Notice of Motion of the Attorney General of Canada Seeking to Tender Supplementary Written Evidence Respecting Two Previously Unrecognized Submarine Slope Failures in the Douglas Channel And a Future Additional Assessment of the Tsunami Potential Associated With these Two Slope Failures Name of Person Bringing Motion: . Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the Federal Government Participants Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Decision or Order Requested: . An Order or Direction permitting the filing of a supplement to the Written Evidence of NRCan and DFO, as follows: . (1) a scientific research paper discussing the identification of two previously unrecognized submarine slope failures in the Douglas Channel, and . (2) a future assessment of the induced wave [“tsunami”] potential associated with these slope failures. . An Order or Direction providing a process by which Parties who may wish to question this evidence identify themselves so that this Panel may schedule that into the questioning phase of the Final Hearings. Date Submitted: . August 17, 2012 Signature: _________________________ Kirk Lambrecht Q.C. Attached are all Materials in Support of the Motion: Contents A. Overview ................................................................................................................................ 3 B. Concise Statement of the Relevant Facts ............................................................................ 4 Geohazards in Canada & the Role of NRCan .................................................................... 4 Relevance of the New Evidence to Existing Evidence in the JRP Record ....................... 5 The New Evidence Described ............................................................................................... 5 New Evidence and the JRP Process .................................................................................... 6 C. Grounds for the Request ...................................................................................................... 6 Relevance to the Mandate of the Panel ............................................................................... 6 Compliance with JRP Decisions Respecting New Evidence ............................................. 7 D. Detailed Description of the Decision Sought ...................................................................... 7 E. Information Supporting the Request .................................................................................. 8 Compliance with Criteria in Prior JRP Rulings on New Evidence.................................. 8 Use of the Scientific Paper During Questioning at the Final Hearings ............................ 9 Appendix I: Submarine Slope Failures and Tsunami Hazard in Coastal British Columbia: Douglas Channel and Kitimat Arm prepared jointly by Kim W. Conway, J. Vaughn Barrie and Richard E. Thomson ........................................................................................................... 10 Appendix II: Evidence Before the JRP Where the Term „tsunami. Appears...................... 11 Appendix III: Excerpts from the Evidence Already Filed With the Term “tsunami” Identified ...................................................................................................................................... 23 Northern Gateway Project Notice of Motion of the Attorney General of Canada Seeking to Tender Supplementary Written Evidence Respecting Two Previously Unrecognized Submarine Slope Failures in the Douglas Channel and a Future Additional Assessment of the Tsunami Potential Associated with these Two Slope Failures A. Overview 1. The Attorney General of Canada seeks an Order permitting the filing of new evidence consisting of: a. The scientific research paper Submarine Slope Failures and Tsunami Hazard in Coastal British Columbia: Douglas Channel and Kitimat Arm prepared jointly by Kim W. Conway, J. Vaughn Barrie and Richard E. Thomson of the Geological Survey of Canada-Pacific, Natural Resources Canada [“NRCan”] and the Institute of Ocean Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans Canada [“DFO”]. b. A future additional assessment being conduced by scientific staff from DFO, anticipated for completion by November 1, 2012. This assessment will consist of modelling of the potential wave heights and speeds that may have resulted from the two previously unrecognized submarine slope failures in the Douglas Channel, and will be informed by a fine-scale numerical model using highresolution seafloor topography and detailed slide-volume characteristics. Should leave to file be granted, the assessment will be provided to the Panel as soon as practicable after data analysis has reached the degree of confidence that is required to support reliable conclusions. 2. The scientific research paper is prepared jointly by NRCan and DFO, and identifies two previously unrecognized submarine slope failures (and other geohazards) in the Douglas Channel. It is attached as Appendix I to this Motion. The significance of this new information is dependent upon the potential of these submarine slope failures to have induced waves in the Douglas Channel. Assessment of this potential is the subject of modelling work being undertaken by DFO. 3. The future additional assessment involves modelling of tsunami potential of these two previously unrecognized slope failures having regard to wave, tide and geographical features in the Douglas Channel. The model results will contribute to an appreciation of the significance of the new information. DFO presently anticipates that an analysis with a Earthquakes in or Near Canada, 1627 - 2007.jpg sufficient degree of resolution can be available by November 1, 2012; but, if that proves impossible, the Attorney General of Canada will advise and seek direction of the Panel. 