1. 1
1 File No. MA 005-12
2 THE MINING ACT
3 IN THE MATTER OF
4 Mining Claims P-4251521, 4251523, 4251524,
5 both inclusive, situate in the BMA 522 862 Area, 4251514
6 to 4251520, both inclusive, situate in the BMA 523 862
7 Area, 4250189, 4251434, 4251510 to 4251513, both
8 inclusive, 4254220, situate in the BMA 524 862 Area,
9 4248438, 4248439, 4251502 to 4251509, both inclusive,
10 situate in the BMA 525 862 Area, 4256490, situate in the
11 BMA 526 862 Area, situate in the Porcupine Mining
12 Division, TB-4251534 to 4251542, both inclusive, situate
13 in the BMA 521 863 (TB) Area, 4248592, 4251525, 4251527 to
14 4251533, both inclusive, situate in the BMA 522 863 (TB)
15 Area, 4251698 to 4251700, both inclusive, 4251881, 4252051
16 to 4252056, both inclusive, 4252058, situate in the Dusey
17 River Area (TB), 4251543 to 4251546, both inclusive,
18 situate in the Hale Lake Area, 4251688 to 4251697, both
19 inclusive, situate in the Kagiami Falls Area (TB), 4251656
20 to 4251658, both inclusive, 4251660 to 4251662, both
21 inclusive, situate in the Sherolock Lake Area, 4248432 to
22 4248434, both inclusive, 4252059 to 4252064, both
23 inclusive, situate in the Tanase Lake Area (TB), 4251547
24 to 4251550, both inclusive, 4251651 to 4251655, both
25 inclusive, situate in the Tillett Lake Area and 4251663,

2. 2
1 situate in the Venton Lake Area (TB) and 4251664 to
2 4251667, both inclusive, both inclusive, situate in the
3 Wowchuk Lake Area, situate in the Thunder Bay Mining
4 Division, recorded in the name of Canada Chrome
5 Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as the "Mining
6 Claims");
7 (Amended October 24, 2012)
8
9 AND IN THE MATTER OF
10 Mining Claims P-1192735, 1192740 and 1192743,
11 situate in the BMA 523 862 Area and 1192755, 1192756,
12 1192759, 1192769 and 1192772, situate in the BMA 524 862
13 Area, situate in the Porcupine Mining Division, recorded
14 in the name of Canada Chrome Corporation by transfer,
15 after the above-noted application was filed, on the 11th
16 day of April, 2012, (hereinafter referred to as the
17 "Transferred Mining Claims").
18 (Amended October 24, 2012)
19
20 AND IN THE MATTER OF
21 A referral by the Minister of Northern
22 Development and Mines to the tribunal pursuant to
23 subsection 51(4) of the Mining Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M. 14,
24 as amended, of an application under the Public Lands Act,
25 R.S.O. 1990, c P.43, as amended, (PLA) for disposition

3. 3
1 under the PLA of surface rights over portions of the
2 Mining Claims and the Transferred Mining Claims:
3
4
5 B E T W E E N:
6
7 2274659 ONTARIO INC.
8 Applicant
9 - and -
10
11 CANADA CHROME CORPORATION
12 Respondent
13
14
15 PURPOSE: Hearing on the Merits
16 HELD ON: Monday, February 11, 2013
17 HELD AT: Office of The Mining and Lands
18 Commission
19 700 Bay Street, 24th Floor
20 Toronto, Ontario
21
22 ----------------------------
23 PUBLIC SESSION
24 ----------------------------
25

4. 4
1 HELD BEFORE: Linda Kamerman - Chair
2 Mining and Lands Commissioner
3
4 Marianne Orr
5 Deputy Mining and Lands Commissioner
6
7 APPEARANCES:
8
9 Chris W. Sanderson, Q.C. For 2274659 Ontario Inc.
10 Toby Kruger
11 Marko Vesely
12
13 Neal J. Smitheman For Canada Chrome
14 Richard Butler Corporation
15 Kim Potter
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

5. 5
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
3 INDEX OF PROCEEDINGS: PAGE NO.
4
5 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SANDERSON:...................... 13
6 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SMITHEMAN:...................... 17
7 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SANDERSON:...................... 18
8 RULING:............................................ 22
9 LASZLO BODI: Sworn................................ 24
10 EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MR. BUTLER:................ 25
11 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. VESELY:................... 71
12 PAXTON HARTMANN: Affirmed......................... 84
13 EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MR. BUTLER:................ 84
14 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. VESELY:................... 113
15 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. BUTLER:...................... 149
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

6. 6
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
2 INDEX OF EXHIBITS
3 PAGE NO.
4 EXHIBIT NO. 17: Colour map, entitled "Alignment A 31
5 Preliminary Geological Plan and
6 Profile-I-02, Canada Chrome Preliminary
7 Infrastructure Corridor Feasibility Study
8 Northwest Ontario."
9
10 EXHIBIT NO. 18: Extract of Appendix 12 from the 66
11 Hartmann affidavit.
12
13 EXHIBIT NO. 19: Excerpt from CD-ROM at tab M of 74
14 Mr. Lavigne's affidavit, "Geology and
15 Terrain Unit Geotechnical Data Report."
16
17 EXHIBIT NO. 20: Cerlox-bound document containing 75
18 portions of Mr. Hartmann's affidavit,
19 Appendixes 9, 10, 11 and 12.
20
21 EXHIBIT NO. 21(a): Updated page 12 of 25 of 98
22 Paxton Hartmann's affidavit.
23
24
25

7. 7
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
2 INDEX OF EXHIBITS
3 PAGE NO.
4 EXHIBIT NO. 21(b): Updated page 13 of 25 of 98
5 Paxton Hartmann's affidavit.
6
7 EXHIBIT NO. 21(c): Updated page 19 of 25 of 98
8 Paxton Hartmann's affidavit.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

