This is page numbers 6207 – 6238 of the Hansard for the 17th Assembly, 5th Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was water.

Topics

Return To Written Question 24-17(5): Transitional Housing Income Support
Returns to Written Questions

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to Written Question 24-17(5), asked by Ms. Bisaro on March 3, 2015, regarding 2015 transitional housing income support.

1. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Bisaro asked four questions,

the first being: "Does the Department of Education, Culture and Employment income support division have a definition of “transitional housing” that they use to determine a client's eligibility for income assistance?"

Mr. Speaker, an individual's eligibility for the Income Assistance program is determined in accordance with the Income Assistance Regulations under the Social Assistance Act and is further prescribed in the Income Assistance Policy Manual. The Income Assistance Regulations and policies do not include a definition of “transitional housing.”

2. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Bisaro's second question was:

"If yes, please provide it. If no, how does the department determine if a client is in transitional housing, and if they are, how does the department determine if the client is eligible for income assistance?"

Mr. Speaker, all clients' eligibility for the Income Assistance program is determined in accordance with the Social Assistance Act, Income Assistance Regulations and associated policies. Specifically, a client must be a “person in need,” as defined in Section 1.1, and meet one of the residency requirements set out in Section 1.11 of the regulations.

3. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Bisaro's third question asked:

"What policy governs clients whose only accommodation option is a motel or hotel room? Why are they not eligible for income assistance?"

Mr. Speaker, as discussed in response to the previous two questions, an individual's eligibility for the Income Assistance program is determined in accordance with the Income Assistance Regulations under the Social Assistance Act and the Income Assistance Policy Manual.

The Income Assistance program includes a variety of benefits such as allowances for food, room and board, accommodation, fuel and utilities, among others. Under Section 3.3 of the Income Assistance Policy Manual, transient living accommodations in a hotel, motel, tourist establishment or hostel are not

eligible for an accommodation allowance because the accommodations are not bound by the Residential Tenancies Act and there is no written tenancy agreement between the client and landlord; however, while someone residing in a hotel or motel is not eligible for a rental allowance, they may still be eligible for other income assistance benefits, depending on their circumstances.

Going forward, the department is committed to reviewing how it provides rental allowances as part of the Income Assistance program.

4. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Bisaro's fourth question was:

"Explain what a client in an emergency housing situation, i.e. no housing options, should do to find accommodation. Who should they go to?"

Mr. Speaker, ECE provides funding to help non-government organizations (NGOs) operate emergency shelters in the NWT. These shelters are available for people who are faced with an emergency housing situation. The department works with the NWT Housing Corporation and the Department of Health and Social Services to address the complex issues associated with homelessness. I commit to continuing the conversation with the social envelope departments as part of our integrated case management work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 25-17(5): GNWT Staff Retention Policy
Returns to Written Questions

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

I have a Return to Written Question 25-17(5), asked by Ms. Bisaro on March 3, 2015, regarding the GNWT Staff Retention Policy.

The Government of the Northwest Territories Staff Retention Policy provides a process for the redeployment of staff whose jobs are eliminated or transferred to another community. The policy focuses on the retention of employees within the public service but does provide layoff as an option where redeployment is not feasible.

The Staff Retention Policy was updated in May 2013, and the reporting requirements were changed. Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table the document entitled “Report on the Staff Retention Policy for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013” and the document entitled “Report on the Staff Retention Policy for 2013-14 and 2014-15.” These documents provide information on employees who were identified as affected employees under the Staff Retention Policy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 26-17(5): Daycare Inspection Reports
Returns to Written Questions

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

I have a Return to Written Question 26-17(5), asked by Mr. Dolynny on March 3, 2015, regarding daycare inspection reports.

