our Mine Planning protocols that we have
put in place recently.
Q. Do you foresee any possibility that Shell might
need to change its Mine Plan in order to get an
acceptable plant feed?
A. Yes, but so from a conceptual perspective, we
understand what we have. Of course we're not into
the detailed mine planning around the Expansion
piece, but we do foresee the need to possibly alter
the face advances somewhat, and we would be
presenting that information to the Board through
our annual updates.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1237
Q. And I assume, Mr. Roberts, if you had to change one
part of the plan, it might have impacts on other
parts of it that you have to address as well; is
that fair to say?
A. Yes, so what we've been doing so far at Muskeg
River is, where we have significant challenges with
low-grade high-fines ores, we are managing that
within the footprint that we have right now. We
would expect that Jackpine Mine would, we would
handle that similarly. And if there were
substantial changes that we would need to make,
such as in-pit dykes and impacts on tailings, we
would bring that back to the Board for discussion.
Q. Now, Mr. Mayes mentioned ID 2001-7. I wanted to
ask you a hypothetical question. So assume
hypothetically that the Jackpine Mine Expansion
Project Application is approved, would Shell or
would this Project be adversely affected by a
requirement in the approval that Shell submit to
the ERCB for review and evaluation two years prior
to construction the details of the bitumen recovery
improvements Shell intends to incorporate into the
Jackpine Mine Expansion plant design and Mine Plan?
A. MR. MAYES: If we just take a second to
caucus.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1238
Q. Certainly.
A. We take no exception to that commitment, sir. Yes.
Q. Thank you, Mr. Mayes.
I'll give you the reference, I don't think
you need to pull it up, it's a January 18, 2012
letter from Shell to the Joint Panel. It's
Exhibit 001-038. And in that letter on page 6
Shell states:
"Shell is therefore not
currently seeking approval of AER
as part of the [Jackpine Mine
Expansion Project]..."
"AER" being "Asphaltene Energy Recovery."
I wanted to ask you if Shell considers asphaltene
to be a potentially usable resource?
A. MR. BROADHURST: So the current process that
we have as part of the bitumen clean-up with the
froth treatment, there is a rejection of some of
the asphaltene, and that that's essential to the
way that the process works. And so in terms of
delivering a final bitumen product, that asphaltene
is key to the process and has no residual value to
us.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1239
The Asphaltene Energy Recovery Project was
looking at whether, with the development of a new
technology, that would allow for the flotation
recovery of that rejected asphaltene, there was an
economic potential for treating and delivering a
feed quality that would allow us to generate power
in the alternative to gas cogeneration or other
sources.
What we have concluded is that at this point
in time that scheme is not economic and that's
driven by predominantly the decrease in the
alternate source of energy, gas pricing. It's not
to say that it isn't something that couldn't be
revisited in the future, but at this point in time
the process is not economic and therefore the
asphaltene continues to have no residual value.
Q. Mr. Broadhurst, where will Shell store rejected
asphaltene?
A. The current asphaltene that's rejected is just part
of the tailings stream that goes out from the
solvent recovery unit, so it becomes part of the
tailings placement, either into, on start-up, the
External Tailings Facility, or over the life of the
mine, into the mine pit.
With the Asphaltene Energy Recovery Project,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1240
if we were going to recover the asphaltene, then of
course that would be used in the process.
Q. So I would like to refer you to Exhibit 001-009.
That's from Shell's SIR Responses of June 2010.
And on page 4-7, which is PDF page 40, Shell
provides a response to question 6A. I would just
like to read that for you. Shell states:
"The current design basis for
the high-temperature froth
treatment process is to reject less
than 10-weight percent asphaltene
based on bitumen production. The
asphaltene rejection level is a
balance between upstream bitumen
recovery and final bitumen quality.
Lower asphaltene rejection rates
favour higher bitumen recoveries
but lower bitumen quality, whereas
increased asphaltene rejection
rates favour the application of
technologies for asphaltene energy
recovery (AER) and further
upgrading at the AOSP Scotford
Upgrader. This balance of adding
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1241
value to the bitumen resource can
and does shift over time, so that
Shell cannot make a firm commitment
on the level of asphaltene
rejection."
So, panel, if I can paraphrase this: Shell
stated that lower asphaltene rejection rates favour
higher bitumen recoveries, and higher asphaltene
rejection rates favour the application of
technologies for asphaltene energy recovery.
Have I summarized that correctly?
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, that's a fair summary.
Q. So given that Shell is not proceeding with
asphaltene energy recovery, does Shell believe its
Application Case favours higher rejection rates or
does it favour higher bitumen recoveries?
A. Well, I think what it favours, actually, the
balance design that we need to be able to deliver a
bitumen quality that's going to be compatible with
a broad range of upgraders and in particular to an
upgrader that has a hydro-conversion or a catalytic
process, as we do at the Scotford Upgrader.
Having been involved from the very beginning
with the development of this technology, it is a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1242
fairly narrow window in terms of asphaltene
rejection. You're talking plus or minus a percent
or two in terms of the window that you need to
target to be able to clean up the bitumen to that
very, very low level of solids, so 800 parts per
million solids, give or take a little bit, as well
as removing all of the free water which is what's
required to remove the chlorides and deliver a
product that is going to be compatible with
conventional metallurgy in downstream facilities.
So the technology would develop -- the technology I
developed, has a target asphaltene rejection level
that is in around that level that we've identified
in our Application.
And I think I understand, Mr. Broadhurst,
that at the end of the day there's some
practicalities that you have to meet in terms of
your product. You mentioned spec at the upgrader.
But in principle, given that Shell's not proceeding
with asphaltene energy recovery, would you agree,
then, with the suggestion that Shell should make
efforts to minimize asphaltene rejection and
maximize bitumen recovery.
A. Well, we do that as a matter of course, but to be
clear, the process that we've designed, the process
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1243
that we have the operating data and the design data
for really does require targeting into that window
that we've identified in our Application. So there
is some opportunity to optimize, and we do that,
but it's really around a percent or two in terms of
that optimization.
Q. Am I correct, Mr. Broadhurst, that the existing
Jackpine Mine has a requirement to limit asphaltene
rejection to 10-mass percent based on bitumen
production on an annual average basis?
A. Just one moment, please.
A. MR. MAYES: Mr. Perkins, that is our
understanding, subject to check.
Q. And I understand you'll check it. Would Shell be
prepared, regardless of the results of your check,
to make that commitment for the Jackpine Mine
Expansion Project?
A. MR. BROADHURST: Again, as I'd indicated,
Mr. Perkins, what we have with the froth treatment
design is we have a design basis that requires us
to operate within a reasonably tight window in
terms of the level of asphaltene rejection. It's,
from a practical point of view, not something that
we could control to to a specific percentage
target.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1244
Again, as I'd indicated, there's a common
interest in trying to ensure that we're providing a
balance that's giving us the maximum amount of
bitumen recovery but also ensuring that we have the
quality of the bitumen that's going to not
compromise the operation of our
multi-billion-dollar downstream upgrading facility.
So I don't think that we can commit to something
that is that narrowly banded. Just, again, having
been the technology developer for this one, it does
need some range to it.
Q. And so just to summarize, then, I understand, as I
understand it, the problem with the commitment is
it may put you in a box: You might owe that
obligation to the energy regulator, but on the
other side of it may not be able to provide a
product that meets your requirements on the
practical side, is that the problem Shell's in?
A. Yes, that's correct. We need to have some
operating flexibility with the facility that we've
got at the mine. And it also has to be done with a
view to the downstream upgrader and protecting the
integrity of that asset.
Q. Now, I think earlier, Mr. Roberts or Mr. Mayes told
me that the design for the expansion is the same as
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1245
the Jackpine design; you mirrored it I think were
the words I heard. So if it's a mirror facility,
what's the difficulty making the same commitment?
A. So with our existing operations, we do target an
asphaltene rejection level on an hour-to-hour
day-to-day basis. There will be variance as our
panel explained. This is a mineral processing
operation, so it isn't something that, for example,
you could control as tightly as you could a
downstream processing unit in a refinery. So there
just has to be from a practical point of view a
range in the operating target around the asphaltene
rejection.
But that said, our goal is always to make
sure that we're managing that balance to achieve
the highest level of bitumen recovery that we can
while still safeguarding that product quality
specification for the downstream asset.
Q. And, in your view, is Shell meeting the commitment
as it applies to the existing Jackpine Mine?
A. We are operating within the operating window that
we've identified with the variances that you would
typically expect to see, that plus or minus a
couple percentages as I've identified.
Q. And just so we're clear, when I made the suggestion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1246
for the commitment, it was on an average annual
basis. Does that not provide you with enough
flexibility to operate?
A. I'd have to actually take that away and give that
some thought, Mr. Perkins.
Q. So would you undertake, then, to do that for me,
Mr. Broadhurst, to respond to me later on that
question?
A. Yes, we will.
MR. PERKINS: Thank you.
MR. DUNCANSON: So was that undertaking clear
on the record? I think for Mr. Broadhurst to go
away and undertake whether that is something Shell
is willing to commit to at this time.
MR. PERKINS: I think that's got it,
Mr. Duncanson.
UNDERTAKING 22: MR. BROADHURST TO CONFIRM WHETHER
SHELL IS WILLING TO COMMIT TO AN ASPHALTENE
REJECTION THRESHOLD OF 10 PERCENT ON AN ANNUAL
BASIS
Q. MR. PERKINS: Panel, now I've got
some questions about Exhibit 001-006B, the
December 2009 SIR Response. Just let me give you a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1247
quote from that and then I'll give you the piece
I'm interested in. In Response 160f, Shell states:
"Shell is designing the TSRU
process so that untreated TSRU
tailings are not routed to the
external tailings disposal area."
The second reference I'll give you that you
might want to pull up is to Exhibit 001-051E. And
that's the May 2012 Submission, Table 44-1 and 44-2
on page 3-137. And it's PDF page 137.
A. Okay, if you'd like to give us just a moment, we'll
find those references. Mr. Perkins, could you give
us the SIR number on the first reference?
Q. Sorry, the quote that I read?
A. No, if you can just give us the Supplemental
Information Request number.
Q. It was 160f. I think I read the quote correctly,
but verify if you like. I'll tell you that I'm
frankly more interested in talking about the
Tables.
A. MR. MAYES: So we found the Table. Maybe
you can give us the question.
Q. Sure. The question is would you agree or disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1248
that the Tables show TSRU deposition in the
External Tailings Disposal Area and also other
impoundment locations?
A. MR. ROBERTS: We agree with you that it
does show deposition in the external tailings
disposal area until 2026.
Q. So, Mr. Roberts, can I get you to look at
Table 44-2?
A. Yes.
Q. And you just responded to me and I think you're
referring to that first entry in the Table that
relates to Sand Cell 1?
A. That's correct.
Q. Okay. What about the indications in the second
column from the left of TSRU tailings going into
Cells 1 to 7 through co-deposition?
A. Yes, those are end pit cells.
Q. And what about the last entry on that Table, 2047
to 20-50, subaqueous deposition into Cell 8?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. What I wanted to ask you was if Shell can confirm
that it has made or it is making the following
commitment: Shell will not discharge untreated
froth-treatment tailings to any tailings ponds or
deposition locations under any operating
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1249
conditions.
A. That's right, the key there is untreated, so where
the tailings solvent-recovery unit is offline.
Q. So Shell makes that commitment?
A. Where it's a trip right now on our units.
Q. Okay. And finally on this line, so, again, a
hypothetical, assume hypothetically that the
Expansion Project Application is approved, how, if
at all, would Shell or Shell's Project be impacted
if as part of its approval conditions Shell was
prohibited from sending any untreated
froth-treatment tailings to any tailings ponds or
deposition locations under all operating
conditions? Or is that an acceptable condition
from Shell's perspective?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So that's acceptable
because if our TSRU is offline, we don't operate,
we don't operate that part of the froth-treatment
plant.
Q. All right, thank you, Mr. Roberts.
I wanted to move on to more specific
questions about tailings. I think we had a bit of
a discussion on Friday about the south External
Tailings Disposal Area. I wanted to pursue that.
I wanted to give you three references, but I'm not
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1250
sure you need to turn them up.
Mr. Broadhurst, in Shell's Opening Statement
on October 29th, this is in Volume 3 of the
transcript, page 239, Mr. Broadhurst indicated that
(as read):
"Additional tailings storage
with a new area referred to as the
North External Tailings Disposal
Area included at the southern end
of Lease 88 was required by Shell
to support the Project."
And in Volume 1 of the Application, that is
Exhibit No. 001-001A, Shell states on page 7-1:
"The previously approved
South [External Tailings Disposal
Area] covers 1,551 hectares and
will have a capacity of 621 million
cubic metres of tailings. An
additional area to the east of the
approved South ETDA area is being
proposed in this application. This
will increase the South ETDA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1251
tailings storage capacity to 696
million cubic metres and the area's
overall footprint to 1,680
hectares."
And, finally, and you may want to look at
this reference, the same part of your Application,
page 7-3, Figure 7-2, shows the location and
boundary of the expanded South ETDA.
And I know from your counsel this morning, I
think there's an update or there's updated
information coming on that.
But what I did want to ask you is if Shell
could clarify if it is or it is not applying in
this proceeding for approval to expand the South
ETDA?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So referring to Volume 1, the
tailings plan associated with the original filing,
that predated Directive 074. So the Jackpine Mine
Expansion or Jackpine Mine - Phase I plans have
been adapted to reflect the requirements of
Directive 074. And concurrent with that, we file
Tailings Management Plans on an annual basis as
required by Directive 074.
So our understanding is that in 2009 and in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1252
2010 Directive 074 plans that have been filed with
the Board, we have shown that disturbed footprint
area to be containing tailings.
Q. And so you're applying now for that Expansion; is
that right?
A. So I think we've already requested to use that
space and we are reflecting that that space is part
of our plan.
Q. Are you telling me, Mr. Roberts, you've requested
it as part of the annual Mine Plan filing?
A. So just if you could give us a couple seconds to
caucus here on this one.
Q. Sure.
A. So, Mr. Perkins, we believe that the footprint, the
disturbance footprint, has already been approved as
part of Jackpine Mine - Phase I. It was previously
a surge facility. It was going to be disturbed.
In our 2011 D074 submissions we have, and 2012 D074
submissions, we have shown that that area as
incorporating an extension of the tailings piece,
so our assumption is that the extension of that
area will be approved as part of our normal course
of business with Jackpine - Phase I.
Q. I'm not sure if you're telling me it has been
approved or it will be approved.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1253
A. We have applied.
Q. You have applied for it. But independent of this
Application?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay.
A. The timing of -- we had originally assumed that we
would be going through this Application a couple of
years ago and this would have been cleared up prior
to us having to utilize that area.
Q. Well, let me ask you this, Mr. Roberts: Can you
confirm for me that the footprint and the boundary
of the applied-for expansion for the South ETDA
that is shown in Figure 7.2 is accurate; that is,
that is what Shell is asking for?
A. So, Mr. Perkins, perhaps we could look at the most
recent post-D074 footprint. And that is, that
would be in our May 2011 Submission, Figure 2.7 --
2-7. And that footprint is consistent with our
current filing for 2012 D074 submission for
Jackpine Mine - Phase I.
Q. So that figure is accurate in terms of the approval
that Shell wants for the Expansion?
A. Yes. Now, I wouldn't be scaling any setbacks off
of that drawing. In fact, the setbacks we'll be
providing later this afternoon.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1254
Q. Right. I understand that.
Panel, in Shell's May 2012 SIR Response, and
that's the one that appears on page 3-121 of
Exhibit 151E, the response indicates that Shell
plans to run MFT centrifuge between 2051 and 2054
to reduce MFT inventories to zero. And I
understand from your previous evidence, that is
intended to eliminate the need to place MFT in pit
lakes; is that right?
A. Correct.
Q. Can you confirm that Shell is committed to reducing
its MFT volume to zero even if tailings operations
are needed after the mine is finished production?
A. That's the basis of our current Application.
Q. Okay, thank you.
And the same exhibit, SIR Response states (as
read):
"All tailings produced from
the JPM Project are now deposited
within the Project boundary."
Can you also confirm that tailings will not
be transferred between the Jackpine Mine and the
Muskeg River Mine.
A. We can confirm that we will not be transferring
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1255
tailings from the Jackpine Mine to the Muskeg River
Mine.
So just to make a clarification on that;
that's tailings would be water, sand, fines. We
still, in terms of water balancing, we still may be
looking to move process-affected water to optimize
our water use between the two sites.
Q. And what about tailings moving the other direction,
will there be water, sands or fines moving from
Muskeg River to Jackpine?
A. Just water at this time. Mr. Perkins, just to
clarify that, there may be opportunities in the
future to use facilities that we've installed at
Jackpine Mine for the benefit of Muskeg River Mine.
If we look to do that, we'd be making a separate
application to do that.
Q. Panel, the same exhibit again, May SIR Responses,
at page 3-122 in Response to SIR 39, Shell states:
"Shell continues to work
through the Oil Sands Tailings
Consortium to evaluate a suite of
tailings technologies and optimize
the application of those
technologies to meet ERCB Directive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1256
074 criteria."
And I wondered if you could say more about
Shell's ability to incorporate information from the
Oil Sands Tailings Consortium into the Jackpine
Mine Expansion operation. One example, is there a
technology that was developed by the consortium
that Shell has incorporated or is considering
incorporating into its operations?
A. So if through the activities of the consortium we
jointly develop a technology that is better than
and more applicable than the technologies that
we've outlined there, it is my understanding that
we will make an application, we would apply to make
a change from the existing suite that we have to
the modified suite at the time it achieves a level
of commercialization that we're satisfied with. It
is in our best interests to have the best available
tailings technology in place.
So, in addition, I guess an example of where
that's playing out right now is the use of Syncrude
data in MFT centrifugation. It's the basis of the
centrifugation facilities that we're looking at
installing at Jackpine Mine. And we've had
discussions with both, shared data with both
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1257
Syncrude and Suncor and atmospheric fines drawing,
the parameters that are used for that technology.
Q. So the work of the consortium has borne some fruit
for Shell, then, already; is that fair to say?
A. Absolutely. I don't think we'd be where we are
with our atmospheric fines drawing without sharing
that data, nor would we be where we are with our
development of centrifugation cases.
Q. In Shell's experience or opinion, what are the
timeframes in which new tailings technologies that
are developed through the consortium or by a
similar process have become or may likely become
commercially viable when implemented?
A. So you're looking for to speculate on when the new
technologies will be commercialized?
Q. Well, you can speculate or if you have an example,
maybe you can tell me. For example, the MFT
centrifuging data from Syncrude, is there a
timeframe within which it went from, say,
conception to realization?
A. So, yes, I think, so this is going by memory here.
I believe the first opportunity that the industry
had of operating centrifuges on MFT was I believe
it was December 2006. So that was essentially six
years ago. And that was operating centrifuges from
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1258
the drilling industry where we were centrifuging
out drilling clays, drilling muds. So that was I
believe it was either December 2006 or
December 2007. So we are essentially five or six
years of work that was predominantly undertaken by
Syncrude alone to get to a point now where at least
two members of industry have it in their Business
Plans.
So the work of the consortium is looking to
shrink that five years to something shorter than
that.
Q. And can you say, Mr. Roberts, does that seem to be
a fairly typical timeline or is it unfair to
characterize things as typical, everything is
unique?
A. So I think I would -- things are unique. And
depending on -- and it's risk dependent. So
certainly bringing a light hydrocarbon, a new
hydrocarbon technology from concept to design is
more likely longer than that given the risks
associated with that. I would believe that, you
know, we will be able to shorten the technology
development on the tailings technologies given that
there is a minimal process safety risks associated
with those. And the limiter has been essentially
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1259
individuals that having the technical talent to do
that work, combining that technical talent now
amongst the various operators and the consultants
that are supporting them will allow us to, should
allow us to contract that timeframe.
Q. And, Mr. Roberts, or I guess anyone else on the
panel, if we refocus that question on Shell, how
much time does Shell typically need from the point
where it is able to identify the technology,
whether on its own or coming out of the consortium
or something like that, to where you can see it
actually manifesting itself in the operation?
A. So maybe I'll let Mr. Broadhurst speak to this.
But maybe if I could put in context just another
example. And that was the shift from drag lines,
bucket wheels, bucket-wheel reclaimers to
truck-and-shovel operation, that was I think, if my
memory serves me correctly, about a 1992
pilot-level work, small-scale commercial work
before that was finally commercialized in the late
'90s, early 2000s. So that's from a transition
from bucket wheels to truck and shovels was about
an eight-year time period.
A. MR. BROADHURST: So it is very difficult to
predict how much time it would take to develop a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1260
given technology. I know that that's something you
would be interested in having something more
definitive on, but I'm afraid that I probably can't
help you there. Again, having done technology
development work for a few decades, it really
depends on the technology that you're working with
and the actual understanding of the fundamentals
and the risk associated with advancing with that
technology on a fundamentals-driven basis or
empirical-driven basis.
As Mr. Roberts discussed, for some of the
tailings technology, we can actually move the
technology forward without necessarily
understanding how or why it works. So, in other
words the fundamentals-driven technology
development.
That said, it still does take a time to move
that forward.
If you look at some of the work that's been
done with industry since Directive 074 has come
into force, I think there's been a risk tolerance
by industry and by the regulators to try and move
quickly, more quickly than would be typical with
some of the technologies where we're actually out
in the field deploying large-scale technology with
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1261
still some level of uncertainty that you might have
been able to manage or predict through intermediate
steps with smaller-scale demonstration facilities.
As well, when you're looking at some of the
technologies being deployed for tailings, if we are
trying to make a material change in terms of the
scope and scale, you also have to factor into
account the time it takes to design and execute and
start-up, which for significant technologies, for
significant processes, can be a three-year process
just unto itself from the point where you decide
you want to do something.
So back to your question, "Can you predict
exactly how long it would take," that would be
probably unwise to try and pin down as a single
number. But it's not unreasonable that a
technology that is identified would have a
development timeline of somewhere between five and
seven years and then a field deployment that would
be a typical project, field-deployment timeline of
anywhere up to 36 months. You can shorten that,
again, depending upon the technology and depending
upon the risk tolerance that the parties have in
deploying it.
Q. Panel, I wanted to ask you some questions about
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1262
tailings thickener technology and design. I'll
refer you to Exhibit 001-001A, that is Volume 1 of
the Project Application, page 6-10, in Section 6.2.
And at the bottom of that page under the heading
"Tailings Treatment and Processing," Shell states:
"The tailings treatment plant will consist of:" and
then if you go to the fourth bullet down, it says,
"a fine tailings thickener." And I just wondered
if you could confirm, first, Shell is using a fine
tailings thickener at Jackpine Mine - Phase I; is
that correct?
A. MR. MAYES: Yes, that is correct.
Q. And can you describe what Shell's experience to
date has been with thickener operations there?
A. I might just ask Mike Margerum behind me to talk
about the details of thickeners.
A. MR. MARGERUM: Yes, so to date we've been
operating a fine tailings thickener at Jackpine
Mine since start-up. It has operated reasonably
reliably. What we have not obtained out of it is a
good quality of underflow stream from that
thickener. It's for a variety of reasons relating
to turn-down of the facility and the ability of the
tailings facilities to handle turn-down conditions.
And or a characterization and so on.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1263
We have instituted a project to address those
issues to provide more turn-down in the facility to
allow us to achieve the quality of underflow that
we're looking for. By "quality of underflow" I'm
referring to the solids content of the underflow
stream and the ability to capture consequently
those solids in a dedicated disposal area.
So we've just recently put in the equipment
for that to allow for that improved turn-down and
we expect to commission that modified facility by
the end of November. And we'll then monitor how
that performs and see what the results are.
Q. And, Mr. Margerum, other than the quality of
underflow, are there other challenges Shell has
experienced at Jackpine Mine with thickener
performance, other notable challenges?
A. That's been the primary challenge to date.
Otherwise the thickener has operated fairly
reliably. There are some details around operations
such as bitumen skimming and things like that which
are not directly related to fines recovery. In
terms of fines recovery, really it's been that
underflow quality that's been the primary issue
that we've been looking at.
Q. Can you describe the tailings thickener design for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1264
the Jackpine Mine Expansion by highlighting any
design differences between that and the Jackpine
Mine - Phase I thickener operations?
A. Well, as submitted in the Application, it was the
same design as per the comment that Mr. Roberts had
earlier. However, we'll certainly incorporate any
learnings out of the current issues and the
measures of putting in to address those issues into
the new design.
Really, the main thing we will provide for is
a good ability to operate in turn-down conditions
and in low-fines ore conditions which is really
where the challenge has been with the current
thickener.
Q. When does Shell anticipate the final design for the
Expansion thickener operations to be completed?
A. So we expect the final design will be completed
just prior to final investment decision in terms of
the basis for design and the first level of design.
The detailed design will be completed post-FID,
post-Final Investment Decision as we move into
executing the Project.
Q. Panel, if we look beyond thickener performance more
broadly, can you tell me how Shell has incorporated
or how Shell intends to incorporate what it learns
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1265
from tailings management from operations at the
Muskeg River Mine and existing Jackpine Mine into
the Jackpine Mine Expansion Project?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So maybe I'll talk a little
bit about how we put our design and
ready-for-operations team in place. With all the
projects we do, we have a comprehensive
lessons-learned exercise where we look at
challenges that we've had, we document what they
were, and how we would eliminate those in the
future.
The other thing that we've got now that we
haven't had in the past is that we have a rather
strong core of people who have been involved in
operating a facility for the Muskeg River Mine for
about 10 years. We've gone through the start-up
and early operation of Jackpine. We would look to
pull individuals from those existing operating
areas. We have within our project structure an
operations readiness and assurance team who is
really ensuring that the designs that are delivered
are operations-ready and have incorporated the
learnings from operations, so part of it is
organizational and part of it is part of the
culture that we're building within our
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1266
organizations.
I guess one of the examples that we can lay
out is we are adopting the learnings from
atmospheric fines drawing at Muskeg River to our
Jackpine Mine tailings plans. And that's a
transfer of knowledge from the operating
organization into the Project organization and into
the Jackpine operating organization. And we do
have the ability to move people back and forth from
our projects organizations into operations, in
between our Jackpine Mine operating facility and
our Muskeg River Mine operating facility. We have
a critical mass of folks now that we've probably
struggled with over the last few years.
Q. I wanted to return to TSRU tailings briefly. And I
know you had a discussion somewhat along this line
with Ms. Buss, but I wondered if you could confirm
how Shell currently deposits TSRU tailings at the
Muskeg River Mine, is it subaerial or subaqueous?
A. MR. MAYES: So currently at the Muskeg
River Mine, we operate two types of froth-treatment
technology; a low-temperature froth treatment and a
high-temperature froth treatment. The discharge
from both of those units, so the discharge from the
TSRU element of both of those units goes into our
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1267
in-pit storage system in a subaqueous flow. So
quite literally, a pipe with TSRU tailings flows
from the units and then from the outlet of that
pipe, which is underwater, the tailings material is
deposited.
Q. What was the original plan for TSRU tailings
deposition at the Muskeg River Mine?
A. That's a very good question. If you just give us a
second to get a very good answer.
We may take some time just to get an answer
to that question. It's a very specific one. We'll
have to get a very specific answer. So if we could
take that on board? We'll have that, if not by the
end of today, it would be by tomorrow morning.
MR. DUNCANSON: So I believe that would make
that an undertaking given by Mr. Mayes and that was
for the original plan for TSRU tailings deposition,
I believe.
MR. PERKINS: Yes.
UNDERTAKING 23: GIVEN BY MR. MAYES TO PROVIDE THE
ORIGINAL PLAN FOR TSRU TAILINGS DEPOSITION
MR. PERKINS:
Q. And I'm not trying to appear dogged about it, but
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1268
Mr. Mayes, this may help you in your response. I'm
given to understand that an application was made in
relation to the Muskeg River Mine to the ERCB to
deposit TSRU tailings subaerially, and that was
either made or approved in March 2011. Do you know
anything about that or does anyone on the panel
know anything about that?
A. Again, we'll take that TSRU tailings discharge area
and quantify what's going on and we'll do that in
the undertaking.
Q. All right, we'll wait for the undertaking response
Mr. Mayes, thank you.
Finally on tailings, I just wanted to have a
discussion with you about fines measurement and
ore. Firstly, can you or can Shell briefly
describe how Shell determines the fine content in
ore?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So are you looking generally
or in detail? Because generally we use laser
defraction, and then we do correlations between the
laser defraction readings and sieve hydrometry. If
you're looking for the number of samples in a given
core, I'd have to undertake to get our
core-sampling procedures.
Q. What I'm interested in is the process that takes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1269
place from when you get the drilling data and then
you populate the Table. Does that make sense,
Mr. Roberts?
A. Yes, we typically get, can get 60 metres of core
and what -- so what -- so I will, subject to check,
I will give you a high-level overview of what we
do. We will take samples of the ore at
one-to-two-metre intervals, we will do a Dean Stark
analysis on that to understand the bitumen content.
The residual solids that are with that, we will do
an analysis of the -- using laser defraction on the
percentages of the various diameters of the solids,
and that information gets populated into a large,
rather large database that we have for all our core
data that has, for any given point in the ore body,
would have bitumen content, would have solids
content, would have a fines concentration
associated with that, would have the
characteristics of the connate water, on some of
them actually, we have, not all of them, but we
have a methyl-blue analysis of the fines. An
understanding of the fines in the ore body is
extremely important to the processability of our
operation as well as our Tailings Management Plans.
It's in our best interest to understand what we
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1270
have.
Q. And why is it important, Mr. Roberts, what can
happen if you don't get it right?
A. So if we don't get it right, we have, say, a marine
ore where we have 7 percent grade, 30 to 40 percent
clays, and we have a large area of that within our
pit, we need to plan our Mine Plan accordingly so
that we're not feeding that material all at the
same time, we blend that in. That's part of our
Blend Management Protocol.
Should the overall bulk-fines content of our
ore body be higher than what we believe, we will
have a higher volume of thickened tails and fines
that we need to either treat through the CT process
or the thickened-tails process. So it changes the
balance of the tailings that we have and will
change our containment plans. So it's extremely
important to understand the fines content in our
ore body.
Q. So given the importance, is Shell confident that
its method of determining fines content is
accurate?
A. So we have made some significant changes in the
last three years in our core analysis to improve
that. We continue to refine our analysis by
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1271
doing -- we're attempting to do fines balancing
over the ore processed and the tailings produced.
So we are confident that we're on the right track
and we're looking at the right indicators and we're
continually looking at methodologies that improve
our ability to balance our fines.
Q. But it sounds like it's, well, not but, it sounds
like it's a continuous improvement, is that --
A. It is. Like many things we do, we're always
looking to improve our business.
Q. Is there anything happening in the Oil Sands
Tailings Consortium along this line or anything
that may be useful to Shell going on in the
consortium?
A. So I can't speak with certainty, but if we were
doing anything, it would be on the back end, on the
tailings end for understanding the measurement
techniques around fines content and ensuring that
we're standardizing how we do that across all of
the operators. I don't believe we have anything
that we're doing on the front end from a drilling,
coring and analysis perspective.
I know that internally within Shell, we're
doing a significant amount of work with our
colleagues in the area of tight-gas production who
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1272
encounter different types of clays and how they may
interpret those clays, particularly the swelling
clays that would swell and close a fracture within
gas processing. We're going to use the analysis
and the techniques that they're using in that and
applying it to the front-end of our operation.
Q. Lastly, Mr. Roberts, how does the fines data get
incorporated into Shell's operational plans? Can
you just describe that process for me?
A. Sure. So we have a master database for all our
core data. That core data, that database is used
for resource volumes, bitumen resource volumes.
It's also used for fines content. It's also used
for connate water composition. So that database is
both used from a development perspective as well as
it's populated with near-face drilling. And that
same database is utilized for operational planning,
the two-year plans, the six-month plans, the
one-week plans, so it's a consistent database that
-- it is one.
Q. Thank you, Mr. Roberts. Panel, I've got some
questions about air emissions now.
The witness panel had a discussion with
Ms. Buss on November 1st about emissions from a
TIER-IV mine fleet. For the record, it appears in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1273
Volume 5 of the transcript on or on either side of
page 829. I don't think you need to turn it up,
though. But Shell was asked in that discussion if
Shell would commit to having all TIER-IV trucks by
2025. And the response, I think it was from you,
Mr. Roberts, was that Shell would not commit to
this, but that Shell would replace retiring trucks
with TIER-IV trucks if those were available. Did I
say that correctly?
A. Yes.
Q. So I did want you to have a look at Exhibit 001-0
51I, and that's the May 2012 SIR Response.
Specifically page 7 of Appendix 3.2, which I have
on PDF page 12. And at the bottom of that page,
Shell states:
"From 2025 onwards, the mine
fleet emissions were calculated
based on Tier 4 emission
standards."
And so my question is, in using this
methodology to calculate NOx emissions, Shell
assumes that all the trucks in its mine fleet will
be TIER-IV trucks by 2025, however, as I understand
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1274
it, Shell is not committing to having all TIER-IV
trucks by 2025. Have I got that right?
A. So, in all likelihood, we would be transitioning to
TIER-IV trucks by 2025, but in the event that our
supplier has continued challenges with TIER-IV
engines, as they are right now, we cannot guarantee
what our supplier may or may not be able to deliver
at a point in time, so to make a commitment that
ties us to a suppliers' delivery technology
development delivery schedule doesn't hang for us.
Q. No, and I understand, Mr. Roberts, you can't do
what you can't do. But what I am interested then
in exploring is how that may impact your
Environmental Assessment?
A. So --
Q. Sorry, go ahead.
A. So from an impact on the Environmental Assessment,
maybe I'll pass this to Wayne.
A. MR. SPELLER: So at its simplest level, if
TIER-IV trucks aren't available when we've assumed
they will be, the emissions from the mine fleet
will be higher and the resulting ground-level
concentrations will be higher. So we've considered
this in a couple of different ways when we've been
discussing this topic. So the first thing we did
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1275
is we moved all of our -- we looked at what would
happen if we moved the trucks up to 2015 with a
15-year life and what would that do to what we
assessed in our EIA. What that showed is it made a
minimal change, about a two- to three-percent
change in emissions and almost no change in
ground-level concentrations.
We also looked at a scenario if we moved the
availability of TIER-IV trucks out to 2021 with a
15-year truck life for TIER-IV trucks. That's not
a larger increase in emissions. That's the mine
fleet itself emissions increase in the 20 to
30 percent range in emissions. The resulting
ground-level concentrations, though, as the mine
fleet isn't the only source in the region, show
that you would end up with about a 10 to 15 percent
increase in ground-level concentrations near the
site, and as you move farther away, the increase
would be much smaller.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Mr. Perkins, in addition
to that, in the current -- the region is, since
1998 to present, you know, the WBA Annual Report
has shown very little change in the NOx emissions
on an average basis. So we're pretty confident
that we'll meet and stay within the LARP Ambient
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1276
Air Guidelines.
Q. Mr. Speller, the changes that you talked about, or
the other analysis you talked about, if the TIER-IV
fleet isn't available, how does that affect the
Application Case? I think you talked about it in
the Planned Development Case.
A. MR. SPELLER: No, sorry, the emission
increases that I was discussing were specific to
the increase that we would see at Shell's mine
fleet.
Q. All right. Thank you.
A. MR. ROBERTS: So, Mr. Perkins, just on the
issue of TIER-IV trucks and the belief that we'll
be continuing to utilize a truck-and-shovel fleet
going forward into the future, that is our current
plans right now. It is in our best interest as a
company to reduce our truck fleet and we are
actively looking at alternatives to trucks such as
conveyors or extending slurry-conditioning lines.
We will continue to do that. So, you know, I think
it's fair to say that the truck fleet that we have
and we've modelled for is conservative and we're
working on ways to actually reduce the magnitude of
that fleet.
Q. But I'm assuming, Mr. Roberts, the decision to
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1277
retire the fleet and move to some other technology
would not be driven simply by the air-emissions
issues?
A. No. It's generally driven by labour availability.
Each of those trucks takes five to seven
individuals to maintain and operate it on an
ongoing basis, so it's predominantly driven by
labour.
Q. Panel, I wanted to ask you some socio-economic
questions if I could now. And I'm not sure who is
going to be the best person for this. Maybe
Mr. Broadhurst, you could help me.
A. MR. BROADHURST: Please start and then we'll
point you to the right person.
Q. Okay. In Exhibit 001-009, which is Shell's
June 2012 (sic) SIR Responses, page 8-2, PDF
page 67, in Response 30c, Shell states:
"Most of the direct
construction workers for Shell's
Jackpine Mine Expansion Project
will be housed in on-site
construction camps. As such, only
a small percentage of these workers
can be expected to receive living
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1278
out allowances."
And in the December 2007 EIA, Shell suggested
the workforce could exceed the capacity of the work
camp. The question I have for you: Is there
enough space at the Albian Sands Village to
accommodate all the workers from the Jackpine Mine
Expansion Project?
A. So that would definitely be our plan. And we are
also responsive where we do see that we're going to
have sustained levels of requirements, both for a
specific project but ongoing sustaining capital
projects, we've got the ability to do expansions to
the Albian camp.
If I look back on our experience through the
expansion project that we recently completed, where
we do have peaks, so we plan for being able to be
fully housed, but where we do have peaks, what
we've been able to be quite successful in is
working with other commercial providers and other
industry partners in accessing additional camp
space.
Q. And how far have you gone to assess the
availability of other camp space? I don't mean
expanding your own camp, but looking at others?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1279
A. So again, it's a planning basis at this point in
time. And as we would move up to our final
investment decision, that's when we put together
all the detailed construction execution plans. And
if we needed to take decisions around changes to
the Albian Village, then that would be part of the
investment package. And if we were needing to put
arrangements in place with other operators or
commercial providers of camps, then that's when
those details would be worked out. It would be
premature to do that now.
Q. So it sounds like you haven't begun to explore with
other parties or third parties what availability is
there, what arrangements you might make?
A. No, I think having been through a couple of these
since the mid-1990s, this is something that would
be low on the list of things that would be a
concern for me in terms of being able to ensure
that we've got the right camp housing in place for
the workforce. We've always been able to put good
robust plans in place to deliver that.
Q. So when you say it's low on the list of your
concerns, I've got to be honest, Mr. Broadhurst, I
might take that two ways: One is you're very
confident that you're going to be able to find
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1280
housing for these people, or, and I don't take it
this way, to be fair to you, you're not bothered if
you can't find housing for all these people. Can
you clarify?
A. Yes, I can be very clear. We're very confident
that we'll be able to provide the housing for the
workforce that we've identified.
Q. And can you say, as an approximation, what
percentage of your workforce you expect to live
off-site?
A. Just one moment, I'll check and see what we had
assumed in the work-up of the SEIA. So,
Mr. Perkins, we'll put you right to the source and
we'll let Mr. Schaaf provide the answer to your
question.
A. MR. SCHAAF: Hi, yes, can you just restate
the question just so I can be sure I answer it
fully?
Q. What's the approximate percentage of the workforce
that will be living off-site or you expect to be
living off-site?
A. Okay, the assumption made in the SEIA is that the
vast majority, so in the range of 90 percent of the
construction workforce will be housed in the camps,
so which will mean that less than or around
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1281
10 percent or less would be housed or would be
off-site and living in the community.
Q. Thank you.
In Shell's December 2009 SIR Response, it's
stated: "Based on updates, labour force
requirements in Part 1 update, Section 6.2 SEIA,
update temporary construction -- sorry, let me go
back:
"Temporary
construction-related housing demand
is estimated at 430 dwellings
during the 2012 to 2015 period."
And I wanted to know if Shell still estimates
that 430 dwellings will be needed?
A. Perhaps I can take that one again. That 430
additional dwellings necessary during the
construction phase is in relation largely to the
indirect and induced workforce as well related to
construction. It would be obviously a temporary
demand during the construction phase. And, yes,
that's still the approximate estimate with respect
to the constructional workforce housing needs.
Q. And can you confirm if Shell still expects that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1282
that need is going to arise between 2012 and 2015?
A. The need would arise during the construction phase
of the Project, which is now in the 2015 to 2018
range, I believe.
A. MR. BROADHURST: So just to be clear, what
we've identified through our most recent
submissions is a 2018 Final Investment Decision, so
the construction would follow from there.
Q. So it sounds like it's past 2018 at this point?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Still a three-year construction window, though, I
assume?
A. Yes, they are typically 36 to 40 months.
Q. And does Shell have an opinion about whether the
municipality, I think I mean the small "m"
municipality, can reasonably be expected to be able
to meet that housing demand?
A. MR. SCHAAF: Yes, perhaps I'll answer that
question.
With respect to the housing issue, obviously
it remains a concern in the municipality, but it is
one that is -- currently, efforts are underway to
be addressing. With respect to the recent MoU
between the Municipality and the Provincial
Government in the creation of an Urban Development
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1283
Subregion which would provide for land available
from the municipality for planning for up to 20
years of growth. In addition, the Municipality has
released its most updated MDP in October of 2011
which provides a fairly conservative -- so looks at
a sizeable amount of growth in the next 20 years
and is moving toward planning for that growth
through, as I mentioned, the UDSR, obviously the
release of other neighbourhoods such as Parson's
Creek, which is looking to come online, and also
there have been investments, sizeable investments
in social housing in the past few years with the
Government of Alberta investing over $50 million
since 2007 for social housing.
And I might just add to that, that as a
result of some of those initiatives, the Wood
Buffalo Development Housing Corporation had
indicated that its waiting list for individuals and
families for affordable housing had dropped from
430 on their waiting list in 2006 to 250 in 2011.
Q. So I'd like to turn, then, from
construction-related housing demand to
operations-workforce housing demand. And Shell
stated in the December SIR Responses that the
estimated demand for its operations workforce was
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1284
1,230 dwellings. Is that right?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. And is that still the estimated demand?
A. Yes.
Q. And can you tell me what the timing window is for
that demand to crest?
A. Oh, that demand is related to operations, so it's a
long-term demand. I guess you would say it would
crest when the Project begins operations.
Q. When would it start to build, then, if we look at
the bottom of the wave?
A. When would it start to build?
Q. Right. I'm particularly interested if there would
be an overlap with the construction-related demand.
A. Just one second. Let me confer.
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, I can give a bit of help
there. So normally what tends to happen is we
build the operating workforce in advance of the
completion of the construction project, and that
typically tends to be 15 to 18 months ahead that we
start to ramp-up. So there is a ramp-up. And the
crest, to use your terminology, would be when we're
fully in operation.
Q. So in that scenario, where would you foresee the
most critical or acute housing pressure to be, is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1285
it in the overlap period, is it further down the
line when you're in full operation?
A. MR. SCHAAF: I would say it's further down
the line, because that's when we would be looking
at again the long-term effect and demand for
housing. And that's ultimately what I think the
Municipality and developers in particular will plan
for is obviously the longer-term demand with
respect to operations. Keeping in mind that again
the Project is, you know, from a population
perspective which translates into housing is only
anticipated to account for approximately
7.5 percent of the growth over the next decade, so
there's a number of other projects that will come
into consideration when it comes to demands for
housing in the long-term.
Q. I'm trying to follow Mr. Broadhurst's updated
timeline. So we've got a sort of a revised
construction timeline I believe of 2018 to 2021,
let's say, and then 15 to 18 months ahead of the
end of that timeline is the beginning of the
building of the operations workforce. So it sounds
to me 2019/2020 is going to be where the overlap
starts.
Do you foresee or does Shell foresee in that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1286
timeframe that the Municipality is going to be able
to satisfy that demand for housing?
A. Well, as I sort of indicated, I think what's
important to understand here is that the
Municipality and developers are aware of and
planning for a very conservative case of growth in
the future. Again, that Municipal Development Plan
has -- I don't have the number in front of me at
this exact moment -- but it has a sizeable amount
of growth to occur in the municipality by 2020. So
they are planning for a large, for a significant or
sizeable growth in the next number of years. And
again we're seeing some of the implementations of
their plans for that growth through such things as
the UDSR between the Municipality and the
Government of Alberta to provide enough land to
allow for, to meet housing demands over the longer
term.
Q. Just a final question on this line and then perhaps
this would be a good time for the lunch break,
Mr. Chairman.
I asked you in relation to the construction
housing what percentage would be expected to be
off-site. Can you give me the same percentage for
operations workforce?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1287
A. MR. BROADHURST: I was just going to reinforce
the point that for our operating workforce, our
strong desire is to have our workforce living in
the community in which we operate, so our intent is
that our full operating workforce or the vast
majority would reside in the Municipality of Wood
Buffalo.
A. MR. SCHAAF: And if I just might add,
that, you know, not to speak for the Municipality
in any way, but based upon obviously some of the
documents they've put out as well as their
submission to this Board, their desire as well is
to see growth and not to see the proliferation of
operations camps, particularly those in relatively
closer proximity to the urban service area. So for
the building of the community, they are also
looking for workers to relocate and to move
families into the region.
MR. PERKINS: Thank you, Panel. I do have
some more socio-economic questions after the lunch
break. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Mr. Perkins. We'll
be back at 1 o'clock.
(The luncheon adjournment)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1288
(11:55 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, everyone.
Just a word about the scheduling. It appears
likely that we'll need to sit this evening, so
probably following a dinner break, but we'll take
another reading at the coffee break and see where
we're at, but it sure looks likely.
Mr. Duncanson?
MR. DUNCANSON: Mr. Chairman, I would just
like to get one more of the undertakings from this
morning.
UNDERTAKING SPOKEN TO, BY MR. DUNCANSON:
MR. DUNCANSON: This is the undertaking given
by Mr. Broadhurst with respect to whether Shell's
willing to commit to an asphaltene rejection
threshold of 10 percent on an annual basis. And I
understand Mr. Broadhurst is able to speak to that
undertaking now.
A. MR. BROADHURST: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So we did go away and consider the request
and we would be comfortable committing to a limit
of up to 10 percent on an annual basis for
asphaltene rejection.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1289
The one point that I would note is that we
would want to reserve the right to be able to come
back and have discussions with the regulator if we
saw an opportunity to optimize value. The reason
for wanting to highlight that potential is that in
our operation, unlike many of the operations, we do
not have a coker upgrader, we have a
hydroconversion upgrader. And that affords us the
opportunity to do a couple of things, one is to
actually grow barrels, so we have a yield out of
the upgrader that's greater than the number of
barrels we put in because of the hydrogen addition
process. And we also have an opportunity, through
the conversion units in the upgrader, set the level
of conversion and that is dependent on the quality
of the feed.
So I think up to 10 percent is a reasonable
condition, with just the qualifier that if we saw
an opportunity for additional value creation, we
would want to go back and speak to the regulator.
(UNDERTAKING NO. 22 SATISFIED)
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1290
Mr. Perkins?
MR. PERKINS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Q. Just to continue with the socio-economic questions,
panel, in Shell's December 2009 SIR Response at
page 9-5, Response 27a states:
"Project-related traffic is
expected to peak in 2014 at between
640 and 780 AADT. Current traffic
volumes along Highway 63, north of
Fort McMurray and south of the
Muskeg River Mine turnoff, vary
between 3,000 and 19,400 AADT, and
is expected to increase when
additional projects begin
construction."
Does Shell still believe the peak will occur
in 2014?
A. MR. SCHAAF: I will speak. No, it does
not. That was based on a 2012 to 2015 construction
scenario. If we look at a 2018 to approximately
2021 scenario, then the peak would probably be in
around the 2020.
Q. How about the numbers, will the numbers change
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1291
significantly?
A. No.
Q. Again in the December 2009 SIR Responses, this time
Exhibit 001-006A, at page 6-8, Shell states:
"The distribution of
estimated 9,310 work years of
on-site employment indicates that
the on-site workforce will remain
above 2,500 from late 2013 to
mid-2015, during project
construction. The on-site
construction workforce will peak at
nearly 4,400 workers in Q1-2015."
I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest
that's a schedule that should be corrected as well?
A. Yes, that would also be updated to the -- again
you're talking from a 2012 to 2015 into a 2018 to
2021 timeframe.
Q. What about the peak employment numbers, are those
the same or do you expect those to change?
A. Based on the workforce curve for the Project, the
peak would be the same.
Q. I wanted to ask for an undertaking, if I could, and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1292
that is if Shell could update Figure 6-1 entitled
"On-site Workforce" for the change dates.
And the other thing we'd like you to do if
you can is can you separate out the employment
numbers between Jackpine Mine Expansion and Pierre
River?
A. Sorry, the last part, you said can we split out
Jackpine Mine Expansion from Pierre River Mine
numbers?
Q. Right.
A. In Figure 6-1?
Q. Right.
A. That's actually just Jackpine Mine Expansion
numbers.
Q. That is?
A. Yes. So there are no Pierre River Mine numbers in
that Figure 6-1.
Q. Rather than ask for Pierre River numbers, then, we
would like you to attempt this, and that is show us
any overlaps with the Pierre River project. Is
that a fair "ask for"?
A. Yes.
Q. All right, thank you.
MR. DUNCANSON: Just to confirm, Mr. Perkins,
that was an undertaking to update Figure 6-1 with
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1293
the changed dates and as well as overlaps or any
overlaps with Pierre River Mine?
MR. PERKINS: That's correct. Thank you.
UNDERTAKING 24: MR. SCHAAF TO UPDATE FIGURE 6-1
WITH THE CHANGED DATES AS WELL AS PROVIDE OVERLAPS
OR ANY OVERLAPS WITH PIERRE RIVER MINE
MR. PERKINS:
Q. Now, panel, Mr. Broadhurst stated in Shell's
Opening Statement:
"During the 35 years of
operations, the annual average
expenditures for the Project will
represent hundreds of millions in
spend per year, including
expenditures on sustaining capital
and plant turnarounds. Of these
expenditures:
- Approximately 40 percent will
accrue to regional companies and
workers; and
- Roughly 30 percent will
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1294
accrue to companies and workers
elsewhere in Alberta, a full
75 percent to Alberta."
And with that background in mind, I wanted to
take you to Table 6-9 of Exhibit 001-006A, the
December 2009 SIR Response and Table 6-1 that
appears on that page. Let me know if you have
that.
A. So that was Table 6-1 on page 6-9 of the
December 2009 filing, correct?
Q. Right.
A. Yes.
Q. The Table is entitled "Geographic Distribution of
Construction Expenditure"?
A. Yes.
Q. So it appears that this Table just reflects
construction expenditures. Would it be possible
for you to provide a similar Table that takes in
operations expenditures?
A. Perhaps I can assist in there is a table in the May
2008 EIA Update, and it's on page 143, and it is
Table 5.5-3. And that's "Average Annual Operations
Expenditure by Geography," it's titled, for JME.
Q. Thank you. We'll have a look at that and perhaps
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1295
if there's anything coming out of that, we'll get
back to you.
A. Okay.
Q. Mr. Broadhurst also stated in the Opening Statement
that the number of long-term operational jobs will
increase by about 750 full-time positions. And
that's repeated essentially in the May 2012 SIR
Responses, Shell states that operations jobs will
be 750 workers for Jackpine Mine Expansion.
And I just wanted to ask you to clarify that,
Mr. Broadhurst, the 750 full-time positions you
were addressing in the Opening Statement, that's
the same 750 that are referred to in the SIR
Response; is that correct?
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, that's the common
operations number.
Q. And, Mr. Roberts, you addressed the matter of, I
think it was you, aircraft landings during the peak
of the construction period.
A. MR. ROBERTS: Yes.
Q. Does that sound familiar?
A. Yes.
Q. The reference I have is from the transcript, Volume
5, page 877, line 24, you said:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1296
"And I can confirm that
during the peak of the construction
period that we had, we had 16
landings per week, so we were in
between two and three a day,
depending on which day of the
week."
And am I correct, you're talking, when you
say "that we had" you're talking about landings in
relation to the Phase I of the Project; is that
correct?
A. That's correct.
Q. And do you expect essentially the same numbers for
the Jackpine Mine Expansion Project?
A. Essentially the same numbers. There's some
infrastructure that is not required to go in for
the third train, but essentially you're talking the
same kit on the ground.
Q. Thank you, sir.
In its May 2008 EIA Update, Shell stated:
"Under Planned Development
Case Assumptions, the regional
population is forecast to reach
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1297
91,200 in 2010, 104,050 in 2015,
and 110,640 in 2020."
And then in the May 2012 SIR Response, the
Nichols material states on page 20 of
Exhibit 001-051S:
"Based on high-growth
scenarios ... project accommodation
population growth trend is expected
to be over 4 percent per year,
reaching over 230,000 permanent and
non-permanent residents by 2030."
The question I have is, did Shell revise its
projected population growth and come to this
conclusion of 230,000 by 2030, or did they take
that information as it was provided in the Rural
Municipality of Wood Buffalo's Submission? I can
give you the reference there, it's page 7 of
Exhibit 14-007. Essentially both parties are
estimating 230,000.
A. MR. SCHAAF: Yes, I can answer that
question. Yes, those numbers, the update, the
230,000, is reflective of the numbers from the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1298
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo's Municipal
Development Plan. That is the estimate to which
the Municipality is attempting or is planning. We
use it as a conservative estimate to provide the
regulator with a conservative scenario for
long-range population growth in the region.
And you're probably aware, but I'll just
quickly mention, that in the Response to SIR-11 in
May 2012, Appendix 2, Section 3.53, there's a
little bit more discussion with respect to
population projections under the updated Plan
Development Case.
Q. What we are interested in is obviously the
projections that Shell made in May 2008 and what
we're dealing with in 2012 are substantially
different; correct?
A. Yes. As I said, the projections are -- well, the
projections in the long range, what we have in May
2012 projects out to 2030. And again, just
relative to that Appendix 2 to SIR-11 in May 2012,
there is a Figure 3.5-1 that provides that.
In May 2008, the projection at that time
didn't go that far out. So it was using a
different model, the RMWB model, population
projection model, wasn't available at that time.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1299
So that's why it has since been revised
accordingly.
Q. So just talking about the May 2008 projection,
again, 91,200 in 2010. 104,050 in 2015. 110,640
in 2020. I'm not a mathematician but it occurs to
me that is a much slower rate of growth than
something that would realize 230,000 in 2030.
Would you agree with that?
A. Well, one thing I'll just clarify, those numbers
that you're referring to from the May 2008
submission are referring to Urban Service Area
population growth only, whereas the numbers that
the Municipality is using, the 230,000, is a number
for the entire municipality, that includes the
permanent population, the non-permanent, and the
Project accommodation. So there is that
additional, those additional numbers to take into
consideration with respect to the population growth
between the two projections.
Q. Well, let me ask you this, then. What we're
particularly interested in is the population growth
projection that Shell has used when it's assessed
socio-economic impacts and when it's designed or
accommodated or taken note of mitigative measures
to address those impacts. So I guess my first
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1300
question is, which population estimate should we be
looking at?
A. And the population number that we should be looking
at is the May 2012 Updated Planned Development
Case.
I'll just note that because of the time that
the Application has been in, has been ongoing, you
know, we have attempted to provide the regulator
with updated population projections. And so that's
what led to, you know, a couple of different
projections through that timeframe because we
wanted to provide the regulator with the most
recent and updated information possible.
So with respect, though, at this point, when
we are dealing with the issue of socio-economic
effects and mitigations undertaken, then we would
be looking at the updated Plan Development Case, as
it's provided in the May 2012 submission, in
Appendix 2, SIR-11.
Q. And sorry, could you explain for me again, then,
what the difference is between the Regional
Municipality's estimates of 230,000 in 2030, and
Shell's estimates in the May 2008 Update?
A. Sure. Very quickly I'll try to provide that.
The estimates in the May 2008 Update are
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1301
estimates from what is known or has been called the
OSDG model, the Oil Sands Development Group
Population Model. And those projections are for
the urban service area. At the time in 2008, there
was no RMWB population projection model and the
OSDG model was the common model used for a lot of
the assessments. It projected, as I said, it was
based on the urban service area population, it
didn't project the rural communities, it didn't
project the camp-based population at a cumulative
level in the municipality.
The RMWB population projection model was -- I
believe it began -- it started development in 2009,
there were forecasts that came around 2010, and
then were refined and updated, and then presented
in the Municipal Development Plan at the end of
2011. And those projections are broader,
basically, because they take into account not just
the Urban Service Area population, but also takes
into account the Project accommodation population
in the region as well as the rural communities.
So we utilized the RMWB's population
projections from their MDP for the updated Planned
Development Case, as I said, because it was a
conservative case, quite conservative, and so it
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1302
allowed us for providing the regulator with a
conservative estimate of cumulative effects for its
assessment.
And secondly, it is the population numbers
which are being used for planning purposes in the
municipality for service providers and
infrastructure.
So it seemed appropriate or prudent to use
those numbers as the updated Planned Development
Case.
Q. So given all that, which of the two projections, in
your view, better identifies or represents the
community of individuals that could be affected by
the Project?
A. Well, again, the updated Plan Development Case, the
RMWB population projections, are the most recent,
and they are the ones that I would use and are
being used. I think it's fair to say that they are
conservative estimates. Again, because one of the
assumptions with the population projections is that
a number of the operations or potential operations
camps -- sorry, that the Project accommodation in
the region will stabilize, will not continue to
grow, so it incorporates a certain aspirational
element for the municipality to see growth within
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1303
the Urban Service Area in terms of a permanent
population.
I'm sorry, did that answer your question?
Q. Let me try this. Between the two projections, do
the impacts and the mitigations that Shell has
identified or specified in its Application, do they
remain the same in both cases, are they just as
effective in both cases?
A. Yes, I would say so. In both cases the Project --
I mean, again we're looking at population
projections so it's a cumulative story that we're
talking about here, more so than a project-specific
story. So obviously Shell, like other proponents,
will act within the realm, that is their area to
act, while responsible agencies and service
providers address cumulative effects with respect
to growth.
Q. All right, thank you.
The last area that I have questions on is the
surface water. And I wanted to discuss water
withdrawals first.
In Shell's Reply Submission of October 15th
in response to a question from DFO, Shell states
(as read):
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1304
"Shell agrees and is already
committed to compliance with the
Water Management Framework for the
Lower Athabasca River as amended."
And for the purposes of these questions, I've
provide Mr. Denstedt with a copy of a document
dated November 10, 2011. It's actually in letter
form. The addressees are Randall Barrett of
Alberta Environment, and Mr. David Burden of
Fisheries and Oceans Canada. I'm just wondering if
anyone on the Panel had an opportunity to review
that document. Mr. Kovach?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, I did.
Q. Do you know what this is, sir?
A. Yes, my understanding is this is a letter put forth
by the Oil Sands Development Group on behalf of its
members to discuss how the allocation or the
threshold, the withdrawal thresholds on the
Athabasca River would be allocated amongst industry
members that are currently in the watershed.
Q. And do you have that document available to you?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. So if I get you to look at the first paragraph,
sorry, the second paragraph on the first page, you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1305
see where it states (as read):
"In order to develop a plan
that will meet the requirements of
the framework in the near term...".
And as I understand it, that is the Draft
Water Management Framework for the Lower Athabasca
(as read):
"... while concurrently
developing a basis for meeting the
framework in the longer term,
industry agreed to the following
underlying principles."
And then below that there are four statements
of principles enumerated (a), (b), (c), and (d).
Do you see that?
A. Yes.
Q. And if I turn to the back of the document, one of
the signatories is Shell Albian Sands; correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. So my question is: When Shell states in this
proceeding that it's committed to compliance with
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1306
the Water Management Framework, is this agreement
or perhaps agreements like this, one of the ways
that Shell makes good on its commitment?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. And how important is a document or an agreement
like this?
A. Oh, it's very important because the framework
that's in place does not spell out the details of
how industry should share that, its water
allocation under low-flow conditions, so this is a
coming-together of industry which helps set the
bounds of each operator to do their part.
Q. And are there other things or other arrangements or
commitments that Shell has done or has considering
doing in order to ensure it complies with the Water
Management Framework?
A. Yes. As part of the Phase 2 recommendation
discussions for the Water Management Framework,
Shell and its industry partners looked at under the
new recommendation, if it were accepted by
Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Alberta Environment
Sustainable Resource Development, how we would like
to change what amount of water we would take. And
as we mentioned earlier, it's kind of -- it depends
on the flows in the river, but at 87 cubic metres
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1307
per second or lower in the Athabasca River, Shell
agreed to take 0.2 cubic metres per second.
Q. And sorry, that comes out of the agreement or that
comes out of the framework, that obligation? I
think you said Shell agreed.
A. Yes, it comes through ongoing discussions on the
Phase II recommendation. Again, the recommendation
hasn't been yet accepted by Fisheries and Oceans
Canada or Alberta Environment Sustainable Resource
Development, but we wanted to try and understand
prior to that how industry would allocate,
distribute the allocation during low-flow
conditions.
Q. And I do have some questions on that, but
Mr. Chairman, I wonder, since we've addressed the
document, that perhaps we should mark this as the
next exhibit.
THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, sir. Do you have a
number for me?
MR. PERKINS: I have 002-038, Mr. Chairman,
and I'll give it a name. It is a letter agreement
dated November 10, 2011 entitled "Re: Oil Sands
Mining Water Management Agreement for the 2011-2012
Winter Period."
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1308
EXHIBIT 002-038: LETTER AGREEMENT DATED
NOVEMBER 10, 2011 ENTITLED "RE: OIL SANDS MINING
WATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE 2011-2012
WINTER PERIOD"
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. PERKINS: Thank you, sir.
And we'll make a few copies available. We
don't have a lot, but we'll distribute them
appropriately.
Q. So getting back to the framework, I wanted to refer
you to Shell's Reply Submission of October 15,
2012, that's Exhibit 001-007A, page 35, PDF
page 42, a response to OSEC. And Shell stated:
"At such time as an updated
Phase II framework is released,
Shell will modify its plans, as
necessary, to ensure ongoing
compliance."
And I believe you had a discussion down this
line with Ms. Buss or it might have been Ms. Biem.
Am I correct that under the current draft Phase II
framework, it is possible that during low-flow
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1309
conditions, Shell's withdrawals from the Athabasca
River may be restricted to infrastructure freeze
protection flows only?
A. Yes, that is correct. That's what the 0.2 cubic
metres per second I was referring to earlier is
talking to.
Q. And does that mean that for all intents and
purposes, for any operations at the mine requiring
water, the source of that water would have to be
somewhere other than the Athabasca River, that is
you can't effectively operate on freeze protection
volumes?
A. That is correct, 0.2 would be what we would be
allowed to take, no more.
Q. So what, if any, plans or strategies does Shell
have to continue operating in the event that
low-flow water-withdrawal restrictions apply for
more than 30 days?
A. MR. ROBERTS: I'll take that one. So we
intend to meet our longer-term commitment to supply
water to our facility through freeboard in our
existing tailings facilities and in our existing
ponds. So that predominantly the river water that
we withdraw goes to steam generation. So we do
have a commitment to reduce our river water intake.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1310
And part of that commitment is exploring other
sources of water, be they aquifers on the leases
that are required to be dewatered, and reuse of our
process water.
We do have a number of pilot plants underway
and water-treatment facilities. We think that
water treatment of water on our existing leases is
going to be the way we will end up proceeding.
So we're looking to minimize the need to
disturb future footprint to store raw water, and
we're doing that with our existing water
inventories.
Q. Shell's also stated in this proceeding and this is,
I'll give you the reference, transcript Volume 3,
page 247, lines 15 to 22, Shell states:
"In our 2011 Oil Sands
Performance Report, we describe our
environmental aspirations for our
Heavy Oil business. These include
... zero river water withdrawal for
our new mining operations..."
So can you put that aspiration into context
for me, how would that become reality in connection
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1311
with the Jackpine Mine Expansion Project?
A. So the use of existing water sources on our leases
of both Jackpine and MRM are key components in
minimizing or eliminating our water withdrawal from
the Athabasca River. So at this point in time,
we've declared that that's an aspiration and we do
have pilot work, research work ongoing to bring
that to fruition.
Mr. Mayes had referenced earlier the water
treatment plant that's in place to reduce calciums
and magnesiums in our water. That's part of the
portfolio of projects that we're looking at to
allow us to utilize more water from the surface
water, subsurface water, that we have on our
existing leases.
Q. During periods of exceptional low flow in the
Athabasca River, would Shell be prepared to reduce
bitumen production in order to reduce water
consumption as one measure to meet water-withdrawal
restrictions?
A. So we are committed to the point 2. And to the
extent that we need to modify our operations to
stay within that point 2 limit, we would do so.
Q. In Shell's Reply Submission, again dated
October 15th, another response to OSEC concerning
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1312
end pit lakes, this one appears on page 34. Shell
states:
"The remaining issues will be
addressed through Shell's ongoing
participation with the Syncrude
Base Mine Lake Project, which will
be the first full scale
demonstration of an oil sands end
pit lake."
I wanted to ask you first, what are the
expected timelines for the completion of Syncrude's
Base Mine Lake full scale demonstration?