4. Should this Panel, or other Parties, want to question on this evidence during the questioning phase of Final Hearings, NRCan and DFO have identified witnesses under whose direction and control the scientific research paper was prepared, and under whose direction and control the additional assessment of tsunami potential is being prepared. These witnesses will be made available to answer questions on this evidence, and will be able to depose that the evidence is accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief. B. Concise Statement of the Relevant Facts Geohazards in Canada & the Role of NRCan 5. The Earth Sciences Sector of NRCan monitors and assesses geohazards such as earthquakes, tsunamis, slope failures, volcanic events and geomagnetic storms that occur in, or may impact, Canada.s onshore and offshore territories. The potential for seismic events along Canada.s western boundary with the Pacific Ocean is well known and NRCan has published a map1 showing earthquake events in or near Canada between 1627 and 2007 (below). National-scale assessments of other geohazards, including slope failures, are presently underway. 6. The Earth Sciences Sector initiated a national assessment of submarine slope failures in late 2011 and completion of the Pacific portion of this assessment is targeted for December of 2012. As part of this work, two submarine slope failures with potential to generate tsunamis have been identified in the Douglas Channel. NRCan has analyzed these features and prepared a peer-reviewed scientific paper of their findings. NRCan is, concurrently with this Motion, making the information in the scientific research paper available to the public via the internet at the following addresses: English link: GEOSCAN: Publications database http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/starweb/geoscan/servlet.starweb?path=geoscan/geosca n_e.web French link: GEOSCAN : base de données des publications http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/starweb/geoscan/servlet.starweb?path=geoscan/geoscan_f. web Relevance of the New Evidence to Existing Evidence in the JRP Record 7. Evidence tendered to the Panel by Enbridge, and other Parties, demonstrates the potential for marine geohazards and associated tsunami events. Appendix II to this Motion provides links to evidence before the Panel where the word „tsunami. appears. Appendix III of this Motion excerpts selections of some of that evidence. 8. Enbridge proposes that the design and operation of the marine terminal will take into account geohazards including earthquakes and tsunamis. It also proposes that further work to determine the magnitude and frequency of tsunami events in Kitimat Arm will be carried out during detailed design of the port facility.2 9. In its Written Evidence,3 NRCan had indicated that the approach taken, and the information provided in terms of earthquake and tsunami hazards, is sufficient at this point in the Environmental Assessment Review of the Application.4 NRCan noted that further investigations committed to by Enbridge, to identify potential subaqueous slide hazards in Kitimat Arm of Douglas Channel, were important. 10. That indication is not affected by the new evidence which is tendered; however, the geographic scope for potential landslide induced tsunami hazards is now better understood to extend beyond the Kitimat Arm. NRCan and DFO seek by this motion to ensure that this Panel, and the Parties before the Panel, have the most up to date information on geohazards in the Douglas Channel. The New Evidence Described 11. Two previously unrecognized submarine slope failures exist along the south-eastern margin of Douglas Channel. The failures comprise blocks of bedrock and related materials that appear to have been detached directly from the near shore off Hawkesbury Island.5 The ages of the slope failures can not be determined with certainty, but existing data suggest they probably occurred 5,000 to 10,000 years ago. Such slope failures are often triggered by earthquake events, and have tsunami potential. An assessment of the wave height and speed associated with the two newly identified slope failures is being undertaken by scientific staff within DFO. 12. The Canadian government has adopted a set of Principle and Guidelines for the Effective Use of Science and Technology Advice in Government Decision Making.6 The scientific research paper sought to be tendered complies with this policy, and has been peer reviewed prior to being finalized in publication format and tendered to the Panel in this Motion. New Evidence and the JRP Process 13. Work on data for the Douglas Channel resulted in the scientific research paper. This work was conducted after expiry of the date provided in the Hearing Order for Written Evidence (December of 2011), and completed after the time for Information Requests related to the Written Evidence (July of 2012). However, the questioning phase of Final Hearings remains in future. 