Page 1 of 3

Printed on: __________________________________ ____________________________ 02-Mar-11 1:58:20 PM Department Head CAO Report prepared by: Jodi MacLean, Land Use Planner

PEACE RIVER REGIONAL DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

ZONING AMENDMENT REPORT BY-LAW NO. 1925, 2011

3rd Reading

OWNER: Paul & Pauline Peterson DATE: March 2, 2011AGENT: CCS Corporation

AREA: Electoral Area D LEGAL: SE¼ Section 31, Township 81, Range 17, W6M, PRD LOT SIZE: 65 ha (160 acres) LOCATION: South Taylor – Tower Lake

PROPOSAL To develop a “Treatment, Recovery and Disposal” facility, with a disposal well on site, to service upstream oilfield waste, including produced water.

RECOMMENDATION: OPTION 1 THAT the Regional Board approve Zoning Amendment By-law No. 1925, 2011 for 3rd Reading which adds an “M-4 (Oil/Gas Production Zone)” to the Dawson Creek Rural Area Zoning Bylaw No. 479, 1986 and rezones the Southeast ¼ of Section 31, Township 81, Range 17, W6M, PRD from A-2 (Large Agricultural Holdings) to M-4 (Oil/Gas Production Zone).

OPTIONS OPTION 1: THAT the Regional Board approve Zoning Amendment By-law No. 1925, 2011 for 3rd Reading which

adds an “M-4 (Oil/Gas Production Zone) to the Dawson Creek Rural Area Zoning Bylaw No. 479, 1986 and rezones the Southeast ¼ of Section 31, Township 81, Range 17, W6M, PRD from A-2 (Large Agricultural Holdings) to M-4 (Oil/Gas Production Zone).

OPTION 2 THAT the Regional Board table the application pending the outcome of the associated ALR Non-Farm Use application.

OPTION 3: THAT the Regional Board refuse the application.

BACKGROUND January 17, 2011 PRRD receives ALR Non-Farm Use & Rezoning applications January 18, 2011 ~ Development Services sign placed on property January 27, 2011 ~ PRRD supports ALR Non-Farm Use application January 27, 2011 ~ Application and proposed bylaw referred to municipalities and provincial agencies February 10, 2011 ~ PRRD Board gives zoning amendment bylaw 1st & 2nd Reading February 15, 2011 ~ Public Hearing notification mailed to landowners February 23 & 24, 2011

~ Public Hearing notification advertised in Alaska Highway News

March 1, 2011 ~ Public Hearing held in Taylor, BC

Part 26 Participants. Includes all except District

of Tumbler Ridge.

File No. 15/2011

Page 2 of 3

COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

APPLICANT: It is the intent of the applicants to use a 4 ha (10 acre) portion of the land (plus a 20 x 164 meter access road to Highway 97) for an oilfield waste treatment facility and disposal well.

ALR: The subject property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and therefore requires the permission of the Agricultural Land Commission as a Non-Farm Use. The applicants have submitted the ALR application and it has been forwarded to the ALC.

OCP: Pursuant to the Dawson Creek Rural Area Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 477, 1986, the subject property is designated “Agriculture – Rural Resource”. This designation permits oil and gas installations. The proposal is consistent with the OCP.

ZONING: The subject property is zoned A-2 (Large Agricultural Holdings) pursuant to Dawson Creek Rural Area Zoning Bylaw No. 479, 1986. In order to permit the proposed use the zoning amendment will:

• Create a new zone titled “M-4 Oil/Gas Production Zone” in which ‘production facilities’ are permitted

• ‘Production facilities’ are defined as including “a battery, oil treater, pumping station, compressor station, dehydrator, gas injection station, line heater, waste processing facility, water disposal facility, water injection station, or upon designation of an authorized BC Oil and Gas Commission employee, any other system of vessels and equipment designated to accommodate production or disposal or both production and disposal of well effluent products and byproducts, but does not include a gas processing plant.”

• The 4 ha lease area on the subject property where the proposed use is proposed is rezoned to this new M-4 zone.

PRODUCTION FACILITIES:

The definition of ‘production facilities’ is derived from the Oil and Gas Handbook (Vol. 2) by the BC Ministry of Employment and Investment. This definition is consistent with other PRRD bylaws.

EQUIPMENT: The proposal involves using land for an office, work shop, injection well, flare stack, tank farm, risers, utility buildings, and solids processing building with a receiving pad and centrifuge.