A. MR. KOVACH: I'll take that. I don't
think we have firm dates for Syncrude's plans, but
what we do understand from the work we've been
doing with them is that there's two main components
that they want to look at first. The first is
stability of the mature fine tails in the bottom of
the end pit lake. The second is maintaining water
quality in the end pit lake. And based on our
discussions with them and participation on these,
we think that within the next 10 years they'll have
firmed that up quite substantially.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1313
Q. So how much will the story, assuming that happens,
how much of the story that you hope to get out of
the demonstration lake will be told in 10 years?
A. I think it's the big major chunk of it in terms of
its ability to act as a water treatment facility.
The next phase will be getting more information on
the biological aspects of integrating it into the
reclaimed environment in terms of, again, providing
plant habitat, bug habitat, and fish habitat. That
will be the next stage.
Q. And what is Shell's role in Syncrude's Base Mine
Lake full scale demonstration project? Do you have
an active role?
A. Our role primarily now is a funding role. And we
work with them. Syncrude definitely leads the
efforts. It is, after all, their end pit lake
demonstration project. But they share their
learnings with us and we help fund the work that
they do.
Q. So Syncrude, though, is really in control of what
happens at that project, if I can call it that?
A. Yes, again, yes, it is their project, they are in
control.
Q. Given Shell's apparent reliance on Syncrude's
project, if the base mine lake demonstration
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1314
ultimately proves not to be successful, how will
Shell demonstrate that its proposed end pit lake
will succeed in providing self-sustaining aquatic
ecosystems?
A. Yes, it's a good question. I mean, I'm sure you
understand that we're very confident that it will
work. But I understand the question is, "What are
we prepared to do?"
I think we just have to continue on with the
research efforts that we're undertaking through the
CEMA Reclamation Working Group, through CONRAD's
Environmental Research Group, and the ongoing work
we're doing, we're going to do, through the Oil
Sands Tailing Consortium and through Canada's Oil
Sands Innovation Alliance to, again, understand the
findings that what we found at Syncrude, why it
didn't demonstrate end pit lakes like we expected
it would, and then we'd have to modify our plans to
do so, to look at how we could avoid that.
But, again, I guess the key message is we
think they are on a trajectory to showing success
and we think this is an unlikely scenario.
Q. So CEMA, CONRAD, OSTC, those are collaborative
organizations; right?
A. Yes, absolutely. This is an industry initiative
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1315
and something we want to work at together. As
Mr. Broadhurst mentioned earlier, it makes good
sense for us to share all our learnings from all
the operators in the region, share our
understandings and pool those so we can reach
solutions quicker and better.
Q. So there's sharing going on. Does that mean that
Shell has some work or some information that it's
doing independent from those groups in relation to
end pit lakes and their viability?
A. Excuse me for one second. We'll just confirm that.
Yes, to answer your question, all of the work
that's being done that Shell's looking at is
through these multi-stakeholder groups and through
the Syncrude demonstration lake.
Q. I provided another document to your counsel.
Hopefully you've had a chance to review it. It's a
Memorandum dated October 1st, 2012 and it says:
"Subject: CEMA
recommendation to Alberta
Government-End Pit Lakes Guidance
Document, 2012."
Has somebody had an opportunity to look at
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1316
that?
A. Yes, we've looked at it. And Mr. Vandenberg is
very familiar with it, being one of the authors.
MR. PERKINS: Maybe, Mr. Chairman, I'll
just hand out a copy of that so we can follow along
with the questions.
Q. Shell's actually addressed this, I believe, in its
Reply Submission of October 15th. I'll refer you
to a statement on page 26. Shell states:
"CEMA recently released an
End Pit Lakes Technical Guidance
Document (CEMA 2012), which
includes technical guidance for the
planning, design, and management of
pit lakes in the Oil Sands Region.
A recurring theme in the End Pit
Lakes Technical Guidance Document
was adaptive management, which
Shell will apply to the JPME
project in general and to pit lakes
in particular."
I wanted to ask you in relation to the
Technical Guidance Document, is it fair to say that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1317
there's only mixed support for that document?
A. MR. KOVACH: Could you rephrase it or be a
little more specific. Do you mean with the
reviewers of the document or in the public?
Q. I would say with the CEMA members that were
involved in it. My understanding, and I think
maybe the better thing, to be fair to you, is to
refer you to the document itself. There are
attached to it a number of letters from groups that
I assume, or companies, that are CEMA participants.
And one in particular, there's a letter from
Syncrude dated 21st August, 2012, and it starts by
saying (as read):
"This letter is submitted to
document the position and concerns
of Syncrude Canada Ltd. in respect
to the draft End Pit Lake Guidance
Document prepared by the CEMA End
Pit Lake Task Group under the
auspices of the Reclamation Working
Group."
And it goes on to state those concerns.
So my point in the question was, there was
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1318
not universal 100 percent support for the draft
Technical Guidance Document; would you agree with
that?
A. Yes, I think I would agree with that. I think when
Syncrude wrote this letter, having done so much
work in the region, and I can't speak for them, but
my understanding is they have a lot of confidence
in their designs given all the work they've done
over the last number of years.
Q. And just see if you agree with me. There was only
conditional support from a number of organizations,
U of A, OSRIN, AESRD, NAIT, Fort McMurray First
Nation, Fort McMurray Environmental Association,
CPAWS, Northern Alberta, Alberta Fish and Game
Association, Métis Nation of Alberta Association
Region 1. It may not be fair to ask you to agree
or disagree.
A. I agree that there's mixed reviews on the document.
Q. It was, however, supported in full by CEMA, CNRL,
Imperial Oil, Suncor, and Shell Albian Sands; is
that right?
A. Definitely by Shell. I'll agree with you on the
other ones.
Q. I won't ask you to speak for the others. So I
guess my question is, given that Syncrude doesn't
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1319
fully support the document, and Syncrude is the
operator of the base mine lake full scale
demonstration, does that difference of opinion
compromise or affect Shell's ability to rely on
Baseline Lake to demonstrate the efficacy of
Shell's end pit lake?
A. No, I don't think so at all. I think what it comes
down to is expectations about what the document
should and should not be. Shell, for its part, we
support the document because we believe it's trying
to advance the science to help us understand what
we understand about end pit lakes and how to
provide successful end pit lakes in the closure
environment.
At the same time, it's also pointing out
areas where more study needs to be undertaken. So
we think it's a good document. And, again, it's
just advancing the science, which, again, is a good
thing.
Q. But you don't have a concern, though, that
Syncrude, as the operator of the demonstration
lake, that you're watching and relying on, may take
the project in a different direction than what you
would be doing with your own development given your
support and I assume adherence to the Technical
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1320
Guidance Document?
A. No, we don't have those concerns because, again,
there's basic principles that of limnology and
hydrology and water treatment and whatnot that you
need to undertake regardless of how the pit lakes
differ, whether or not there's mature fine tails in
those lakes or not. So again, we believe the work
that Syncrude is doing is going to be very
informative to all of industry. And of course
we're going to have to adaptively manage from that
for our own circumstances. But, again, it's a
really good start for us as an industry to
understand the efficacy of end pit lakes -- or pit
lakes, excuse me.
Q. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we should mark that
document. I have got 002-039, if that's correct,
sir?
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. PERKINS: And I'll describe it. It's a
Memorandum dated October 1, 2012, subject: CEMA
recommendation to Alberta Government - End Pit
Lakes Guidance Document 2012. And to the extent we
have a few more copies, we'll make those available,
sir.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1321
EXHIBIT 002-039: MEMORANDUM DATED OCTOBER 1,
2012, SUBJECT: CEMA RECOMMENDATION TO ALBERTA
GOVERNMENT - END PIT LAKES GUIDANCE DOCUMENT 2012
Q. MR. PERKINS: Panel, I wanted to refer
you to Shell's response to undertaking 8. Sorry,
undertaking 8 relates to Exhibit 001 - or, sorry,
it is 001-080. And I was hoping you could walk me
through Table 1.
A. Yes, thank you. We have that.
Q. So the fourth bullet under the Table states:
"At 15.6 million cubic metres
of process-affected water, centrate
water, will be transferred to the
Northeast Pit Lake between 2051 and
2054."
Now, Table 1 shows that Northeast Pit Lake
will start filling in 2050 and it will start
discharging in 2065. Have I got that right?
A. MR. VANDENBERG: That's correct.
Q. So for the filling period, 15 years, the lake will
receive tailings seepage of 1.5 million cubic
metres a year, consolidation flux 2 million cubic
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1322
metres a year, and fine tailings centrate 1 million
cubic metres per year.
A. Yes, those are on average, averaged over the
15-year period.
Q. So when I add that up to 67.5 million cubic metres,
would you agree that that number is the total
volume of process-affected water that will
accumulate in the Northeast Pit Lake during the 15
years of filling?
A. The number that represents process-affected water
would be slightly less than that because the
reclaimed landscape runoff includes some
process-affected water and some what would be
considered site runoff but not process affected, in
other words, in contact with reclaimed materials
but not in contact with tailings.
So the 67 million you mentioned would be
slightly higher than the total volume of
process-affected water.
Q. Okay, what do you estimate that volume would be,
then?
A. I'd have to take this away again and break down
that 12 million, but it would be, you know, about
60 probably.
Q. Okay, about 60 million cubic metres?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1323
A. Yes.
Q. Okay, I think we can work with that. And can you
confirm that Shell has stated it's committed to not
discharging any water until it is in compliance
with water discharge criteria?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, that is correct, we will
commit to that.
Q. So the question I have for you, Shell, in order to
increase the chances of successfully achieving
self-sustaining aquatic ecosystems, has Shell
considered progressively treating the
process-affected water as a method to reduce the
final inventory process-affected water that will be
disposed of in the end pit lake?
A. No, at this time our current designs do not include
active treatment. Although we do note it as an
adaptive management alternative, we could undertake
if needed.
Q. Right. And I understand you're not planning to do
it. I guess the question is, why wouldn't you plan
to do it? Well, let me back up. Do you believe
that not transferring an inventory of
process-affected water to the end pit lake is
something that's worthy of consideration?
A. I'm sorry, could you just repeat that one more
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1324
time?
Q. I'll try this the Rusty Miller way. Not putting
process-affected water inventory, not accumulating
an inventory of process-affected water and
disposing of it in the end pit lake, is that a good
thing?
A. Yeah, at a high level, absolutely. Of course
there's a number of considerations that go into how
much treatment you should undertake, you know,
economic, social, and environmental, but
absolutely.
Q. So what are the considerations, then, that leads
Shell not to consider doing that? I know it's
difficult.
A. I think I understand what you're saying.
Q. Okay.
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, so thank you.
You know, one of the things that we need to
make sure that we're doing in our designs is we
need to be ensuring that we're providing that
balance, that we're actually spending the right
money on the right things. And when we look at the
option for closure and reclamation, and the ability
to use the pit lakes as effectively, fairly
cost-effective treatment mechanism, it wouldn't be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1325
reasonable to think that you would take more
aggressive steps until you had the data to suggest,
as we've discussed previously, that that's a
mitigation that you would need to put in place.
And we would have the time to be able to do that.
These things, as well, are always a balancing
act, a trade-off. You're looking at economics.
But even within the environmental frame, you're
looking at trying to get the right trade-off.
So we have a very passive system that allows
us to treat large volumes of process-affected
water. You could put in a processing plant that
has requirement for all sorts of rotating equipment
and heat input, and you could trade-off
environmental performance on the water side for
reduced environmental performance on the GHG side,
but we don't see a need to do that. And we don't
see a need to look at committing significant
resources to exploring those options at this time.
I think the important thing is to really
focus the energy within Shell and, of course,
within the industry on making this good solution
work.
Q. Well, okay, let's talk about the need to do it,
then, Mr. Broadhurst.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1326
I think we've established or Shell's agreed
in this hearing that there's no 100 percent
certainty the end pit lakes strategy is going to
work; right?
A. Well, I think, we have the 100 percent discussion,
I think what the people who are specialists in the
field said is that they have a high degree of
confidence that it will work.
Q. Right. And that is what Shell has said. But
there's within "a high degree of confidence," and
"100 percent certainty," there's a margin within
which there's going to be problems with end pit
lake strategy, would you agree, potentially
problems within end pit lake strategies?
A. Which is why whenever you're developing a
technology, as we're doing with the pit lake
technology, that you're gathering the data, that
you're designing the experiments, and that you're
gathering the data to allow you to understand where
you need to adjust or adapt the technology or the
plan. So that again is where the focus of energy
should be occurring.
What is not helpful is to maintain a full
suite of every conceivable option for dealing with
the treatment of process-affected water and, as a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1327
consequence, overextend your resources both
financial and human and not realize success in any
of the areas.
So I think the industry is taking the right
approach, because they've got the data that gives
the high confidence that this technology will work.
And it's really just a matter of applying ourselves
to delivering that.
Q. So, Mr. Broadhurst, if we're operating in the realm
of confidences and what's prudent, wouldn't it be
prudent to have a back-up strategy? Aren't those
things worthy of consideration?
A. Well, I think it's prudent to be understanding what
the risks are and making sure that you can deploy a
mitigation strategy with enough time to actually
develop and deploy that as required. And there is
plenty of time for people to start looking at more
costly potentially less environmentally-friendly
technologies in the alternative to this. There is
time to do that. I wouldn't suggest that it would
be prudent to do it now.
Q. Okay. And, in fact, Mr. Roberts stated that he
said on November 1st, I think, that you've got 38
years to assess lakes that are being put in place
and to manage and put alternatives in place. So is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1328
that Shell's approach, that is, well, is that
Shell's approach, you're going to see what happens
in those 38 years?
A. Shell's approach is always to be data-driven and to
be very deliberate in how we deploy the resources.
As we discussed earlier, we're in a fantastic
situation as an industry in the sense that Syncrude
is at a position where they can be developing the
large-scale pit-lake opportunity. We will get the
data that we need to design the ultimate closure
landscapes for a number of the operating complexes
on the basis of that. Because it is all industry
that is supporting that technology development, we
know that the financial and the human resources
will be deployed. That, to me, seems like a pretty
prudent approach to be taking.
To the extent that we need to have mitigation
options, we will draw on our expertise, both
globally and locally, and as Mr. Roberts had
already identified, we do employ process water
treatment technology today in support of our
recovery initiatives and so it's not going to be a
real challenge for us to be able to take that and
build it into a mitigation plan if and when we need
to.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1329
Q. But you're not prepared to explore mitigation
strategies now, it's too early?
A. What I've said is that we need to make sure that
we're doing the prudent things in terms of
investing the human resources, investing the
financial resources, at the right time. That's not
trying to move away from ensuring we have an
appropriate mitigation in place, that's just being
a prudent operator and ensuring we do the right
things at the right time.
Q. All right, I'm mindful of the discussion we had,
Mr. Broadhurst. I want to ask you for an
undertaking. If you don't want to do it, just tell
me you don't want to do it, okay. I won't be
offended.
Will Shell undertake to provide an economic
assessment of actively treating end pit lake water
to the point that it meets discharge criteria?
A. No. I think I'd already explained that I don't
think that that would be a good use of resources.
And thank you for not being offended.
Q. Mr. Kovach, you stated in transcript Volume 5, it's
captured that you stated:
"No, we're not suggesting it
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1330
would be similar water quality to a
lake, a naturally-occurring lake."
And, sorry, this is obviously in relation to
the end pit lake.
"What we're suggesting is
that the end pit lake will provide
adequate water treatment and
ultimately provide habitat."
And in Exhibit 001-006, this is a response to
SIRs in December of 2009, Shell stated in relation
to Response 307-L (as read):
"Shell will meet the pit lake
discharge criteria that are being
developed by CEMA and adopted by
Alberta Environment. Water will
not be discharged from the pit
lakes unless the water meets these
criteria."
Would you agree these criteria have not been
developed yet?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1331
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, that is correct.
Q. Does Shell agree or disagree that the water quality
parameters of the water discharging from the end
pit lake should be within the natural variability
of the water quality parameters in the receiving
streams and the Athabasca River?
A. One moment. Yes, what Shell would agree is that
they have to be health-based, first and foremost,
but that should be a primary consideration, the
natural variability.
Q. Panel, will Shell make the following commitment:
If CEMA's end pit lake discharge criteria are not
available at the time Shell is prepared to
discharge end pit lake water, Shell will meet CCME
and ESRD guidelines for freshwater when discharging
water from the end pit lake?
A. Could you just give us one minute to caucus on
that.
Okay, let's see if I got all that.
I think that the major concern with the CCME
criteria are what happens naturally today. So do
you have natural exceedances of these criteria in
the watershed today.
So there's a little bit of reticence to just
agreeing to that.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1332
I think what Shell would agree, though, is
that if there were no guidelines in place, it's
prudent and absolutely necessary for us to work
with the regulators to help them to understand what
our water quality looks like and provide evidence
to their satisfaction that health in the lower
reaches of the Muskeg River will be protected.
Q. Would you want them to indicate that satisfaction
before you release, as you're releasing, or after
you release?
A. MR. BROADHURST: So I think the key thing that
we were discussing is that we do need to be
cognizant of what the background quality is in the
region that we're going to be discharging to. The
proposal is that, in the absence of the CEMA
guidelines, what we would do is we would actually
prepare a proposed set of criteria. We would take
that to the regulator. The assumption was that we
would go to ASRD and we would look for their
consent to release on that basis.
So it's really important that we get the
regulatory check and balance. And in the absence
of the CEMA guideline, we think that would be a
reasonable approach.
Q. Thank you, Mr. Broadhurst.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1333
Panel, I'm going to give you two references.
Exhibit 001-070A, that's Shell's Reply Submission
of October 15th, page 26. And in response to an
OSEC position, Shell stated:
"As described in the text and
illustrated in figures in the May
2011, Submission of Information to
the Joint Review Panel,
Section 3.4, 'the model predicted
that both pit lakes would be
dimictic."
And help me if I haven't pronounced that
correctly.
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Correct on both the quote and the pronunciation.
Thank you.
The other reference I'll give you is
Exhibit 001-070K. And that is the CEMA End Pit
Lakes Guidance Document 2012, chapter 3, page 76.
And the statement that appears there is:
"Given that oil sands EPLs
will receive moderately saline
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1334
surface and groundwater, ranging
from approximately 110 ppm to
527 ppm total dissolved solids
(TDS), the potential exists for
these lakes to become meromictic
with chemoclines being formed if
layers of different salinity
develop."
And further on:
"Current hydrodynamic models
suggest a very low probability of
meromixis development at all
planned and approved EPLs.
Nevertheless, each company should
have a monitoring plan designed to
identify the development of
meromictic conditions, and a
contingency plan in place to manage
meromictic EPLs if lakes should
become meromictic over time."
So help me; is this passage suggesting that
an EPL could become meromictic?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1335
A. MR. VANDENBERG so the Chapter 3 of the End
Pit Lake Guidance Document is titled "Lessons
Learned from other -- I think it might just be
lessons learned. Sorry, it's "Lessons Learned from
other Mining Industries." And what the author
there is doing is he's giving cautionary notes for
oil sands pit lake developers to consider when they
are planning oil sands pit lakes. So what he's
saying is that pit lakes are known to become
meromictic in some settings and this is something
you should consider as part of your design.
So we've done that specifically for this
Project. It was presented in the 2011 Muskeg River
Diversion Assessment Update. And I can refer you
to page 17 of Appendix 1 where we specifically
looked at the long-term mixing behaviour of all of
the pit lakes on this Project. And none of them
were predicted to become meromictic.
So essentially you've got the guidance
document telling you pit lakes could be meromictic,
you should look at this on a site-specific basis.
And that's what we've done in the May 2011
document.
Q. So the guidance is a cautionary tale?
A. Chapter 3 of the guidance document is a cautionary
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1336
tale.
Q. And the part of the cautionary tale is a monitoring
plan designed to identify development of meromictic
conditions. Has Shell planned for that with its
end pit lake?
A. So that monitoring is covered in two places that
I'm aware of. One is Section 9.6 of the End Pit
Lake Guidance Document, which has some specific
monitoring around end pit lakes. The other is
Appendix 4-7 (sic) of the 2007 EIA where we put
together a conceptual monitoring plan for this
Project. Both of those would have monitoring in
the end pit lakes that would confirm or rule out
meromictic conditions. Sorry, that's Appendix 4-9
of the 2007 EIA.
Q. So if I were able to turn that up, then that would
reveal to me Shell's plans to monitor for the
potential development of these conditions in the
end pit lake?
A. Yes.
Q. So you've got a monitoring strategy. What can
Shell do if it sees this condition as starting to
develop in the lake?
A. I think I need to refer back to some work that was
done for CEMA about five years ago. It was a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1337
modelling project and one of the conclusions of
that project where we looked at, you know, all
proposed and hypothetical pit lakes that could be
built in the region, was that over time meromixes
is predicted to decline and not increase. So if
meromixis is going to occur in a pit lake, it will
occur from the start and not become meromictic over
time. So that's the general behaviour you would
expect. Now, that doesn't rule out the possibility
100 percent, like other things in science, it would
still be possible for a lake to become meromictic
with time. But, in that case, there are a number
of steps that could be taken, mechanically mixing,
adding bubblers or that type of thing to remix the
water column. There are other things that could be
done as well, but those are the easiest.
Q. Those are the easiest measures you can take. Can
you give us any more, though, what else can you do
to address that condition?
A. Well, I mean, you're getting into a lot of
hypotheticals here. I mean, if it is possible that
meromixes could occur and there would be no
ecological harm and you would just let it go. And
a lot of pit lakes have been turned into meromictic
lakes as a mitigation measure. So there are a lot
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1338
of hypotheticals there that you would need to
evaluate.
Q. I admit that it's a hypothetical question. I'm
just interested if worst-case scenario, Shell were
to find itself in this situation, what tools are
available to it to address it? You've told me
about mechanical mixing and adding bubbles, and
that sounds like fun, is there something else,
though?
A. Well, I think the bubbling would be the first step.
I mean, that's also done in natural lakes to
promote aeration, and so you get two effects at
once, you get aeration and mixing. And I think
that would be Shell's first step, if you ever got
to that point.
Q. And I'm interested in that comment. We're talking
about end pit lakes which obviously aren't natural
lakes, but is this a condition that can happen just
as easily in a natural lake?
A. In natural lakes, aeration is generally put into
place because you're combatting some sort of human
influence; eutrophication or some other problem
that requires aeration and mixing to prevent winter
kills.
Q. But I'm just wondering, if it can occur in natural
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1339
lakes, and, you know, whoever takes an interest in
the lake wants to stop the process, there are
things they can do. I assume that experience would
be useful to Shell if it found itself in this
position. Maybe it's just not prevalent enough in
natural lakes to be discussing; is that the point?
A. Okay, sorry, Mr. Perkins, could you repeat the
question?
Q. I'll try. I'm just interested, if a natural lake
can become meromictic, there are far more natural
lakes in the world than there are end pit lakes, I
guess I'd say, if that's happening, is there
information about the efforts taken to restore a
natural lake that's developing this condition that
can be useful to Shell, that you know of?
A. Yes, and I just have to parse your wording a little
bit there. Because, in the natural lakes, it's not
necessarily considered a bad thing for a lake to
become meromictic, so to restore those lakes
doesn't really, like, there's no need to restore
them because they are naturally meromictic, if you
know what I'm saying.
Q. So would a naturally meromictic lake, then, would
it support an ecosystem that was adapted to exist
in that environment?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1340
A. Yes, definitely. And there are a number of
meromictic lakes worldwide, including in Canada.
Q. Okay, so given that perspective, then, you don't
want to go in and disturb those meromictic lakes,
that's what you're telling me?
A. Exactly, they are naturally meromictic, there's no
need to mess with Mother Nature in those cases.
Q. So Shell's end pit lake, though, is not intended to
be meromictic, it's supposed to be a dimictic lake,
however, if it becomes meromictic, how would that
affect Shell's conclusions about the lake's ability
to become a self-sustaining aquatic ecosystem?
A. So again this is hypothetical, there are a number
of hypothetical outcomes that could occur in a
meromictic pit lake. The first would be slower
degradation of organic constituents in the lower
layer. A meromictic lake in an oil sands pit lake,
this would most likely become anoxic fairly
quickly, in the lower layer, and it would lead to a
slower degradation of anything that relies on
aerobic degradation.
You could also get gas production at the
sediment water interface due to a lack of oxygen.
There are, I guess from an ecological
perspective, you would be -- you would have less
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1341
habitat in a meromictic pit lake because most
organisms require oxygen.
So those would be some of the hypothetical
outcomes of a meromictic pit lake.
Q. And those three outcomes that you just described, I
assume none of those are conducive to the aquatic
ecosystems that Shell's envisioned for the end pit
lake?
A. Correct. Now, I should state once again that these
have been predicted through modelling. And the
hydro-dynamic modelling that is used to predict
whether or not lakes will stratify in the long-term
is actually very reliable. There is a range of
uncertainty you get from different models and the
hydro-dynamic mixing models are on the high end of
that certainty scale.
Q. And to be fair, this was a hypothetical discussion.
I'm not suggesting that this will be the result. I
just wanted to explore what the reality would be if
the unforeseen becomes a foreseen.
A. M'mm-hmm, yes. So this question comes up a lot
with oil sands pit lakes because of what's been
observed in the hard-rock mining industry. And
it's definitely something that needs to be
considered every time a pit lake is developed, as
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1342
we did in the May 2011 Submission.
Q. And you've got 38 years to consider it; right?
A. Correct.
MR. PERKINS: Panel, unless something
arises from the undertakings that were given in
relation to the questions I have asked, those are
all I have. My colleague, Mr. Mueller, has some
questions and then I believe he'll be followed by
Mr. Birchall, but thank you for your responses.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Mr. Perkins.
Mr. Mueller?
QUESTIONS BY ERCB BOARD STAFF, BY MR. MUELLER:
MR. MUELLER: Good afternoon.
Q. If we could just please go to Exhibit 001-001F.
And I'm going to look at page 29 there which is
Table 13, Sound Emission Spectra, All Scenarios,
December 2007. And I'm not sure who wants to
answer this, but if someone could describe the
Sound Emission Spectra represented in Table 13.
A. MR. SPELLER: We're just trying to find the
page. We'll be with you shortly.
Q. Okay, sure.
A. Yes, Table 13 in Appendix 3-11, the noise modelling
methods and results section. It's the different
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1343
frequencies used in the noise model for the
different emission sources that were considered.
Q. This is at Jackpine Mine - Phase I?
A. It's for, Table 13, it's a combination of Jackpine
Mine Phase I and Jackpine Mine Expansion, that's
correct.
Q. And describe how the Sound Emission Spectra in
Table 13 were determined.
A. So on the right-hand column of that Table, where it
says "REF," a short form for "reference."
Q. Yes.
A. You'll see there are two main kinds of references
that were used. One is that it was calculated from
acoustic literature, and there are a number of
sources listed there, as well as some measurements
that were taken at the Muskeg River Mine Expansion
site for equivalent type of equipment, as well as
some information that was gathered during the 2007
field measurement baseline studies.
Q. So were all the sound spectra calculated except for
the spectra from the propane bird-cannons and the
haul road trucks which are measured values; is that
fair to say?
A. Yes, so they were either calculated or taken
directly from the literature.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1344
Q. Okay, what assumptions were used to determine the
calculated Sound Emission Spectra values in
Table 13?
A. So we don't have the person who did the noise
assessment here with us, but we could undertake to
get that information. Perhaps you could provide a
little more information as to why you're asking, so
it may help with that.
Q. Well, was this data calculated from acoustic
literature, what sources was it calculated from?
A. Yes, what I can tell you is at the bottom of
Table 13, it lists the sources. I don't have the
breakdown by which one of these rows was for each
one of those references at the bottom of Table 13,
but it does show that -- and I'm going to mangle
these names and I do apologize -- Bies & Hansen
2003, Baranek and Ver 1992, CadnaSET 2003,
Neitzel et al., 1998, those were the kinds of
sources that were used to get that kind of
information.
Q. So I just want to confirm, those are theoretical
calculations, then?
A. Again, I didn't do the calculations, but I would --
I'm not sure how many categories of calculations
there are, but they would have taken the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1345
information and divided them into these different
spectra or frequencies in order to feed them into
the model.
Q. Will Shell verify the accuracy of the assumptions
used to determine the calculated Sound Emission
Spectra values in Table 13 by conducting sound
pressure level measurements of the operating
Jackpine Mine - Phase I equipment?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: I'll try to answer that
question.
Right now, what we do is, and have for the
last few EIAs in the construction, is we do a
post-construction, and, well, of course a
pre-construction noise survey at various receptors
near our site. And so that's been done for MRM and
for the Jackpine Expansion. And so those are
actual measurements and not theoretical. Is that
what you're looking for ultimately?
Q. No, we would like the actual measurements of the
operating equipment, not just the theoretical.
A. So a truck parked in a parking lot and someone
holding a microphone to the exhaust pipe?
Q. Well, I'm not sure of exactly how the measurements
are made by actuals.
A. We need a little more information. Like, actuals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1346
is what we do now, like, we'll have a receptor and
we'll have a cabin.
Q. We'd like you to take measurements of the current
equipment that's operating.
A. Okay.
Q. That's reflected in Table 13.
A. So you want noise for our 797s, for the graders,
for the dozers, for the pick-up trucks, for our
gen-sets and light plants, is that what you're
looking for on an individual basis?
Q. Yes.
A. Is there something that you're looking for that
isn't done or covered by a regular survey?
Q. What we're getting at is we want to know what the
cumulative effects are for all the operating
equipment.
A. I'm sorry, when we do a survey, we'll have sound
stations placed around our site and for 24 hours it
monitors the noise at receptors and that's a
cumulative noise. So I'm failing to understand,
like, isn't that what you're looking for is what
would be the noise at our lease boundaries?
Q. The Application only has predicted levels based on
Table 13.
A. Right.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1347
Q. We don't have access to the actual measurements.
A. I will look into that.
A. MR. BROADHURST: So maybe, again, sorry to be
difficult, what we want to do is really make sure
we understand what you're asking for so that we can
make sure we fulfill any undertaking.
Are you talking specifically about committing
to a type of survey for Jackpine Mine Expansion as
it's being constructed and when it goes into
operation?
Q. We'd like the measured values to replace the
calculated values to get a more accurate assessment
for the Phase I.
A. For the Jackpine Mine.
Q. For Phase I.
A. For Phase I, okay.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: We did a noise survey
this summer as part of our post-construction
requirement, so we can provide that data.
Q. Okay, thanks.
MR. DUNCANSON: Now, sorry, just to interject
quickly. Is that an undertaking that you have
asked for?
MR. MUELLER: Yes, we'll put that down as
an undertaking.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1348
MR. DUNCANSON: Mr. Martindale, do you have a
sense of how long it will take to gather that
information?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Probably by the end of
the week. It's a matter of just getting the
report, because we've already collected it, done it
and have submitted it. But not to Alberta
Environment. And we'll add it to the Table. So we
need to look at that. So I'd say the end of the
week for sure.
MR. DUNCANSON: Just to confirm, that's an
undertaking to provide the actual monitored noise
emissions for Jackpine Mine Phase I; is that right?
MR. MUELLER: Yes.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Post-construction noise
survey.
MR. DUNCANSON: Post-construction noise.
Okay, thank you.
UNDERTAKING 25: MR. MARTINDALE TO PROVIDE THE
ACTUAL POST-CONSTRUCTION MONITORED NOISE EMISSIONS
FOR JACKPINE MINE - PHASE I
Q. MR. MUELLER: Yes.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So I really want to make
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1349
this clear. So the post-construction survey that
we've done looks at receptors around our mine site
and it's monitored for 24 hours, that's the
protocol. Whereas the Table, if you want to refill
the Table, that's actually going out and monitoring
the noise of all the different pieces of equipment.
And we have not done that. And we don't do that
normally. So just by adding that little to fill in
the Table, you can't do that from our noise survey.
But it gives you the cumulative noise from our
site.
MR. MUELLER: Okay. So we'll just move on
to the next question.
Q. That's in reference to transcript Volume 4,
page 591, lines 17 through 25, and page 592, lines
1 through 2. Bird deterrent system,
cross-examination by ACFN of Darrel Martindale of
Shell on Wednesday, October 31st. And the quote
is:
"And the results show that
the bird deterrent did work.
And after using it for nine
years, we work with the
manufacturer, it's a small company,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1350
and so they've been able to work
with us to improve its
effectiveness, to improve its
response time. Adjust the radar,
we've gone from an analogue radar
to digital. And we've improved the
communications so that the radio
signal to the deterrents is much
quicker than it was. So it's
continually improving and getting
better."
So the question is, is the sound spectra
emission for the bird deterrent in Table 13
representative of the Sound Emission Spectra for
the improved bird deterrent systems in use today at
Shell operations?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So the basic answer is we
have used the same cannons for nine years or the
same propane scare-cannons for nine years, so it's
unlikely that the sound profile of that cannon
would change from what's on Table 13.
Q. Okay. The next reference, Volume 5, transcript
page 829, lines 21 through 25, page 830, lines 1
through 3, cross-examination of Mr. Roberts of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1351
Shell on November 1st, 2012. Quote:
"I'm interested in your
mine-fleet turnover in 2025, so
does Shell commit to turning over
to having all TIER-IV trucks by
2025?
A: Mr. Roberts, I'll take that
one.
So what we will commit to is
purchasing TIER-IV trucks when they
are available as we replace our
fleet and as we bring new trucks on
to the market or into the fleet."
Now, the question is, is the sound spectra
emission for the haul trucks on Table 13
representative of the Sound Emission Spectra for
the TIER-IV trucks Shell has committed to purchase?
A. MR. SPELLER: So the haul trucks on Table
13 and the spectra that were used were measurements
for trucks that are at the site today. So those
aren't TIER-IV trucks because the TIER-IV trucks
are not on the site yet, they don't exist yet. So
we can't answer whether the spectra will be the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1352
same until we have more information about what that
truck configuration will be, how the engines are
configured to achieve TIER-IV. And we won't have
that yet.
Q. So then Shell will commit to updating the noise
impact information for the trucks and the noise
bird deterrent system as that information comes in?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Yes, we will. Yes, we
can.
Q. And would you do that through measurements of the
equipment while it's operating?
A. MR. SPELLER: There's a couple of ways it
could be done. So in this example, what happened
is we had set up our monitoring equipment in a safe
position near the truck routes and the haul roads
so we could get them while they were in operation.
There's really only two ways we would get this
information. We would either monitor when it's on
the site or there would be a profile provided by
the supplier themselves.
Q. So we just confirm Mr. Martindale's earlier answer
that you've not conducted any actual assessments on
any of the operating equipment?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Right, when we do the
noise survey that was required under pre- and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1353
post-construction, we are just taking perimeter and
from certain locations, so it's not individual
equipment or anything.
Q. Could there be any equipment changes for the final
engineering design phase of the proposed Jackpine
Mine Expansion Project, and if yes, how would these
changes affect the sound emission spectra in Table
13?
A. MR. ROBERTS: So there, there is a
possibility and likely a probability that the
equipment might be somewhat different than what we
have today because we will improve our equipment as
we bring in the lessons from the Muskeg River Mine
and Jackpine Mine. Part of that assessment of
bringing that new equipment in, if it's
substantially different, would be a noise
assessment at the time. And as Darrell suggested,
we would be taking perimeter readings of our noise
so if there are substantial changes in noise, we
would take that into account.
And just to give an example of some work that
we're doing on that right now, is as we've adjusted
our tailings plans to accommodate Directive 074,
inputting in place centrifuges, part of the
centrifuge project is understanding what the noise
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1354
impact is associated with that. So that's an
incremental change where we are assessing the noise
impact.
Q. So you agree that taking actual measurements of
operating equipment is required in order to meet
any mitigation requirements that may be needed?
A. MR. SPELLER: I guess just in concept.
When we do this kind of modelling, ideally we have
measurements from operating equipment available to
us to do this work.
As you can imagine, in some facilities,
especially with where we're at in this stage of
development of a project, the facility is not built
yet so we don't have that operating measurement
equipment.
So I think we're always trying to find a
balance of trying to find the best information we
have in our assessments. Sometimes it is
monitoring from operations. Sometimes it's
literature values. Keeping in mind that often the
literature values are measurements that have been
taken and assembled in some sort of literature.
Q. Right, but there is all the equipment that's come
into operation in 2010; is that correct?
A. I'm sorry, could you be more specific?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1355
Q. Like, well, you haven't taken actual measurements
on the equipment that's come into use in 2010?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: You mean the start-up of
Jackpine and the trucks?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, so again, the pre- and post-construction
survey would have done that, but not with
individual equipment because it's the same
equipment that we currently have, so the 797s are
the same and all the equipment is essentially the
same.
Q. Can you verify that the measured levels are the
same as the predicted levels?
A. MR. SPELLER: Sorry, I'm not sure if I
understand your question.
So the post-construction monitoring that
Darrel Martindale is talking about is with the
purpose to look at the cumulative noise from this
equipment and confirm whether the measured noise is
consistent with the predicted noise that's in the
Application?
Q. Yes, can you confirm that?
A. For Jackpine Mine Expansion? It hasn't been built
yet.
Q. For whatever was in this Application.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1356
A. So this -- so I'm sorry, I'm trying to be helpful.
So this Table 13 is representing Jackpine
Mine Expansion, which hasn't been constructed yet,
so that post-construction monitoring hasn't been
done yet. But it will be conducted later, so. I'm
not sure if I'm being as helpful as I want to be.
Q. In Table 13, are the measured values listed for
Jackpine Mine - Phase I, do they match up with your
measured values?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Again, Table 13 is a list
of individual pieces of equipment, and what we have
measured is the outside perimeter at various
receptors. So we will provide that as per the
previous undertaking. And we will be doing the
same for any Expansion construction.
A. MR. SPELLER: And if I could just add, so
when I look at these 60 to 70 rows of different
pieces of equipment and the spectra and what was
used in the model, knowing that we've used the best
information that's available to us, the purpose of
this modelling and looking at this assessment is to
look at those cumulative impacts in terms of the
receivers that we looked at or at the RCB
1.5 kilometre boundary.
So I don't know that we've ever taken an
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1357
exercise to look at each of these individual
sources at the measurement side after
post-construction. It's more did we get the
cumulative impacts correct in the modelling, and
then is there any adjustments that need to be done
for compliance.
Q. Okay, well, we have a commitment to do the actuals,
so.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Yes.
Q. Now, just getting back to the equipment changes,
you'll commit to update Table 13 to reflect those
changes; is that correct?
A. MR. KOVACH: I want to try and be helpful
on this question, too. And if it's all right, I'd
like to go back and talk about what I think the
intent of the questioning is because I think that
will help us to be helpful.
When you asked this line of questioning, I
think our ongoing understanding is that the ERCB
wants assurance that Shell understands Directive 38
and they have requirements under Directive 038 to
comply. And also that Shell recognizes that over
the life of a mine, that there could be changes in
equipment that could cause changes in our sound
levels coming from our equipment. And therefore, I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1358
think I understand the intent to be that how is
Shell going to give the Board comfort or assurance
that throughout the life of the Project that we'll
be compliant with Directive 038.
If that is the intent of the line of
questioning, I think what Shell's overarching
message is is that we agree with that, that we have
to comply and we have to monitor it to understand
what our sound levels are due to our Project. And
as our equipment changes, it is incumbent upon
Shell to understand if that's going to put us in a
position where we wouldn't comply with Directive
038.
So we do agree with monitoring. I think what
we're stumbling over is do we need to monitor each
individual piece of equipment or can we continue to
do ambient monitoring around the boundary of our
property and at key receptor locations to meet that
requirement to make sure we've met it?
The way we've done it in the past is to look
at it more from an ambient standpoint. So when we
look at it ambient, that gives us an idea if we're
compliant.
What we're stumbling over is do we actually
need to go back and look at every single piece of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1359
equipment and look at sound levels from that to
give the Board assurance that we're going to be in
compliance with the Directive. I don't know if
that's helpful.
Q. Well, I mean, Directive 038, Section 3-6, reporting
requirement for acceptable NIA, part 18B, sound
source identification, page 16 of that Directive,
noise control states (as read):
"Indicate whether the sound
data are from vendor's field
measurements, theoretical
estimates, et cetera. Note that
the use of any theoretical data or
extrapolation techniques can lead
to inaccuracies and therefore is
less reliable than actual field
measurements made once the
equipment is in place."
So do you agree with this statement?
A. Do we agree that's what the statement, what the
Directive 038 says?
Q. Well, do you agree with the intent of the
statement?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1360
A. Yes.
Q. And do you agree that the Noise Impact Assessment
based, or in Table 13, is based primarily on
theoretical assessments?
A. Yes, we agree.
A. MR. SPELLER: And just to, again, trying to
be helpful.
So to gather the information for each one of
those rows, for it to be useful in order to know
whether you're compliant or not, would then mean
you would have to run your model, your predictive
model again, which is always theoretical, and look
at what the results are. But you can also achieve
knowing you have compliance by simply going out and
doing the ambient monitoring.
It seems like an additional step that I'm not
aware of it being done in the region before in
order to determine compliance. I just offer that
as some context.
Q. Now, my next question is, what monitoring program
does Shell currently use for its existing
operations at Muskeg River and Jackpine Mine -
Phase I to ensure compliance with permissible sound
levels from ERCB Directive 038, i.e. are there
annual comprehensive sound monitoring programs?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1361
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So there are not annual
sampling programs. It's pre-construction and
post-construction, and so then there'd be a period
of monitoring. And for some parts, like in
buildings, there's Occupational Health & Safety, so
we do interior sound noise sampling within pieces
of equipment and within buildings to make sure that
our workers aren't exposed to excessive levels of
noise or that that building has a hearing
protection designation. So there are spot samples
done and then there's the pre- and
post-construction.
Q. And should these monitoring programs identify an
exceedance, how do you identify the particular
problem and deal with it?
A. Well, typically what we do is, when we get the
results, you look at what's changed. Because
sometimes basically the equipment or the active
mine could be working in a pit so that the noise is
lower, and so it could be quieter in some receptor
areas. And then in other areas, it could be louder
because of the highway noise. So you look at where
the receptor is and what its result is and then
just assess what's going on in the area, what's
changed over the last, since the last survey.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1362
Q. But how does that help you identify the specific
problem or item that's creating the exceedance?
A. Well, so the only exceedances that one would expect
would be the noise at a certain receptor is higher.
And so you look at what's going on in that area
that is giving that higher reading. It could be
highway noise. So there's more traffic on the
highway. And so from the pre-construction survey
to the post-construction survey, there's more
construction going on at another facility and
therefore there's more highway noise. I think
that's what you're -- that's a typical change that
would occur between a survey.
Q. What is the source order ranking from the NIA used
for?
A. I'm sorry, could you repeat that?
Q. Sure. What is the source order ranking from the
NIA used for?
A. Sorry, I can't answer that. I don't know.
A. MR. SPELLER: Would you have a reference to
point me to the term, to the term you used, the
"source order ranking"?
Q. It's the output from the model that shows all of
the items to come up with the cumulative model.
A. Talking with the team here as well, it's not a term
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1363
we're familiar with. If you could give me a
reference in the documentation so we can talk about
the same thing.
Q. We didn't see one in this assessment, but there
must be a ranking on Table 13, is there? A ranking
for each item at the receptor level.
A. Okay. I think I'm with you now. So let me point
you to, do you have our documentation there? Let
me point you to a table and I want to make sure
we're talking about the same thing. It's a version
of that. So in our Appendix 3-11, we have -- it's
Table 3 on page 10 of Appendix 3-11. And what it
has is each of our large sources, so by project,
ranked by each of the receptors. And so this Table
3 that I'm looking at would be what you're
discussing as a source order ranking rolled up by
project by receiver. Is that the question?
Q. Yes, we're just trying to understand what the
individual sources are for the cumulative amount,
significant sources.
A. We haven't provided that information as part of
this. If it would be helpful, I can describe what
some of them are, though, based on our
understanding of some of the results.
Q. Would you agree that the determination of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1364
significant sources is important to understand in
case mitigation is required?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: Yes, that's true.
And to answer an earlier question, there are
different mitigation measures that we can take such
as barriers, berms, trees, or retaining tree lines.
So once we've identified the source or the problem
source, we can put into place the appropriate
barrier for that particular sound. And there's
different equipment out there that, or expertise
out there, sorry, that can help us with that.
THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Mueller, sorry, we're
right about break time. Would this be a convenient
time to break?
MR. MUELLER: Sure.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MR. MUELLER: We just had one or two
questions if that would --
THE CHAIRMAN: Go ahead.
MR. MUELLER: Okay.
Q. What monitoring program will Shell have in place
for the proposed Jackpine Mine Expansion Project to
ensure compliance with permissible sound levels
from ERCB Directive 038, i.e. will they have an
annual comprehensive sound monitoring program or a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1365
pre-and a post-measurement?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: We would do a pre- and a
post-measurement for sure.
MR. MUELLER: We're good. Thank you.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We'll be back at
3:20.
(The afternoon adjournment)
THE CHAIRMAN: Could we resume, please.
Mr. Duncanson?
MR. DUNCANSON: Mr. Chairman, I would just
like to discharge one more of the undertakings from
this morning.
UNDERTAKING SPOKEN TO, BY MR. DUNCANSON:
MR. DUNCAN: This was the undertaking
relating to the original Muskeg River Mine TSRU
deposition plan. And Mr. Mayes is prepared to
speak to that now.
A. MR. MAYES: Sorry for the delay, we went
back and reviewed our historical files.
We understand that the limitations on the
disposition of our froth treatment TSRU tailings
material goes back to the original application for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1366
our business. And at that point in time, we made a
commitment to place the tails in a subaqueous
situation below three metres from the water
surface, so not depositing without three metres of
water cover above the tailings point.
The reason for that commitment was a concern
at the time from the Fort McKay First Nations that
there would be emissions of solvent as a result of
the TSRU discharge if that discharge was made
closer to the surface than the three-metre
threshold.
So we gave that endeavour, and that's been
carried on through our applications including
through the JPME Application.
However, after start-up and through our
operating history we have had great difficulty in
maintaining a reliable operation where the tailings
are disposed of at a level below three metres from
the surface. We run into trouble where icecaps
form over the pipe work in wintertime and we're no
longer able to readily move the pipe work around.
And we've also run into situations where the pipe
becomes engulfed in solid tailings material.
So in 2010, we entered into discussions with
the ERCB staff to push forward our proposal where
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1367
that constraint would be lifted and we would no
longer be constrained to discharging below three
metres from the water surface.
We undertook trials and mounted the case that
there would be no change to fugitive emissions as a
result of that discharge point change.
In 2011, as the ERCB staff member indicated,
that was approved and we now operate in a situation
where the tailings are discharged either higher in
the water table or directly on to the beach. We've
had no reports of changes in emissions from that
situation.
Hopefully that clarifies the question.
(UNDERTAKING DISCHARGED)
MR. DUNCANSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Birchall?
MR. BIRCHALL: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
QUESTIONS BY CEAA, BY MR. BIRCHALL:
Q. Good afternoon, panel. My name's Chuck Birchall.
Like Mr. Perkins, I'll be referring to different
exhibits. We may or may not go to those depending
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1368
on the detail that we're going to be getting into.
I'm going to be asking you questions starting with
some questions around terrestrial resources. And
then we'll move from there to a few questions on
aquatic issues. Then a few questions on Aboriginal
issues. And then wrapping up with some questions
about health, accidents and malfunctions.
So beginning with terrestrial resources.
Last week there was a discussion around the use of
AVI versus Landsat data to map the RSA. And I
understand that Shell used Alberta vegetation
inventory data to provide relatively fine-scale
habitat information, but when it came to the RSA,
Shell relied on Landsat imagery to quantify habitat
types suggesting that it's too computationally
intensive to use AVI data for the RSA.
So I guess it's fair to say that the end
result is that habitat data for the RSA is of a
more, shall we say, coarse degree of accuracy.
Can you just clarify as to why AVI data
couldn't be used for some portion of the RSA?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: First of all, AVI data
isn't available across the whole RSA. So to use it
for just a part of it, then we couldn't really get
at the picture for the whole RSA, so it would kind
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1369
of defeat the purpose. And you referred to the
computational issues. We did actually try to use
AVI data, it was referred to earlier in the Fort
McKay specific assessment where we were supplying
information to that work. And we found that trying
to use AVI over such a large area was more than
challenging. In fact, we ended up with a
40-Township area, which seemed like the maximum we
could work with.
Q. So just so I understand, Mr. Jalkotzy, is it a case
of you either use AVI throughout or you don't use
it at all when it comes -- that to use AVI for a
portion of the RSI skews things?
A. Yes, that's correct. I mean, if we were trying to
sum up, let's say, the amount of a particular
resource on the landscape in the, at the RSA scale,
then we need to have the same type of information
across the whole RSA.
Q. So it's not possible to use an average AVI data
over a number of blocks or districts?
A. Well, I think at that point we're starting to make
assumptions about what the area is, and we're
better off to go with a coarser-scale Landsat data
which covers the whole RSA.
Q. So help me just understand how you dealt with the,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1370
when you're using coarser data how you dealt with
the resultant increased uncertainty?
A. Sorry, can you be more specific, uncertainty in
what regard?
Q. Well, if you've got data that's less detailed,
presumably you're making, you're having to make
some assumptions because it's not as detailed, the
data that you're working with, so did you apply an
uncertainty to that, an uncertainty factor to that?
A. We certainly look at our predictions. And we
indicate in the EIA what our certainty is around
the predictions at the RSA scale and at the LSA
scale, so we do look at that. If that's what
you're getting at, I'm not sure.
Q. Yes.
A. Yes.
Q. So let's just take, I'm looking at taking
Exhibit 063, 001-063. It's in Response to an SIR.
It's dated September 7th, 2012. And it's page 84.
And there's a table, 3.3-5, which shows "Regional
Land Cover Classes" in the RSA. And Shell has
suggested there that the loss of wetlands from the
pre-industrial case to the planned development case
would be 185,872 hectares. So what kind of level
of uncertainty would be associated with that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1371
assessment, that number?
A. Could I just take a look at that Table?
Q. Sure.
A. So when we're talking about levels of uncertainty,
we're talking about the accuracy of the RSA scale
mapping. And we've answered SIRs with respect to
that. I think it was in Round 1 where we're
talking about an accuracy, if I remember correctly,
in the 75 to 80 percent range as far as looking at
the cover types, the land cover types that we're
mapping. So, I mean, the confidence we have in
that number is based on that mapping, which is sort
of in the 75 to 80 percent. So it's taking into
account that it is a coarser scale. It's
relatively good. I mean, we're pretty confident in
that.
Q. So, Mr. Jalkotzy, when it comes to the same Table,
you've differentiated between three classes of
peatlands: the non-treed wetlands, the treed
bog/poor, and treed fen. So would we apply the
same level, 75 to 80 percent of certainty to making
those kinds of distinctions?
A. As I understand it, yes.
Q. Okay, thank you. And I take it that the 75 to
80 percent, it carries through from the base case
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1372
to the planned development case as well; right?
A. Certainly, yes. The mapping is, the regional land
cover class mapping is the same as you move
forward. We're using the same base mapping to
start with.
Q. Okay, thank you. So just one more just so I've got
this. I'm looking again at Exhibit 063,
Table 1.3-1, and Appendix A, pages 2, 3, and 4,
Shell uses the same approach using the Landsat data
to predict current habitat available in the base
case which represents the data with the greatest
certainty and projects this into the planned
development case; correct?
A. I don't have it in front of me, but go ahead.
Q. Well, let's just take it that I've managed to copy
down the number correctly, at this hour, may, you
know, it's subject to check.
But for example, you have a change of minus
28 percent in the amount of highly suitable habitat
for the rusty blackbird from the PIC to the PDC.
Ideally that would be associated with a plus or
minus value to indicate uncertainty.
But in this instance, I think what you've
told us is we can rely on that number within a
range of 75 to 80 percent?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1373
A. Well, now you've gone from the regional land cover
classes to habitat suitability rankings. And the
models that we use will have uncertainty, any
individual model will have uncertainty built into
it depending on the source data that we have. So,
no, you can't just take the regional land cover
class mapping accuracy that I described earlier and
apply it to the results, of the habitat suitability
model.
Q. Although, I'm advised that you did use the Landsat
data for projecting the suitable habitat for the
rusty blackbird?
A. Yeah, oh, it's correct to say -- sorry, maybe I
didn't say that correctly. I'm not saying that we
didn't use the regional land cover class to inform
the habitat suitability model. What I'm saying is
the habitat suitability model and the predictions
of high, moderate and low quality habitat, or those
sorts of things, are going to have inherently their
own uncertainties built into it, so that would be
layered on top of the regional land cover class
mapping.
Q. So it's uncertainty layered on uncertainty?
A. Well, I mean, I said that the regional land cover
class was actually a pretty good classification.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1374
And the different habitat suitability models have
different levels of uncertainty associated with
them.
Q. Let's move on to ecological thresholds.
I'm referring to the May 2012 Response to
SIR-9B. And in that SIR, it's exhibit I believe
it's 001-051. The statement is made:
"Although ecological
thresholds are unknown, they are
unlikely to be exceeded by the
Project."
And I'm wondering if you could help clarify
that statement. If you don't know what the
thresholds are, how do you know if they are going
to be exceeded or not exceeded?
A. So when we're talking about ecological thresholds,
there's a fair amount of information out in the
literature indicating that when we're looking at
population viability, and now tying it back to
habitat loss, the habitat loss numbers, magnitude
of habitat loss that we have been seeing in that
pre-industrial case to the 2012 planned development
case, so the cumulative effects case, although they
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1375
are exceeding our 20 percent magnitude value that
we've used to indicate a high magnitude impact,
they don't yet, for the most part they don't yet
approach what is, based on the literature, likely
thresholds where a population decline will occur.
So that's what that statement is based on.
So if you go to some of the literature,
there's a paper out of U of A, Swift and Hannon,
who indicated that, you know, in general, although
there certainly are exceptions, but in general, the
habitat remaining now needs to be in the vicinity
of, if I remember correctly, 30 percent, before
thresholds where drastic declines are predicted.
Q. Okay. Well, just to continue in that vein, you
were saying that Shell goes on to suggest that the
use of 20 percent as a threshold for categorizing
impacts, magnitude is high, is supported by the
operational policy statement for adaptive
management. Is that the 20 percent you were
referring to, Mr. Jalkotzy?
A. No, I was referring to the 20 percent that we're
using as the indication of high magnitude habitat
loss.
Q. So whenever you don't know what an ecological
threshold is for some impact, you're not using a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1376
value of 20 percent?
A. No, we're not. No, that, as I said, that is a
value for us to be taking a look, then, at, in a
broader sense, well, all right, we've got a
20 percent habitat loss here, what does, in the
bigger picture, what does this population look
like, are there other things that we should be
looking at. And that's in fact what we do. I
wouldn't say the 20 percent is a threshold.
Q. So later on, again, in the same document, there's a
reference to empirical evidence, and maybe this is
what you're getting at:
"Empirical evidence suggests
that habitat loss thresholds
indicating rapid changes in species
abundance or species richness
generally occur when 70 to
90 percent of habitat is
disturbed."
And there's a reference, as I think you've
already pointed out, to Swift and Hannon, and
Betts. Is that --
A. And there are others as well.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1377
Q. And so just so I have it, so when the landscape
becomes 70 to 90 percent disturbed, is there other
literature, other than that 70 to 90 percent,
because when you look at the Betts study, it's only
referencing songbirds, so did you take the 70 to
90 percent and apply it across all species or was
it just for certain species?
A. Now, subject to check, Swift and Hannon doesn't
just cover songbirds.
Q. No, I was referencing Betts.
A. Oh, sorry. Could you rephrase what you just said.
I don't think I caught it correctly. Your last
question.
Q. Well, the question is, are you relying on the 70 to
90 percent figure beyond songbirds, or do the
numbers change depending on the species?
A. Well, we're not relying on the 70 to 90 or any
other high habitat loss number for anything in
particular. That's something that's in the
literature that is giving some indication about
when a threshold may occur.
When we're looking at, when we're taking into
account ecological significance of certain-sized
habitat loss and overall the general health, let's
say, of a particular species in the RSA, we will be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1378
looking at how much habitat loss there is as well
as other factors, including where we have it,
population information. And I think that's in our
submission.
Q. So, Mr. Jalkotzy, just to come full circle, maybe
it explains the sentence that I initially quoted
under SIR-9b, "Although ecological thresholds are
unknown," so in other words, the literature has
different numbers, but at the end of the day, the
thresholds are unknown?
A. And, yes, I would agree with that. And having said
that, as I indicated, Swift and Hanon came up,
after doing a pretty comprehensive review, with the
number that I stated earlier. And I think that in
that sense, it, although they're unknown, we have
some notion of where they sit in general.
The other thing, and you remarked on it
earlier, is that it's very species-specific and in
some cases area-specific as well.
Q. So just to confirm that, in the Betts study, they
were looking at songbird habitat thresholds and in
Table 1, the black-throated blue warbler was the
least sensitive to habitat disturbance at around
10 percent, while the yellow-bellied flycatcher was
the most sensitive at 30. So to underscore your
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1379
point, it varies, there can be significant
differences?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Okay, thank you.
I just want to ask a question about in
Exhibit 001-063, Table 1.3-1, you've provided a
table that shows the predicted habitat change from
the pre-industrial for all SARs and KIRs, and from
this Table, at pages 96-101, that the only species
that Shell suggests has significant adverse effects
on habitat are woodland caribou with a 93 percent
loss of moderate habitat, and the black-throated
blue warbler with 51 percent in moderate habitat.
A. That would be a black-throated green warbler in
this case.
Q. Thank you. And can you explain why other species
that also have large-scale loss in the habitat
aren't considered significant? And what we were
looking at specifically was a reference to the
Canada warbler at 61 percent loss, the barred owl
at 55 percent moderate habitat, so just trying to
get a sense, sir, as to how you came to the
conclusion that it was just woodland caribou and
the black-throated did you say green warbler?
A. Yes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1380
Q. Green warbler.
A. So what we're looking at here now is that, and I
alluded to this earlier, we have the habitat loss
information from within the Regional Study Area.
Other information then that we go looking at is
whatever trend information that we can come up
with, so we'll try to look for population trend
information in and around our study area and then
we'll start casting the net wider, and we'll start
casting the net wider and go looking for population
trend information further on. And it's all part of
the larger assessment that we're actually doing.
Here we're looking specifically at habitat
loss. And it's in the cumulative effects case. So
this is from the pre-industrial case to the
planned, to the 2012 planned development case. And
once we're going beyond the habitat information,
we're also starting to look at movement and
abundance. And so when you're looking at movement
and abundance, that's where I was referring to
population trend information. And so the reason
that we came up with the two that we did choose to
have as significant adverse effects had to do with
the available trend information that we had, either
in Alberta or Canada-wide, and so we brought that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1381
information into the mix as far as making really
it's a professional judgment based on the empirical
data that we have.
Q. So you took into account other factors, movement
and abundance, and you used as a reference critical
habitat thresholds to assess significance of
habitat loss or you didn't?
A. We didn't -- we're not talking about significant
effects of habitat loss here. What we're talking
about here is we look at the amount of habitat that
has been lost in the area. We take it into
account. Then we look at abundance and movement.
And we're getting, trying to get a better idea of
the overall health of that particular indicator,
and the trend as far as where it could be going in
the planned development case. So certainly we use
that information, but, as I said earlier, it's not
the only information that we use.
Q. Okay, thank you.
I think you're going to be able to answer
this question for me, but in your pieces of
literature that you've referenced in your document,
you referenced a study by Romprey et al., 2010
(phonetic). And in the paper, it suggests quite
strongly that 40 percent should be the threshold at
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1382
which forests are managed so as to ensure
sufficient biodiversity in order to protect the
most sensitive species and to deal with uncertainty
associated with thresholds and to maintain at least
40 percent of residual habitats. Did that come
into play at all in your work?
A. Yes, it did. Yes, I've got that information. And
that was a study that was done in I think northern
Quebec. And certainly they were looking at making
general guidelines. And it certainly was part of
our thought process, I'd say.
Q. And in order to recover biodiversity to, say, PIC
or Base Case levels, would you agree that
management targets need to be set at habitat
thresholds so to capture the most sensitive
species?
A. Oh, I think that if you're going to now talk about
thresholds -- I think now that you're talking about
something that needs to be done at the regional
scale. So although this Project is having really
fairly small incremental impacts on any one of
these species, there is a cumulative effect that's
occurring that we've presented in the
September 2012 submission. And the cumulative
effects that we're talking about here need to be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1383
dealt with at a regional planning scale.
And we now see LARP coming out, the Lower
Athabasca Regional Plan, and in that regional plan,
they are going to come up with exactly what you're
asking for, I suspect, biodiversity targets in
2013.
Q. And there's nothing we can use or rely on now in
terms of biodiversity targets in the literature
that we could point to in terms of recovery?
A. Well, as I said, I think from the perspective of an
Environmental Impact Assessment, we looked at the
environmental consequences on the key indicators,
we then broadened that out to take a look at the
ecological context that those effects were
occurring and we made a judgment at that point. So
I don't think there's a need at that point to have
thresholds. I think the thresholds within the
context of a Lower Athabasca Regional Plan are
entirely appropriate.
Q. Can you tell me, we were talking about the RSA and
cumulative effects, can you tell me what the
percentage of hectares in the RSA that have been
approved for project development, did that come up
last week, was there a number, do we know what that
is, the percentage of hectares in the RSA that have
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1384
already been approved for Project development?
A. Sorry, I don't have it off the top of my head, but
I know we have it in our Application.
Q. Okay, well, we'll go hunting for it at the break.
The Terrestrial Ecosystem Management
Framework, in your October 15th, 2012 Response, and
I can give you the cite if you want, it's
Exhibit 001-070, and you state that you
participated in the development of CEMA's TEMF and
conditionally supported the approach used on the
development of the framework. Can you just
elaborate on what "conditionally" means?
Mr. Kovach?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, I have that here.
Q. Thank you.
A. Yes, Shell sent a note on TEMF May 6, 2008
endorsing the overall approach and direction. And
our support was premised on benefit from certainty
on locations of protected areas, size of zones for
development, and firm reclamation requirements.
Areas where Shell didn't believe we could support
it were concerns over restriction of development on
our current lease holdings. We are hoping for more
certainty around the amount of land to be
protected. And there were concerns over the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1385
ability to meet accelerated reclamation timing.
And concerns over lack of detailed plans, that
being they are open to interpretation, so wanted
more detail.
Q. But I just want to get to the use of the
quarter-township level. Did you do any analysis at
the quarter-township level?
A. As part of this Project?
Q. Yes.
A. No, we did not.
Q. And can you just tell me why? I mean, at page 22
of the TEMF it states:
"The quarter-township metric
is currently considered the
appropriate measure for evaluating
the impact of both mining and
in situ footprint on ecological
indicators. This is based on
assumptions of the amount and
configuration of footprint
associated with the hypothetical in
situ development as modeled, and
current scientific understanding of
the response of indicators to the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1386
footprint."
So just wondering why, given your conditional
support, I guess, why the quarter-township metric
wasn't used?
A. MR. SPELLER: I can speak to that.
So the TEMF is based on the total area of the
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo and looking
at the amount of development in that
quarter-township. There's no aspect of our
assessment that has that broad of a study area.
Our Regional Study Area is about a third of that
size as a subset, so looking at the
quarter-township information in our Regional Study
Area, which is where we have our data for that type
of assessment, wouldn't provide information that we
could compare to what's provided in TEMF, so we
didn't do that assessment.
We did as part of the October 15th letter,
we've looked at some of those numbers in terms of
the hectares which we used instead of the
quarter-township, we looked at our predicted
disturbance. That information is in there. But at
the quarter-township level, we don't have that
information to provide.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1387
Q. One other question about TEMF. Does Shell agree
with the TEMF guideline that development in the
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo should be
less than 14 percent?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, Shell agrees with the
intent of TEMF to, again, look at the region in
three types of zones: The Intensive Zone, the
Extensive Zone, and the Protected Zone. And in
that Intensive Zone, we find some threshold of
development cap, and that is the 5 to 14 percent.
Q. Okay, thank you. Maybe you can help me out here.
I understand that in your work, you came up with a
number of 8 percent that your analysis using actual
area of intensive development and you concluded
that intensive development is only 8 percent,
whereas OSEC came up with a number of 21 percent.
Can you just advise us to why there's that spread,
how that comes to be?
A. MR. SPELLER: I haven't had a chance to --
there's not enough information in the OSEC
submission to go into the details, but I have some
observations that might be helpful.
First off, is just the nature of the
quarter-township approach. So quarter-township
approach would assume that any level of what they
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1388
consider extensive development means that that
quarter-township is under intensive use. Sorry, so
intensive action is under intensive use. So there
may be a very small portion of a development in a
quarter-township and that quarter-township would be
considered intensive use.
We've seen some assessment work in some areas
with that sort of a gridded system at the Township
or other things that leads to an amount of
conservatism in the number where if there's a bit
of what you're looking at in that Township, and you
consider it's all of that use, your number will be
a bit larger.