14. The information which the Attorney General of Canada seeks to tender to the Panel is relatively discrete. It can be tested by questioning, should the Panel consider that appropriate. Such questioning may occur on or about the times presently scheduled in Procedural Direction No. 8.7 15. Volumes 3, 6, 7 and 8 of the Application materials deal with geotechnical issues, including tsunamis, and are listed for consideration at the Prince George hearings. The Prince Rupert hearings (November 12 to December 18), will also consider some aspects of volumes 3, 6, 7 and 8. In particular, the subjects of “Operations, Safety, Accident Prevention and Response” are scheduled to be heard at both locations. However, the engineering issues and site location issues are listed for Prince George only. C. Grounds for the Request Relevance to the Mandate of the Panel 16. This Motion to tender new information to the JRP is brought on behalf of NRCan and DFO on the grounds that it will assist in informing the Panel, and the Parties before the Panel, of a potential geohazard, which is relevant to the mandate of the Panel. The evidence may assist the Panel, and the Parties before the Panel, in assessing risk, and mitigations of risk, associated with geohazards in the Douglas Channel. Compliance with JRP Decisions Respecting New Evidence 17. Hearing Order OH-4-2011, as amended by AO-001-0H-4-2011, describe the Panel.s process. Sections 4 and 10 provide for filing of documents after the deadlines for filing of evidence has concluded, and also provide for Motions to the Panel. Panel decisions on motions of other Parties seeking to tender evidence after the deadline for written evidence indicate that the Panel will consider the following: o The availability of the Party tendering the evidence to be available at the final hearings to answer any questions about the written evidence filed; o The ability of a witness for the party to confirm that the written evidence was prepared by the witness or under their direction and control, and is accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief; and o Fairness or prejudice to other Parties. 18. Should the Panel direct, NRCan and DFO will tender witnesses to answer questions about the information on the new evidence. These witnesses will be able to confirm that the written evidence was prepared by the witness, or under their direction and control, and is accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief. 19. Allowing other Parties to question witnesses respecting the new evidence contributes to fairness in the Panel.s process. No prejudice is occasioned by supplementing the existing Written Evidence in this way since sound scientific information is necessary for the Panel to discharge its functions. D. Detailed Description of the Decision Sought 20. The Attorney General of Canada requests an Order, as follows: The Panel allow the Written Evidence of NRCan and DFO, Government Participants, to be supplemented by: a. the geological scientific research paper Submarine Slope Failures and Tsunami Hazard in Coastal British Columbia: Douglas Channel and Kitimat Arm prepared jointly by Kim W. Conway, J. Vaughn Barrie and Richard E. Thomson of the Geological Survey of Canada-Pacific, Natural Resources Canada and the Institute of Ocean Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans Canada. b. A future additional assessment informed by a fine-scale numerical model using high-resolution seafloor topography and detailed slide-volume. 21. An Order or Direction providing a process by which parties who may wish to question this evidence identify themselves so that this Panel may schedule that into the questioning phase of the Final Hearings E. Information Supporting the Request Compliance with Criteria in Prior JRP Rulings on New Evidence 22. This Panel has issued numerous Rulings in respect of efforts to tender evidence which became available to a Party after Written Evidence was already filed.8 Amended Ruling No. 72 outlines the Panel.s process for receipt of such evidence: “When a party seeks to file evidence late, the Panel will consider whether the documents are relevant to the issues in the hearing and appropriate to be filed as late written evidence. Section 36 of the National Energy Board Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules) sets out the general requirements for written evidence filed by parties to an oral hearing. Generally, a party must be available at the final hearings to answer any questions about the written evidence filed. Prior to answering questions, a witness for the party must also confirm that: (i) the written evidence was prepared by the witness or under their direction and control; and (ii) the evidence is accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief.”9 23. The information sought to be tendered in this instance is relevant to the issues in the hearing and appropriate to be filed as late, or supplementary, written evidence. Should the Panel direct questioning on this supplementary evidence, the Government Participants will have witnesses available under whose direction and control the evidence was or is being prepared, and who can confirm that the evidence is accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief. 24. The Panel also considers whether tendering of evidence will cause unfairness or prejudice to other parties. In this instance no prejudice or unfairness is caused. Many witnesses have filed evidence relating to tsunami potential. Enbridge is fully aware of this potential and proposes to address it during detailed design of the port facility. This Panel will assess that approach. The information which is tendered will give the Panel, Enbridge and the Parties to this Proceeding contemporary information. That information can be tested by questioning should the Panel consider it appropriate. Use of the Scientific Paper During Questioning at the Final Hearings 25. The Panel has indicated, with respect to another matter arising after the closure of the date for written evidence, that it is likely that the Panel procedures would allow information of this nature to be used in the oral questioning phase of the final hearings.10 These procedures will be addressed further in workshops regarding the final hearings, to be provided by the Process Advisory Team in August. They will also be addressed in an upcoming procedural direction. 