[All] NEB went well

[Louisette Lanteigne]

Hi folks

A few of the delegates at the hearing had to reschedule their participation so the NEB asked if I could testify today so I did. It went remarkably well. 

A solicitor for Aamjiwnaag confirmed how the entire process lacked Aboriginal consent. The way the system was supposed to work in compliance with the Constitutional Act, is to allow the Crown to secure an objective facilitator who can hear the concerns of both the company and First Nations. Areas for Hunting, Fishing, Water Supplies and Sacred Lands are identified and measures are taken to protect and preserve these key features. The decision made by the Crown is then presented to the NEB for consideration before final approval.  All tribes are legally entitled to this process unless Parliament has taken action to specifically exempt a group. The NEB itself has no jurisdictional powers to function as the Crown. The Federal Government is responsible to provide the facilitator. 


The Solicitor for Unifor was amazing. I loved what they did. (Unifor is CAW plus the Canadian Paperworkers Union combined. Largest Union in Canada.) They crafted full support for Enbridge Line 9 on condition that it NOT be for export but must refine bitumen in Canada for Canadian jobs and energy security and must have regard for Green House Gas Emission Standards. If it's for export, they will not support it. 

Suncor currently does not have infrastructure to process bitumen at their refinery.  The union pushed for environmental compliance, proper consultation with First Nations and the protection of jobs and energy security for Canada. (Personally speaking, I suspect without the oil export funding, it simply won't be cost effective to pursue. They support the pipe which appeases government, but the conditions for that support are enough to kill it.) 

There was a group called Algonquin to Adirondack (A2A) and they formed to protect wildlife corridors and natural features between the two parks so the areas they protect are both in Canada and the US.  It contains a Karst moraine system that provides drinking water and it's a natural corridor for wildlife. 59% treecover. With Climate Change, this corridor will be essential to secure species survival as they migrate northwards. The group wants recovery strategies for 59 Federally Endangered Species in this area. They also want to make sure if there is a spill, the remediation will protect as many species as possible with the appropriate treatment measures for each one. They showed a report of a location where biodiversity fell after a spill from 11 different species down to just 5 afterwards. 

A2A secured documentation of pipeline issues from Hilton to Cardinal is where they found the highest volume of structural integrity issues within the existing Line 9  ie: cracks, corrosion etc.  They didn't know why all these issues were happening in this small zone. Meanwhile as part of my presentation, I have a Natural Resources Canada Map showing that exact same area as an earthquake hotspot. Our presentations went together like peanut butter and jam. My presentation featured the earthquake risks, and her's confirmed the damages. We were both delighted to see that our presentations combined, created the complete picture. 

A speaker from Dunham spoke of how the pipeline crosses 12 tributaries in a 7 mile stretch around Whitby, crossing through floodplains, wetland complex and sensitive forested areas. This is evidence of the lack of EA process. To avoid this all they had to do was go north a short way. He found data of the original approval which indicated the EA info used was insufficient. Enbridge was ordered to do follow up monitoring by the NEB but it never happened. The highest pressure the pipeline was subjected to was at the Cardinal pumping station. Oil was pumped at 666psi for 5 minutes. It has never gone higher than that but the proposed line reversal intends to ship oil from 750 to 1000 psi, well beyond levels ever used on the pipe before. 

A women who came in as a concerned citizen gathered a list of names of home owners who lived less than 200m to the oil pipe. She photographed the pipeline crossing in their back yards and none of the owners even knew it was there.  She chronicled the fact the same scenario was taking place in multiple communities. Enbridge blocked her request for info and stated her concerns were out of scope. (In fact, most delegates got the exact same response when seeking various data from Enbridge)  She raised concern that shut off valves were 12 miles apart. That if the leak happened the pipe would still be discharging the remaining fluids even if a valve were shut. 

I have a copy of the City of Toronto's presentation which was wonderful. They proposed all sorts of new conditions and revealed the flimsy safety protocols of Enbridge. If a spill happens in Toronto: it's a 90 minute response time and by that time, a spill could already have reached Lake Ontario. The pipeline is in proximity to a proposed subway extension by Finch. The municipalities all found out about Line 9 hearing because they received a letter by Environmental Defence. Enbridge didn't contact them at all until they felt to give a response of their own. All the emergency measures Enbridge had for Toronto were flimsy. The data requested from Enbridge by the City of Toronto was hard to access and had many pages blacked out. At best all safety protocols are generalized, outdated and unreliable. It provides no support for emergency services. 

The Solicitor for Toronto also provided a hard copy of a Supreme Court hearing that specifies the roll municipalities have in protection of the Environment.  I have a copy. This is perfect material for the Waterloo vs. OMB in the courts hearing. 

I was the last presenter. Afterwards the board stated some of the issues I mentioned regarding the Grand River were from the first hearing and out of scope but I stated, the data was included to show the path of the logic, how localized concerns for the Grand revealed system wide issues. I reminded him that my testimony included flood risks from Alberta too in order to illustrate that this is happening nation wide and is not specific to simply Enbridge or this particular pipe. The need is there to establish criteria for the placement of shut off valves. Since pipes in tributaries are at the highest risk of erosion issues, there should be shut off valves on both sides of a river  to isolate oil volumes heading in and out of these areas as soon as possible. I stated that in Enbridge's written response they said they have a system to assess the placement of shut off valves implying that it is an elective process but in the Halton Hills article they stated,
 "There is no shut off valves for non-navigable waters." That last statement is not permissive, it is absolute and this conflicts with what what they told me previously. 

Afterwards I was invited to the Religious Friends of Quakers who hosted a lovely dinner for  non industry intervenors. It was a great way for the group to meet, speak of the day and pass off our written info to the next set of delegates to cross reference. In supporting another delegate's contribution it strengthen's both arguments and validates shared concerns and I have another fella who will be referencing my data on Saturday regarding seismic risks and system integrity issues. He's borrowing my testimony this evening for review. 

That's about it. I'll be heading to Toronto tomorrow to glean even more data. It's a fascinating process. I love doing this stuff.  

Night night. 

Lulu :0)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20131016/09504c1c/attachment.html>