Another aspect, if you look at the figures
that was provided by OSEC, are representations of
leases sometimes versus development footprints.
Some of the shapes that you'll see in the OSEC
figure are a lease footprint, so sometimes -- and
we do the same thing at times -- where we don't
have a project footprint, especially for some of
the in situs that are in the planned development
case, where the footprint within that lease will
actually be very small because it's a series of
well pads and pipelines connecting them. But when
you don't know, sometimes we, and I think what they
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1389
have done as well, is we assume the entire lease is
developed as a conservatism because we don't have
clarity as to what that should look like.
Looking at their map, I think I saw a few
leases where we do have development footprints and
leases have been made, so that will lead to a
difference.
And I just, I think there are some
differences on some of the projects that it's part
of the inclusion list. Those would be kind of the
three major items that I would see that would help
support that kind of difference.
Q. Thank you.
So I have it, the 14 percent figure was based
on the quarter-township model, you used a different
method than the quarter-township.
A. That's correct.
Q. And OSEC used the quarter-township method. Is
that?
A. That's a good summary, yes.
Q. Thank you.
I just want to spend a couple minutes on
reversibility.
In your May 2011 Submission, and it's
Exhibit 001-015C, Appendix A, you suggest that a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1390
significant effect is defined as:
"An adverse ... effect
resulting in a sustained,
irreversible effect with
unacceptable environmental
consequences on a regional
resource, population or community,
or, on a unique localized resource,
population or community..."
Or on a unique localized resource population
community. Sorry, that's a stutter. Just close
the quote there on "community."
So are only irreversible effects significant?
It just seems that you have a double-barreled test;
it would be an irreversible effect, unacceptable
environmental consequence.
A. Please let us discuss that for a sec.
A. MR. JALKOTZY: One minute. We're just
looking something up.
A. MR. SPELLER: Could I get you to ask the
question again? Sorry. Or the short form of it.
Q. I should dash over to the tele-prompter.
Are you suggesting that only irreversible
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1391
effects are considered significant? And then
Mr. Speller, I added, I said, it seems to me when I
read the quote, it's a double-barrelled test, it's
got to be an irreversible effect with an
unacceptable environmental consequence.
A. Yeah, so we're looking to see some of our -- yeah,
so the short answer is no. So a reversible effect
could be significant in our system. And my
colleagues were just looking at the black-throated
green warbler example that we provided in the
September submission, and that's an example of a
reversible impact that we did find to be a
significant adverse effect due to the, again,
that's all development in the region.
Q. Now, you cited a reversible impact. Can you tell
me, in your assessment, did you find any effects to
be irreversible?
A. Yes, we do. So one of the examples we treat as
irreversible is we treat some of the wetland
losses. So because of the technology to reclaim
some aspects of wetlands, like peatlands isn't
there, so we call that irreversible.
Old-growth forest, so old-growth forest is
another example of in the terrestrial world where
we would look at something as being irreversible.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1392
Now, when you plant a tree and you leave it there
long enough and it's the right kind of tree, it
will turn into old-growth. But our assessment has
an 80-year timeframe that we go out to, and
old-growth takes longer than that 80 years to
establish, so we say it's irreversible based on our
80-year timeframe, but that's a conservatism we
have because we know that if we stretch that out
farther, eventually the old-growth would return.
Q. Let me just ask two questions following on from
that.
There's an Appendix 2 for SIR-11, and it's
Exhibit 001-057G. [051G]. And there's a chart
there, Mr. Speller, that has wetlands and the
classification around reversibility, and it has a
number of zero. And I would have thought if it's
irreversible, it would be a different number than
zero.
A. MR. JALKOTZY: So, I'm sorry, we misled
Mr. Speller there with a little nod of the head.
And then we went to the table, and oops. But you
were ahead of us.
So in the case of old-growth, it's
reversible/irreversible. Because once you get, as
Wayne was talking about, the forest on a trajectory
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1393
to old-growth, it can get there. And that's in the
case of upland forests. However, in the case of
peatlands and peatland old-growth, we know that we
can't, at this point, and we're stating in the
assessment, that we're assuming that peatlands
can't be reclaimed with the known technology, and
so that would be the irreversible part of that.
Q. So your old-growth forests in the same table are
also labelled as zero as well, and peatlands as
well. Wetlands, including peatlands, old-growth
forests.
A. So the wetlands, including peatlands, that's also a
zero because there are wetlands that can't be
reclaimed. The MONGs and graminoid marshes and the
swamp types, as opposed to the peatlands, which as
I just indicated, we're not assuming can be
reclaimed.
Q. And maybe it's Mr. Speller, Mr. Jalkotzy, you
referenced "long-term," and Mr. Speller mentioned
80 years. But when you look at your definition of
long-term on page 38 of the same May 2011 document,
it says:
"Long-term refers to an
effect that is occurring or
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1394
persisting over 20 years."
So is "long-term" more than 20 years or is
long-term something other than more than 20 years?
Or does the definition change, does "long-term"
change according to what you're assessing?
A. No. Under duration, so we have a number of
different criteria when we're determining our
environmental consequence, and under duration,
long-term is defined as greater than than 20 years.
The 80 years that we're referring to is the far
future past reclamation. And so that's an
enclosure. So those are the two differences. It's
not like -- we're not changing the definitions.
Q. And just to go back to your chart around peatlands
and wetlands, would it have been possible if you
were using something other than Landsat data to
kind of distinguish between wetlands and peatlands?
Because I understand that wetlands, there is some
reversibility there. Peatlands, no.
A. If we were using a finer scale, like an Alberta
vegetation inventory data set, yes, we can
differentiate them. But using the Landsat imagery,
they can't be differentiated.
Q. Thank you.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1395
I just want to refer you to, this is going to
significance resulting from environmental
consequences, and it's Exhibit 001-0 70. It's
Shell's Responses to OSEC on October the 15th. And
in that response, you suggest that determining the
significance of resulting environmental
consequences involves more than applying this
environmental consequence pertaining to habitat
loss. And then some authors are cited. Can you
clarify what's meant by -- what more is involved?
A. I think I've already covered this. When we arrive
at our environmental consequence, and then we look
at ecological context. And in addition to what
I've said earlier about ecological context, and I
think we've covered that fairly well, I would say
the one thing that I didn't add was that we also
look at the source for the population declines for
a particular indicator. And that's why in some
cases, with certain indicators, we paid less
attention to habitat loss in the region because
habitat loss wasn't an issue for that species.
So if we take an example, boreal toad, the
issue there is disease and it's not a question of
habitat being limited. And so in those cases,
again, as I said, we take into account ecological
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1396
context.
Q. Just in terms of significance and the assessment of
it, in Exhibit 001-015C, there's a federally listed
species at risk assessment on page 8. And you
state that:
".... adverse effects with
moderate or high environmental
consequence ratings were further
considered in terms of the
definition of a Significant effect
and identified as a Significant
effect or an Insignificant effect."
So what did you base the significance
decision on, I mean, was it simply using
professional judgment, or how did you come to
categorize moderate or high environmental
consequence as significant?
A. Well, I think I've covered this. And I actually
did indicate that at the end of the day, we take
all the available data we have, population trend
data, reasons for declines in a species at risk,
those sorts of things in addition to the extent of
habitat loss in the RSA, if it may be even remotely
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1397
maybe a habitat issue. And then we do make a
professional judgment. But it's not just a
professional judgment. It's based on a lot of
thought in the ecological context for that
particular indicator. It's not arrived at lightly.
Q. I wouldn't suggest that, actually. It's just in
terms of that thought process, I take it there are
criteria, there are things that, and we can go to
the documents and find out what was in that thought
process to arrive at the definition of
significance, how you've determined something is
significant?
A. Yes, that's correct. And if I recall correctly,
it's in the -- just one minute, please, I'll check.
So I wouldn't say that we used defined
criteria. We took the various pieces of
information that we had. And of course it varied
by the different indicators and the kind of
information that we had and we arrived at that
conclusion for any particular indicator. And we
covered that off in the specific lines of thought
that we went through in the September 2012
submission. In each case, we looked at the
information that we're going on and why we are
following that line of thinking.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1398
Q. So I'm looking at Table 1.3-1 in Exhibit 001-063,
Appendix A, and there is the Canada warbler, the
change from the pre-industrial case to the 2012
planned development case, I mean, the percentage
changes for high and moderate are minus 61 and
minus 45. Is that considered significant?
A. So for the Canada warbler, and I'll speak to it
while -- so with respect to the Canada warbler, I
mean, certainly the indication of that relatively
high loss of habitat in the RSA was a concern. But
we're not applying significance to that particular
measure, as I've said before, that's applied after
we look at the environmental consequences in total,
as well as looking at the ecological context. So
just one minute, please. So in Attachment 1 of the
September 2012 submission, Section 2.3.3.2.3, the
heading is "Canada Warbler and Wolverine." And
actually, this doesn't cover the section. Now,
this talks about the significance, but there's an
earlier section where we actually talk about the
fact that there's a decline in Canada, but the
decline isn't suggesting it's going to extirpation.
And in addition to that, the other information that
we had that we were going with there was the report
that the ABMI put out recently released on
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1399
intactness in the oil sands region. And in that
case, when comparing to referenced conditions,
sites in the oil sands were considered 100 percent
intact for Canada warbler, if I remember correctly.
Let me correct that, actually. That came out
afterwards, the ABMI report. So we were basing it
on, we primarily based it on when we looked at the
amount of habitat loss that we had in the area, in
the RSA cumulatively, then we looked at the
population trend data that was available in Canada
and in Alberta. And that's how we arrived at that.
And that's the same approach that we used for the
black-throated green warbler, which although had a
habitat loss within the RSA that was less than the
Canada warblers, the actual decline across the
country was greater. And so that's why we came to
a different conclusion there.
Q. I just wanted to ask you something about
relocation. I'm looking at Exhibit 005-020, and
it's a letter from Environment Canada dated
October the 1st. And Environment Canada provides a
recommendation in that letter that species at risk
with low mobility, for example amphibians, should
be relocated and in return Shell suggests that it
would work with Environment Canada to develop a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1400
practical program for the relocation of the western
toad prior to clearing where feasible. Is that
relocation exercise fairly common? Is that
something that you're confident can be done? Or
give us some details on that. I'll let you answer
that question before I give you another one.
A. So relocation programs, it's not commonly done, I
don't think, here in Canada. They certainly are
done in other areas in the world where
Environmental Impact Assessments and mitigating
losses to species at risk are being, well, are
being mitigated. It's possible to do, yes.
Q. Is there a track record for the western toad -- get
the moving vans -- where would you move the western
toad to?
A. Well, the idea with these relocation programs in
general is that you move them off the site where if
they remained there they would be destroyed.
Q. So where are you going to? You got an RSA, is that
where they're going?
A. Well, again, I think we would be working with AESRD
with respect to a plan on, you know, what exactly
or how this would exactly work. I mean, we know
how to call, or we know how to locate toads. And
certainly it may be challenging catching them, but
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1401
it's certainly possible. And then where they go is
another part of a plan like that.
Q. Is this the only species that's targeted for
relocation, are there other species that might be
relocated as well?
A. Well, we haven't considered any others.
Q. Are you aware of this kind of relocation being
successfully done in oil sands projects? I think
you mentioned another geographic location. I'm
just wondering if this kind of activity has been
successfully done in other projects.
A. I'm not familiar with the results of the planned
relocation. I'm aware that Total at their Joslyn
North Mine, I think it is, are undertaking such a
program, or that's my understanding anyway. I'm
not intimately familiar with it.
Q. Okay. I just want to move to caribou and sight
lines. And I think there was some discussion of
this last week. In Exhibit 001-051, it's the May
12th, May 2012 Submission, and I'm looking at
Table 22-2, you state that you'll mitigate the
potential for vehicle wildlife collisions to
species like wolverine by developing roads that
have long sight lines. Did you consider the
potential negative effects associated with long
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1402
sight lines on other wildlife species?
A. Well, if we're talking about high-speed roads, no.
But I need to back up and say that we don't have
caribou on our lease, at least they are virtually
absent there. So, I mean, when we're talking about
mitigating the effects of roads, we're talking
about other species here.
Q. So in terms of long sight lines, no effects on
other wildlife species, You say caribou aren't in
the area, so they get removed from the list, any
other wildlife species that were identified that
might be subject to predation as a result of long
sight lines?
A. Well, I think that when we're looking at roads like
this, now we're not talking about cut-lines, we're
talking about roads, and roads with high-speed
traffic on it, if we're trying to reduce mortality,
we need to have long sight lines so that people can
see the wildlife on the road. Those roads
typically are travelled, are fairly heavily used,
and they tend not to be used by wildlife.
The notion of having limited lines of sight
typically apply to cut-lines and the like and that
has to do with reducing, potentially reducing the
efficiency of predators like wolves that may use
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1403
those lines to travel and so they can't see as far
down the line to see that prey might be sort of two
or three hundred metres away.
So there are two different things here that
we're talking about.
Q. So the cut-lines would be that, that's where you
recommend -- and I'm going to have a hard time
saying this word at this hour -- "curvilinearity"?
A. That's correct.
Q. Just in terms of site clearing, in Exhibit 001-051,
May 12th Submission, in the Table 4.4-1, listed as
a category of potential effects, "direct mortality
due to site clearing." And for all the KIRs listed
there, moose, bear, lynx, toad, you listed the
effect as being "reversible." Can you just explain
your thinking there, please.
A. This is a population-level reference, I think. And
I mean, if you're suggesting that an animal that
dies is somehow comes back to life, no.
Q. No. But I'm just wondering, I take it it's
reversible because they relocate?
A. Well, and, yeah, they are really not impacted, they
are really not affected. Mobile species are really
not affected by that activity. I mean, that's the
activity that we would be looking, toads for
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1404
example, at.
Q. I just want to spend a few minutes on carrying
capacity in the RSA.
Throughout your assessment, you've employed
the assumption that many species of wildlife will
not be negatively impacted by habitat loss in the
LSA because there's suitable habitat in the
surrounding RSA that's below carrying capacity for
most species. And you've cited some, moose, bear,
and others. Have I got that right, that that's --
A. Could you point me to the -- sorry.
Q. Go to Exhibit 001-051G, May 2012, it's Response to
an SIR, Appendix 2, page 139.
A. Sorry, the page number?
Q. 139.
A. One minute, please.
Q. And you'll see a 3.4.3.2 heading "Summary of
Results."
A. Go ahead.
Q. So at that section, you suggest that black bear and
moose are likely to be currently below carrying
capacity in the region. Changes in carrying
capacity are unlikely to relate directly to changes
in abundance. Can you just explain how that
conclusion was arrived at?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1405
A. Two things. Primarily, those are both hunted
species, and so they are managed, and as a result
they are unlikely to be at carrying capacity. And
with respect to moose in particular, there has been
some work that's been done that suggests that a
carrying capacity for moose was considerably higher
than the density estimate that we came up with in
the LSA. I think the density estimate that we came
up with in the LSA was 0.22 moose per square
kilometre. And now I don't remember exactly, but I
think it was over 0.5 moose per square kilometre
was a potential carrying capacity that's sort of
habitat-based.
Q. And, Mr. Jalkotzy, are there studies which suggest
that wide-ranging species like moose, deer, bear,
can adapt and maintain positive population growth
trends after they've lost large-scale habitat in
their home range by simply moving to a neighbouring
existing habitat outside their home range?
A. So I don't think I would characterize it as they
leave and they move to the adjacent habitat and
then they are doing just fine.
I think initially what happens in these
situations, from a sort of now we're talking about
a management sort of scale, moose, let's say, use
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1406
moose for an example, they will be displaced.
Initially, you could say that the density will
increase in this the area around it. But given
that they are below carrying capacity, as I said
earlier, the actual habitat end of the issue
shouldn't be a problem, there will be enough food.
However, over time, and I think we had an SIR on
this in Round 1 for JME, that those populations
would stabilize at whatever level was, well,
whatever level occurred as a result of other
factors like predation, human hunting, and other
factors that control the population in general in
the region.
Q. So I'm coming to the conclusion that you took
account of higher densities in the surrounding area
and that you took account of let's take moose
densities, you took account of the effects on
vegetation in the surrounding habitat when coming
to the conclusion that this was more than just a
possibility, but in fact you could rely on it, that
surrounding RSA is below carrying capacity, you
would have higher densities and notwithstanding
those higher densities, there'd be enough food to
sustain the increased population?
A. That's correct.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1407
Q. Okay. And I guess associated with higher
densities, there's also, I guess you would
acknowledge this, there's a potential kind of
cascading effect on other wildlife species as well,
when you introduce another species, there can be a
certain cascading effect and you took account of
that in the RSA as well?
A. Well, and that's what I was referring to, when
you -- initially the animals will be displaced and
so there isn't a direct mortality there. And then
over time, the populations in the RSA will likely
change based on whatever the other drivers are that
are, you know, that are affecting population
dynamics in the entire region.
Q. So just to help us out, the carrying capacity of
five moose per kilometre squared, is that in the
literature somewhere?
A. Actually, my compatriot here was telling me that
when I said 0.5, I was actually very, very low.
And it's a paper by Messier, I believe, on moose
carrying capacity.
Q. Is that in the oil sands region?
A. No, that was a paper that looked at -- actually, it
was North America-wide. It looked at a lot of
information across moose range in North America.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1408
Q. And I guess if we go back --
A. Sorry, and just to add, they did have data points
from north-eastern Alberta.
Q. Okay, thank you.
Just I guess in terms of making your
estimates around the habitat abundance in the RSA,
again, you're relying on the Landsat data to make
those kinds of calculations and determinations?
A. Correct.
Q. Yes, thanks.
I want to take you to Exhibit 001-070. It's
your letter of October 15th, page 8. And you
responded to Environment Canada's recommendation
that:
"... additional detailed
baseline data [should be collected]
on the distribution and abundance
of SAR and migratory birds in the
LSA prior to any additional site
disturbance."
With the suggestion that given:
"... EIA predictions
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1409
regarding habitat loss are certain,
there is no need to validate EIA
predictions in areas where all
habitat will be removed."
And in your response, we're wondering what you
meant by "predictions about habitat loss are
certain"?
A. We were talking about in the construction and
operations case, and it's an open pit mine, so we
know the habitat will be lost. There's not a
question about that.
Q. So does Shell think that having a better
understanding of baseline data about wildlife in
the LSA might assist, give it a better
understanding of the impacts of clearing of habitat
within the LSA?
A. And I really just about answered your question in
the last go-around. We've already done
considerable baseline work. We've done species at
risk surveys, including yellow rail surveys. We've
done extensive winter track surveys. We've done
aerial surveys. So as far as being able to
characterize the landscape prior to development, I
think that we've done that. So I don't see the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1410
need for additional surveys in areas that we are
going to lose to development at this point.
Certainly, there's value in having baseline
information because that will then provide a
baseline for the reclamation end of the Project
where wildlife will immigrate back into the
reclaimed landscape and we'll be able to compare
that to what we had before.
Q. So you think you have enough now for that, to, you
know, assist in the future reclamation process?
A. Yes, we did two years of baseline work on Jackpine
Mine Expansion initially. And then we also went
out at the request of Environment Canada and did
species at risk bird surveys. And we also did, in
conjunction with EPEA approval conditions, I think
it was for the Muskeg River Mine Expansion, we did
yellow rail surveys. So there's been a lot of
surveys that have gone on, more so than I would
suggest any other oil sands project that I've
worked on to date.
Q. Remnant forested areas. Exhibit 001-0 51, your
May 2012 Submission, Table 22-2, it's at page 3-70.
You suggest at 3-70 that you will "leave remnant
forested areas undisturbed where practical." Can
you just speak a bit to how you're assessing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1411
practicality in that regard?
A. One minute, please.
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, thank you for your
patience.
What we mean by "where practical" is, again,
if you find there's a piece of your mine maybe
inside of your mine footprint where you can leave a
forest, that's not of much value because it's not
connected to anything. So what we're talking about
in terms of practicality is along, you know, areas
where there are connections to the broader
environment, that's where if you can save an area
and not clear it, that's what we want to avoid.
Q. Do you know how much at this stage how much might
be avoided?
A. No, I don't think we know at this point how much.
It will all depend on our drilling results and what
we find out and where we have to move stuff.
As you understand, we are trying to minimize
our disturbance footprint as part of the Project,
and we keep it as small as possible, but, I'm
sorry, at this time I can't tell you.
Q. But that, as small as possible, you don't have a
set target, you're just trying to keep the
footprint as small as possible?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1412
A. Yes, not just for environmental reasons, but that's
also good economic reasons too.
Q. Would you place an emphasis on old-growth habitats,
old-growth forest, would you try to rejig things if
you were trying to leave remnant old-growth forest?
A. We understand the intent, and it's a good intent,
to try and minimize impacts to old-growth forest.
But at the same time, our main priority is again to
have a competent Mine Plan that makes sense. So,
again, if there was a situation where it could
work, great, but again our first priority would be
to have a competent Mine Plan.
Q. Let's spend a minute or two on conservation
allowances just to understand a little bit better
the dialogue there.
I'm looking at Exhibit 005-020. It's a
letter from Environment Canada. It's dated
October the 1st. And page 23. Environment Canada
suggests in that letter:
"Given the extent of
cumulative habitat loss in the RSA
for several [SAR] and migratory
birds, efforts should be made to...
compensate for direct and indirect
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1413
local scale Project effects."
And I understand that in your response to the
Environment Canada letter, this is at page 9, and
your letter is dated October 15th (as read):
"Shell disagrees the
conservation allowances are
required to address project impacts
to species at risk and migratory
birds."
And I guess in light of the fact that
reclamation isn't necessarily 100 percent certain
as a method of mitigation for loss of wildlife
habitat, can you just elaborate on why there is no
consideration of conservation allowances?
A. Yes, again, when we look at the Project impacts
with reclamation without reclamation, what we find
is we don't anticipate significant adverse effects
to these species. That's our primary
consideration. We do recognize, though, on a
cumulative basis in the region, as Mr. Jalkotzy
noted earlier, that there are cumulative effects to
these species. And that's why in Shell's response
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1414
of October 15th that you allude to, that's why we
suggest that LARP, the biodiversity framework under
LARP, and the wetlands policy, those are the types
of appropriate mechanisms to address these
cumulative effects. And they make a lot of sense
because, again, you want to understand the regional
objectives and what the government wants for the
region. It also is the best mechanism to make sure
you get results. Looking at it on a
project-by-project perspective arguably won't get
you the results if you have a concerted effort in
the region.
Q. So when it comes to the cumulative effects to
woodland caribou and the black-throated green
warbler, that would be LARP's, left to LARP to try
to sort that out rather than working to consider
conservation allowances or offsets to protect the
habitat for those species in the RSA or elsewhere
in north-eastern Alberta?
A. Yeah, again, we believe LARP is the appropriate
mechanism to look at cumulative environmental
effects.
Q. Just curious, just one more on that, given that
peatlands can't be reclaimed, or it's uncertain,
can Shell explain why or can you offer why you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1415
wouldn't consider obtaining conservation offsets
that might protect peatlands?
A. Yes, that's a good question. Again, it's a very
similar question. When we look at wetland function
on a regional basis, what we see is that the
Jackpine Mine Expansion Project will reduce
wetlands in the region by about 1 percent. So we
think, and to start with, the wetlands make-up
about 44 percent of the Regional Study Area at
pre-industrial, and at the application case, with
the cumulative development, they make up about
39 percent. So wetlands are highly abundant in the
region. We understand our effects to the wetlands
are not significant. And, again, we understand
that wetland function will be maintained.
And again, we still think the appropriate
mechanism again to look at wetlands from a
cumulative basis is again the wetland policy that's
been developed by the Government of Alberta.
Q. Well, I guess for the same reason whether you would
consider the use of offsets as a temporary
mitigation measure in the interim, I take it the
same answer would apply, so?
A. Yes, especially in the case of wetlands, because
even though, as we mentioned earlier in these
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1416
proceedings, that Shell is actively looking at
initiatives to put wetlands in the reclaimed
landscape. The assumption is, in terms of our
impact assessment, that peatlands lost due to
operations in construction will be the same loss at
reclamation.
Q. Wildlife corridor movement. In Exhibit 001-051,
you responded in May 2012 to the SIR page 3-67.
Shell suggested there that it is:
"Committed to not developing
within 100 metres of watercourses."
Just give us some explanation as to why that
figure was chosen, the 100-metre barrier.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So the 100 metres is what
we've been using as our boundary for the
development of the Muskeg River Mine. So there's
100 metres on either side of the Muskeg River,
there's 100 metres on either side of the Jackpine
Creek. So it was basically standardized at that.
Q. And have you got results on the effects of that
100-metre buffer to the extent its been employed?
A. Well, as mentioned last week, we are members of and
participate in the monitoring program. So there's
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1417
some collared moose. And we know that there's
three collared moose that hang out in that area.
And we also have done tracking surveys early on.
And we've got a camera installed on the wildlife
underpass. I don't have results for that right
now, but tracks indicate that these corridors are
being used.
Q. Have you got any data on breeding and foraging
habitat for listed bird species, the effectiveness
of the 100-metre buffer, are there studies that
would indicate that that's the kind of buffer that
would meet nesting and foraging requirements for
riparian birds?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: So the work that we've
been doing, the work that Shell has been doing on
corridors has been directed primarily at
wider-ranging species. However, there has been
work that, it's out of the U of A, that looked at
corridor widths in the oil sands. Think it was
Dr. Hannon's students. And we're wracking our
brains trying to think of the reference, but we
can't come up with it. And I know I've cited it in
SIRs regarding corridor efficacy, and it looks at
breeding birds as well as small mammals.
Q. And just while we're on the 100-metre buffer issue,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1418
is there empirical evidence to suggest that that
buffer is sufficient for maintaining populations of
western toads?
A. No, but I would suggest that -- I'm trying to
remember now my western toad biology. They are not
that wide-ranging and they probably use areas like
that as habitat, in fact. And certainly, although
there aren't any direct studies in the oil sands
looking at western toad movement, there has been
some work on Canadian toads with respect to the
reclaimed landscape at Suncor and the degree that
they move. And so based on the literature and that
information, I would suggest that the corridors at
100-metres wide would effectively be habitat given
that they could use the length of it, so.
Q. I just wondered because, as you know, they are on
the relocation list, so I just figured that that
might be the reason why, maybe there was evidence
to suggest that 100 metres wasn't sufficient.
Just on the subject of the buffer and genetic
connectivity, in your Exhibit 001-070, and it's
your October 15th submission at page 40, you state
(as read):
"Wildlife movement around the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1419
Project footprint is predicted to
be sufficient to main genetic
connectivity in the RSA."
Can you just give us some detail as to how
that conclusion was reached and for which species
in particular?
A. Sure. When we're talking about genetic
connectivity, I mean, that's a measure of, of
corridor efficacy. And that's what's required to
maintain genetic heterogeneity in the region. So
you don't want to have one population cut off from
another. And so when we're looking at our
corridors, and generally, if you back up to 30,000
feet or even more, and look at the regional area
and you look at where the developments are,
wide-ranging species will be able to continue to
move through that landscape.
And there were three years of talking
specifically about corridors now along the
Athabasca River and the Muskeg River adjacent to
the Muskeg River Mine and the Muskeg River Mine
Expansion, Jackpine Mine - Phase 1, the three years
of work we did that really did demonstrate that we
had sufficient movement. And the work that's been
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1420
continuing since then out of the U of A, the IOM
group, suggest it is also providing additional
information.
There are three aspects to that program.
There's a wolf radio-collaring program. There's a
moose radio-otometry (phonetic) program. As well
as a camera program. And they are gathering data.
And right now, the final results aren't in,
but if you look at let's say the 2011 Annual Report
for that work, you can see that, in fact, using
Jackpine Mine Phase I, there's one particular moose
that's living up along Jackpine Creek adjacent to
the development.
Other examples, sometimes although it --
well, I think sometimes we don't give wildlife
enough credit. We have examples now with respect
to that wolf program where wolves are denning in
the immediate buffer area around active mines.
And, to a degree, I think it's because there isn't
a lot of human disturbance outside of mine trucks
that they have now, I suspect, got habituated to.
So it is interesting that way.
Q. So it's clear from your October 15th submission
that you're going to continue collecting data on
wildlife movement in the corridors during and after
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1421
construction. And you go on to say in a letter to
MCFN dated September 28th that you use adaptive
management to determine appropriate strategies to
increase the functionality of corridors are not
facilitating wildlife movement and habitat use as
expected.
So I take it this data that's collected, that
will be made available, will be publicly available?
A. Yes.
Q. And if the landscape beyond 100 metres is already
cleared, what kind of adaptive management would you
employ if you find that the hundred metres isn't
working in relation to a particular species?
A. So a couple of things. I'd like to back up first.
At that regional scale, if you look at a map, and
as I just described, took a 30,000-foot view of
that area, even if those corridors were actually
ineffective for a particular species, let's just
use an example, the wolverine, that's really
wide-ranging, home ranges of over 1,000 square
kilometres. They can still move around that
landscape.
But to get back to your question, there are
certain mitigations that you can affect, and this
would have to be something that you're working with
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1422
the mine planners at Shell. Things, and we
answered this in an SIR in some of the earlier
rounds, where things like dense tree planting to
screen the mine development area, so the screening,
the cover providing shelter that way. The other
aspect that you can look at is actually introducing
food plants for a particular species. If let's say
it's for some reason or other, let's use an
example, moose aren't using a corridor the way we
would expect and we would like to see that use,
then you could be planting willows and those kinds
of things that possibly attract them.
There's also, I mean, at the far end of the
scale as far as mitigation, you can actually then
go to the extent of building sound attenuation
walls in particular areas, let's say around bridge
areas where they are going underneath, that kind of
thing, in local situations.
Q. You mentioned wolverines, they use the buffers?
A. Wolverine is the one species that we did not see in
the three years of monitoring in the buffer. But
we did have wolverines, if you're looking at sort
of wildlife monitoring in the oil sands region, and
there are wolverines that are using areas close to
development.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1423
And given the disbursal capabilities of young
wolverines, in my experience in the Foothills, I
would hazard a guess, I can't prove this, but I
would hazard a guess that they would be going
through those corridors, and they could, and again
this is based on my own experience, they will cover
20 or 30 kilometres in a night.
Q. Are there studies that provide information on
effective adaptive management measures in
comparable settings that we can look to?
A. One minute. So I can't point to any particular
studies, but there certainly are studies that
demonstrate the effectiveness of let's say sound
attenuation walls in reducing sound levels.
There is certainly work in the urban
landscape that demonstrate that areas that where
you plant cover and shelter belts that you can get
use in those areas or increased use for wildlife in
those areas. But I can't point to a particular
study right now.
MR. BIRCHALL: Thank you. Mr. Chair, I
think you were mentioning breaking at 5:00. I'm
about to go into another area, so.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks, Mr. Birchall. So
we'll break for dinner and resume at 6:30. The
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1424
original thought was that we might be able to get
through the questions for this panel this evening.
I don't think we'll be able to do it all, but I
think we'll be able to get through most of
Mr. Birchall's questions. So we'll resume at 6:30.
(The dinner adjournment)
(5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.)
THE CHAIRMAN: Please continue,
Mr. Birchall.
MR. BIRCHALL:
Q. I just want to go back to woodland caribou, the
discussion we were having. You had indicated in
your Project documentation that woodland caribou in
the LSA are virtually absent and, that yet, we note
that in the document from the Métis, the letter
dated October the 1st, 2012, the Métis have
indicated that there are woodland caribou in the
LSA footprint. And I guess have you taken that
view into account? Have you responded in any way?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: So we are aware of that.
And it really doesn't change it. You know, in our
baseline, we did have one track. And I know that
on one of the Shell mine sites, I think it was on a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1425
dyke, there was another observation. But with
wildlife, there is never 100 percent certainty, so
they certainly would never say never with wildlife.
I'm sure they occasionally, very occasionally pass
through. But the Project isn't in a recognized
caribou range. Other First Nations input has
indicated that they haven't been there for decades,
so it, you know, at the end of the day, I would
stay with what I said and that they are virtually
absent.
Q. Just, Mr. Jalkotzy, help me again with, just to
confirm, the effects on the LSA, are there any
effects from the activity in the LSA that would
cause effects on caribou habitat or on caribou in
the RSA?
A. One minute, please. I'll just chat with my partner
here.
Q. Okay.
A. So with respect to effects in the LSA, we have
looked at the potential for indirect effects. So
certainly -- but when we looked at it overall, it
was very much a negligible effect. I don't know if
you have more questions about what the indirect
effect is, but.
Q. Well, when you say "negligible," anything that you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1426
identified that could be an indirect effect?
A. So the indirect effects have to do with -- and we
did respond to these sorts -- we had questions
regarding this from Environment Canada, I think it
was. And there exists a potential that if we are
displacing wildlife from the Local Study Area, and,
in particular wolves and deer and moose from that
Local Study Area, that those individuals, those
animals that are displaced, will move over into
neighbouring habitats, including the caribou range
that's to the north and east. You know, the
probability of this is not at all something that we
can -- I mean, I have trouble even measuring, you
know, coming up with some notion of how important
that might be.
When I look at that, though, and I'll go
through it a bit here, if deer and moose are pushed
out of the Project footprint, and wolves follow, so
to speak, there would appear to be the potential
for increasing predation on caribou, so call that
an indirect effect. However, if you look at
caribou habitat and caribou habitat preferences,
they prefer, in particular, large peatlands, and
part of that has to do with an avoidance of wolves.
And if you look at the habitat preferences of deer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1427
and moose, they are upland species. And wolves are
opportunistic predators so they are going to be
going where basically the fridge is fullest and
where there's more of the prey that they go after.
And so although it's not impossible that, you
know, a wolf eats a caribou out there, in fact we
know that's happening, and that's a bigger problem
across the whole of the oil sands region and has
been identified long ago, more than a decade ago we
were talking about caribou and the issues around
them, so at the end of the day, you know, even if
you're looking at that indirect, the potential
indirect effect associated with displacement, I
think it's a real, well, like I said, I think I
referred to it as negligible.
Q. So as you're aware, the federal SARA Recovery
Strategy was posted in early October, and
Mr. Jalkotzy, I think I'm probably quoting
something that you're familiar with, the Recovery
Strategy suggests that (as read):
"Predation on caribou by
wolves is one of the greatest
threats to caribou recovery."
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1428
You've indicated you've considered it. Do
you have a sense of, from your work, are there the
number of wolves in the LSA.
A. Well, certainly we have baseline data on wolves in
the LSA. Again, but from the perspective of this
Project, let's remove it from the bigger picture of
the cumulative effects of development in the RSA
and in the region, that potential for an indirect,
as a result of this Project is, you know,
notwithstanding that we know that there are issues
with wolves and caribou, moose and deer, and the
whole complex there, I just don't see that it's a
big effect.
Q. And can you confirm, Mr. Jalkotzy, that the
Richardson range that was identified in the
strategy is included in the RSA?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. Do you know if there are other caribou ranges
contained in the RSA?
A. Yeah, there's two others on -- the RSA spans the
Athabasca River. And so there's the west side of
the Athabasca River herd on the west side, and
there's one more at the very south end, there's the
east side of the Athabasca River herd to the south.
Q. And how close is the LSA to this range? I know you
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1429
touched on it last day.
A. Sorry, to which range now?
Q. The caribou, the Richardson range.
A. I think it's, in earlier testimony last week, I
think I said tens of kilometres and I think it was
affirmed that it was something around 20.
Q. So it's quite close?
A. It's about 20 kilometres.
Q. So I note that in your response, Shell's response
to an ACFN, you stated that (as read):
"Caribou appear to be
declining to extirpation in the
RSA. This outcome is predicted
whether or not further developments
occur in the RSA unless population
management actions by ASRD are able
to arrest or reverse the decline.
Shell is supportive of ASRD's
efforts to facilitate recovery of
woodland caribou populations in the
RSA."
I mean, other than being supportive, is there
something more by way of support or?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1430
A. Well, I'll speak to it a bit and then I'll pass it
off to Bill here.
I think we're now talking about a regional
effort that's required. And, as I said earlier,
it's something that has come up quite a long time
ago. This is not, although the Recovery Strategy
was just released, so there's quite a bit of
attention again on caribou, this issue has been
around for more than a decade now. And, you know,
they are having to deal with it. And even relative
to north-eastern Alberta, caribou declines are
actually a national issue. We have caribou
declines in northern Ontario, we have caribou
declines even in Jasper National Park. So it is a
big issue. I'm not trying to make light of it.
There's now a Caribou Recovery Strategy
that's out within the Lower Athabasca Regional
Plan. They talk about the Caribou Strategy.
They've identified critical habitat. Now, it will
have an effect on how development proceeds in the
oil sands region as well as elsewhere in Canada.
So it is an issue that's being dealt with.
Q. And in your letter to the ACFN, you state that (as
read):
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1431
"Shell is actively involved
in the reclamation and enhancement
of disturbed habitat outside of
active developments for caribou."
So is that what you're referencing as part of
your answer?
A. MR. KOVACH: I'm sorry, could you provide
us that reference again, sorry.
Q. Sure. It's Shell's October 15th, 2012 Response to
ACFN. It's at page 40. It's Exhibit 001-070.
And, Mr. Kovach, I think the quote there is (as
read):
"Shell is actively involved
in the reclamation and enhancement
of disturbed habitat outside of
active developments for caribou."
And my question was, tying into what
Mr. Jalkotzy had said, can you elaborate on your
involvement in those activities?
A. One moment, please.
A. MR. JALKOTZY: While they are caucusing,
I just wanted to make a correction. I said it was
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1432
the ESAR head, the east side of the Athabasca
River. I made a mistake. It was the Red Earth
Herd, it was the third one.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So with regards to some
of the other work that's being done that was being
referred to, is Shell belongs to OSLI, Oil Sands
Leadership Initiative, and the Land Group has a
couple of caribou recovery projects, one's called
the Algar Project, which is in south and outside of
the RSA, and the other one is looking at rapid
reclamation of linear disturbances.
And as well, Shell has done work up in the
Peace River area on some of our other leases,
regular conventional leases, and also on linear
disturbances.
So that's the focus of work outside of -- for
caribou recovery.
Q. But I think to pick up on what Mr. Jalkotzy said, a
regional effort is required?
A. Right.
Q. And so in that sense, efforts need to be made
presumably in terms of the RSA as well?
A. Right, so the OSLI work is all the oil sands
developers. And that's sort of morphing into the
COCIA land group and that would be a project that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1433
would be continued. So there's more regional
players in that group.
Q. So in terms of your efforts on the RSA, can you be
more precise or specific about what your land
management, what you're proposing to do to help
reduce the rate of disturbance in the RSA so it's
kept to less than 65 percent as prescribed in the
Recovery Strategy for critical habitat?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: I need to correct you.
The 65 percent refers to inside caribou range.
This Project is not occurring inside caribou range.
It refers to --
Q. Inside the Richardson range?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. And so it wouldn't apply because, yeah, 10 to 20
kilometres?
A. I mean, that doesn't mean that Shell shouldn't be
doing things to reduce their disturbance. But I'll
let Bill speak to that.
Q. Okay.
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, I think to follow up on
what Mr. Jalkotzy said is, what we understand from
the work we've done are that caribou are virtually
absent from our Project area. And we don't believe
we're having a significant adverse effect on
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1434
caribou by any stretch of the imagination due to
the Jackpine Mine Expansion Project. So in terms
of additional mitigation, we frankly don't think
it's required as part of this Project.
Q. Just so I have it. The caribou habitat in the RSA,
is there anything that you're doing or could be
doing to protect that kind of habitat?
A. No.
Q. You're saying because the Project doesn't affect
it?
A. Just one moment, please. Thank you. To be clear,
just to repeat, again, Shell does not believe our
Project is going to have effects on caribou and
that's why we're not proposing any mitigation as
part of this Project.
However, Shell, as Mr. Martindale noted, will
continue to participate in regional initiatives and
stuff such as initiatives such as LARP and work
through that in our multi-stakeholder committees.
Q. Let's move on to whooping cranes. This is
Exhibit 001-051, your May 2012 Response to an SIR,
page 3-104. You state that:
"The occurrence of whooping
cranes landing on tailings ponds is
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1435
extremely unlikely or remote."
Can you just indicate why you think it's
extremely unlikely or remote?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: So we consider it
extremely unlikely or remote based on a number of
lines of evidence: One, the pretty intensive
survey effort that John Gully did in the, this is
now quite a while ago, in the late '80s and into
the '90s, this is monitoring daily throughout the
Suncor leases, he never saw one whooping crane.
We've been doing surveys for a number of
other species, including migratory waterfowl,
aerial surveys, surveys in the fall for beaver
muskrat, those are aerial surveys and we've never
seen a whooping crane.
In addition, the information from the
banding, the radiotelemetry banding effort that the
USGS has been working on in the last couple of
years, indicate that although the actual flyway
does come across the oil sands region, and
certainly I'm not disputing that they are not
coming by, they are coming by, they certainly are
coming by, but given the number of sightings and
those data, it says they, you know, those data
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1436
would indicate that they actually seem to be
avoiding landing.
I'm just looking at some information from the
USGS data; landings have occurred within three
kilometres, the closest landings have occurred,
based on the radiotelemetry data, they've occurred
three kilometres from a tailings pond. And they
have occurred sort of about three kilometres from
the Jackpine Mine Expansion area. So, again, a
number of lines of evidence that would indicate
that they are just not coming into the oil sands,
they are not landing very often near these tailings
ponds.
And in addition, you have to take into
account that we also have a very active and
effective deterrent system set up on the existing
tailings ponds. And I wouldn't be surprised at all
if that's also having an effect on something like
the whooping crane.
Q. So I think what I've understood is that you're in
agreement with what Environment Canada has cited in
its letter, submission of October 1st in their
submission, which is to the effect that the US Fish
and Wildlife Service Study indicates that
48 percent of 31 tagged whooping cranes flew
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1437
directly over the oil sands area, and of those
birds, 60 percent landed at least once in a
mineable area for a night within close proximity of
a tailings pond.
A. Well, I wouldn't say that three kilometres is close
to a tailings pond as far as the actual issues with
tailings ponds and the risks associated with it.
Based on that, the fact that their flyway goes over
that area, and that they do land, you know, they
have a resting spot here and there through the oil
sands region, and the fact that they are not
showing up on the ponds, based on some pretty
detailed work that's been done, this is now, the
monitoring work that's been done by Colleen Cassady
St. Clair and her team from the U of A, would
indicate that if they are coming through, they are
avoiding those ponds. I mean there is an active
effective deterrent system in place at those ponds.
Q. And I take it that one of the things that also
helps is that the wetland habitats, right, whooping
cranes looking for wetland habitats and if they are
available, they will land, right? And as I
understand it, that according to the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, you need to have that kind of
stopover habitat available for every 10 miles or 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1438
kilometres throughout their migratory corridor.
A. And in response, I would say, yes, they do need
that. And if you look at the effect of the Project
on wetlands and you look at what's, more
importantly what's remaining for wetlands around
the various developments, I don't consider they are
an issue. And again, I don't think that when you
look at the kinds of wetland habitats that you're
referring to that exist in and around the oil sands
area, and let's say specifically in and around
Shell leases, I don't think that a tailings pond
looks like a nice FT and N fen, wooded fen.
And again, getting back to it, they don't
appear to be coming in. And there's quite a bit of
monitoring that's going on.
Q. So just one more question. If in fact you should
get a whooping crane landing in a tailings pond, is
the oiling of an endangered bird like that, would
it be reversible, can you reverse the effects of
oiling?
A. MR. MARTINDALE: So, first of all, that's
a very hypothetical question. And as for landing
on a tailings pond, they are not ducks, they do
land on land, they don't like to land on water. So
it's hypothetical for those reasons. As well,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1439
birds that we have ourselves rescued from slight
oiling, typically if a bird has less than
10 percent oiling, we have been able to recover it
and release it without any oil on its feathers. So
we don't of course track it, but we assume that
it's fairly healthy when we release it. So we know
that we can recover birds with, you know,
10 percent or less oil on it.
Q. Mr. Martindale, are shore birds at a higher risk
from tailings ponds than waterfowl?
A. Actually, we don't think so. The snipes and the
shore birds that we see are very light birds, and
any kind of bitumen that is on the shores, it
doesn't take very long and it oxidizes. And so if
a bird does land, you can see it running on the
surface and it never, we've never seen one get
stuck, if you will.
Q. Okay.
A. It oxidizes very quickly. So shore birds aren't --
we haven't recovered very many shore birds because
they don't get stuck.
Q. Okay.
A. And also the radar system that we have does detect
the shore birds and they are scared by the cannons
as well.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1440
Q. In Shell's letter to Environment Canada on
October 15th, this is Exhibit 001-070 at page 7,
Shell agreed to:
"... provide a report to
Environment Canada that highlights
practical activities that can be
undertaken to avoid direct loss of
species at risk and migratory bird
habitat."
Is that report done or is it to be done?
A. MR. KOVACH: To be done.
Q. So just a couple of questions on the yellow rail
and the yellow rail Management Plan.
According to the SARA Management Plan for the
yellow rail, the largest threat to the species is
development on both summer and winter ranges. And
on page 8, it says (as read):
"The main threats to the
yellow rail populations is habitat
loss from agricultural, commercial,
industrial and infrastructure
development. Historical declines
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1441
in wetland habitats and parts of
both summer and winter ranges are
well documented."
Do you agree with that finding?
A. MR. JALKOTZY: I'm familiar with it.
And however, I would underline that when they're
talking about -- that's a national plan, I believe,
that you're looking at.
Q. Yes.
A. So when we're talking about the loss of wetlands on
summer range, the majority by far we're talking
about is in the prairie and southern regions. So,
yes, they breed in wetlands in the Regional Study
Area, but I would submit that we don't have a lack
of, or we're not -- certainly if you look at the
effects of the Project, and even cumulatively on
wetlands in the Regional Study Area, the issues
aren't in the boreal, the issues are in the south
where the loss of wetlands is well documented.
Q. I think what the plan says is that (as read):
"Large-scale projects are
anticipated to affect wetland
habitat in the northern part of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1442
range, specifically oil sands
development in Alberta and pipeline
construction in the Mackenzie
Valley region."
A. But I would reiterate, though, that if you looked
at the reasons that the yellow rail are listed and
the issues around summer breeding habitat, the
losses in the southern parts of summer range in
Canada are the primary issue.
Q. And you were mentioning, Mr. Jalkotzy, that in the
Regional Study Area, there seems to be a high
degree of habitat available for the yellow rail?
A. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but, yes,
there's a substantial amount of yellow rail habitat
in the Regional Study Area outside of the Project
footprint.
Q. And that would be the graminoid fen would appear to
be the --
A. That's one of them. There's graminoid marsh and
shrubby fen are the two primary types.
Q. And again, your Landsat imagery would be able to
pick that kind of fen up?
A. In this case, we're looking at non-treed wetlands,
but having said that, I can look at some of the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1443
other aerial photography that we have in different
areas and see that there are large fens in other
parts of the RSA.
Q. Just to go back to wetlands and reversibility for a
minute. We talked about this earlier. You
mentioned that, well, you don't just look at -- you
look at a variety of things, including wildlife
movement habitat and abundance?
A. For assessing the effects on wildlife, yes.
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, yeah.
Q. Did you do a metric on all of those, like, is there
a chart that we can go to that assesses that?
A. No. As I indicated earlier, a lot of the wildlife
assessment is something that is not something that
we can quantify. Outside of the specifics
regarding habitat loss and habitat remaining in the
Regional Study Area, a lot of it has to do with,
depending on the indicator and depending on the
circumstances of those indicators, we're looking at
gathering lines of evidence, call it, you know, the
weight of evidence, to see whether or not we think
that at the end of the day are we having a
significant adverse effect on the viability of a
regional population.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1444
Q. I know there was a discussion last week, I believe
it was with Ms. Gorrie, talking about fires and
post-reclamation landscapes, and I believe she was
referencing an OSEC October 1st submission at
page 29, which is found in Exhibit 017-016, a
letter from OSEC dated October the 1st. It says
(as read):
"Shell's not taken into
account the increased
susceptibility of forest fires in
the post-reclamation landscape that
will be significantly dryer because
of extensive peat wetland loss,
and, as a result, Shell has
underestimated the loss of
old-growth forest potential."
And I know that there was some back and forth
on that. But to take her questioning just one step
further, is it possible that the increased risk of
fire and old-growth habitats, assuming you
accept that, could reduce habitat available for
species like the Canada warbler?
A. Well, I think that we've assessed fire in a manner
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1445
that was consistent with the way it was assessed
now by the Terrestrial Eco-Systems Management
Framework. There is still casticity built into
that; up to 10 percent of the RSA can be burned at
any time in one year. I really don't see how we've
underestimated it. I think we were requested to
update our Assessment with respect to fire and
forestry activities, and we did it in a manner that
we were requested. I don't think we're
underestimating it.
Q. Have you got evidence to suggest or are there
studies to suggest that vegetation in wildlife
species have returned to pre-industrial or base
case conditions after reclamation elsewhere?
A. Was that a general question about wildlife?
Q. No, well, vegetation and wildlife species, yes.
A. Yes.
A. MR. SPELLER: Sorry, just take a minute.
It feels like we're getting a lot of questions that
we've answered before, so we're just meeting to
make sure we remember what the answer was before,
so.
A. MR. JALKOTZY: So within the oil sands
region, we do have some reclamation going on. In
particular, I would point to the work, and I think
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1446
I referred to this earlier last week, I think, the
work that's been going on at Suncor. I mean,
wildlife species are coming back, yes, at the point
in time that we're at now in the reclamation
progression, the biodiversity is less than it would
be, you know, in another 50 years, I would suggest.
But it is in the, heading in the right direction.
And outside of the oil sands -- with respect to the
Shell Project specifically, there is some very
early reclamation, but it's a young mine, so there
aren't a lot of opportunities there yet. If you go
outside of the oil sands region and look at mining
in particular, open-pit mining, there are lots of
examples of wildlife using habitats, in particular
now I'm referring to coal mining in western
Alberta, up at Grand Cache, that, you know, they've
had a moose coming back, they've had all sorts of
species coming back.
Getting back to the oil sands itself, I'm
less familiar with this, but at Crane Lake, we have
reclamation going on, which is a wetland. So this
is something that is occurring. It's a bit early
on in the day in the oil sands, so we can't point
to a 100-year-old reclaimed site yet. But I would
say that we're learning a lot as we go and it will
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1447
work.
Q. Just one last question on this area.
In the original Jackpine Mine Review, there
were recommendations made dealing with, in 2004,
three in particular, did Shell participate (as
read):
"Shell should participate in
a technical review of wildlife
corridors that include the analysis
of corridor effectiveness."
And I take it, you've mentioned that; you've
referenced that, so that's been done. (As read):
"An action plan in place to
maintain islands or strips of
undisturbed native vegetation on
the Shell lease."
Have you done that or put in place an action
plan on that?
A. MR. KOVACH: Before we answer, could I ask
you again to give us the reference?
Q. It was taken from Exhibit 017-012, which was a list
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1448
of recommendations taken from the OSEC motion, and
they listed the Panel's recommendations to Shell in
2004. And one of those was an action plan in place
to maintain islands or strips of undisturbed native
vegetation on the Shell lease.
A. MR. MARTINDALE: And what's the third one?
And then we'll answer them all together.
Q. It was tied to that one, so we'll just leave it at
those two.
A. Well, the technical review of corridors is ongoing,
as indicated earlier. And then the strips of
undisturbed land would primarily be those same
corridors. There's, like I said, 100 metres on
either side of the water passage, and that's pretty
much like the Muskeg River and the Jackpine Creek.
Because the entire sites are mined, so there's not
a lot of opportunity in the middle of the mine for
undisturbed sites.
Q. All right. Okay. So I'm going to move on to
aquatics, if I might, for a few minutes.
I want to take you to Exhibit 001-070, and
Shell's reply to the Federal Government. And it's
in response, dealing with Environment Canada's
recommendation that Shell:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1449
"Evaluate the efficacy of the
existing Chronic Effects Benchmark
values (CEB) by testing mixtures of
these same chemicals at the CEB
concentrations, using a range of
representative organisms, including
the fathead minnow, early
life-stage test, since it is a
locally resident species."
And your response back was that you:
"... understands the intent
of the recommendation is to use the
best available information to
inform potential aquatic health
effects of discharges from the
project."
And you agreed with this intent and you
agreed to:
"Provide information to AESRD
on closure water quality with
comparisons to the latest relevant
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1450
aquatic health indicators,
including Chronic Effects
Benchmarks."
So can you confirm that you're using the
latest CEB indicators to assess impacts on early
fish lifestages?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, just as a clarification,
you're talking about today, right, not in the
closure environment?
Q. Yes.
A. Okay, just one moment, please.
A. MR. VANDENBERG: I'll answer this question.
I'm just looking up a reference for you.
I can confirm that we are using the latest
Chronic Effects Benchmarks. Those were presented
in the May 2012 Submission, Appendix 3.6, Section
2. A new set of Chronic Effects Benchmarks were
derived for this Project.
Q. Just in terms of the diversion of the Muskeg River,
does Shell propose to incorporate prospective fish
habitat in the diversion channel?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, as part of this Project,
Shell has again assumed a HADD due to relocation or
diversion of the Muskeg River and we're managing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1451
that primarily through our compensation habitat
we're proposing. At the same time we're not
suggesting it precludes fish habitat, particularly
in the closure environment.
Q. So in terms of choosing which species, are you
prioritizing the fish habitat in the channel at
all? Like, is there going to be some
prioritization of what goes into that channel?
A. No. Again, we haven't really looked at what fish
will colonize that part of the channel. We assume
it will be fish that, you know, are using the
Muskeg River to date. What we did look at is in
terms of our compensation habitat, working with our
First Nation neighbours and Fisheries and Oceans
Canada in terms of what type of fish they would
like in the compensation habitat.
Q. So how will the footprint of the proposed -- maybe
you can't answer this at this stage -- how the
footprint of the proposed diversion channel
installation will impact other non-aquatic species?
A. I guess I'm a little bit confused by that. You
mean beyond what we've assessed in the EIA?
Q. I think the question was going from, there was
going to be a pipe initially and now it's going to
be a diversion channel.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1452
A. Right.
Q. What effect is the diversion channel going to have
on non-aquatic species?
A. I'll let Mr. Speller speak to it.
A. MR. SPELLER: So when we did the Muskeg
River Diversion Assessment in May 2011 and then
when we carried that forward into our May 2012, the
primary difference you'll see between when there is
a pipeline diversion system to then the channel
diversion system is we placed the channel around
the north end of the footprint which results in a
small increase in additional footprint to the
Project in that north end, was about a 78-hectare
difference in footprint. So that was accounted
for. So there is some additional terrestrial
disturbance around that north end, but it's been
accounted for in the assessment that we did for
soils and vegetation and wildlife and biodiversity.
Q. And in terms of conducting that assessment,
anything significant turn up?
A. No. If you look at the Muskeg River diversion
alternative mine footprint compared to the
footprint that was shown on May 2008, you'll see a
bit of a -- the north end of the site looks
similar, but it's gone a little bit farther north
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1453
and it's pulled in a little bit into the west. And
overall, the results were the same before and after
in terms of that north end terrestrial effects.
Q. So the question is, what are the effects on current
fish populations during the transition period until
habitat is fully available to fish in the diversion
channel?
A. MR. CLIPPERTON: A couple of aspects. So
with the diversion channel itself, we had some
discussion about fish rescue plans and the fact
that the fish in the existing Muskeg River would be
removed from the channel prior to dewatering. And
then shortly after water is put through the
diversion channel, it would be accessible to fish
in the Muskeg River to use.
In addition to that, and in terms of some of
the temporal lag in habitat becoming available,
that's also accounted for in the 2:1 compensation
ratio for the No Net Loss Plan.
Q. So I understand that the Department of Fisheries
and Oceans Canada recommends that there be a
recommendation that (as read):
"Shell finalize and implement
a detailed plan that would provide
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1454
at a minimum a 2:1 ratio of fish
habitat gains versus impacts on
habitat units."
I understand that Shell disagrees with that
ratio. Can you just explain why and what you've
proposed.
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes. Shell will ultimately
defer to DFO's discretion on this. But the point
that Shell is trying to make in this response is
that the 2:1 ratio in part is to account for
factors like time delay between when the HADD
occurs and when the compensation is exactly acting
as compensation. Our understanding is that there
might be an opportunity to put in compensation
faster. And what our hope is is that that can be
recognized in terms of what our compensation factor
will be for the Project. But ultimately that's at
the discretion of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
Q. I just want to spend a couple of minutes talking
about your Responses to the Joint Review Panel's
January 2012 Supplemental Information Requests.
And this would be in response to SIR-9A, page 3-21
to 3-22. And on that, in that Response, and sorry,
it's Exhibit 001-051E. You state there that:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1455
"The numbers used in the
numerical ranking system were
chosen based on Golder &
Associates' professional judgment
regarding the relative importance
of each criterion for the
evaluation of environmental
effects, and ultimately the
determination of significance."
Just, we've touched on this before, but can
you point to -- I understand you relied on
professional judgments. Were there specific
guidelines or methodologies that you used or that
your professionals used to make the assessments?
A. MR. SPELLER: And just to clarify, are you
looking for methods and how we came up with the
scoring for each of those criteria, or how we
develop the scorings that we use in each of the
components?
Q. It was the first, I think.
A. So, no, it's primarily professional judgment. So
when we look at magnitude, geographic extent,
duration, reversibility, and frequency, and then
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1456
the different sub categories of each of those, such
as for geographic extent, local regional or beyond
regional, we looked at, in our professional
judgment, if we're looking at the overall
environmental consequence on some sort of receptor,
of those criteria, which ones are the most
important or which ones, or what combination most
fully represent that impact or that environmental
consequence.
So as you can see in our system, the
magnitude of the effect or the severity of that
effect on that receptor is the one we've given the
most weight, it has the highest numerical scores to
it. And if an item is, for geographic extent, the
farther it is, the extent it spreads from the
Project site, the longer term the duration of that
effect, whether it's reversible, and if the
frequency is high, those get the higher numeric
scores which then result in a higher environmental
consequence. And for us, it makes sense.
There are other numbers that we could put in
here for this but we think they would all scale the
same, we would end up with a similar-looking number
set than what we've already got.
Q. So in terms of alternative means, as you know, in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1457
your Volume 1, Project Description, you listed a
number of alternatives, site conditions, facilities
and infrastructure, locations, process, methods,
et cetera. We just wanted to confirm that you, in
your view, you had covered all possible alternate
means for conducting various aspects of the Project
that are technically and economically feasible.
And in asking the question, I'm assuming you're
going to say yes. So how did you figure out which
means were technically and economically feasible?
A. MR. BROADHURST: Shall I go now?
Q. Yes.
A. So the answer is yes. And so when we're looking at
the alternatives, we start with the highest level
assessment and that is what are the mechanisms by
which we can achieve resource recovery. And for
the nature of the resource that we have, you really
are constrained to something that allows you to
access the resource from surface. So we did look
at whether or not, and we always look at whether or
not you could apply a current in situ technology.
And of course that isn't viable.
Then what it really comes down to in terms of
assessment of alternatives is given that you have a
mining operation, and given that we are working
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1458
with a water-based technology generally within the
industry, what are your options around dimensions
of the Project. And so that would relate to the
things that we identified in the Application where
you're looking at types of facilities and placement
of facilities within the overall design.
Q. I just want to move on to a couple of health
questions. And I'm taking you to Exhibit 006-013.
It's the ACF's Submission, Appendix D, Part 4,
Section 5.2.2, and it's page 5-17.
And at that page, the ACFN have stated in
their hearing submission that:
"Fish consumption advisories
have been in [effect] for the
Athabasca River ... since ... 2003.
... and that the Regional Aquatics
Monitoring Program informed ACFN
about high mercury levels in larger
sized pickerel and low levels in
whitefish in 2002 and again in
2009."
You've noted that (as read):
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1459
"There are several mitigation
measures that could be used to
reduce levels of mercury in the
water and thereby reduce risk for
human consumption."
And there are a list of mitigations that
you've set out.
I note that, as well, in the same exhibit,
there's a reference to the Hatfield study which
points to high level mercury levels as well.
I just wanted to confirm that Shell is
committed to implementing the mitigation measures
listed in your No Net Loss Plan, which is at
Section 6.3.4.5?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes, the mitigations that
we've laid out as part of our No Net Loss Plan, our
intention is to meet those commitments as required
to manage methylmercury uptake in fish in the
Compensation Lake.
Q. Are there other mitigation measures that are
designed to reduce methylmercury generation that
would add to this list?
A. Yes, there's other things that you could add to it.
You could cap, like put other materials on top of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1460
the peat. You could strip peat. Those would be a
couple that come to mind right off the top.
Q. But, as I note, you're not planning to do that?
A. No, we believe we've come up with a method that
will help us ensure that methylmercury levels in
the Compensation Lake are managed. One of the
problems with capping and stripping is they are
good but again you don't have a lot of control with
them; so you still could have a methylmercury issue
even if you do it.
Q. I just want to take you to Exhibit 001-001B. And
in Section 5.3.2.1, and it's page 5-36, and you
note there that the 2004 Guidance from Health
Canada in your determination of health effects on
the Project are going to use that guideline or that
guidance document. And that guidance document
suggests that sensitive individuals include those
that Shell, that you have used, infants, toddlers,
elders and those with compromised health. But the
guidance document also recommends that you include
pregnant women as well.
Was there a reason why, in your analysis,
that that category of person wasn't included?
A. MR. KOPPE: There's really no reason why
that was left out of the bullets on page 5-36. In
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1461
fact, sensitive individuals like pregnant women
would have been assessed as part of the Human
Health Risk Assessment. And the way that we
address or characterize potential risks to all
sensitive groups is by adopting exposure limits or
health-based guidelines that ensure that there's
adequate protection for all sensitive groups,
including pregnant women. So they would have been
included as part of the Human Health Risk
Assessments.
Q. Okay, so they were included as part of the human
health, so it's just an omission?
A. They would have been included. It's a subset or
examples of potentially sensitive individuals who
would have been assessed in the Human Health Risk
Assessment. But the Human Health Risk Assessment
is intended to be protective of all individuals in
a population, so that includes, it can be as
sensitive as a developing embryo, it could include
pregnant women, they are all addressed as part of
the Human Health Risk Assessments.
Q. And in the Health Canada Guidance document,
residents are assumed to spend 1.5 hours per day
outside while workers are assumed to spend eight
hours per day -- sorry, yeah, workers are assumed
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1462
to spend eight hours a day outside.
I'm just wondering, in doing the calculation,
when it comes to the Health Canada Guidance
document, how did you characterize Aboriginal
persons, were they, particularly people with a
traditional lifestyle, were they accounted for?
A. So they were accounted for. They were accounted
for in the original Human Health Risk Assessment
that was filed as part of the 2007 EIA. And again,
they were addressed in the 2012 filing, which is
presented in Appendix 3.3. And the way that we
assess the Aboriginal residents is that we assume
that they spent all their time engaged in
traditional activities, they spent all their time
outside, and they were engaged in the types of
activities that would ensure that we're presenting
a realistic worst-case scenario, so people that
were eating fish from local waterbodies, people
that were exclusively eating traditional foods,
people that were exposed to soils from the area.
So the Aboriginal residents were assessed both in
the 2007 Human Health Risk Assessment and then in
the Update as well.
Q. So I'm taking you to Exhibit 005-018, Health Canada
Response to Shell's Response to Information
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1463
Requests, page 20. And in your volume, it's your
Exhibit 001-001B, you state that the COPC air
concentrations that exceeded your health-based
guidelines include acrolein pm2.5, eye irritant
mixture, and respiratory tract irritant mixture.
And Health Canada in its response identified
acrolein as an important issue for human health.
And Health Canada noted that Shell had not
identified any mitigation measures for exceedances
of acrolein.
Have you identified any such measures?
A. So there are several parts to this response. I
think, again, I would refer you back to the tables
in Appendix 3.3 in the 2012 filing, which is a
Human Health Risk Assessment Update. And the
results for both the acute inhalation and the
chronic inhalation scenarios show that there's
essentially no difference between the Base Case and
the Application Case, risk estimates for acrolein,
which then suggests that the Project is having a
negligible impact on those acrolein-related health
risks.
So there's very little that the Project could
do because the elevated health risk associated with
acrolein are associated with baseline conditions.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1464
Now, having said that, I think it's important
to note that even though we've got some exceedances
of the health-based exposure limit, that exposure
limit is a very conservative one in that we have a
margin of safety built into it and that we're a
considerable ways away from reaching a point where
you would actually realize a health effect
associated with acrolein.
And probably the third part of this response
is that the acrolein emissions are associated with
the mine fleet, with diesel emissions, so any
mitigation measures associated with acrolein would
be associated with reductions in the diesel fleet,
or sorry, the mine fleet emissions.