ROAD NETWORK:

The applicant is working with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to construct a lighted intersection which could include acceleration/deceleration lanes and a turning lane.

FENCING + BUFFER:

CCS Corporation intends to fence the perimeter of lease area and retain existing trees as a buffer between the site and the highway.

LIGHTING + FLARING:

As the facility is intended to be manned 24 hours a day, CCS Corporation intends to provide lighting across the lease area. However, representatives of CCS Corporation have stated they are investigating the use of motion-sensors and other features on some fixtures to reduce light pollution. CCS Corporation intends to construct an intermittent (electronic igniter) flare stack on site with a shrouded hood.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION:

The re-zoning process requires that the Regional District issue a public notification. There is an option to either advertise public notification of the proposed bylaw or to advertise a Public Hearing meeting that can be held at a time and place of the Board’s choosing. The advertisements must reach at least every landowner within 100 meters of the subject property and be published twice in a local newspaper. However, the limits to the notification parameters may be altered if more people or areas are deemed affected by the proposal.

The applicants have followed the Province’s new Oil and Gas Activities Act which requires consultation with landowners within 1 km of the proposed facility and notification of landowners within a 1.5 km radius (which encompasses ~14 unique landowners).

File No. 15/2011

Page 3 of 3

IMPACT ANALYSIS AGRICULTURE: During consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture’s Regional Agrologist during the ALR Non-

Farm Use application, she noted the following concerns: � loss of potentially productive agricultural land (Class 3 and 4 soils) � increased traffic, dust and airborne particulate matter within the surrounding area � increased potential for restricted access to adjacent fields � increased opportunity for conflict between farm and non-farm uses

Parkland Geotechnical Ltd. conducted a site assessment on the lease area and provided CCS Corporation with soil handling and soil monitoring recommendations, among other recommendations.

CONTEXT: The proposed facility is intended to serve upstream oil and gas companies (from drilling to production) who are active in the area. CCS Corporation operates a similar facility in Goodlow (between Fort St. John and the Alberta border), Secure Energy Services operates a similar facility in Rolla (north of Dawson Creek), and there are several other similar facilities in Alberta.

SETBACK: The closest homesite to this leased area belongs to the landowners, whose house is about 0.6 km (0.4 miles) to the north. The closest homesite that does not belong to the landowner is about 1 km (0.6 miles) to the northeast.

TRAFFIC: CCS Corporation proposes to have the lease area to have access from Highway 97. They are working with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to determine intersection specifications, which could include acceleration/deceleration lanes, a turning lane, and lighting. They expect about 30 trucks per day.

EMPLOYMENT: Representatives from CCS Corporation stated they expect the facility to be continuously manned with the majority of the activity expected between the hours of 7 am and 5 pm, and that it could employ, if successful, up to 15 people in the long term.

COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM MUNICIPALITIES AND PROVINCIAL AGENCIES CITY OF FORT ST. JOHN: Interests unaffected by Bylaw.

DISTRICT OF HUDSON’S HOPE: Too far from Hudson’s Hope to affect our interests.

COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC Pursuant to the Local Government Act a public hearing was held on March 1, 2011. Notification was published in the February 23 & 24, 2011 editions of the Alaska Highway News and mailed to landowners on February 15, 2011. The minutes are included with this report.