8. 8
1 --- Upon commencing at 10:01 a.m.
2 CHAIR: Just a couple of things before we
3 proceed this morning. The first is that Ms. Orr and I
4 have had occasion to discuss our preferences on the
5 hearing of final submissions, and we prefer to hear them
6 in person. We prefer to go straight through and do what
7 we can through the end of this week.
8 One other matter that I'll raise, and I
9 haven't heard from Mr. Smitheman on this, or the Minister
10 or the Surveyor General, but in 1906, the Mining Act
11 created the mining commissioner as an officer of the High
12 Court and there were clear injunctive powers in that
13 particular rendition of the Mining Act, which were removed
14 in 1908, so I just put it to you that, you know, we do
15 wonder about whether or not we're the proper forum for the
16 particular motion, but that's set for Wednesday, so I
17 won't say more than that.
18 MR. SMITHEMAN: I might just say something
19 about that. I think we should deal with that point
20 because we're proceeding with the hearing.
21 CHAIR: Yes.
22 MR. SMITHEMAN: We'll be making submissions on
23 Wednesday.
24 CHAIR: Yes.
25 MR. SMITHEMAN: And I don't want to, with

9. 9
1 respect, take up these commissioners' time, this
2 Tribunal's time with this application for an injunction,
3 as it were, and an application for prohibition. I think
4 we should deal with that point right now because we're
5 taking the position that the motion for an injunction, as
6 it were, should not proceed on Wednesday for a number of
7 reasons.
8 And one is that the commissioners do not have
9 the jurisdiction for starters. Another is we don't even
10 know who the parties are to this injunction. It's for an
11 order of prohibition against the Surveyor General.
12 There's a request for an injunction against MNR.
13 There's -- I think there's another one for an injunction
14 to enjoin the Mining Recorder, and nothing at all to do
15 with the parties to this proceeding. That's a separate
16 and distinct proceeding, and it may impinge upon, from
17 Cliffs' point of view, what this proceeding is all about,
18 but that's something separate and apart, and we should not
19 even be considering it and we shouldn't be complicating
20 the matter that's rightly before the commissioners at this
21 stage.
22 So that's my position on this return motion on
23 Wednesday, because I don't see -- the way I envision this
24 unfolding is that we'll complete evidence by I should
25 think tomorrow, and then I would suspect -- and what I

10. 10
1 would expect to happen is then we'll commence submissions
2 on Wednesday and Thursday, and hopefully, that should be
3 enough to end it. If not, we've got another day in March
4 to finish it, but if we have to deal with this injunction
5 and make a determination about how to proceed with this
6 injunction at that time, I think it's something we should
7 deal with right away. Thank you.
8 MR. SANDERSON: Just briefly, Madam
9 Commissioner. My friend is free to make all those
10 arguments and no doubt will on Wednesday. This is
11 ancillary relief that I just wanted to give the parties
12 notice that we would be seeking in final argument.
13 The reason I made it returnable Wednesday was,
14 as of Friday, it was still possible that we would have
15 arguments split up, and so I just wanted to get it in
16 place early, but given the commissioners' preference to
17 hear final argument Wednesday, that's fine. We'll just
18 deal with that when we come to the relief sought. My
19 friend will make his submissions about whether that's
20 appropriate and you'll decide. I don't expect it to add
21 more than 10 minutes to my submissions on the merit.
22 CHAIR: Mr. Smitheman, you mentioned --
23 MR. SMITHEMAN: But there's a motion. There's
24 a motion, and they're relying on certain evidence and
25 they've named the respondents, and on the motion, we have

11. 11
1 a right not only to make submissions, but to submit not
2 only argument, but in addition, to provide evidence on the
3 motion.
4 So we need to deal with that, because this --
5 what my friends are trying to do -- they can't just make
6 argument on this. What they're trying to do, effectively,
7 is stop the respondents from bringing the claims to lease.
8 That's what they're trying to do. In the middle of this
9 hearing, that's what they're attempting to do, and they've
10 known about it. The respondent put -- in Mr. Smeenk's
11 affidavit, it was right in there that the claims were
12 going to lease. This is no surprise.
13 So suddenly, at this stage, what we're finding
14 is this Notice of Motion for injunctive relief, and if
15 that's what we're going to do, then I request an
16 adjournment to deal with this Notice of Motion right now
17 so I can respond to it, provide affidavit evidence.
18 It doesn't lie in my friend's mouth to say,
19 "Well, we'll just deal with this in our submissions."
20 This is a Notice of Motion for an injunction. The proper
21 parties aren't even -- I don't even know if they've been
22 served. They're trying to enjoin the Surveyor General
23 from -- and they're trying to enjoin the, I'm sorry,
24 prohibit the Surveyor General, enjoin the Mining Recorder
25 from allowing our claims to go to lease, and you can't

12. 12
1 just tag this on to the application.
2 If that's what they want to do, then we need
3 time to respond to this, and if it's all part and parcel
4 of this, either it's not part of this application and
5 we're not dealing with it at all, or if it is, then we
6 need time to respond and file materials and cross-examine.
7 Thank you.
8 MS. ORR: Mr. Sanderson, Mr. Smitheman has
9 made some very good points and that is with respect to the
10 fact that the bodies or people or parties that are named
11 in that motion include three entities that are not here as
12 parties. How would you propose bringing them in at this
13 point, and why should this process be stopped in order to
14 take on this particular motion which really seems to be a
15 separate matter apart from what we're dealing with?
16 First of all, have these other bodies been
17 served with this notice?
18 MR. SANDERSON: At this moment, two of three
19 have, Commissioner.
20 MS. ORR: Which two?
21 MR. SANDERSON: On Friday, we provided notice
22 to counsel for MNR, and MNR has -- actually, I misspoke.
23 One has. The Surveyor General is ultimately
24 responsible -- MNR is ultimately responsible for this --
25 MS. ORR: Well, the MNR is not here as a