Q. So last week, and this is in Volume 3 of the
transcripts, page 76 (sic), line 15, Shell stated
that it is continuing environmental research
initiatives at its mines and with others through
collaborative efforts. And one of the initiatives
that was pointed to was the Joint Canada-Alberta
Implementation Plan for Oil Sands Monitoring. And
we would like to know what Shell's planned
participation would be in that monitoring program?
A. MR. KOVACH: Yes. Shell's participation
right now is strictly funding. Our understanding
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1465
is that Alberta and Canada want to keep this arm's
length, but we're going to help fund that. We
agree with that.
Q. I just want to spend a minute on accidents and
malfunctions. I guess I'm referring to your
Exhibit 001-015. It's your May 2011 Update Report,
Section 3.2 at page 41. And you noted that you'd
done a series of scenarios such as things as
hydrocarbon releases, mining activities, surface
water incidents, air quality control incidents.
Can you describe the process by which you picked
the scenarios, are they standard in the industry
and that's how they were selected, or was there
some other way in which you picked those scenarios?
A. MR. BROADHURST: Yes, certainly. So when we
were looking at the accidents and malfunctions,
what we were focusing in on was a type of event
that could have an impact off our site to either
the environment or to human health. So that was
one of the framings that we put in place.
Then what we did was we looked at what had
been submitted in previous hearings, so we looked
at the most recent hearing with Total, and looked
at the nature of the events that they'd included
within their accidents and malfunctions.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1466
We then went further and stepped back and
looked at, from a hazard and effect management
point of view, if we went through all of our
operations, and we thought about all of the things
that could meet that criteria, potential off-site,
environmental or human health effect, what might be
on that list. So that's the process that we used
in arriving at the list.
Q. And just are there any proposed extra preventative
measures where pipelines are near or crossing
rivers, is there anything that's extra that Shell
proposes in those circumstances?
A. Yes, so I'm going to let Mr. Roberts speak to that
because it's his organization that historically
looked at how we set out the pipelines on the site
and think about how we're going to manage those
risks.
A. MR. ROBERTS: So it depends on the type of
pipeline. In a slurry line, where you would expect
high wear, that type of pipeline crossing a
sensitive area, a river, a creek, a stream, that
type of thing, would typically be above grade, in a
sleeve, on a bridge deck or a portion of a bridge
deck that's contained, so that if you did have a
leak of some sort, it would be contained within the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1467
outer sleeve and drained to catchment areas on both
sides.
In the case of a water line, we have water
lines passing between Jackpine and Muskeg River, in
those areas we have typically drilled and pulled
those lines through and underneath the river bed.
And they are typically in a, given that it's not a
corrosive, not a corrosive-rust environment, they'd
be just in the single line.
Q. Presumably in terms of preventing accidents and
malfunctions, there's an elaborate health and
safety procedure and other procedures. Can you
just speak for a minute or two about how you're
going to ensure that contractors are going to meet
those standards on your site as well.
A. MR. MAYES: So, so far as practical on
the Albian side, we treat contractor personnel no
different than we treat Shell personnel. So both
sets of personnel receive extensive induction
training as soon as they come to site, so we cover
matters to do with the health and safety and the
environment, along with other procedures that are
applicable to the business.
If an individual contractor employee is
involved in an activity where they can come into
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1468
contact with a hazardous substance or a
particularly risky activity or an activity of
elevated risk, then they would receive specialist
training in those activities and materials just as
an employee would.
MR. BIRCHALL: Mr. Chair, I have one other
line of questioning which will take about an hour,
so I've come to a break for questioning at this
point.
THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Duncanson, we would like
to go for about another hour if your witnesses are
up to it. We just need to give the reporter and
the witnesses a break.
MR. DUNCANSON: Certainly.
THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, we'll take 15 minutes.
(The evening adjournment)
THE CHAIRMAN: Ladies and Gentlemen,
Mr. Birchall has advised me that if he could
examine what he has left overnight, that there's
probably some good economies to be achieved, so
what I propose we do is, notwithstanding that we
just broke, is to quit for the evening and
Mr. Birchall will look at his additional questions
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1469
and we will start in the morning at 8:30.
So I'm sorry for keeping you for the break,
but I think this is probably a better solution
overall.
Thanks for nodding, Mr. Denstedt.
Well, for what's left of it, have a good
evening and we'll see you in the morning. Thank
you all for your patience.
(The hearing adjourned at 8:00 p.m.)
(The hearing to reconvene at 8:30 a.m.
on Tuesday, November 6th, 2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Realtime Connectioncourtreporters@shawbiz.ca
1470
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
I, Nancy Nielsen, RCR, RPR, CSR(A), Official
Realtime Reporter in the Provinces of British Columbia
and Alberta, Canada, do hereby certify:
That the proceedings were taken down by me in
shorthand at the time and place herein set forth and
thereafter transcribed, and the same is a true and
correct and complete transcript of said proceedings to
the best of my skill and ability.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed
my name this 5th day of November, 2012.
_____________________________________
Nancy Nielsen, RCR, RPR, CSR(A)
Official Realtime Reporter
#
#001-088 [2] - 1213:7;
1222:19
#175 [1] - 1208:17
#468 [1] - 1208:13
$
$50 [1] - 1283:13
'
'80s [1] - 1435:9
'90s [2] - 1259:21; 1435:10
'the [1] - 1333:10
0
0.2 [3] - 1307:2; 1309:4, 13
0.22 [1] - 1405:9
0.5 [2] - 1405:11; 1407:19
001 [2] - 1224:14; 1321:7
001-0 [3] - 1273:11; 1395:3;
1410:21
001-001A [2] - 1250:15;
1262:2
001-001B [2] - 1460:11;
1463:2
001-001F [1] - 1342:15
001-006 [1] - 1330:12
001-006A [2] - 1291:4;
1294:6
001-006B [1] - 1246:24
001-007A [1] - 1308:13
001-009 [2] - 1240:3; 1277:15
001-015 [1] - 1465:6
001-015C [2] - 1389:25;
1396:3
001-038 [1] - 1238:7
001-051 [5] - 1374:7;
1401:19; 1403:10; 1416:7;
1434:21
001-051E [2] - 1247:10;
1454:25
001-051G [1] - 1404:12
001-051S [1] - 1297:6
001-057G [1] - 1392:13
001-063 [3] - 1370:18;
1379:6; 1398:1
001-070 [6] - 1384:8;
1408:11; 1418:21;
1431:11; 1440:2; 1448:21
001-070A [1] - 1333:2
001-070K [1] - 1333:20
001-080 [1] - 1321:8
001-083 [3] - 1212:3;
1216:25; 1217:2
001-084 [2] - 1212:7; 1217:23
001-085 [2] - 1212:12;
1218:18
001-086 [3] - 1212:15;
1219:8, 11
001-087 [3] - 1212:18;
1221:13, 16
001-088 [1] - 1222:12
002-038 [3] - 1213:8;
1307:20; 1308:1
002-039 [3] - 1213:11;
1320:16; 1321:1
005-018 [1] - 1462:24
005-020 [2] - 1399:19;
1412:16
006-013 [1] - 1458:8
009-002 [4] - 1213:4;
1222:15, 24; 1224:10
017-012 [1] - 1447:25
017-016 [1] - 1444:5
038 [7] - 1357:21; 1358:4, 13;
1359:5, 23; 1360:24;
1364:24
051G] [1] - 1392:13
063 [2] - 1370:18; 1372:7
074 [7] - 1251:19, 22, 24;
1252:1; 1256:1; 1260:20;
1353:23
084 [1] - 1217:21
085 [1] - 1218:15
1
1 [29] - 1208:19; 1213:11;
1224:1; 1232:18; 1248:12,
16; 1250:14; 1251:17;
1262:2; 1281:6; 1287:23;
1318:16; 1320:20; 1321:1,
9, 19; 1322:1; 1335:15;
1349:16; 1350:24; 1371:7;
1378:22; 1398:15; 1406:8;
1415:7; 1419:23; 1457:1
1,000 [1] - 1421:20
1,230 [1] - 1284:1
1,551 [1] - 1250:19
1,680 [1] - 1251:3
1.3-1 [3] - 1372:8; 1379:6;
1398:1
1.425 [1] - 1220:2
1.5 [3] - 1321:24; 1356:24;
1461:23
1.9 [1] - 1229:9
10 [21] - 1213:8; 1214:12;
1246:20; 1265:16;
1275:16; 1281:1; 1288:18,
24; 1289:17; 1304:8;
1307:22; 1308:2; 1312:24;
1313:3; 1363:12; 1378:24;
1433:15; 1437:25; 1439:3,
8; 1445:4
10-05-59540 [1] - 1223:25
10-mass [1] - 1243:9
10-weight [1] - 1240:12
100 [15] - 1318:1; 1326:2, 5,
11; 1337:10; 1399:3;
1413:14; 1416:12, 16,
19-20; 1418:19; 1421:10;
1425:2; 1448:13
100-metre [4] - 1416:15, 23;
1417:10, 25
100-metres [1] - 1418:14
100-year-old [1] - 1446:24
104,050 [2] - 1297:1; 1299:4
10:00 [1] - 1215:2
10:10 [2] - 1210:22; 1227:24
10:15 [2] - 1210:22; 1227:24
11 [5] - 1212:4; 1214:4;
1216:17; 1217:2, 10
110 [1] - 1334:2
110,640 [2] - 1297:2; 1299:4
11:55 [2] - 1210:23; 1288:1
12 [3] - 1227:16; 1273:14;
1322:23
1206 [1] - 1206:18
1215 [1] - 1210:3
1216 [1] - 1210:18
1217 [3] - 1212:3, 7; 1214:4
1218 [3] - 1212:12; 1214:5
1219 [2] - 1212:15; 1214:7
1220 [1] - 1214:8
1221 [2] - 1212:18; 1214:9
1222 [1] - 1213:4
1225 [1] - 1210:20
1227 [2] - 1210:21
1246 [1] - 1214:10
1267 [1] - 1214:13
1287 [1] - 1210:23
1288 [1] - 1211:4
1289 [1] - 1214:15
1293 [1] - 1214:16
12:00 [1] - 1224:20
12th [2] - 1401:20; 1403:11
13 [27] - 1212:8; 1214:5;
1217:13, 23; 1218:5;
1342:17, 20, 24; 1343:4, 8;
1344:3, 12, 14; 1345:6;
1346:6, 24; 1350:14, 22;
1351:17, 21; 1353:8;
1356:2, 7, 10; 1357:11;
1360:3; 1363:5
13,291 [1] - 1220:2
1308 [1] - 1213:8
1321 [1] - 1213:11
1342 [1] - 1211:6
1348 [1] - 1214:19
1365 [2] - 1211:7
1367 [2] - 1211:10; 1214:21
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
1
137 [1] - 1247:12
139 [2] - 1404:13, 15
14 [3] - 1387:4, 10; 1389:14
14-007 [1] - 1297:21
1424 [2] - 1211:11
143 [1] - 1294:22
1468 [1] - 1211:14
1469 [1] - 1211:15
1470 [1] - 1206:18
15 [9] - 1275:16; 1284:20;
1285:20; 1308:12;
1310:15; 1321:23; 1322:8;
1464:16; 1468:15
15-year [3] - 1275:3, 10;
1322:4
15.6 [1] - 1321:13
151 [1] - 1206:24
151E [1] - 1254:4
1554388 [1] - 1206:4
15th [14] - 1303:22; 1311:25;
1316:8; 1333:3; 1384:6;
1386:19; 1395:4; 1408:12;
1413:5; 1414:1; 1418:22;
1420:23; 1431:10; 1440:2
16 [7] - 1212:12; 1214:6;
1218:8, 18, 24; 1296:3;
1359:7
160f [2] - 1247:2, 19
17 [6] - 1212:16; 1214:7;
1219:11, 16; 1335:15;
1349:15
18 [6] - 1214:8; 1219:19;
1220:10; 1238:5; 1284:20;
1285:20
185,872 [1] - 1370:24
18B [1] - 1359:6
19 [1] - 1206:10
19,400 [1] - 1290:13
1992 [2] - 1259:18; 1344:17
1998 [2] - 1275:22; 1344:18
1:00 [3] - 1210:23; 1224:21;
1288:1
1st [10] - 1272:24; 1315:18;
1327:23; 1351:1; 1399:21;
1412:18; 1424:18;
1436:22; 1444:4, 6
2
2 [14] - 1220:6; 1232:18;
1298:9, 20; 1300:19;
1306:17; 1311:21, 23;
1321:25; 1349:16; 1372:8;
1392:12; 1404:13; 1450:18
2,500 [1] - 1291:10
2-1 [1] - 1220:7
2-7 [1] - 1253:18
2.3.3.2.3 [1] - 1398:16
2.7 [1] - 1253:17
20 [20] - 1275:12; 1283:2, 6;
1297:5; 1375:1, 16, 19, 21;
1376:1, 5, 9; 1394:1, 3-4,
10; 1423:7; 1429:6, 8;
1433:15; 1463:1
20-50 [1] - 1248:19
2000 [2] - 1206:7, 9
2000s [1] - 1259:21
2001-7 [3] - 1227:15;
1235:13; 1237:14
2002 [1] - 1458:21
2003 [3] - 1344:17; 1458:16
2004 [3] - 1447:4; 1448:3;
1460:13
2006 [3] - 1257:24; 1258:3;
1283:20
2007 [9] - 1258:4; 1278:3;
1283:14; 1336:10, 15;
1342:18; 1343:18; 1462:9,
22
2008 [11] - 1294:22; 1296:21;
1298:14, 22; 1299:3, 10;
1300:23, 25; 1301:4;
1384:16; 1452:23
2009 [10] - 1246:25; 1251:25;
1281:4; 1290:4; 1291:3;
1294:7, 11; 1301:13;
1330:13; 1458:22
2010 [15] - 1225:17; 1226:9,
13, 18, 24; 1231:6; 1240:4;
1252:1; 1297:1; 1299:4;
1301:14; 1354:24; 1355:2;
1366:24; 1381:23
2011 [21] - 1213:8; 1252:18;
1253:17; 1268:5; 1283:4,
20; 1301:17; 1304:8;
1307:22; 1308:2; 1310:17;
1333:8; 1335:13, 22;
1342:1; 1367:7; 1389:24;
1393:21; 1420:9; 1452:6;
1465:6
2011-2012 [3] - 1213:9;
1307:23; 1308:3
2012 [73] - 1206:10, 16;
1211:16; 1212:6, 11, 14,
17; 1213:11; 1215:1;
1217:6; 1218:3, 22;
1219:14; 1220:6; 1228:25;
1229:3; 1231:15; 1233:1;
1238:5; 1247:11; 1252:18;
1253:19; 1254:2; 1273:12;
1277:16; 1281:13; 1282:1;
1290:21; 1291:19; 1295:7;
1297:4; 1298:9, 15, 19-20;
1300:4, 18; 1308:13;
1315:18, 23; 1316:13;
1317:12; 1320:20, 22;
1321:2; 1333:21; 1351:1;
1370:19; 1374:5, 24;
1380:16; 1382:24; 1384:6;
1397:22; 1398:3, 16;
1401:20; 1404:12;
1410:22; 1416:8; 1424:18;
1431:10; 1434:21;
1450:17; 1452:7; 1454:22;
1462:10; 1463:14;
1469:12; 1470:14
2013 [2] - 1291:10; 1383:6
2014 [2] - 1290:8, 19
2015 [8] - 1275:2; 1281:13;
1282:1, 3; 1290:21;
1291:19; 1297:1; 1299:4
2018 [6] - 1282:3, 7, 9;
1285:19; 1290:22; 1291:19
2019/2020 [1] - 1285:23
2020 [4] - 1286:10; 1290:24;
1297:2; 1299:5
2021 [4] - 1275:9; 1285:19;
1290:23; 1291:20
2025 [7] - 1273:5, 17, 25;
1274:2, 4; 1351:4, 7
2026 [1] - 1248:6
2030 [5] - 1297:13, 17;
1298:19; 1299:7; 1300:22
2047 [1] - 1248:18
2050 [1] - 1321:20
2051 [2] - 1254:5; 1321:16
2054 [2] - 1254:5; 1321:17
2065 [1] - 1321:21
21 [6] - 1212:19; 1214:9;
1221:16, 22; 1350:24;
1387:16
21st [1] - 1317:12
22 [6] - 1214:10, 15; 1246:18;
1289:22; 1310:15; 1385:11
22-2 [2] - 1401:21; 1410:22
23 [3] - 1214:13; 1267:21;
1412:18
230,000 [7] - 1297:12, 17, 22,
25; 1299:7, 13; 1300:22
239 [1] - 1250:4
24 [5] - 1214:16; 1293:5;
1295:24; 1346:18; 1349:3
247 [1] - 1310:15
25 [4] - 1214:19; 1348:20;
1349:15; 1350:24
250 [1] - 1283:20
26 [3] - 1316:9; 1333:3;
1437:25
27a [1] - 1290:5
28 [1] - 1372:19
28th [1] - 1421:2
29 [2] - 1342:16; 1444:5
29th [1] - 1250:3
2:1 [3] - 1453:18; 1454:1, 11
3
3 [11] - 1229:8; 1250:3;
1310:14; 1333:21; 1335:1,
25; 1350:25; 1363:12, 15;
1372:8; 1464:15
3,000 [1] - 1290:13
3-104 [1] - 1434:22
3-11 [3] - 1342:24; 1363:11
3-121 [1] - 1254:3
3-122 [1] - 1255:18
3-137 [1] - 1247:12
3-21 [1] - 1454:23
3-22 [1] - 1454:24
3-6 [1] - 1359:5
3-67 [1] - 1416:8
3-70 [2] - 1410:22
3.2 [2] - 1273:13; 1465:7
3.3 [2] - 1462:11; 1463:14
3.3-5 [1] - 1370:20
3.4 [1] - 1333:10
3.4.3.2 [1] - 1404:17
3.5-1 [1] - 1298:21
3.53 [1] - 1298:9
3.6 [1] - 1450:17
30 [7] - 1270:5; 1275:13;
1293:25; 1309:18;
1375:12; 1378:25; 1423:7
30,000 [1] - 1419:14
30,000-foot [1] - 1421:16
307-L [1] - 1330:14
30c [1] - 1277:17
31 [2] - 1224:2; 1436:25
31st [1] - 1349:18
34 [1] - 1312:1
35 [2] - 1293:13; 1308:13
36 [2] - 1261:21; 1282:13
38 [5] - 1327:23; 1328:3;
1342:2; 1357:20; 1393:21
39 [2] - 1255:18; 1415:12
3:20 [1] - 1365:6
4
4 [5] - 1273:19; 1297:11;
1349:14; 1372:8; 1458:9
4,400 [1] - 1291:14
4-7 [2] - 1240:5; 1336:10
4-9 [1] - 1336:14
4.4-1 [1] - 1403:11
40 [9] - 1230:9; 1240:5;
1270:5; 1282:13; 1293:22;
1381:25; 1382:5; 1418:22;
1431:11
40-Township [1] - 1369:8
41 [1] - 1465:7
42 [1] - 1308:14
430 [4] - 1281:12, 16-17;
1283:20
44 [1] - 1415:9
44-1 [1] - 1247:11
44-2 [2] - 1247:11; 1248:8
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
2
45 [1] - 1398:6
48 [1] - 1436:25
5
5 [15] - 1206:16; 1212:6, 11,
14, 17; 1215:1; 1217:6;
1218:3, 22; 1219:14;
1273:1; 1295:24; 1329:22;
1350:23; 1387:10
5-17 [1] - 1458:10
5-36 [2] - 1460:12, 25
5.2.2 [1] - 1458:10
5.3.2.1 [1] - 1460:12
5.5-3 [1] - 1294:23
50 [2] - 1230:12; 1446:6
51 [3] - 1222:4; 1379:13;
1410:21
51I [1] - 1273:12
52 [1] - 1206:10
527 [1] - 1334:3
55 [1] - 1379:21
591 [1] - 1349:15
592 [1] - 1349:15
59540 [1] - 1206:6
5:00 [4] - 1211:11; 1224:24;
1423:22; 1424:8
5C5 [1] - 1206:25
5th [1] - 1470:14
6
6 [2] - 1238:7; 1384:16
6-1 [8] - 1214:17; 1292:1, 11,
17, 25; 1293:5; 1294:7, 10
6-10 [1] - 1262:3
6-8 [1] - 1291:4
6-9 [2] - 1294:6, 10
6.2 [2] - 1262:3; 1281:6
6.3.4.5 [1] - 1459:15
60 [5] - 1269:4; 1322:24;
1356:17; 1437:2
61 [2] - 1379:20; 1398:5
621 [1] - 1250:20
63 [1] - 1290:10
640 [1] - 1290:9
65 [2] - 1433:7, 10
67 [2] - 1277:17; 1322:17
67.5 [1] - 1322:5
696 [1] - 1251:1
6:30 [4] - 1211:11; 1423:25;
1424:5, 8
6A [1] - 1240:6
6TH [1] - 1211:16
6th [1] - 1469:12
7
7 [7] - 1206:17; 1227:17;
1248:16; 1270:5; 1273:13;
1297:20; 1440:2
7-1 [1] - 1250:15
7-2 [1] - 1251:8
7-3 [1] - 1251:8
7.2 [1] - 1253:13
7.5 [1] - 1285:13
70 [8] - 1356:17; 1376:18;
1377:2, 5, 14, 17; 1395:3
75 [6] - 1294:3; 1371:9, 13,
21, 24; 1372:25
750 [4] - 1295:6, 9, 11, 13
76 [2] - 1333:21; 1464:16
78-hectare [1] - 1452:13
780 [1] - 1290:9
797s [2] - 1346:7; 1355:9
7th [1] - 1370:19
8
8 [8] - 1248:19; 1321:6;
1387:13, 15; 1396:4;
1408:12; 1440:19
8-2 [1] - 1277:16
8.4 [1] - 1227:10
80 [8] - 1371:9, 13, 21, 25;
1372:25; 1392:5; 1393:20;
1394:11
80-year [2] - 1392:4, 7
800 [1] - 1242:5
829 [2] - 1273:2; 1350:24
830 [1] - 1350:24
84 [1] - 1370:19
87 [1] - 1306:25
877 [1] - 1295:24
88 [1] - 1250:11
8:00 [2] - 1211:15; 1469:10
8:30 [3] - 1211:15; 1469:1, 11
9
9 [1] - 1413:4
9,310 [1] - 1291:7
9-5 [1] - 1290:5
9.6 [1] - 1336:7
90 [7] - 1280:23; 1376:19;
1377:2, 6, 15, 17
91,200 [2] - 1297:1; 1299:4
93 [1] - 1379:11
96-101 [1] - 1379:9
A
a.m [5] - 1215:2; 1227:24;
1288:1; 1469:11
A.M [4] - 1210:22; 1211:15
AADT [2] - 1290:9, 13
ability [13] - 1256:4; 1262:23;
1263:6; 1264:11; 1266:9;
1271:6; 1278:13; 1313:5;
1319:4; 1324:23; 1340:11;
1385:1; 1470:11
able [33] - 1230:7; 1241:19;
1242:4; 1244:16; 1258:22;
1259:9; 1261:2; 1274:7;
1278:17, 19; 1279:18, 20,
25; 1280:6; 1282:16;
1286:1; 1288:19; 1289:2;
1325:5; 1328:23; 1336:16;
1350:1; 1366:21; 1381:20;
1409:23; 1410:7; 1419:17;
1424:1, 3-4; 1429:17;
1439:3; 1442:22
ABMI [2] - 1398:25; 1399:6
Aboriginal [4] - 1368:5;
1462:4, 12, 21
ABORIGINAL [2] - 1212:17;
1219:13
absence [2] - 1332:15, 22
absent [4] - 1402:5; 1424:16;
1425:10; 1433:24
absolutely [5] - 1257:5;
1314:25; 1324:7, 11;
1332:3
abundance [9] - 1376:17;
1380:19; 1381:5, 12;
1404:24; 1408:6, 18;
1443:8
abundant [1] - 1415:12
academic [1] - 1232:3
accelerated [1] - 1385:1
accept [1] - 1444:23
acceptable [6] - 1223:8;
1236:4, 18; 1249:14, 16;
1359:6
accepted [2] - 1306:20;
1307:8
access [3] - 1223:7; 1347:1;
1457:19
accessible [1] - 1453:14
accessing [1] - 1278:21
accidents [5] - 1368:7;
1465:4, 16, 25; 1467:10
accommodate [3] - 1231:20;
1278:7; 1353:23
accommodated [1] -
1299:24
accommodation [4] -
1297:9; 1299:16; 1301:20;
1302:22
according [3] - 1394:6;
1437:23; 1440:16
accordingly [2] - 1270:7;
1299:2
account [18] - 1261:8;
1285:12; 1301:18, 20;
1353:20; 1371:14;
1377:23; 1381:4, 12;
1395:25; 1406:15-17;
1407:6; 1424:21; 1436:15;
1444:10; 1454:11
accounted [6] - 1452:14, 17;
1453:18; 1462:6
accrue [2] - 1293:23; 1294:1
accumulate [1] - 1322:8
accumulating [1] - 1324:3
accuracy [5] - 1345:4;
1368:19; 1371:5, 8; 1373:7
accurate [4] - 1253:13, 21;
1270:22; 1347:12
ACF's [1] - 1458:9
ACFN [6] - 1349:17; 1429:10;
1430:23; 1431:11;
1458:11, 18
achieve [5] - 1245:15;
1263:3; 1352:3; 1360:13;
1457:16
achieved [1] - 1468:22
achieves [1] - 1256:16
achieving [1] - 1323:9
acknowledge [1] - 1407:3
acoustic [2] - 1343:14;
1344:9
acrolein [9] - 1463:4, 7, 10,
19, 21, 25; 1464:8, 10, 12
acrolein-related [1] -
1463:21
ACT [3] - 1206:7, 10
act [4] - 1303:14; 1313:5;
1325:7
acting [1] - 1454:13
action [4] - 1388:3; 1447:16,
21; 1448:3
actions [1] - 1429:17
active [9] - 1230:3; 1313:13;
1323:16; 1361:18;
1420:18; 1431:4, 18;
1436:15; 1437:17
actively [6] - 1230:19;
1276:18; 1329:17; 1416:1;
1431:1, 15
activities [8] - 1256:10;
1431:22; 1440:7; 1445:8;
1462:14, 16; 1465:9;
1468:4
activity [7] - 1401:10;
1403:24; 1425:13;
1467:25; 1468:2
actual [15] - 1223:21; 1260:7;
1345:17, 19; 1347:1;
1348:12; 1352:22; 1354:4;
1355:1; 1359:17; 1387:13;
1399:15; 1406:5; 1435:20;
1437:6
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
3
ACTUAL [2] - 1214:19;
1348:21
actuals [3] - 1345:24; 1357:7
acute [2] - 1284:25; 1463:16
Adams [1] - 1207:7
adapt [2] - 1326:20; 1405:16
adapted [2] - 1251:21;
1339:24
adaptive [6] - 1316:19;
1323:17; 1375:18; 1421:2,
11; 1423:9
adaptively [1] - 1320:10
add [9] - 1283:15; 1287:8;
1322:5; 1348:8; 1356:16;
1395:16; 1408:2; 1459:23
added [1] - 1391:2
adding [4] - 1240:25;
1337:14; 1338:7; 1349:8
addition [11] - 1227:9;
1256:20; 1275:20; 1283:3;
1289:12; 1395:13;
1396:24; 1398:23;
1435:17; 1436:14; 1453:16
additional [18] - 1232:21;
1250:7, 22; 1278:21;
1281:18; 1289:19;
1290:15; 1299:17;
1360:16; 1408:16, 20;
1410:1; 1420:2; 1434:3;
1452:12, 15; 1468:25
address [10] - 1237:3;
1263:1; 1264:8; 1299:25;
1303:16; 1337:19; 1338:6;
1413:9; 1414:4; 1461:4
addressed [6] - 1295:17;
1307:15; 1312:5; 1316:7;
1461:20; 1462:10
addressees [1] - 1304:9
addressing [2] - 1282:23;
1295:12
Adequacy [1] - 1223:23
adequate [2] - 1330:9;
1461:7
adherence [1] - 1319:25
adjacent [3] - 1405:21;
1419:21; 1420:12
adjourned [2] - 1227:22;
1469:10
ADJOURNED [1] - 1211:15
adjournment [4] - 1287:25;
1365:8; 1424:7; 1468:17
ADJOURNMENT [4] -
1210:23; 1211:7, 11, 14
adjust [2] - 1326:20; 1350:4
adjusted [1] - 1353:22
adjustments [1] - 1357:5
admit [1] - 1338:3
adopted [1] - 1330:18
adopting [2] - 1266:3;
1461:5
advance [2] - 1284:18;
1319:11
advances [2] - 1234:9;
1236:23
advancing [2] - 1260:8;
1319:18
adverse [8] - 1379:10;
1380:23; 1390:3; 1391:13;
1396:7; 1413:20; 1433:25;
1443:24
adversely [1] - 1237:18
advise [1] - 1387:17
advised [3] - 1224:22;
1373:10; 1468:20
advising [1] - 1228:10
advisories [1] - 1458:14
AER [3] - 1238:11, 15;
1240:23
aeration [4] - 1338:12, 20, 23
aerial [4] - 1409:23; 1435:14;
1443:1
aerobic [1] - 1340:21
AESRD [3] - 1318:12;
1400:21; 1449:23
Affairs [1] - 1207:13
affect [7] - 1276:4; 1319:4;
1340:11; 1353:7; 1421:24;
1434:9; 1441:24
affected [18] - 1237:18;
1255:6; 1302:13; 1321:14;
1322:7, 10, 13-14, 19;
1323:12, 23; 1324:3;
1325:11; 1326:25; 1403:23
affecting [1] - 1407:13
AFFIRMED [2] - 1210:4;
1215:12
affirmed [1] - 1429:6
affordable [1] - 1283:19
affords [1] - 1289:8
afraid [1] - 1260:3
Afshan [1] - 1207:19
afternoon [5] - 1253:25;
1288:3; 1342:14; 1365:8;
1367:23
AFTERNOON [1] - 1211:7
afterwards [1] - 1399:6
agencies [1] - 1303:15
AGENCY [3] - 1206:6;
1207:6
aggressive [1] - 1325:2
ago [8] - 1222:2; 1253:8;
1257:25; 1336:25; 1427:9;
1430:6; 1435:9
agree [30] - 1242:20;
1247:25; 1248:4; 1299:8;
1318:2, 4, 10, 16, 18, 22;
1322:6; 1326:13; 1330:24;
1331:2, 7; 1332:1; 1354:4;
1358:7, 14; 1359:21, 24;
1360:2, 5; 1363:25;
1378:11; 1382:13; 1387:1;
1441:5; 1465:3
agreed [7] - 1305:14; 1307:2,
5; 1326:1; 1440:3; 1449:20
agreeing [1] - 1331:25
AGREEMENT [4] - 1213:8;
1308:1, 3
agreement [6] - 1306:1, 5;
1307:3, 21, 23; 1436:21
agreements [1] - 1306:2
agrees [2] - 1304:1; 1387:5
agricultural [1] - 1440:23
Aguas [1] - 1207:15
ahead [8] - 1225:1; 1274:16;
1284:20; 1285:20;
1364:19; 1372:14;
1392:22; 1404:19
aid [2] - 1227:11
air [4] - 1272:22; 1277:2;
1463:2; 1465:10
Air [1] - 1276:1
air-emissions [1] - 1277:2
aircraft [1] - 1295:18
al [2] - 1344:18; 1381:23
ALARM [1] - 1210:21
alarm [2] - 1227:20; 1228:4
ALBERTA [5] - 1206:2, 4, 12;
1213:12; 1321:2
Alberta [30] - 1206:24;
1208:18, 24; 1283:13;
1286:16; 1294:2; 1304:10;
1306:21; 1307:9; 1315:21;
1318:14; 1320:21;
1330:19; 1348:7; 1368:11;
1380:25; 1394:21;
1399:11; 1408:3; 1414:19;
1415:19; 1430:11; 1442:2;
1446:16; 1464:20; 1465:1;
1470:5
Albian [6] - 1278:6, 14;
1279:6; 1305:22; 1318:20;
1467:17
Alex [1] - 1207:4
Algar [1] - 1432:9
Alliance [1] - 1314:15
allocate [1] - 1307:11
allocated [1] - 1304:20
allocation [3] - 1304:18;
1306:10; 1307:12
allow [10] - 1229:17; 1239:3,
6; 1259:4; 1263:3, 9;
1286:17; 1311:13; 1326:19
allowances [5] - 1278:1;
1412:14; 1413:8, 17;
1414:17
allowed [2] - 1302:1;
1309:14
allows [2] - 1325:10; 1457:18
allude [1] - 1414:1
alluded [1] - 1380:3
almost [1] - 1275:6
alone [1] - 1258:6
alphabetical [1] - 1208:5
alter [1] - 1236:22
alternate [2] - 1239:12;
1457:5
Alternative [1] - 1220:4
alternative [5] - 1239:7;
1323:17; 1327:19;
1452:22; 1456:25
alternatives [5] - 1276:18;
1327:25; 1457:2, 14, 24
Amanda [1] - 1207:12
ambient [4] - 1358:17, 21-22;
1360:15
Ambient [1] - 1275:25
amended [1] - 1304:4
America [2] - 1407:24
America-wide [1] - 1407:24
amount [19] - 1229:13;
1235:21, 24; 1244:3;
1271:24; 1283:6; 1286:9;
1306:23; 1363:19;
1369:15; 1372:19;
1374:19; 1381:10;
1384:24; 1385:20; 1386:9;
1388:9; 1399:8; 1442:15
amphibians [1] - 1399:23
AN [4] - 1214:11; 1246:19
analogue [1] - 1350:5
ANALYSIS [2] - 1212:6;
1217:6
analysis [12] - 1269:9, 11,
21; 1270:24; 1271:22;
1272:4; 1276:3; 1385:6;
1387:13; 1447:10; 1460:22
AND [12] - 1206:4, 7-8, 10,
12; 1210:18; 1212:8, 21;
1216:15; 1217:24; 1221:19
animal [1] - 1403:18
animals [2] - 1407:9; 1426:9
Anna [2] - 1208:15; 1209:11
announcement [1] - 1228:3
annual [11] - 1236:25;
1243:10; 1246:1; 1251:23;
1252:10; 1288:18, 24;
1293:14; 1360:25; 1361:1;
1364:25
ANNUAL [2] - 1214:12;
1246:20
Annual [3] - 1275:22;
1294:23; 1420:9
anoxic [1] - 1340:18
answer [27] - 1267:9, 12;
1280:14, 17; 1282:18;
1297:23; 1303:3; 1315:12;
1342:19; 1345:9; 1350:18;
1351:25; 1352:21;
1362:19; 1364:4; 1381:20;
1391:7; 1400:5; 1415:23;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
4
1431:7; 1445:21; 1447:23;
1448:7; 1450:13; 1451:18;
1457:13
answered [4] - 1371:6;
1409:18; 1422:2; 1445:20
anticipate [3] - 1233:14;
1264:15; 1413:20
anticipated [2] - 1285:12;
1441:24
ANY [2] - 1214:17; 1293:7
anyway [1] - 1401:15
AOSP [1] - 1240:24
apologize [1] - 1344:16
apparent [1] - 1313:24
appear [5] - 1267:25;
1426:19; 1429:12;
1438:14; 1442:18
APPEARANCES [1] - 1207:1
Appendix [19] - 1273:13;
1298:9, 20; 1300:19;
1335:15; 1336:10, 14;
1342:24; 1363:11; 1372:8;
1389:25; 1392:12; 1398:2;
1404:13; 1450:17; 1458:9;
1462:11; 1463:14
applicable [2] - 1256:12;
1467:23
APPLICANT [1] - 1208:1
application [9] - 1240:21;
1241:10; 1250:24;
1255:16, 24; 1256:14;
1268:2; 1365:25; 1415:10
APPLICATION [1] - 1206:4
Application [23] - 1233:15;
1237:17; 1241:16;
1242:14; 1243:3; 1249:8;
1250:14; 1251:7; 1253:3,
7; 1254:14; 1262:3;
1264:4; 1276:5; 1300:7;
1303:6; 1346:23; 1355:21,
25; 1366:14; 1384:3;
1458:4; 1463:19
applications [1] - 1366:13
applied [6] - 1233:12;
1253:1, 12; 1398:12
applied-for [1] - 1253:12
applies [1] - 1245:20
apply [11] - 1256:14;
1309:17; 1316:20; 1370:8;
1371:20; 1373:8; 1377:6;
1402:23; 1415:23;
1433:15; 1457:21
applying [6] - 1251:14;
1252:4; 1272:6; 1327:7;
1395:7; 1398:11
approach [13] - 1327:5;
1328:1, 4, 16; 1332:24;
1372:9; 1375:4; 1384:10,
17; 1387:24; 1399:12
appropriate [10] - 1224:13;
1302:8; 1329:8; 1364:8;
1383:19; 1385:16; 1414:4,
20; 1415:16; 1421:3
appropriately [2] - 1236:11;
1308:10
approval [6] - 1237:19;
1238:11; 1249:10;
1251:15; 1253:21; 1410:15
approved [14] - 1233:15;
1237:17; 1249:8; 1250:17,
23; 1252:15, 22, 25;
1268:5; 1334:15; 1367:8;
1383:23; 1384:1
approximate [2] - 1280:19;
1281:23
approximation [1] - 1280:8
aquatic [9] - 1314:3;
1323:10; 1340:12; 1341:6;
1368:5; 1449:16; 1450:1;
1451:20; 1452:3
aquatics [1] - 1448:20
Aquatics [1] - 1458:17
aquifers [1] - 1310:2
area [51] - 1220:1; 1247:7;
1248:6; 1250:8, 22-23;
1252:3, 19, 22; 1253:9;
1263:7; 1268:8; 1270:6;
1271:25; 1287:15; 1301:4,
8; 1303:14, 19; 1361:24;
1362:5; 1369:6, 8, 22;
1378:19; 1380:8; 1381:11;
1386:7, 11; 1387:14;
1399:8; 1402:10; 1406:3,
15; 1411:12; 1417:2;
1419:15; 1420:18;
1421:17; 1422:4; 1423:23;
1432:13; 1433:24; 1436:9;
1437:1, 3, 9; 1438:10;
1447:2; 1462:20; 1466:21
Area [19] - 1221:1; 1248:2;
1249:24; 1250:10, 19;
1299:11; 1301:19; 1303:1;
1380:4; 1386:12, 15;
1415:9; 1426:6, 8;
1441:15, 18; 1442:12, 16;
1443:18
area's [1] - 1251:2
area-specific [1] - 1378:19
areas [27] - 1220:15; 1229:4,
22; 1265:19; 1319:16;
1327:3; 1361:21; 1384:19,
21; 1388:7; 1400:9;
1409:3; 1410:1, 21, 24;
1411:10; 1418:6; 1422:16,
24; 1423:16, 18-19;
1443:2; 1467:1, 5
arguably [1] - 1414:10
arise [2] - 1282:1
arises [1] - 1342:5
arising [1] - 1224:9
arm's [1] - 1465:1
arrangements [3] - 1279:8,
14; 1306:13
arrest [1] - 1429:18
arrive [3] - 1227:2; 1395:11;
1397:10
arrived [4] - 1397:5, 19;
1399:11; 1404:25
arriving [1] - 1466:8
AS [4] - 1214:17; 1293:6
aside [1] - 1235:7
aspect [3] - 1386:10;
1388:14; 1422:6
aspects [5] - 1313:7;
1391:21; 1420:4; 1453:8;
1457:6
ASPHALTENE [2] - 1214:11;
1246:19
Asphaltene [3] - 1238:15;
1239:1, 25
asphaltene [28] - 1238:16,
21, 23; 1239:4, 16, 18-19;
1240:1, 12, 14, 17, 20, 22;
1241:4, 8-9, 11, 15;
1242:1, 12, 20, 22; 1243:8,
22; 1245:5, 12; 1288:17,
25
aspiration [2] - 1310:24;
1311:6
aspirational [1] - 1302:24
aspirations [1] - 1310:19
ASRD [2] - 1332:19; 1429:17
ASRD's [1] - 1429:19
assembled [1] - 1354:22
assess [6] - 1278:23;
1327:24; 1361:24; 1381:6;
1450:6; 1462:12
assessed [8] - 1275:4;
1299:22; 1444:25; 1445:1;
1451:22; 1461:2, 15;
1462:21
assesses [1] - 1443:13
assessing [4] - 1354:2;
1394:6; 1410:25; 1443:9
assessment [27] - 1302:3;
1329:17; 1344:5; 1347:12;
1353:14, 17; 1356:21;
1363:4; 1369:4; 1371:1;
1380:12; 1386:11, 16, 18;
1388:7; 1391:16; 1392:3;
1393:5; 1396:2, 4; 1404:4;
1416:4; 1443:15; 1452:17,
19; 1457:15, 24
Assessment [16] - 1222:3,
22; 1224:11; 1274:14, 17;
1335:14; 1360:2; 1383:11;
1445:7; 1452:6; 1461:3,
16; 1462:8, 22; 1463:15
ASSESSMENT [5] - 1206:5,
10; 1207:6; 1213:4;
1222:15
assessments [6] - 1216:20;
1301:7; 1352:22; 1354:18;
1360:4; 1455:16
Assessments [3] - 1400:10;
1461:10, 21
ASSESSMENTS [2] - 1212:5;
1217:4
asset [2] - 1244:23; 1245:18
assets [1] - 1230:8
assigned [2] - 1222:7, 23
assist [3] - 1294:21; 1409:15;
1410:10
associated [21] - 1251:18;
1258:21, 24; 1260:8;
1269:18; 1354:1; 1370:25;
1372:21; 1374:2; 1382:4;
1385:22; 1401:25; 1407:1;
1427:13; 1437:7; 1463:24;
1464:8, 10, 12
Associates' [1] - 1455:5
Association [4] - 1208:12;
1318:13, 15
assume [14] - 1223:8;
1237:1, 15; 1249:7;
1282:12; 1317:10;
1319:25; 1339:3; 1341:6;
1387:25; 1389:1; 1439:5;
1451:10; 1462:12
assumed [7] - 1253:6;
1274:20; 1280:12;
1450:24; 1461:23
assumes [2] - 1234:25;
1273:24
assuming [6] - 1276:25;
1313:1; 1393:5, 16;
1444:22; 1457:8
assumption [5] - 1252:21;
1280:22; 1332:18; 1404:5;
1416:3
assumptions [6] - 1302:20;
1344:1; 1345:4; 1369:22;
1370:7; 1385:20
Assumptions [1] - 1296:24
assurance [4] - 1265:20;
1357:20; 1358:2; 1359:2
AT [3] - 1206:15; 1211:15
Athabasca [19] - 1208:7;
1304:4, 20; 1305:8;
1307:1; 1309:1, 10;
1311:5, 17; 1331:6;
1383:3, 18; 1419:21;
1428:21, 24; 1430:17;
1432:1; 1458:16
atmospheric [3] - 1257:1, 6;
1266:4
attached [1] - 1317:9
Attachment [1] - 1398:15
attempt [1] - 1292:19
attempted [1] - 1300:8
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
5
attempting [2] - 1271:1;
1298:3
attention [3] - 1222:1;
1395:20; 1430:8
attenuation [2] - 1422:15;
1423:14
Attorney [2] - 1208:8, 23
attract [1] - 1422:12
August [1] - 1317:12
auspices [1] - 1317:21
Austin [1] - 1207:21
author [1] - 1335:5
authors [2] - 1316:3; 1395:9
availability [4] - 1275:9;
1277:4; 1278:24; 1279:13
available [33] - 1216:22;
1217:18; 1218:13; 1219:6;
1223:1; 1256:18; 1273:8;
1274:20; 1276:4; 1283:1;
1298:25; 1304:22; 1308:8;
1320:23; 1331:13; 1338:6;
1351:12; 1354:9; 1356:20;
1368:23; 1372:10;
1380:24; 1396:22;
1399:10; 1421:8; 1437:22,
25; 1442:13; 1444:23;
1449:15; 1453:6, 17
Average [1] - 1294:23
average [6] - 1243:10;
1246:1; 1275:24; 1293:14;
1322:3; 1369:19
averaged [1] - 1322:3
AVI [9] - 1368:10, 16, 20, 22;
1369:3, 6, 11-12, 19
avoid [3] - 1314:19; 1411:13;
1440:8
avoidance [1] - 1426:24
avoided [1] - 1411:15
avoiding [2] - 1436:2;
1437:17
aware [8] - 1286:5; 1298:7;
1336:7; 1360:17; 1401:7,
13; 1424:22; 1427:16
B
back-up [1] - 1327:11
background [2] - 1294:5;
1332:13
bad [1] - 1339:18
balance [10] - 1240:15, 25;
1241:19; 1244:3; 1245:15;
1270:16; 1271:6; 1324:21;
1332:22; 1354:17
balancing [3] - 1255:5;
1271:1; 1325:6
Band [1] - 1208:17
banded [1] - 1244:9
banding [2] - 1435:18
Baranek [1] - 1344:17
barred [1] - 1379:20
barreled [1] - 1390:16
barrelled [1] - 1391:3
barrels [2] - 1289:10, 12
Barrett [1] - 1304:9
barrier [2] - 1364:9; 1416:15
barriers [1] - 1364:6
BART [2] - 1210:7; 1215:18
Base [5] - 1312:7, 14;
1313:11; 1382:13; 1463:18
base [7] - 1313:25; 1319:2;
1371:25; 1372:4, 10;
1396:15; 1445:13
based [40] - 1220:4; 1240:13;
1243:9; 1273:19; 1281:5;
1287:10; 1290:21;
1291:23; 1297:8; 1301:8,
10; 1312:22; 1331:8;
1346:23; 1360:3; 1363:23;
1371:12; 1375:4, 6;
1381:2; 1385:19; 1386:7;
1389:14; 1392:6; 1397:3;
1399:7; 1405:13; 1407:12;
1418:12; 1423:6; 1435:6;
1436:6; 1437:8, 12;
1455:4; 1458:1; 1461:6;
1463:3; 1464:3
baseline [10] - 1343:19;
1408:17; 1409:14, 20;
1410:3, 5, 11; 1424:24;
1428:4; 1463:25
Baseline [1] - 1319:5
basic [2] - 1320:3; 1350:18
basing [1] - 1399:6
basis [24] - 1240:9; 1243:10,
20; 1245:6; 1246:2;
1251:23; 1254:14;
1256:22; 1260:9; 1264:19;
1275:24; 1277:7; 1279:1;
1288:18, 24; 1305:12;
1328:12; 1332:20;
1335:21; 1346:10;
1413:23; 1415:5, 18
BASIS [2] - 1214:12; 1246:21
beach [1] - 1367:10
bear [4] - 1403:14; 1404:9,
20; 1405:15
beaver [1] - 1435:14
become [14] - 1257:12;
1310:25; 1334:5, 22, 25;
1335:9, 18; 1337:7, 11;
1339:10, 19; 1340:12, 18
becomes [5] - 1239:21;
1340:10; 1341:20;
1366:23; 1377:2
becoming [1] - 1453:17
bed [1] - 1467:6
began [1] - 1301:13
begin [1] - 1290:15
beginning [4] - 1231:6;
1241:24; 1285:21; 1368:8
begins [1] - 1284:9
begun [1] - 1279:12
BEHALF [2] - 1213:4;
1222:16
behalf [5] - 1209:5, 10-11;
1304:17
behaviour [2] - 1335:16;
1337:8
behind [1] - 1262:15
belief [1] - 1276:13
BELL [2] - 1210:8; 1215:19
bellied [1] - 1378:24
belongs [1] - 1432:6
below [8] - 1305:17; 1366:3,
18; 1367:2; 1404:8, 21;
1406:4, 21
belts [1] - 1423:17
Benchmark [1] - 1449:2
Benchmarks [3] - 1450:3,
16, 18
benefit [2] - 1255:14;
1384:18
benefits [1] - 1234:6
berms [1] - 1364:6
Bertolin [1] - 1208:18
best [11] - 1233:22; 1256:18;
1269:25; 1276:16;
1277:11; 1354:17;
1356:19; 1414:8; 1449:15;
1470:11
better [11] - 1256:11;
1302:12; 1315:6; 1317:7;
1350:11; 1369:23;
1381:13; 1409:13, 15;
1412:14; 1469:3
Betts [4] - 1376:24; 1377:4,
10; 1378:20
between [34] - 1228:22, 24;
1233:14, 19; 1234:20;
1235:1, 5, 17; 1240:15;
1254:5, 23; 1255:7;
1261:18; 1264:2; 1266:11;
1268:20; 1282:1, 24;
1286:15; 1290:8, 13;
1292:5; 1296:5; 1299:19;
1300:21; 1303:4; 1321:16;
1362:13; 1371:18;
1394:18; 1452:8; 1454:12;
1463:18; 1467:4
Bevan [1] - 1207:19
beyond [6] - 1264:23;
1377:15; 1380:17;
1421:10; 1451:22; 1456:2
BIEM [2] - 1212:8; 1217:24
Biem [3] - 1208:7; 1217:14;
1308:23
Bies [1] - 1344:16
BIFTU [2] - 1210:9; 1215:21
big [5] - 1222:4; 1223:5;
1313:4; 1428:13; 1430:15
bigger [3] - 1376:6; 1427:7;
1428:6
BILL [2] - 1210:15; 1216:9
Bill [2] - 1430:2; 1433:19
billion [1] - 1244:7
biodiversity [7] - 1382:2, 12;
1383:5, 8; 1414:2; 1446:5;
1452:18
biological [1] - 1313:7
biology [1] - 1418:5
BIP [1] - 1227:16
BIRCHALL [7] - 1211:10, 12;
1367:20, 22; 1423:21;
1424:12; 1468:6
Birchall [8] - 1207:7; 1342:9;
1367:19, 23; 1423:24;
1424:11; 1468:20, 25
Birchall's [1] - 1424:5
bird [12] - 1343:21; 1349:16,
22; 1350:14, 16; 1352:7;
1410:14; 1417:9; 1438:18;
1439:2, 15; 1440:9
bird-cannons [1] - 1343:21
birds [14] - 1408:19;
1412:24; 1413:11;
1417:13, 24; 1437:2;
1439:1, 7, 9, 12, 19-20, 24
Bishop [1] - 1208:19
bit [21] - 1225:2; 1242:6;
1249:22; 1265:5; 1284:16;
1298:10; 1331:24;
1339:17; 1388:10, 13;
1410:25; 1412:14;
1426:17; 1430:1, 7;
1438:14; 1446:22;
1451:21; 1452:24; 1453:1
bitumen [31] - 1225:24;
1226:9; 1230:25; 1232:11;
1234:21; 1235:2, 12;
1237:21; 1238:19, 23;
1240:13, 15-16, 18-19;
1241:1, 9, 17, 20; 1242:4,
23; 1243:9; 1244:4;
1245:16; 1263:20; 1269:9,
16; 1272:12; 1311:18;
1439:13
black [10] - 1228:1, 13;
1378:22; 1379:12, 14, 24;
1391:9; 1399:13; 1404:20;
1414:14
BLACK [2] - 1222:21; 1228:2
Black [1] - 1207:12
black-throated [7] - 1378:22;
1379:12, 14, 24; 1391:9;
1399:13; 1414:14
blackbird [2] - 1372:20;
1373:12
Blend [1] - 1270:10
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
6
blend [3] - 1234:20; 1235:1;
1270:9
blending [4] - 1226:24;
1227:4; 1236:7, 10
blends [1] - 1227:5
blocks [1] - 1369:20
BLOISE [2] - 1210:12;
1216:3
blue [3] - 1269:21; 1378:22;
1379:13
Board [9] - 1207:10;
1236:24; 1237:13; 1252:2;
1287:12; 1358:2; 1359:2
board [1] - 1267:13
BOARD [9] - 1206:4, 12;
1207:9; 1210:20; 1211:6;
1213:6; 1222:18; 1225:8;
1342:13
Bob [1] - 1207:13
body [4] - 1269:15, 22;
1270:12, 19
bog/poor [1] - 1371:20
Bolton [1] - 1207:4
boreal [2] - 1395:22; 1441:19
borne [1] - 1257:3
bothered [1] - 1280:2
bottom [7] - 1228:8; 1262:4;
1273:14; 1284:11;
1312:20; 1344:11, 14
boundaries [2] - 1221:7;
1346:22
BOUNDARIES [2] - 1212:21;
1221:20
boundary [7] - 1221:7;
1251:9; 1253:11; 1254:20;
1356:24; 1358:17; 1416:17
BOUNDARY [2] - 1212:21;
1221:19
bounds [1] - 1306:12
box [1] - 1244:14
Boychuk [1] - 1207:17
brains [1] - 1417:21
break [15] - 1224:17, 20;
1231:3; 1286:20; 1287:21;
1288:6; 1322:22; 1364:13;
1384:4; 1423:25; 1468:8,
13; 1469:2
breakdown [1] - 1344:13
breaking [1] - 1423:22
breed [1] - 1441:14
breeding [3] - 1417:8, 24;
1442:8
bridge [3] - 1422:16; 1466:23
briefly [2] - 1266:15; 1268:15
bring [4] - 1237:13; 1311:7;
1351:13; 1353:13
bringing [2] - 1258:18;
1353:15
British [1] - 1470:4
broad [2] - 1241:21; 1386:11
broadened [1] - 1383:13
broader [3] - 1301:17;
1376:4; 1411:11
broadhurst [3] - 1218:9;
1242:15; 1246:12
Broadhurst [22] - 1219:19,
23; 1220:8; 1225:9;
1239:17; 1243:7; 1246:7;
1250:2, 4; 1259:13;
1277:12; 1279:23;
1288:16, 19; 1293:10;
1295:4, 11; 1315:2;
1325:25; 1327:9; 1329:12;
1332:25
BROADHURST [25] -
1210:16; 1212:13, 16;
1214:10; 1216:11;
1218:19; 1219:12, 24;
1225:11; 1238:18;
1241:13; 1243:18;
1246:18; 1259:24;
1277:13; 1282:5; 1284:16;
1287:1; 1288:21; 1295:15;
1324:17; 1332:11; 1347:3;
1457:11; 1465:15
Broadhurst's [1] - 1285:17
broadly [1] - 1264:24
BROCK [2] - 1210:13;
1216:5
broke [1] - 1468:24
brought [1] - 1380:25
bubblers [1] - 1337:14
bubbles [1] - 1338:7
bubbling [1] - 1338:10
bucket [3] - 1259:16, 22
bucket-wheel [1] - 1259:16
Buffalo [5] - 1209:3;
1283:17; 1287:7; 1386:8;
1387:3
Buffalo's [2] - 1297:19;
1298:1
buffer [8] - 1416:23;
1417:10, 25; 1418:2, 20;
1420:18; 1422:21
buffers [1] - 1422:19
bug [1] - 1313:9
build [4] - 1284:10, 12, 18;
1328:24
building [5] - 1265:25;
1285:22; 1287:16; 1361:9;
1422:15
buildings [2] - 1361:5, 7
built [7] - 1337:4; 1354:13;
1355:23; 1373:4, 20;
1445:3; 1464:5
bulk [1] - 1270:11
bulk-fines [1] - 1270:11
bullet [2] - 1262:7; 1321:11
bullets [1] - 1460:25
Burden [1] - 1304:10
burned [1] - 1445:4
business [7] - 1226:20;
1234:7; 1252:23; 1271:10;
1310:20; 1366:1; 1467:23
Business [1] - 1258:7
BUSS [2] - 1224:8, 18
Buss [7] - 1208:11; 1209:1;
1224:7, 15; 1266:17;
1272:24; 1308:23
BY [40] - 1206:2, 11;
1210:20; 1211:4, 6, 8, 10,
12; 1212:4, 6, 8, 10, 12,
14, 16-17, 19; 1214:13;
1217:3, 6, 24; 1218:2, 19,
21; 1219:12; 1221:17;
1225:8; 1267:21; 1288:14;
1342:13; 1365:16; 1367:22
C
C.0-7 [1] - 1206:9
cabin [1] - 1346:2
Cache [1] - 1446:16
CadnaSET [1] - 1344:17
calcium [3] - 1227:13;
1231:9; 1235:19
calciums [1] - 1311:10
calculate [1] - 1273:23
calculated [9] - 1273:18;
1343:13, 20, 24; 1344:2,
9-10; 1345:5; 1347:12
calculation [1] - 1462:2
calculations [4] -
1344:22-24; 1408:8
camera [2] - 1417:4; 1420:7
camp [7] - 1278:5, 14, 21,
24-25; 1279:19; 1301:10
camp-based [1] - 1301:10
camps [5] - 1277:23; 1279:9;
1280:24; 1287:14; 1302:22
Canada [46] - 1208:2, 9;
1209:7; 1304:11; 1306:21;
1307:9; 1317:17; 1340:2;
1379:20; 1380:25; 1398:2,
7-8, 17, 21; 1399:4, 10, 15,
20-21, 25; 1400:8;
1410:13; 1412:17; 1413:4;
1426:4; 1430:21; 1436:21;
1440:1, 6; 1442:10;
1444:24; 1451:15;
1453:21; 1454:19;
1460:14; 1461:22; 1462:3,
24; 1463:6, 8; 1464:20;
1465:1; 1470:5
CANADA [2] - 1206:3, 12
Canada's [3] - 1314:14;
1408:13; 1448:23
Canada-Alberta [1] -
1464:20
Canada-wide [1] - 1380:25
CANADIAN [3] - 1206:5, 10;
1207:6
Canadian [1] - 1418:10
CANDACE [2] - 1210:8;
1215:19
cannon [1] - 1350:21
cannons [4] - 1343:21;
1350:19; 1439:24
cannot [2] - 1241:3; 1274:6
cap [2] - 1387:10; 1459:25
capabilities [1] - 1423:1
capacity [19] - 1229:12, 14;
1230:5, 11; 1232:21;
1250:20; 1251:1; 1278:4;
1404:3, 8, 22-23; 1405:3,
6, 12; 1406:4, 21; 1407:15,
21
capital [3] - 1234:10;
1278:12; 1293:18
capping [1] - 1460:7
capture [2] - 1263:6; 1382:15
captured [1] - 1329:23
caribou [39] - 1379:11, 23;
1401:17; 1402:4, 9;
1414:14; 1424:13, 15, 19;
1425:6, 14; 1426:10, 20,
22; 1427:6, 10, 22, 24;
1428:11, 18; 1429:3, 12,
21; 1430:8, 11-13; 1431:4,
18; 1432:8, 17; 1433:10,
23; 1434:1, 5, 13
Caribou [2] - 1430:16, 18
carried [2] - 1366:13; 1452:7
carries [1] - 1371:25
carrying [11] - 1404:2, 8,
21-22; 1405:3, 6, 12;
1406:4, 21; 1407:15, 21
cascading [2] - 1407:4, 6
case [36] - 1286:6; 1301:25;
1337:12; 1338:4; 1364:2;
1367:4; 1369:10; 1370:23;
1371:25; 1372:1, 11, 13;
1374:24; 1379:15;
1380:14-16; 1381:16;
1388:22; 1392:23; 1393:2;
1397:23; 1398:3; 1399:2;
1409:10; 1415:10, 24;
1442:24; 1445:14;
1462:17; 1467:3
Case [13] - 1241:16; 1276:5;
1296:24; 1298:12; 1300:5,
17; 1301:24; 1302:10, 15;
1382:13; 1463:18
cases [8] - 1257:8; 1303:7-9;
1340:7; 1378:19; 1395:19,
24
Cassady [1] - 1437:14
casticity [1] - 1445:3
casting [2] - 1380:9
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
7
catalytic [1] - 1241:22
catching [1] - 1400:25
catchment [1] - 1467:1
categories [2] - 1344:24;
1456:1
categorization [1] - 1227:15
categorize [1] - 1396:18
categorizing [1] - 1375:16
category [2] - 1403:12;
1460:23
caucus [3] - 1237:25;
1252:12; 1331:17
caucusing [1] - 1431:24
caught [1] - 1377:12
caustic [1] - 1227:9
cautionary [4] - 1335:6,
24-25; 1336:2
CCME [2] - 1331:14, 20
CEAA [6] - 1207:6; 1211:10,
12; 1223:25; 1367:22
CEAR [1] - 1206:6
CEB [3] - 1449:3; 1450:6
Cell [2] - 1248:12, 19
CELLS [2] - 1212:20;
1221:19
Cells [1] - 1248:16
cells [2] - 1221:6; 1248:17
CEMA [17] - 1213:11;
1314:11, 23; 1315:20;
1316:11, 13; 1317:5, 10,
19; 1318:19; 1320:20;
1321:2; 1330:18; 1332:15,
23; 1333:20; 1336:25
CEMA's [2] - 1331:12;
1384:9
centrate [2] - 1321:14;
1322:1
centrifugation [3] - 1256:22;
1257:8
centrifuge [2] - 1254:5;
1353:25
centrifuges [3] - 1257:23,
25; 1353:24
centrifuging [2] - 1257:18;
1258:1
certain [11] - 1302:24;
1353:2; 1362:4; 1377:7,
23; 1395:19; 1407:6;
1409:1, 8; 1413:14;
1421:24
certain-sized [1] - 1377:23
certainly [25] - 1238:1;
1258:18; 1264:6; 1370:10;
1372:2; 1375:10; 1381:16;
1382:9; 1398:9; 1400:8,
25; 1401:1; 1410:3;
1418:7; 1423:12, 15;
1425:3, 21; 1428:4;
1435:22; 1441:16;
1465:15; 1468:14
certainty [10] - 1271:15;
1326:3, 11; 1341:16;
1370:11; 1371:21;
1372:12; 1384:18, 24;
1425:2
CERTIFICATION [1] - 1470:1
certify [1] - 1470:5
cetera [2] - 1359:13; 1457:4
chair [3] - 1367:20; 1423:21;
1468:6
Chair [2] - 1207:3; 1224:8
chairman [1] - 1220:13
CHAIRMAN [33] - 1215:4;
1216:25; 1217:21;
1218:16; 1219:9; 1220:21;
1221:14; 1222:13; 1223:4;
