Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Josette Weir Not Here n Gateway Response 52402 e

Josette Weir Not Here n Gateway Response 52402 e

Ratings: (0)|Views: 40 |Likes:
Published by uncleadolph

More info:

Published by: uncleadolph on Feb 15, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
September 29, 2011E-FILE
Attention: Ms. Anne-Marie EricksonSecretary to the Joint Review PanelEnbridge Northern Gateway Project
National Energy Board444 Seventh Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0X8Dear Ms. Erickson:
Subject: Northern Gateway Pipelines Inc. (Northern Gateway)Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Application of 27 May 2010Hearing Order OH-4-2011NEB File No: OF-Fac-Oil-N304-2010-01 01Northern Gateway Request for Confidentiality in Joint Review Panel (JRP)Information Request No. 3.1(e) & (f) and 3.9(b)
Further to the JRP’s Procedural Direction of September 12, 2011, comments were received fromthe following parties regarding Northern Gateway’s August 30, 2011 confidentiality request:The Federal Government Participants;The Haisla Nation;C.J. Peters Associates Engineering; andJosette Weir.This letter provides Northern Gateway’s reply comments.Northern Gateway notes that, with the exception of Ms. Weir, no party takes issue with NorthernGateway’s position that the documents that are the subject of the confidentiality request, namelythe Design Report, the Facility Construction Specifications and the Pipe Specifications(collectively "the Confidential Documents"), are the proprietary information of Enbridge andhave consistently been treated confidentially. The Confidential Documents are of the samenature as the design standards which Enbridge has already confidentially filed with the JRP.These design standards were listed in Attachment JRP IR 3.1(f). The Confidential Documentshave been developed by Enbridge and represent a significant investment, both with respect toEnbridge’s internal staff resources and the consultants that have worked with Enbridge todevelop these materials. The Confidential Documents are the intellectual property of Enbridge,and are essential to the conduct of its pipeline business. The Confidential Documents have
 
September 29, 2011Enbridge Northern Gateway Project - OH-4-2011
3000, 425 1
st
Street SW, Calgary, AB, T2P 3L8 (T) 403.231.3900 (F) 403.718.3525
consistently been treated as confidential and have never been made available to Enbridge’scompetitors. Notwithstanding the acknowledgement of the proprietary and confidential nature of the Confidential Documents, the intervenors are essentially arguing that the public interestrequires disclosure in this case. Northern Gateway submits that public disclosure is not requiredfrom either a public interest perspective or as a matter of fairness to the parties.It was the JRP that requested the Confidential Documents. None of the intervenors haverequested or in any way indicated that they required these documents in the information requeststhey submitted to Northern Gateway on or before August 26, 2011. Over 2100 informationrequests were submitted to Northern Gateway by intervenors and government participants.Numerous requests have sought detailed information regarding specific pipeline design andspecification issues. This is expressly acknowledged by the Haisla Nation in their comments onthe confidentiality request. The Haisla Nation indicates that they are being assisted by technicalexperts who have been preparing their requests. The Haisla Nation comments as follows:NGP has stated with respect to JRP IR 3.1(e) that “if specific design details are required,JRP can address those specific items as they are requested.” The Haisla Nation hassubmitted a number of information requests to NGP which seek specific design details.NGP has not yet provided its responses to those information requests, so it is too early toknow whether NGP is, in fact, prepared to provide this information.Northern Gateway’s responses to the information requests have not been provided becauseresponses are not yet due. The Haisla Nation will receive responses to their information requestsby October 6, 2011. To the extent that the experts retained by the Haisla Nation consider thatfurther information is required, the JRP process provides the opportunity for a second round of requests through which further specific information can be sought.The same is true of other intervenors; the federal government participants and Ms. Weir alsoasked numerous questions regarding pipeline design specifications. They too will receiveresponses and will have the chance to follow up with any specific questions.The purpose of the information request process is not to obtain a general discovery of allpotentially relevant documents. That is the process in civil litigation. Civil litigation documentproduction is not subject to public disclosure and has implied confidentiality obligations thatfollow all documents produced. The regulatory process is different. The regulatory processprovides for specific information requests. Intervenors and government participants have madethose requests in this case and none of them thought it necessary to request the ConfidentialDocuments. Following the filing of the detailed responses to the information requests byNorthern Gateway on October 6, parties will be able to determine whether they require anyfurther information that can be sought in the second round of information requests. In the eventthat any intervenor or government participant does not believe that the information they havesought has been reasonably provided, there is a separate process for seeking further and betterinformation responses.In conclusion, Northern Gateway submits that the Confidential Documents are the intellectualproperty of Enbridge and have been consistently treated as confidential. The public disclosure of the Confidential Documents would compromise Enbridge’s competitive interests relative to otherpipeline companies. The Confidential Documents were only sought by the JRP and not other

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->