Mr. Speaker, I committed to making inspection report information publicly available during the February/March 2015 session. The health and safety of children in the care of licenced child care facilities in the NWT is a top priority of the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. As of mid-May 2015, a summary report of the child daycare licensing inspections that occur after April 1, 2015, will be available to the public on ECE's website. Due to access to information and protection of privacy considerations, inspection reports from prior years will not be included. All licenced programs have been officially informed that all inspections beginning April 1, 2015, will be posted in the daycare and will be available on the ECE website. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 27-17(5): Horizontally Fractured Wells In The Northwest Territories
Returns to Written Questions

May 27th, 2015

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

I have a Return to Written Question 27-17(5), asked by Mr. Bromley on March 10, 2015, regarding horizontally fractured wells in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Bromley's questions are with respect to each horizontally fractured well in the NWT to date. I can confirm that to date there have been two horizontally fractured wells in the NWT: Mirror Lake P-20 and Dodo Canyon E-76. Both were exploratory wells drilled by ConocoPhillips Canada Resources Corp. in the Sahtu region near Norman Wells. Both wells were authorized by the National Energy Board prior to devolution on April 1, 2014, and both now fall within the jurisdiction of the Government of the Northwest Territories regulator of oil and gas operations.

My objective is to be as open and transparent as possible about the regulation of oil and gas operations in the NWT. However, some of the information that Mr. Bromley has requested is currently privileged under Section 91 of the Petroleum Resources Act and cannot be disclosed until the statutory privilege period is over.

In addition, some of the information requested does not fall within the regulatory responsibilities of the regulator under the Oil and Gas Operations Act. However, in an attempt to be helpful, I have provided alternative sources of information where possible.

Mr. Bromley asked the following questions:

a) What was the source of the water used and how

much was consumed?

The volume of water used for the horizontal hydraulic fracturing process was 7,676.1 cubic metres for the Mirror Lake P-20 well and 6,317.35 cubic metres for the Dodo Canyon E-76 well. These volumes may include fresh water, produced water and/or recycled water.

This information is publicly available on the FracFocus.ca website. I am pleased to report that on April 7, 2015, the office of the regulator of oil and gas operations signed an agreement with the British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission for the use of FracFocus.ca. This office will post information about any future hydraulic fracturing activities within its jurisdiction on FracFocus.ca when it has the consent of an operator to do so.

Under the Oil and Gas Operations Act and its predecessor legislation, the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act, the regulator does not regulate the source of water used for horizontal hydraulic fracturing. However, information on this and other questions related to water use for these wells as well as for associated access roads, camps, et cetera, can be found on the Sahtu Land and Water Board or the Sahtu Board online public registry at www.slwb.com, water licence number 813L1-004.

b) What was the quantity of greenhouse gases

emissions due to flaring, and how many days did flaring occur?

The information requested is currently subject to the privilege provision at Section 91 of the Petroleum Resources Act, and the regulator is therefore unable to disclose it for a period of two years from each well's termination date.

The privilege period for the Dodo Canyon E-76 well expires on January 23, 2016, and the privilege period for the Mirror Lake P-20 well expires on February 23, 2016.

c) What was the amount and composition of each

additive used during fracking, and how is the flow of unrecovered produced water tracked underground?

Information on the amount and composition of each additive used during the horizontal hydraulic fracturing of the two wells in question is publicly available on the FracFocus.ca website. Information is provided on the trade name of the hydraulic fracturing fluid, the supplier, and the ingredients of the fluid, including, for each ingredient, the chemical abstract service number, the maximum concentration, in percentage by mass, of the ingredient in the additive and the maximum concentration, in percentage by mass, of the ingredient in the hydraulic fracturing fluid.

The same information is available on the Sahtu board online public registry as a requirement of the water licence associated with the two wells.

A Surface and Groundwater Monitoring Plan was approved by the Sahtu board under water licence S12L1-005, also held by ConocoPhillips, and will be reviewed annually by the board and reviewers, including government authorities responsible for fish and water resource protection.

The Sahtu board concluded that this monitoring program will identify any changes to groundwater and surface water quality caused by land use activities associated with the ConocoPhillips program.

d) How much produced water has been recovered

to date, what chemicals are in the recovered water, how is it being transported and disposed of, and what NWT communities does it travel through?