26. Given that the scientific research paper will be placed into the public domain, and that it is likely that the Panel procedures would allow information of this nature to be used in the oral questioning phase of the final hearings, there is no unfairness or prejudice which would be occasioned to any party if that paper were included as supplementary written evidence as proposed. * 8space Document Adams, Alan - Letter of Comment (A39587) Functions Highlight 8space Document Owens, Dwight - Letter of Comment (A39533) Functions Highlight 8space Document Phillips, John and Moireen - Letter of Comment (A39692) Functions Highlight 8space Document Woolsey, Patricia - Letter of Comment (A43371) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-08-09 bourassa, emma - Letter of Comment (A43438) Functions Highlight 8space Document B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31684) Functions Highlight Appendix II: Evidence Before the JRP Where the Term ‘tsunami’ Appears (Keyword Search conducted August 14, 2012) Results: 1 to 50 of a possible 67 MIMEType Name Size Location Functions Adams, Alan - Letter of Comment - A2Q5L9 111 KB Adams, Alan - Letter of Comment (A39587) Owens, Dwight - Letter of Comment - A2Q4S4 112 KB Owens, Dwight - Letter of Comment (A39533) Phillips, John and Moireen - Letter of Comment - A2Q6T1 455 KB Phillips, John and Moireen - Letter of Comment (A39692) Woolsey, Patricia - Letter of Comment - A2V6H6 110 KB Woolsey, Patricia - Letter of Comment (A43371) bourassa, emma - Letter of Comment - A2V7A4 108 KB 12-08-09 bourassa, emma - Letter of Comment (A43438) B35-5 - Attachment JRP IR 4.1 - Appendices A and B to Landslide Generated Wave Hazard Analysis A2D3A2 4433 KB B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31... 8space Document Bristow, Jack - Letter of Comment (A40458) Functions Highlight 8space Document Poirier, Kim - Letter of Comment (A38404) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-08-10 Wur, Evie - Letter of Comment (A44379) Functions Highlight 8space Document B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31684) Functions Highlight 8space Document Belanger, Richard - Letter of Comment (A43382) Functions Highlight 8space Document B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31684) Functions Highlight 8space Document Coward, Woodrow - Letter of Comment (A40880) Functions Highlight 8space Document Fudge, Sarah - Letter of Comment (A38226) Functions Highlight Bristow, Jack - Letter of Comment - A2R8C8 114 KB Bristow, Jack - Letter of Comment (A40458) Poirier, Kim - Letter of Comment - A2L0Z8 111 KB Poirier, Kim - Letter of Comment (A38404) Wur, Evie - Letter of Comment - A2W7I0 111 KB 12-08-10 Wur, Evie - Letter of Comment (A44379) B35-14 - Attachment JRP IR 4.1 - Appendices E and F to Landslide Generated Wave Hazard Analysis A2D3C1 3175 KB B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31... Belanger, Richard - Letter of Comment - A2V6L2 111 KB Belanger, Richard - Letter of Comment (A43382) B35-3 - Attachment JRP IR 4.1 - Landslide Generated Wave Hazard Analysis Kitimat Arm A2D3A0 736 KB B035 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Response to JRP Information Request No. 4 (A31... Coward, Woodrow - Letter of Comment - A2S3W9 1001 KB Coward, Woodrow - Letter of Comment (A40880) Fudge, Sarah - Letter of Comment - A2K8X8 112 KB Fudge, Sarah - Letter of Comment (A38226) 8space Document Grace, Mike - Letter of Comment (A38254) Functions Highlight 8space Document C037 - Friends of Morice-Bulkley - Gilden, Jairus - Written Comment Form (A26180) Functions Highlight 8space Document D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Functions Highlight 8space Document D54-07 - Douglas Channel Watch - Written Evidence of Douglas Channel Watch (A37845) Functions Highlight 8space Document Visser, Nieke - Letter of Comment (A37002) Functions Highlight 8space Document Prenat, Isabelle - Letter of Comment (A39748) Functions Highlight 8space Document B001 - Enbridge Northern Gateway LP - Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Application - Volumes 1-3 (A25244) Functions Highlight Canada - Letter of Comment - A2K9F0 114 KB Grace, Mike - Letter of Comment (A38254) Friends of Morice-Bulkley - Gilden, Jairus - Written Comment Form A1U4C6 120 KB C037 - Friends of Morice- Bulkley - Gilden, Jairus - Written Comment Form (A26180) Council of the Haida Nation - Living Marine Legacy of Gwaii Haanas V - Coastal Zone Part 6 - A2K3L9 221 KB D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Douglas Channel Watch - Written Evidence of Douglas Channel Watch - A2K0Y8 154 KB D54-07 - Douglas Channel Watch - Written Evidence of Douglas Channel Watch (A37845) Salt Spring Trail and Nature Club - Letter of Comment - A2I9Q9 124 KB Visser, Nieke - Letter of Comment (A37002) PRENAT, Isabelle - Letter of Comment - A2Q7G7 117 KB Prenat, Isabelle - Letter of Comment (A39748) B1-10 - Vol 3 – Gateway Application – Engineering, Construction and Operations 1260 KB B001 - Enbridge Northern Gateway LP - Enbridge Northern Gateway Project 8space Document B023 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Additional Evidence - TERMPOL Surveys and Studies (A29571) Functions Highlight 8space Document B016 - Northern Gateway Pipeline Limited Partnership - Technical Data Report - Risk (7 of 7) for Enbridge Northern Gateway Project (A27084) Functions Highlight 8space Document D71-17 - Gitga'at First Nation - Gitga'at Response to NG IR 1 (A42628) Functions Highlight 8space Document D42-06 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, the Council of the Haida Nation (A37891) Functions Highlight 8space Document D13-2 - Beckett, Doug - Information request # 1 From