Activities: Trans Mountain launched two online surveys and hosted twowebinars. These online engagement opportunities provide stakeholders a digitalforum to offer feedback regarding the Project, in addition to attending anin-person event.

Feedback:Concerns raised through online engagementforums ranged from construction impacts and locations, notification of constructionactivities, reclamation, workforce, local benefits and on broader topics suchas climate change, economic benefits, safety and emergency response, healthimpacts, environmental protection, pipeline maintenance, sensitiveenvironmental areas and marine traffic. Detailed concerns from each onlineforum can be found inSection 1.21 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps:Feedback was forwarded to the Project team to beconsidered and incorporated into planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities: Technical Working Groups wereinitiated in communities throughout BC in late 2015. We will continue to meetwith these groups on an as-needed basis throughout the planning andconstruction phases as needed.

Feedback: Comments collected through ourinitial Technical Working Group meetings can be found inSection 1.23 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps: AdditionalTechnical Working Group meetings will continue as needed.

Activities: SEEMP meetings were successfully held in seven communitiesincluding Merritt, Clearwater, Valemount and Kamloops, British Columbia, and inEdmonton, Edson and Jasper, Alberta. Themeetings provided stakeholders with an opportunity to discuss and comment onthe SEEMP approach to be implemented during the construction phase of theproposed Project and to further discuss interests and concerns related toconstruction of the proposed Project.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the meetingsranged from accommodations, local purchase of goods and services, impacts onlocal policing, emergency and health services, community preparedness, traffic,impacts to tourism and ongoing point of contact through construction. Detailedconcerns from each community can be found inSection 1.19 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps:Thefeedback collected will be considered in the development of the Socio-Economic Effects Monitoring Plan.

Activities: Neighbourhood Information Sessions were successfully held in threecommunities in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. The session provided stakeholders with an update on the proposedProject and information related to environment, reclamation and constructionimpacts.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the Information Sessions ranged from environmentalimpacts, construction impacts and timing, emergency response, tanker trafficand safety, procurement and economic benefits. Detailed concerns from eachcommunity can be found inSection 1.20 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps:Feedback was forwarded to the Project team to beconsidered and incorporated into planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities: An EMSW, Part 2 wassuccessfully held in the Tri-Cities area (Coquitlam, Port Moody and PortCoquitlam) and we invited emergency first responders and planners. Threecommunities asked to postpone the discussion to spring 2015 and threecommunities either declined or were unable to meet with us.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the workshopsranged from environmental impact (fish, water bodies, wetlands, water qualityand quantity), disaster planning and emergency spill response. Detailed tablesof concerns from each community can be found inSection 1.15.12 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps:EMSW,Part 3 is planned for 2016. The focus of Part 3 is to collect new data andinput from communities, Aboriginal groups and various levels of government onthe enhancement of the existing plan to meet the new system.

Activities: EPP workshops weresuccessfully held in four communities in BC’s Lower Mainland including FraserRiver/Coquitlam, Brunette River/Burnaby, Surrey Bend Park/Surrey and Langley. EPPworkshops provided participants the opportunity to discuss reclamation andenvironmental mitigation, watercourse crossings and fish habitat, caribouhabitat, air quality, wildlife, critical habitat, municipal and local parks andprotected areas, wetlands, vegetation (i.e., rare plants and ecologicalcommunities, rare species), land use (i.e., forestry, agriculture, recreation),soil and soil productivity and marine fish/mammals/birds.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the workshopsranged from environmental impacts (i.e., fish, birds, trees, watercourse crossings,wetlands, water quality and quantity, sensitive areas), reclamation, noise,routing, pipeline construction timing and techniques. Detailed tables ofconcerns from each community can be found inSection 1.18 of Consultation Update No. 4.

NextSteps:Feedbackgathered will be reported as outlined in NEB Draft Conditions and commitmentsmade by Trans Mountain in responses to Information Requests.

Activities:We hosted six public Open Houses and three InformationSessions with Secondary Schools inthe BC Interior region from November to December 2014. The local newspaper rana story on employment and training opportunities. Third-party support for theProject was demonstrated when we partnered with Post-Secondary EducationInstitutions in the hosting of events.

Feedback:Interests and concerns expressed included: employmentand training, economic benefits, procurement or business opportunities andcommunity capacity building. Full details of feedback gathered can be found inSection 1.18 of Consultation Update No. 3.