1224:6, 15, 19; 1227:22;
1228:1, 13; 1287:22;
1288:3; 1289:25; 1307:18;
1308:6; 1320:18; 1342:10;
1364:12, 16, 19; 1365:5,
10; 1367:18; 1423:24;
1424:10; 1468:10, 15, 19
Chairman [23] - 1215:6;
1216:24; 1217:20;
1218:14; 1219:7; 1220:23;
1221:12, 24; 1223:12, 18;
1224:4; 1225:6; 1286:21;
1288:10, 21; 1289:24;
1290:2; 1307:15, 20;
1316:4; 1320:15; 1365:12;
1367:17
challenge [4] - 1228:17;
1263:17; 1264:13; 1328:23
challenges [5] - 1237:6;
1263:14, 16; 1265:9;
1274:5
challenging [2] - 1369:7;
1400:25
chamber [1] - 1230:15
chambers [3] - 1227:7;
1230:10; 1231:25
chance [2] - 1315:17;
1387:19
chances [1] - 1323:9
change [31] - 1229:23;
1230:4; 1233:14, 18;
1236:17; 1237:1; 1256:15;
1261:6; 1270:17; 1275:5,
23; 1290:25; 1291:22;
1292:2; 1306:23; 1350:22;
1354:2; 1362:12; 1367:5;
1372:18; 1377:16; 1379:7;
1394:5; 1398:3; 1407:12;
1424:23
changed [3] - 1293:1;
1361:17, 25
CHANGED [2] - 1214:17;
1293:6
changes [26] - 1226:8;
1229:20; 1230:24; 1231:1,
4, 22; 1232:2, 25; 1237:11;
1270:15, 23; 1276:2;
1279:5; 1353:4, 7, 19;
1357:10, 12, 23-24;
1358:10; 1367:11;
1376:16; 1398:5; 1404:22
changing [1] - 1394:14
channel [13] - 1450:22;
1451:6, 8, 10, 19, 25;
1452:2, 9-10; 1453:7, 9,
12, 14
CHAPMAN [2] - 1210:14;
1216:6
chapter [2] - 1333:21;
1335:25
Chapter [1] - 1335:1
characteristics [2] -
1232:17; 1269:19
characterization [1] -
1262:25
characterize [5] - 1258:14;
1405:20; 1409:24; 1461:4;
1462:4
Charles [1] - 1207:7
chart [3] - 1392:13; 1394:15;
1443:13
chat [1] - 1425:16
check [10] - 1224:1;
1243:13-15; 1269:5;
1280:11; 1332:22;
1372:17; 1377:8; 1397:14
Chelsea [1] - 1209:4
chemicals [1] - 1449:4
chemoclines [1] - 1334:6
Chipewyan [1] - 1208:7
chlorides [1] - 1242:8
choose [1] - 1380:22
choosing [1] - 1451:5
chosen [2] - 1416:15; 1455:4
Chronic [4] - 1449:2; 1450:2,
16, 18
chronic [1] - 1463:17
Chuck [1] - 1367:23
chunk [1] - 1313:4
circle [1] - 1378:5
circumstances [3] - 1320:11;
1443:20; 1466:12
cite [1] - 1384:7
cited [5] - 1391:15; 1395:9;
1404:9; 1417:22; 1436:21
citrate [1] - 1227:11
Clair [1] - 1437:15
clarification [3] - 1223:16;
1255:3; 1450:8
clarifies [1] - 1367:13
clarify [9] - 1251:14;
1255:12; 1280:4; 1295:10;
1299:9; 1368:20; 1374:14;
1395:10; 1455:17
clarity [1] - 1389:3
class [5] - 1372:3; 1373:7,
15, 21, 25
classes [3] - 1370:21;
1371:18; 1373:2
classification [2] - 1373:25;
1392:15
clay [1] - 1235:18
clays [5] - 1258:2; 1270:6;
1272:1
clean [2] - 1238:19; 1242:4
clean-up [1] - 1238:19
clear [9] - 1242:25; 1245:25;
1246:11; 1280:5; 1282:5;
1349:1; 1411:13; 1420:23;
1434:11
cleared [2] - 1253:8; 1421:11
clearing [4] - 1400:2;
1403:10, 13; 1409:16
Clearwater [1] - 1208:17
Clinton [1] - 1209:9
CLIPPERTON [3] - 1210:10;
1215:24; 1453:8
close [7] - 1272:3; 1390:13;
1422:24; 1428:25; 1429:7;
1437:3, 5
closer [2] - 1287:15; 1366:10
closest [1] - 1436:5
closure [6] - 1319:13;
1324:23; 1328:10;
1449:24; 1450:10; 1451:4
Club [1] - 1209:4
CNRL [1] - 1318:19
co [1] - 1248:16
co-deposition [1] - 1248:16
coal [1] - 1446:15
Coalition [1] - 1209:1
coarse [1] - 1368:19
coarser [3] - 1369:23;
1370:1; 1371:14
coarser-scale [1] - 1369:23
COCIA [1] - 1432:25
coffee [1] - 1288:7
cogeneration [1] - 1239:7
cognizant [1] - 1332:13
coker [1] - 1289:7
COLIN [2] - 1210:13; 1216:4
collaborative [2] - 1314:23;
1464:19
collared [2] - 1417:1
collaring [1] - 1420:5
colleague [1] - 1342:7
colleagues [2] - 1271:25;
1391:9
collected [3] - 1348:6;
1408:17; 1421:7
collecting [1] - 1420:24
Colleen [1] - 1437:14
collisions [1] - 1401:22
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
8
colonize [1] - 1451:10
Columbia [1] - 1470:4
column [3] - 1248:15;
1337:15; 1343:9
combatting [1] - 1338:21
combination [2] - 1343:4;
1456:7
combining [1] - 1259:2
comfort [1] - 1358:2
comfortable [1] - 1288:23
coming [19] - 1228:11;
1251:12; 1259:10; 1295:1;
1306:11; 1357:25; 1383:2;
1406:14, 18; 1426:14;
1435:23; 1436:11;
1437:16; 1438:14; 1446:3,
17
coming-together [1] -
1306:11
comment [2] - 1264:5;
1338:16
commercial [4] - 1259:19;
1278:20; 1279:9; 1440:23
commercialization [1] -
1256:17
commercialized [2] -
1257:15; 1259:20
commercially [1] - 1257:13
commission [1] - 1263:10
COMMIT [2] - 1214:11;
1246:19
commit [10] - 1244:8;
1246:14; 1273:4, 6;
1288:17; 1323:7; 1351:5,
10; 1352:5; 1357:11
commitment [19] - 1224:21;
1238:2; 1241:3; 1243:16;
1244:13; 1245:3, 19;
1246:1; 1248:23; 1249:4;
1274:8; 1306:3; 1309:20,
25; 1310:1; 1331:11;
1357:7; 1366:2, 6
commitments [2] - 1306:14;
1459:18
committed [7] - 1254:11;
1304:2; 1305:25; 1311:21;
1323:3; 1351:19; 1459:13
Committed [1] - 1416:11
committees [1] - 1434:19
committing [4] - 1274:1;
1288:23; 1325:18; 1347:7
common [4] - 1244:1;
1295:15; 1301:6; 1400:3
commonly [1] - 1400:7
Communication [1] -
1207:13
communications [1] -
1350:7
Communications [1] -
1207:8
communities [2] - 1301:9,
21
community [7] - 1281:2;
1287:4, 16; 1302:13;
1390:8, 13
Community [1] - 1208:12
community.. [1] - 1390:10
companies [3] - 1293:23;
1294:1; 1317:10
company [3] - 1276:17;
1334:16; 1349:25
comparable [1] - 1423:10
compare [2] - 1386:17;
1410:7
compared [1] - 1452:22
comparing [1] - 1399:2
comparisons [1] - 1449:25
compatible [2] - 1241:20;
1242:9
compatriot [1] - 1407:18
compensate [1] - 1412:25
Compensation [2] - 1459:20;
1460:6
compensation [8] - 1451:1,
13, 16; 1453:18;
1454:13-15, 17
competent [2] - 1412:9, 12
complete [3] - 1224:23;
1225:4; 1470:10
completed [7] - 1216:20;
1217:17; 1220:20;
1264:16, 20; 1278:16
completion [2] - 1284:19;
1312:13
complex [1] - 1428:12
complexes [1] - 1328:11
compliance [10] - 1304:2;
1305:25; 1308:20; 1323:4;
1357:6; 1359:3; 1360:14,
18, 23; 1364:23
compliant [6] - 1229:3;
1233:3, 5; 1358:4, 23;
1360:10
complies [1] - 1306:15
comply [3] - 1357:22;
1358:8, 12
components [3] - 1311:3;
1312:18; 1455:21
composition [1] - 1272:14
comprehensive [4] - 1265:7;
1360:25; 1364:25; 1378:13
comprise [1] - 1229:4
compromise [2] - 1244:6;
1319:4
compromised [1] - 1460:19
computational [1] - 1369:2
computationally [1] -
1368:15
conceivable [1] - 1326:24
concentration [1] - 1269:17
concentrations [6] -
1274:23; 1275:7, 14, 17;
1449:5; 1463:3
concept [2] - 1258:19;
1354:7
conception [1] - 1257:20
conceptual [2] - 1236:19;
1336:11
concern [6] - 1279:18;
1282:21; 1319:20;
1331:20; 1366:6; 1398:10
concerning [1] - 1311:25
concerns [7] - 1279:23;
1317:16, 24; 1320:2;
1384:22, 25; 1385:2
concerted [1] - 1414:11
concluded [2] - 1239:9;
1387:14
conclusion [8] - 1297:17;
1379:23; 1397:20;
1399:17; 1404:25;
1406:14, 19; 1419:6
conclusions [2] - 1337:1;
1340:11
concurrent [1] - 1251:22
concurrently [1] - 1305:11
condition [6] - 1249:14;
1289:18; 1336:22;
1337:19; 1338:18; 1339:14
conditional [2] - 1318:11;
1386:3
conditionally [2] - 1384:10,
12
conditioning [5] - 1229:8;
1230:1; 1231:24; 1232:19;
1276:19
conditions [19] - 1229:6;
1249:1, 10, 14; 1262:24;
1264:11; 1306:10;
1307:13; 1309:1; 1334:19;
1336:4, 14, 18; 1399:2;
1410:15; 1445:14; 1457:2;
1463:25
conducive [1] - 1341:6
conducted [2] - 1352:22;
1356:5
conducting [3] - 1345:6;
1452:19; 1457:6
confer [1] - 1284:15
confidence [6] - 1233:4;
1318:7; 1326:8, 10;
1327:6; 1371:11
confidences [1] - 1327:10
confident [8] - 1270:20;
1271:3; 1275:24; 1279:25;
1280:5; 1314:6; 1371:15;
1400:4
confidential [1] - 1218:12
configuration [2] - 1352:2;
1385:21
configured [1] - 1352:3
CONFIRM [2] - 1214:11;
1246:18
confirm [26] - 1220:18;
1248:21; 1253:11;
1254:11, 22, 25; 1262:9;
1266:17; 1281:25;
1292:24; 1296:1; 1315:11;
1323:3; 1336:13; 1344:21;
1348:11; 1352:21;
1355:19, 22; 1378:20;
1425:12; 1428:14; 1450:5,
15; 1457:4; 1459:12
confused [1] - 1451:21
conjunction [1] - 1410:15
connate [2] - 1269:19;
1272:14
connected [1] - 1411:9
connecting [1] - 1388:24
Connection [1] - 1209:15
connection [1] - 1310:25
connections [1] - 1411:11
connectivity [3] - 1418:21;
1419:3, 9
CONRAD [1] - 1314:23
CONRAD's [1] - 1314:11
consent [1] - 1332:20
consequence [11] - 1327:1;
1390:18; 1391:5; 1394:9;
1395:8, 12; 1396:9, 19;
1456:5, 9, 20
consequences [5] - 1383:12;
1390:7; 1395:3, 7; 1398:13
consequently [1] - 1263:6
conservation [5] - 1412:13;
1413:8, 17; 1414:17;
1415:1
CONSERVATION [7] -
1206:4, 7-8, 12; 1207:9;
1213:6; 1222:18
conservatism [3] - 1388:10;
1389:2; 1392:7
conservative [10] - 1276:22;
1283:5; 1286:6; 1298:4;
1301:25; 1302:2, 19;
1464:4
consider [13] - 1288:22;
1324:13; 1335:7, 11;
1342:2; 1388:1, 12;
1401:24; 1414:16; 1415:1,
21; 1435:5; 1438:6
considerable [2] - 1409:20;
1464:6
considerably [1] - 1405:6
consideration [8] - 1230:19;
1285:15; 1299:18;
1323:24; 1327:12; 1331:9;
1413:17, 22
considerations [2] - 1324:8,
12
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
9
considered [15] - 1274:23;
1322:14; 1323:11;
1339:18; 1341:25; 1343:2;
1379:18; 1385:15; 1388:6;
1391:1; 1396:10; 1398:6;
1399:3; 1401:6; 1428:1
considering [3] - 1230:16;
1256:8; 1306:14
considers [1] - 1238:16
consist [1] - 1262:6
consistent [4] - 1253:18;
1272:19; 1355:20; 1445:1
consolidation [1] - 1321:25
Consortium [4] - 1255:22;
1256:5; 1271:12; 1314:14
consortium [7] - 1256:7, 10;
1257:3, 11; 1258:9;
1259:10; 1271:14
constituents [1] - 1340:16
constrained [2] - 1367:2;
1457:18
constraint [1] - 1367:1
constructed [2] - 1347:9;
1356:3
Construction [1] - 1294:15
construction [49] - 1233:16;
1237:21; 1277:20, 23;
1279:4; 1280:24; 1281:7,
11, 19, 21-22; 1282:2, 8,
11; 1283:22; 1284:14, 19;
1285:19; 1286:22;
1290:16, 21; 1291:12;
1294:18; 1295:19; 1296:2;
1345:12-14; 1347:18;
1348:15, 17; 1349:1;
1353:1; 1355:6, 16;
1356:4, 15; 1357:3;
1361:2, 12; 1362:8-10;
1409:9; 1416:5; 1421:1;
1442:3
CONSTRUCTION [2] -
1214:19; 1348:21
construction-related [3] -
1281:11; 1283:22; 1284:14
constructional [1] - 1281:24
consultants [1] - 1259:3
CONSULTATION [2] -
1212:17; 1219:13
consultation [1] - 1219:3
consumption [3] - 1311:19;
1458:14; 1459:5
contact [3] - 1322:15; 1468:1
contained [3] - 1428:19;
1466:24
containing [1] - 1252:3
containment [1] - 1270:17
content [10] - 1263:5;
1268:16; 1269:9, 16-17;
1270:11, 18, 21; 1271:18;
1272:13
context [10] - 1259:14;
1310:24; 1360:19;
1383:14, 18; 1395:13;
1396:1; 1397:4; 1398:14
contingency [1] - 1334:20
CONTINING [1] - 1211:13
continually [2] - 1271:5;
1350:10
continue [13] - 1233:24;
1270:25; 1276:20; 1290:3;
1302:23; 1309:16; 1314:9;
1358:16; 1375:14;
1419:17; 1420:24;
1424:10; 1434:17
continued [3] - 1230:21;
1274:5; 1433:1
continues [2] - 1239:16;
1255:20
continuing [3] - 1276:14;
1420:1; 1464:17
continuous [1] - 1271:8
contract [1] - 1259:5
contractor [2] - 1467:17, 24
contractors [1] - 1467:14
control [8] - 1243:24;
1245:9; 1313:20, 23;
1359:8; 1406:12; 1460:8;
1465:10
convenient [1] - 1364:13
conventional [2] - 1242:10;
1432:14
conversely [1] - 1235:9
conversion [3] - 1241:22;
1289:14
conveyors [1] - 1276:19
Cooke [1] - 1207:4
Coordinator [1] - 1207:12
COPC [1] - 1463:2
copies [8] - 1216:22;
1217:18; 1218:10, 13;
1219:5; 1221:12; 1308:8;
1320:23
COPIES [2] - 1212:13;
1218:19
copy [3] - 1304:7; 1316:5;
1372:15
core [8] - 1265:14; 1268:23;
1269:4, 14; 1270:24;
1272:11
core-sampling [1] - 1268:24
coring [1] - 1271:22
Corporation [1] - 1283:17
CORPORATION [2] - 1213:5;
1222:17
correct [51] - 1222:24;
1224:2; 1226:15; 1233:11,
17; 1243:7; 1244:19;
1248:13, 20; 1254:10;
1262:11; 1282:10; 1284:2;
1293:3; 1294:11; 1295:14;
1296:9, 12-13; 1298:16;
1305:22; 1306:4; 1308:24;
1309:4, 13; 1320:16;
1321:22; 1323:6; 1331:1;
1333:16; 1341:9; 1342:3;
1343:6; 1354:24; 1357:4,
12; 1369:14; 1372:13;
1373:13; 1379:3; 1389:17;
1397:13; 1399:5; 1403:9;
1406:25; 1408:9; 1433:9;
1470:10
corrected [1] - 1291:17
correction [1] - 1431:25
correctly [12] - 1241:12;
1247:19; 1259:18; 1273:9;
1333:15; 1371:8; 1372:16;
1373:14; 1375:12;
1377:12; 1397:13; 1399:4
correlations [1] - 1268:20
corridor [7] - 1416:7;
1417:19, 23; 1419:10;
1422:9; 1438:1; 1447:11
corridors [12] - 1417:6, 16;
1418:13; 1419:14, 20;
1420:25; 1421:4, 17;
1423:5; 1447:10; 1448:10,
13
corrosive [2] - 1467:8
corrosive-rust [1] - 1467:8
cost [1] - 1324:25
cost-effective [1] - 1324:25
costly [1] - 1327:18
counsel [2] - 1251:10;
1315:16
Counsel [4] - 1207:7, 10
country [1] - 1399:16
couple [18] - 1231:3;
1245:24; 1252:11; 1253:7;
1274:24; 1279:15; 1289:9;
1300:10; 1352:12;
1389:22; 1421:14; 1432:8;
1435:19; 1440:14; 1453:8;
1454:20; 1458:7; 1460:2
course [13] - 1227:18;
1231:15; 1236:20; 1240:2;
1242:24; 1252:22; 1320:9;
1324:7; 1325:21; 1345:13;
1397:17; 1439:5; 1457:22
COURT [1] - 1209:14
Courtney [1] - 1207:20
cover [16] - 1366:5; 1370:21;
1371:10; 1372:3; 1373:1,
6, 15, 21, 24; 1377:9;
1398:18; 1422:5; 1423:6,
17; 1467:20
covered [7] - 1336:6;
1346:13; 1395:11, 15;
1396:20; 1397:21; 1457:5
covers [2] - 1250:19;
1369:24
CPAWS [1] - 1318:14
Crane [1] - 1446:20
crane [4] - 1435:11, 16;
1436:19; 1438:17
cranes [4] - 1434:20, 25;
1436:25; 1437:21
creating [1] - 1362:2
creation [2] - 1282:25;
1289:19
credit [1] - 1420:16
Cree [2] - 1208:17, 21
creek [1] - 1466:21
Creek [4] - 1283:10; 1416:21;
1420:12; 1448:15
crest [3] - 1284:6, 9, 22
criteria [16] - 1256:1; 1323:5;
1329:18; 1330:17, 22, 24;
1331:12, 21-22; 1332:17;
1394:8; 1397:8, 16;
1455:19; 1456:6; 1466:5
criterion [1] - 1455:7
critical [5] - 1266:13;
1284:25; 1381:5; 1430:19;
1433:8
cross [2] - 1349:17; 1350:25
cross-examination [2] -
1349:17; 1350:25
crossing [2] - 1466:10, 20
crushers [1] - 1234:8
CSR(A [3] - 1209:15; 1470:3,
19
CT [1] - 1270:14
cubic [11] - 1250:21; 1251:2;
1306:25; 1307:2; 1309:4;
1321:13, 24-25; 1322:2, 5,
25
culture [1] - 1265:25
cumulative [26] - 1301:10;
1302:2; 1303:11, 16;
1346:15, 20; 1349:10;
1355:18; 1356:22; 1357:4;
1362:24; 1363:19;
1374:25; 1380:14;
1382:22, 24; 1383:21;
1412:22; 1413:23; 1414:5,
13, 21; 1415:11, 18;
1428:7
cumulatively [2] - 1399:9;
1441:17
curious [1] - 1414:23
Curran [1] - 1207:13
current [20] - 1236:5;
1238:18; 1239:19; 1240:9;
1253:19; 1254:14; 1264:7,
13; 1275:21; 1276:15;
1290:9; 1308:24; 1323:15;
1334:12; 1346:3; 1372:10;
1384:23; 1385:24; 1453:4;
1457:21
curve [1] - 1291:23
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
10
curvilinearity [1] - 1403:8
cut [4] - 1402:15, 23; 1403:6;
1419:12
cut-lines [3] - 1402:15, 23;
1403:6
Cynthia [1] - 1208:18
D
d) [1] - 1305:18
D074 [4] - 1252:18; 1253:16,
19
daily [1] - 1435:10
Dan [1] - 1208:3
Daniel [1] - 1207:20
Daniela [1] - 1208:22
Darrel [2] - 1349:17; 1355:17
DARRELL [2] - 1210:16;
1216:10
Darrell [1] - 1353:17
dash [1] - 1390:24
DATA [2] - 1212:9; 1218:1
data [60] - 1223:20; 1236:2;
1243:1; 1256:22, 25;
1257:7, 18; 1269:1, 15;
1272:7, 11; 1325:2;
1326:17, 19; 1327:5;
1328:4, 10; 1344:9;
1347:19; 1359:11, 14;
1368:10, 12, 16, 18, 20,
22; 1369:3, 19, 23; 1370:1,
5, 8; 1372:9, 11; 1373:5,
11; 1381:3; 1386:15;
1394:17, 22; 1396:22;
1399:10; 1408:2, 7, 17;
1409:14; 1417:8; 1420:7,
24; 1421:7; 1428:4;
1435:25; 1436:4, 6
data-driven [1] - 1328:4
database [6] - 1269:14;
1272:10, 14, 17, 19
date [7] - 1228:25; 1233:1;
1262:14, 17; 1263:17;
1410:20; 1451:12
dated [13] - 1304:8; 1307:22;
1311:24; 1315:18;
1317:12; 1320:20;
1370:19; 1399:20;
1412:17; 1413:5; 1421:2;
1424:18; 1444:6
DATED [4] - 1213:8, 11;
1308:1; 1321:1
dates [3] - 1292:2; 1293:1;
1312:16
DATES [2] - 1214:17; 1293:6
DAVID [2] - 1210:7; 1215:17
David [1] - 1304:10
day-to-day [1] - 1245:6
days [1] - 1309:18
deal [3] - 1361:15; 1382:3;
1430:10
dealing [5] - 1298:15;
1300:15; 1326:24; 1447:4;
1448:23
dealt [4] - 1369:25; 1370:1;
1383:1; 1430:22
Dean [1] - 1269:8
Debbie [1] - 1208:19
Deborah [1] - 1207:21
decade [3] - 1285:13;
1427:9; 1430:9
decades [2] - 1260:5; 1425:7
December [13] - 1246:25;
1257:24; 1258:3; 1278:3;
1281:4; 1283:24; 1290:4;
1291:3; 1294:7, 11;
1330:13; 1342:18
decide [1] - 1261:11
Decision [1] - 1282:7
decision [5] - 1264:18, 21;
1276:25; 1279:3; 1396:16
decisions [1] - 1279:5
deck [2] - 1466:23
declared [1] - 1311:6
decline [6] - 1337:5; 1375:5;
1398:21; 1399:15; 1429:18
declines [7] - 1375:13;
1395:17; 1396:23;
1430:11, 13-14; 1440:25
declining [1] - 1429:13
decrease [1] - 1239:11
dedicated [1] - 1263:7
deer [5] - 1405:15; 1426:7,
17, 25; 1428:11
defeat [1] - 1369:1
defer [1] - 1454:9
defined [3] - 1390:1;
1394:10; 1397:15
definitely [5] - 1278:9;
1313:15; 1318:22; 1340:1;
1341:24
definition [4] - 1393:20;
1394:5; 1396:11; 1397:10
definitions [1] - 1394:14
definitive [1] - 1260:3
defraction [3] - 1268:20;
1269:11
degradation [3] - 1340:16,
20
degree [6] - 1326:7, 10;
1368:19; 1418:11;
1420:19; 1442:13
degrees [2] - 1230:9, 12
delay [2] - 1365:21; 1454:12
deliberate [1] - 1328:5
deliver [4] - 1241:19; 1242:8;
1274:7; 1279:21
delivered [1] - 1265:21
delivering [3] - 1238:23;
1239:5; 1327:8
delivery [2] - 1274:9
demand [14] - 1281:11, 22;
1282:17; 1283:22, 25;
1284:3, 6-8, 14; 1285:5, 8;
1286:2
demands [2] - 1285:15;
1286:17
demonstrate [6] - 1314:2,
17; 1319:5; 1419:24;
1423:13, 16
demonstration [10] - 1261:3;
1312:9, 14; 1313:3, 12, 17,
25; 1315:15; 1319:3, 21
Den [1] - 1228:6
denning [1] - 1420:17
dense [1] - 1422:3
densities [5] - 1406:15, 17,
22-23; 1407:2
density [3] - 1405:7; 1406:2
Denstedt [3] - 1208:2;
1304:7; 1469:5
Department [1] - 1453:20
dependent [2] - 1258:17;
1289:15
deploy [3] - 1327:14, 16;
1328:5
deployed [2] - 1261:5;
1328:15
deploying [2] - 1260:25;
1261:24
deployment [2] - 1261:19
deposit [1] - 1268:4
deposited [2] - 1254:19;
1267:5
depositing [1] - 1366:4
DEPOSITION [2] - 1214:14;
1267:22
deposition [9] - 1248:1, 5,
16, 19, 25; 1249:13;
1267:7, 17; 1365:19
deposits [1] - 1266:18
Deranger [2] - 1208:10
derived [1] - 1450:19
describe [13] - 1226:7;
1232:12; 1233:6; 1262:13;
1263:25; 1268:16; 1272:9;
1310:18; 1320:19;
1342:19; 1343:7; 1363:22;
1465:11
described [5] - 1230:24;
1333:6; 1341:5; 1373:7;
1421:16
DESCRIPTION [5] - 1210:2;
1211:2; 1212:2; 1213:2;
1214:2
Description [1] - 1457:1
design [31] - 1225:23;
1228:23; 1232:9, 19;
1233:4; 1237:23; 1240:9;
1241:19; 1243:1, 20;
1244:25; 1245:1; 1258:19;
1261:8; 1262:1; 1263:25;
1264:2, 5, 9, 15, 17, 19-20;
1265:5; 1316:15; 1328:10;
1335:11; 1353:5; 1458:6
designation [1] - 1361:10
designed [6] - 1232:10;
1242:25; 1299:23;
1334:17; 1336:3; 1459:22
designing [2] - 1247:4;
1326:18
designs [7] - 1227:6, 8;
1235:16; 1265:21; 1318:8;
1323:15; 1324:19
desire [2] - 1287:3, 12
destroyed [1] - 1400:18
detail [4] - 1268:19; 1368:1;
1385:4; 1419:5
detailed [9] - 1236:21;
1264:20; 1279:4; 1370:5,
7; 1385:2; 1408:16;
1437:13; 1453:25
details [7] - 1237:21;
1262:16; 1263:19;
1279:10; 1306:8; 1387:21;
1400:5
detect [1] - 1439:23
determination [3] - 1363:25;
1455:10; 1460:14
determinations [1] - 1408:8
determine [4] - 1344:1;
1345:5; 1360:18; 1421:3
determined [2] - 1343:8;
1397:11
determines [1] - 1268:16
determining [3] - 1270:21;
1394:8; 1395:5
deterrent [7] - 1349:16, 22;
1350:14, 16; 1352:7;
1436:16; 1437:18
deterrents [1] - 1350:8
develop [10] - 1236:2;
1242:11; 1256:11;
1259:25; 1305:3; 1327:16;
1334:8; 1336:23; 1399:25;
1455:20
developed [9] - 1223:20;
1242:12; 1256:7; 1257:11;
1330:18, 25; 1341:25;
1389:2; 1415:19
developer [1] - 1244:10
developers [4] - 1285:7;
1286:5; 1335:7; 1432:24
developing [7] - 1305:12;
1326:15; 1328:8; 1339:14;
1401:23; 1416:11; 1461:19
Development [17] - 1276:6;
1282:25; 1283:17; 1286:7;
1296:23; 1298:2, 12;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
11
1300:4, 17; 1301:2, 16, 24;
1302:9, 15; 1304:17;
1306:22; 1307:10
development [54] - 1239:2;
1241:25; 1257:8; 1258:23;
1260:5, 16; 1261:18;
1272:15; 1274:10;
1301:13; 1319:24;
1328:13; 1334:14, 18;
1336:3, 18; 1354:13;
1370:23; 1372:1, 13;
1374:24; 1380:16;
1381:16; 1383:23; 1384:1,
9, 11, 20, 22; 1385:23;
1386:9; 1387:2, 10, 14-15;
1388:1, 4, 16, 21; 1389:5;
1391:14; 1398:4; 1409:24;
1410:2; 1415:11; 1416:18;
1420:13; 1422:4, 25;
1428:7; 1430:20; 1440:18,
25; 1442:2
developments [5] - 1419:16;
1429:15; 1431:4, 18;
1438:6
devoted [1] - 1226:23
dewatered [1] - 1310:3
dewatering [1] - 1453:12
DFO [1] - 1303:23
DFO's [1] - 1454:9
dialogue [1] - 1412:15
diameters [1] - 1269:12
dies [1] - 1403:19
diesel [2] - 1464:11, 13
differ [1] - 1320:6
difference [7] - 1300:21;
1319:3; 1389:7, 12;
1452:8, 14; 1463:18
differences [7] - 1228:22,
25; 1229:3; 1264:2;
1379:2; 1389:9; 1394:13
different [30] - 1272:1;
1274:24; 1298:16, 24;
1300:10; 1319:23; 1334:7;
1341:14; 1342:25; 1343:2;
1345:1; 1349:6; 1353:11,
16; 1356:17; 1364:5, 10;
1367:24; 1374:1; 1378:9;
1389:15; 1392:17; 1394:8;
1397:18; 1399:17; 1403:4;
1443:1; 1456:1; 1467:18
differentiate [1] - 1394:23
differentiated [2] - 1371:18;
1394:24
difficult [3] - 1259:24;
1324:14; 1347:4
difficulty [2] - 1245:3;
1366:16
digital [1] - 1350:6
Dilay [1] - 1207:3
dimensions [1] - 1458:2
dimictic [2] - 1333:12;
1340:9
dinner [3] - 1288:6; 1423:25;
1424:7
DINNER [1] - 1211:11
direct [7] - 1235:23; 1277:19;
1403:12; 1407:10;
1412:25; 1418:8; 1440:8
directed [1] - 1417:16
direction [5] - 1232:3;
1255:8; 1319:23; 1384:17;
1446:7
Directive [20] - 1227:15;
1233:7; 1235:13; 1251:19,
22, 24; 1252:1; 1255:25;
1260:20; 1353:23;
1357:20; 1358:4, 12;
1359:3, 5, 7, 23; 1360:24;
1364:24
directly [5] - 1263:21;
1343:25; 1367:10;
1404:23; 1437:1
disagree [3] - 1247:25;
1318:17; 1331:2
disagrees [2] - 1413:7;
1454:5
disbursal [1] - 1423:1
discharge [13] - 1248:23;
1266:23; 1268:8; 1323:5;
1329:18; 1330:17;
1331:12, 14; 1365:13;
1366:9; 1367:6
discharged [2] - 1330:20;
1367:9
DISCHARGED [1] - 1367:15
discharges [1] - 1449:17
discharging [6] - 1321:21;
1323:4; 1331:3, 15;
1332:14; 1367:2
discrete [1] - 1234:9
discretion [2] - 1454:9, 19
discuss [3] - 1303:20;
1304:18; 1390:19
discussed [3] - 1260:11;
1325:3; 1328:6
discussing [5] - 1274:25;
1276:8; 1332:12; 1339:6;
1363:16
discussion [16] - 1237:13;
1249:23; 1266:16;
1268:14; 1272:23; 1273:3;
1298:10; 1308:22; 1326:5;
1329:11; 1341:17; 1368:9;
1401:18; 1424:14; 1444:1;
1453:10
discussions [6] - 1256:25;
1289:3; 1306:18; 1307:6;
1312:23; 1366:24
disease [1] - 1395:23
displaced [3] - 1406:1;
1407:9; 1426:9
displacement [1] - 1427:13
displacing [1] - 1426:6
disposal [4] - 1220:15;
1247:7; 1248:6; 1263:7
Disposal [5] - 1221:1;
1248:2; 1249:24; 1250:9,
18
disposed [2] - 1323:14;
1366:18
disposing [1] - 1324:5
disposition [1] - 1365:24
disputing [1] - 1435:22
dissolved [1] - 1334:3
distance [1] - 1220:25
distinctions [1] - 1371:22
distinguish [1] - 1394:18
distribute [2] - 1307:12;
1308:9
distribution [2] - 1291:6;
1408:18
Distribution [1] - 1294:14
districts [1] - 1369:20
disturb [2] - 1310:10; 1340:4
DISTURBANCE [4] - 1212:9;
1217:25; 1218:2
disturbance [12] - 1217:15;
1219:21; 1220:1; 1252:15;
1378:23; 1386:23;
1408:21; 1411:20;
1420:20; 1433:6, 18;
1452:16
disturbances [2] - 1432:11,
15
disturbed [6] - 1252:2, 17;
1376:20; 1377:2; 1431:3,
17
Diversion [3] - 1220:4;
1335:14; 1452:6
diversion [12] - 1450:20, 22,
25; 1451:19, 25; 1452:2,
9-10, 21; 1453:6, 9, 14
divided [1] - 1345:1
Document [10] - 1315:23;
1316:13, 25; 1317:19;
1318:2; 1320:1, 22;
1333:21; 1335:2; 1336:8
DOCUMENT [2] - 1213:12;
1321:3
document [34] - 1222:4;
1224:11; 1265:9; 1304:7,
13, 22; 1305:21; 1306:5;
1307:16; 1315:16;
1316:18; 1317:1, 4, 8, 16;
1318:18; 1319:1, 8, 10, 17;
1320:16; 1335:20, 23, 25;
1376:10; 1381:22;
1393:21; 1424:17;
1460:16, 20; 1461:22;
1462:4
documentation [3] - 1363:2,
8; 1424:15
documented [2] - 1441:3, 20
documents [3] - 1224:14;
1287:11; 1397:9
dogged [1] - 1267:25
dollar [1] - 1244:7
Don [2] - 1207:18; 1208:21
done [50] - 1244:21; 1260:4,
20; 1306:14; 1315:13;
1318:5, 8; 1335:12, 22;
1336:25; 1337:16;
1338:11; 1345:15;
1346:13; 1348:6; 1349:2,
7; 1352:13; 1355:7;
1356:5; 1357:5; 1358:20;
1360:17; 1361:11; 1382:8,
19; 1389:1; 1400:4, 7, 9;
1401:8, 11; 1405:5;
1409:19, 22, 25; 1417:3;
1432:5, 12; 1433:23;
1437:13; 1440:12;
1447:14, 21; 1465:8
Donna [2] - 1208:10
door [1] - 1228:5
double [2] - 1390:16; 1391:3
double-barreled [1] -
1390:16
double-barrelled [1] -
1391:3
down [21] - 1228:5; 1231:3;
1233:25; 1234:5; 1261:15;
1262:7, 23-24; 1263:2, 9;
1264:11; 1285:1, 3;
1308:22; 1319:8; 1322:22;
1347:24; 1372:16; 1403:2;
1457:23; 1470:7
downstream [5] - 1242:10;
1244:7, 22; 1245:10, 18
dozers [1] - 1346:8
Dr [2] - 1223:20; 1417:20
Draft [1] - 1305:7
draft [3] - 1308:24; 1317:18;
1318:1
drag [1] - 1259:15
drained [1] - 1467:1
drastic [1] - 1375:13
draw [1] - 1328:18
drawing [5] - 1221:5;
1253:24; 1257:1, 6; 1266:4
drilled [1] - 1467:5
drilling [7] - 1258:1; 1269:1;
1271:21; 1272:16; 1411:17
Drive [1] - 1206:24
driven [8] - 1239:11; 1260:9,
15; 1277:2, 4, 7; 1328:4
drivers [1] - 1407:12
dropped [1] - 1283:19
dryer [1] - 1444:13
ducks [1] - 1438:23
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
12
due [7] - 1340:23; 1358:9;
1391:13; 1403:13; 1416:4;
1434:1; 1450:24
DUNCAN [1] - 1365:17
DUNCANSON [32] - 1211:5,
9; 1215:6; 1216:16;
1217:8, 12; 1218:7;
1219:1, 18; 1220:8, 12, 22;
1221:9, 24; 1223:3, 11;
1224:3; 1246:11; 1267:15;
1288:10, 14-15; 1289:24;
1292:24; 1347:21; 1348:1,
11, 17; 1365:12, 16;
1367:17; 1468:14
Duncanson [6] - 1208:2;
1215:5; 1246:16; 1288:9;
1365:11; 1468:10
duration [4] - 1394:7, 9;
1455:25; 1456:16
during [16] - 1224:25;
1281:13, 18, 22; 1282:2;
1291:11; 1293:13;
1295:18; 1296:2; 1307:12;
1308:25; 1311:16; 1322:8;
1343:18; 1420:25; 1453:5
dwellings [4] - 1281:12, 16,
18; 1284:1
dyke [1] - 1425:1
dykes [1] - 1237:12
dynamic [2] - 1341:11, 15
dynamics [1] - 1407:14
E
E&P [1] - 1209:8
E-10 [1] - 1206:7
Eamon [1] - 1208:7
early [9] - 1259:21; 1265:17;
1329:2; 1417:3; 1427:17;
1446:10, 22; 1449:7;
1450:6
Earth [1] - 1432:2
easiest [2] - 1337:16
easily [1] - 1338:19
east [5] - 1221:7; 1250:22;
1426:11; 1428:24; 1432:1
EAST [2] - 1212:21; 1221:20
eastern [3] - 1408:3;
1414:19; 1430:11
eating [2] - 1462:18
eats [1] - 1427:6
Eco [1] - 1445:2
Eco-Systems [1] - 1445:2
ecological [15] - 1337:23;
1340:24; 1374:4, 9, 18;
1375:24; 1377:23; 1378:7;
1383:14; 1385:18;
1395:13, 25; 1397:4;
1398:14
economic [11] - 1239:5, 10,
15; 1277:9; 1287:20;
1290:3; 1299:23; 1300:15;
1324:10; 1329:16; 1412:2
economically [2] - 1457:7,
10
economics [1] - 1325:7
economies [1] - 1468:22
ecosystem [2] - 1339:24;
1340:12
Ecosystem [1] - 1384:5
ecosystems [3] - 1314:4;
1323:10; 1341:7
effect [36] - 1285:5; 1382:22;
1390:1, 3, 5, 17; 1391:4, 7,
13; 1393:25; 1396:11, 13;
1403:15; 1407:4, 6;
1425:22, 24; 1426:1, 21;
1427:13; 1428:13;
1430:20; 1433:25;
1436:18, 23; 1438:3;
1443:24; 1452:2; 1456:11,
17; 1458:15; 1464:7;
1466:2, 6
effective [5] - 1303:8;
1324:25; 1423:9; 1436:16;
1437:18
effectively [3] - 1309:11;
1324:24; 1418:14
effectiveness [4] - 1350:3;
1417:9; 1423:13; 1447:11
Effects [4] - 1449:2; 1450:2,
16, 18
effects [47] - 1230:25;
1300:16; 1302:2; 1303:16;
1338:12; 1346:15;
1374:25; 1379:10;
1380:14, 23; 1381:9;
1382:25; 1383:14, 21;
1390:15; 1391:1, 16;
1396:7; 1401:25; 1402:6,
8; 1403:12; 1406:17;
1413:1, 20, 24; 1414:5, 13,
22; 1415:13; 1416:22;
1425:12-14, 19-20; 1426:2;
1428:7; 1434:13; 1438:19;
1441:17; 1443:9; 1449:17;
1453:3; 1455:9; 1460:14
efficacy [5] - 1319:5;
1320:13; 1417:23;
1419:10; 1449:1
efficiency [1] - 1402:25
effort [5] - 1414:11; 1430:4;
1432:19; 1435:8, 18
efforts [12] - 1226:19;
1231:18; 1242:22;
1282:22; 1313:16;
1314:10; 1339:13;
1412:24; 1429:20;
1432:21; 1433:3; 1464:19
EIA [11] - 1275:4; 1278:3;
1294:22; 1296:21;
1336:10, 15; 1370:11;
1408:25; 1409:2; 1451:22;
1462:9
EIAs [1] - 1345:12
eight [3] - 1259:23; 1461:24;
1462:1
eight-year [1] - 1259:23
either [14] - 1239:22; 1258:3;
1268:5; 1270:14; 1273:1;
1343:24; 1352:18; 1367:9;
1369:11; 1380:24;
1416:19; 1448:14; 1465:18
elaborate [4] - 1384:12;
1413:16; 1431:21; 1467:11
elders [1] - 1460:19
element [2] - 1266:25;
1302:25
elevated [2] - 1463:24;
1468:3
Elford [1] - 1208:9
eliminate [2] - 1254:8;
1265:10
eliminating [1] - 1311:4
elsewhere [4] - 1294:2;
1414:18; 1430:21; 1445:14
embryo [1] - 1461:19
Emission [7] - 1342:17, 20;
1343:7; 1344:2; 1345:5;
1350:15; 1351:18
emission [6] - 1273:19;
1276:7; 1343:2; 1350:14;
1351:17; 1353:7
EMISSIONS [2] - 1214:20;
1348:21
emissions [18] - 1272:22, 24;
1273:18, 23; 1274:21;
1275:6, 11-13, 23; 1277:2;
1348:13; 1366:8; 1367:5,
11; 1464:10, 14
emphasis [1] - 1412:3
empirical [5] - 1260:10;
1376:11, 14; 1381:2;
1418:1
empirical-driven [1] -
1260:10
employ [2] - 1328:20;
1421:12
employed [2] - 1404:4;
1416:23
employee [2] - 1467:24;
1468:5
employment [3] - 1291:8, 21;
1292:4
en [1] - 1227:3
enable [1] - 1236:2
enclosure [1] - 1394:13
encounter [1] - 1272:1
END [2] - 1213:12; 1321:3
End [9] - 1315:22; 1316:12,
17; 1317:18; 1320:21;
1333:20; 1335:1; 1336:7
end [67] - 1220:18; 1221:8;
1242:16; 1248:17;
1250:10; 1263:11;
1267:14; 1271:16, 21;
1272:6; 1275:16; 1285:21;
1301:16; 1310:8; 1312:1,
9, 21-22; 1313:16; 1314:2,
17; 1315:10; 1319:6,
12-13; 1320:13; 1323:14,
23; 1324:5; 1326:3, 12, 14;
1329:17; 1330:5, 8;
1331:3, 12, 14, 16; 1336:5,
9, 13, 19; 1338:17;
1339:11; 1340:8; 1341:7,
15; 1348:4, 9; 1368:17;
1378:9; 1396:21; 1406:5;
1410:5; 1422:13; 1425:8;
1427:11; 1428:23;
1443:23; 1452:11, 13, 16,
24; 1453:3; 1456:23
endangered [1] - 1438:18
endeavour [1] - 1366:12
ended [1] - 1369:7
endorsing [1] - 1384:17
ENERGY [6] - 1206:4, 7, 12;
1207:9; 1213:5; 1222:17
Energy [3] - 1238:15; 1239:1,
25
energy [8] - 1239:12;
1240:22; 1241:11, 15;
1242:20; 1244:15;
1325:21; 1326:21
engaged [2] - 1462:13, 15
engineering [1] - 1353:5
engines [2] - 1274:6; 1352:2
engulfed [1] - 1366:23
enhancement [2] - 1431:2,
16
enjoyed [1] - 1225:12
ensure [12] - 1228:8; 1244:2;
1279:18; 1306:15;
1308:19; 1360:23;
1364:23; 1382:1; 1460:5;
1461:6; 1462:16; 1467:14
ensuring [6] - 1244:4;
1265:21; 1271:18;
1324:20; 1329:7, 9
entered [1] - 1366:24
entire [4] - 1299:14; 1389:1;
1407:14; 1448:16
entirely [1] - 1383:19
ENTITLED [4] - 1212:5;
1213:8; 1217:5; 1308:2
entitled [3] - 1292:1;
1294:14; 1307:22
entrance [1] - 1228:10
entry [2] - 1248:11, 18
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
13
enumerated [1] - 1305:18
Environment [18] - 1304:10;
1306:21; 1307:9; 1330:19;
1348:8; 1399:20, 25;
1408:13; 1410:13;
1412:17; 1413:4; 1426:4;
1436:21; 1440:1, 6;
1448:23
environment [9] - 1313:8;
1319:14; 1339:25;
1411:12; 1450:10; 1451:4;
1465:19; 1467:8, 22
ENVIRONMENTAL [3] -
1206:5, 10; 1207:6
environmental [25] -
1310:19; 1324:10; 1325:8,
15-16; 1383:12; 1390:6,
18; 1391:5; 1394:9;
1395:2, 6, 8, 12; 1396:8,
18; 1398:13; 1412:1;
1414:21; 1455:8; 1456:5,
8, 19; 1464:17; 1466:6
Environmental [8] - 1209:1;
1223:23; 1274:14, 17;
1314:12; 1318:13;
1383:11; 1400:10
environmentally [1] -
1327:18
environmentally-friendly [1]
- 1327:18
envisioned [1] - 1341:7
EPEA [1] - 1410:15
EPL [1] - 1334:25
EPLs [3] - 1333:24; 1334:15,
21
equations [1] - 1235:13
equipment [40] - 1234:14,
16-17; 1263:8; 1325:13;
1343:17; 1345:8, 20;
1346:4, 16; 1349:6;
1352:11, 14, 23; 1353:3,
11-12, 15; 1354:5, 9, 15,
23; 1355:2, 8-10, 19;
1356:11, 18; 1357:10,
24-25; 1358:10, 16;
1359:1, 19; 1361:7, 18;
1364:10
equipments [1] - 1234:17
equivalency [1] - 1220:2
equivalent [1] - 1343:17
ERCB [15] - 1206:4; 1207:9,
13; 1210:20; 1211:6;
1225:8; 1237:20; 1255:25;
1268:3; 1342:13; 1357:19;
1360:24; 1364:24;
1366:25; 1367:7
Erin [1] - 1207:17
Errors [1] - 1220:6
ESAR [1] - 1432:1
especially [3] - 1354:12;
1388:20; 1415:24
Esq [9] - 1207:7, 10; 1208:2,
7, 9, 13, 23; 1209:3
ESRD [1] - 1331:15
essential [1] - 1238:21
essentially [12] - 1232:22;
1257:24; 1258:4, 25;
1295:7; 1296:14, 16, 18;
1297:21; 1335:19;
1355:10; 1463:18
establish [1] - 1392:6
established [1] - 1326:1
ESTABLISHED [1] - 1206:2
estimate [8] - 1281:23;
1298:2, 4; 1300:1; 1302:2;
1322:20; 1405:7
estimated [5] - 1220:19;
1281:12; 1283:25; 1284:3;
1291:7
estimates [9] - 1281:15;
1300:22, 25; 1301:1;
1302:19; 1359:13; 1408:6;
1463:19
estimating [1] - 1297:22
et [4] - 1344:18; 1359:13;
1381:23; 1457:4
ETDA [5] - 1250:23, 25;
1251:9, 16; 1253:12
eutrophication [1] - 1338:22
evaluate [3] - 1255:22;
1338:2; 1449:1
evaluating [1] - 1385:16
evaluation [2] - 1237:20;
1455:8
evening [6] - 1225:2; 1288:5;
1424:2; 1468:17, 24;
1469:7
EVENING [1] - 1211:14
event [4] - 1228:4; 1274:4;
1309:16; 1465:17
events [1] - 1465:24
eventually [1] - 1392:9
evidence [11] - 1254:7;
1332:5; 1376:11, 14;
1418:1, 18; 1435:7;
1436:10; 1443:21; 1445:11
exact [1] - 1286:9
exactly [9] - 1234:24;
1261:14; 1340:6; 1345:23;
1383:4; 1400:22; 1405:10;
1454:13
examination [4] - 1224:24;
1225:4; 1349:17; 1350:25
examine [1] - 1468:21
example [18] - 1245:8;
1256:6, 20; 1257:16;
1259:15; 1352:13;
1353:21; 1372:18;
1391:10, 24; 1395:22;
1399:23; 1404:1; 1406:1;
1421:19; 1422:9
examples [6] - 1266:2;
1391:18; 1420:14, 16;
1446:14; 1461:14
exceed [1] - 1278:4
exceedance [2] - 1361:14;
1362:2
exceedances [4] - 1331:22;
1362:3; 1463:9; 1464:2
exceeded [4] - 1374:11, 17;
1463:3
exceeding [1] - 1375:1
except [1] - 1343:20
exception [1] - 1238:2
exceptional [1] - 1311:16
exceptions [1] - 1375:10
excessive [1] - 1361:8
exclusively [1] - 1462:19
excuse [2] - 1315:11;
1320:14
execute [3] - 1230:3; 1236:2;
1261:8
executing [1] - 1264:22
execution [1] - 1279:4
exercise [3] - 1265:8;
1357:1; 1400:3
exhaust [1] - 1345:22
EXHIBIT [22] - 1212:3, 7, 12,
15-16, 18; 1213:4, 6, 8, 11;
1217:2, 23; 1218:18;
1219:11; 1221:16;
1222:15, 18-19; 1308:1;
1321:1
exhibit [12] - 1216:23;
1217:19; 1219:2; 1222:7,
10, 23; 1223:7; 1254:16;
1255:17; 1307:17; 1374:6;
1459:9
Exhibit [53] - 1218:15;
1219:8; 1221:13; 1224:10;
1238:7; 1240:3; 1246:24;
1247:10; 1250:15; 1254:4;
1262:2; 1273:11; 1277:15;
1291:4; 1294:6; 1297:6,
21; 1308:13; 1321:7;
1330:12; 1333:2, 20;
1342:15; 1370:18; 1372:7;
1379:6; 1384:8; 1389:25;
1392:13; 1395:3; 1396:3;
1398:1; 1399:19; 1401:19;
1403:10; 1404:12;
1408:11; 1410:21;
1412:16; 1416:7; 1418:21;
1431:11; 1434:21; 1440:2;
1444:5; 1447:25; 1448:21;
1454:25; 1458:8; 1460:11;
1462:24; 1463:2; 1465:6
exhibits [1] - 1367:25
EXHIBITS [2] - 1212:1;
1213:1
exist [3] - 1339:24; 1351:24;
1438:9
existing [18] - 1232:23;
1243:7; 1245:4, 20;
1256:15; 1265:2, 18;
1309:22; 1310:7, 11;
1311:2, 15; 1360:21;
1405:19; 1436:16; 1449:2;
1453:11
exists [2] - 1334:4; 1426:5
exit [1] - 1228:5
expand [1] - 1251:15
expanded [1] - 1251:9
expanding [1] - 1278:25
EXPANSION [3] - 1206:2;
1212:14; 1218:21
expansion [3] - 1244:25;
1253:12; 1278:16
Expansion [45] - 1218:11;
1226:4; 1232:8, 10, 16;
1233:9, 19; 1236:3, 11, 21;
1237:16, 23; 1238:13;
1243:17; 1249:8; 1251:20;
1252:4; 1253:22; 1256:6;
1264:1, 16; 1265:3;
1277:21; 1278:8; 1292:5,
8, 13; 1295:9; 1296:15;
1311:1; 1343:5, 16;
1345:16; 1347:8; 1353:6;
1355:23; 1356:3, 15;
1364:22; 1410:12, 16;
1415:6; 1419:23; 1434:2;
1436:9
expansions [1] - 1278:13
expect [14] - 1235:8, 10;
1237:9; 1245:23; 1263:10;
1264:17; 1280:9, 20;
1291:22; 1296:14; 1337:9;
1362:3; 1422:10; 1466:19
expectations [1] - 1319:8
expected [9] - 1277:25;
1282:16; 1286:23; 1290:8,
14; 1297:10; 1312:13;
1314:17; 1421:6
expects [1] - 1281:25
Expenditure [2] - 1294:15,
24
expenditures [5] - 1293:15,
18, 20; 1294:18, 20
experience [6] - 1257:9;
1262:13; 1278:15; 1339:3;
1423:2, 6
experienced [1] - 1263:15
experiences [1] - 1232:7
experiments [1] - 1326:18
expertise [2] - 1328:18;
1364:10
explain [6] - 1300:20;
1379:16; 1403:15;
1404:24; 1414:25; 1454:6
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
14
explained [2] - 1245:7;
1329:19
explains [1] - 1378:6
explanation [1] - 1416:14
explore [3] - 1279:12;
1329:1; 1341:19
exploring [3] - 1274:13;
1310:1; 1325:19
exposed [2] - 1361:8;
1462:20
exposure [3] - 1461:5;
1464:3
extending [1] - 1276:19
extension [2] - 1252:20
extensive [5] - 1387:8;
1388:1; 1409:22; 1444:14;
1467:19
extent [12] - 1235:21;
1311:22; 1320:22;
1328:17; 1396:24;
1412:21; 1416:23;
1422:15; 1455:24; 1456:2,
14
External [6] - 1221:1;
1239:23; 1248:2; 1249:23;
1250:9, 18
external [2] - 1247:7; 1248:5
extirpation [2] - 1398:22;
1429:13
extra [3] - 1225:12; 1466:9,
11
extraction [8] - 1226:22, 25;
1227:3, 11; 1231:8;
1235:9, 11, 25
extrapolation [1] - 1359:15
extremely [5] - 1269:23;
1270:17; 1435:1, 4, 6
eye [1] - 1463:4
F
face [2] - 1236:23; 1272:16
facies [2] - 1236:10, 13
facilitate [1] - 1429:20
facilitating [1] - 1421:5
facilities [14] - 1226:5;
1233:13, 20; 1242:10;
1255:13; 1256:23; 1261:3;
1262:24; 1309:22; 1310:6;
1354:11; 1457:2; 1458:5
facility [16] - 1234:3, 13;
1244:7, 20; 1245:2;
1252:17; 1262:23; 1263:2,
10; 1265:15; 1266:11;
1309:21; 1313:5; 1354:13;
1362:10
Facility [1] - 1239:23
fact [17] - 1223:21; 1235:11;
1253:24; 1327:22; 1369:7;
1376:8; 1398:21; 1406:20;
1413:13; 1418:7; 1420:10;
1427:6; 1437:8, 11;
1438:16; 1453:10; 1461:1
factor [3] - 1261:7; 1370:9;
1454:17
factors [5] - 1378:2; 1381:4;
1406:11; 1454:12
failing [1] - 1346:20
fair [14] - 1237:4; 1241:13;
1257:4; 1276:21; 1280:2;
1292:21; 1302:18;
1316:25; 1317:7; 1318:16;
1341:17; 1343:23;
1368:17; 1374:19
fairly [11] - 1242:1; 1258:13;
1263:18; 1283:5; 1324:24;
1340:18; 1382:21;
1395:15; 1400:3; 1402:20;
1439:6
fall [1] - 1435:14
familiar [8] - 1295:21;
1316:3; 1363:1; 1401:12,
16; 1427:19; 1441:6;
1446:20
families [2] - 1283:19;
1287:18
fantastic [1] - 1328:6
far [15] - 1237:5; 1278:23;
1298:23; 1339:10; 1371:9;
1381:1, 15; 1394:11;
1403:1; 1409:23; 1422:13;
1437:6; 1441:12; 1467:16
faster [1] - 1454:16
fathead [1] - 1449:7
favour [5] - 1240:18, 21;
1241:8, 10, 17
favours [2] - 1241:16, 18
feasible [3] - 1400:2; 1457:7,
10
feathers [1] - 1439:4
Federal [1] - 1448:22
federal [1] - 1427:16
federally [1] - 1396:3
feed [11] - 1227:8; 1231:7,
10-11; 1232:20; 1235:18;
1236:4, 18; 1239:6;
1289:16; 1345:2
feed-well [1] - 1227:8
feeding [1] - 1270:8
feedstocks [1] - 1226:25
feet [1] - 1419:15
fen [6] - 1371:20; 1438:12;
1442:18, 21, 23
fens [1] - 1443:2
few [13] - 1215:7; 1224:22;
1260:5; 1266:14; 1283:12;
1308:8; 1320:23; 1345:12;
1368:4; 1389:4; 1404:2;
1448:20
FID [1] - 1264:20
field [7] - 1260:25; 1261:19;
1326:7; 1343:19; 1359:11,
17
field-deployment [1] -
1261:20
FIGURE [2] - 1214:17;
1293:5
figure [6] - 1253:21; 1377:15;
1388:18; 1389:14;
1416:15; 1457:9
Figure [8] - 1251:8; 1253:13,
17; 1292:1, 11, 17, 25;
1298:21
figured [2] - 1228:3; 1418:17
figures [3] - 1220:15; 1333:7;
1388:14
file [2] - 1223:5; 1251:22
filed [7] - 1216:21; 1217:17;
1218:12; 1219:5; 1221:10;
1252:1; 1462:9
files [1] - 1365:22
filing [7] - 1223:22; 1251:18;
1252:10; 1253:19;
1294:11; 1462:10; 1463:14
filings [2] - 1222:1; 1224:12
fill [1] - 1349:8
filling [3] - 1321:20, 23;
1322:9
Final [1] - 1282:7
final [11] - 1238:23; 1240:16;
1264:15, 17-18, 21;
1279:2; 1286:19; 1323:13;
1353:4; 1420:8
finalize [1] - 1453:24
finally [6] - 1220:22;
1223:13; 1249:6; 1251:6;
1259:20; 1268:13
financial [3] - 1327:2;
1328:14; 1329:6
findings [1] - 1314:16
fine [9] - 1262:8, 18;
1268:16; 1312:20; 1320:6;
1322:1; 1368:12; 1405:22
fine-scale [1] - 1368:12
finer [1] - 1394:21
fines [27] - 1235:17-19;
1236:10, 13; 1237:7;
1255:4, 9; 1257:1, 6;
1263:21; 1264:12; 1266:4;
1268:14; 1269:17, 21-22;
1270:11, 13, 18, 21;
1271:1, 6, 18; 1272:7, 13
finished [1] - 1254:13
FIRE [1] - 1210:21
fire [4] - 1227:20; 1444:22,
25; 1445:7
firemen [1] - 1228:9
fires [2] - 1444:2, 11
firm [3] - 1241:3; 1312:16;
1384:20
firmed [1] - 1312:25
First [9] - 1208:7, 11, 13, 16,
22; 1318:12; 1366:7;
1425:6; 1451:14
first [30] - 1216:16; 1220:13;
1221:25; 1225:16; 1235:6,
14; 1247:15; 1248:11;
1257:22; 1262:9; 1264:19;
1274:25; 1299:25;
1303:21; 1304:24; 1312:8,
12, 19; 1331:8; 1338:10,
14; 1340:15; 1368:22;
1387:23; 1412:11;
1421:14; 1438:21; 1455:22
FIRST [2] - 1213:5; 1222:16
firstly [2] - 1229:5; 1268:15
Fish [3] - 1318:14; 1436:23;
1437:23
fish [17] - 1313:9; 1450:7, 21;
1451:3, 6, 9, 11, 15;
1453:5, 10-11, 14; 1454:1;
1458:14; 1459:19; 1462:18
Fisheries [6] - 1304:11;
1306:21; 1307:8; 1451:14;
1453:20; 1454:19
FITCH [2] - 1210:12; 1216:2
five [6] - 1258:4, 10; 1261:18;
1277:5; 1336:25; 1407:16
fleet [19] - 1272:25; 1273:18,
24; 1274:21; 1275:12, 15;
1276:4, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24;
1277:1; 1351:4, 13-14;
1464:11, 13
flew [1] - 1436:25
flexibility [3] - 1234:1;
1244:20; 1246:3
Flook [1] - 1209:4
flotation [4] - 1229:12, 14;
1232:21; 1239:3
flow [6] - 1267:1; 1306:10;
1307:12; 1308:25;
1309:17; 1311:16
flows [3] - 1267:2; 1306:25;
1309:3
flux [1] - 1321:25
flycatcher [1] - 1378:24
flyway [2] - 1435:20; 1437:8
focus [6] - 1226:18, 21;
1227:14; 1325:21;
1326:21; 1432:16
focusing [1] - 1465:17
folks [2] - 1222:8; 1266:13
follow [5] - 1282:8; 1285:17;
1316:5; 1426:18; 1433:21
followed [1] - 1342:8
following [6] - 1248:22;
1288:6; 1305:14; 1331:11;
1392:10; 1397:25
food [3] - 1406:6, 23; 1422:7
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
15
foods [1] - 1462:19
Foothills [1] - 1423:2
footprint [30] - 1220:5;
1237:8; 1251:3; 1252:2,
14-15; 1253:11, 16, 18;
1310:10; 1385:18, 21;
1386:1; 1388:18, 20, 22;
1411:7, 20, 25; 1419:1;
1424:20; 1426:18;
1442:17; 1451:17, 19;
1452:11, 14, 22
footprints [2] - 1388:16;
1389:5
FOR [16] - 1212:5, 9-10, 13;
1213:9; 1214:14, 20;
1217:4, 25; 1218:1, 20;
1267:22; 1308:3; 1348:22
foraging [2] - 1417:8, 12
force [2] - 1260:21; 1281:5
forecast [1] - 1296:25
forecasts [1] - 1301:14
foremost [1] - 1331:8
foresee [5] - 1236:16, 22;
1284:24; 1285:25
foreseen [1] - 1341:20
forest [9] - 1391:23; 1392:25;
1411:8; 1412:4, 7;
1444:11, 17
forested [2] - 1410:21, 24
forestry [1] - 1445:8
forests [4] - 1382:1; 1393:2,
8, 11
form [4] - 1304:9; 1343:10;
1366:20; 1390:23
formed [1] - 1334:6
forms [1] - 1229:18
Fort [14] - 1206:24;
1208:11-13, 15; 1222:2,
22-23; 1224:10; 1290:11;
1318:12; 1366:7; 1369:3
FORT [5] - 1206:2; 1213:4;
1222:15
forth [4] - 1266:9; 1304:16;
1444:19; 1470:8
forward [7] - 1236:9;
1260:13, 18; 1276:15;
1366:25; 1372:4; 1452:7
four [1] - 1305:17
fourth [2] - 1262:7; 1321:11
Fox [1] - 1228:6
fracture [1] - 1272:3
frame [1] - 1325:8
Framework [7] - 1304:3;
1305:8; 1306:1, 16, 18;
1384:6; 1445:3
framework [9] - 1305:5, 13;
1306:7; 1307:4; 1308:11,
17, 25; 1384:11; 1414:2
framings [1] - 1465:20
frankly [2] - 1247:21; 1434:3
free [1] - 1242:7
freeboard [1] - 1309:21
freeze [2] - 1309:2, 11
frequencies [2] - 1343:1;
1345:2
frequency [2] - 1455:25;
1456:18
freshwater [1] - 1331:15
Friday [7] - 1218:9; 1219:20;
1220:16, 20, 25; 1223:15;
1249:23
fridge [1] - 1427:3
friendly [1] - 1327:18
FROM [4] - 1212:20; 1213:4;
1221:18; 1222:16
front [5] - 1271:21; 1272:6;
1286:8; 1372:14; 1442:14
front-end [1] - 1272:6
froth [13] - 1229:15, 17;
1232:20; 1238:20;
1240:10; 1243:19;
1248:24; 1249:12, 18;
1266:21-23; 1365:24
froth-treatment [4] -
1248:24; 1249:12, 18;
1266:21
fruit [1] - 1257:3
fruition [1] - 1311:8
FT [1] - 1438:12
fugitive [1] - 1367:5
fulfill [1] - 1347:6
full [12] - 1285:2; 1287:5;
1294:2; 1295:6, 11;