13. 13
1 party, per se.
2 MR. SANDERSON: No, I accept that.
3 MS. ORR: So that would require another
4 additional --
5 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SANDERSON:
6 Let me explain. Let me explain how I see this
7 happening and I may be right, I may be wrong, but I don't
8 think it raises the complexities that Mr. Smitheman is
9 suggesting it does.
10 My submission on Wednesday would be that to
11 now proceed to lease would be an abuse of your process,
12 having listened to this hearing for 18 months, however
13 it's been. So I will be grounding my submissions in this
14 Commission's ability to protect its own processes from
15 abuse. My friend will have an opportunity to respond.
16 That will be part of the relief we seek, not on the basis
17 of any new evidence at all, but rather, on the evidence in
18 this proceeding.
19 So my submissions will be entirely based on
20 the record before you. My friend will have the
21 opportunity to make whatever submissions he wants on the
22 record before you. I've not suggested filing any new
23 evidence. Simply what's already before you in the
24 substance and main part of this proceeding.
25 MS. ORR: Well, Mr. Sanderson, why was this

14. 14
1 only brought now? As Mr. Smitheman has pointed out, this
2 material, this information was in Mr. Smeenk's affidavit
3 which has been sitting out there for quite some time now.
4 Why bring it during the middle of a hearing?
5 MR. SANDERSON: Because until Mr. Smeenk said
6 on the record that the requisite steps for taking the
7 property to lease had been complete, with the exception of
8 an action by, or step to be taken by the Surveyor General,
9 which he was pressing to have taken, there was not
10 material before this Tribunal that formed the basis for
11 the application we bring.
12 It's true that we were aware of those facts as
13 of the cross-examination of Mr. Smeenk which was in
14 January, but it wasn't -- I'm sorry, December, but it
15 wasn't yet before the commissioners, and we wanted to make
16 sure that you had notice and Mr. Smitheman had notice that
17 we were going to be seeking this as final relief, as part
18 of our final relief. That's why the motion on Friday, but
19 the key piece of evidence on the record here for you came
20 out with the cross-examination of Mr. Smeenk. He was the
21 one who advised you that all the steps were in place, and
22 we need that, it will be my submission, we need to have
23 you accept his evidence have that effect in order to
24 succeed on this application. If we're still -- if we were
25 not yet at that stage, we wouldn't be bringing this

15. 15
1 application.
2 MS. ORR: Well, why weren't these other
3 parties notified at that time as well?
4 MR. SANDERSON: I'm sorry?
5 MS. ORR: The application for -- if you were
6 aware, Mr. Sanderson, that the application for a lease was
7 being pursued by Canada Chrome back in December at least,
8 as I believe that the affidavits were actually filed
9 sometime before then --
10 MR. SANDERSON: The affidavits were. This is
11 the cross.
12 MS. ORR: Since you're aware of that
13 information at least in December, I'd like to know what
14 effort's been made to notify the Surveyor General and the
15 Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, and the
16 effective recorder, Mining Recorder, at that time to put
17 them on notice that, "Wait a minute. We can't have you
18 processing the lease application because we've got
19 something going in front of the Commissioner."
20 MR. SANDERSON: Right. I don't want to give
21 evidence. I'm not going to, but with respect, I think
22 that's a different question than whether they were given
23 notice of this motion. In other words, to respond to your
24 question, I would have to --
25 MS. ORR: Well, it gets in part to my asking:

16. 16
1 Why are you bringing this now?
2 MR. SANDERSON: Because it's part of the final
3 relief we seek to obtain from you in this proceeding.
4 It's a temporary relief.
5 If the commissioners were able to issue a
6 decision immediately, we wouldn't be seeking this. This
7 is interim relief respecting the fact that we expect the
8 commissioners at the end of argument will need time in
9 order to issue a decision, and it is in anticipation of
10 that, given the sense of urgency that Mr. Smeenk's
11 testimony brings to the situation, that guides us to say,
12 well, during that period, to have this entire process
13 rendered moot, because now it's gone to lease and there is
14 no longer a conflict between a mining claimant and Cliffs,
15 rather, there's a conflict that there is a lease granted
16 of the surface, fundamentally rendering this entire
17 process academic would be with respect to travel.
18 And so it's to prevent the possibility of that
19 happening that this application is an appropriate piece of
20 relief to seek pending your decision. It will be in place
21 only for so long as it takes the commissioners to actually
22 issue an order coming out of this proceeding, and if you
23 look at the motion, it's expressed that way.
24 CHAIR: Mr. Smitheman.
25 MS. ORR: Mr. Smitheman.

17. 17
1 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SMITHEMAN:
2 What this is really all about is an attempt to
3 enjoin the respondent, without saying so, without naming
4 the respondent, because what this Notice of Motion says is
5 that if the respondent tries to bring its claims to lease,
6 it asks that the commissioners prohibit the Surveyor
7 General from doing that. It asks that the commissioners
8 enjoin the Mining Recorder from recording the leases, and
9 the MNDM from allowing any claims to be taken to lease
10 pursuant to section 181 and 184 of the Mining Act.
11 Aside from the jurisdictional questions, this
12 is really a not-very-well disguised attempt to get a qui
13 timet injunction against the respondent; namely, to stop
14 the respondent from attempting to bring its claims to
15 lease. That is improper, and in any event, the respondent
16 needs to respond to this Notice of Motion for an
17 injunction, and it cannot and should not be done at this
18 time in this hearing.
19 MS. ORR: So Mr. Smitheman, are you --
20 MR. SMITHEMAN: It's an ambush.
21 MS. ORR: Are you calling upon the Tribunal to
22 not hear this motion, even without you submitting a
23 response?
24 MR. SMITHEMAN: I'm saying that -- here's what
25 I'm requesting then, to put it simply:

