· RealtimeConnection [email protected] 1206 IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT REVIEW PANEL ("JOINT PANEL") ESTABLISHED TO REVIEW THE JACKPINE MINE EXPANSION, FORT MCKAY, ALBERTA,

Realtime [email protected]

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


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


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)


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


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


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


1212

INDEX OF EXHIBITS


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


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


1214

INDEX OF UNDERTAKINGS


(UNDERTAKING NO. 11 SATISFIED) 1217






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 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


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


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


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.


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


1218

MAPPING IN THE RSA, DATA SOURCES FOR RSA SCALE

DISTURBANCE MAPPING - SUBMITTED BY SHELL ON

NOVEMBER 5, 2012


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


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


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.


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


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


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.


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


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.



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


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


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.


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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?


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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?


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


1306

the Water Management Framework, is this agreement

or perhaps agreements like this, one of the ways

that Shell makes good on its commitment?


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


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


1308

EXHIBIT 002-038: LETTER AGREEMENT DATED

NOVEMBER 10, 2011 ENTITLED "RE: OIL SANDS MINING

WATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE 2011-2012

WINTER PERIOD"


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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?


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


1379

point, it varies, there can be significant

differences?


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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 - [email protected]

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



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



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;



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



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



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



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



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



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



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;



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



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



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



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



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;



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



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



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;



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



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;



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;



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,



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;



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



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,



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



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



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



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;



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;



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



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;



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



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



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;



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;



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



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;



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;



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

Documents

· RealtimeConnection [email protected] 1206 IN THE MATTER OF THE JOINT REVIEW PANEL ("JOINT PANEL") ESTABLISHED TO REVIEW THE JACKPINE MINE EXPANSION, FORT MCKAY, ALBERTA,