1312:8, 14; 1313:12;
1318:19; 1319:2; 1326:23;
1378:5
full-time [2] - 1295:6, 11
fullest [1] - 1427:3
fully [6] - 1278:18; 1280:18;
1284:23; 1319:1; 1453:6;
1456:8
fun [1] - 1338:8
function [2] - 1415:4, 15
functionality [1] - 1421:4
fund [2] - 1313:18; 1465:2
fundamentally [1] - 1233:17
fundamentals [3] - 1260:7,
9, 15
fundamentals-driven [2] -
1260:9, 15
funding [2] - 1313:14;
1464:25
future [10] - 1223:19;
1226:14; 1239:14;
1255:13; 1265:11;
1276:15; 1286:7; 1310:10;
1394:12; 1410:10
G
gained [1] - 1226:1
gains [1] - 1454:2
Game [1] - 1318:14
Gary [1] - 1207:10
gas [5] - 1239:7, 12;
1271:25; 1272:4; 1340:22
gather [2] - 1348:2; 1360:8
gathered [1] - 1343:18
gathering [5] - 1228:8;
1326:17, 19; 1420:7;
1443:21
gen [1] - 1346:9
gen-sets [1] - 1346:9
general [11] - 1232:3;
1316:21; 1337:8; 1375:9;
1377:24; 1378:16;
1382:10; 1400:17;
1406:12; 1445:15
General [2] - 1208:8, 23
generally [8] - 1231:12;
1268:18; 1277:4; 1338:20;
1376:18; 1419:14; 1458:1
generate [2] - 1235:25;
1239:6
generation [2] - 1309:24;
1459:22
genetic [4] - 1418:20;
1419:2, 8, 11
Gentlemen [1] - 1468:19
Geographic [1] - 1294:14
geographic [4] - 1401:9;
1455:24; 1456:2, 14
Geography [1] - 1294:24
geological [1] - 1236:2
GETU [2] - 1210:9; 1215:21
GHG [1] - 1325:16
Gill [1] - 1209:16
given [35] - 1216:18;
1217:13; 1218:8; 1220:13;
1241:14; 1242:19;
1258:20, 23; 1260:1;
1267:16; 1268:2, 22;
1269:15; 1270:20;
1288:15; 1302:11;
1313:24; 1318:8, 25;
1319:24; 1333:24; 1340:3;
1342:5; 1386:3; 1406:3;
1408:23; 1412:21;
1414:23; 1418:14; 1423:1;
1435:24; 1456:12;
1457:24; 1467:7
GIVEN [12] - 1212:4, 8, 12,
16, 19; 1214:13; 1217:3,
24; 1218:19; 1219:12;
1221:17; 1267:21
Gladys [1] - 1207:15
globally [1] - 1328:19
go-around [1] - 1409:19
goal [1] - 1245:14
Golder [1] - 1455:4
GOODJOHN [2] - 1210:6;
1215:15
Gorrie [6] - 1209:1, 6, 9, 11;
1216:18; 1444:2
GORRIE [2] - 1212:4; 1217:3
government [1] - 1414:7
GOVERNMENT [3] -
1206:12; 1213:12; 1321:3
Government [7] - 1282:25;
1283:13; 1286:16;
1315:22; 1320:21;
1415:19; 1448:22
Government-End [1] -
1315:22
grade [10] - 1227:17;
1231:13; 1235:7, 10;
1236:8, 10, 13; 1237:7;
1270:5; 1466:22
graders [1] - 1346:7
grades [2] - 1226:1; 1231:21
graminoid [3] - 1393:14;
1442:18, 20
Grand [1] - 1446:16
great [3] - 1223:11; 1366:16;
1412:11
greater [3] - 1289:11;
1394:10; 1399:16
greatest [2] - 1372:11;
1427:23
green [6] - 1379:14, 24;
1380:1; 1391:10; 1399:13;
1414:14
gridded [1] - 1388:8
ground [5] - 1274:22;
1275:7, 14, 17; 1296:19
ground-level [4] - 1274:22;
1275:7, 14, 17
groundwater [1] - 1334:1
group [4] - 1225:10; 1420:2;
1432:25; 1433:2
Group [7] - 1301:2; 1304:17;
1314:11; 1317:20, 22;
1432:7
groups [6] - 1208:19;
1315:9, 14; 1317:9;
1461:5, 7
grow [2] - 1289:10; 1302:24
growth [36] - 1283:3, 6-7;
1285:13; 1286:6, 10, 12,
14; 1287:13; 1297:8, 10,
16; 1298:6; 1299:6, 12, 18,
21; 1302:25; 1303:17;
1391:23; 1392:3, 5, 9, 23;
1393:1, 3, 8, 10; 1405:16;
1412:3-5, 7; 1444:17, 22
guarantee [1] - 1274:6
guess [25] - 1234:25;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
16
1256:20; 1259:6; 1266:2;
1284:8; 1299:25; 1314:20;
1318:25; 1323:20;
1339:12; 1340:24; 1354:7;
1368:17; 1386:4; 1407:1;
1408:1, 5; 1413:13;
1415:20; 1423:3; 1424:20;
1451:21; 1465:5
GUIDANCE [2] - 1213:12;
1321:3
Guidance [13] - 1315:22;
1316:12, 25; 1317:18;
1318:2; 1320:1, 22;
1333:21; 1335:2; 1336:8;
1460:13; 1461:22; 1462:3
guidance [8] - 1316:14, 18;
1335:19, 24-25; 1460:16,
20
guideline [3] - 1332:23;
1387:2; 1460:15
Guidelines [1] - 1276:1
guidelines [7] - 1331:15;
1332:2, 16; 1382:10;
1455:15; 1461:6; 1463:4
Gully [1] - 1435:8
H
habitat [105] - 1313:9;
1330:10; 1341:1; 1368:13,
18; 1372:10, 19; 1373:2, 8,
11, 16-18; 1374:1, 22-23;
1375:11, 22; 1376:5, 15,
19; 1377:18, 24; 1378:1,
21, 23; 1379:7, 11-13, 17,
21; 1380:3, 13, 17; 1381:6,
9-10; 1382:14; 1395:8,
20-21, 24; 1396:25;
1397:1; 1398:10; 1399:8,
14; 1404:6; 1405:13, 17,
19, 21; 1406:5, 18; 1408:6;
1409:1, 4, 7, 11, 16;
1412:22; 1413:16;
1414:18; 1417:9; 1418:7,
14; 1421:5; 1425:14;
1426:22, 25; 1430:19;
1431:3, 17; 1433:8;
1434:5, 7; 1437:25;
1440:10, 22; 1441:25;
1442:8, 13, 15; 1443:8, 17;
1444:23; 1450:22; 1451:1,
3, 6, 13, 16; 1453:6, 17;
1454:2
habitat-based [1] - 1405:13
habitats [9] - 1382:5; 1412:3;
1426:10; 1437:20; 1438:8;
1441:1; 1444:22; 1446:14
habituated [1] - 1420:21
HADD [2] - 1450:24; 1454:12
half [1] - 1222:2
hand [2] - 1316:5; 1343:9
handle [2] - 1237:10;
1262:24
handling [1] - 1234:13
hang [2] - 1274:10; 1417:2
Hannon [3] - 1375:8;
1376:23; 1377:8
Hannon's [1] - 1417:20
Hanon [1] - 1378:12
Hansen [1] - 1344:16
hard [7] - 1216:22; 1217:18;
1218:13; 1219:5; 1221:11;
1341:23; 1403:7
hard-rock [1] - 1341:23
harm [1] - 1337:23
Hatfield [1] - 1459:10
haul [4] - 1343:22; 1351:17,
20; 1352:15
HAVERS [2] - 1210:5;
1215:14
hazard [3] - 1423:3; 1466:2
hazardous [1] - 1468:1
head [3] - 1384:2; 1392:20;
1432:1
heading [5] - 1228:12;
1262:4; 1398:17; 1404:17;
1446:7
Health [15] - 1361:5;
1460:13; 1461:3, 9, 15-16,
21-22; 1462:3, 8, 22, 24;
1463:6, 8, 15
health [22] - 1331:8; 1332:6;
1368:7; 1377:24; 1381:14;
1449:16; 1450:1; 1458:7;
1460:14, 19; 1461:6, 12;
1463:3, 7, 21, 24; 1464:3,
7; 1465:19; 1466:6;
1467:11, 21
health-based [4] - 1331:8;
1461:6; 1463:3; 1464:3
healthy [1] - 1439:6
heard [2] - 1228:11; 1245:2
Hearing [1] - 1207:12
HEARING [3] - 1206:15;
1211:15
hearing [6] - 1326:2; 1361:9;
1458:12; 1465:23; 1469:10
hearings [1] - 1465:22
heat [1] - 1325:14
heavily [1] - 1402:20
Heavy [1] - 1310:20
hectares [7] - 1220:2;
1250:19; 1251:4; 1370:24;
1383:22, 25; 1386:21
Held [1] - 1206:23
help [24] - 1225:23; 1232:11;
1260:4; 1268:1; 1277:12;
1284:16; 1313:18;
1319:11; 1332:4; 1333:14;
1334:24; 1344:8; 1357:17;
1362:1; 1364:11; 1369:25;
1374:14; 1387:11;
1389:11; 1407:15;
1425:11; 1433:5; 1460:5;
1465:2
helpful [9] - 1326:23; 1356:1,
6; 1357:13, 17; 1359:4;
1360:7; 1363:22; 1387:22
helps [2] - 1306:11; 1437:20
herd [2] - 1428:22, 24
Herd [1] - 1432:3
hereby [1] - 1470:5
herein [1] - 1470:8
hereunto [1] - 1470:13
heterogeneity [1] - 1419:11
hi [1] - 1280:16
high [27] - 1230:16; 1237:7;
1240:10; 1266:23; 1269:6;
1297:8; 1324:7; 1326:7,
10; 1327:6; 1341:15;
1373:18; 1375:2, 17, 22;
1377:18; 1396:8, 18;
1398:5, 10; 1402:2, 16;
1442:12; 1456:18;
1458:19; 1459:11; 1466:20
high-fines [1] - 1237:7
high-growth [1] - 1297:8
high-level [1] - 1269:6
high-speed [2] - 1402:2, 16
high-temperature [2] -
1240:10; 1266:23
higher [24] - 1227:16;
1230:8; 1235:6; 1240:18;
1241:9, 16-17; 1270:12;
1274:22; 1322:18; 1362:4,
6; 1367:9; 1405:6;
1406:15, 22-23; 1407:1;
1439:9; 1456:18
highest [3] - 1245:16;
1456:13; 1457:14
highlight [1] - 1289:5
highlighting [1] - 1264:1
highlights [1] - 1440:6
highly [2] - 1372:19; 1415:12
Highway [1] - 1290:10
highway [4] - 1361:22;
1362:7, 11
historical [2] - 1365:22;
1440:25
historically [1] - 1466:14
history [1] - 1366:16
hmm [1] - 1341:21
holding [1] - 1345:22
holdings [1] - 1384:23
home [3] - 1405:18; 1421:20
honest [1] - 1279:23
hope [2] - 1313:2; 1454:16
hopefully [3] - 1230:21;
1315:17; 1367:13
hoping [4] - 1222:10;
1224:12; 1321:8; 1384:23
horses [1] - 1232:16
hour [7] - 1225:12; 1245:5;
1372:16; 1403:8; 1468:7,
11
hour-to-hour [1] - 1245:5
hours [5] - 1346:18; 1349:3;
1461:23, 25; 1462:1
housed [4] - 1277:22;
1278:18; 1280:24; 1281:1
HOUSEKEEPING [2] -
1210:18; 1216:15
housekeeping [5] - 1215:5,
7; 1223:13; 1224:4, 19
housing [20] - 1279:19;
1280:1, 3, 6; 1281:11, 24;
1282:17, 20; 1283:12, 14,
19, 22-23; 1284:25;
1285:6, 11, 16; 1286:2, 17,
23
Housing [1] - 1283:17
human [11] - 1327:2;
1328:14; 1329:5; 1338:21;
1406:11; 1420:20; 1459:5;
1461:11; 1463:7; 1465:19;
1466:6
Human [8] - 1461:2, 9,
15-16, 21; 1462:8, 22;
1463:15
hundred [2] - 1403:3;
1421:12
hundreds [1] - 1293:16
hunted [1] - 1405:1
hunting [2] - 1384:4;
1406:11
hydro [3] - 1241:22; 1341:11,
15
hydro-conversion [1] -
1241:22
hydro-dynamic [2] -
1341:11, 15
hydrocarbon [3] - 1258:18;
1465:9
hydroconversion [1] -
1289:8
hydrodynamic [1] - 1334:12
hydrogen [1] - 1289:12
hydrology [1] - 1320:4
hydrometry [1] - 1268:21
hypothetical [11] - 1237:15;
1249:7; 1337:3; 1338:3;
1340:13; 1341:3, 17;
1385:22; 1438:22, 25
hypothetically [2] - 1237:16;
1249:7
hypotheticals [2] - 1337:21;
1338:1
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
17
I
i.e [2] - 1360:24; 1364:24
icecaps [1] - 1366:19
ID [1] - 1237:14
ID-7 [1] - 1233:7
idea [3] - 1358:22; 1381:13;
1400:16
ideally [2] - 1354:8; 1372:21
identification [1] - 1359:7
identified [20] - 1242:13;
1243:3; 1245:22, 24;
1261:17; 1280:7; 1282:6;
1303:6; 1328:20; 1364:7;
1396:12; 1402:11; 1426:1;
1427:9; 1428:15; 1430:19;
1458:4; 1463:6, 9, 11
identifies [1] - 1302:12
identify [6] - 1259:9;
1334:18; 1336:3; 1361:13;
1362:1
II [3] - 1307:7; 1308:17, 24
illustrated [1] - 1333:7
imagery [3] - 1368:14;
1394:23; 1442:22
imagination [1] - 1434:1
imagine [1] - 1354:11
immediate [1] - 1420:18
immigrate [1] - 1410:6
Impact [4] - 1223:24; 1360:2;
1383:11; 1400:10
impact [16] - 1232:5;
1274:13, 17; 1352:6;
1354:1, 3; 1375:2, 25;
1385:17; 1391:12, 15;
1416:4; 1451:20; 1456:8;
1463:21; 1465:18
impacted [3] - 1249:9;
1403:22; 1404:6
impacts [15] - 1237:2, 12;
1299:23, 25; 1303:5;
1356:22; 1357:4; 1375:17;
1382:21; 1409:16; 1412:7;
1413:9, 18; 1450:6; 1454:2
Imperial [1] - 1318:20
implement [1] - 1453:24
Implementation [1] -
1464:21
implementations [1] -
1286:13
implemented [1] - 1257:13
implementing [1] - 1459:13
importance [2] - 1270:20;
1455:6
important [13] - 1269:23;
1270:2, 18; 1286:4;
1306:5, 7; 1325:20;
1332:21; 1364:1; 1426:14;
1456:7; 1463:7; 1464:1
importantly [1] - 1438:5
impossible [1] - 1427:5
impoundment [1] - 1248:3
improve [12] - 1225:24;
1226:3, 9; 1229:17;
1232:11; 1233:24;
1270:24; 1271:5, 10;
1350:2; 1353:12
improved [5] - 1231:16;
1263:9; 1350:6, 16
improvement [3] - 1226:19;
1232:5; 1271:8
improvements [11] -
1225:20; 1226:8, 12-13;
1229:1; 1231:14; 1232:9;
1233:25; 1234:4, 11;
1237:22
improving [1] - 1350:10
IN [9] - 1206:1, 4-5, 7-8, 10;
1212:9; 1218:1; 1470:13
in-pit [2] - 1237:12; 1267:1
inaccuracies [1] - 1359:16
Inc [1] - 1209:15
incidents [2] - 1465:10
include [8] - 1227:8;
1310:20; 1323:15;
1447:10; 1460:17, 20;
1461:19; 1463:4
included [8] - 1225:22;
1250:10; 1428:16;
1460:23; 1461:9, 11, 13;
1465:24
includes [4] - 1299:14;
1316:14; 1322:12; 1461:18
including [14] - 1226:20;
1293:17; 1340:2; 1366:13;
1378:2; 1393:10, 12;
1409:21; 1426:10;
1435:13; 1443:7; 1449:6;
1450:2; 1461:8
inclusion [1] - 1389:10
incorporate [11] - 1225:19;
1226:20; 1232:9; 1233:20;
1234:4, 11; 1237:22;
1256:4; 1264:6, 25;
1450:21
incorporated [4] - 1256:8;
1264:24; 1265:22; 1272:8
incorporates [1] - 1302:24
incorporating [4] - 1232:8;
1233:25; 1252:20; 1256:9
increase [13] - 1250:25;
1275:11, 17-18; 1276:9;
1290:14; 1295:6; 1323:9;
1337:5; 1406:3; 1421:4;
1452:12
increased [8] - 1227:9, 13;
1240:20; 1370:2; 1406:24;
1423:18; 1444:10, 21
increases [1] - 1276:8
increasing [4] - 1229:25;
1231:23; 1232:1; 1426:20
incremental [2] - 1354:2;
1382:21
incumbent [1] - 1358:10
independent [2] - 1253:2;
1315:9
INDEX [5] - 1210:1; 1211:1;
1212:1; 1213:1; 1214:1
indicate [13] - 1332:8;
1359:10; 1370:11;
1372:22; 1375:2; 1396:21;
1417:6, 11; 1435:3, 20;
1436:1, 10; 1437:16
indicated [16] - 1220:16;
1243:18; 1244:1; 1250:4;
1283:18; 1286:3; 1367:7;
1375:9; 1378:12; 1393:16;
1424:14, 19; 1425:7;
1428:1; 1443:14; 1448:11
indicates [3] - 1254:4;
1291:8; 1436:24
indicating [2] - 1374:20;
1376:16
indication [4] - 1223:4;
1375:22; 1377:20; 1398:9
indications [1] - 1248:14
indicator [5] - 1381:14;
1395:18; 1397:5, 20;
1443:19
indicators [9] - 1271:4;
1383:12; 1385:19, 25;
1395:19; 1397:18;
1443:20; 1450:1, 6
indirect [10] - 1281:20;
1412:25; 1425:20, 23;
1426:1, 21; 1427:12;
1428:8
individual [9] - 1346:10;
1353:2; 1355:8; 1356:11;
1357:1; 1358:16; 1363:19;
1373:4; 1467:24
individuals [11] - 1208:19;
1259:1; 1265:18; 1277:6;
1283:18; 1302:13; 1426:8;
1460:17; 1461:1, 14, 17
induced [1] - 1281:20
induction [1] - 1467:19
industrial [8] - 1370:23;
1374:24; 1379:8; 1380:15;
1398:3; 1415:10; 1440:24;
1445:13
Industries [1] - 1335:5
industry [23] - 1232:3;
1257:22; 1258:1, 7;
1260:20, 22; 1278:21;
1304:20; 1305:14; 1306:9,
11, 19; 1307:11; 1314:25;
1320:9, 12; 1325:22;
1327:4; 1328:7, 12;
1341:23; 1458:2; 1465:12
INDUSTRY [2] - 1213:5;
1222:17
ineffective [1] - 1421:18
infants [1] - 1460:18
influence [1] - 1338:22
inform [2] - 1373:15;
1449:16
INFORMATION [2] - 1212:9;
1217:25
information [60] - 1217:15;
1236:24; 1251:12; 1256:4;
1269:13; 1297:18;
1300:13; 1313:6; 1315:8;
1339:13; 1343:18; 1344:6,
20; 1345:1, 25; 1348:3;
1352:1, 6-7, 18; 1354:17;
1356:20; 1360:8; 1363:21;
1368:13; 1369:5, 17;
1374:19; 1378:3; 1380:4-6,
8, 11, 17, 21, 24; 1381:1,
17-18; 1382:7; 1386:14,
16, 23, 25; 1387:20;
1397:17, 19, 24; 1398:23;
1407:25; 1410:4; 1418:13;
1420:3; 1423:8; 1435:17;
1436:3; 1449:15, 23
Information [4] - 1247:18;
1333:8; 1454:22; 1462:25
informative [1] - 1320:9
informed [1] - 1458:18
infrastructure [6] - 1234:8;
1296:17; 1302:7; 1309:2;
1440:24; 1457:3
inhalation [2] - 1463:16
inherently [1] - 1373:19
initiative [1] - 1314:25
Initiative [1] - 1432:7
initiatives [7] - 1283:16;
1328:22; 1416:2; 1434:17;
1464:18
Innovation [1] - 1314:15
input [2] - 1325:14; 1425:6
inputting [1] - 1353:24
inside [4] - 1411:7; 1433:10,
13
insignificant [1] - 1396:13
installation [1] - 1451:20
installed [4] - 1227:11;
1229:21; 1255:13; 1417:4
installing [1] - 1256:24
instance [1] - 1372:23
instead [1] - 1386:21
instituted [1] - 1263:1
intact [1] - 1399:4
intactness [1] - 1399:1
intake [1] - 1309:25
integrating [1] - 1313:7
integrity [1] - 1244:23
intend [1] - 1309:20
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
18
intended [3] - 1254:8;
1340:8; 1461:17
intending [1] - 1232:9
intends [2] - 1237:22;
1264:25
Intensive [2] - 1387:7, 9
intensive [8] - 1368:16;
1387:14; 1388:2, 6; 1435:7
intent [10] - 1287:4; 1357:16;
1358:1, 5; 1359:24;
1387:6; 1412:6; 1449:13,
20
intention [1] - 1459:18
intents [1] - 1309:7
interest [4] - 1244:2;
1269:25; 1276:16; 1339:1
interested [15] - 1226:16;
1234:1; 1235:3; 1247:2,
21; 1260:2; 1268:25;
1274:12; 1284:13;
1298:13; 1299:21; 1338:4,
16; 1339:9; 1351:3
interesting [1] - 1420:22
interests [2] - 1233:22;
1256:18
interface [1] - 1340:23
interim [1] - 1415:22
interior [1] - 1361:6
interject [1] - 1347:21
intermediate [1] - 1261:2
internal [1] - 1227:6
internally [1] - 1271:23
interpret [1] - 1272:2
interpretation [1] - 1385:3
intervals [1] - 1269:8
INTERVENERS [1] - 1208:5
intimately [1] - 1401:16
introduce [1] - 1407:5
introducing [1] - 1422:6
inventories [2] - 1254:6;
1310:12
inventory [6] - 1323:13, 22;
1324:3; 1368:12; 1394:22
investing [3] - 1283:13;
1329:5
Investment [1] - 1282:7
investment [4] - 1264:18, 21;
1279:3, 7
investments [3] - 1234:10;
1283:11
involved [7] - 1241:24;
1265:14; 1317:6; 1395:10;
1431:1, 15; 1467:25
involvement [1] - 1431:22
involves [1] - 1395:7
IOM [1] - 1420:1
ions [3] - 1227:13; 1231:10;
1235:20
irreversible [12] - 1390:5, 15,
17, 25; 1391:4, 17, 19, 22,
25; 1392:6, 17; 1393:7
irritant [2] - 1463:4
IS [2] - 1214:11; 1246:19
Island [1] - 1206:23
islands [2] - 1447:17; 1448:4
issue [17] - 1263:23;
1276:13; 1282:20;
1300:15; 1395:21, 23;
1397:1; 1406:5; 1417:25;
1430:8, 12, 15, 22; 1438:7;
1442:10; 1460:9; 1463:7
issues [14] - 1263:2; 1264:7;
1277:3; 1312:4; 1368:5;
1369:2; 1427:10; 1428:10;
1437:6; 1441:18; 1442:8
item [3] - 1362:2; 1363:6;
1456:14
items [2] - 1362:24; 1389:11
itself [9] - 1226:22; 1259:12;
1261:11; 1275:12; 1317:8;
1338:5; 1339:4; 1446:19;
1453:9
IV [18] - 1272:25; 1273:4, 8,
25; 1274:1, 4-5, 20;
1275:9; 1276:3, 13;
1351:6, 11, 19, 23; 1352:3
J
Jackpine [88] - 1218:10;
1225:23; 1226:4; 1228:23;
1229:1, 6, 12, 16, 20;
1230:6; 1231:2; 1232:7,
10, 16, 18; 1233:2, 4, 10,
19; 1236:11; 1237:9, 16,
23; 1238:12; 1243:8, 16;
1245:1, 20; 1251:19;
1252:16, 23; 1253:20;
1254:23; 1255:1, 10, 14;
1256:5, 24; 1262:10, 18;
1263:15; 1264:1; 1265:2,
17; 1266:5, 8, 11; 1277:21;
1278:7; 1292:5, 8, 13;
1295:9; 1296:15; 1311:1,
3; 1343:3-5; 1345:8, 16;
1347:8, 14; 1348:13;
1353:5, 14; 1355:4, 23;
1356:2, 8; 1360:22;
1364:22; 1410:11; 1415:6;
1416:20; 1419:23;
1420:11; 1434:2; 1436:9;
1447:3; 1448:15; 1467:4
JACKPINE [7] - 1206:2;
1212:13; 1214:20;
1218:20; 1348:22
JALKOTZY [17] - 1210:8;
1212:4, 8; 1215:20;
1217:3, 24; 1223:18;
1368:22; 1390:20;
1392:19; 1417:14;
1424:22; 1431:24; 1433:9;
1435:5; 1441:6; 1445:23
Jalkotzy [17] - 1216:18;
1217:13; 1223:16;
1369:10; 1371:17;
1375:20; 1378:5; 1393:18;
1405:14; 1413:23;
1425:11; 1427:18;
1428:14; 1431:21;
1432:18; 1433:22; 1442:11
Jamault [1] - 1207:8
James [1] - 1208:9
January [2] - 1238:5;
1454:22
JASON [2] - 1210:6; 1215:16
Jasper [1] - 1430:14
Jean [1] - 1207:21
Jean-Pierre [1] - 1207:21
Jeerakathil [1] - 1208:13
JEFF [2] - 1210:17; 1216:12
Jefferson [1] - 1219:1
JEFFERSON [2] - 1210:14;
1216:7
Jenny [1] - 1208:7
JERRY [2] - 1210:9; 1215:22
Jill [1] - 1207:7
Jim [1] - 1207:3
JME [2] - 1294:24; 1406:8
JOAO [2] - 1210:10; 1215:23
jobs [2] - 1295:5, 8
John [2] - 1208:15; 1435:8
JOHN [2] - 1210:16; 1216:11
Johnston [2] - 1208:15;
1209:8
JOINT [3] - 1206:1; 1207:2
Joint [6] - 1207:7; 1223:22;
1238:6; 1333:9; 1454:21;
1464:20
jointly [1] - 1256:11
Joslyn [1] - 1401:13
JPM [1] - 1254:19
JPME [5] - 1220:1; 1232:14,
22; 1316:20; 1366:14
judgment [8] - 1381:2;
1383:15; 1396:17; 1397:2;
1455:5, 23; 1456:4
judgments [1] - 1455:14
June [3] - 1225:17; 1240:4;
1277:16
Justice [1] - 1208:23
K
Karin [2] - 1208:11; 1209:1
KASEY [2] - 1210:10;
1215:24
Katherine [1] - 1209:3
keep [5] - 1224:25; 1234:9;
1411:21, 24; 1465:1
keeping [3] - 1285:9;
1354:20; 1469:2
Keith [1] - 1209:6
Kellie [1] - 1209:8
kept [1] - 1433:7
key [7] - 1238:24; 1249:2;
1311:3; 1314:20; 1332:11;
1358:18; 1383:12
kills [1] - 1338:24
kilometre [4] - 1356:24;
1405:10; 1407:16
kilometres [13] - 1229:8;
1230:2; 1421:21; 1423:7;
1429:5, 8; 1433:16;
1436:5, 7-8; 1437:5;
1438:1
kind [20] - 1306:24; 1344:19;
1354:8; 1368:25; 1370:24;
1389:10, 12; 1392:2;
1394:18; 1397:18; 1401:7,
10; 1407:3; 1417:11;
1421:11; 1422:17; 1434:7;
1437:24; 1439:13; 1442:23
kinds [6] - 1343:12; 1344:18;
1371:22; 1408:8; 1422:11;
1438:8
Kirk [1] - 1208:8
KIRs [2] - 1379:8; 1403:13
kit [1] - 1296:19
knowing [2] - 1356:19;
1360:14
knowledge [2] - 1226:1;
1266:6
known [3] - 1301:1; 1335:9;
1393:6
Kolenick [1] - 1208:3
Komers [1] - 1223:21
KOPPE [3] - 1210:7;
1215:18; 1460:24
Kovach [4] - 1304:13;
1329:22; 1384:13; 1431:12
KOVACH [20] - 1210:15;
1216:9; 1304:14; 1312:15;
1317:2; 1323:6; 1331:1;
1357:13; 1384:14; 1387:5;
1411:3; 1431:8; 1433:21;
1440:13; 1447:23; 1450:8,
23; 1454:8; 1459:16;
1464:24
Krista [1] - 1207:17
KUPPER [2] - 1210:10;
1215:23
L
labelled [1] - 1393:9
labour [3] - 1277:4, 8; 1281:5
LaCasse [1] - 1207:11
lack [3] - 1340:23; 1385:2;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
19
1441:15
Ladha [1] - 1209:7
Ladies [1] - 1468:19
lag [1] - 1453:17
laid [1] - 1459:17
Lake [14] - 1312:7, 14;
1313:12; 1317:18, 20;
1319:5; 1321:16, 19;
1322:8; 1335:2; 1336:8;
1446:20; 1459:20; 1460:6
lake [50] - 1312:10, 21-22;
1313:3, 16, 25; 1314:2;
1315:15; 1319:2, 6, 22;
1321:23; 1323:14, 23;
1324:5; 1326:13, 16;
1328:9; 1329:17; 1330:2,
5, 8, 16; 1331:4, 12, 14,
16; 1335:7; 1336:5, 19, 23;
1337:6, 11; 1338:19;
1339:2, 9, 14, 18, 23;
1340:8, 15, 17; 1341:1, 4,
8, 25
lake's [1] - 1340:11
lakes [43] - 1254:9; 1312:1;
1314:17; 1315:10;
1316:16, 18, 21; 1319:12;
1320:5, 7, 13-14; 1324:24;
1326:3; 1327:24; 1330:21;
1333:11; 1334:5, 21;
1335:8, 17, 20; 1336:9, 13;
1337:3, 24-25; 1338:11,
17-18, 20; 1339:1, 6, 11,
17, 19; 1340:2, 4; 1341:12,
22
LAKES [2] - 1213:12; 1321:3
Lakes [4] - 1315:22; 1316:12;
1320:22; 1333:21
Lambrecht [4] - 1208:8;
1218:9; 1219:2, 20
land [20] - 1283:1; 1286:16;
1370:21; 1371:10; 1372:2;
1373:1, 6, 15, 21, 24;
1384:24; 1432:25; 1433:4;
1437:9, 22; 1438:24;
1439:15; 1448:12
Land [1] - 1432:7
landed [1] - 1437:2
landing [5] - 1434:25;
1436:2, 12; 1438:17, 22
landings [5] - 1295:18;
1296:4, 10; 1436:4
Landsat [9] - 1368:10, 14;
1369:23; 1372:9; 1373:10;
1394:17, 23; 1408:7;
1442:22
landscape [12] - 1322:12;
1369:16; 1377:1; 1409:24;
1410:7; 1416:3; 1418:11;
1419:18; 1421:10, 22;
1423:16; 1444:12
landscapes [2] - 1328:11;
1444:3
large [14] - 1260:25; 1269:13;
1270:6; 1286:11; 1325:11;
1328:9; 1363:13; 1369:6;
1379:17; 1405:17;
1426:23; 1441:23; 1443:2
large-scale [5] - 1260:25;
1328:9; 1379:17; 1405:17;
1441:23
largely [1] - 1281:19
larger [4] - 1275:11; 1380:12;
1388:13; 1458:19
largest [1] - 1440:17
LARP [7] - 1275:25; 1383:2;
1414:2, 15, 20; 1434:18
LARP's [1] - 1414:15
laser [3] - 1268:19, 21;
1269:11
last [28] - 1215:8; 1218:9;
1219:20; 1220:16, 25;
1230:18; 1248:18;
1266:14; 1270:24; 1292:7;
1303:19; 1318:9; 1345:12;
1361:25; 1368:9; 1377:12;
1383:24; 1401:19;
1409:19; 1416:24; 1429:1,
4; 1435:19; 1444:1;
1446:1; 1447:2; 1464:15
lastly [1] - 1272:7
late [4] - 1228:11; 1259:20;
1291:10; 1435:9
latest [3] - 1449:25; 1450:6,
15
latter [1] - 1231:22
launch [1] - 1228:18
lay [1] - 1266:2
layer [2] - 1340:17, 19
layered [2] - 1373:21, 23
layers [1] - 1334:7
lead [3] - 1340:19; 1359:15;
1389:6
Leader [1] - 1207:13
Leadership [1] - 1432:7
leads [3] - 1313:15; 1324:12;
1388:9
leak [1] - 1466:25
learned [2] - 1265:8; 1335:4
Learned [2] - 1335:3
learning [1] - 1446:25
learnings [5] - 1264:7;
1265:23; 1266:3; 1313:18;
1315:3
learns [1] - 1264:25
lease [10] - 1221:7; 1346:22;
1384:23; 1388:18, 22;
1389:1; 1402:4; 1447:19;
1448:5
LEASE [4] - 1212:21;
1221:19
Lease [1] - 1250:11
leases [12] - 1218:10;
1310:2, 7; 1311:2, 15;
1388:16; 1389:5; 1432:13;
1435:11; 1438:11
LEASES [2] - 1212:13;
1218:20
least [5] - 1258:6; 1378:23;
1382:4; 1402:4; 1437:2
leave [7] - 1224:15; 1392:1;
1405:21; 1410:23; 1411:7;
1412:5; 1448:8
led [1] - 1300:10
left [5] - 1248:15; 1414:15;
1460:25; 1468:21; 1469:6
length [8] - 1229:8, 25;
1230:2; 1231:23; 1232:19;
1418:15; 1465:2
Les [1] - 1207:4
less [18] - 1227:17; 1235:10;
1240:11; 1280:25; 1281:1;
1322:11; 1327:18;
1340:25; 1359:17; 1370:5;
1387:4; 1395:19; 1399:14;
1433:7; 1439:2, 8; 1446:5,
20
lessons [3] - 1265:8; 1335:4;
1353:13
Lessons [2] - 1335:2, 4
lessons-learned [1] - 1265:8
letter [22] - 1238:6; 1304:8,
16; 1307:21; 1317:11, 15;
1318:5; 1386:19; 1399:20,
22; 1408:12; 1412:17, 19;
1413:4; 1421:1; 1424:17;
1430:23; 1436:22; 1440:1;
1444:6
LETTER [2] - 1213:8; 1308:1
letters [1] - 1317:9
level [38] - 1227:9; 1231:11;
1235:19; 1240:14; 1241:4;
1242:5, 12-13; 1243:22;
1245:5, 16; 1256:16;
1259:19; 1261:1; 1264:19;
1269:6; 1274:19, 22;
1275:7, 14, 17; 1289:14;
1301:11; 1324:7; 1345:7;
1363:6; 1366:18; 1370:24;
1371:21; 1385:6; 1386:24;
1387:25; 1403:17; 1406:9;
1457:14; 1459:11
levels [20] - 1231:9; 1278:11;
1346:23; 1355:12;
1357:25; 1358:9; 1359:1;
1360:24; 1361:8; 1364:23;
1371:4; 1374:2; 1382:13;
1423:14; 1458:19; 1459:3,
11; 1460:5
life [7] - 1239:23; 1275:3, 10;
1357:23; 1358:3; 1403:19;
1449:8
life-stage [1] - 1449:8
lifestages [1] - 1450:7
lifestyle [1] - 1462:6
lifted [1] - 1367:1
light [5] - 1258:18; 1346:9;
1413:13; 1430:15; 1439:12
lightly [1] - 1397:5
likelihood [1] - 1274:3
likely [9] - 1257:12; 1258:20;
1288:5, 8; 1340:18;
1353:10; 1375:4; 1404:21;
1407:11
limb [1] - 1291:16
limit [5] - 1243:8; 1288:23;
1311:23; 1464:3
limitations [1] - 1365:23
LIMITED [1] - 1206:3
limited [2] - 1395:24;
1402:22
limiter [1] - 1258:25
limits [1] - 1461:5
limnology [1] - 1320:3
LINDA [4] - 1210:5, 14;
1215:14; 1216:7
line [23] - 1229:6, 8; 1230:1;
1234:1, 5; 1249:6;
1266:16; 1271:12; 1285:2,
4; 1286:19; 1295:24;
1308:23; 1357:18; 1358:5;
1397:25; 1403:2; 1464:16;
1466:19; 1467:3, 9; 1468:7
linear [2] - 1432:11, 14
lines [26] - 1231:24; 1259:15;
1276:19; 1310:15;
1349:15; 1350:24; 1364:6;
1397:21; 1401:18, 24;
1402:1, 8, 13, 15, 18,
22-23; 1403:1, 6; 1435:7;
1436:10; 1443:21; 1467:4,
6
Lingen [1] - 1207:18
LIST [2] - 1212:16; 1219:13
list [13] - 1279:17, 22;
1283:18, 20; 1356:10;
1389:10; 1402:10;
1418:17; 1447:25; 1459:7,
23; 1466:7
listed [11] - 1343:15; 1356:7;
1396:3; 1403:11, 13-14;
1417:9; 1442:7; 1448:2;
1457:1; 1459:14
lists [1] - 1344:12
literally [1] - 1267:2
literature [16] - 1343:14, 25;
1344:10; 1354:20-22;
1374:20; 1375:4, 7;
1377:3, 20; 1378:8;
1381:22; 1383:8; 1407:17;
1418:12
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
20
live [1] - 1280:9
living [6] - 1277:25; 1280:20;
1281:2; 1287:3; 1420:12
loaded [1] - 1222:4
loading [3] - 1230:14, 17;
1231:24
Local [2] - 1426:6, 8
local [4] - 1413:1; 1422:18;
1456:2; 1462:18
localized [2] - 1390:9, 12
locally [2] - 1328:19; 1449:9
locate [1] - 1400:24
location [2] - 1251:8; 1401:9
locations [7] - 1248:3, 25;
1249:13; 1353:2; 1358:18;
1384:19; 1457:3
long-range [1] - 1298:6
long-term [14] - 1231:19;
1284:8; 1285:5, 16;
1295:5; 1335:16; 1341:12;
1393:19, 21, 24; 1394:3-5,
10
longer-term [2] - 1285:8;
1309:20
look [83] - 1224:16; 1248:7;
1251:6; 1253:15; 1255:15;
1260:19; 1264:23; 1265:8,
17; 1273:11; 1278:15;
1284:10; 1290:22;
1294:25; 1304:24;
1312:19; 1314:19;
1315:25; 1324:22;
1325:18; 1332:19;
1335:21; 1342:16; 1347:2;
1348:9; 1355:18; 1356:17,
22; 1357:1; 1358:20, 22,
25; 1359:1; 1360:12;
1361:17, 22; 1362:5;
1370:10, 13; 1371:2;
1376:3, 6; 1377:4; 1380:7,
18; 1381:10, 12; 1383:13;
1387:6; 1388:14; 1389:3;
1391:25; 1393:20;
1395:12, 17; 1398:13;
1413:18; 1414:21; 1415:4,
17; 1419:15; 1420:9;
1421:15; 1422:6; 1423:10;
1426:16, 21, 25; 1438:3, 8;
1441:16; 1442:25; 1443:6;
1446:12; 1451:12;
1452:21; 1455:24;
1457:19; 1468:25
looked [26] - 1275:1, 8;
1306:19; 1316:2; 1335:16;
1337:2; 1356:23; 1383:11;
1386:20, 22; 1397:23;
1399:7, 9; 1407:23;
1417:18; 1425:20; 1442:6;
1451:9; 1456:3;
1465:21-23; 1466:2, 15
looking [85] - 1236:8, 13;
1239:2; 1255:6; 1256:23;
1257:14; 1258:9; 1261:4;
1263:4, 24; 1268:18, 22;
1271:4, 10; 1276:18;
1278:25; 1283:10; 1285:4;
1287:17; 1300:2, 17;
1303:10; 1310:9; 1311:12;
1315:13; 1325:7, 9;
1327:17; 1345:18;
1346:10, 12, 21; 1356:21;
1363:15; 1370:17; 1371:9;
1372:7; 1374:20; 1376:8;
1377:22; 1378:1, 21;
1379:19; 1380:2, 5, 10, 13,
19; 1382:9; 1386:8, 13;
1388:11; 1389:4; 1390:21;
1391:6, 9; 1398:1, 14;
1399:19; 1401:20;
1402:14; 1403:25;
1412:16; 1414:9; 1416:1;
1418:9; 1419:13; 1422:22;
1427:12; 1432:10; 1436:3;
1437:21; 1441:9; 1442:24;
1443:20; 1450:14;
1455:18; 1456:4, 23;
1457:13; 1458:5; 1465:16
looks [7] - 1283:5; 1288:8;
1332:5; 1349:2; 1417:23;
1438:12; 1452:24
lose [1] - 1410:2
Loss [3] - 1453:19; 1459:14,
17
loss [37] - 1370:22; 1374:22;
1375:23; 1376:5, 15;
1377:18, 24; 1378:1;
1379:12, 17, 20; 1380:3,
14; 1381:7, 9; 1395:9,
20-21; 1396:25; 1398:10;
1399:8, 14; 1404:6;
1409:1, 7; 1412:22;
1413:15; 1416:5; 1440:8,
23; 1441:11, 20; 1443:17;
1444:14, 16
losses [3] - 1391:20;
1400:11; 1442:9
lost [4] - 1381:11; 1405:17;
1409:11; 1416:4
louder [1] - 1361:21
low [16] - 1237:7; 1242:5;
1264:12; 1266:22;
1279:17, 22; 1306:10;
1307:12; 1308:25;
1309:17; 1311:16;
1334:13; 1373:18;
1399:23; 1407:19; 1458:20
low-fines [1] - 1264:12
low-flow [4] - 1306:10;
1307:12; 1308:25; 1309:17
low-grade [1] - 1237:7
low-temperature [1] -
1266:22
lower [10] - 1230:16; 1235:9;
1240:17, 19; 1241:8;
1307:1; 1332:6; 1340:16,
19; 1361:20
Lower [5] - 1304:4; 1305:8;
1383:2, 18; 1430:17
lowering [1] - 1231:24
LSA [15] - 1370:12; 1404:7;
1405:8; 1408:20; 1409:15,
17; 1424:16, 20; 1425:12,
19; 1428:3, 5, 25
Ltd [4] - 1208:2; 1209:7;
1317:17
Lucille [1] - 1207:8
lunch [3] - 1224:21; 1286:20;
1287:20
luncheon [1] - 1287:25
LUNCHEON [1] - 1210:23
lynx [1] - 1403:14
M
m'mm [1] - 1341:21
m'mm-hmm [1] - 1341:21
MacDonald [2] - 1206:23
Mackenzie [1] - 1442:3
magnesium [3] - 1227:13;
1231:10; 1235:20
magnesiums [1] - 1311:11
magnitude [8] - 1276:23;
1374:22; 1375:1, 17, 22;
1455:24; 1456:11
Mahmood [1] - 1207:19
main [7] - 1235:5; 1264:10;
1312:18; 1343:12; 1412:8;
1419:2; 1440:21
maintain [7] - 1277:6;
1326:23; 1382:4; 1405:16;
1419:11; 1447:17; 1448:4
maintained [1] - 1415:15
maintaining [3] - 1312:21;
1366:17; 1418:2
maintenance [2] - 1234:12,
15
major [3] - 1313:4; 1331:20;
1389:11
majority [3] - 1280:23;
1287:6; 1441:12
make-up [1] - 1415:8
MALCOLM [2] - 1210:17;
1216:13
Malcolm [1] - 1208:15
malfunctions [5] - 1368:7;
1465:5, 16, 25; 1467:11
Mallon [1] - 1208:21
mammals [1] - 1417:24
manage [7] - 1223:10;
1261:2; 1320:10; 1327:25;
1334:20; 1459:19; 1466:16
managed [4] - 1372:15;
1382:1; 1405:2; 1460:6
MANAGEMENT [2] - 1213:9;
1308:3
management [14] - 1265:1;
1307:23; 1316:15, 19;
1323:17; 1375:19;
1382:14; 1405:25; 1421:3,
11; 1423:9; 1429:17;
1433:5; 1466:2
Management [12] - 1251:23;
1269:24; 1270:10; 1304:3;
1305:8; 1306:1, 16, 18;
1384:5; 1440:15; 1445:2
Manager [2] - 1207:7
managing [3] - 1237:7;
1245:15; 1450:25
mangle [1] - 1344:15
manifesting [1] - 1259:12
manner [2] - 1444:25; 1445:8
manufacturer [1] - 1349:25
map [4] - 1221:10; 1368:10;
1389:4; 1421:15
MAP/DRAWING [2] -
1212:19; 1221:17
mapping [9] - 1217:15;
1371:6, 11-12; 1372:2-4;
1373:7, 22
MAPPING [4] - 1212:9;
1218:1
March [1] - 1268:5
MARGERUM [3] - 1210:11;
1216:1; 1262:17
Margerum [2] - 1262:15;
1263:13
margin [2] - 1326:11; 1464:5
marginalize [1] - 1227:1
marine [3] - 1227:2; 1235:22;
1270:4
marine-type [2] - 1227:2;
1235:22
mark [3] - 1224:13; 1307:16;
1320:15
MARK [2] - 1210:11; 1215:25
marked [1] - 1229:1
market [1] - 1351:14
marking [1] - 1224:9
marsh [1] - 1442:20
marshes [1] - 1393:14
MARTIN [2] - 1210:8;
1215:20
Martindale [5] - 1348:1;
1349:17; 1355:17;
1434:16; 1439:9
MARTINDALE [23] - 1210:16;
1214:19; 1216:10;
1275:20; 1345:9; 1347:17;
1348:4, 15, 20, 25;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
21
1350:18; 1352:8, 24;
1355:3; 1356:10; 1357:9;
1361:1; 1364:3; 1365:2;
1416:16; 1432:4; 1438:21;
1448:6
Martindale's [1] - 1352:21
Martineau [1] - 1207:20
mass [2] - 1227:3; 1266:13
master [1] - 1272:10
match [1] - 1356:8
material [8] - 1232:5;
1234:13; 1261:6; 1267:4;
1270:8; 1297:5; 1365:25;
1366:23
material-handling [1] -
1234:13
materially [2] - 1231:17;
1233:14
materials [3] - 1322:15;
1459:25; 1468:4
mathematician [1] - 1299:5
MATTER [6] - 1206:1, 4-5,
7-8, 10
matter [5] - 1224:9; 1242:24;
1295:17; 1327:7; 1348:5
MATTERS [2] - 1210:18;
1216:15
matters [4] - 1215:7;
1221:25; 1224:5; 1467:21
mature [2] - 1312:20; 1320:6
maximize [2] - 1233:23;
1242:23
maximum [2] - 1244:3;
1369:8
mayes [1] - 1365:19
Mayes [11] - 1226:17;
1228:17; 1230:23; 1232:6;
1237:14; 1238:3; 1244:24;
1267:16; 1268:1, 12;
1311:9
MAYES [14] - 1210:17;
1214:13; 1216:13;
1226:11; 1228:20;
1234:23; 1237:24;
1243:12; 1247:23;
1262:12; 1266:20;
1267:21; 1365:21; 1467:16
MCFN [1] - 1421:2
McKay [9] - 1208:11, 16;
1222:2, 22-23; 1224:10;
1366:7; 1369:4
MCKAY [5] - 1206:2; 1213:4;
1222:15
McMurray [5] - 1206:24;
1208:13; 1290:11; 1318:12
McMurray/Fort [1] - 1208:16
MDP [2] - 1283:4; 1301:23
mean [36] - 1278:24;
1280:25; 1282:15;
1303:10; 1309:7; 1314:5;
1315:7; 1317:3; 1337:20;
1338:11; 1355:3; 1359:5;
1360:10; 1369:14;
1371:11, 15; 1373:24;
1385:11; 1396:16; 1398:4,
9; 1400:23; 1402:5;
1403:18, 24; 1411:5;
1419:9; 1422:13; 1426:13;
1429:24; 1433:17;
1437:17; 1446:2; 1451:22
means [6] - 1223:6; 1384:12;
1388:1; 1456:25; 1457:6,
10
meant [2] - 1395:10; 1409:7
measure [6] - 1311:19;
1337:25; 1385:16;
1398:12; 1415:22; 1419:9
measured [7] - 1343:22;
1347:11; 1355:12, 19;
1356:7, 9, 12
measurement [7] - 1268:14;
1271:17; 1343:19;
1354:14; 1357:2; 1365:1, 3
measurements [15] -
1343:15; 1345:7, 17, 19,
23; 1346:3; 1347:1;
1351:21; 1352:10; 1354:4,
9, 21; 1355:1; 1359:12, 18
measures [12] - 1264:8;
1299:24; 1337:17; 1364:5;
1423:9; 1459:2, 13, 21;
1463:9, 11; 1464:12;
1466:10
measuring [1] - 1426:13
mechanical [1] - 1338:7
mechanically [1] - 1337:13
mechanism [4] - 1324:25;
1414:8, 21; 1415:17
mechanisms [2] - 1414:4;
1457:15
medium [1] - 1231:19
meet [17] - 1242:17; 1255:25;
1275:25; 1282:17;
1286:17; 1305:4; 1309:20;
1311:19; 1330:16;
1331:14; 1354:5; 1358:18;
1385:1; 1417:12; 1459:18;
1466:5; 1467:14
meeting [4] - 1233:7;
1245:19; 1305:12; 1445:20
meets [3] - 1244:17;
1329:18; 1330:21
Meighan [1] - 1207:11
Melissa [4] - 1209:1, 6, 9, 11
Member [2] - 1207:4
member [1] - 1367:7
members [5] - 1258:7;
1304:18, 21; 1317:5;
1416:24
MEMORANDUM [2] -
1213:11; 1321:1
Memorandum [2] - 1315:18;
1320:20
memory [2] - 1257:21;
1259:18
mention [1] - 1298:8
mentioned [14] - 1230:19;
1237:14; 1242:18; 1283:8;
1306:24; 1315:2; 1322:17;
1393:19; 1401:9; 1415:25;
1416:24; 1422:19; 1443:6;
1447:13
mentioning [2] - 1423:22;
1442:11
mercury [3] - 1458:19;
1459:3, 11
meromictic [26] - 1334:5, 19,
21-22, 25; 1335:10, 18, 20;
1336:3, 14; 1337:7, 11, 24;
1339:10, 19, 21, 23;
1340:2, 4, 6, 9-10, 15, 17;
1341:1, 4
meromixes [2] - 1337:4, 22
meromixis [2] - 1334:14;
1337:6
mess [1] - 1340:7
message [2] - 1314:20;
1358:7
Messier [1] - 1407:20
met [1] - 1358:19
metal [1] - 1235:20
metallurgy [1] - 1242:10
method [6] - 1270:21;
1323:12; 1389:16, 18;
1413:15; 1460:4
methodologies [2] - 1271:5;
1455:15
methodology [1] - 1273:23
methods [3] - 1342:25;
1455:18; 1457:3
methyl [1] - 1269:21
methyl-blue [1] - 1269:21
methylmercury [4] -
1459:19, 22; 1460:5, 9
metre [2] - 1269:8; 1366:10
metres [25] - 1250:21;
1251:2; 1269:4; 1306:25;
1307:2; 1309:5; 1321:13,
25; 1322:1, 5, 25; 1366:3,
18; 1367:3; 1403:3;
1416:12, 16, 19-20;
1418:19; 1421:10, 12;
1448:13
metric [3] - 1385:14; 1386:4;
1443:12
MFT [7] - 1254:5, 8, 12;
1256:22; 1257:17, 23
Michael [1] - 1207:19
MICHAEL [2] - 1210:11;
1216:1
microphone [1] - 1345:22
mid-1990s [1] - 1279:16
mid-2015 [1] - 1291:11
middle [1] - 1448:17
MIDDLETON [2] - 1210:13;
1216:4
might [28] - 1224:23;
1232:13; 1236:16; 1237:2;
1244:14; 1247:10; 1261:1;
1262:15; 1279:14, 24;
1283:15; 1287:8; 1308:23;
1335:3; 1353:11; 1387:22;
1401:4; 1402:12; 1403:2;
1409:15; 1411:14; 1415:2;
1418:18; 1424:1; 1426:15;
1448:20; 1454:15; 1466:6
migratory [6] - 1408:19;
1412:23; 1413:10;
1435:13; 1438:1; 1440:9
Mihiretu [1] - 1207:16
Mike [1] - 1262:15
Mikisew [1] - 1208:21
miles [1] - 1437:25
Miller [1] - 1324:2
million [12] - 1242:6;
1250:20; 1251:2; 1283:13;
1321:13, 24-25; 1322:1, 5,
17, 23, 25
millions [1] - 1293:16
mind [4] - 1285:9; 1294:5;
1354:20; 1460:2
mindful [1] - 1329:11
mine [39] - 1219:21; 1220:1,
16; 1226:20; 1231:7;
1234:9, 21; 1236:12, 21;
1239:24; 1244:21;
1254:13; 1272:25;
1273:17, 24; 1274:21;
1275:11, 14; 1276:9;
1309:8; 1313:25; 1319:2;
1349:2; 1351:4; 1357:23;
1361:19; 1409:10; 1411:6;
1420:20; 1422:1, 4;
1424:25; 1446:10;
1448:17; 1452:22;
1464:11, 14
Mine [124] - 1218:11; 1220:5;
1225:21, 23; 1226:4, 10,
19, 23; 1227:8; 1228:23;
1229:2, 6-7, 10, 12, 16,
19-20, 22; 1230:1, 6, 14,
20; 1231:5, 17; 1232:10,
16, 18; 1233:2, 19; 1236:3,
6, 9, 11-12, 14, 17; 1237:9,
16, 23; 1238:12; 1243:8,
16; 1245:20; 1251:19;
1252:10, 16; 1253:20;
1254:23; 1255:1, 14;
1256:6, 24; 1262:10, 19;
1263:15; 1264:1, 3;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
22
1265:2, 15; 1266:5, 11-12,
19, 21; 1267:7; 1268:3;
1270:7; 1277:21; 1278:7;
1290:12; 1292:5, 8, 13, 16;
1293:2; 1295:9; 1296:15;
1311:1; 1312:7, 14;
1313:11; 1343:3, 5, 16;
1345:8; 1347:8, 14;
1348:13; 1353:6, 13-14;
1355:23; 1356:3, 8;
1360:22; 1364:22;
1365:18; 1401:14;
1410:12, 16; 1412:9, 12;
1415:6; 1416:18; 1419:22;
1420:11; 1434:2; 1436:9;
1447:3
MINE [9] - 1206:2; 1212:13;
1214:18, 20; 1218:20;
1293:7; 1348:22
mine-fleet [1] - 1351:4
mineable [1] - 1437:3
mined [1] - 1448:16
mineral [1] - 1245:7
mines [2] - 1420:18; 1464:18
minimal [2] - 1258:24;
1275:5
minimize [4] - 1242:22;
1310:9; 1411:19; 1412:7
minimizing [1] - 1311:4
minimum [1] - 1454:1
Mining [1] - 1335:5
mining [9] - 1307:23;
1310:22; 1341:23;
1385:17; 1446:12, 15;
1457:25; 1465:9
MINING [2] - 1213:9; 1308:2
Minister [1] - 1208:23
minnow [1] - 1449:7
minus [6] - 1242:2; 1245:23;
1372:18, 22; 1398:5
minute [13] - 1331:17;
1390:20; 1397:14;
1398:15; 1404:16; 1411:2;
1412:13; 1423:11;
1425:16; 1443:5; 1445:18;
1465:4; 1467:13
minutes [5] - 1389:22;
1404:2; 1448:20; 1454:20;
1468:15
mirror [3] - 1232:22; 1233:9;
1245:2
mirrored [2] - 1235:12;
1245:1
misled [1] - 1392:19
mistake [1] - 1432:2
MITCHEL [2] - 1210:6;
1215:15
mitigate [1] - 1401:21
mitigated [1] - 1400:12
mitigating [2] - 1400:10;
1402:6
mitigation [20] - 1325:4;
1327:15; 1328:17, 24;
1329:1, 8; 1337:25;
1354:6; 1364:2, 5;
1413:15; 1415:22;
1422:14; 1434:3, 14;
1459:1, 13, 21; 1463:9;
1464:12
mitigations [5] - 1300:16;
1303:5; 1421:24; 1459:7,
16
mitigative [1] - 1299:24
mix [1] - 1381:1
mixed [2] - 1317:1; 1318:18
mixing [6] - 1335:16;
1337:13; 1338:7, 13, 23;
1341:15
mixture [2] - 1463:5
mixtures [1] - 1449:3
mobile [1] - 1403:23
mobility [1] - 1399:23
model [21] - 1298:24; 1301:2,
5-6, 12; 1333:10; 1343:1;
1345:3; 1356:19; 1360:11;
1362:23; 1373:4, 9, 16-17;
1389:15
Model [1] - 1301:3
modeled [1] - 1385:23
modelled [1] - 1276:22
modelling [7] - 1337:1;
1341:10; 1342:24; 1354:8;
1356:21; 1357:4
models [6] - 1236:6;
1334:12; 1341:14; 1373:3;
1374:1
moderate [7] - 1373:18;
1379:12, 21; 1396:8, 18;
1398:5
moderately [1] - 1333:25
modifications [1] - 1226:8
modified [3] - 1227:6;
1256:16; 1263:10
modify [3] - 1308:18;
1311:22; 1314:18
moment [11] - 1222:21;
1230:3, 20; 1243:11;
1247:13; 1280:11; 1286:9;
1331:7; 1431:23; 1434:11;
1450:12
Monday [1] - 1215:1
money [1] - 1324:22
MONGs [1] - 1393:14
monitor [5] - 1263:11;
1336:17; 1352:18; 1358:8,
15
monitored [2] - 1348:12;
1349:3
MONITORED [2] - 1214:20;
1348:21
Monitoring [2] - 1458:18;
1464:21
monitoring [28] - 1334:17;
1336:2, 6, 9, 11-12, 21;
1349:5; 1352:14; 1354:19;
1355:16; 1356:4; 1358:14,
17; 1360:15, 20, 25;
1361:4, 13; 1364:21, 25;
1416:25; 1422:21, 23;
1435:10; 1437:14;
1438:15; 1464:23
monitors [1] - 1346:19
month [1] - 1272:18
months [4] - 1261:21;
1282:13; 1284:20; 1285:20
moose [25] - 1216:19;
1403:14; 1404:9, 21;
1405:4, 6, 9, 11, 15, 25;
1406:1, 16; 1407:16, 20,
25; 1417:1; 1420:6, 11;
1422:9; 1426:7, 17;
1427:1; 1428:11; 1446:17
MOOSE [4] - 1212:5; 1217:4
Morianos [1] - 1209:3
morning [21] - 1215:4, 6;
1216:22; 1217:18;
1218:13; 1219:5, 23, 25;
1221:3, 11; 1222:8;
1224:5, 8; 1225:9;
1251:10; 1267:14;
1288:12; 1365:14; 1469:1,
7
morphing [1] - 1432:24
mortality [3] - 1402:17;
1403:12; 1407:10
most [19] - 1253:15; 1277:19;
1282:6; 1283:4; 1284:25;
1300:12; 1302:16;
1340:18; 1341:1; 1375:3;
1378:25; 1382:3, 15;
1404:9; 1424:4; 1456:6,
13; 1465:23
Mother [1] - 1340:7
motion [1] - 1448:1
MoU [1] - 1282:23
mounted [1] - 1367:4
move [30] - 1225:14;
1249:21; 1255:6; 1260:12,
17, 22; 1264:21; 1266:9;
1275:18; 1277:1; 1279:2;
1287:17; 1329:7; 1349:12;
1366:21; 1368:4; 1372:3;
1374:4; 1400:14, 17;
1401:17; 1405:21;
1411:18; 1418:12;
1419:18; 1421:21; 1426:9;
1434:20; 1448:19; 1458:7
moved [3] - 1275:1, 8
MOVED [2] - 1213:6; 1222:18
movement [11] - 1380:18;
1381:4, 12; 1416:7;
1418:9, 25; 1419:25;
1420:25; 1421:5; 1443:8
moving [5] - 1255:8; 1283:7;
1400:14; 1405:18
MR [204] - 1210:20; 1211:5,
9-10, 12; 1212:4, 8, 13, 16,
19; 1214:10, 13, 16, 19;
1215:6; 1216:16; 1217:3,
8, 12, 24; 1218:7, 19;
1219:1, 12, 18, 24; 1220:8,
12, 22; 1221:4, 9, 17, 24;
1223:3, 11, 18; 1224:3;
1225:6, 8, 11; 1226:11;
1228:15, 20; 1232:15;
1234:23; 1236:5; 1237:24;
1238:18; 1241:13;
1243:12, 18; 1246:10, 15,
18, 23; 1247:23; 1248:4;
1249:16; 1251:17;
1259:24; 1262:12, 17;
1265:4; 1266:20; 1267:15,
19, 21, 24; 1268:18;
1274:19; 1275:20; 1276:7,
12; 1277:13; 1280:16;
1282:5, 18; 1284:16;
1285:3; 1287:1, 8, 19;
1288:10, 14-15, 21;
1289:24; 1290:2, 20;
1292:24; 1293:3, 5, 9;
1295:15, 20; 1297:23;
1304:14; 1307:20; 1308:7;
1309:19; 1312:15; 1316:4;
1317:2; 1320:19; 1321:5,
22; 1323:6; 1324:17;
1331:1; 1332:11; 1335:1;
1342:4, 13-14, 21; 1345:9;
1347:3, 17, 21, 24; 1348:1,
4, 11, 14-15, 17, 20, 24-25;
1349:12; 1350:18;
1351:20; 1352:8, 12, 24;
1353:9; 1354:7; 1355:3,
14; 1356:10, 16; 1357:9,
13; 1360:6; 1361:1;
1362:20; 1364:3, 15, 17,
20; 1365:2, 4, 12, 16-17,
21; 1367:17, 20, 22;
1368:22; 1384:14; 1386:6;
1387:5, 19; 1390:20, 22;
1392:19; 1411:3; 1416:16;
1417:14; 1423:21;
1424:12, 22; 1431:8, 24;
1432:4; 1433:9, 21;
1435:5; 1438:21; 1440:13;
1441:6; 1445:18, 23;
1447:23; 1448:6; 1450:8,
13, 23; 1452:5; 1453:8;
1454:8; 1455:17; 1457:11;
1459:16; 1460:24;
1464:24; 1465:15;
1466:18; 1467:16; 1468:6,
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
23
14
MRM [2] - 1311:3; 1345:15
MS [8] - 1212:4, 8; 1217:3,
24; 1222:21; 1224:8, 18;
1228:2
muds [1] - 1258:2
Mueller [4] - 1207:11;
1342:7, 11; 1364:12
MUELLER [11] - 1211:6;
1342:13; 1347:24;
1348:14, 24; 1349:12;
1364:15, 17, 20; 1365:4
multi [3] - 1244:7; 1315:14;
1434:19
multi-billion-dollar [1] -
1244:7
multi-stakeholder [2] -
1315:14; 1434:19
Municipal [3] - 1286:7;
1298:1; 1301:16
municipality [9] - 1282:15,
21; 1283:2; 1286:10;
1299:14; 1301:11; 1302:6,
25
Municipality [15] - 1209:2;
1282:24; 1283:3; 1285:7;
1286:1, 5, 15; 1287:6, 9;
1297:19; 1298:1, 3;
1299:13; 1386:8; 1387:3
Municipality's [1] - 1300:22
Murphy [1] - 1208:7
MURRAY [2] - 1210:12;
1216:2
Muskeg [56] - 1220:4;
1225:21; 1226:10, 19, 23;
1227:7; 1228:24; 1229:7,
9, 19, 22, 25; 1230:6, 14,
20; 1231:2, 5, 16; 1232:7;
1236:5, 9; 1237:5;
1254:24; 1255:1, 10, 14;
1265:2, 15; 1266:4, 12,
19-20; 1267:7; 1268:3;
1290:12; 1332:7; 1335:13;
1343:16; 1353:13;
1360:22; 1365:18;
1410:16; 1416:18;
1419:21; 1448:15;
1450:20, 25; 1451:12;
1452:5, 21; 1453:11, 15;
1467:4
muskrat [1] - 1435:15
must [1] - 1363:5
muster [2] - 1228:7, 9
Métis [5] - 1208:12, 18;
1318:15; 1424:17
N
NAIT [1] - 1318:12
name [2] - 1307:21; 1470:14
name's [1] - 1367:23
named [1] - 1208:20
names [1] - 1344:16
Nancy [3] - 1209:15; 1470:3,
19
narrow [1] - 1242:1
narrowly [1] - 1244:9
NATION [2] - 1213:5;
1222:16
Nation [9] - 1208:7, 11, 14,
16, 18, 22; 1318:13, 15;
1451:14
national [2] - 1430:12;
1441:8
National [1] - 1430:14
Nations [2] - 1366:7; 1425:6
native [2] - 1447:18; 1448:4
natural [13] - 1331:4, 10, 22;
1338:11, 17, 19-20, 25;
1339:6, 9-10, 14, 17
naturally [5] - 1330:2;
1331:21; 1339:21, 23;
1340:6
naturally-occurring [1] -
1330:2
nature [3] - 1387:23;
1457:17; 1465:24
Nature [1] - 1340:7
near [7] - 1272:16; 1275:17;
1305:5; 1345:15; 1352:15;
1436:12; 1466:10
near-face [1] - 1272:16
nearly [1] - 1291:14
necessarily [3] - 1260:13;
1339:18; 1413:14
necessary [4] - 1230:7;
1281:18; 1308:19; 1332:3
need [56] - 1228:7; 1234:7;
1236:17, 22; 1237:11;
1238:5; 1241:19; 1242:3;
1244:11, 19; 1250:1;
1254:8; 1259:8; 1270:7,
14; 1273:2; 1282:1;
1288:5; 1310:9; 1311:22;
1320:5; 1324:18, 20;
1325:4, 17-18, 24;
1326:20; 1328:10, 17, 24;
1329:3; 1332:12; 1336:24;
1338:1; 1339:20; 1340:7;
1345:25; 1348:9; 1357:5;