PEACE RIVER REGIONAL DISTRICT

Public Hearing Minutes

Proposed Zoning Amendment By-law No. 1925, 2011

Date: March 1, 2011 Time: 6:30 p.m. Place: Peace Community Church, Taylor, BC Present: Director: Wayne Hiebert Director of Electoral Area “D” Staff: Jodi MacLean Land Use Planner Applicant: Dan Wallace Business Development Manager, CCS (Calgary) Hanif Ladha Land, Environment & Regulatory Director, CCS (Calgary) Paul Walker Business Development, CCS (Calgary) Lance Kile Operations General Manager, CCS (Fort St. John) Bryan Kelm Land Manager, CCS (Calgary) Richard Lane Vice President, Operations, CCS (Calgary) Mike Ollenberger Plant Administrator, CCS (Fort St. John) Tim Van Den Heuvel Marketing Representative, CCS (Fort St. John) Jennifer Robitaille Coordinator, National Public Relations (Calgary) Heather Oliver Coordinator, National Public Relations (Calgary) Jay Hill CCS Public: Brian Derfler Box 30, Farmington, BC Cal Stephenson Box 321, Taylor, BC Dennis Bruvold Box 412, Taylor, BC Lynne May Box 412, Taylor, BC Ronald Harden Box 203, Baldonnel, BC Ray Brookes Box 88, Taylor, BC Elwood Baker Box 458, Taylor, BC Bill Bellamy Box 501, Taylor, BC Fred Jarvis Box 95, Taylor, BC Brad Filmer Box 277, Taylor, BC Doug Witmer Box 883, Taylor, BC Betty Ponto Box 524, Taylor, BC Frank Patterson Box 411, Taylor, BC Marlene Fouillard Box 59, Taylor, BC Aime Fouillard Box 59, Taylor, BC Ed Rouble Box 11, Taylor, BC Cyndy Reid Box 34, Taylor, BC William Cassidy Box 520, Taylor, BC Lee Westgate Box 74, Taylor, BC Bertha Mueller Box 32, Taylor, BC Albert Weighill Box 150, Taylor, BC Dave Neal Box 237, Taylor, BC Vince Loya?? Box 7, Taylor, BC Andre da Costa CJDC TV, Fort St. John, BC Matthew Bains Northeast News, Dawson Creek, BC

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

2

1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:44 p.m.

2. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING Wayne Hiebert, read the statement of “Public Hearing”. 3. INTRODUCTION TO PROPOSAL

The proposal and application process was reviewed by Jodi MacLean. 4. SUMMARY OF APPLICATION PROCEDURE

January 17, 2011 January 18, 2011 January 27, 2011 January 27, 2011 February 10, 2011 February 15, 2011 February 23, 2011 February 24, 2011 March 1, 2011

�

�

� � � �

�

�

�

PRRD receives ALR Non-Farm Use & Rezoning applications Development Services sign placed on property PRRD supports ALR Non-Farm Use application Application and proposed bylaw referred to municipalities and provincial agencies PRRD Board gives zoning amendment bylaw 1st & 2nd Reading Public Hearing notification mailed to landowners Public Hearing notification advertised in Alaska Highway News Public Hearing notification advertised in Alaska Highway News Public Hearing held in Taylor, BC

5. COMMENTS FROM AGENCIES AND MUNICIPALITIES RECEIVED

City of Fort St John City of Dawson Creek

Interests unaffected by by-law. Interests unaffected by by-law.

Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure

…the Ministry has no concerns regarding the rezoning. The Ministry is currently working with CCS in regards to the access from the Alaska Highway No. 97N

Northern Health Authority

All development on this land must adhere to the Public Health Act and its regulations. Such regulations would include BC Sewerage Reg. Industrial Camp Reg. and if applicable Food Premise Reg. and the Drinking Water Protection Act and Reg.

Agricultural Land Commission

This is to advise that a Treatment, Recovery and Disposal (TRD) facility is not a permitted use in the ALR and requires the submission of a non-farm use application for the ALC’s review. … Should the Commission allow the TRD facility then it likely would have no objection to the proposed bylaw.

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

3

6. WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC A petition in opposition to the waste management facility, signed by 20 people, received by the PRRD on October 12, 2010, was included with the agenda package. Cal Stephenson handed out copies of minutes from the January 27, 2011 Regional District Board Meeting highlighting D-3 & R-1 which the CCS Midstream Services delegation and the associated ALR Non-Farm Use application.

7. COMMENTS FROM APPLICANT The applicants (representatives of CCS Corporation) distributed promotional literature regarding the proposed facility. Dan Wallace – provides an overview of CCS Corp and its operation across Western Canada and Northeast BC and a description of Treatment, Recovery and Disposal facilities. He provided rationale for developing the proposed site, including accessibility to requisite geological formations, lack of non-operational existing wells in area, and positioning to minimize traffic disruption and visual barrier. He acknowledged impact issues with traffic, noise, odour, and light. He addressed each impact issue: CCS is working with the Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure to design and construct highway improvements (left turn lane, deceleration lane, highway lighting); machinery will be electronic and the site will be buffered to reduce the noise; should be no odour as there will be very little dumping and an incinerator system (rather than a flare) will be used; CCS is working with an engineer to minimize light pollution. Dan reiterated CCS’s desire to invest and provide jobs in BC.

8. COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC

Cal Stephenson – Distributed minutes from the Regional Board meeting of January 27, 2011, highlighting the presentation by representatives of CCS Corp (D-3) and the associated ALR Non-farm use application (R-1). He noted the time CCS spent presenting and time the Board spent discussing the application. He described the process as ‘rubber-stamping’ by the Regional Board. Wayne Hiebert – Noted that the Public Hearing comments should focus on the rezoning application, the proposed bylaws, and the proposal itself. Cal Stephenson – Asks if the Regional Board has already supported the proposal. Wayne Hiebert– Reiterated the purpose of the Public Hearing. Cal Stephenson – Thinks that Option #2 on the ALR Non-Farm Use application should have been selected (for a public information meeting). He believes that because the

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

4

option to forward the application to the ALC was selected over the public information meeting, the Regional Board essentially ‘rubber-stamped’ it. Wayne Hiebert – Denied that anything is ‘rubber-stamped’. Dan Wallace – Elaborates on the months of preparation and consultation that occurred in order to address issues before making application. Cal Stephenson – Asks where their consultation is documented. Dan Wallace – States that the consultation that CCS did prior to the application was included with the application package. Jodi MacLean – Clarifies that documentation regarding CCS communication with private land-owners was accepted by the PRRD as part of the application package but was not published. Cal Stephenson – Reiterates his preference for public consultation before the ALR application. Dave Neal – Asks what were the methods of notification? Jodi MacLean – Describes the notification procedure: registered mail notices (1.5 km radius), newspaper advertisements (Alaska Highway News), development services sign on property. Dave Neal – Believes the radius should have been larger than 1.5 km. Questions the definition of production facilities and whether it includes what is being proposed. Jodi MacLean – Confirms that the proposal is covered by production facilities. Dave Neal – States the difficultly that residents have in excluding land from the ALR. Discussion ensues regarding the distinction between ALR ‘Exclusion’ and ‘Non-Farm Use’. Hanif Ladha – Explains the rationale of the 1.5 km notification radius (from Oil and Gas Activities Act) and the 3 km notification radius that CCS Corp voluntary used. Brian Kelm – Expands upon the procedures used in the 3 km notification radius. Dave Neal – Expresses concern over northbound traffic approaching the proposed site.

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

5

Dan Wallace – Explains their traffic projections. Dave Neal – Addresses issues with the South Taylor hill and asks whether this proposal will add traffic to the hill. Dan Wallace – States that CCS Corp anticipates the project will lessen traffic using the hill. Tim Van Den Heuvel – Expands upon traffic projections. Explains that CCS Corp operates a similar facility in the North Peace area which they expect waste from north of the Peace River will use rather than crossing the river and climbing the hill. He expects this proposed facility to capture those trucks from the South Peace area, stopping them from travelling north to CCS Corp’s facilities in the North Peace. Dave Neal – Asks what is meant by ‘underground storage’. Dan Wallace – Explains the process of deep well disposal. Dave Neal – Asks if it has any impact of the Peace River. Dan Wallace – States that it does not impact the Peace River. Dave Neal – Asks what happens in the event of a traffic accident that impacts Six Mile Creek. Lance Kile – Explains the established emergency procedures. Dave Neal – States that accidents will occur and asks if CCS Corp is concerned about that. Lance Kile – Explains that the facility is intended to be the end point for waste and their interest in keeping the facility operating without any accidents. Dave Neal – Asks about clean-up procedures. Lance Kile – Further explains CCS Corp emergency procedures. Tim Van Den Heuvel – Details some of the background that CCS looked into when considering a site, including location and designs that facilitate accident avoidance. Dan Wallace – States that CCS Corp is responsible for any accidents on site. Hanif Ladha – Goes further into the corporate emergency plan, and some of its site-specific details.

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

6

Dave Neal – Asks how long it would take for them to respond to an accident. Hanif Ladha – States they would respond as soon as they are notified. Lynne May – States she is a resident on the Tower Lake side of the proposed site. She is concerned about the environmental impact, especially on wildlife like moose and their habitat. She purchased her land to farm and since then it has become progressively more difficult as industry as built up around her. She is no longer able to rent her land in South Taylor due to the industrialization around the land. She describes the dangers of pulling onto the highway with farm equipment. She believes that industry should provide better roads so that they can co-exist safely with slow moving farm equipment. The man she bought some of her land from was killed pulling out onto the highway. She is very concerned about the proposed site’s creation of a new intersection on the highway. Dan Wallace – Explain their site selection and desire to be close to the highway without being right on it. They did not want to have trucks travelling along unpaved side roads. Lynne May – Asks if they were just trying to avoid being affected by road bans. Dan Wallace – States their business would have been impacted by road bans had they chosen a site further away from the paved highway. Lynne May – States she was approached by industry to acquire land to avoid road bans. Dan Wallace – Details the environmental assessments performed on the site, including soil assessment and wildlife documentation. Their proposal includes an animal-proof fence. Lynne May – States she is familiar with the specific area. There are many moose who use the area. Many are killed on the highway and this site may direct more onto the highway. States that there must be a better location for the proposal. Believes this area should be planned for agricultural use, not industrial use. Ray Brookes – Asks about the projected lifespan. Dan Wallace – States it is being built to last 20 to 25 years, but will likely last longer with improvements and technological upgrades. The facilities are inspected yearly. Ami Fouillard – Expresses his concerns over the traffic impact. Turning takes lots of time and cars coming north do not have much time to react. People will likely spin out. Believes there should be traffic lights or a double lane. Marlene Fouillard – Relates her experience with truck traffic on the South Taylor hill and close-calls she has had to the 230 Road intersection. Believes there should be