Doug Beckett (A30846) Functions Highlight 8space Document D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Functions Highlight (Part 6 of 19) - A1S9Y3 Application - Volumes 1-3 (A25244) B23-13 - TERMPOL Surveys and Studies - Section 3.13 - Berth Procedures and Provisions A1Z6J7 426 KB B023 - Northern Gateway Pipelines Limited Partnership - Northern Gateway Additional Evidence - TERMPOL Surveys and Studi... B16-27 - Marine Physical Environment_TDR_Part (2 of 5) A1V8F5 4406 KB B016 - Northern Gateway Pipeline Limited Partnership - Technical Data Report - Risk (7 of 7) for Enbridge Northern Gatew... Gitga'at First Nation - Gitga at Response to NG IR 1 - A2U7E2 437 KB D71-17 - Gitga'at First Nation - Gitga'at Response to NG IR 1 (A42628) Council of the Haida Nation - Ecosystem Overview PNCIMA Appendix C - Oceanography - A2K3A1 4540 KB D42-06 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, the Council of the Haida Nation (A37891) Chapter 8 of Compendium A2C3L0 4306 KB D13-2 - Beckett, Doug - Information request # 1 From Doug Beckett (A30846) Council of the Haida Nation - Living Marine Legacy of Gwaii 1341 KB D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written 8space Document D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Functions Highlight 8space Document A047 - Panel - Letter and Information Request No. 4 to Northern Gateway (A30818) Functions Highlight 8space Document Government of Canada - Written Evidence of the Government of Canada (A37927) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-05-09 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 51 - May 9, 2012 (A41361) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-06-02 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 55 - June 2, 2012 (A41964) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-05-24 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 52 - May 24, 2012 (A41769) Functions Highlight Haanas V - Coastal Zone Part 1 - A2K3L4 Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Council of the Haida Nation - Living Marine Legacy of Gwaii Haanas V - Coastal Zone Part 7 - A2K3Q0 6185 KB D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) A47-1 - Letter and Information Request no. 4 to Northern Gateway A2C2Z3 566 KB A047 - Panel - Letter and Information Request No. 4 to Northern Gateway (A30818) Government of Canada - Volume 6_Part 2_Natural Resources Canada_Written Evidence - A2K4T9 341 KB Government of Canada - Written Evidence of the Government of Canada (A37927) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.51-WedMay09.12 - A2S9X4 463 KB 12-05-09 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 51 - May 9, 2012 (A41361) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.55-SatJun02.12 - A2T8F1 829 KB 12-06-02 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 55 - June 2, 2012 (A41964) International Reporting Inc. - 771 KB 12-05-24 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 8space Document D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Functions Highlight 8space Document D52-5 - Disney, John - Notice of Motion (A39724) Functions Highlight 8space Document Parkinson, Glenn - Schwab Pipeline Geomorphology Study (A40500) Functions Highlight 8space Document D155-06 - Northwest Institute for Bioregional Research - Northwest Institute Written Evidence (A37972) Functions Highlight 8space Document D53-3 - Donaldson, Doug - Written evidence (A38044) Functions Highlight 8space Document D167-03 - Province of British Columbia - Information Request #2 - Northern Gateway (A35404) Functions Highlight Vol.52-ThuMay24.12 - A2T5I6 Hearing Transcript Vol. 52 - May 24, 2012 (A41769) Council of the Haida Nation - Living Marine Legacy of Gwaii Haanas V - Coastal Zone Part 14a - A2K3Q7 4727 KB D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Disney, John - Notice of Motion - A2Q7A0 22862 KB D52-5 - Disney, John - Notice of Motion (A39724) Parkinson, Glenn - 11- 03Schwab_Pipelinegeomorphology_ Sept2011 - A2R8L8 3453 KB Parkinson, Glenn - Schwab Pipeline Geomorphology Study (A40500) Northwest Institute for Bioregional Research - Hillslope and Fluvial Processes Along hte Proposed Pipeline Corridor, Bur... 3453 KB D155-06 - Northwest Institute for Bioregional Research - Northwest Institute Written Evidence (A37972) Donaldson, Doug - Hillslope and Fluvial Processes Along the Proposed Pipeline Corridor, - A2K6Q4 3453 KB D53-3 - Donaldson, Doug - Written evidence (A38044) Province of British Columbia Information Request#2 - A2H2F6 543 KB D167-03 - Province of British Columbia - Information Request #2 - Northern 8space Document 12-03-02 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 24 - March 2, 2012 (A39705) Functions Highlight 8space Document D72-24 - Gitxaala Nation - Written Evidence (A37841) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-05-25 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 53 - May 25, 2012 (A41809) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-05-29 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Transcript REVISED Vol. 53 - May 25, 2012 (A41830) Functions Highlight 8space Document D66-03 - Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Written Evidence of ForestEthics (A37869) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-04-04 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 38 - April 4, 2012 (A40595) Functions Highlight Gateway (A35404) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.24-FriMar02.12 - A2Q6W0 624 KB 12-03-02 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 24 - March 2, 2012 (A39705) Gitxaala Nation - Charles Menzies Report d. Dec. 18, 2011, to pp. 44 - A2K0V6 497 KB D72-24 - Gitxaala Nation - Written Evidence (A37841) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.53-FriMay25.12 - A2T5Z6 420 KB 12-05-25 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 53 - May 25, 2012 (A41809) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.53-FriMay25.12-Revised - A2T6F2 418 KB 12-05-29 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Transcript REVISED Vol. 53 - May 25, 2012 (A41830) Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Written evidence of ForestEthics, Dec 21, 20... 