Under the Oil and Gas Operations Act and its predecessor legislation, the regulator does not regulate the transportation and out-of-territory disposal of wastewater associated with horizontal hydraulic fracturing. However, the water licence issued by the Sahtu board requires annual reporting of the monthly and annual quantities of each and all wastes produced associated with the wells in question, including flowback fluid, drill waste and produced water. These reports are available on the Sahtu board's online public registry.

The flowback fluid would be expected to contain the same chemical compounds found in the hydraulic fracturing fluid as well as chemical compounds from the rock formation in which the well was drilled.

The water licence requires that all drill waste solids and fluids be stabilized and removed for disposal to an approved waste disposal facility outside of the NWT and that all produced water and flowback be deposited at an approved waste disposal facility outside of the Northwest Territories.

e) What monitoring of methane gas leakage from

the well pipe stems was carried out and what has been the amount of methane leakage that occurred during and following the fracking operations?

Methane gas leakage from the wells, as distinct from gas flared with approval of the National Energy Board, the regulator at the time the wells were drilled and completed using horizontal hydraulic fracturing, is regulated under Sections 56 and 57 of the Oil and Gas Drilling and Production Regulations. Those sections place ongoing legal obligations on operators to leave wells in a condition that prevents leakage and to ensure that the well is monitored and inspected to maintain its continued integrity and to prevent pollution.

In addition, a leak may be reportable as a "spill" in the NWT. Operators are required to report spills through the Northwest Territories - Nunavut spill reporting line. Information on spills is publicly available through the hazardous materials spill database on the website of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

The land use permit issued by the Sahtu board for these wells, Number S13A-001, requires that all such spills be reported as described above and that

a detailed report on each spill be submitted to the Sahtu board within 30 days of the incident.

Furthermore, the annual report required by the Sahtu board under the water licence for these wells must include a list of unauthorized discharges. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 28-17(5): Hydraulic Fracturing And Other Developments
Returns to Written Questions

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

I have a Return to Written Question 28-17(5), asked by Mr. Yakeleya on March 11, 2015, regarding comparison of impact of hydraulic fracturing and other developments.

Mr. Yakeleya asked the following questions:

1. What is/are the cleanest burning fossil fuel(s) for

heating use and for generating electricity?

The cleanest burning fossil or carbon-based fuel is natural gas, which is primarily composed of methane (CH

4

).

A general rule of thumb is that the smaller the molecule, the cleaner burning it is. Of all fossil fuel molecules, methane is the smallest.

The average emission rates (lbs/MWh) from natural gas-fired generation are 1.135 lbs/MWh of carbon dioxide, 0.1 lbs/MWh of sulfur dioxide, and 1.7 lbs/MWh of nitrogen oxides. Compared to the average air emissions from coal-fired generation, natural gas produces half as much carbon dioxide, less than a third as much nitrogen oxides, and 1 percent as much sulfur oxides at the power plant.

2. Please provide the city of Yellowknife’s annual

energy consumption, with a breakdown of each source of energy.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled “City of Yellowknife Energy Use (Gigajoules).”

3. Please describe a typical hydraulic fracturing

operation, including how many times a well is “fracked.”

Step 1 – Drilling:

Once a drilling location is established, the drilling can begin. A drill bit is then mounted on the end of a drill pipe. As the bit continues to grind its way down, air is pumped down the pipe to flush rock cuttings from the hole and lift them to the surface. The hole is drilled to just underneath the first amount of fresh water underneath the surface. Then the drill pipe and bit are removed. Next, surface casing is inserted into the hole to isolate the fresh water zone. It also serves as a foundation for the blowout preventer, a safety device that connects the rig to the wellbore. Then cement is pumped through the casing and out through the opening of the shoe at the bottom of the casing.

The cement is then forced up between the casing and the hole, sealing off the wellbore from the fresh water. The cementing process prevents any contamination of the fresh water aquifers. The pipe and bit are lowered back down the hole to drill through the plug and the cement and continue the vertical section of the well to approximately 500 feet above the planned horizontal leg. This depth is called the kick-off point, where the curve will begin so that the horizontal section can be drilled.