NextSteps: Continue to host Jobs & Training Sessions, andparticipate in other local events such as Career Fairs, in communities alongthe pipeline corridor.

Activities:An online survey and feedback from requesting commentsfrom stakeholders on routing optimization and the proposal to returning asection of our existing pipeline to service, was available on the our website.Supporting materials were provided for visitors to review and provide commenton.

Feedback:85 feedback forms were received with comments on main topics of land, air,water and human activity and land use. Details of the comments can be found inSection 1.5.7 of Consultation Update No. 2.

Next Steps: Feedback collected was forwarded to the project team to be consideredand incorporated in to planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities:Workshops were held in west Edmonton, Wabamun, Fraser Valley/Chilliwack,Coquitlam, Surrey, Langley and Burnaby. The workshops provided stakeholderswith an opportunity to receive updated Project information, to review andprovide feedback on area-specific revisions to the proposed pipeline corridor,since filing the NEB Application in December 2013.

Feedback:Key issues and concerns were documented around themesof land, air, water and human activity and land use. Detailed feedback bycommunity can be found inSection 1.5.5 of Consultation Update No. 2.

NextSteps:Feedback was forwarded to the project team to beconsidered and incorporated in to planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities:Two Twitter Town Halls were held, one on October 14, 2014 that focused onmarine safety and one on October 27, 2014 that focused on pipeline safety. Wecreated the hashtag #AskTransMtn for use in all tweets and asked thoseparticipating to use it. This made tweets searchable for anyone to see.

Feedback:During the marine safety Twitter Town Hall, there were approximately 2,100 tweets and retweets using the hashtag#AskTransMtn, and during the pipeline safety Twitter Town Hall,there were approximately 80 tweets and retweets using thehashtag #AskTransMtn.

NextSteps:All questions were either answered during the event,or as a follow-up if we couldn’t get to a question during the one-hour event.All tweets were consolidated into a Storify post and posted to our blog.

• Marine Safety
• Pipeline Safety

Activities:At the workshops, we provided attendees with a proposed overview of theselected study corridor in each park, sought feedback of attendees onparticular concerns relating to human activity and environment in the parks aswell as discussed parks benefits, in break-out groups.

Feedback:Feedback from the workshops is included in the tables of key topics of interestor concern inSection 1.6 of Consultation Update #2.

NextSteps: Feedback received at these sessions and afterwards,was considered in setting the scope for the BC Parks Stage 2 BoundaryAdjustment Application. Event reports and proposed benefits were submitted toBC Parks for consideration against Park benefit priorities.

Activities:On August 12, 2014 we met with representatives of JasperNational Park and Mount Robson Provincial Park. The meeting includeda site visit to determine next steps for remediation.

Feedback:Attendees raised the following issues:

• location of valves;
• mitigation plans for natural hazardsites;
• level of disturbance to culturalresources sites compared to the 1950s as well as ancillary development such asaccess, power sites; and
• comprehensiveness of Aboriginalengagement.

NextSteps:We will continue to provide information to the publicand interested stakeholders, so that they know what to expect duringreactivation activities.

Activities:Prior to each of the Telephone Town Halls, outboundcalls were placed within the six targeted BC communities of Burnaby, Coquitlam-Surrey, Vancouver and Abbotsford-Chilliwack. In total,more than 20, 000 people participated over the course of the four sessions. Participantswere welcomed by a moderator and introduced to Kinder Morgan Canada President,Mr. Ian Anderson, who provided an initial update on the status of the Project. Participantscould then ask questions of Mr. Ian Anderson. At the conclusion of eachTelephone Town Hall, stakeholders were invited to remain on the line and leavea voice message with questions or alternatively, they could contact us directlyat[email protected] or toll-free at 1-866-514-6700.

Feedback:Each call covered a number of topics. Full recordingsand select clips from each event are available on our blog:

• Burnaby
• Coquitlam - Langley
• Vancouver
• Abbotsford - Chilliwack

Next Steps:Topics raised on the call were communicated to the regional engagement specialistsand appropriate project team members to incorporate into future engagementefforts and project planning.

Activities:On September 24, 2013, we provided a tour of the Lac du Bois Grasslands area tokey stakeholders. Attendees met at the Holiday Inn in Kamloops, BritishColumbia for a briefing and were then driven to the proposed right-of-way forthe Project for a walking tour of the grasslands area. Following the identification of concerns anddiscussion with subject matter experts, attendees were provided route maps.