18. 18
1 Either this Notice of Motion gets struck and
2 we continue with the hearing, or we adjourn to deal with
3 this Notice of Motion so that we can properly respond.
4 The other parties who have been named can become parties
5 to the motion, they can file materials, evidence, and deal
6 with this issue because I expect that these are issues
7 that are of grave concern to the jurisdiction of the three
8 additional parties.
9 MS. ORR: And --
10 MR. SMITHEMAN: We can't just have this
11 hanging out there. Sorry, go ahead.
12 MS. ORR: And what would be the basis for the
13 notice getting struck at this point?
14 MR. SMITHEMAN: There's no jurisdiction and
15 it's inappropriate at this time. My friend just can't tag
16 this along as part of his submissions and relief that he
17 requests by simply filing a Notice of Motion to the
18 respondent only. I mean, it's just -- it's simply
19 improper, and speaking of abuse, this is a classic abuse
20 of process, in my respectful submission.
21 MS. ORR: Thank you.
22 MR. SMITHEMAN: So we want an adjournment.
23 SUBMISSIONS BY MR. SANDERSON:
24 Let me just speak to the last point, just the
25 adjournment issue and the process issue.

19. 19
1 Without -- you know, I've said what I've said
2 and I think we can proceed in the way that I've mentioned,
3 but let me just speak to one point.
4 If there were -- and the commissioners hear
5 any merit to the notion that the respondents need time to
6 deal with this, then there's a simple solution to that,
7 and if they don't want to hear it as part of the principal
8 argument, we can finish the argument this week, just the
9 way that Mr. Smitheman's suggesting we probably could, and
10 if the commissioners want to hear the motion, then that
11 can be done on the March 12th date we already have
12 reserved, and that will give my friend lots of time.
13 I maintain the motion is an appropriate relief
14 to seek in the main argument. It's based on the record
15 before you. If you should be persuaded otherwise, the
16 simple thing is all right, well, then let's have the
17 argument on the record before you, on everything else and
18 we'll use the March 12th date to resolve this issue.
19 MS. ORR: Mr. Sanderson, I doubt that Mr.
20 Smitheman's client would be the only party that the
21 Tribunal would like to hear from with respect to this
22 motion.
23 MR. SANDERSON: Well, and so that gives us
24 until March 12 if that were the case to sort out --
25 MS. ORR: We don't know whether or not all

20. 20
1 those parties would be available on March 12 for that
2 particular -- for this motion.
3 MR. SANDERSON: Well, that's a challenge I
4 guess that I'll face, but my expectation is that those
5 parties may very well not see the need to appear, but I'm
6 not going to -- I'm not going to --
7 MS. ORR: Don't know.
8 MR. SANDERSON: -- commit to that yet now. I
9 will say this, though, that from my perspective, this is
10 similar to a situation where you're demanding documents
11 from a third party. They may have the right to be heard.
12 They're not a party in the proceeding, but if you're
13 seeking those documents from them, and the commissioners
14 are considering whether to issue an order to that third
15 party for that effect, then they do have standing to come
16 to speak to that motion, I quite accept, which is why I'm
17 trying to get in touch with them.
18 But I can report back by Wednesday morning as
19 to whether the proposal I just made is -- will accommodate
20 them. I would be surprised, frankly, if that were the
21 problem, given that they are coming to this merely with
22 counsel and they have a month's notice. I'm sure there
23 are counsel who can appear by then on their behalf on
24 March the 12th.
25 MS. ORR: I'm sorry, I didn't hear the last

21. 21
1 part of --
2 MR. SANDERSON: Well, it just seems to me that
3 if it's for this one narrow issue, a motion a month from
4 now, it seems unlikely that that will pose an obstacle to
5 their presence that's insurmountable. In other words,
6 there's no counsel engaged on this already, so they have a
7 month to determine their position and appear.
8 MS. ORR: Well, be that as it may, I think
9 that the Tribunal will be interested in hearing from those
10 parties at the very least, those entities at the very
11 least, so that's going to have to be a matter that will be
12 waiting out there in the ether.
13 I think, in the meantime, we will take a break
14 and determine how to deal with this particular matter.
15 MR. SMITHEMAN: My position, just so I make it
16 clear, is that that's not the way it works. We have --
17 they're asking for, essentially, extraordinary remedies
18 against three parties. Those parties may want to file
19 materials, make submissions. We don't know if that can be
20 done on the 12th. That is not a solution. That's why I'm
21 taking the position that my friend either withdraw this
22 completely or the respondents get an adjournment. Thank
23 you.
24 MS. ORR: Thank you.
25 MR. SMITHEMAN: With costs.

22. 22
1 --- Recess at 10:22 a.m.
2 --- Upon resuming at 10:27 a.m.
3 RULING:
4 MS. ORR: With respect to this Notice of
5 Motion and the arguments that have been made this morning,
6 the Tribunal agrees with Mr. Smitheman, and as a result,
7 the motion, Notice of Motion is struck and we are going to
8 be proceeding with the hearing today. Thank you.
9 Who is our first -- the first order of
10 business is Mr. Tattersall?
11 MR. SANDERSON: Yes, I hope so. We have Mr.
12 Tattersall here this morning, Commissioner. You'll recall
13 that I guess it was on Thursday morning, you ruled that
14 Mr. Tattersall should appear to listen to questions, or
15 sorry, just to quote you from page 74, line 18 of the
16 transcript: "We're prepared to listen to questions being
17 asked of Mr. Tattersall on that excerpt." That was the in
18 camera or the excerpt that was discussed on the voir dire
19 with respect to that excerpt.
20 So as I understand this morning, we're going
21 to produce Mr. Tattersall in camera for the purposes of
22 speaking to the excerpt only.
23 MS. ORR: All right.
24 MR. SANDERSON: And Mr. Tattersall is here for
25 that purpose.