1804 KB D66-03 - Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Written Evidence of ForestEthics (A... International Reporting Inc. - Vol.38-WedApr04.12 - A2S0C6 1053 KB 12-04-04 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 38 - 8space Document D66-03 - Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Written Evidence of ForestEthics (A37869) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-06-01 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 54 - June 1, 2012 (A41962) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-08-10 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 68 - August 10, 2012 (A44354) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-07-17 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 62 - July 17, 2012 (A42922) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-08-08 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 67 - August 8, 2012 (A43384) Functions Highlight * April 4, 2012 (A40595) Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Attachment H - Pipeline and Tanker Trouble R... 2627 KB D66-03 - Living Oceans Society, Raincoast Conservation Foundation and ForestEthics - Written Evidence of ForestEthics (A... International Reporting Inc. - Vol.54-FriJun01.12 - A2T8E7 590 KB 12-06-01 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 54 - June 1, 2012 (A41962) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.68-FriAug10.12 - A2W7D0 615 KB 12-08-10 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 68 - August 10, 2012 (A44354) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.62-TueJul17.12 - A2V0S6 494 KB 12-07-17 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 62 - July 17, 2012 (A42922) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.67-WedAug08.12 - A2V6L6 741 KB 12-08-08 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 67 - August 8, 2012 (A43384) Results: 51 to 67 of a possible 67 8space Document D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-04-05 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 39 - April 5, 2012 (A40623) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-06-25 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 58 - June 25, 2012 (A42387) Functions Highlight 8space Document D170-2 - Raincoast Conservation Foundation - Written Evidence of Raincoast Conservation Foundation (A37896) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-04-23 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 44 - April 23, 2012 (A41004) Functions Highlight MIMEType Name Size Location Functions Council of the Haida Nation - Living Marine Legacy of Gwaii Haanas V - Coastal Zone Part 29 - A2K3S3 307 KB D42-04 - Council of the Haida Nation - Written Evidence of the Intervenor, Council of the Haida Nation (A37898) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.39- ThuApr05.12 - A2S0L6 239 KB 12-04-05 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 39 - April 5, 2012 (A40623) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.58- MonJun25.12 - A2U3Q5 530 KB 12-06-25 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 58 - June 25, 2012 (A42387) Raincoast Conservation Foundation - Written submission of Raincoast Conservation Foundation, Part 1, Dec 21, 2011 - A2K3... 779 KB D170-2 - Raincoast Conservation Foundation - Written Evidence of Raincoast Conservation Foundation (A37896) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.44- MonApr23.12 - A2S5G9 580 KB 12-04-23 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 44 - April 23, 2012 (A41004) 8space Document 12-01-11 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol 9 - Jan. 11, 2012 (A38252) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-07-27 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 64 - July 27, 2012 (A43164) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-07-10 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 61 - July 10, 2012 (A42707) Functions Highlight 8space Document B016 - Northern Gateway Pipeline Limited Partnership - Technical Data Report - Risk (7 of 7) for Enbridge Northern Gateway Project (A27084) Functions Highlight 8space Document D35-14 - Coastal First Nations - Great Bear Initiative - CFN Evidence (A37835) Functions Highlight International Reporting Inc. - Vol.9- WedJan11.12 - A2K9E6 593 KB 12-01-11 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol 9 - Jan. 11, 2012 (A38252) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.64- FriJul27.12 - A2V3X3 567 KB 12-07-27 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 64 - July 27, 2012 (A43164) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.61- TueJul10.12 - A2U8C2 675 KB 12-07-10 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 61 - July 10, 2012 (A42707) B16-26 - Marine Physical Environment_TDR_Part (1 of 5) A1V8F4 4547 KB B016 - Northern Gateway Pipeline Limited Partnership - Technical Data Report - Risk (7 of 7) for Enbridge Northern Gatew... Coastal First Nations - Great Bear Initiative - CFN Evidence - A2K0J7 1127 KB D35-14 - Coastal First Nations - Great Bear Initiative - CFN Evidence (A37835) 8space Document 12-04-26 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 47 - April 26, 2012 (A41081) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-02-29 