Step 2 – Perforating the Casing:

First a perforating gun is lowered into a targeted position within the horizontal portion of the well. Then an electrical current is sent down the well to set off a small explosive charge that perforates the well casing with tiny holes and out a short, controlled distance into the shale formation. The holes created by the “perf” gun serve two purposes: It provides access for the hydraulic fracturing fluid (HFF) to enter the formation and subsequently allows natural gas to enter the wellbore.

Step 3 – Shale Fracturing:

The fracturing of a well creates a complex network of cracks in the shale formation. This is achieved by pumping water, sand and chemicals down the wellbore under high pressure. After these cracks are created, the sand will remain in the formation, propping open the shale to create a pathway for the gas to enter the wellbore and flow up the well.

Step 4 – Repeat in Stages:

During each stage, monitoring is done to adjust and record all of the stage parameters to maximize the natural gas or oil production from the shale. After each stage is completed, a plug will be set and new perforations created to direct the HFF to the next stage. By segmenting the well in stages, a greater amount of gas is produced from the lateral length of the well.

Step 5 – HFF Removal:

After hydraulic fracturing is completed, all of the plugs placed between hydraulic fracturing stages are drilled out to remove the restrictions in the wellbore. The completed well is then opened up to remove the HFF so that natural gas can be produced. The HFF that is recovered from each well is either treated and reused or transported to a certified storage facility.

Step 6 – Flaring:

Toward the end of the HFF removal process, gas will start to travel up the well along with the HFF. Since the amount of gas increases as the water decreases, a flare is commonly set up.

Step 7 – Harvesting the Natural Gas:

After removing the HFF from the formation, the sand will remain in the shale to provide a pathway for the gas to flow into the wellbore to the surface.

Once at the surface, the gas is processed and delivered.

There is no set correlation between how many times a well may be fractured and its decline rate. For each well, a decision has to be made based on the specific geology. It is not uncommon for any given horizontally drilled well to undergo 60 to 150 fracture treatments.

4. Please provide a table or graph showing the

annual water use of:

a) a typical hydraulic fracturing operation:

ConocoPhillips was allowed to draw water from nine different surface water sources; however, only five sources were used. The total water use of the project was 105,127 cubic metres, which included water for an overland ice road, which was the largest water use, ice pads for the two wells drilled, water for the drilling operation and water for the hydraulic fracturing treatment of the two wells. The flowback fluids (produced water) totalled to 5,673.2 cubic metres. This water was hauled to treatment plants in British Columbia and Alberta.

b) Imperial Oil’s facilities in Norman Wells:

According to the water licence granted by the Sahtu Land and Water Board (SLWB) to Imperial Oil Inc. for its Norman Wells Proven Area, the operator is not allowed to exceed the total allowable water withdrawal limit of 3.500 million cubic metres per year and must not exceed the withdrawal rate of 16,000 cubic metres per day.

The annual water withdrawal rates for Imperial Oil’s Norman Wells Project from the Mackenzie River can be found in Imperial Oil’s annual water licence reports which are available on the SLWB’s public registry.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled “Annual Water Withdrawal Rates for Imperial Oil Norman Wells Project.”

c) The City of Yellowknife:

The City of Yellowknife’s water licence granted by the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board (MVLWB) allows for the use of up to 575,000 cubic metres of water per month. The City of Yellowknife must not exceed the total allowable annual water withdrawal limit of 3.600 million cubic metres.

The annual water withdrawal rates for the City of Yellowknife from the Yellowknife River can be found in the City of Yellowknife’s annual water licence reports, which are available on the MVLWB’s public registry.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled “Annual Water Withdrawal Rates for the City of Yellowknife.”

d) The Diavik Diamond Mine:

Diavik Diamond Mine’s (DDM) water licence granted by the Wek’eezhii Land and Water Board (WLWB) applies a phased approach to water withdrawal. Between the periods of November 1, 2008, to December 31, 2009, DDM was authorized to withdraw 1.750 million cubic metres of water annually.