Feedback:Several stakeholders cautiously expressed support forthe pipeline passing through the Lac du Bois Grasslands, provided an adequatenet benefit to the park could be demonstrated by Trans Mountain. Somestakeholders were uncomfortable with the proposed right-of-way passing throughthe Lac du Bois Grasslands and preferred the alternate route through thecommunity of Westsyde.

NextSteps:Engagement activities related to our BC Parks Stage 2Boundary Adjustment Application will be completed in spring 2014 for Finn CreekProvincial Park, North Thompson Provincial Park, Lac du Bois Protected Area,Coquihalla Summit Recreation Area and Bridal Veil Falls Provincial Park. Engagementwill follow the Provincial Protected Area Boundary Adjustment Policy, Processand Guidelines (British Columbia Ministry of Environment 2010).

Activities:Routing Open Houses were held in Edmonton, AB, Hinton, AB, Kamloops, BC, Abbotsford,BC and Burnaby, BC. At our Abbotsford Open House, in addition to the standarddisplay boards and technical representatives, we also provided a bus tour ofthe Sumas Pump Station and Terminal.

Feedback:Participants providedfeedback on environment, routing and socio-economic topics.Section 1.7.10 of Volume 3A of the Facilities Application providestables with each concerns expressed at each open house, unique to eachcommunity.

NextSteps:Information gathered was forwarded to the project teamto be considered and incorporated in to planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities:Seventeen workshops were help in pipeline communities between April and June2013. Participation included municipal representatives, local communityrepresentatives, business groups, recreational representatives, and guides andoutfitters. The materials we provided to participants at the workshops includeda Project introduction, presentations on land, air, water, and human activityas well as an exit survey. Information presented in the community workshops wasmade available online the day following each session and was live for threeweeks for additional comments from participants and the general public.Newspaper, radio and online advertising was used to promote the onlineengagement opportunity.

Feedback:Local environmental knowledge helped to identifyissues of concern in our study areas, possible mitigation measures, andpossible compensation or net benefit initiatives to consider as part of our overallProject proposal. Participants providedspecific feedback on land, air, water and human use and activities.Section 1.7.9 of Volume 3A of the Facilities Application providestables with each concerns expressed at each workshop, unique to each community.

NextSteps:Information gathered was forwarded to the project teamto be considered and incorporated in to planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities:Technical Working Groups were initiated in communities throughout our LowerMainland/Fraser Valley region in late 2014. We will initiate Technical WorkingGroups in the Interior BC and Alberta regions in Q2/Q3 2015. We will continueto meet with these groups on an as-needed basis throughout the planning and constructionphases as needed.

Feedback: Comments collected throughour initial Technical Working Group meetings up to December 2014 can be foundinSection 1.13 of Consultation Update No. 3.

Next Steps: Additional TechnicalWorking Groups will be initiated in the Interior BC and Alberta Regions inQ2/Q3 2015, and meetings will continue as needed.

Activities:Discussions were held with six local governments in British Columbia in 2014.

Feedback:The details of the Municipal Parks and Recreation Areas discussions aresummarized inTable 1.12-1 to 1.12-4 of Consultation Update No. 3.

NextSteps:Discussions will continue with additional opportunityfor feedback during engagement activities planned for spring 2015.

Activities:EMSW, Part 2 were successfully held in 20 communities and we invited the samemunicipal, regional districts (BC) and counties (AB) to participate in scenariodiscussions, as we did in EMSW, Part 1. Three communities asked to postpone thediscussion to spring 2015 and three communities either declined or were unableto meet with us.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the workshops ranged from incidentnotification, to first responder capacity and coordination, to interest inbeing involved in reassessment of control points and incorporating localknowledge into plans. Detailed tables of concerns from each community can befound inSection 1.7.2 of Consultation Update No. 3.

NextSteps: EMSW, Part 3 is planned for 2015. The focus of Part 3is to collect new data and input from communities, Aboriginal groups andvarious levels of government on the enhancement of the existing plan to meetthe new system.

Activity:Seven organizations attended the Westridge MarineWorkshop we hosted on July 14, 2014.

Feedback:Stakeholders provided feedback on legacy impacts and offsets. Details of thefeedback can be found inTable 1.6.2-4 of Consultation Update No. 3.