23. 23
1 MS. ORR: Having said that, we will be
2 clearing the room, those not parties to the action, to the
3 matter. Mr. Tattersall, who is called already, please
4 take your place there in the box.
5 MR. SMITHEMAN: Does that order extend to Mr.
6 Smeenk as well as it did the other day?
7 MS. ORR: Well, I think at the time, we
8 discussed the fact that it's -- just give us a minute.
9 MR. SMITHEMAN: Sure. Sorry.
10 --- In camera proceedings in separate volume.
11 --- Recess at 11:33 a.m.
12 --- Upon resuming at 11:53 a.m.
13 MR. SMITHEMAN: Quick point of clarification:
14 Notwithstanding the sign, I'm told that we can have coffee
15 in here; is that correct?
16 CHAIR: I think it may be a necessity. Those
17 signs were put up prior to my having taken over 20 years
18 ago, and I've never -- I don't drink coffee, so I haven't
19 paid them much mind, but by all means, drink coffee.
20 MR. SMITHEMAN: Thank you.
21 CHAIR: Or power drinks, if you need.
22 MR. SMITHEMAN: Gin.
23 CHAIR: Well, we'll draw the line.
24 MS. ORR: Save that for when you get home.
25 CHAIR: I had a case in Kirkland Lake at the

24. 24
1 legion, where I always hear cases in Kirkland Lake, and a
2 representative for one of the parties asked me if he could
3 smoke since it was the legion, and it was before you could
4 not smoke indoors, and I said, "No, and you can't have a
5 pitcher of beer either just because it's the legion." So
6 we'll hold to those rules.
7 MR. VESELY: One other housekeeping matter:
8 We thought it helpful to note for the record that we are
9 no longer in camera and that the public is back in.
10 CHAIR: Okay. Certainly. Thank you. Thank
11 you very much, Mr. Vesely. Mr. Butler, you have a witness
12 for us.
13 MR. BUTLER: Yes. Prior to our morning break,
14 you'd identified Paxton Hartmann. In fact, we're going to
15 begin with Mr. Laszlo Bodi, please.
16 CHAIR: Okay. My apologies.
17 LASZLO BODI: Sworn.
18 THE WITNESS: Do I stand or...?
19 CHAIR: You can sit. If you require water,
20 hopefully --
21 THE WITNESS: No.
22 CHAIR: You're okay?
23 MR. BUTLER: Madam Commissioners, during Mr.
24 Bodi's testimony, I'll be referring to the affidavit of
25 Paxton Hartmann, and the exhibits contained thereto. That

25. 25
1 is 8(a) of the commissioners' list.
2 CHAIR: Thank you.
3 MR. BUTLER: And you may have noticed that
4 some of the figures in that report are a titch small and
5 I'll be providing you with larger exhibits, but I'll
6 introduce those as I come to them.
7 CHAIR: Thank you. I was going to comment on
8 that.
9 MR. BUTLER: There's a lot of information
10 there. We'll try and get through it.
11 MS. ORR: I think your exhibit number should
12 be 9(a), should it not, Mr. Butler?
13 MR. BUTLER: Is that 9(a)? Yes. That is
14 correct. Thank you.
15 CHAIR: Whenever you're ready.
16 MR. BUTLER: Thank you.
17 EXAMINATION IN-CHIEF BY MR. BUTLER:
18 Q. Mr. Bodi, could you just please state your
19 full name for the record again?
20 A. My name is Laszlo Bodi.
21 Q. And do try to keep your voice up as much
22 as possible.
23 Mr. Bodi, what I'd like to do is just take you
24 through your CV to begin. It's located at tab A of the
25 affidavit of Paxton Hartmann. It's the fifth page in.

26. 26
1 There is actually two CVs there, both Mr. Hartmann's and
2 Mr. Bodi's.
3 So, Mr. Bodi, you have an M. Sc. in civil
4 engineering from Budapest University; is that correct?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Could you tell us what your area of
7 expertise is?
8 A. My masters degree is road --
9 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry, your masters
10 degree...?
11 THE WITNESS: Road, railway, and geotechnical
12 engineering.
13 BY MR. BUTLER:
14 Q. Do you have other areas of expertise as
15 well?
16 A. I spend my entire life on these things.
17 Q. Okay. Could you give us -- who is your
18 present employer?
19 A. Tetra Tech.
20 Q. And prior to Tetra Tech, where were you
21 employed?
22 A. Immediately prior to that, I was lecturing
23 in Abu Dhabi in Dubai, and prior to that, I lived in
24 Sudbury and I was working for Trow Consulting Engineers,
25 T-R-O-W, and I was working as a geotechnical engineer,

27. 27
1 senior geotechnical engineer in Sudbury serving in
2 northern Ontario.
3 Q. And are you a member of the Professional
4 Engineers of Ontario?
5 A. I am. Yes, I am.
6 Q. With respect to a project of this nature,
7 you mentioned your work in northern Ontario. Have you
8 ever been involved in other projects involving road or
9 rail in northern climates?
10 A. In northern Ontario.
11 Q. Could you give us a couple of examples,
12 please?
13 A. We are working on the Sudbury bypass. I
14 was involved in Muskoka Route 34, road construction. This
15 is near Parry Sound, and would involve some testing
16 process in a few roads in Sudbury area, Sudbury, Sault
17 Ste. Marie area.
18 MR. BUTLER: Madam Commissioners, based on Mr.
19 Bodi's experience, we tender him as an expert witness in
20 the area of geotechnical engineering.
21 MR. VESELY: We have no objection to his
22 qualifications.
23 CHAIR: Thank you, Mr. Vesely. So recognized.
24 MR. BUTLER: Thank you.
25 BY MR. BUTLER:

28. 28
1 Q. So what I'd like to do now is take you to
2 tab B of the affidavit of Paxton Hartmann. This is, in
3 fact, the Material Availability Assessment Report. Now,
4 Mr. Bodi, did you draft this report?
5 A. No.
6 Q. And do you know who did?
7 A. According to my information, that was
8 Paxton.
9 Q. Okay, but let's talk about how you
10 contributed to this project. Could you give us a brief
11 review of the work that you undertook as part of this
12 assessment?
13 A. I understood that the project involves the
14 evaluation of certain components for road and railway, the
15 construction or design, and I was involved in the
16 geotechnical component of the project.
17 These infrastructure components must be built
18 over a certain distance in the north, and I was involved
19 to analyze the available data that was available for
20 geotechnical purpose.
21 Q. And let me stop you there. What was that
22 available data, in what form?
23 A. I was given a report prepared by Golder
24 Associates, and in that report, I was given information
25 about the soils in the infrastructure corridor, and soil

29. 29
1 profiles marking all the soil conditions around the
2 proposed infrastructure corridor.
3 MR. BUTLER: And if I could just pause there
4 for one moment, Madam Commissioners, the Golder report
5 identified by Mr. Bodi is appended to the affidavit of
6 Maurice Lavigne as a CD. It is a very, very large
7 document, so we've provided it in CD form, but that's the
8 information and data that Mr. Bodi is referring to.
9 MS. ORR: So this is the report that is
10 produced for Canada Chrome?
11 MR. BUTLER: That is correct.
12 MS. ORR: From Golder.
13 MR. BUTLER: That is correct.
14 MS. ORR: Thank you.
15 CHAIR: Golder north as opposed to Golder
16 south, or did we have two Golders?
17 MR. BUTLER: Here we go. Absolutely. There
18 was -- there is Golder for Canada Chrome, and that is this
19 report.
20 CHAIR: Okay.
21 MR. BUTLER: Let's leave the north and south
22 out because I think that will actually add a wrinkle that
23 no one will particularly appreciate.
24 CHAIR: Okay.
25 MR. BUTLER: So thank you.

30. 30
1 BY MR. BUTLER:
2 Q. You mentioned the soil profiles that
3 Golder provided. I have -- these are contained in the
4 affidavit of Maurice Lavigne, and they were also provided
5 as part of the appendices to the report that we're now
6 turned to, but I thought I would print them out in larger
7 size. I don't think I need to have them noted as an
8 exhibit because they are already contained in affidavit
9 materials, but I just thought it would be of assistance to
10 see these in a larger size for the commissioners.
11 MS. ORR: So could you identify specifically,
12 Mr. Butler, where these would be found in the Lavigne
13 affidavit?
14 MR. BUTLER: They are in the CD.
15 MS. ORR: Oh, they are --
16 MR. BUTLER: In the DVD.
17 MS. ORR: -- within the body of the CD itself.
18 MR. BUTLER: That's correct. As well, in a
19 slightly more accessible location, with the expert report
20 that is in the affidavit of Mr. Paxton Hartmann we also
21 provided a CD, because there was a large number of
22 appendices and these are also contained in that appendices
23 as Appendix 14.
24 MS. ORR: Well, I think that because the CD
25 contents are not visible right now, we should make this a

31. 31
1 separate affidavit, sorry, a separate exhibit.
2 MR. BUTLER: I'm happy to do that if that's of
3 assistance.
4 CHAIR: No objections? We're at 17. Just
5 going to read off Exhibit 17: "Alignment A Preliminary
6 Geological Plan and Profile-I-02, Canada Chrome
7 Preliminary Infrastructure Corridor Feasibility Study
8 Northwest Ontario." Thank you.
9 EXHIBIT NO. 17: Colour map, entitled
10 "Alignment A Preliminary Geological Plan and Profile-I-02,
11 Canada Chrome Preliminary Infrastructure Corridor
12 Feasibility Study Northwest Ontario."
13 MR. BUTLER: Thank you.
14 BY MR. BUTLER:
15 Q. Mr. Bodi, could you just explain for the
16 commissioners what we see in the exhibit before us, and
17 then we'll move on to how it was used, but just a brief
18 explanation of what we see here would be helpful.
19 A. There are two components on the drawing.
20 The top is the site plan. This is the horizontal
21 alignment for the proposed infrastructure corridor, and
22 the one at the bottom, this is a vertical cross-section of
23 the alignment. This is indicating the soil profile along
24 the centreline of the proposed road and railway.
25 Q. Great. Please have a seat. Now, could

32. 32
1 you tell us what information you used from that Golder
2 profile?
3 A. I used the second one, the bottom part one
4 that indicates the soil condition along the alignment. If
5 we look at the profile, Golder went to the site and they
6 had a large number of boreholes along the alignment. They
7 investigated the soil condition along the alignment, and
8 based on their field work and lab results, they created
9 the soil profile from the start of the corridor to the
10 end, 330 kilometres, and this particular one is the first
11 page out of the section, and this shows the soil profile
12 from the start, from 0 to 370, 3.7-kilometre section.
13 Q. Now, just before we go on to that data, it
14 might be of some assistance to the commissioners to know a
15 little bit about the geology and the soils in that area.
16 Could you just give us a brief description of the geology
17 of the area over which the corridor passes?
18 A. The corridor belongs to northern Ontario
19 and this part of Ontario is a very large wetland. The
20 area is mostly covered with swamp, with peat, small lakes,
21 and the soil condition, the soil, all the soils that you
22 can find at this part of the world is a result of the
23 glacial action in the past. The ice was the one that
24 mixed all different types of soils into certain soils.
25 Should I go into depth to explain what do I