Following January 1, 2010, DDM is authorized to withdraw up to 1.280 million cubic metres of water annually. In regards to the dewatering of the A21 pool water, DDM is authorized to withdraw up to 11.400 million cubic metres during this process. During in-lake dredging activities, DDM is allowed to withdraw up to 3.500 million cubic metres.

The annual water withdrawal rates for DDM from Lac du Gras can be found in Diavik’s annual water licence reports which are available on the WLWB’s public registry. The dike at A21 has not been constructed yet, and therefore there isn’t any water volume data reported.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled “Annual Water Withdrawal Rates for Diavik Diamond Mine.”

5. What is the Department of Industry, Tourism

and Investment doing to educate NWT residents about the technology used in hydraulic fracturing?

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers provided an overview of hydraulic fracturing practices and technology on a tour it participated in with the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment (ITI) in the Gwich’in communities of Fort McPherson, Tsiigehtchic, Aklavik and Inuvik in August 2014. ITI is also funding the Gwich’in Tribal Council to complete a project through the Aboriginal Capacity Building Fund to gather information on public perceptions and questions related to hydraulic fracturing in Gwich’in communities, with results expected by the end of May 2015.

The results can be used to identify public information and knowledge needs related to hydraulic fracturing.

Furthermore, ITI intends to build community awareness of hydraulic fracturing during community public engagement on the draft NWT Hydraulic Fracturing Filing Regulations from April to June 2015. ITI also intends to include hydraulic fracturing information in future oil and gas education and outreach activities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 29-17(5): Impacts And Benefits Of Mining
Returns to Written Questions

Tim Mercer Clerk Of The House

I have a Return to Written Question 29-17(5), asked by Mr. Yakeleya on March 11, 2015, regarding impacts and benefits of mining.

Mr. Yakeleya asked the following questions:

1. Which mining companies contribute to non-

profit organizations

in

the

Northwest

Territories, and how much do they contribute?

Mining companies generally have an interest in contributing to community and local non-governmental organizations and support of community-driven initiatives. The Mining Association of Canada, through its program entitled “Towards Sustainable Mining," provides companies with a set of tools and indicators to ensure that key mining risks are managed. Social investment contributions are also committed to by mining companies through participation and impact benefit agreements.

It is not possible to provide exact dollar figures for financial contributions and/or in-kind support for NGOs only because programs and events may involve several organizations, and reporting on community support varies by company. For example, companies may list organizations and programs supported, but not dollar figures for each contribution.

In the NWT for the fiscal year 2012-2013, a total of $23 million was contributed by the three producing diamond mines. This dollar figure includes contributions made to individual events, festivals, traditional activities, raffles, community organizations, schools and support provided under private agreements.

Additional information on the programs and organizations that have received funding from the diamond mines can be found on page 11 of the NWT and Nunavut Chamber of Mines' "Measuring Success 2014: NWT Diamond Mines Continue to Create Benefits" report.

Mining exploration companies also contribute to non-profit organizations by providing financial, in-kind and volunteer support. These contributions are often made on a case-by-case basis from companies headquartered in various jurisdictions; therefore, there is no readily available summary available to speak to total contributions.

2. How many NWT residents who work for mining

companies active in the NWT live in communities other than Yellowknife?

Statistics on workforce residency provided by mining companies generally differentiate between northern and southern workforce and seldom include community details in their reports. Exploration companies typically seek to hire NWT residents to support and lead field research programs; however, exploration companies are not required to report on workforce residency. The Government of the Northwest Territories does have access to workforce residency data through its socio-economic agreements.

Available numbers on workforce residency indicate that in 2013 a total of 642 person years were

contributed by NWT residents working at the Diavik Diamond Mine and Snap Lake Mine together.

Yellowknife residents provided 482.9 person years, and all other NWT communities provided 159.1 person years to both mines in 2013.

During the first half of 2014, Dominion Diamond Mines (2012) Inc. reported that Yellowknife

residents provided 260.05 person years, and the communities 77.2 person years for the Diavik Mine. These numbers do not include contractor employment, which may include staff hired from NWT communities other than Yellowknife.