NextSteps: We will continue to engage with local communities,government, Aboriginal groups and stakeholders on environmental mitigation andoffset measures related to the construction and operation of the WestridgeMarine Terminal expansion.

Activities:Through our ongoing engagement initiatives, priorityareas for community benefit investments were identified with input from localand regional governments, and other local stakeholders. We offered to meet witheach municipality where we operate to discuss potential community benefits. As of March 19, 2015 we have signed12 agreements with 15 communities for a total dollar commitment of more than$4.8 million.

Feedback:Conversations on community benefits are at different stages within eachcommunity.

Next Steps:We will continue Community Benefit conversations with communities alongthe line, and are committed to providing direct benefits to those communitiesalong the proposed corridor. We will announce each agreement as it is signed through 2015.

Activities: EMSW,Part 1 invitees included local community emergency managers and first responders, healthand safety officials and other officials or agency representatives with responsibility for emergency management in the region. We providedattendees an overview of existing operations and the proposed Project. We alsoprovided an introduction to the Emergency Management planning process. Existing Emergency Response Plans were made available at each workshop.

Feedback:Concerns raised at the sessions included: third-partystrikes to the pipeline, leak detection, fire plans, natural hazard impacts, vandalism orterrorism, explosion, public safety and awareness, increased emergency trainingand resources needs, oil transport via rail, communication strategies in caseof evacuation, location specific spill response times, coordination andcapacity of response, water contamination and remediation and associated costs.

Next Steps: Feedback received at the sessions was shared with the participantswithin two weeks of the workshop and will be incorporated into a summary reporton recommendations once all EMSW, Part 1 events have been completed.

Activities:Face-to-face meetings, presentations and workshops withstakeholders between Hinton, AB and Hargreaves, BC, and between Darfield, BCand Black Pines, BC were held to hear concerns, questions and suggestions aboutthe reactivation.

Feedback:Concerns were expressed about access requirements fordig sites, safety and emergency responses, confusion that a third line wasgoing to be built through Jasper National Park and Mount Robson ProvincialPark, associated power line work, water sourcing for the required hydrostatictesting and chemical storage at Jasper Pump Station. Stakeholders also inquiredabout the product shipped in the pipeline, the age of the pipeline to bereactivated, impacts to pressure within the pipe in case of power loss, testingprocess prior to reactivating and condition of the existing line.

NextSteps:Meetings scheduled to discuss mitigation methods orchanges to project plans to address concerns and solicit any additionalconcerns.

Activities:We hosted six ESA Workshops togather feedback from local and regional subject matter experts including municipal,federal and provincial governments, local Environmental Non-Government Organizations(ENGOs), and other environmental interest groups. Four workshops were held inpipeline corridor communities and two workshops were held in marine corridorcommunities. In response to stakeholder interests in the Fraser Valley, we alsohosted an agricultural-specific workshop that recognized their specificinterests. We opted to invite participants to the ESA Workshops based on theirspecific technical and/or local knowledge, which would enable them to provideinput into the design of an ESA. At the workshops, we provided attendees with aproposed overview of our ESA approach for the Project and sought feedback from attendeeson particular modules of the ESA including air, land, and water. The AgriculturalWorkshop in Abbotsford focused on soil and agriculture. Additional input wassolicited online for two weeks after each workshop.

Feedback: Participants provided feedback on air quality,water quality and quantity, fish and fish habitat, wildlife, wetlands,vegetation, socio-economic topics, engineering, stakeholder engagement, climatechange, geology, soils, Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge and many other topics.Section 1.7.8 of Volume 3A of the Facilities Application providesan overview of the concerns expressed at each workshop.

Next Steps:Feedback received at thesesessions, and afterwards, was shared with the relevant environmentaldisciplines and was considered in setting the scope and methodologies for the Project’sESA.

Activities:On November 13, 2014, we filed a Stage 2 Boundary Adjustment Application with BCParks that reported on our engagement activities described in ConsultationUpdate No. 2, as well as information gathered during the open comment period.

Feedback:A copy of our BC Parks Stage 2 Boundary AdjustmentApplication can be foundhere.

NextSteps:BC Provincial government review and recommendation currently underway.

Activities:Outbound calls were placed to Burnaby households and to134 people who had registered via our online registration form, resulting in closeto 5,000 people participating in the Telephone Town Hall. At the conclusion ofeach Telephone Town Hall, stakeholders were invited to remain on the line and leavea voice message with questions and or alternatively, they could contact usdirectly at[email protected] or toll-free at 1-866-514-6700.