33. 33
1 mean when I say "soil" or I can skip that?
2 MS. ORR: Please.
3 CHAIR: That would be very useful.
4 THE WITNESS: Because when you have to explain
5 the geology for an area, that we always have to split the
6 rock, the underlying solid rock, and whatever on the top
7 of the rock is what we call soils, because from geology,
8 when you had the solid rock at any part of the globe, with
9 time, the surface is weathering, is breaking up into
10 smaller pieces, and once the solid rock is breaking up
11 into smaller parts, smaller particles, these smaller
12 particles that they do not stick together, these are the
13 ones that we call soils.
14 And around the world, we have six different
15 types of soils based on the -- whatever the representative
16 size of individual grains are. Every -- the soils in the
17 rock, the solid rock is one rock mass, is completely
18 solid, solidified from the magma or solidified from
19 certain soils in some areas.
20 Once the rock is breaking up into soils, then
21 there are different agents that are sorting these
22 different types of soils. Again, we have the six -- out
23 of the six soils, the most widely known, the largest one
24 is the boulder. If you imagine, let's say a size of the
25 watermelon, anything that is bigger than the 200

34. 34
1 millimetre, that is a boulder, what -- for the general
2 public is not really soil, but for the engineers is soil
3 already because is not solid rock.
4 When that watermelon breaks up in smaller
5 pieces and it becomes the size of an orange, then we call
6 it a cobble, C-O-B-B-L-E, and these are the two largest
7 soils. Usually, they are -- because they are too large,
8 they cannot travel too far from the original.
9 Let's say that just if you imagine a mountain
10 and the rock is breaking up on the surface, first the
11 large pieces are dislocated from the surface of the
12 mountain and they usually stay there because no wind, no
13 water can move these large because they are heavy, and
14 once they are breaking up into even smaller pieces, once
15 the size of one grain becomes smaller than 60 millimetre,
16 about that much, then we call it gravel.
17 MS. ORR: Sorry, your -- what would, if you're
18 sticking with oranges --
19 THE WITNESS: Okay. Let's make it a --
20 MS. ORR: -- what would that size be that you
21 just described?
22 THE WITNESS: Let's call it a lime, a nice
23 green lime. That's approximately 60 millimetre.
24 MS. ORR: What did you call that lime again?
25 THE WITNESS: Gravel. G-R-A. That's the

35. 35
1 gravel. This is the third in the road from boulder,
2 cobble. The gravel is the third type of soil which is
3 most of the time -- when we are talking about soil,
4 usually we don't deal with the cobbles and the boulders
5 because these are too big for the general engineering
6 purpose. We often use them for shore protection at the
7 seashore against wave action and so on, or rip-rap to
8 protect --
9 THE REPORTER: Or...?
10 THE WITNESS: Rip-rap, R-I-P, dash, R-A-P.
11 Rip-rap. These are a mass of cobbles and boulders we use
12 against wave action, and river banks to stabilize river
13 banks and so on. So these are -- but these are not really
14 used for other purposes, major engineering purposes like
15 making concrete or using fill under foundation or behind
16 retaining wall.
17 From 60 millimetre, if you go to 2
18 millimetres, the size of 2 millimetre, I can just show it,
19 2 millimetre is a poppy seed maybe. Maybe if you glue two
20 poppy seeds together, maybe you have that. 2 millimetre.
21 MS. ORR: Thank you. That's very descriptive.
22 THE WITNESS: I was lecturing for so many
23 years, I had to come up with some ideas for students.
24 So this is the important thing, but this is
25 the borderline between sand and gravel. Once the

36. 36
1 individual grain is smaller than 2 millimetres, then it's
2 sand, and it goes all the way to 0.06 millimetre, which is
3 exactly the dust, because you can distinct the individual
4 grains. When you see a sand, when you have sand in your
5 hand, you can see the individual grains because these are
6 larger than 0.06 millimetre, and when smaller than that,
7 then we call it silt.
8 The silt is the one, if you would have -- you
9 call it dust in a container, then it's the -- is the same
10 as the silt, the silt particles. These are so small, they
11 can be picked up by wind or by water, and transported
12 further along the path.
13 And the last one, the smallest soil is the
14 clay, the clay, C-L-A-Y. Clay is the smallest one. When
15 the individual particles are smaller than 0.002
16 millimetre, that is the soil that is we call clay, and the
17 major difference between the clay, not only that this is
18 the smallest one, but those particles are flat like a
19 coin. All the others are rounded, but the clay, the clay
20 are flakey, and that's the reason that that part of the
21 world up there in the north, most of the soils are, the
22 last two, silts and --
23 THE REPORTER: Most of the soils are...?
24 THE WITNESS: Most of the soils up in the
25 north are silt and clays because they were transported to

37. 37
1 that area by the water.
2 About millions, we are talking of millions of
3 years, so then the soil was created at that part, and when
4 the ice, during the ice ages, we had I think four or five
5 really significant ice ages, when the ice was advancing
6 from the north, from the North Pole, and everything was
7 freezing, freezing, the ice was growing and growing, and
8 the south end of the ice sheet was a little bit further
9 south from the U.S./Canada border. At the last point was
10 about more than 10,000 years ago.
11 And when the ice came, whatever soil was
12 there, all the soils what we have discussed, the different
13 factions, the ice mixed everything together, so when you
14 had the mix of soils, which included silt, clay, sand,
15 gravel, cobbles, boulders, everything, everything was
16 worked together by the ice.
17 THE REPORTER: Everything was...?
18 THE WITNESS: Worked. Worked together, pushed
19 together, mixed together, and then there is a type of --
20 it's not the soils, the mix of soils, and they gave a
21 different name, and the name of that mix of soils is till,
22 T-I-L-L, which is they use as a name in soil mechanics,
23 geotechnical engineering. It's not the name of the soil,
24 but is a name of a mix of soils that was created by the
25 advancing ice sheet.