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

7

advanced warning lights or flashing lights. Dan Wallace – Thanks the Fouillards for the information on the traffic patterns. He will consider the information in their operational plans. Marlene Fouillard – Elaborates trucker behavior she has experienced: some of skilled but some are just tired or in bad condition. Lee Westgate – Stated that he bought his property for its access to water. He is concerned the proposal would impact the quality of the water. Asks if the borings will be cased. Dan Wallace –Yes. Lee Westgate – Asks if there is any chance of leaching at higher levels? Dan Wallace – No. Lee Westgate –States that everyone around here uses water wells for drinking water. Dan Wallace – Describes the geology and hydrology requirements for their site selection. The proposed disposal well is a fit-for-purpose well, meaning it is designed and built for this purpose (not a retrofitted well). Lee Westgate – Asks whether, after 10 – 15 years if the well stops accepting product, they would perforate additional holes at higher levels? Dan Wallace – Explains how the pressure requirements regulate how much they can dispose. Dave Neal – Questions the process with which vacuum trucks operate with liquids and gases and where it is all collected. Dan Wallace – Describes the system which collects the product at several sites and uses an incinerator. Dave Neal – Asks if it is designed to withstand the strong Chinook winds that hit the area. Lance Kile – Provides more details on the vacuum system and their experience at the other CCS disposal facilities. Lynne May – Asks about the application process after the meeting.

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

8

Wayne Hiebert & Jodi MacLean – Describes the process. Cal Stephenson – Asks the CCS representatives how many people they think support the proposal. Brian Kelm – Explains their process for resolving issues or objections. Discussion ensues regarding requirements for consultation under the Oil and Gas Activities Act. Cal Stephenson – Notes the site is outside of the rural fire protection area. Asks what happens in event of a fire. Hanif Ladha – Describes the purpose of the corporate emergency response plan, site-specific facilities to cope with an emergency, the landowners list (for notificiation/evacuation), and arrangements with the Taylor Fire Department. Dennis Bruvold – Based on his past experience with fires outside of the rural fire protection area, he doubts that the department will respond. He states that he is within the 3 km of the site but was not notified. Brian Kelm – Explains that they only notified residences within 3 km, so some who do not have a house within the 3 km radius may have not been notified. Dennis Bruvold – Makes the distinction between notification and consultation. States that he was nearly killed yesterday on the South Taylor hill in a near collision with a truck. He had driven a truck professionally for 16 years but recently stopped and has been reviewing the industry. He is very concerned that people will have accidents here and die here. He expresses fondness for his neighbours and family and wishes to help prevent accidents. He asks what the proponents do with the resulting solids from the process. Dan Wallace – Solids are transported to other facilities. Dennis Bruvold – Expresses environmental concerns. He notes that if fluids leak into Six Mile Creek, it takes a half day to respond. He does not want to jeopardize his water source. Dan Wallace – Explains the containment proposed around the site and commitment to work with local authorities to respond to any emergencies. Regarding traffic CCS Corp is working with the Ministry of Transportation and accepting all their recommendations. He promises to return with answers and feedback. Ray Brookes – Notes he has spent 30 years working in forestry and has seen thousands of these types of meetings. The best plan he ever saw was a self-reporting requirement put