Feedback:The call covered a number of topics. A full recordingand select clips from the event are available on ourblog.

NextSteps:A survey was posted online asking the public to tellus how they wanted to continue the conversation and on what topics. The top three ways stakeholders want to provide feedback are: communityopen houses, online feedback forums and panel discussions. We will develop engagementactivities that incorporate the most popular techniques and the topics chosenthrough the online survey.

Activities:We hosted five Open Houses that provided stakeholderswith an opportunity to receive updated Project information, to review andprovide feedback on area-specific revisions to the proposed pipeline corridorsince filing the NEB Application in December 2013.

Feedback:Key issues and concerns were documented around themesof land, air, water and human activity and land use. Detailed feedback bycommunity can be found inSection 1.5.6 of Consultation Update No. 2.

Next Steps:Feedback was forwarded to the project team to be considered andincorporated in to planning and design, as appropriate.

Activities:Sixteen events were held along the proposed corridor from Edmonton, AB to Burnaby,BC. Over 1,300 people attended the events. Attendees were encouraged toregister via our website, to be notified about procurement and employmentopportunities with the Project.

Feedback:205 companies expressed interest in procurement opportunities and 127 peopleexpression interested in employment opportunities through registration forms onthe website. Response from the leadership and membership of local Chambers wasgenerally positive. A theme of local opportunities emerged quickly in ourconversations with local businesses and economic development groups, and ontraditional and social media.

NextSteps: Provide community level information about procurementand employment opportunities as they become more solidified in 2015 and 2016.

Activities:Two open houses were held, one that focused on theexpansion of our Burnaby Terminal and one that focused on the expansion of our EdmontonTerminal. Information was presented and technical experts were available toanswer questions and solicit feedback. Materials such as 3D models, routingmaps and factsheets were available at each open house.

Feedback:Participants providedfeedback on emergency response, security, employment opportunities, humanhealth, environment, corporate responsibility, liability, operations and management,noise, air quality, routing, safety, stakeholder engagement and socio-economictopics.Section 1.7.11 of Volume 3A of the Facilities Application summarizesthe concerns expressed at each open house.

NextSteps: Information gathered was forwarded to the projectteam to be considered and incorporated in to planning and design, asappropriate.

Activities:Thirty-sevenopen houses were held between Edmonton, AB and Sooke, BC with approximately2,200 people attending over the course of the events. The Open Houses were structuredas drop-in events where stakeholders could gain information and ask questionsabout the Project. Our Project information was displayed on large poster boardspositioned throughout each venue. Corporate leadership and technical expertsincluding representatives from marine biological science, maritime navigationand industry, environment, routing, geotechnical, regulatory, operations,stakeholder engagement, and media relations were on hand to answer questions,and receive comments and concerns from attendees. Attendees were encouraged to completefeedback forms; 250 completed forms were received. The form was designed tocollect participants’ feedback on the following:

• Qualityand completeness of information provided;
• Topicswhere more information was necessary;
• Topicsof particular interest/concern;
• Importanttopics for the environmental assessment;
• Importanttopics for the socio-economic assessment;
• Preferredcommunication methods for project information

Additionally, feedback was solicited online through afeedback form and discussion forums specific to each community.

Feedback:Thetop areas of interest or concern identified by stakeholders were:

• Pipelinesafety
• Pipelinemonitoring and spill response
• Marinesafety
• Marinespill response
• Naturalenvironment
• Pipelinerouting
• Socio-economicbenefits and impacts (particularly employment and procurement)

We gathered stakeholder’s questions, concerns andfeedback on:

• Thescope and design of the environmental and socio-economic studies beingconducted along the pipeline corridor and the marine corridor
• Localand provincial economic benefits and impacts
• Importantlocal considerations for planning, constructing and operating the proposed lineand facilities
• Routingin areas where it is not practical for the new line to follow the existingpipeline right-of-way
• Formatand content of the engagement process
• How the proposed Project could beimproved.

Next Steps:We gained valuableinformation about what stakeholders felt they still needed information aboutand which concerns they felt still need to be addressed. This input influencedthe design of the proposed Project and our Application to the National EnergyBoard (NEB). Read afull report of how this feedback wasincorporated into project planning, with specifics starting on page 46.