The Ekati Mine does not report employment by community, and in its 2013 SEA report, Ekati reported that 59 percent of employees were northern based, and of those, 60 percent were northern Aboriginals and 40 percent were northern non-Aboriginal.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled "Workforce Residency at Diavik Diamond Mine and Snap Lake Mine (2013)."

3. How many lakes have been lost to diamond

mines and how much water was drained from NWT lakes to accommodate diamond mines?

There are three diamond mines that are currently operating in the NWT and one mine currently under construction. These are:

Ekati Mine: To date, open pit mining is underway at five out of a total of eight kimberlite pipes located under small lakes. Some underground mining is also underway. The Jay Pipe Project is currently in environmental assessment.

Diavik: To date, open pit and underground mining has occurred at two out of the three kimberlite pipes located in shallow, near shore areas of Lac de Gras. The last pit, referred to as A21, will be developed in the coming years.

Snap Lake Mine: Fully underground mining of one kimberlite dike beneath Snap Lake.

Gahcho Kue Mine: Currently under construction and will require dewatering of sections of Kennady Lake to access three kimberlite pipes.

Of the three operating diamond mines, only one mine, Ekati, has drained entire lakes in order to conduct mining operations. Diavik only dewatered near shore lake sections that were cut off by ring dikes.

In total, five small lakes and two sections of another lake have been drained, accounting for removal of approximately 21,105,882 cubic metres of water.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled "Water Volumes at Ekati and Diavik Diamond Mines."

4. How many fish were lost when these lakes were

drained, and what has been done to compensate for the loss of fish habitat?

The approval to conduct fish-out activities and drain lakes was granted by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, or DFO. These approvals were provided years before the recent changes to the Fisheries Act. DFO provided a Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction, or HADD, authorization to those developments that triggered a Fisheries Act Section 35 authorization. The authorizations provided approval to drain a lake but also required compensation to ensure that DFO's No Net Loss Policy was achieved. That meant that DFO collected money to alter or augment fish habitat in other areas to compensate for the loss of habitat from draining entire lakes to mine kimberlite pipes. DFO should be contacted if additional details are required about the HADD and DFO's fish habitat augmentation efforts.

Regarding the number of fish removed from the lakes prior to draining them, DFO required that a fish-out plan be submitted for approval. The detailed information is retained by DFO. Generally the development plans required that fish be removed from the lakes prior to draining. Fish were measured and catalogued for monitoring and research purposes. Many of these fish were provided to local communities as per agreements made at that time. In addition, in some instances efforts were made to move fish to other lakes in order to reduce the number of fish lost.

Again, DFO should be contacted to provide additional details for all water bodies where fish-out activities occurred at the diamond mines.

Later today, at the appropriate time, I will table a document entitled "Number of Large Bodied Fish Removed from Lakes at the Ekati Diamond Mine."

5. What is the impact of winter roads to the

diamond mines on caribou herds?

Studies from Alaska, Norway and other regions have shown that caribou and reindeer tend to avoid roads and transmission lines up to a distance of about four to five kilometres, although the effect depends on the level of traffic. Relatively narrow roads with little traffic may act as a partial barrier when newly built, but caribou will eventually cross the road and get used to crossing the road. Roads with greater levels of traffic, especially large trucks, are avoided more than roads with limited traffic. In Norway, roads that are side by side with transmission lines are avoided more than single roads and may act as more complete barriers to caribou movement. Roads can also enable greater levels of hunter harvest, if the road is through an area that is used heavily by caribou.

Winter roads to Gameti and Wekweeti made hunter access to Bathurst caribou by pickup truck fairly

easy up to 2010, even when the herd had declined to lower numbers. Areas accessible by truck can result in heavier harvests than areas accessible only by skidoo.

Satellite radio-collar locations of Bathurst caribou since 1996 have indicated that there have been generally few caribou wintering near the winter roads to the existing diamond mines at Ekati, Diavik and Snap Lake; however, distribution of Bathurst caribou and caribou from neighbouring herds varies from one winter to the next.

Nevertheless, caribou can also be affected by a wide variety of natural and induced factors that include insect harassment, disease, weather, climate change, predation, harvesting, increased energetic costs related to avoidance of industrial development, such as roads, mines, communities and cumulative effects.

