COWLING WLG

July 8, 2019

Natalie Rizkalla-Kamel <contact information removed>

Via E-Mail: ceaa.miltonlogisticshubpanel.acee@canada.ca

Lesley Griffiths, Panel Chair Milton Logistics Hub Project Review Panel do Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street Ottawa, ON K1A OH3

Dear Ms. Griffiths I Members of the Review Panel:

Re: Milton Logistics Hub Project — Undertaking 15

On behalf on the Regional Municipality of Halton, the Corporation of the Town of Milton, the Corporation of the Town of Halton Hills, the Corporation of the City of Burlington, and the Corporation of the Town of Oakville (together the "Halton Municipalities"), this letter is made in follow-up to CN's response to Undertaking #15.

The Halton Municipalities object to the submission of the memo from Amy Jiang to Darren Reynolds provided by CN on June 28, 2019 as part of Undertaking #15 (the "June 28, 2019 Memo").

Undertaking 15 was an Information request for "CN to provide 2008 traffic report and summary of traffic generation by June 28, 2019". CN provided the BA Group 2008 report and the June 28, 2019 Memo. The June 28, 2019 Memo was not simply a summary of the 2008 BA Group Report, as requested, but a 4-page substantive memo that provided a new interpretation of the 2008 report and, importantly, set out additional commentary and critique on Halton Municipalities' expert presentation given on June 26, 2019. The Halton Municipalities submitted and posted its presentation a week in advance. CN had an opportunity to question Halton Municipalities' experts on the issues contained in the June 28, 2019 Memo during the corresponding presentations on June 26, 2019, but it chose not to.

The Panel recently gave the direction that it does not want to be in a position where "if objections are raised in closing comments, we cannot pursue the issue with the relevant experts" and that going forward, CN's closing remarks "will not be an opportunity to offer additional response or new information") The inclusion of the June 28, 2019 Memo leads to the same procedural unfairness, as it would allow CN to criticize a technical expert's views after the fact, without giving the expert an opportunity to respond.

1 Hearing Transcript Volume 7: June 28, 2019 ("CEAR 889"), at p. 1891-1893.

Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP Suite 1600, 1 First Canadian Place 100 King Street West Toronto ON M5X 1G5 Canada

T +1 416 862 7525 F +1 416 862 7661 gowlingwlg.com

Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP is a member of Gowling WLG, an international law firm which consists of independent and autonomous entities providing services around the world. Our structure is explained in more detail at gowlingwIg.comilegal.

Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP Suite 1600, 1 First Canadian Place 100 King Street West Toronto ON M5X 1G5 Canada

T +1 416 862 7525 F +1 416 862 7661 gowlingwlg.com

Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP is a member of Gowling WLG, an international law firm which consists of independent and autonomous entities providing services around the world. Our structure is explained in more detail at gowlingwlg.com/legal.

Natalie Rizkalla-Kamel

July 8, 2019 Via E-Mail: ceaa.miltonlogisticshubpanel.acee@canada.ca Lesley Griffiths, Panel Chair Milton Logistics Hub Project Review Panel c/o Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3

Dear Ms. Griffiths / Members of the Review Panel:

Re: Milton Logistics Hub Project – Undertaking 15

On behalf on the Regional Municipality of Halton, the Corporation of the Town of Milton, the Corporation of the Town of Halton Hills, the Corporation of the City of Burlington, and the Corporation of the Town of Oakville (together the “Halton Municipalities”), this letter is made in follow-up to CN’s response to Undertaking #15.

The Halton Municipalities object to the submission of the memo from Amy Jiang to Darren Reynolds provided by CN on June 28, 2019 as part of Undertaking #15 (the “June 28, 2019 Memo”).

Undertaking 15 was an Information request for “CN to provide 2008 traffic report and summary of traffic generation by June 28, 2019”. CN provided the BA Group 2008 report and the June 28, 2019 Memo. The June 28, 2019 Memo was not simply a summary of the 2008 BA Group Report, as requested, but a 4-page substantive memo that provided a new interpretation of the 2008 report and, importantly, set out additional commentary and critique on Halton Municipalities’ expert presentation given on June 26, 2019. The Halton Municipalities submitted and posted its presentation a week in advance. CN had an opportunity to question Halton Municipalities’ experts on the issues contained in the June 28, 2019 Memo during the corresponding presentations on June 26, 2019, but it chose not to.

The Panel recently gave the direction that it does not want to be in a position where “if objections are raised in closing comments, we cannot pursue the issue with the relevant experts” and that going forward, CN’s closing remarks “will not be an opportunity to offer additional response or new information”.1 The inclusion of the June 28, 2019 Memo leads to the same procedural unfairness, as it would allow CN to criticize a technical expert’s views after the fact, without giving the expert an opportunity to respond.