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 23 - February 29, 2012 (A39646) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-04-24 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 45 - April 24, 2012 (A41022) Functions Highlight 8space Document 12-06-14 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 57 - June 14, 2012 (A42181) Functions Highlight 8space Document Government of Canada - Written Evidence of the Government of Canada (A37927) Functions Highlight International Reporting Inc. - Vol.47- ThuApr26.12 - A2S6D2 707 KB 12-04-26 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 47 - April 26, 2012 (A41081) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.23- WedFeb29.12 - A2Q6E4 1029 KB 12-02-29 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 23 - February 29, 2012 (A39646) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.45- TueApr24.12 - A2S5Q0 821 KB 12-04-24 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing Transcript Vol. 45 - April 24, 2012 (A41022) International Reporting Inc. - Vol.57- ThuJun14.12 - A2U1E2 823 KB 12-06-14 International Reporting Inc. - OH-4-2011 Hearing transcript Vol. 57 - June 14, 2012 (A42181) Government of Canada - Volume 3_Part 4_Transport Canada_Annex_Examination and Certification of Seafarers - A2K4S6 1401 KB Government of Canada - Written Evidence of the Government of Canada 8space Document B001 - Enbridge Northern Gateway LP - Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Application - Volumes 1-3 (A25244) Functions Highlight 8space Document Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development - Federal Government Participants - Government of Canada-Letter and Information Request No 1 to Northern Gateway (A30930) Functions Highlight (A37927) B1-5 - Vol 3 – Gateway Application – Engineering, Construction and Operations (Part 1 of 19) - A1S9X8 2538 KB B001 - Enbridge Northern Gateway LP - Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Application - Volumes 1- 3 (A25244) Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development - Government of Canada-Letter and Information Request No 1 to Nort... 2488 KB Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development - Federal Government Participants - Government of Canada- Letter an... Bottom of Form Appendix III: Excerpts from the Evidence Already Filed With the Term “tsunami” Identified Enbridge is aware of tsunami potential. Application Volume 1 Section 11.8, affirms that the magnitude and frequency of tsunami events in Kitimat Arm will be determined during detailed design. Effects of the Environment on the Marine Terminal Environmental factors that have the potential to affect the long-term integrity of the marine terminal include slope failure (slides), seismic events (earthquakes) and tsunamis. The marine terminal is configured, and will be designed, to limit exposure to these hazards. The west side of Kitimat Arm, above the marine terminal, has been identified as a site that could be susceptible to slope failure resulting from slides, debris flows and rock fall. These hazards can be effectively mitigated by designing rock and soil cuts to produce stable slopes, and by using passive rockfall protection, including meshing, anchoring, ditch and berm design. Consideration will also be given to catch fences. Seismic conditions at the marine terminal are characterized as moderate. The marine terminal will be designed for appropriate seismic forces with reference to applicable codes and engineering practice. Landslides, including slides in sensitive glaciomarine clays, might move in response to seismic motions, but the potential for movement has been and will be allowed for or mitigated during design. Glaciomarine clay, which might be susceptible to seismically induced sliding, will be removed from selected areas such as below tank foundations. Cut slopes will be designed to allow for seismic motions, and infrastructure will be designed with appropriate consideration of seismic conditions. Large seismically induced tsunami events have occurred at many locations around the Pacific Basin. However, the Queen Charlotte and other coast islands protect the Kitimat region from tsunamis originating west of these islands. There are no faults or identified sources of landslides near the Project that could generate a large tsunami. The magnitude and frequency of locally generated tsunami events in Kitimat Arm will be determined during detailed design. The design and operation of the marine terminal will take into account appropriate wave heights and characteristics. Warning systems for tsunamis generated by offshore earthquakes will be coordinated with existing Pacific Basin tsunami warning systems. Given the mitigation, and given that detailed engineering design will take these potential hazards into account, the residual effects of the environment on the marine terminal are predicted to be not significant.”11 In Application Volume 6B, Section 15, Enbridge proposes to incorporate protection measures during detailed design and engineering of the port facility i.e. after the planning (at a more general level of design) and approval stages of project development. 