1358:15, 25; 1369:17;
1382:14, 25; 1383:16;
1402:3, 18; 1409:2;
1410:1; 1432:21; 1433:9;
1437:24; 1438:2; 1468:12
needed [5] - 1254:13;
1279:5; 1281:16; 1323:18;
1354:6
needing [1] - 1279:7
needs [7] - 1224:20; 1228:5;
1281:24; 1319:16;
1341:24; 1375:11; 1382:19
negative [1] - 1401:25
negatively [1] - 1404:6
negligible [4] - 1425:22, 25;
1427:15; 1463:21
neighbourhoods [1] -
1283:9
neighbouring [2] - 1405:18;
1426:10
neighbours [1] - 1451:14
Neitzel [1] - 1344:18
nesting [1] - 1417:12
net [2] - 1380:9
Net [3] - 1453:19; 1459:14,
17
never [7] - 1425:2; 1435:11,
15; 1439:16
nevertheless [1] - 1334:16
new [15] - 1225:22; 1227:8;
1234:17; 1239:2; 1250:8;
1257:10, 14; 1258:18;
1264:9; 1306:20; 1310:22;
1351:13; 1353:15; 1450:18
next [14] - 1218:7; 1219:1,
18; 1232:23; 1283:6;
1285:13; 1286:12;
1307:17; 1312:24; 1313:6,
10; 1349:13; 1350:23;
1360:20
NIA [3] - 1359:6; 1362:14, 18
nice [1] - 1438:12
Nichols [1] - 1297:5
Nielsen [3] - 1209:15;
1470:3, 19
night [2] - 1423:7; 1437:3
nine [3] - 1349:23; 1350:19
nipple [1] - 1229:16
NO [31] - 1206:4, 6; 1210:2;
1211:3; 1212:2, 4, 8, 12,
16, 19; 1213:2; 1214:2,
4-9, 15; 1217:2, 10, 23;
1218:5, 18, 24; 1219:11,
16; 1220:10; 1221:16, 22;
1289:22
Noise [1] - 1360:2
NOISE [2] - 1214:20;
1348:21
noise [34] - 1342:24; 1343:1;
1344:4; 1345:14; 1346:7,
19-20, 22; 1347:17;
1348:12, 15, 17; 1349:6,
9-10; 1352:5, 25; 1353:16,
18-19, 25; 1354:2;
1355:18-20; 1359:8;
1361:6, 9, 19, 22; 1362:4,
7, 11
Non [1] - 1208:15
non [6] - 1297:13; 1299:15;
1371:19; 1442:24;
1451:20; 1452:3
non-aquatic [2] - 1451:20;
1452:3
non-permanent [2] -
1297:13; 1299:15
Non-Status [1] - 1208:15
non-treed [2] - 1371:19;
1442:24
none [2] - 1335:17; 1341:6
normal [1] - 1252:22
normally [2] - 1284:17;
1349:8
north [11] - 1290:10; 1408:3;
1414:19; 1426:11;
1430:11; 1452:11, 13, 16,
24-25; 1453:3
North [4] - 1250:9; 1401:14;
1407:24
north-eastern [3] - 1408:3;
1414:19; 1430:11
Northeast [3] - 1321:16, 19;
1322:8
northern [3] - 1382:8;
1430:13; 1441:25
Northern [1] - 1318:14
notable [1] - 1263:16
note [12] - 1289:1; 1299:24;
1300:6; 1323:16; 1359:13;
1384:16; 1424:16; 1429:9;
1459:9; 1460:3, 13; 1464:2
noted [5] - 1413:24; 1434:16;
1458:24; 1463:8; 1465:7
notes [1] - 1335:6
nothing [1] - 1383:7
notion [3] - 1378:16;
1402:22; 1426:14
notwithstanding [3] -
1406:22; 1428:10; 1468:23
NOVEMBER [12] - 1206:16;
1211:16; 1212:6, 11, 14,
17; 1213:8; 1217:6;
1218:3, 22; 1219:14;
1308:2
November [9] - 1215:1;
1263:11; 1272:24; 1304:8;
1307:22; 1327:23; 1351:1;
1469:12; 1470:14
NOx [2] - 1273:23; 1275:23
nuances [1] - 1233:18
number [60] - 1215:8;
1216:17, 23; 1217:19;
1222:4, 7, 10, 23; 1223:7,
9, 25; 1247:15, 18;
1261:16; 1268:22;
1285:14; 1286:8, 12;
1289:11; 1295:5, 16;
1299:13; 1300:3; 1302:21;
1307:19; 1310:5; 1317:9;
1318:9, 11; 1322:6, 10;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
24
1324:8; 1328:11; 1337:12;
1340:1, 13; 1343:14;
1369:20; 1371:1, 12;
1372:16, 24; 1377:18;
1378:14; 1383:24;
1387:13, 16; 1388:10, 12;
1392:16; 1394:7; 1404:14;
1428:3; 1435:6, 12, 24;
1436:10; 1456:23; 1457:2
numbers [25] - 1219:2;
1290:25; 1291:21; 1292:5,
9, 14, 16, 18; 1296:14, 16;
1297:24; 1299:9, 12, 17;
1302:4, 9; 1374:22;
1377:16; 1378:9; 1386:20;
1442:14; 1455:2; 1456:21
numeric [1] - 1456:18
numerical [2] - 1455:3;
1456:13
O
O'Callaghan [1] - 1208:22
o'clock [1] - 1287:23
objectives [1] - 1414:7
obligation [2] - 1244:15;
1307:4
observation [1] - 1425:1
observations [1] - 1387:22
observed [2] - 1231:1;
1341:23
obtained [1] - 1262:20
obtaining [1] - 1415:1
obvious [1] - 1235:14
obviously [9] - 1281:21;
1282:20; 1283:8; 1285:8;
1287:10; 1298:13;
1303:13; 1330:4; 1338:17
occasionally [2] - 1425:4
Occupational [1] - 1361:5
occur [12] - 1286:10;
1290:18; 1337:6, 22;
1338:25; 1340:14;
1362:13; 1375:5; 1376:18;
1377:21; 1429:16
occurred [5] - 1406:10;
1436:4-6, 8
occurrence [1] - 1434:24
occurring [7] - 1326:22;
1330:2; 1382:23; 1383:15;
1393:25; 1433:11; 1446:22
occurs [2] - 1299:5; 1454:13
Oceans [6] - 1304:11;
1306:21; 1307:8; 1451:14;
1453:21; 1454:19
OCR [1] - 1209:16
October [27] - 1250:3;
1283:4; 1303:22; 1308:12;
1311:25; 1315:18; 1316:8;
1320:20; 1333:3; 1349:18;
1384:6; 1386:19; 1395:4;
1399:21; 1408:12;
1412:18; 1413:5; 1414:1;
1418:22; 1420:23;
1424:18; 1427:17;
1431:10; 1436:22; 1440:2;
1444:4, 6
OCTOBER [2] - 1213:11;
1321:1
OF [22] - 1206:1, 4-5, 7-8, 10,
12; 1210:1; 1211:1;
1212:1, 9, 13, 20; 1213:1,
4; 1214:1, 12; 1217:25;
1218:19; 1221:18;
1222:16; 1246:20
off-site [6] - 1280:10, 20-21;
1281:2; 1286:24; 1466:5
offended [2] - 1329:15, 21
offer [2] - 1360:18; 1414:25
Official [2] - 1470:3, 20
offline [2] - 1249:3, 17
offsets [3] - 1414:17; 1415:1,
21
often [2] - 1354:20; 1436:12
Oil [13] - 1209:1; 1255:21;
1256:5; 1271:11; 1301:2;
1304:17; 1310:17, 20;
1314:13; 1318:20; 1432:6;
1464:21
oil [33] - 1225:25; 1307:22;
1312:9; 1316:16; 1333:24;
1335:7; 1340:17; 1341:22;
1399:1, 3; 1401:8;
1407:22; 1410:19;
1417:19; 1418:8; 1422:23;
1427:8; 1430:21; 1432:23;
1435:21; 1436:11; 1437:1,
10; 1438:9; 1439:4, 8;
1442:1; 1445:23; 1446:8,
12, 19, 23
OIL [3] - 1206:8; 1213:9;
1308:2
oiling [4] - 1438:18, 20;
1439:2
old [16] - 1391:23; 1392:3, 5,
9, 23; 1393:1, 3, 8, 10;
1412:3-5, 7; 1444:17, 22
old-growth [16] - 1391:23;
1392:3, 5, 9, 23; 1393:1, 3,
8, 10; 1412:3-5, 7;
1444:17, 22
omission [1] - 1461:12
Omissions [1] - 1220:6
ON [13] - 1211:16; 1212:6,
10, 14, 17; 1213:4;
1214:12; 1217:6; 1218:2,
21; 1219:14; 1222:16;
1246:20
On-site [1] - 1292:2
on-site [4] - 1277:22; 1291:8,
12
once [7] - 1338:13; 1341:9;
1359:18; 1364:7; 1380:17;
1392:24; 1437:2
one [94] - 1222:1; 1223:17;
1226:11; 1234:2, 6;
1235:14; 1237:1; 1243:11;
1244:10; 1252:12; 1254:3;
1256:6; 1266:2; 1267:11;
1269:8; 1272:19; 1279:24;
1280:11; 1281:17;
1282:22; 1284:15;
1288:11; 1289:1, 9;
1299:9; 1302:19; 1305:21;
1306:2; 1309:19; 1311:19;
1312:1; 1315:11; 1316:3;
1317:11; 1323:25;
1324:18; 1331:7, 17;
1336:7; 1337:1; 1343:13;
1344:13; 1351:9; 1360:8;
1362:3; 1363:4; 1364:17;
1365:13; 1372:6; 1382:21;
1387:1; 1390:20; 1391:18;
1395:16; 1397:14;
1398:15; 1400:6; 1404:16;
1411:2; 1414:23; 1419:12;
1420:11; 1422:20;
1423:11; 1424:24;
1425:16; 1427:23;
1428:23; 1431:23; 1432:3,
10; 1434:11; 1435:7, 11;
1437:19; 1438:16;
1439:16; 1442:20;
1444:20; 1445:5; 1447:2;
1448:3, 6, 8; 1450:12;
1456:12; 1460:6; 1464:4,
19; 1465:20; 1468:6
one's [2] - 1223:1; 1432:8
one-to-two-metre [1] -
1269:8
one-week [1] - 1272:19
ones [4] - 1302:17; 1318:23;
1456:6
ongoing [10] - 1277:7;
1278:12; 1300:7; 1307:6;
1308:19; 1311:7; 1312:5;
1314:12; 1357:19; 1448:10
online [1] - 1283:10
Onovwiona [1] - 1207:15
Ontario [1] - 1430:13
onwards [1] - 1273:17
oops [1] - 1392:21
open [3] - 1385:3; 1409:10;
1446:13
open-pit [1] - 1446:13
Opening [4] - 1250:2;
1293:11; 1295:4, 12
operate [13] - 1230:7, 11;
1243:21; 1246:3; 1249:17;
1264:11; 1266:21; 1277:6;
1287:4; 1309:11; 1367:8
operated [2] - 1262:19;
1263:18
operating [32] - 1243:1;
1244:20; 1245:12, 21;
1248:25; 1249:13;
1257:23, 25; 1262:18;
1265:15, 18; 1266:6, 8,
11-12; 1284:18; 1287:2, 5;
1309:16; 1327:9; 1328:11;
1345:7, 20; 1346:4, 15;
1352:11, 23; 1354:5, 9, 14;
1366:16
operation [19] - 1232:23;
1233:18, 20; 1244:6;
1245:8; 1256:6; 1259:12,
17; 1265:17; 1269:24;
1272:6; 1284:23; 1285:2;
1289:6; 1347:10; 1352:16;
1354:24; 1366:17; 1457:25
operational [4] - 1272:8, 17;
1295:5; 1375:18
operations [38] - 1226:2;
1234:18; 1245:4; 1254:12;
1256:9; 1262:14; 1263:19;
1264:3, 16; 1265:1, 6, 20,
22-23; 1266:10; 1283:23,
25; 1284:7, 9; 1285:9, 22;
1286:25; 1287:14; 1289:6;
1293:14; 1294:20; 1295:8,
16; 1302:21; 1309:8;
1311:22; 1350:17;
1354:19; 1360:22;
1409:10; 1416:5; 1466:4
Operations [1] - 1294:23
operations-ready [1] -
1265:22
operations-workforce [1] -
1283:23
operations.. [1] - 1310:22
operator [4] - 1306:12;
1319:2, 21; 1329:9
operators [4] - 1259:3;
1271:20; 1279:8; 1315:4
opinion [4] - 1236:1; 1257:9;
1282:14; 1319:3
opportunistic [1] - 1427:2
opportunities [3] - 1234:15;
1255:12; 1446:11
opportunity [12] - 1223:14;
1243:4; 1257:22; 1289:4,
9, 13, 19; 1304:12;
1315:25; 1328:9; 1448:17;
1454:15
opposed [1] - 1393:15
optimization [1] - 1243:6
optimize [6] - 1226:24;
1231:12; 1243:4; 1255:6,
23; 1289:4
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
25
optimum [1] - 1230:10
option [2] - 1324:23; 1326:24
options [3] - 1325:19;
1328:18; 1458:2
OR [4] - 1210:4; 1214:17;
1215:12; 1293:7
order [17] - 1208:5; 1229:23;
1236:17; 1305:3; 1306:15;
1311:18; 1323:8; 1345:2;
1354:5; 1360:9, 18;
1362:14, 17, 22; 1363:16;
1382:2, 12
ore [20] - 1231:10, 13, 21;
1234:20; 1235:1, 5, 21-22;
1264:12; 1268:15, 17;
1269:7, 15, 22; 1270:5, 12,
19; 1271:2
ores [6] - 1227:2, 14-15;
1231:15; 1235:22; 1237:7
organic [1] - 1340:16
organisms [2] - 1341:2;
1449:6
organization [4] - 1266:7;
1466:14
organizational [1] - 1265:24
organizations [4] - 1266:1,
10; 1314:24; 1318:11
original [8] - 1251:18;
1267:6, 17; 1365:18, 25;
1424:1; 1447:3; 1462:8
ORIGINAL [2] - 1214:14;
1267:22
originally [1] - 1253:6
OSDG [2] - 1301:2, 6
OSEC [14] - 1223:22;
1308:14; 1311:25; 1333:4;
1387:16, 20; 1388:15, 17;
1389:18; 1395:4; 1444:4,
6; 1448:1
OSLI [2] - 1432:6, 23
OSRIN [1] - 1318:12
OSTC [1] - 1314:23
Osume [1] - 1209:11
Osuoka [1] - 1209:11
otherwise [1] - 1263:18
otometry [1] - 1420:6
ourselves [2] - 1327:7;
1439:1
outcome [1] - 1429:14
outcomes [3] - 1340:14;
1341:4
outer [1] - 1467:1
outlet [1] - 1267:3
outlined [1] - 1256:13
output [1] - 1362:23
outside [15] - 1227:14;
1356:12; 1405:19;
1420:20; 1431:3, 17;
1432:9, 16; 1442:16;
1443:16; 1446:8, 12;
1461:24; 1462:1, 15
overall [10] - 1251:3;
1270:11; 1377:24;
1381:14; 1384:17;
1425:21; 1453:2; 1456:4;
1458:6; 1469:4
overarching [1] - 1358:6
overburden [1] - 1220:15
overextend [1] - 1327:1
overlap [3] - 1284:14;
1285:1, 23
overlaps [3] - 1292:20;
1293:1
OVERLAPS [4] - 1214:17;
1293:6
overnight [1] - 1468:21
overview [1] - 1269:6
owe [1] - 1244:14
owl [1] - 1379:20
own [7] - 1224:20; 1259:10;
1278:25; 1319:24;
1320:11; 1373:20; 1423:6
oxidizes [2] - 1439:14, 19
oxygen [2] - 1340:23; 1341:2
P
P.M [4] - 1210:23; 1211:11,
15
p.m [5] - 1224:24; 1288:1;
1424:8; 1469:10
package [1] - 1279:7
pads [1] - 1388:24
PAGE [5] - 1210:2; 1211:2;
1212:2; 1213:2; 1214:2
page [70] - 1220:7; 1224:2;
1238:7; 1240:5; 1247:12;
1250:4, 15; 1251:8;
1254:3; 1255:18; 1262:3;
1273:2, 13-14; 1277:16;
1290:5; 1291:4; 1294:8,
10, 22; 1295:24; 1297:5,
20; 1304:25; 1308:13;
1310:15; 1312:1; 1316:9;
1333:3, 21; 1335:15;
1342:16, 22; 1349:15;
1350:24; 1359:7; 1363:12;
1370:19; 1385:11;
1393:21; 1396:4; 1404:13;
1408:12; 1410:22;
1412:18; 1413:4; 1416:8;
1418:22; 1431:11;
1434:22; 1440:2, 19;
1444:5; 1454:23; 1458:10;
1460:12, 25; 1463:1;
1464:16; 1465:7
pages [2] - 1372:8; 1379:9
PAGES [1] - 1206:18
paid [1] - 1395:19
Panel [23] - 1207:3, 7;
1223:22, 24; 1224:20;
1234:19; 1238:6; 1246:23;
1254:2; 1255:17; 1261:25;
1264:23; 1272:21; 1277:9;
1287:19; 1304:12; 1321:5;
1331:11; 1333:1, 9; 1342:4
PANEL [6] - 1206:1; 1207:2,
14; 1210:3; 1215:11
panel [10] - 1225:9; 1241:7;
1245:7; 1259:7; 1268:6;
1272:23; 1290:4; 1293:10;
1367:23; 1424:2
Panel's [2] - 1448:2; 1454:21
paper [4] - 1375:8; 1381:24;
1407:20, 23
paragraph [2] - 1304:24
parameters [3] - 1257:2;
1331:3, 5
paraphrase [1] - 1241:7
Park [2] - 1206:23; 1430:14
parked [1] - 1345:21
parking [1] - 1345:21
parse [1] - 1339:16
Parson's [1] - 1283:9
part [58] - 1224:11; 1234:11;
1236:14; 1237:2; 1238:12,
19; 1239:19, 21; 1249:10,
18; 1251:7; 1252:7, 10, 16,
22; 1265:23; 1270:9;
1279:6; 1292:7; 1306:12,
17; 1310:1; 1311:11;
1319:9; 1335:11; 1336:2;
1347:18; 1353:14, 24;
1359:6; 1363:21; 1368:24;
1375:3; 1380:11; 1382:10;
1385:8; 1386:19; 1389:9;
1393:7; 1401:2; 1411:20;
1426:24; 1431:6; 1434:4,
15; 1441:25; 1450:23;
1451:10; 1454:11;
1459:17; 1461:2, 9, 11, 20;
1462:9; 1464:9
Part [2] - 1281:6; 1458:9
participants [1] - 1317:10
participate [4] - 1416:25;
1434:17; 1447:5, 8
participated [1] - 1384:9
participation [5] - 1208:25;
1312:6, 23; 1464:23
particular [31] - 1227:1;
1231:8; 1241:21; 1285:7;
1316:22; 1317:11;
1361:14; 1364:9; 1369:15;
1377:19, 25; 1381:14;
1395:18; 1397:5, 20;
1398:11; 1405:4; 1419:7;
1420:11; 1421:13, 18;
1422:7, 16; 1423:11, 19;
1426:7, 23; 1445:25;
1446:13; 1447:5
particularly [8] - 1230:14;
1272:2; 1284:13; 1287:14;
1299:21; 1451:3; 1462:5;
1468:2
parties [4] - 1261:23;
1279:13; 1297:21
partner [1] - 1425:16
partners [2] - 1278:21;
1306:19
parts [7] - 1237:3; 1242:5;
1361:4; 1441:1; 1442:9;
1443:3; 1463:12
pass [4] - 1232:13; 1274:18;
1425:4; 1430:1
passage [2] - 1334:24;
1448:14
passing [1] - 1467:4
passive [1] - 1325:10
past [5] - 1265:13; 1282:9;
1283:12; 1358:20; 1394:12
patience [2] - 1411:4; 1469:8
Paul [2] - 1207:15; 1208:17
PDC [1] - 1372:20
PDF [5] - 1240:5; 1247:12;
1273:14; 1277:16; 1308:13
Peace [1] - 1432:13
peak [8] - 1290:8, 18, 23;
1291:13, 21, 24; 1295:18;
1296:2
peaks [2] - 1278:17
peat [3] - 1444:14; 1460:1
peatland [1] - 1393:3
peatlands [15] - 1371:19;
1391:21; 1393:3, 5, 9-10,
12, 15; 1394:15, 18, 20;
1414:24; 1415:2; 1416:4;
1426:23
people [11] - 1265:14;
1266:9; 1280:1, 3; 1326:6;
1327:17; 1402:18; 1462:5,
17-18, 20
per [15] - 1242:5; 1264:5;
1293:17; 1296:4; 1297:11;
1307:1; 1309:5; 1322:2;
1356:13; 1405:9, 11;
1407:16; 1461:23, 25
PERCENT [2] - 1214:12;
1246:20
percent [70] - 1227:17;
1240:12; 1242:2; 1243:5,
9; 1270:5; 1275:5, 13, 16;
1280:23; 1281:1; 1285:13;
1288:18, 24; 1289:17;
1293:22, 25; 1294:3;
1297:11; 1318:1; 1326:2,
5, 11; 1337:10; 1371:9, 13,
21, 25; 1372:19, 25;
1375:1, 12, 16, 19, 21;
1376:1, 5, 9, 19; 1377:2, 6,
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
26
15; 1378:24; 1379:11, 13,
20-21; 1381:25; 1382:5;
1387:4, 10, 13, 15-16;
1389:14; 1399:3; 1413:14;
1415:7, 9, 12; 1425:2;
1433:7, 10; 1436:25;
1437:2; 1439:3, 8; 1445:4
percentage [11] - 1235:17;
1243:24; 1277:24; 1280:9,
19; 1286:23; 1383:22, 25;
1398:4
percentages [2] - 1245:24;
1269:12
Performance [1] - 1310:18
performance [8] - 1225:25;
1226:3; 1231:16; 1233:1;
1263:16; 1264:23; 1325:15
performs [1] - 1263:12
perhaps [9] - 1253:15;
1281:17; 1282:18;
1286:19; 1294:21, 25;
1306:2; 1307:16; 1344:6
perimeter [3] - 1353:1, 18;
1356:12
PERIOD [2] - 1213:10;
1308:4
period [10] - 1259:23;
1281:13; 1285:1; 1295:19;
1296:3; 1307:24; 1321:23;
1322:4; 1361:3; 1453:5
periods [1] - 1311:16
Perkins [21] - 1207:10;
1220:14, 24; 1225:5;
1228:14; 1243:12, 19;
1246:5; 1247:14; 1252:14;
1253:15; 1255:11;
1275:20; 1276:12;
1280:13; 1287:22; 1290:1;
1292:24; 1339:7; 1342:10;
1367:24
PERKINS [19] - 1210:20;
1225:6, 8; 1228:15;
1246:10, 15, 23; 1267:19,
24; 1287:19; 1290:2;
1293:3, 9; 1307:20;
1308:7; 1316:4; 1320:19;
1321:5; 1342:4
permanent [5] - 1297:12;
1299:15; 1303:1
permissible [2] - 1360:23;
1364:23
persisting [1] - 1394:1
person [4] - 1277:11, 14;
1344:4; 1460:23
personnel [3] - 1467:17
persons [1] - 1462:5
perspective [12] - 1233:2;
1234:12; 1236:19;
1249:15; 1271:22;
1272:15; 1285:11; 1340:3,
25; 1383:10; 1414:10;
1428:5
pertaining [1] - 1395:8
PETER [2] - 1210:14; 1216:6
petter [1] - 1223:20
pH [1] - 1227:10
Phase [24] - 1228:23;
1233:10; 1251:20;
1252:16, 23; 1253:20;
1262:10; 1264:3; 1296:11;
1306:17; 1307:7; 1308:17,
24; 1343:3, 5; 1345:8;
1347:13, 15-16; 1348:13;
1356:8; 1360:23; 1419:23;
1420:11
PHASE [2] - 1214:20;
1348:22
phase [5] - 1281:19, 22;
1282:2; 1313:6; 1353:5
phonetic [1] - 1420:6
phonetic) [1] - 1381:24
photography [1] - 1443:1
PIC [2] - 1372:20; 1382:12
pick [4] - 1228:16; 1346:8;
1432:18; 1442:23
pick-up [1] - 1346:8
picked [2] - 1465:11, 14
pickerel [1] - 1458:20
picture [3] - 1368:25; 1376:6;
1428:6
piece [6] - 1236:22; 1247:1;
1252:20; 1358:16, 25;
1411:6
pieces [6] - 1349:6; 1356:11,
18; 1361:6; 1381:21;
1397:16
PIERRE [2] - 1214:18;
1293:7
Pierre [7] - 1207:21; 1292:5,
8, 16, 18, 20; 1293:2
pilot [3] - 1259:19; 1310:5;
1311:7
pilot-level [1] - 1259:19
pin [1] - 1261:15
pipe [7] - 1267:2, 4; 1345:22;
1366:20-22; 1451:24
pipeline [4] - 1442:2; 1452:9;
1466:19
pipelines [3] - 1388:24;
1466:10, 15
pit [68] - 1220:16; 1237:12;
1239:24; 1248:17; 1254:8;
1267:1; 1270:7; 1312:1,
10, 21-22; 1313:16;
1314:2, 17; 1315:10;
1316:16, 21; 1319:6,
12-13; 1320:5, 13;
1323:14, 23; 1324:5, 24;
1326:3, 12, 14, 16; 1328:9;
1329:17; 1330:5, 8, 16, 20;
1331:4, 12, 14, 16;
1333:11; 1335:7-9, 17, 20;
1336:5, 9, 13, 19; 1337:3,
6, 24; 1338:17; 1339:11;
1340:8, 15, 17; 1341:1, 4,
7, 22, 25; 1361:19;
1409:10; 1446:13
Pit [11] - 1315:22; 1316:12;
1317:18, 20; 1320:21;
1321:16, 19; 1322:8;
1333:20; 1335:2; 1336:7
PIT [2] - 1213:12; 1321:3
pit-lake [1] - 1328:9
place [31] - 1229:6, 16;
1236:15; 1254:8; 1256:19;
1265:6; 1269:1; 1279:8,
19, 21; 1306:8; 1311:10;
1325:4; 1327:24; 1329:8;
1332:2; 1334:20; 1338:21;
1353:24; 1359:19; 1364:8,
21; 1366:2; 1412:3;
1437:18; 1447:16, 21;
1448:3; 1465:20; 1470:8
placed [2] - 1346:18;
1452:10
placement [2] - 1239:22;
1458:5
places [1] - 1336:6
PLAMONDON [2] - 1210:6;
1215:16
plan [27] - 1237:2; 1251:18;
1252:8; 1267:6, 17;
1270:7; 1278:9, 17;
1285:7; 1305:3; 1323:20;
1326:21; 1328:24;
1334:17, 20; 1336:3, 11;
1365:19; 1383:3; 1400:22;
1401:2; 1441:8, 21;
1447:16, 22; 1448:3;
1453:25
PLAN [2] - 1214:14; 1267:22
Plan [23] - 1220:5; 1236:3,
17; 1237:23; 1252:10;
1270:7; 1286:7; 1298:2,
11; 1300:17; 1301:16;
1302:15; 1383:3, 18;
1412:9, 12; 1430:18;
1440:15; 1453:19;
1459:14, 17; 1464:21
planned [13] - 1334:15;
1336:4; 1370:23; 1372:1,
12; 1374:24; 1380:16;
1381:16; 1388:21; 1398:4;
1401:12; 1464:22
Planned [5] - 1276:6;
1296:23; 1300:4; 1301:23;
1302:9
planners [1] - 1422:1
Planning [1] - 1236:14
planning [15] - 1226:14;
1236:21; 1272:17; 1279:1;
1283:2, 7; 1286:6, 11;
1298:3; 1302:5; 1316:15;
1323:19; 1335:8; 1383:1;
1460:3
plans [21] - 1251:20; 1252:1;
1254:5; 1266:5; 1270:17;
1272:8, 18-19; 1276:16;
1279:4, 21; 1286:14;
1308:18; 1309:15;
1312:16; 1314:18;
1336:17; 1353:23; 1385:2;
1453:10
Plans [3] - 1251:23; 1258:8;
1269:24
plant [24] - 1226:22, 25;
1227:3, 5, 12; 1228:23;
1231:20; 1234:21; 1235:2,
9, 11, 16; 1236:4, 18;
1237:23; 1249:19; 1262:6;
1293:19; 1311:10; 1313:9;
1325:12; 1392:1; 1423:17
planting [2] - 1422:3, 11
plants [4] - 1235:25; 1310:5;
1346:9; 1422:7
play [1] - 1382:6
players [1] - 1433:2
playing [1] - 1256:21
PLEASE [2] - 1213:6;
1222:19
plenty [1] - 1327:17
plus [3] - 1242:2; 1245:23;
1372:21
pm2.5 [1] - 1463:4
point [50] - 1228:7, 9;
1232:15; 1239:9, 14;
1243:23; 1245:11; 1258:6;
1259:8; 1261:11; 1269:15;
1274:8; 1277:14; 1279:1;
1282:9; 1287:2; 1289:1;
1300:14; 1311:5, 21, 23;
1317:25; 1329:18;
1338:15; 1339:6; 1362:21;
1363:7, 9; 1366:1, 5;
1367:6; 1369:21; 1379:1;
1383:9, 15-16; 1393:4;
1404:11; 1410:2; 1411:16;
1423:11, 19; 1445:25;
1446:3, 23; 1454:9;
1455:13; 1464:6; 1466:3;
1468:9
pointed [2] - 1376:23;
1464:20
pointing [1] - 1319:15
points [4] - 1234:7, 10;
1408:2; 1459:11
policy [3] - 1375:18; 1414:3;
1415:18
pond [6] - 1436:7; 1437:4, 6;
1438:11, 17, 23
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
27
ponds [11] - 1248:24;
1249:12; 1309:23;
1434:25; 1436:13, 17;
1437:7, 12, 17-18; 1439:10
pool [1] - 1315:5
populate [1] - 1269:2
populated [2] - 1269:13;
1272:16
POPULATION [4] - 1212:5;
1217:4
Population [1] - 1301:3
population [49] - 1216:19;
1285:10; 1296:25;
1297:10, 16; 1298:6, 11,
24; 1299:12, 15, 18, 21;
1300:1, 3, 9; 1301:5, 8, 10,
12, 19-20, 22; 1302:4, 16,
20; 1303:2, 10; 1374:21;
1375:5; 1376:6; 1378:3;
1380:7, 10, 21; 1390:8, 10,
12; 1395:17; 1396:22;
1399:10; 1403:17;
1405:16; 1406:12, 24;
1407:13; 1419:12;
1429:16; 1443:25; 1461:18
population-level [1] -
1403:17
populations [6] - 1406:8;
1407:11; 1418:2; 1429:21;
1440:22; 1453:5
portfolio [1] - 1311:12
portion [4] - 1368:21;
1369:13; 1388:4; 1466:23
position [7] - 1230:10;
1317:16; 1328:8; 1333:4;
1339:5; 1352:15; 1358:12
positions [2] - 1295:6, 11
positive [1] - 1405:16
possibility [4] - 1236:16;
1337:9; 1353:10; 1406:20
possible [16] - 1222:9;
1225:3; 1294:18; 1300:13;
1308:25; 1337:11, 21;
1369:19; 1394:16;
1400:12; 1401:1; 1411:21,
23, 25; 1444:21; 1457:5
possibly [2] - 1236:22;
1422:12
POST [2] - 1214:19; 1348:21
post [20] - 1253:16; 1264:20;
1345:13; 1347:18;
1348:15, 17; 1349:1;
1353:1; 1355:6, 16;
1356:4; 1357:3; 1361:3,
12; 1362:9; 1365:1, 3;
1444:3, 12
post-construction [13] -
1345:13; 1347:18;
1348:15, 17; 1349:1;
1353:1; 1355:6, 16;
1356:4; 1357:3; 1361:3,
12; 1362:9
POST-CONSTRUCTION [2] -
1214:19; 1348:21
post-D074 [1] - 1253:16
post-FID [1] - 1264:20
post-final [1] - 1264:21
post-measurement [2] -
1365:1, 3
post-reclamation [2] -
1444:3, 12
posted [1] - 1427:17
potential [19] - 1239:5;
1289:5; 1302:21; 1334:4;
1336:18; 1401:22, 25;
1403:12; 1405:12; 1407:3;
1425:20; 1426:5, 19;
1427:12; 1428:8; 1444:17;
1449:16; 1461:4; 1466:5
potentially [5] - 1238:17;
1326:13; 1327:18;
1402:24; 1461:14
power [1] - 1239:6
ppm [2] - 1334:2
practical [9] - 1235:15;
1243:23; 1244:18;
1245:11; 1400:1; 1410:24;
1411:5; 1440:7; 1467:16
practicalities [1] - 1242:17
practicality [2] - 1411:1, 10
practice [1] - 1232:4
Prairie [1] - 1209:4
prairie [1] - 1441:13
pre [15] - 1345:14; 1352:25;
1355:6; 1361:2, 11;
1362:8; 1365:1; 1370:23;
1374:24; 1379:8; 1380:15;
1398:3; 1415:10; 1445:13
pre-and [1] - 1365:1
pre-construction [3] -
1345:14; 1361:2; 1362:8
pre-industrial [7] - 1370:23;
1374:24; 1379:8; 1380:15;
1398:3; 1415:10; 1445:13
precise [1] - 1433:4
precludes [1] - 1451:3
predated [1] - 1251:19
Predation [1] - 1427:22
predation [3] - 1402:12;
1406:11; 1426:20
predators [2] - 1402:25;
1427:2
predict [5] - 1259:25; 1261:2,
13; 1341:11; 1372:10
predicted [12] - 1333:10;
1335:18; 1337:5; 1341:10;
1346:23; 1355:13, 20;
1375:13; 1379:7; 1386:22;
1419:1; 1429:14
predictions [6] - 1370:10,
12; 1373:17; 1408:25;
1409:3, 7
predictive [1] - 1360:11
predominantly [5] - 1236:8;
1239:11; 1258:5; 1277:7;
1309:23
prefer [1] - 1426:23
preferences [2] - 1426:22,
25
prefix [2] - 1222:24; 1224:13
pregnant [4] - 1460:21;
1461:1, 8, 20
premature [1] - 1279:11
premised [1] - 1384:18
preparations [1] - 1225:2
prepare [1] - 1332:17
prepared [8] - 1219:4;
1243:15; 1311:17; 1314:8;
1317:19; 1329:1; 1331:13;
1365:19
prescribed [1] - 1433:7
present [5] - 1231:10;
1234:14, 18; 1235:20;
1275:22
presented [5] - 1301:15;
1335:13; 1382:23;
1450:16; 1462:11
presenting [2] - 1236:24;
1462:16
pressure [2] - 1284:25;
1345:7
presumably [3] - 1370:6;
1432:22; 1467:10
pretty [8] - 1275:24; 1328:15;
1371:15; 1373:25;
1378:13; 1435:7; 1437:12;
1448:14
prevalent [1] - 1339:5
prevent [1] - 1338:23
preventative [1] - 1466:9
preventing [1] - 1467:10
previous [5] - 1226:21;
1236:7; 1254:7; 1356:14;
1465:22
previously [3] - 1250:17;
1252:16; 1325:3
PREVIOUSLY [2] - 1210:4;
1215:11
prey [2] - 1403:2; 1427:4
pricing [1] - 1239:12
primarily [8] - 1313:14;
1360:3; 1399:7; 1405:1;
1417:16; 1448:12; 1451:1;
1455:23
primary [13] - 1227:7;
1229:11, 13; 1230:9, 15;
1231:25; 1263:17, 23;
1331:9; 1413:21; 1442:10,
21; 1452:8
principle [1] - 1242:19
principles [3] - 1305:15, 18;
1320:3
prioritization [1] - 1451:8
prioritizing [1] - 1451:6
priority [3] - 1229:24;
1412:8, 11
probability [3] - 1334:13;
1353:10; 1426:12
problem [8] - 1244:13, 18;
1338:22; 1361:15; 1362:2;
1364:7; 1406:6; 1427:7
problems [4] - 1223:10;
1326:12, 14; 1460:7
procedure [1] - 1467:12
procedures [3] - 1268:24;
1467:12, 22
proceeding [6] - 1241:14;
1242:19; 1251:15;
1305:25; 1310:8, 13
proceedings [3] - 1416:1;
1470:7, 10
PROCEEDINGS [3] -
1206:15; 1210:1; 1211:1
proceeds [1] - 1430:20
process [49] - 1225:15;
1227:1, 10; 1230:7;
1231:8; 1232:2, 17;
1238:18, 22, 24; 1239:15;
1240:2, 11; 1241:23;
1242:25; 1247:5; 1255:6;
1257:12; 1258:24;
1261:10; 1268:25;
1270:14; 1272:9; 1289:13;
1310:4; 1321:14; 1322:7,
10, 13-14, 19; 1323:12, 23;
1324:3; 1325:11; 1326:25;
1328:20; 1339:2; 1382:11;
1397:7, 10; 1410:10;
1457:3; 1465:11; 1466:7
process-affected [13] -
1255:6; 1321:14; 1322:7,
10, 13, 19; 1323:12, 23;
1324:3; 1325:11; 1326:25
processability [2] - 1231:14;
1269:23
processed [1] - 1271:2
processes [2] - 1229:21;
1261:10
Processing [1] - 1262:5
processing [7] - 1227:14;
1234:21; 1235:2; 1245:7,
10; 1272:4; 1325:12
produced [2] - 1254:18;
1271:2
product [5] - 1238:23;
1242:9, 18; 1244:17;
1245:17
production [6] - 1240:13;
1243:10; 1254:13;
1271:25; 1311:18; 1340:22
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
28
professional [8] - 1381:2;
1396:17; 1397:2; 1455:5,
14, 23; 1456:3
professionals [1] - 1455:16
profile [2] - 1350:21; 1352:19
program [12] - 1360:20;
1364:21, 25; 1400:1;
1401:15; 1416:25;
1420:4-7, 17; 1464:23
Program [1] - 1458:18
programs [5] - 1360:25;
1361:2, 13; 1400:7, 16
progress [1] - 1230:20
progression [1] - 1446:5
progressively [1] - 1323:11
prohibited [1] - 1249:11
PROJECT [3] - 1206:2;
1212:5; 1217:5
Project [79] - 1216:20;
1232:8; 1233:9; 1236:3;
1237:17; 1239:1, 25;
1243:17; 1249:8; 1250:12;
1254:19; 1262:3; 1264:22;
1265:3; 1266:7; 1277:21;
1278:8; 1282:3; 1284:9;
1285:10; 1291:23;
1293:15; 1296:11, 15;
1299:16; 1301:20;
1302:14, 22; 1303:9;
1311:1; 1312:7; 1335:13,
17; 1336:12; 1353:6;
1358:3, 9; 1364:22;
1374:12; 1382:20; 1384:1;
1385:8; 1410:5; 1411:20;
1413:1, 18; 1415:6;
1419:1; 1424:15; 1425:5;
1426:18; 1428:6, 9;
1432:9; 1433:11, 24;
1434:2, 4, 9, 13, 15;
1438:3; 1441:17; 1442:16;
1446:9; 1450:19, 23;
1452:13; 1454:18;
1456:16; 1457:1, 6;
1458:3; 1460:15; 1463:20,
23
project [35] - 1230:3;
1261:20; 1263:1; 1265:19;
1278:12, 16; 1284:19;
1290:7; 1291:11; 1292:20;
1297:9; 1301:9; 1303:12;
1313:12, 17, 21-22, 25;
1316:21; 1319:23; 1337:1;
1353:25; 1354:13;
1363:13, 17; 1383:23;
1388:20; 1410:19; 1413:9;
1414:10; 1432:25; 1449:18
project-by-project [1] -
1414:10
project-related [1] - 1290:7
project-specific [1] -
1303:12
Project].. [1] - 1238:13
projected [2] - 1297:16;
1301:7
projecting [1] - 1373:11
projection [6] - 1298:22, 25;
1299:3, 22; 1301:5, 12
projections [15] - 1298:11,
14, 17-18; 1299:19;
1300:9, 11; 1301:3, 17, 23;
1302:11, 16, 20; 1303:4,
11
projects [13] - 1265:7;
1266:10; 1278:13;
1285:14; 1290:15;
1298:19; 1311:12;
1372:12; 1389:9; 1401:8,
11; 1432:8; 1441:23
proliferation [1] - 1287:13
promote [1] - 1338:12
prompter [1] - 1390:24
pronounced [1] - 1333:14
pronunciation [1] - 1333:17
propane [2] - 1343:21;
1350:20
property [1] - 1358:18
proponents [1] - 1303:13
proposal [2] - 1332:15;
1366:25
propose [2] - 1450:21;
1468:23
PROPOSED [1] - 1206:2
proposed [11] - 1232:14;
1250:24; 1314:2; 1332:17;
1337:3; 1353:5; 1364:22;
1451:17, 19; 1454:7;
1466:9
proposes [1] - 1466:12
proposing [3] - 1433:5;
1434:14; 1451:2
prospective [1] - 1450:21
protect [4] - 1382:2;
1414:17; 1415:2; 1434:7
protected [4] - 1332:7;
1384:19, 25; 1387:8
protecting [1] - 1244:22
protection [4] - 1309:3, 11;
1361:10; 1461:7
protective [1] - 1461:17
protocol [2] - 1227:4; 1349:4
Protocol [1] - 1270:10
protocols [1] - 1236:14
prove [1] - 1423:3
proves [1] - 1314:1
PROVIDE [10] - 1212:13, 16;
1214:14, 17, 19; 1218:19;
1219:12; 1267:21; 1293:6;
1348:20
provide [35] - 1230:5, 11;
1231:20; 1244:16; 1246:2;
1263:2; 1264:10; 1280:6,
14; 1283:1; 1286:16;
1294:19; 1298:4; 1300:8,
12, 24; 1304:7; 1319:13;
1329:16; 1330:8, 10;
1332:5; 1344:6; 1347:19;
1348:12; 1356:13;
1368:12; 1386:16, 25;
1410:4; 1423:8; 1431:8;
1440:5; 1449:23; 1453:25
provided [12] - 1220:24;
1221:5, 12; 1297:18;
1300:18; 1315:16;
1352:19; 1363:21; 1379:6;
1386:17; 1388:15; 1391:10
providers [4] - 1278:20;
1279:9; 1302:6; 1303:16
provides [4] - 1240:6;
1283:5; 1298:21; 1399:21
PROVIDING [1] - 1221:17
providing [8] - 1244:2;
1253:25; 1302:1; 1313:8;
1314:3; 1324:20; 1420:2;
1422:5
PROVIDIONG [1] - 1212:19
Provinces [1] - 1470:4
Provincial [1] - 1282:24
proximity [2] - 1287:15;
1437:3
prudent [9] - 1302:8;
1327:10, 13, 21; 1328:16;
1329:4, 9; 1332:3
public [1] - 1317:4
Public [1] - 1207:13
publicly [1] - 1421:8
pull [3] - 1238:5; 1247:10;
1265:18
pulled [3] - 1228:4; 1453:1;
1467:5
purchase [1] - 1351:19
purchasing [1] - 1351:11
Purdy [2] - 1209:2
purpose [3] - 1355:18;
1356:20; 1369:1
purposes [4] - 1236:8;
1302:5; 1304:6; 1309:8
pursue [1] - 1249:24
push [1] - 1366:25
pushed [1] - 1426:17
put [30] - 1236:15; 1244:14;
1259:14; 1263:8; 1265:5;
1279:3, 7, 20; 1280:13;
1287:11; 1289:12;
1304:16; 1310:24; 1325:4,
12; 1327:24; 1336:10;
1338:20; 1347:24;
1358:11; 1364:8; 1398:25;
1416:2; 1447:21; 1453:13;
1454:15; 1456:21;
1459:25; 1465:20
putting [2] - 1264:8; 1324:2
Q
Q.C [4] - 1208:2, 8, 21;
1209:2
Q1-2015 [1] - 1291:14
qualifier [1] - 1289:18
qualities [2] - 1231:21;
1235:23
quality [23] - 1231:7, 12;
1239:6; 1240:16, 19;
1241:20; 1244:5; 1245:17;
1262:21; 1263:3, 13, 23;
1289:15; 1312:22; 1330:1;
1331:2, 5; 1332:5, 13;
1373:18; 1449:24; 1465:10
quantify [3] - 1268:9;
1368:14; 1443:16
quarter [16] - 1385:6, 14;
1386:4, 10, 14, 22, 24;
1387:24; 1388:2, 5;
1389:15, 18
quarter-township [16] -
1385:6, 14; 1386:4, 10, 14,
22, 24; 1387:24; 1388:2, 5;
1389:15, 18
Quebec [1] - 1382:9
questioning [6] - 1357:16,
18; 1358:6; 1444:20;
1468:7
QUESTIONS [7] - 1210:20;
1211:6, 10, 12; 1225:8;
1342:13; 1367:22
questions [31] - 1224:23;
1225:14; 1246:24;
1249:22; 1261:25;
1272:22; 1277:10;
1287:20; 1290:3; 1303:19;
1304:6; 1307:14; 1316:6;
1342:6, 8; 1364:18;
1368:2-6; 1392:10; 1424:2,
5; 1425:23; 1426:3;
1440:14; 1445:19; 1458:8;
1468:25
quicker [2] - 1315:6; 1350:9
quickly [7] - 1260:23;
1298:8; 1300:24; 1340:19;
1347:22; 1439:19
quieter [1] - 1361:20
quit [1] - 1468:24
quite [12] - 1224:22; 1226:23;
1267:2; 1278:19; 1301:25;
1312:25; 1381:24; 1429:7;
1430:5, 7; 1435:9; 1438:14
quote [9] - 1247:1, 16, 19;
1333:17; 1349:18; 1351:1;
1390:14; 1391:3; 1431:12
quoted [1] - 1378:6
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
29
quoting [1] - 1427:18
R
R.S.A [2] - 1206:7, 9
radar [3] - 1350:4; 1439:23
radio [3] - 1350:7; 1420:5
radio-collaring [1] - 1420:5
radio-otometry [1] - 1420:6
radiotelemetry [2] - 1435:18;
1436:6
rail [9] - 1409:21; 1410:17;
1440:14, 17, 22; 1442:7,
13, 15
ramp [2] - 1284:21
ramp-up [2] - 1284:21
Randall [1] - 1304:9
range [27] - 1241:21;
1244:11; 1245:12;
1275:13; 1280:23; 1282:4;
1298:6, 18; 1341:13;
1371:9; 1372:25; 1405:18;
1407:25; 1425:6; 1426:10;
1428:15, 25; 1429:2;
1433:10, 13; 1441:12;
1442:1, 9; 1449:5
ranges [4] - 1421:20;
1428:18; 1440:18; 1441:2
Rangi [1] - 1208:13
ranging [6] - 1334:1;
1405:15; 1417:17; 1418:6;
1419:17; 1421:20
ranked [1] - 1363:14
ranking [7] - 1362:14, 17, 22;
1363:5, 16; 1455:3
rankings [1] - 1373:2
rapid [2] - 1376:16; 1432:10
rate [2] - 1299:6; 1433:6
rates [6] - 1234:22; 1240:17,
21; 1241:8, 10, 16
rather [5] - 1231:13; 1265:13;
1269:14; 1292:18; 1414:16
ratings [1] - 1396:9
ratio [5] - 1227:16; 1453:19;
1454:1, 6, 11
raw [1] - 1310:10
Ray [1] - 1209:2
RCB [1] - 1356:23
RCR [3] - 1209:15; 1470:3,
19
Re [1] - 1307:22
RE [2] - 1213:8; 1308:2
reach [4] - 1226:25; 1227:5;
1296:25; 1315:5
reached [1] - 1419:6
reaches [2] - 1231:8; 1332:7
reaching [2] - 1297:12;
1464:6
read [25] - 1240:7; 1247:16,
19; 1250:5; 1254:17;
1303:24; 1305:1, 9;
1317:13; 1330:14; 1359:8;
1391:3; 1413:5; 1418:23;
1427:20; 1429:10;
1430:24; 1431:13;
1440:19; 1441:21; 1444:7;
1447:6, 14; 1453:22;
1458:24
readily [1] - 1366:21
readiness [1] - 1265:20
reading [2] - 1288:7; 1362:6
readings [3] - 1224:25;
1268:21; 1353:18
ready [4] - 1220:17; 1221:8;
1265:6, 22
ready-for-operations [1] -
1265:6
real [2] - 1328:23; 1427:14
realistic [1] - 1462:17
reality [2] - 1310:25; 1341:19
realization [1] - 1257:20
realize [3] - 1299:7; 1327:2;
1464:7
really [36] - 1226:22;
1228:25; 1229:4, 22;
1231:6; 1243:2, 5; 1260:5;
1263:22; 1264:10, 12;
1265:21; 1313:20;
1320:12; 1325:20; 1327:7;
1332:21; 1339:20; 1347:4;
1348:25; 1352:17;
1368:24; 1381:1; 1382:20;
1403:22; 1409:18;
1419:24; 1421:19;
1424:23; 1445:5; 1451:9;
1457:17, 23; 1460:24
realm [2] - 1303:14; 1327:9
REALTIME [1] - 1209:14
Realtime [2] - 1470:4, 20
realtime [1] - 1209:15
reason [9] - 1232:24; 1289:4;
1366:6; 1380:21; 1415:20;
1418:18; 1422:8; 1460:22,
24
reasonable [3] - 1289:17;
1325:1; 1332:24
reasonably [3] - 1243:21;
1262:19; 1282:16
reasons [6] - 1262:22;
1396:23; 1412:1; 1438:25;
1442:7
receive [5] - 1277:25;
1321:24; 1333:25;
1467:19; 1468:3
receiver [1] - 1363:17
receivers [1] - 1356:23
receiving [1] - 1331:5
recent [6] - 1253:16; 1282:6,
23; 1300:13; 1302:16;
1465:23
recently [6] - 1236:7, 15;
1263:8; 1278:16; 1316:11;
1398:25
receptor [8] - 1346:1;
1358:18; 1361:20, 23;
1362:4; 1363:6; 1456:5, 12
receptors [5] - 1345:14;
1346:19; 1349:2; 1356:13;
1363:14
reclaim [1] - 1391:20
reclaimed [11] - 1313:8;
1322:12, 15; 1393:6, 14,
17; 1410:7; 1414:24;
1416:2; 1418:11; 1446:24
reclaimers [1] - 1259:16
Reclamation [2] - 1314:11;
1317:21
reclamation [20] - 1324:23;
1384:20; 1385:1; 1394:12;
1410:5, 10; 1413:14, 19;
1416:6; 1431:2, 16;
1432:11; 1444:3, 12;
1445:14, 24; 1446:4, 10,
21
recognize [1] - 1413:22
recognized [2] - 1425:5;
1454:17
recognizes [1] - 1357:22
recommend [1] - 1403:7
RECOMMENDATION [2] -
1213:12; 1321:2
recommendation [11] -
1306:17, 20; 1307:7;
1315:21; 1320:21;
1399:22; 1408:13;
1448:24; 1449:14; 1453:22
recommendations [3] -
1447:4; 1448:1
recommends [2] - 1453:21;
1460:20
RECONVENE [1] - 1211:15
reconvene [1] - 1469:11
record [3] - 1246:12;
1272:25; 1400:13
records [1] - 1219:3
recover [4] - 1240:1;
1382:12; 1439:3, 7
recovered [4] - 1235:3, 8, 10;
1439:20
recoveries [3] - 1240:18;
1241:9, 17
recovery [38] - 1225:24;
1226:9; 1229:1, 3;
1230:25; 1231:16; 1232:5,
11; 1233:2, 5, 23-24;
1234:21; 1235:6, 12, 24;
1237:21; 1239:4, 21;
1240:16, 23; 1241:11, 15;
1242:20, 23; 1244:4;
1245:16; 1249:3; 1263:21;
1328:22; 1383:9; 1427:24;
1429:20; 1432:8, 17;
1457:16
Recovery [8] - 1238:15;
1239:1, 25; 1427:16, 19;
1430:6, 16; 1433:8
recovery-compliant [1] -
1229:3
recurring [1] - 1316:17
Red [1] - 1432:2
reduce [16] - 1254:6;
1276:17, 23; 1309:25;
1311:10, 17-18; 1323:12;
1402:17; 1415:6; 1433:6,
18; 1444:23; 1459:3, 22
reduced [1] - 1325:16
reducing [4] - 1254:11;
1402:24; 1423:14
reductions [1] - 1464:13
REF [1] - 1343:10
REFER [2] - 1213:6; 1222:19
refer [10] - 1240:3; 1262:2;
1308:11; 1316:8; 1317:8;
1321:5; 1335:14; 1336:24;
1395:1; 1463:13
reference [24] - 1223:25;
1238:4; 1247:9, 15;
1251:7; 1295:23; 1297:20;
1310:14; 1333:19;
1343:10; 1349:14;
1350:23; 1362:20; 1363:2;
1376:11, 22; 1379:19;
1381:5; 1403:17; 1417:21;
1431:9; 1447:24; 1450:14;
1459:10
referenced [6] - 1311:9;
1381:22; 1393:19; 1399:2;
1447:14
references [5] - 1247:14;
1249:25; 1333:1; 1343:12;
1344:14
referencing [4] - 1377:5, 10;
1431:6; 1444:4
referred [8] - 1223:20;
1250:8; 1295:13; 1369:1,
3; 1427:15; 1432:6; 1446:1
referring [16] - 1248:11;
1251:17; 1263:5; 1299:10;
1309:5; 1367:24; 1374:5;
1375:20; 1380:20;
1394:11; 1407:8; 1438:9;
1446:15; 1465:5
refers [3] - 1393:24; 1433:10,
12
refill [1] - 1349:4
refine [1] - 1270:25
refined [1] - 1301:15
refinery [1] - 1245:10
reflect [3] - 1229:20;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
30
1251:21; 1357:11
reflected [1] - 1346:6
reflecting [1] - 1252:7
reflective [1] - 1297:25
reflects [1] - 1294:17
refocus [1] - 1259:7
regard [2] - 1370:4; 1411:1
regarding [5] - 1409:1;
1417:23; 1426:4; 1443:17;
1455:6
regardless [2] - 1243:15;
1320:5
regards [1] - 1432:4
Region [3] - 1208:19;
1318:16
region [35] - 1275:15, 21;
1287:18; 1298:6; 1301:21;
1302:23; 1315:4; 1316:16;
1318:6; 1332:14; 1337:4;
1360:17; 1387:6; 1391:14;
1395:20; 1399:1; 1404:22;
1406:13; 1407:14, 22;
1413:23; 1414:8, 12;
1415:7, 13; 1419:11;
1422:23; 1427:8; 1428:8;
1430:21; 1435:21;
1437:11; 1442:4; 1445:24;
1446:12
regional [23] - 1293:23;
1296:24; 1372:2; 1373:1,
6, 15, 21, 24; 1382:19;
1383:1, 3; 1390:7; 1414:6;
1415:5; 1419:15; 1421:15;
1430:3; 1432:19; 1433:1;
1434:17; 1443:25; 1456:2
Regional [19] - 1209:2;
1298:1; 1300:21; 1370:20;
1380:4; 1383:3, 18;
1386:8, 12, 14; 1387:3;
1415:9; 1430:17; 1441:14,
18; 1442:12, 16; 1443:18;
1458:17
regions [1] - 1441:13
registering [4] - 1209:5, 10
Registry [7] - 1221:11;
1222:3, 5, 8, 25; 1223:6, 9
regular [2] - 1346:13;
1432:14
regulator [8] - 1244:15;
1289:3, 20; 1298:5;
1300:8, 12; 1302:1;
1332:18
regulators [2] - 1260:22;
1332:4
regulatory [1] - 1332:22
reinforce [1] - 1287:1
reiterate [1] - 1442:6
reject [1] - 1240:11
rejected [3] - 1239:4, 17, 19
REJECTION [2] - 1214:11;
1246:20
rejection [17] - 1238:20;
1240:14, 17, 20; 1241:5, 8,
10, 16; 1242:2, 12, 22;
1243:9, 22; 1245:5, 13;
1288:17, 25
rejig [1] - 1412:4
relate [3] - 1232:6; 1404:23;
1458:3
related [9] - 1226:13;
1263:21; 1281:11, 20;
1283:22; 1284:7, 14;
1290:7; 1463:21
relates [2] - 1248:12; 1321:7
relating [2] - 1262:22;
1365:18
relation [10] - 1268:3;
1281:19; 1286:22;
1296:11; 1315:9; 1316:24;
1330:4, 13; 1342:6;
1421:13
RELATIONS [2] - 1213:5;
1222:17
relationship [6] - 1234:20;
1235:1, 4, 12, 17, 24
relationships [1] - 1235:5
relative [6] - 1229:7, 19;
1235:15; 1298:20;
1430:10; 1455:6
relatively [4] - 1287:14;
1368:12; 1371:15; 1398:9
release [6] - 1283:9; 1332:9,
20; 1439:4, 6
released [5] - 1283:4;
1308:17; 1316:11;
1398:25; 1430:7
releases [1] - 1465:9
releasing [1] - 1332:9
relevant [1] - 1449:25
reliable [3] - 1341:13;
1359:17; 1366:17
reliably [2] - 1262:20;
1263:19
reliance [1] - 1313:24
relied [2] - 1368:14; 1455:13
relies [1] - 1340:20
relocate [4] - 1234:7;
1287:17; 1403:21
relocated [2] - 1399:24;
1401:5
relocation [10] - 1399:19;
1400:1, 3, 7, 16; 1401:4, 7,
13; 1418:17; 1450:24
rely [4] - 1319:4; 1372:24;
1383:7; 1406:20
relying [4] - 1319:22;
1377:14, 17; 1408:7
remain [2] - 1291:9; 1303:7
remained [1] - 1400:18
remaining [4] - 1312:4;
1375:11; 1438:5; 1443:17
remains [2] - 1220:19;
1282:21
remarked [1] - 1378:17
remember [7] - 1228:20;
1371:8; 1375:12; 1399:4;
1405:10; 1418:5; 1445:21
remix [1] - 1337:14
remnant [3] - 1410:21, 23;
1412:5
remote [3] - 1435:1, 4, 6
remotely [1] - 1396:25
removal [1] - 1227:12
remove [2] - 1242:8; 1428:6
removed [3] - 1402:10;
1409:4; 1453:12
removing [1] - 1242:7
repeat [4] - 1323:25; 1339:7;
1362:16; 1434:12
repeated [1] - 1295:7
rephrase [2] - 1317:2;
1377:11
replace [3] - 1273:7;
1347:11; 1351:12
replacement [1] - 1234:16
reply [1] - 1448:22
Reply [5] - 1303:22; 1308:12;
1311:24; 1316:8; 1333:2
report [5] - 1348:6; 1398:24;
1399:6; 1440:5, 12
Report [4] - 1275:22;
1310:18; 1420:9; 1465:6
reporter [1] - 1468:12
Reporter [2] - 1470:4, 20
REPORTER'S [1] - 1470:1
reporting [1] - 1359:5
REPORTING [1] - 1209:14
reports [1] - 1367:11
represent [2] - 1293:16;
1456:8
representations [1] -
1388:15
representative [3] - 1350:15;
1351:18; 1449:6
represented [2] - 1208:10;
1342:20
representing [1] - 1356:2
represents [3] - 1302:12;
1322:10; 1372:11
Request [1] - 1247:18
request [2] - 1288:22;
1410:13
requested [4] - 1252:6, 9;
1445:6, 9
Requests [2] - 1454:22;
1463:1
require [2] - 1243:2; 1341:2
required [15] - 1242:8;
1250:11; 1251:24;
1296:17; 1310:3; 1327:16;
1352:25; 1354:5; 1364:2;
1413:9; 1419:10; 1430:4;
1432:19; 1434:4; 1459:18
requirement [6] - 1237:19;
1243:8; 1325:13; 1347:19;
1358:19; 1359:6
requirements [9] - 1244:17;
1251:21; 1278:11; 1281:6;
1305:4; 1354:6; 1357:21;
1384:20; 1417:12
requires [2] - 1243:20;
1338:23
requiring [1] - 1309:8
rescue [1] - 1453:10
rescued [1] - 1439:1
research [4] - 1232:3;
1311:7; 1314:10; 1464:17
Research [1] - 1314:12
reserve [1] - 1289:2
reside [1] - 1287:6
resident [1] - 1449:9
residents [4] - 1297:13;
1461:23; 1462:12, 21
residual [6] - 1231:11;
1235:21; 1238:24;
1239:16; 1269:10; 1382:5
Resource [2] - 1306:22;
1307:9
resource [11] - 1238:17;
1241:1; 1272:12; 1369:16;
1390:8, 12; 1457:16, 19
resources [9] - 1325:19;
1327:1; 1328:5, 14;
1329:5, 20; 1368:3, 8
RESOURCES [6] - 1206:4, 7,
12; 1207:9; 1213:6;
1222:18
respect [21] - 1216:19;
1220:25; 1281:23;
1282:20, 23; 1285:9;
1288:16; 1298:10;
1299:18; 1300:14;
1303:16; 1317:17; 1371:6;
1398:8; 1400:22; 1405:4;
1418:10; 1420:16;
1425:19; 1445:7; 1446:8
RESPECT [2] - 1212:4;
1217:3
respiratory [1] - 1463:5
respond [2] - 1246:7; 1426:3
responded [4] - 1248:10;
1408:13; 1416:8; 1424:21
response [29] - 1220:1;
1228:18; 1240:6; 1254:4;
1268:1, 11; 1273:5;
1303:23; 1308:14;
1311:25; 1321:6; 1330:12;
1333:3; 1350:4; 1385:25;
1395:5; 1409:6; 1413:3,
25; 1429:9; 1438:2;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
31
1448:23; 1449:11;
1454:10, 23; 1463:6, 12;
1464:9
RESPONSE [10] - 1212:3, 7,
12, 15, 18; 1217:2, 23;
1218:18; 1219:11; 1221:16
Response [24] - 1246:25;
1247:2; 1254:2, 16;
1255:18; 1273:12;
1277:17; 1281:4; 1290:4;
1294:7; 1295:14; 1297:4;
1298:8; 1330:14; 1370:18;
1374:5; 1384:6; 1404:12;
1431:10; 1434:21;
1454:24; 1462:25
Responses [9] - 1225:16;
1240:4; 1255:17; 1277:16;
1283:24; 1291:3; 1295:8;
1395:4; 1454:21
responses [1] - 1342:9
responsible [1] - 1303:15
responsive [1] - 1278:10
restate [2] - 1234:23;
1280:16
restful [1] - 1225:10
resting [1] - 1437:10
restore [3] - 1339:13, 19
restricted [1] - 1309:2
restriction [1] - 1384:22
restrictions [2] - 1309:17;
1311:20
result [13] - 1231:1; 1283:16;
1341:18; 1361:23; 1366:8;
1367:6; 1368:18; 1402:12;
1405:2; 1406:10; 1428:9;
1444:15; 1456:19
resultant [1] - 1370:2
resulting [5] - 1274:22;
1275:13; 1390:4; 1395:2, 6
Results [1] - 1404:18
results [18] - 1243:15;
1263:12; 1342:25;
1349:21; 1360:13;
1361:17; 1363:24; 1373:8;
1401:12; 1411:17; 1414:9,
11; 1416:22; 1417:5;
1420:8; 1452:11; 1453:2;
1463:16
resume [3] - 1365:10;
1423:25; 1424:5
RESUMING [2] - 1210:3;
1215:11
retaining [1] - 1364:6
reticence [1] - 1331:24
retire [1] - 1277:1
retiring [1] - 1273:7
return [3] - 1266:15; 1392:9;
1399:24
returned [1] - 1445:13
reuse [1] - 1310:3
reveal [1] - 1336:17
reverse [2] - 1429:18;
1438:19
reversibility [5] - 1389:23;
1392:15; 1394:20; 1443:4;
1455:25
reversible [7] - 1391:7, 12,
15; 1403:15, 21; 1438:19;
1456:17
reversible/irreversible [1] -
1392:24
Review [5] - 1207:7;
1223:22; 1333:9; 1447:3;
1454:21
review [7] - 1223:15;
1237:20; 1304:12;
1315:17; 1378:13; 1447:9;
1448:10
REVIEW [2] - 1206:1
reviewed [1] - 1365:22
reviewers [1] - 1317:4
reviews [1] - 1318:18
revise [1] - 1297:15
revised [3] - 1220:14;
1285:18; 1299:1
revisited [1] - 1239:14
Richardson [3] - 1428:15;
1429:3; 1433:13
richness [1] - 1376:17
right-hand [1] - 1343:9
riparian [1] - 1417:13
risk [18] - 1258:17; 1260:8,
21; 1261:23; 1396:4, 23;
1399:22; 1400:11;
1409:21; 1410:14;
1413:10; 1439:9; 1440:9;
1444:21; 1459:4; 1463:19,
24; 1468:3
Risk [8] - 1461:3, 9, 15-16,
21; 1462:8, 22; 1463:15
risks [7] - 1258:20, 24;
1327:14; 1437:7; 1461:4;
1463:22; 1466:17
risky [1] - 1468:2
River [78] - 1208:17; 1220:4;
1225:21; 1226:10, 19, 23;
1227:7; 1228:24; 1229:7,
10, 19, 22, 25; 1230:6, 14,