1 Hearing Transcript Volume 7: June 28, 2019 (“CEAR 889”), at p. 1891-1893.

<contact information removed>

GOWLING WLG

Please find enclosed a letter from Lisa De Angelis to the Panel, elaborating on the information provided in the June 28, 2019 Memo.

The Halton Municipalities thus request that the June 28, 2019 Memo be excluded from the record.

Sincerely,

Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP

<Original signed by>

Natalie Rizkalla-Kamel

end.

Page 2

Page 2

Please find enclosed a letter from Lisa De Angelis to the Panel, elaborating on the information provided in the June 28, 2019 Memo.

The Halton Municipalities thus request that the June 28, 2019 Memo be excluded from the record.

Sincerely, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP

Natalie Rizkalla-Kamel

encl.

<Original signed by>

,A Halton

July 8, 2019

Via E-Mail: ceaa.miltonlogisticshubpanel.acee@canada.ca

Lesley Griffiths, Panel Chair Milton Logistics Hub Project Review Panel do Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street Ottawa, ON KlA OH3

Dear Ms. Griffiths / Members of the Review Panel:

Re: Milton Logistics Hub Project — Response to June 28, 2019 CN Memo Undertaking #15

I write this letter in response to the memo from Amy Jiang to Darren Reynolds provided by CN on June 28, 2019 as part of Undertaking #15 (the "June 28, 2019 Memo").

The June 28, 2019 Memo is not a summary of the 2008 BA Report. Instead, the Memo supplements the 2008 BA Report, providing additional interpretation as well as commentary and critique on Halton Municipalities' expert presentations given on June 26, 2019. In particular, I would direct the Panel to following instances of new information, interpretation and critique:

• Although Table 1 in the June 28, 2019 Memo appears in the 2008 BA Report, the paragraphs immediately below the Table provide new commentary on how to interpret Table 1 in order to break out truck trips for comparison to the present Project proposal.

• The entire June 28, 2019 Memo is an attempt to refute the considered opinion of Halton Municipalities' expert, Mr. Alvaro Almuina, that the 2008 concept and the current proposed Project would not generate roughly comparable volumes of heavy-truck traffic. CN did not raise this critique with Mr. Almuina during the hearing and this does not allow Mr. Almuina an opportunity to respond.

• Table 2 is a comparison of site traffic generation between the current proposed Project and the 2008 concept

• The Memo comments on Mr. Almuina's discussion of the driveway accesses in the 2008 BA Group Report. Halton Municipalities recognizes that the full 2008 plan had multiple accesses, and that the first 136-acre phase would have included only 2 accesses. If CN had asked this of Mr. Almuina or me on June 26, 2019, we could have clarified this for the Panel.

Regional Municipality of Halton HEAD OFFICE: 1151 Bronte Rd, Oakville, ON L6M 3L1

905-825-6000 I Toll free: 1-866-442-5866

in lobe

Page 2

Further, the June 28, 2019 Memo does not fairly characterize the findings of the 2008 BA Group and highlights only select information. The following new information and interpretation provided in the June 28, 2019 Memo is either inaccurate or misleading:

• The comparison provided in the June 28, 2019 Memo leads the reader to believe that a straight comparison of Passenger Car Units ("PCUs") is appropriate. However, an industrial park would attract a variety of trips with the potential for alternative modes of travel (e.g. employees accessing the site by transit or active transportation modes). Halton's expert, Mr. Alvaro Almuina spoke to this on June 26, 2019.

• The interpretation in the June 28, 2019 Memo focuses on traffic during Peak Hours. However, truck traffic will be continuous all day for the Project, as shown in Slide 10 of CN's June 26, 2019 presentation. In fact, as presented in Slide 10, there would be numerous "Peak Hours" of site traffic through the day, as a result of the proposed Project — primarily between 8 AM and 9 PM. Thus, the interpretation provided by the Memo is misleading.

• The June 28, 2019 Memo states that the 136-acre initial phase was rail-served industrial use, allegedly based on the 2008 BA Group Report. However, the 2008 Report, Section 3.1 Development Context speaks to "industrial uses", which include rail and non-rail serviced parcels (20% non-rail parcels, 80% rail-access parcels).

• The interpretation of Appendix B is not clear, specifically: o The text is unclear and could lead the reader to assume that the proxy sites used for

the 2008 Report are comparable to the current proposal; and o The truck percentages referenced in the last paragraph of page 2 of the June 28,

2019 Memo could not be replicated or confirmed from the 2008 Report.

We thank you for this opportunity to respond to CN's provision of new information, interpretation and critique.

Your very truly,

Lisa De Angelis, MC =', RPP, P.Eng. Director, Infrastructure Planning & Policy Halton Region Public Works

<Original signed by>