12 Mitigation strategies are discussed in the Environmental Protection and Management Plan (Volume 7A).13 Geotechnical considerations are provided in Volume 3, Appendix E.14 The Overview to Section 15 of Volume 6B states: 15.1 Overview The marine terminal is seaward from the upper edge of the marine riparian area. It includes a 150-m wide safety zone seaward from the berthing structures. Infrastructure at the marine terminal includes two tanker berths equipped for loading oil tankers and unloading condensate tankers and one utility berth. Since 2005, studies have been undertaken by Northern Gateway to reduce effects on the environment to enhance the long-term integrity of the Kitimat Terminal. The terminal has been configured to limit exposure to terrain hazards; however, ongoing geomorphic processes such as shallow to moderately deep landslides, debris flows, rockfall and tsunamis could, in the absence of suitable mitigation measures, result in damage to the marine terminal infrastructure. Detailed engineering design will take these potential hazards into account. Section 15.2.3.5 of Volume 6B discusses design considerations and mitigations: 15.2.3.5 Design Considerations and Mitigation “Further work to determine the magnitude and frequency of tsunami events in Kitimat Arm will be carried out during detailed design. The design and operation of the marine terminal will take into account appropriate wave heights and characteristics. Warning systems for tsunamis generated by offshore earthquakes will be coordinated with existing Pacific Basin tsunami warning systems. Infrastructure and operational methods will be designed to take account of tsunamis that would likely to be generated …” The potential for tsunami to affect port operations is discussed in a Technical Data Report on Marine Shipping Quantitative Risk Analysis prepared by Det Norske Veritas (DNV), of Oslo, Norway: Situations where mooring lines break and vessels are forced from the berth by wind or waves are rare and are usually the result of an extreme weather event, earthquake or tsunami. In the case of conditions that may lead to a failure of the mooring lines, cargo transfer operations will be stopped, the loading arms drained and tug boats will be readied to provide assistance to the tankers as required. Therefore the probability of a mooring failure is assumed to be negligible. 15 The NRCan evidence filed in December 2011 states: 57. In terms of tsunamis, Enbridge has documented the effects of the landslide induced tsunamis of 1974 and 1975. Enbridge indicates that future work will be undertaken to review the likely magnitude and frequency relations for potential future tsunami events relative to the terminal facilities. 58. Further, Enbridge states that the design and operations of the terminal will take into account wave heights and characteristics and that warning systems for offshore tsunamis will be coordinated with existing Pacific Basin tsunami warning systems. 59. NRCan concludes that the approach taken, and the information provided in terms of earthquake and tsunami hazards, is sufficient at this point in the Environmental Assessment Review of the Application.16 1 Earthquakes in or near Canada, 1627 to 2007 at http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/science/story/3579. 2 Precise references are given in Appendix III. 3 Written Evidence of Natural Resources Canada, https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624911/718030/777411/Government_ of_Canada_-_Volume_6_Part_2_Natural_Resources_Canada_Written_Evidence_- _A2K4T9.pdf?nodeid=777451&vernum=0. 4 Precise references are given in Appendix III. 5 Hawkesbury Island is described by the Government of British Columbia at: http://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/bcgnws/names/36235.html. 6 Principle and Guidelines for the Effective Use of Science and technology Advice in Government Decision Making http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/C2-500- 2000E.pdf. 7 JRP Procedural Direction No. 8: https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624909/829069/A182-1_- _Panel_Letter_-_Procedural_Direction__8_Final_Hearings_- _A2U5X3.pdf?nodeid=829070&vernum=0. 8 Prior evidentiary rulings of the Joint Review Panel: . Ruling No. 41 – McLeod Lake - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=802575&objAction=browse . Ruling No. 44 – Heiltsuk Nation - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=802575&objAction=browse . Ruling No. 45 – Dieter Wagner - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=808640&objAction=browse . Ruling No. 48 – Haisla Nation - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=809359&objAction=browse . Ruling No. 47 – Daiya-Mattess Keyoh - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=809190&objAction=browse ENDNOTES . Ruling No. 72 – Cheryl Brown - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=833566&objAction=browse . Ruling no. 75 - Douglas Channel Watch - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624476/835614/Panel- Commission_-_Ruling_no._75_- _Notice_of_Motion_no._5_filed_by_Douglas_Channel_Watch_on_14_July_2012_- _A2V4W6?nodeid=835425&vernum=0. 9 Ruling No. 72 – Cheryl Brown - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe?func=ll&objId=833566&objAction=browse. 10 Ruling no. 75 - Douglas Channel Watch - https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624476/835614/Panel-Commission_- _Ruling_no._75_- _Notice_of_Motion_no._5_filed_by_Douglas_Channel_Watch_on_14_July_2012_- _A2V4W6?nodeid=835425&vernum=0 11 B1-3 - Vol 1 – Gateway Application – Overview and General Information (Part 2 of 2) - A1S9X6. 12 B3-15 - Vol 6B - Marine Terminal ESA (Part 4 of 4) - A1T0G5. 13 https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624798/620129/B3-19_-_Vol_7A_- _Construction_EPMP_(Part_1_of_1)_-_A1T0G9_.pdf?nodeid=620142&vernum=0 14 https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/lleng/ livelink.exe/fetch/2000/90464/90552/384192/620327/624798/619886/B1-10__-_Vol_3_– _Gateway_Application_–_Engineering,_Construction_and_Operations_(Part_6_of_19)_- _A1S9Y3.pdf?nodeid=619784&vernum=0. 15 B23-34 - TERMPOL TDR - Marine Shipping Quantitative Risk Analysis A1Z6L8. 16 Government of Canada - Volume 6_Part 2_Natural Resources Canada_Written Evidence A2K4T9