Officials from the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment and the NWT diamond mining companies participate in the ENR-led Bathurst Caribou Management Plan, and also participated in the Bathurst/Bluenose-East Barren-ground Caribou Technical Working Group that was tasked with reviewing information about the two herds and drafting recommended conservation actions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return To Written Question 29-17(5): Impacts And Benefits Of Mining
Returns to Written Questions

The Speaker Jackie Jacobson

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Item 11, replies to opening address. Item 12, petitions. Item 13, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 14, tabling of documents. Mr. Beaulieu.

Tabled Document 235-17(5): Report On The Staff Retention Policy For 2011-2012 And 2012-2013 Tabled Document 236-17(5): Report On The Staff Retention Policy For 2013-2014 And 2014-2015
Tabling of Documents

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Further to my Return to Written Question 25-17(5), I wish to table the following two documents, entitled “Report on Staff Retention Policy for 2011-2012 and 2012-2013,” and “Report on Staff Retention Policy for 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.”

Tabled Document 235-17(5): Report On The Staff Retention Policy For 2011-2012 And 2012-2013 Tabled Document 236-17(5): Report On The Staff Retention Policy For 2013-2014 And 2014-2015
Tabling of Documents

The Speaker Jackie Jacobson

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Ramsay.

Tabled Document 237-17(5): City Of Yellowknife Energy Use Tabled Document 238-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For Imperial Oil Norman Wells Project Tabled Document 239-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For The City Of Yellowknife Tabled Document 240-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For D
Tabling of Documents

David Ramsay Kam Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Further to Return to Written Question 27-17(5), I wish to table the following four documents, entitled “City of Yellowknife Energy Use,” “Annual Water Withdrawal Rates for Imperial Oil – Norman Wells Project,” “Annual Withdrawal Rates for City of Yellowknife” and “Annual Water Withdrawal Rates for Diavik Diamond Mines.”

Also, further to my Return to Written Question 29-17(5), I wish to table the following three documents, entitled “Workforce Residency at Diavik Diamonds and Snap Lake Mines,” “Water Volumes Removed at Ekati and Diavik Diamond Mines” and “Number of Large Bodied Fish Removed from Lakes at the Ekati Diamond Mine.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Tabled Document 237-17(5): City Of Yellowknife Energy Use Tabled Document 238-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For Imperial Oil Norman Wells Project Tabled Document 239-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For The City Of Yellowknife Tabled Document 240-17(5): Annual Water Withdrawal Rates For D
Tabling of Documents

The Speaker Jackie Jacobson

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Dolynny.

Tabled Document 244-17(5): Robertson Report Link And A Review Of Electrical Generation, Transmission, Distribution And Regulation In The Northwest Territories
Tabling of Documents

Daryl Dolynny Range Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table a document that was actually buried in our legislative library and was actually never a tabled document of our House. It’s the Electrical Generation, Transmission, and Distribution in the Northwest Territories, A Design for Tomorrow, in December 28, 2000, referred to as the Robertson Report. Thank you.

Tabled Document 244-17(5): Robertson Report Link And A Review Of Electrical Generation, Transmission, Distribution And Regulation In The Northwest Territories
Tabling of Documents

The Speaker Jackie Jacobson

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Item 15, notices of motion. Mr. Blake.

Motion 43-17(5): Reappointment Of Information And Privacy Commissioner
Notices of Motion

Frederick Blake Jr. Mackenzie Delta

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Friday, May 29, 2015, I will move the following motion: Now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Kam Lake, that pursuant to Section 61 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, that Ms. Elaine Keenan Bengts be reappointed for a term of five years as Information and Privacy Commissioner;

And further, that the appointment be effective October 30, 2015.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Motion 43-17(5): Reappointment Of Information And Privacy Commissioner
Notices of Motion

The Speaker Jackie Jacobson

Thank you, Mr. Blake. Item 16, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 17, motions. Item 18, first reading of bills. Item 19, second reading of bills. Mr. Hawkins.