20; 1231:2, 5, 16; 1232:7;
1236:6, 9; 1237:6;
1254:24; 1255:1, 10, 14;
1265:2, 15; 1266:4, 12, 19,
21; 1267:7; 1268:3;
1290:12; 1292:6, 8, 16, 18,
20; 1293:2; 1304:4, 20;
1307:1; 1309:2, 10;
1311:5, 17; 1331:6;
1332:7; 1335:13; 1343:16;
1353:13; 1360:22;
1365:18; 1410:16;
1416:18; 1419:21;
1428:21, 24; 1432:2, 13;
1448:15; 1450:20, 25;
1451:12; 1452:6, 21;
1453:11, 15; 1458:16;
1467:4
river [6] - 1306:25; 1309:23,
25; 1310:21; 1466:21;
1467:6
RIVER [2] - 1214:18; 1293:7
rivers [1] - 1466:11
RMWB [4] - 1298:24; 1301:5,
12; 1302:16
RMWB's [1] - 1301:22
road [2] - 1343:22; 1402:19
roads [8] - 1352:15; 1401:23;
1402:2, 6, 14, 16, 19
Robert [1] - 1207:11
Roberts [28] - 1220:24;
1221:2, 9; 1232:13;
1233:8; 1237:1; 1244:24;
1248:7; 1249:20; 1252:9;
1253:10; 1258:12; 1259:6;
1260:11; 1264:5; 1269:3;
1270:2; 1272:7, 21;
1273:6; 1274:11; 1276:25;
1295:17; 1327:22;
1328:19; 1350:25; 1351:8;
1466:13
ROBERTS [17] - 1210:17;
1212:19; 1216:12; 1221:4,
17; 1232:15; 1236:5;
1248:4; 1249:16; 1251:17;
1265:4; 1268:18; 1276:12;
1295:20; 1309:19; 1353:9;
1466:18
robust [2] - 1231:20;
1279:21
rock [1] - 1341:23
role [4] - 1313:11, 13
rolled [1] - 1363:16
Romprey [1] - 1381:23
ROSEMARY [2] - 1210:12;
1216:3
rotating [1] - 1325:13
Rothwell [1] - 1208:23
Roughly [1] - 1293:25
Round [2] - 1371:7; 1406:8
rounds [1] - 1422:3
routed [1] - 1247:6
routes [1] - 1352:15
rows [3] - 1344:13; 1356:17;
1360:9
RPR [3] - 1209:15; 1470:3,
19
RSA [52] - 1212:9; 1217:15;
1218:1; 1223:19; 1368:10,
13, 16, 18, 21, 23, 25;
1369:16, 18, 24; 1370:12,
21; 1371:5; 1377:25;
1383:20, 22, 25; 1396:25;
1398:10; 1399:9, 14;
1400:19; 1404:3, 8;
1406:21; 1407:7, 11;
1408:6; 1412:22; 1414:18;
1419:3; 1425:15; 1428:7,
16, 19-20; 1429:14, 16, 22;
1432:10, 22; 1433:3, 6;
1434:5; 1443:3; 1445:4
RSI [1] - 1369:13
rule [2] - 1336:13; 1337:9
run [4] - 1254:5; 1360:11;
1366:19, 22
running [1] - 1439:15
runoff [2] - 1322:12, 14
Rural [1] - 1297:18
rural [2] - 1301:9, 21
rust [1] - 1467:8
rusty [2] - 1372:20; 1373:12
Rusty [1] - 1324:2
S
S.C [1] - 1206:10
safe [1] - 1352:14
safeguarding [1] - 1245:17
Safety [1] - 1361:5
safety [4] - 1258:24; 1464:5;
1467:12, 21
saline [1] - 1333:25
salinity [1] - 1334:7
salt [3] - 1231:11; 1235:21
samples [3] - 1268:22;
1269:7; 1361:10
sampling [3] - 1268:24;
1361:2, 6
SAND [2] - 1212:20; 1221:18
Sand [1] - 1248:12
sand [2] - 1221:6; 1255:4
Sander [1] - 1208:2
sands [32] - 1225:25; 1255:9;
1307:22; 1312:9; 1316:16;
1333:24; 1335:7; 1340:17;
1341:22; 1399:1, 3;
1401:8; 1407:22; 1410:19;
1417:19; 1418:8; 1422:23;
1427:8; 1430:21; 1432:23;
1435:21; 1436:11; 1437:1,
11; 1438:9; 1442:1;
1445:23; 1446:8, 12, 19,
23
Sands [14] - 1209:1;
1255:21; 1256:5; 1271:11;
1278:6; 1301:2; 1304:17;
1305:22; 1310:17;
1314:14; 1318:20; 1432:6;
1464:21
SANDS [3] - 1206:8; 1213:9;
1308:2
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
32
SAR [2] - 1408:19; 1412:23
SARA [2] - 1427:16; 1440:16
SARs [1] - 1379:8
satisfaction [2] - 1332:6, 8
satisfied [1] - 1256:17
SATISFIED [15] - 1214:4-9,
15, 21; 1217:10; 1218:5,
24; 1219:16; 1220:10;
1221:22; 1289:22
satisfy [1] - 1286:2
save [1] - 1411:12
saw [4] - 1289:4, 18; 1389:4;
1435:11
SAWYER [2] - 1210:11;
1215:25
Sawyer [2] - 1220:13, 16
SCALE [2] - 1212:10; 1218:1
scale [28] - 1259:19;
1260:25; 1261:3, 7;
1312:8, 14; 1313:12;
1319:2; 1328:9; 1341:16;
1368:12; 1369:16, 23;
1370:12; 1371:5, 14;
1379:17; 1382:20; 1383:1;
1394:21; 1405:17, 25;
1413:1; 1421:15; 1422:14;
1441:23; 1456:22
scaling [1] - 1253:23
scare [1] - 1350:20
scare-cannons [1] - 1350:20
scared [1] - 1439:24
scenario [8] - 1275:8;
1284:24; 1290:22; 1298:5;
1314:22; 1338:4; 1462:17
Scenarios [1] - 1342:17
scenarios [5] - 1297:9;
1463:17; 1465:8, 12, 14
Schaaf [1] - 1280:14
SCHAAF [10] - 1210:7;
1214:16; 1215:17;
1280:16; 1282:18; 1285:3;
1287:8; 1290:20; 1293:5;
1297:23
schedule [2] - 1274:10;
1291:17
scheduling [1] - 1288:4
scheme [1] - 1239:10
science [3] - 1319:11, 18;
1337:10
scientific [1] - 1385:24
scope [1] - 1261:7
scores [2] - 1456:13, 19
scoring [1] - 1455:19
scorings [1] - 1455:20
Scotford [2] - 1240:24;
1241:23
screen [1] - 1422:4
screening [1] - 1422:4
sec [1] - 1390:19
second [14] - 1217:12;
1226:11; 1230:5; 1237:24;
1247:9; 1248:14; 1267:9;
1284:15; 1304:25; 1307:1;
1309:5; 1312:21; 1315:11
secondary [2] - 1229:12, 14
secondly [2] - 1229:11;
1302:4
seconds [1] - 1252:11
SECRETARIAT [1] - 1207:14
section [4] - 1342:25;
1398:18, 20; 1404:20
Section [14] - 1207:13;
1220:6; 1262:3; 1281:6;
1298:9; 1333:10; 1336:7;
1359:5; 1398:16; 1450:17;
1458:10; 1459:15;
1460:12; 1465:7
sections [1] - 1231:4
sediment [1] - 1340:23
see [42] - 1245:23; 1259:11;
1263:12; 1276:9; 1278:10;
1280:11; 1287:13; 1288:7;
1302:25; 1305:1, 19;
1318:10; 1325:17; 1328:2;
1331:19; 1343:12; 1363:4;
1383:2; 1388:17; 1389:11;
1391:6; 1402:19; 1403:1;
1404:17; 1409:25; 1415:5;
1420:10; 1422:10, 20;
1428:12; 1439:12, 15;
1443:2, 22; 1445:5;
1452:8, 23; 1456:10;
1469:7
seeing [3] - 1231:13;
1286:13; 1374:23
seeking [2] - 1227:1;
1238:11
seeks [1] - 1227:4
seem [2] - 1258:12; 1436:1
seepage [1] - 1321:24
sees [1] - 1336:22
SEIA [3] - 1280:12, 22;
1281:6
seismic [1] - 1223:19
selected [1] - 1465:13
self [3] - 1314:3; 1323:10;
1340:12
Self [1] - 1208:10
Self-represented [1] -
1208:10
self-sustaining [3] - 1314:3;
1323:10; 1340:12
sending [1] - 1249:11
sense [13] - 1235:15; 1269:2;
1315:3; 1328:7; 1348:2;
1376:4; 1378:15; 1379:22;
1412:9; 1414:5; 1428:2;
1432:21; 1456:20
sensitive [11] - 1378:23, 25;
1382:3, 15; 1460:17;
1461:1, 5, 7, 14, 19;
1466:21
sent [2] - 1234:20; 1384:16
sentence [1] - 1378:6
separate [2] - 1255:15;
1292:4
separation [5] - 1227:7;
1229:17; 1230:9, 15;
1231:25
September [6] - 1370:19;
1382:24; 1391:11;
1397:22; 1398:16; 1421:2
series [2] - 1388:23; 1465:8
serves [1] - 1259:18
Service [5] - 1299:11;
1301:19; 1303:1; 1436:24;
1437:24
service [6] - 1232:24;
1287:15; 1301:4, 8;
1302:6; 1303:15
set [13] - 1289:14; 1306:11;
1332:17; 1352:14;
1382:14; 1394:22;
1411:24; 1436:16;
1450:18; 1456:24; 1459:8;
1466:15; 1470:8
setback [1] - 1220:25
SETBACKS [2] - 1212:20;
1221:18
setbacks [3] - 1221:5;
1253:23
sets [2] - 1346:9; 1467:19
settings [2] - 1335:10;
1423:10
seven [2] - 1261:19; 1277:5
several [3] - 1412:23;
1459:1; 1463:12
severity [1] - 1456:11
shall [2] - 1368:19; 1457:11
shapes [1] - 1388:17
share [4] - 1306:9; 1313:17;
1315:3
shared [1] - 1256:25
sharing [2] - 1257:6; 1315:7
Shawn [1] - 1208:2
Sheliza [1] - 1209:7
SHELL [18] - 1206:2; 1210:3;
1212:6, 10, 13-14, 17;
1213:4; 1214:11; 1215:11;
1217:6; 1218:2, 20-21;
1219:14; 1222:16; 1246:19
Shell [189] - 1208:2; 1222:1;
1224:24; 1225:4, 16, 19;
1232:8; 1233:12; 1236:16;
1237:17, 19, 22; 1238:6, 8,
10, 16; 1239:17; 1240:5, 7;
1241:3, 7, 14-15; 1242:21;
1243:14; 1245:19;
1246:13; 1247:2, 4;
1248:21, 23; 1249:4, 9-10;
1250:11, 15; 1251:13;
1253:14, 22; 1254:4, 11;
1255:18, 20; 1256:8;
1257:4; 1259:7; 1262:5, 9;
1263:14; 1264:15, 24-25;
1266:18; 1268:15;
1270:20; 1271:13, 23;
1273:3, 6-7, 15, 23;
1274:1; 1277:17; 1278:3;
1281:15, 25; 1282:14;
1283:23; 1285:25;
1290:18; 1291:4; 1292:1;
1295:8; 1296:21; 1297:15;
1298:14; 1299:22; 1303:5,
13, 23; 1304:1; 1305:22,
24; 1306:3, 14, 19; 1307:1,
5; 1308:14, 18; 1309:15;
1310:15; 1311:17; 1312:1;
1314:2; 1315:8; 1316:9,
20; 1318:20, 22; 1319:9;
1323:3, 8, 10; 1324:13;
1325:21; 1326:9; 1329:16;
1330:13, 16; 1331:2, 7, 11,
13-14; 1332:1; 1333:4;
1336:4, 22; 1338:4;
1339:4, 15; 1345:4;
1349:18; 1350:17; 1351:1,
5, 19; 1352:5; 1357:20, 22;
1358:2, 11; 1360:21;
1364:21; 1368:11, 14;
1370:21; 1372:9; 1375:15;
1379:10; 1384:16, 21;
1387:1, 5; 1399:24;
1409:13; 1413:7; 1414:25;
1416:1, 9; 1417:15;
1422:1; 1424:25; 1429:19;
1431:1, 15; 1432:6, 12;
1433:17; 1434:12, 16;
1438:11; 1440:3; 1444:15;
1446:9; 1447:5, 8, 19;
1448:2, 5, 24; 1450:21, 24;
1453:24; 1454:5, 8, 10;
1459:12; 1460:18; 1463:8;
1464:16; 1466:11; 1467:18
Shell's [60] - 1224:12, 14;
1231:1; 1232:6; 1234:1,
19; 1236:1; 1240:4;
1242:19; 1244:18; 1249:9,
15; 1250:2; 1254:2;
1256:4; 1257:9; 1262:13;
1272:8; 1276:9; 1277:15,
20; 1281:4; 1288:16;
1290:4; 1293:10; 1300:23;
1303:22; 1308:12; 1309:1;
1310:13; 1311:24; 1312:5;
1313:11, 24; 1315:13;
1316:7; 1319:4, 6; 1321:6;
1326:1; 1328:1, 4; 1333:2;
1336:17; 1338:14; 1340:8,
11; 1341:7; 1358:6;
1395:4; 1413:25; 1429:9;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
33
1431:10; 1440:1; 1444:9;
1448:22; 1462:25;
1464:22, 24
shelter [2] - 1422:5; 1423:17
shift [2] - 1241:2; 1259:15
shore [5] - 1439:9, 12, 19-20,
24
shores [1] - 1439:13
short [3] - 1343:10; 1390:23;
1391:7
shorten [2] - 1258:22;
1261:21
shorter [1] - 1258:10
shorthand [1] - 1470:8
shortly [2] - 1342:22;
1453:13
shovel [2] - 1259:17;
1276:14
shovels [1] - 1259:22
show [8] - 1229:1; 1248:1, 5;
1275:15; 1292:19;
1344:15; 1349:21; 1463:17
showed [1] - 1275:4
showing [3] - 1220:15;
1314:21; 1437:12
shown [6] - 1235:13; 1252:2,
19; 1253:13; 1275:23;
1452:23
SHOWS [2] - 1212:20;
1221:18
shows [6] - 1221:5; 1251:8;
1321:19; 1362:23;
1370:20; 1379:7
shrink [1] - 1258:10
shrubby [1] - 1442:21
sic [4] - 1232:16; 1277:16;
1336:10; 1464:16
side [14] - 1244:16, 18;
1273:1; 1325:15; 1357:2;
1416:19; 1428:21, 24;
1432:1; 1448:14; 1467:17
sides [1] - 1467:2
Sierra [1] - 1209:4
sieve [1] - 1268:21
sight [7] - 1401:17, 24;
1402:1, 8, 13, 18, 22
sightings [1] - 1435:24
sign [2] - 1228:6, 10
signal [1] - 1350:8
signatories [1] - 1305:22
significance [10] - 1377:23;
1381:6; 1395:2, 6; 1396:2,
15; 1397:11; 1398:11, 19;
1455:10
significant [32] - 1231:14;
1232:2; 1234:13; 1237:6;
1261:9; 1270:23; 1271:24;
1286:11; 1325:18;
1363:20; 1364:1; 1379:1,
10, 18; 1380:23; 1381:8;
1390:1, 15; 1391:1, 8, 13;
1396:11, 19; 1397:12;
1398:6; 1413:20; 1415:14;
1433:25; 1443:24; 1452:20
significantly [4] - 1229:5, 11;
1291:1; 1444:13
similar [7] - 1232:17;
1257:12; 1294:19; 1330:1;
1415:4; 1452:25; 1456:23
similar-looking [1] - 1456:23
similarly [1] - 1237:10
SIMONS [2] - 1210:13;
1216:5
simplest [1] - 1274:19
simply [4] - 1277:2; 1360:14;
1396:16; 1405:18
single [3] - 1261:15;
1358:25; 1467:9
SIR [25] - 1225:16; 1240:4;
1246:25; 1247:15; 1254:2,
16; 1255:17; 1273:12;
1277:16; 1281:4; 1283:24;
1290:4; 1291:3; 1294:7;
1295:7, 13; 1297:4;
1370:18; 1374:6; 1404:13;
1406:7; 1416:8; 1422:2;
1434:21
SIR-11 [4] - 1298:8, 20;
1300:19; 1392:12
SIR-9A [1] - 1454:23
SIR-9B [1] - 1374:6
SIR-9b [1] - 1378:7
SIRs [3] - 1330:13; 1371:6;
1417:23
sit [3] - 1225:2; 1288:5;
1378:16
site [34] - 1275:18; 1277:22;
1280:10, 20-21; 1281:2;
1286:24; 1291:8, 12;
1292:2; 1322:14; 1335:21;
1343:17; 1345:15;
1346:18; 1349:2, 11;
1351:22, 24; 1352:19;
1400:17; 1403:10, 13;
1408:20; 1446:24;
1452:24; 1456:16; 1457:2;
1465:18; 1466:5, 15;
1467:15, 20
site-specific [1] - 1335:21
sites [5] - 1255:7; 1399:3;
1424:25; 1448:16, 18
situ [3] - 1385:18, 23;
1457:21
situation [6] - 1328:7;
1338:5; 1366:3; 1367:8,
12; 1412:10
situations [3] - 1366:22;
1405:24; 1422:18
situs [1] - 1388:21
six [3] - 1257:24; 1258:4;
1272:18
six-month [1] - 1272:18
size [4] - 1219:20; 1235:19;
1384:19; 1386:13
sizeable [4] - 1283:6, 11;
1286:9, 12
sized [3] - 1234:3; 1377:23;
1458:20
skews [1] - 1369:13
skill [1] - 1470:11
skimming [1] - 1263:20
sleeve [2] - 1466:23; 1467:1
slight [1] - 1439:1
slightly [2] - 1322:11, 18
slower [3] - 1299:6; 1340:15,
20
slurry [7] - 1229:6, 8; 1230:1;
1231:24; 1232:19;
1276:19; 1466:19
slurry-conditioning [1] -
1276:19
small [12] - 1259:19;
1277:24; 1282:15;
1349:25; 1382:21; 1388:4,
23; 1411:21, 23, 25;
1417:24; 1452:12
small-scale [1] - 1259:19
smaller [2] - 1261:3; 1275:19
smaller-scale [1] - 1261:3
snipes [1] - 1439:11
social [3] - 1283:12, 14;
1324:10
socio [5] - 1277:9; 1287:20;
1290:3; 1299:23; 1300:15
socio-economic [5] -
1277:9; 1287:20; 1290:3;
1299:23; 1300:15
sodium [1] - 1227:10
soils [2] - 1452:18; 1462:20
solid [1] - 1366:23
solids [8] - 1242:5; 1263:5,
7; 1269:10, 12, 16; 1334:3
solution [2] - 1325:22;
1469:3
solutions [1] - 1315:6
solvent [3] - 1239:21;
1249:3; 1366:8
solvent-recovery [1] -
1249:3
someone [2] - 1342:19;
1345:21
sometimes [8] - 1354:18;
1361:18; 1388:16, 18, 25;
1420:14
somewhat [3] - 1236:23;
1266:16; 1353:11
somewhere [3] - 1261:18;
1309:10; 1407:17
songbird [1] - 1378:21
songbirds [3] - 1377:5, 9, 15
soon [1] - 1467:20
sorry [49] - 1222:21;
1247:16; 1274:16; 1276:7;
1281:7; 1292:7; 1300:20;
1302:22; 1303:3; 1304:25;
1307:3; 1321:6; 1323:25;
1330:4; 1335:4; 1336:14;
1339:7; 1346:17; 1347:3,
21; 1354:25; 1355:14;
1356:1; 1362:16, 19;
1364:11; 1365:21; 1370:3;
1373:13; 1377:11; 1384:2;
1388:2; 1390:13, 23;
1392:19; 1404:11, 14;
1408:2; 1411:22; 1429:2;
1431:8; 1445:18; 1454:24;
1461:25; 1464:14; 1469:2
sort [17] - 1235:23; 1285:18;
1286:3; 1338:21; 1354:22;
1371:12; 1388:8; 1403:2;
1405:12, 24-25; 1414:16;
1422:22; 1432:24; 1436:8;
1456:5; 1466:25
sorts [5] - 1325:13; 1373:19;
1396:24; 1426:3; 1446:17
sound [22] - 1295:21;
1343:20; 1345:6; 1346:17;
1350:13, 21; 1351:16;
1353:7; 1357:24; 1358:9;
1359:1, 6, 10; 1360:23, 25;
1361:6; 1364:9, 23, 25;
1422:15; 1423:13
Sound [7] - 1342:17, 20;
1343:7; 1344:2; 1345:5;
1350:15; 1351:18
SOUNDS [1] - 1210:21
sounds [8] - 1223:11;
1227:20; 1271:7; 1279:12;
1282:9; 1285:22; 1338:8
source [16] - 1217:14;
1220:3, 5; 1239:12;
1275:15; 1280:13; 1309:9;
1359:7; 1362:14, 17, 22;
1363:16; 1364:7; 1373:5;
1395:17
SOURCE [2] - 1212:9;
1217:25
sources [13] - 1239:8;
1310:2; 1311:2; 1343:2,
15; 1344:10, 12, 19;
1357:2; 1363:13, 19-20;
1364:1
SOURCES [2] - 1212:10;
1218:1
south [8] - 1221:1, 6;
1249:23; 1290:11;
1428:23; 1432:9; 1441:19
South [7] - 1207:18;
1250:18, 23, 25; 1251:9,
15; 1253:12
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
34
SOUTH [2] - 1212:20;
1221:19
southern [3] - 1250:10;
1441:13; 1442:9
space [5] - 1252:7; 1278:6,
22, 24
spans [1] - 1428:20
spec [1] - 1242:18
specialist [1] - 1468:3
specialists [1] - 1326:6
species [58] - 1376:16;
1377:6, 16, 25; 1378:18;
1379:9, 16; 1382:3, 16, 22;
1395:21; 1396:4, 23;
1399:22; 1400:11; 1401:3,
23; 1402:1, 7, 9, 11;
1403:23; 1404:5, 9;
1405:2, 15; 1407:4;
1409:20; 1410:14;
1413:10, 21, 25; 1414:18;
1417:9, 17; 1419:6, 17;
1421:13, 18; 1422:7, 20;
1427:1; 1435:13; 1440:9,
17; 1444:24; 1445:13, 16;
1446:3, 18; 1449:9;
1451:5, 20; 1452:3
species-specific [1] -
1378:18
Specific [3] - 1222:3, 22;
1224:11
specific [20] - 1226:12;
1243:24; 1249:21;
1267:11; 1276:8; 1278:12;
1303:12; 1317:3; 1335:21;
1336:8; 1354:25; 1362:1;
1369:4; 1370:3; 1378:18;
1397:21; 1433:4; 1455:14
SPECIFIC [2] - 1213:4;
1222:15
specifically [10] - 1273:13;
1335:12, 15; 1347:7;
1379:19; 1380:13;
1419:20; 1438:10; 1442:1;
1446:9
specification [1] - 1245:18
specifics [1] - 1443:16
specified [1] - 1303:6
Spectra [7] - 1342:17, 20;
1343:7; 1344:2; 1345:6;
1350:15; 1351:18
spectra [9] - 1343:20;
1345:2; 1350:13; 1351:16,
21, 25; 1353:7; 1356:18
speculate [2] - 1257:14, 16
speed [2] - 1402:2, 16
spell [1] - 1306:8
SPELLER [18] - 1210:15;
1216:8; 1274:19; 1276:7;
1342:21; 1351:20;
1352:12; 1354:7; 1355:14;
1356:16; 1360:6; 1362:20;
1386:6; 1387:19; 1390:22;
1445:18; 1452:5; 1455:17
speller [7] - 1276:2; 1391:2;
1392:14, 20; 1393:18;
1452:4
spend [9] - 1293:17;
1389:22; 1404:2; 1412:13;
1454:20; 1461:23; 1462:1;
1465:4
spending [1] - 1324:21
spent [2] - 1462:13
split [1] - 1292:7
SPOKEN [6] - 1210:19;
1211:4, 8; 1216:15;
1288:14; 1365:16
spoken [1] - 1222:7
spot [2] - 1361:10; 1437:10
spread [1] - 1387:17
spreads [1] - 1456:15
square [3] - 1405:9, 11;
1421:20
squared [1] - 1407:16
St [1] - 1437:15
stability [1] - 1312:20
stabilize [2] - 1302:23;
1406:9
staff [4] - 1223:4; 1224:22;
1366:25; 1367:7
STAFF [4] - 1210:20; 1211:6;
1225:8; 1342:13
stage [7] - 1233:15; 1313:10;
1354:12; 1411:14; 1449:8;
1451:18
stairs [2] - 1228:6, 8
stakeholder [2] - 1315:14;
1434:19
standard [1] - 1465:12
standardized [1] - 1416:21
standardizing [1] - 1271:19
standards [2] - 1273:20;
1467:15
standpoint [1] - 1358:21
Stark [1] - 1269:8
start [21] - 1239:22; 1261:9;
1262:19; 1265:16;
1277:13; 1284:10, 12, 21;
1320:12; 1321:20;
1327:17; 1337:7; 1355:3;
1366:15; 1372:5; 1380:9;
1415:8; 1457:14; 1469:1
start-up [6] - 1239:22;
1261:9; 1262:19; 1265:16;
1355:3; 1366:15
started [2] - 1228:25;
1301:13
starting [4] - 1336:22;
1368:2; 1369:21; 1380:18
starts [2] - 1285:24; 1317:12
state [10] - 1317:24; 1341:9;
1384:8; 1396:5; 1401:21;
1418:22; 1430:23;
1434:22; 1454:25; 1463:2
Statement [5] - 1223:24;
1250:2; 1293:11; 1295:4,
12
statement [9] - 1316:9;
1333:22; 1359:21, 25;
1374:7, 15; 1375:6, 18
statements [2] - 1223:17;
1305:17
states [22] - 1238:8; 1240:7;
1247:2; 1250:15; 1254:16;
1255:18; 1262:5; 1273:15;
1277:17; 1290:5; 1291:4;
1295:8; 1297:5; 1303:23;
1305:1, 24; 1310:15;
1312:2; 1316:9; 1321:11;
1359:8; 1385:12
stating [1] - 1393:4
stations [1] - 1346:18
Status [1] - 1208:15
stay [3] - 1275:25; 1311:23;
1425:9
steam [1] - 1309:24
step [4] - 1338:10, 14;
1360:16; 1444:20
Stephen [1] - 1209:16
stepped [1] - 1466:1
steps [3] - 1261:3; 1325:2;
1337:13
Steven [1] - 1207:18
Stewart [1] - 1209:6
still [16] - 1245:17; 1255:5;
1260:17; 1261:1; 1281:15,
23, 25; 1282:11; 1284:3;
1290:18; 1337:11;
1415:16; 1421:21; 1445:3;
1460:9
stop [1] - 1339:2
stopover [1] - 1437:25
stopped [1] - 1228:21
storage [3] - 1250:7; 1251:1;
1267:1
store [2] - 1239:17; 1310:10
story [4] - 1303:11, 13;
1313:1
strategies [4] - 1309:15;
1326:14; 1329:2; 1421:3
strategy [6] - 1326:3, 13;
1327:11, 15; 1336:21;
1428:16
Strategy [6] - 1427:17, 20;
1430:6, 16, 18; 1433:8
stratify [1] - 1341:12
stream [4] - 1239:20;
1262:21; 1263:6; 1466:21
streams [1] - 1331:6
stretch [2] - 1392:8; 1434:1
strictly [1] - 1464:25
strip [1] - 1460:1
stripping [1] - 1460:7
strips [3] - 1447:17; 1448:4,
11
strong [3] - 1235:16;
1265:14; 1287:3
strongly [1] - 1381:25
structure [1] - 1265:19
structures [1] - 1229:16
struggled [1] - 1266:14
stuck [2] - 1439:17, 21
students [1] - 1417:20
studies [8] - 1343:19;
1405:14; 1417:10; 1418:8;
1423:8, 12; 1445:12
study [9] - 1319:16; 1377:4;
1378:20; 1380:8; 1381:23;
1382:8; 1386:11; 1423:20;
1459:10
Study [12] - 1380:4; 1386:12,
14; 1415:9; 1426:6, 8;
1436:24; 1441:14, 18;
1442:12, 16; 1443:18
stuff [2] - 1411:18; 1434:18
stumbling [2] - 1358:15, 24
stutter [1] - 1390:13
sub [1] - 1456:1
subaerial [1] - 1266:19
subaerially [1] - 1268:4
subaqueous [4] - 1248:19;
1266:19; 1267:1; 1366:2
SUBJECT [2] - 1213:11;
1321:2
subject [8] - 1243:13;
1269:5; 1315:20; 1320:20;
1372:17; 1377:8; 1402:12;
1418:20
Submission [18] - 1220:6;
1223:23; 1247:11;
1253:17; 1297:19;
1303:22; 1308:12;
1311:24; 1316:8; 1333:2,
8; 1342:1; 1389:24;
1401:20; 1403:11;
1410:22; 1450:17; 1458:9
submission [17] - 1222:11;
1253:19; 1287:12;
1299:11; 1300:18; 1378:4;
1382:24; 1387:21;
1391:11; 1397:23;
1398:16; 1418:22;
1420:23; 1436:22; 1444:4;
1458:12
submissions [3] - 1252:18;
1282:7
submit [2] - 1237:19;
1441:15
SUBMITTED [8] - 1212:6, 10,
14, 17; 1217:6; 1218:2, 21;
1219:13
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
35
submitted [4] - 1264:4;
1317:15; 1348:7; 1465:22
Subregion [1] - 1283:1
subscribed [1] - 1470:13
subset [2] - 1386:13;
1461:13
substance [1] - 1468:1
substantial [4] - 1232:25;
1237:11; 1353:19; 1442:15
substantially [3] - 1298:15;
1312:25; 1353:16
subsurface [1] - 1311:14
subtle [1] - 1233:18
succeed [1] - 1314:3
success [2] - 1314:21;
1327:2
successful [3] - 1278:19;
1314:1; 1319:13
successfully [3] - 1323:9;
1401:8, 11
sufficient [7] - 1231:19;
1236:1; 1382:2; 1418:2,
19; 1419:2, 25
sufficiently [1] - 1234:3
sufficiently-sized [1] -
1234:3
suggest [21] - 1291:16;
1325:2; 1327:20; 1334:13;
1375:15; 1389:25; 1395:5;
1397:6; 1404:20; 1405:14;
1410:19, 23; 1414:2;
1418:1, 4, 13, 19; 1420:2;
1445:11; 1446:6
suggested [4] - 1278:3;
1353:17; 1370:22; 1416:9
suggesting [9] - 1329:25;
1330:7; 1334:24; 1341:18;
1368:15; 1390:25;
1398:22; 1403:18; 1451:3
suggestion [3] - 1242:21;
1245:25; 1408:23
suggests [9] - 1376:14;
1379:10; 1381:24;
1399:24; 1405:5; 1412:19;
1427:20; 1460:17; 1463:20
suitability [5] - 1373:2, 8,
16-17; 1374:1
suitable [3] - 1372:19;
1373:11; 1404:7
suite [4] - 1255:22; 1256:15;
1326:24
sum [1] - 1369:15
summarize [1] - 1244:12
summarized [1] - 1241:12
Summary [1] - 1404:17
summary [2] - 1241:13;
1389:20
summer [6] - 1347:18;
1440:18; 1441:2, 12;
1442:8
Suncor [5] - 1257:1;
1318:20; 1418:11;
1435:11; 1446:2
Supplemental [2] - 1247:17;
1454:22
supplier [3] - 1274:5, 7;
1352:20
suppliers' [1] - 1274:9
supply [2] - 1236:4; 1309:20
supplying [1] - 1369:4
support [14] - 1250:12;
1317:1; 1318:1, 11;
1319:1, 10, 25; 1328:21;
1339:24; 1384:18, 21;
1386:4; 1389:12; 1429:25
supported [3] - 1318:19;
1375:17; 1384:10
supporting [2] - 1259:4;
1328:13
supportive [2] - 1429:19, 24
supposed [1] - 1340:9
surface [10] - 1303:20;
1311:13; 1334:1; 1366:4,
10, 19; 1367:3; 1439:16;
1457:19; 1465:9
surge [1] - 1252:17
surpasses [1] - 1226:21
surprised [1] - 1436:17
surrounding [4] - 1404:8;
1406:15, 18, 21
survey [15] - 1345:14;
1346:13, 17; 1347:8, 17;
1348:16; 1349:1, 9;
1352:25; 1355:7; 1361:25;
1362:8, 13; 1435:8
surveys [13] - 1409:21-23;
1410:1, 14, 17-18; 1417:3;
1435:12, 14
susceptibility [1] - 1444:11
suspect [3] - 1219:7; 1383:5;
1420:21
sustain [1] - 1406:24
Sustainable [2] - 1306:22;
1307:9
sustained [2] - 1278:11;
1390:4
sustaining [5] - 1278:12;
1293:18; 1314:3; 1323:10;
1340:12
swamp [1] - 1393:15
swell [1] - 1272:3
swelling [1] - 1272:2
Swift [4] - 1375:8; 1376:23;
1377:8; 1378:12
SWORN [2] - 1210:4;
1215:12
Syncrude [18] - 1209:7;
1256:21; 1257:1, 18;
1258:6; 1312:6; 1313:15,
20; 1314:16; 1315:15;
1317:12, 17; 1318:5, 25;
1319:1, 21; 1320:8; 1328:7
Syncrude's [4] - 1312:13,
16; 1313:11, 24
system [13] - 1267:1;
1325:10; 1349:16; 1352:7;
1388:8; 1391:8; 1436:16;
1437:18; 1439:23; 1452:9;
1455:3; 1456:10
systems [1] - 1350:16
Systems [1] - 1445:2
T
T9H [1] - 1206:25
table [7] - 1294:21; 1363:9;
1367:10; 1370:20; 1379:7;
1392:21; 1393:8
Table [57] - 1224:1; 1247:11,
23; 1248:8, 11, 18; 1269:2;
1294:6, 10, 14, 17, 19, 23;
1321:9, 11, 19; 1342:17,
20, 24; 1343:4, 8-9;
1344:3, 12, 14; 1345:6;
1346:6, 24; 1348:8;
1349:4, 9; 1350:14, 22;
1351:17, 20; 1353:7;
1356:2, 7, 10; 1357:11;
1360:3; 1363:5, 12, 14;
1371:2, 17; 1372:8;
1378:22; 1379:6, 9;
1398:1; 1401:21; 1403:11;
1410:22
tables [2] - 1220:14; 1463:13
Tables [2] - 1247:22; 1248:1
tagged [1] - 1436:25
Tailing [1] - 1314:14
tailings [73] - 1237:12;
1239:20, 22; 1247:6;
1248:5, 15, 24; 1249:3, 12,
22; 1250:7, 21; 1251:1, 18;
1252:3, 20; 1254:12, 18,
22; 1255:1, 4, 8, 23;
1256:19; 1257:10;
1258:23; 1260:12; 1261:5;
1262:1, 6, 8, 10, 18, 24;
1263:25; 1265:1; 1266:5,
15, 18; 1267:2, 4, 6, 17;
1268:4, 8, 13; 1270:16;
1271:2, 17; 1309:22;
1321:24; 1322:1, 16;
1353:23; 1365:24; 1366:5,
17, 23; 1367:9; 1434:25;
1436:7, 12, 17; 1437:4,
6-7; 1438:11, 17, 23;
1439:10
TAILINGS [2] - 1214:14;
1267:22
Tailings [12] - 1221:1;
1239:23; 1248:2; 1249:24;
1250:9, 18; 1251:23;
1255:21; 1256:5; 1262:5;
1269:24; 1271:12
tails [5] - 1270:13, 15;
1312:20; 1320:6; 1366:2
tale [3] - 1335:24; 1336:1
talent [2] - 1259:1
talks [1] - 1398:19
Tara [1] - 1207:16
target [6] - 1242:4, 12;
1243:25; 1245:4, 12;
1411:24
targeted [1] - 1401:3
targeting [1] - 1243:2
targets [3] - 1382:14; 1383:5,
8
Task [1] - 1317:20
TDS [1] - 1334:4
team [4] - 1265:6, 20;
1362:25; 1437:15
technical [6] - 1259:1;
1316:14, 18; 1447:9;
1448:10
Technical [4] - 1316:12, 25;
1318:2; 1319:25
technically [2] - 1457:7, 10
techniques [3] - 1271:18;
1272:5; 1359:15
technologies [12] - 1240:22;
1241:11; 1255:23, 25;
1256:12; 1257:10, 15;
1258:23; 1260:24; 1261:5,
9; 1327:19
technology [36] - 1239:3;
1241:25; 1242:11;
1244:10; 1256:7, 11, 19;
1257:2; 1258:19, 22;
1259:9; 1260:1, 4, 6, 9,
12-13, 15, 25; 1261:17, 22;
1262:1; 1266:22; 1274:9;
1277:1; 1326:16, 20;
1327:6; 1328:13, 21;
1391:20; 1393:6; 1457:21;
1458:1
tele [1] - 1390:24
tele-prompter [1] - 1390:24
TEMF [8] - 1384:9, 16;
1385:12; 1386:7, 17;
1387:1, 6
temperature [5] - 1230:8;
1232:1; 1240:10; 1266:22
temporal [1] - 1453:17
temporary [4] - 1281:7, 10,
21; 1415:21
tend [1] - 1402:21
tends [2] - 1284:17, 20
tens [1] - 1429:5
term [22] - 1231:19; 1284:8;
1285:5, 8, 16; 1286:18;
1295:5; 1305:13; 1309:20;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
36
1335:16; 1341:12;
1362:21, 25; 1393:19, 21,
24; 1394:3-5, 10; 1456:16
term..." [1] - 1305:5
terminology [1] - 1284:22
terms [48] - 1219:21;
1220:22; 1223:13;
1231:22; 1232:19;
1233:25; 1238:22; 1242:1,
3, 17; 1243:5, 22; 1253:21;
1255:5; 1261:6; 1263:22;
1264:18; 1279:18; 1303:1;
1313:4, 8; 1329:4;
1356:22; 1383:8; 1386:20;
1396:2, 10; 1397:7;
1402:8; 1403:10; 1408:5;
1411:10; 1416:3; 1432:22;
1433:3; 1434:2; 1450:20;
1451:5, 13, 15; 1452:19;
1453:3, 16; 1454:17;
1456:25; 1457:23; 1467:10
terrestrial [5] - 1368:3, 8;
1391:24; 1452:15; 1453:3
Terrestrial [2] - 1384:5;
1445:2
test [3] - 1390:16; 1391:3;
1449:8
testimony [1] - 1429:4
testing [1] - 1449:3
text [1] - 1333:6
THAT [2] - 1212:8; 1217:24
THE [82] - 1206:1, 4-5, 7-8,
10-12; 1210:23; 1211:7,
11, 14-15; 1212:5, 9, 13,
16, 20-21; 1213:9;
1214:14, 17, 19; 1215:4;
1216:25; 1217:4, 21, 25;
1218:1, 16, 19-20; 1219:9,
12; 1220:21; 1221:14,
18-19; 1222:13; 1223:4;
1224:6, 15, 19; 1227:22;
1228:1, 13; 1267:21;
1287:22; 1288:3; 1289:25;
1293:6; 1307:18; 1308:3,
6; 1320:18; 1342:10;
1348:20; 1364:12, 16, 19;
1365:5, 10; 1367:18;
1423:24; 1424:10;
1468:10, 15, 19
theme [1] - 1316:17
themselves [2] - 1234:18;
1352:20
theoretical [7] - 1344:21;
1345:17, 20; 1359:12, 14;
1360:4, 12
there'd [2] - 1361:3; 1406:23
thereafter [1] - 1470:9
thereby [1] - 1459:4
therefore [5] - 1238:10;
1239:15; 1357:25;
1359:16; 1362:11
they've [9] - 1287:11; 1318:8;
1327:5; 1350:1; 1405:17;
1430:19; 1436:6; 1446:16
thickened [2] - 1270:13, 15
thickened-tails [1] - 1270:15
thickener [13] - 1262:1, 8,
10, 14, 18, 22; 1263:15,
18, 25; 1264:3, 14, 16, 23
thickeners [1] - 1262:16
thinking [2] - 1397:25;
1403:16
third [6] - 1279:13; 1296:18;
1386:12; 1432:3; 1448:6;
1464:9
thirdly [2] - 1229:15; 1230:13
Thomas [1] - 1208:23
Thonney [1] - 1207:21
threat [1] - 1440:17
threats [2] - 1427:24;
1440:21
three [32] - 1229:4, 21, 23;
1230:2, 18; 1231:22;
1249:25; 1261:10;
1270:24; 1275:5; 1282:11;
1296:5; 1341:5; 1366:3,
10, 18; 1367:2; 1371:18;
1387:7; 1389:11; 1403:3;
1417:2; 1419:19, 23;
1420:4; 1422:21; 1436:4,
7-8; 1437:5; 1447:5
three-metre [1] - 1366:10
three-percent [1] - 1275:5
three-year [2] - 1261:10;
1282:11
threshold [9] - 1288:18;
1304:19; 1366:11;
1375:16, 25; 1376:9;
1377:21; 1381:25; 1387:9
THRESHOLD [2] - 1214:12;
1246:20
thresholds [17] - 1304:19;
1374:4, 10, 16, 18; 1375:5,
13; 1376:15; 1378:7, 10,
21; 1381:6; 1382:4, 15, 18;
1383:17
throated [7] - 1378:22;
1379:12, 14, 24; 1391:9;
1399:13; 1414:14
throughout [5] - 1358:3;
1369:11; 1404:4; 1435:10;
1438:1
tied [1] - 1448:8
TIER [18] - 1272:25; 1273:4,
8, 25; 1274:1, 4-5, 20;
1275:9; 1276:3, 13;
1351:6, 11, 19, 23; 1352:3
Tier [1] - 1273:19
TIER-IV [18] - 1272:25;
1273:4, 8, 25; 1274:1, 4-5,
20; 1275:9; 1276:3, 13;
1351:6, 11, 19, 23; 1352:3
ties [1] - 1274:9
tight [2] - 1243:21; 1271:25
tight-gas [1] - 1271:25
tightly [1] - 1245:9
timeframe [7] - 1257:19;
1259:5; 1286:1; 1291:20;
1300:11; 1392:4, 7
timeframes [1] - 1257:10
timeline [6] - 1258:13;
1261:18, 20; 1285:18, 21
timelines [1] - 1312:13
timing [3] - 1253:6; 1284:5;
1385:1
titled [2] - 1294:24; 1335:2
TO [50] - 1206:2, 18;
1210:19, 22-23; 1211:4, 8,
11, 15; 1212:3-5, 7-8,
12-13, 15-16, 18; 1213:5,
12; 1214:10, 13, 16, 19;
1216:15; 1217:2-4, 23-24;
1218:18; 1219:11;
1221:16; 1222:17, 19;
1246:18; 1267:21;
1288:14; 1293:5; 1321:2;
1348:20; 1365:16
to.. [1] - 1412:24
toad [7] - 1395:22; 1400:2,
13, 15; 1403:14; 1418:5, 9
toads [4] - 1400:24; 1403:25;
1418:3, 10
today [12] - 1221:8, 11;
1224:21; 1231:5; 1267:14;
1328:21; 1331:21, 23;
1350:16; 1351:22;
1353:12; 1450:9
toddlers [1] - 1460:18
toe [1] - 1221:6
TOE [2] - 1212:20; 1221:18
together [6] - 1208:20;
1279:3; 1306:11; 1315:1;
1336:11; 1448:7
tolerance [2] - 1260:21;
1261:23
tomorrow [1] - 1267:14
took [7] - 1381:4; 1397:16;
1406:14, 16-17; 1407:6;
1421:16
tools [1] - 1338:5
top [4] - 1373:21; 1384:2;
1459:25; 1460:2
topic [1] - 1274:25
Tore [1] - 1209:3
total [5] - 1322:6, 18; 1334:3;
1386:7; 1398:13
Total [2] - 1401:13; 1465:23
TOTAL [1] - 1209:8
touched [3] - 1230:23;
1429:1; 1455:12
Tough [1] - 1207:17
toward [1] - 1283:7
TOWARDS [2] - 1212:20;
1221:19
towards [1] - 1221:6
township [16] - 1385:6, 14;
1386:4, 10, 14, 22, 24;
1387:24; 1388:2, 5;
1389:15, 18
Township [2] - 1388:8, 11
Townships [2] - 1219:21;
1220:3
track [5] - 1271:3; 1400:13;
1409:22; 1424:24; 1439:5
tracking [1] - 1417:3
tracks [1] - 1417:6
tract [1] - 1463:5
trade [3] - 1325:7, 9, 14
trade-off [3] - 1325:7, 9, 14
traditional [3] - 1462:6, 14,
19
traffic [4] - 1290:7, 9; 1362:7;
1402:17
train [9] - 1230:21; 1232:16,
18, 23-24; 1296:18
training [2] - 1467:20;
1468:4
trajectory [2] - 1314:21;
1392:25
transcribed [1] - 1470:9
transcript [8] - 1250:4;
1273:1; 1295:23; 1310:14;
1329:22; 1349:14;
1350:23; 1470:10
transcripts [2] - 1223:15;
1464:16
transfer [1] - 1266:6
transferred [2] - 1254:23;
1321:15
transferring [2] - 1254:25;
1323:22
transition [2] - 1259:21;
1453:5
transitioning [1] - 1274:3
translates [1] - 1285:11
travel [1] - 1403:1
travelled [1] - 1402:20
treat [6] - 1270:14; 1325:11;
1391:18; 1467:17
treating [3] - 1239:5;
1323:11; 1329:17
Treatment [1] - 1262:5
treatment [23] - 1227:12;
1238:20; 1240:11;
1243:19; 1248:24;
1249:12, 18; 1262:6;
1266:21-23; 1310:6;
1311:10; 1313:5; 1320:4;
1323:16; 1324:9, 25;
1326:25; 1328:21; 1330:9;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
37
1365:24
tree [4] - 1364:6; 1392:1;
1422:3
treed [4] - 1371:19; 1442:24
trees [1] - 1364:6
trend [9] - 1297:10; 1380:6,
11, 21, 24; 1381:15;
1396:22; 1399:10
trends [1] - 1405:17
Trevis [1] - 1207:20
trials [1] - 1367:4
trip [1] - 1249:5
trouble [2] - 1366:19;
1426:13
truck [9] - 1259:17, 22;
1275:10; 1276:14, 17, 21;
1345:21; 1352:2, 15
truck-and-shovel [2] -
1259:17; 1276:14
trucks [28] - 1273:4, 7-8,
24-25; 1274:2, 4, 20;
1275:2, 9-10; 1276:13, 18;
1277:5; 1343:22; 1346:8;
1351:6, 11, 13, 17, 19-20,
22-23; 1352:6; 1355:4;
1420:20
true [2] - 1364:3; 1470:9
trust [1] - 1225:9
try [16] - 1225:3; 1231:12;
1260:22; 1261:15;
1300:24; 1303:4; 1307:10;
1324:2; 1339:9; 1345:9;
1357:13; 1369:2; 1380:7;
1412:4, 7; 1414:15
trying [27] - 1231:6, 9;
1244:2; 1261:6; 1267:25;
1285:17; 1319:10; 1325:9;
1329:7; 1342:21; 1354:16;
1356:1; 1360:6; 1363:18;
1369:5, 14; 1379:21;
1381:13; 1402:17;
1411:19, 24; 1412:5;
1417:21; 1418:4; 1430:15;
1454:10
TSRU [18] - 1214:14; 1247:4;
1248:1, 15; 1249:17;
1266:15, 18, 25; 1267:2, 6,
17, 22; 1268:4, 8; 1365:18,
24; 1366:9
Tuesday [1] - 1469:12
TUESDAY [1] - 1211:16
turn [12] - 1250:1; 1262:23;
1263:2, 9; 1264:11;
1273:2; 1283:21; 1305:21;
1336:16; 1392:3; 1452:20
turn-down [5] - 1262:23;
1263:2, 9; 1264:11
turnarounds [1] - 1293:19
turned [1] - 1337:24
turning [1] - 1351:5
turnoff [1] - 1290:12
turnover [1] - 1351:4
TV [1] - 1227:16
twice [1] - 1229:13
two [37] - 1220:12; 1221:24;
1226:2; 1235:5; 1237:20;
1242:3; 1243:5; 1255:7;
1258:7; 1266:21; 1269:8;
1272:18; 1275:5; 1279:24;
1296:5; 1299:19; 1302:11;
1303:4; 1312:18; 1333:1;
1336:6; 1338:12; 1343:12;
1352:17; 1364:17;
1380:22; 1392:10;
1394:13; 1403:2, 4;
1405:1; 1410:11; 1412:13;
1428:20; 1442:21; 1448:9;
1467:13
two-year [1] - 1272:18
tying [2] - 1374:21; 1431:20
type [12] - 1227:2; 1235:22;
1337:14; 1343:17; 1347:8;
1369:17; 1386:15;
1451:15; 1465:17;
1466:18, 20, 22
types [12] - 1231:21;
1266:21; 1272:1; 1368:15;
1371:10; 1387:7; 1393:15;
1414:3; 1442:21; 1458:5;
1462:15
typical [5] - 1258:13;
1260:23; 1261:20; 1362:12
typically [12] - 1245:23;
1259:8; 1269:4; 1282:13;
1284:20; 1361:16;
1402:20, 23; 1439:2;
1466:22; 1467:5, 7
U
UDSR [2] - 1283:8; 1286:15
ultimate [1] - 1328:10
ultimately [7] - 1285:6;
1314:1; 1330:10; 1345:18;
1454:8, 18; 1455:9
unacceptable [3] - 1390:6,
17; 1391:5
uncertain [1] - 1414:24
uncertainties [1] - 1373:20
uncertainty [15] - 1261:1;
1341:14; 1370:2, 9, 25;
1371:4; 1372:22; 1373:3,
23; 1374:2; 1382:3
under [19] - 1230:19;
1248:25; 1249:13; 1262:4;
1296:23; 1298:11;
1306:10, 19; 1308:24;
1317:20; 1321:11;
1352:25; 1357:21; 1378:7;
1388:2; 1394:7, 9; 1414:2
underestimated [2] -
1444:16; 1445:6
underestimating [1] -
1445:10
underflow [6] - 1262:21;
1263:3-5, 14, 23
undergo [1] - 1234:15
underline [1] - 1441:7
underlying [1] - 1305:15
underneath [2] - 1422:17;
1467:6
underpass [1] - 1417:5
underscore [1] - 1378:25
understandings [1] - 1315:5
understood [1] - 1436:20
undertake [9] - 1222:9;
1246:6, 13; 1268:23;
1320:5; 1323:17; 1324:9;
1329:16; 1344:5
undertaken [4] - 1258:5;
1300:16; 1319:16; 1440:8
UNDERTAKING [37] -
1211:4, 8; 1212:4, 8, 12,
16, 19; 1214:4-10, 13,
15-16, 19, 21; 1217:2, 10,
23; 1218:5, 18, 24;
1219:11, 16; 1220:10;
1221:16, 22; 1246:18;
1267:21; 1288:14;
1289:22; 1293:5; 1365:16;
1367:15
undertaking [32] - 1216:17;
1217:12; 1218:7; 1219:2,
18-19; 1220:24; 1221:2, 4;
1246:11; 1267:16;
1268:10; 1288:15, 20;
1291:25; 1292:25;
1314:10; 1321:6; 1329:13;
1347:6, 22, 25; 1348:12,
20; 1356:14; 1365:17;
1401:14
UNDERTAKINGS [3] -
1210:18; 1214:1; 1216:15
undertakings [6] - 1215:8;
1220:12, 23; 1288:11;
1342:5; 1365:13
undertook [1] - 1367:4
underwash [2] - 1229:15;
1232:20
underwater [1] - 1267:4
underway [2] - 1282:22;
1310:5
undisturbed [5] - 1410:24;
1447:18; 1448:4, 12, 18
unfair [1] - 1258:13
unforeseen [1] - 1341:20
unique [4] - 1258:15; 1390:9,
12
unit [3] - 1239:21; 1245:10;
1249:3
units [6] - 1249:5; 1266:24;
1267:3; 1289:14; 1454:3
universal [1] - 1318:1
unknown [4] - 1374:10;
1378:8, 10, 15
unless [3] - 1330:21; 1342:4;
1429:16
unlike [1] - 1289:6
unlikely [8] - 1314:22;
1350:21; 1374:11;
1404:23; 1405:3; 1435:1,
4, 6
unreasonable [1] - 1261:16
unto [1] - 1261:11
untreated [4] - 1247:5;
1248:23; 1249:2, 11
unwise [1] - 1261:15
up [75] - 1227:10; 1228:16;
1230:11; 1234:9; 1238:5,
19; 1239:22; 1242:4;
1247:10; 1250:1; 1253:8;
1261:9, 21; 1262:19;
1265:16; 1273:2; 1275:2,
16; 1279:2; 1280:12;
1283:2; 1284:21; 1288:24;
1289:17; 1310:8; 1312:25;
1322:5; 1323:21; 1327:11;
1336:16; 1341:21; 1346:8;
1352:14; 1355:3; 1356:8;
1362:24; 1363:16;
1366:15; 1368:6; 1369:7,
15; 1378:12; 1380:6, 22;
1383:4, 23; 1387:12, 16;
1390:21; 1402:3; 1405:7,
9; 1415:8, 11; 1417:22;
1419:14; 1420:12;
1421:14; 1426:14; 1430:5;
1432:12, 18; 1433:21;
1436:16; 1437:12;
1442:23; 1445:4; 1446:16;
1450:14; 1452:20;
1455:18; 1456:23; 1460:4;
1468:12
Update [8] - 1294:22;
1296:21; 1300:23, 25;
1335:14; 1462:23;
1463:15; 1465:6
update [8] - 1251:11; 1281:6;
1292:1, 25; 1297:24;
1357:11; 1445:7
UPDATE [2] - 1214:16;
1293:5
updated [14] - 1216:19;
1251:11; 1283:4; 1285:17;
1291:18; 1298:11; 1300:9,
13, 17; 1301:15, 23;
1302:9, 15; 1308:16
UPDATED [2] - 1212:5;
1217:4
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
38
Updated [1] - 1300:4
updates [2] - 1236:25;
1281:5
updating [1] - 1352:5
upgrade [1] - 1234:16
Upgrader [2] - 1240:25;
1241:23
upgrader [7] - 1241:22;
1242:18; 1244:22; 1289:7,
11, 14
upgraders [1] - 1241:21
upgrading [2] - 1240:24;
1244:7
upland [2] - 1393:2; 1427:1
upload [1] - 1222:9
uploaded [3] - 1222:6, 25;
1223:5
upstream [1] - 1240:15
uptake [1] - 1459:19
Urban [4] - 1282:25;
1299:11; 1301:19; 1303:1
urban [4] - 1287:15; 1301:4,
8; 1423:15
US [2] - 1436:23; 1437:23
usable [1] - 1238:17
useful [4] - 1271:13; 1339:4,
15; 1360:9
uses [1] - 1372:9
USGS [2] - 1435:19; 1436:4
usual [1] - 1224:24
utilize [3] - 1253:9; 1276:14;
1311:13
utilized [2] - 1272:17;
1301:22
V
validate [1] - 1409:2
Valley [1] - 1442:4
value [11] - 1238:24;
1239:16; 1241:1; 1289:4,
19; 1372:22; 1375:1;
1376:1, 3; 1410:3; 1411:8
values [10] - 1343:22;
1344:2; 1345:6; 1347:11;
1354:20; 1356:7, 9; 1449:3
van [1] - 1207:18
VANDENBERG [5] - 1210:9;
1215:22; 1321:22; 1335:1;
1450:13
Vandenberg [1] - 1316:2
vans [1] - 1400:14
variability [2] - 1331:4, 10
variance [1] - 1245:6
variances [1] - 1245:22
varied [1] - 1397:17
varies [1] - 1379:1
variety [3] - 1215:8; 1262:22;
1443:7
various [8] - 1219:3; 1259:3;
1269:12; 1345:14;
1356:12; 1397:16; 1438:6;
1457:6
vary [1] - 1290:12
vast [2] - 1280:23; 1287:5
vegetation [8] - 1368:11;
1394:22; 1406:18;
1445:12, 16; 1447:18;
1448:5; 1452:18
vehicle [1] - 1401:22
vein [1] - 1375:14
vendor's [1] - 1359:11
Ver [1] - 1344:17
verify [3] - 1247:20; 1345:4;
1355:12
version [1] - 1363:10
versus [4] - 1229:9; 1368:10;
1388:16; 1454:2
vessels [1] - 1230:12
VIABILITY [2] - 1212:6;
1217:5
viability [3] - 1315:10;
1374:21; 1443:24
viable [2] - 1257:13; 1457:22
vicinity [1] - 1375:11
view [9] - 1243:23; 1244:22;
1245:11, 19; 1302:12;
1421:16; 1424:21; 1457:5;
1466:3
Village [2] - 1278:6; 1279:6
virtually [4] - 1402:4;
1424:16; 1425:9; 1433:23
volume [6] - 1254:12;
1270:13; 1322:7, 18, 20;
1463:1
VOLUME [1] - 1206:17
Volume [12] - 1250:3, 14;
1251:17; 1262:2; 1273:1;
1295:23; 1310:14;
1329:22; 1349:14;
1350:23; 1457:1; 1464:15
volumes [6] - 1227:2;
1272:12; 1290:10;
1309:12; 1325:11
W
wait [1] - 1268:11
waiting [2] - 1283:18, 20
walk [1] - 1321:8
walls [2] - 1422:16; 1423:14
Wang [1] - 1207:16
wants [5] - 1253:22; 1339:2;
1342:18; 1357:20; 1414:7
Warbler [1] - 1398:17
warbler [14] - 1378:22;
1379:13, 20, 24; 1380:1;
1391:10; 1398:2, 7-8;
1399:4, 13; 1414:15;
1444:24
warblers [1] - 1399:15
warrant [1] - 1229:22
WAS [2] - 1212:8; 1217:24
watching [1] - 1319:22
WATER [2] - 1213:9; 1308:3
Water [5] - 1304:3; 1305:8;
1306:1, 15, 18
water [84] - 1227:12; 1242:7;
1255:4-7, 9, 11; 1269:19;
1272:14; 1303:20; 1306:9,
23; 1307:23; 1309:9, 17,
21, 23, 25; 1310:2, 4, 6-7,
10-11, 21; 1311:2, 4, 9, 11,
13-14, 18-19; 1312:21;
1313:5; 1320:4; 1321:14;
1322:7, 10, 13, 19; 1323:4,
12-13, 23; 1324:3;
1325:12, 15; 1326:25;
1328:20; 1329:17; 1330:1,
9, 19, 21; 1331:2, 5, 14,
16; 1332:5; 1337:15;
1340:23; 1366:3, 5;
1367:3, 10; 1438:24;
1448:14; 1449:24;
1453:13; 1458:1; 1459:4;
1465:10; 1467:3
water-based [1] - 1458:1
water-treatment [1] - 1310:6
water-withdrawal [2] -
1309:17; 1311:19
waterbodies [1] - 1462:18
watercourses [1] - 1416:12
waterfowl [2] - 1435:13;
1439:10
watershed [2] - 1304:21;
1331:23
wave [1] - 1284:11
Wayne [2] - 1274:18;
1392:25
WAYNE [2] - 1210:15;
1216:8
ways [8] - 1230:16; 1274:24;
1276:23; 1279:24; 1306:2;
1352:12, 17; 1464:6
WBA [1] - 1275:22
wear [2] - 1234:14; 1466:20
Wednesday [1] - 1349:18
week [15] - 1215:9; 1220:18;
1272:19; 1296:4, 7;
1348:5, 10; 1368:9;
1383:24; 1401:19;
1416:24; 1429:4; 1444:1;
1446:1; 1464:15
weekend [1] - 1225:10
weight [2] - 1443:22;
1456:13
WELL [2] - 1214:17; 1293:6
west [3] - 1428:21; 1453:1
western [7] - 1400:1, 13-14;
1418:3, 5, 9; 1446:15
Westman [1] - 1209:9
wetland [11] - 1391:19;
1415:4, 15, 18; 1437:20;
1438:8; 1441:1, 24;
1444:14; 1446:21
wetlands [26] - 1370:22;
1371:19; 1391:21;
1392:14; 1393:10, 12-13;
1394:16, 18-19; 1414:3;
1415:7, 12-13, 17, 24;
1416:2; 1438:4; 1441:11,
14, 18, 20; 1442:24;
1443:4
whatnot [1] - 1320:4
wheel [1] - 1259:16
wheels [2] - 1259:16, 22
whereas [4] - 1240:19;
1299:12; 1349:4; 1387:16
WHEREOF [1] - 1470:13
WHETHER [2] - 1214:11;
1246:18
WHICH [2] - 1212:20;
1221:18
whitefish [1] - 1458:21
whole [7] - 1226:20;
1368:23, 25; 1369:18, 24;
1427:8; 1428:12
whooping [8] - 1434:20, 24;
1435:11, 16; 1436:19, 25;
1437:20; 1438:17
wide [7] - 1380:25; 1405:15;
1407:24; 1418:6, 14;
1419:17; 1421:20
wide-ranging [4] - 1405:15;
1418:6; 1419:17; 1421:20
widened [1] - 1226:18
wider [3] - 1380:9; 1417:17
wider-ranging [1] - 1417:17
widths [1] - 1417:19
wildlife [32] - 1401:22;
1402:1, 9, 11, 19, 21;
1404:5; 1407:4; 1409:14;
1410:6; 1413:15; 1416:7;
1417:4; 1418:25; 1420:15,
25; 1421:5; 1422:23;
1423:18; 1425:2; 1426:6;
1443:7, 9, 14; 1445:12,
15-16; 1446:3, 14; 1447:9;
1452:18
Wildlife [2] - 1436:24;
1437:24
willing [2] - 1246:14;
1288:17
WILLING [2] - 1214:11;
1246:19
willows [1] - 1422:11
window [7] - 1242:1, 3;
1243:2, 21; 1245:21;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
39
1282:11; 1284:5
WINTER [2] - 1213:9; 1308:4
winter [5] - 1307:24;
1338:23; 1409:22;
1440:18; 1441:2
wintertime [1] - 1366:20
WITH [6] - 1212:4; 1214:17;
1217:3; 1293:6
withdraw [1] - 1309:24
withdrawal [5] - 1304:19;
1309:17; 1310:21; 1311:4,
19
withdrawals [2] - 1303:21;
1309:1
WITNESS [3] - 1210:3;
1215:11; 1470:13
witness [1] - 1272:23
witnesses [3] - 1223:14;
1468:11, 13
WITNESSES [2] - 1210:4;
1215:11
wolf [3] - 1420:5, 17; 1427:6
Wolverine [1] - 1398:17
wolverine [3] - 1401:23;
1421:19; 1422:20
wolverines [4] - 1422:19, 22,
24; 1423:2
wolves [10] - 1402:25;
1420:17; 1426:7, 18, 24;
1427:1, 23; 1428:3, 11
women [4] - 1460:21;
1461:1, 8, 20
wonder [2] - 1307:15;
1320:15
wondered [5] - 1226:7;
1256:3; 1262:8; 1266:17;
1418:16
wondering [8] - 1304:11;
1338:25; 1374:14; 1386:3;
1401:10; 1403:20; 1409:6;
1462:2
Wood [7] - 1209:3; 1283:16;
1287:6; 1297:19; 1298:1;
1386:8; 1387:3
wooded [1] - 1438:12
woodland [7] - 1379:11, 23;
1414:14; 1424:13, 15, 19;
1429:21
word [2] - 1288:4; 1403:8
wording [1] - 1339:16
words [4] - 1245:2; 1260:15;
1322:15; 1378:8
work-up [1] - 1280:12
workers [11] - 1277:20, 24;
1278:7; 1287:17; 1291:14;
1293:24; 1294:1; 1295:9;
1361:8; 1461:24
Workforce [1] - 1292:2
workforce [19] - 1278:4;
1279:20; 1280:7, 9, 19, 24;
Realtime Connection - the Realtime EXPERTS - courtreporters@shawbiz.ca
Shell Jackpine Mine Expansion, Fort McKay, Alberta - Volume 7
40
1281:20, 24; 1283:23, 25;
1284:18; 1285:22;
1286:25; 1287:2, 5;
1291:9, 13, 23
works [2] - 1238:22; 1260:14
world [3] - 1339:11; 1391:24;
1400:9
worldwide [1] - 1340:2
worst [2] - 1338:4; 1462:17
worst-case [2] - 1338:4;
1462:17
worthy [2] - 1323:24;
1327:12
wracking [1] - 1417:20
wrapping [1] - 1368:6
writing [1] - 1219:5
wrote [1] - 1318:5
Y
year [12] - 1222:2; 1228:24;
1259:23; 1261:10;
1272:18; 1282:11;
1293:17; 1297:11;
1321:25; 1322:1; 1445:5
year-and-a-half [1] - 1222:2
years [41] - 1236:7; 1237:20;
1253:8; 1257:25; 1258:5,
10; 1261:19; 1265:16;
1266:14; 1270:24; 1283:3,
6, 12; 1286:12; 1291:7;
1293:13; 1312:24; 1313:3;
1318:9; 1321:23; 1322:9;
1327:24; 1328:3; 1336:25;
1342:2; 1349:24; 1350:19;
1392:5; 1393:20; 1394:1,
3-4, 10-11; 1410:11;
1419:19, 23; 1422:21;
1435:20; 1446:6
yellow [10] - 1378:24;
1409:21; 1410:17;
1440:14, 17, 22; 1442:7,
13, 15
yellow-bellied [1] - 1378:24
Yetimgeta [1] - 1207:16
yield [1] - 1289:10
young [2] - 1423:1; 1446:10
Z
Zalik [1] - 1209:11
zero [7] - 1254:6, 12;
1310:21; 1392:16, 18;
1393:9, 13
Zone [2] - 1387:7, 9
zone [2] - 1387:8
zones [2] - 1384:19; 1387:7
Recommended