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

9

into place if you spilled as little as 5 gallons of oil. Miraculously, no one ever spilled again, or at least no one ever admitted they did. Dan Wallace – Recalls some of the self-reporting that occurs in the industry. Ray Brookes – States a belief that prevention is best. Dave Neal – Regarding his water supply, he has registered and tested it. He wants to know, hypothetically, if his water supply was contaminated by the CCS Corp site, how would CCS Corp remedy the situation? Dan Wallace – Expects they would bring in professional inspectors to assess the problem at CCS Corp’s expense. He provides some details on the proposed lining and ground-water monitoring. Dennis Bruvold – Clarifies with Dave Neal that he is referring to the integrity of the casings and the events of a failure in the casing. Dave Neal – Agrees with Dennis and notes that everyone is dependent on the water supply there. Dan Wallace – Notes their business plan in dependent on keeping product safely disposed. He notes that there are already numerous wells in the area and that the disposal wells have many more regulations to follow to ensure safety. Dave Neal – Asks if contamination of his water supply is their responsibility. Dan Wallace – States that CCS Corp will not dispose of contaminants that will impact drinking water. Elwood Baker – Relates the experience he had with his water well; while drilling near-by a fault line was created and his water turned cloudy. Dan Wallace – Reiterates that the disposal well is ‘fit-for-purpose’ and must be approved by the Oil and Gas Commission. Elwood Baker – Expresses doubt that the engineers at the OGC know where the fault lines are. Ray Brookes – States that wells should be tested before they go into business. Dan Wallace – States that the disposal well is tested beforehand. Ray Brookes – Clarifies that he meant water wells should be tested before construction

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

10

of the disposal well. The water quality should be tested and monitored. Dan Wallace – Agrees that is a good idea. Lynne May – Requests this testing and monitoring happen for everyone within 5 km. Dan Wallace – States they will consider it. Brian Derfler – Suggests the use of tracers in the injection fluid to be able to track whether this well is responsible for anything that occurs in the area. Dan Wallace – Finds the tracer idea to be innovative. Brian Derfler – Thanks CCS Corp for using an incinerator rather than a flare stack. He advocates that they go a little further and implements air monitoring technology. Bill Bellamy – Asks about their market research in Groundbirch-Farmington area. Tim Van Den Heuvel – Noted that area was researched as well but did not have the geology they required. Bill Bellamy – Asked about the incineration versus flaring. Dan Wallace – Briefly explained Oil and Gas Activities Act requirements for flaring and incineration. Dave Neal – Asked where else this necessary geology exists. Tim Van Den Heuvel – Said the studies didn’t show it elsewhere. Paul Walker – Explained general geology of the area, from the Rockies to the Peace River and said that the geology forces them to locate in a populated area. Dave Neal – Asks whether those studies are available to the public. Dan Wallace – Says he can provide the methodology used that resulted in the conclusions, but the study itself is proprietary information. Dennis Bruvold – Asks for further explanation on the geological requirements. Paul Walker – Provides further explanation of the criteria necessary in the geological formations. Dave Neal – States that he cannot accept that this here is the only spot where the

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

11

necessary geological formation exists. Asks if it can be found in the Del Rio. Dan Wallace – Commits to showing the study’s methodology which will illustrate the conclusions. Cal Stephenson – Asks why put an injection well and a tank farm together. He thinks that separating them would lessen the impact to the neighbours and reduce the visual impact. Dan Wallace – Stated that they are committed to mitigating impacts, including visual impacts. Cal Stephenson – States he is skeptical about their ability to keep the area’s visual quality. He thinks the project’s aesthetics will be disruptive. Brian Derfler – Asks what the injection pressure will be. Dan Wallace – Answers that the injection pressure has not been determined yet. Drilling and testing is required beforehand. Brian Derfler – Asks about flowback valve. A short discussion ensues regarding the use of a flowback valve. Frank – Asks who determines the details of the turning lanes. Wayne Hiebert – Answers it is the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Frank – Asks what the Regional District’s role is in road construction. Wayne Hiebert – Describes the Regional District’s role as more of advocacy and provides examples. Cal Stephenson – Asks if the Ministry of Transportation is paying for the new road improvements. Dan Wallace – Answers that CCS is paying for the road improvements which are being done to the Ministry standards. Cal Stephenson – States that a representative of the Ministry of Transportation should be here tonight. Wayne Hiebert – Asks if there are any other comments.

Peace River Regional District

Public Hearing Minutes of March 1, 2011 (By-law No. 1925, 2011)

12

9. FINAL COMMENTS FROM APPLICANT None.

10. TERMINATION OF PUBLIC MEETING Meeting was terminated at 9:52 p.m.

___________________________ _____________________________ Jodi MacLean, Recorder Wayne Hiebert, Chair