38. 38
1 So most of the soils, because of this ice
2 action during the glaciation, the ice, almost the entire
3 north was -- anything that is soil above the solid rock,
4 it was till, which is a mix of all these, including high
5 percentage of silt and clay particles.
6 When the ice was retreating between the
7 glaciations, we call them interglacial periods, and the
8 ice was melting, and we are having the same action still
9 going on, the ice is retreating, still going back, and it
10 will come back eventually, but we won't go into that.
11 Anyway, today the ice is still keep going back
12 and when the ice was retreating, the melted water flooded
13 large areas, and that large whole north, northern part of
14 Ontario was, of course, flooded by this huge amount of
15 water that came from the melted ice.
16 To the south, the ground level was higher. To
17 the north, the drainage was blocked by the ice, so created
18 a large lake at that part, so anything that was -- that
19 new soil came in, into that part of the world, of Canada,
20 of Ontario, that was brought in by most of the time moving
21 water from the other part that was bringing in again the
22 two smallest soils, the silt and the clay.
23 So we have the solid rock, generally, at the
24 base. On the top, we have the till, which is the mix of
25 clay, silt, sand and gravel, and cobbles, and then on the

39. 39
1 top, between the glaciations, usually we have so-called
2 interglacial layers. These are generally silt and clays,
3 silt and clays, which are again the smallest soils,
4 especially the clay is responsible for the very poor
5 drainage, because again, I told you that the clay
6 particles are flat. They are flakey. They sit on each
7 other like coins, so they block the movement of the water.
8 The water is not going anywhere. It's staying there.
9 And if you go up to the north and you fly over
10 the north, that's what you going to see, that everything,
11 all these millions of lakes there, because the poor
12 drainage because of the underlying till, which is again
13 included sand and gravel and other soils, but the
14 permeability was controlled by this water.
15 P-E-R-M-E-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y.
16 BY MR. BUTLER:
17 Q. Okay. I've got you there. Stop.
18 A. Okay. Sorry.
19 Q. That was excellent. Thank you. Let's
20 take that background. We know the geology of the area and
21 we know what it looks like presently.
22 What I'd like to do is just take you to --
23 well, I'll take you, just for the commissioners' benefit,
24 a much smaller version of what Mr. Bodi just said is at
25 page 10 of 25 of the report. That gives some background

40. 40
1 on the geology of the area.
2 Now, taking the Golder report, what were you
3 able to do with the information generated in the Golder
4 report?
5 A. Okay. Again, I should refer to that
6 drawing again. If you will have the full, on the other
7 drawings, you can see the colouring of different soils.
8 They have different symbols, and if we would have the
9 front page, this is I-02.
10 On I-01, there is a legend that explains the
11 names of the different soil formations on that section. I
12 refer the yellow one. The yellow one represents the solid
13 rock. If you see where the solid rock is, the yellow one,
14 it's in the middle and a little bit to the right. So
15 those are where the solid rock comes up close to the
16 surface. In some instances, you can actually see the rock
17 sticking out from the ground anywhere where the yellow is.
18 Between them, that -- the purple one with the
19 broken 45 degree line, that represents the till deposit,
20 the till that I explained that is a mix of all different
21 sorts of soils, and then you can see the greenish one and
22 the reddish one, those are all silts and clays.
23 Again, the yellow was the solid rock before
24 anything happened in that part of the world, the till
25 represents the major reverting of all the soils together

41. 41
1 by the ice sheet, and the clay represents -- the silt and
2 the clay represents the interglacial period, when the
3 small size soils were brought in, into that huge lake or
4 sea that was flooding the whole northern Ontario, all the
5 way up to the Hudson Bay.
6 And then you can see on the top at certain
7 points, the small plus signs, the small plus crosses on
8 the surface, almost everywhere on the left and right.
9 This is the peat. Right here. This part here. These,
10 all these depressions, of course, these are marshland.
11 These are the swampy areas where you have peat, and the
12 reason you have peat because under that, you have silt and
13 clay. You have silt and clay everywhere. No drainage.
14 Whatever water was brought in were depressions everywhere.
15 That water cannot drain anywhere. The drainage was
16 provided only by the major rivers. All these rivers at
17 that part of world, they flow to the north.
18 There are three watersheds in Ontario. The
19 watershed is where any -- when the precipitation comes to
20 the surface, to the earth, then depending on what
21 direction the water can go, they drain into one direction.
22 If all the rivers are going in one direction,
23 that's we call one watershed, and the separation line is
24 somewhere north of Kapuskasing, where south of that, all
25 the rivers, all the precipitation is flowing either into

42. 42
1 the St. Lawrence River or down to the Mississippi, and
2 anything to the north flows to the James Bay and Hudson
3 Bay.
4 So all those rivers, Attawapiskat River, the
5 Albany River, the Moose River, they all flow to the north,
6 and that watershed is the one which is poorly drained.
7 Once the rivers are overflowing, they are the one that are
8 just taking any excess water into the James Bay and Hudson
9 Bay.
10 Q. So with respect to the profiles that
11 you've mentioned and the various elements, how did you
12 record that information?
13 And if it assists the commissioners, this is
14 similar to the maps that, or to the profile that Mr. Bodi
15 has. This is an excerpt from his -- one of his appendix
16 that was attached to the affidavit of Paxton Hartmann, and
17 might be of -- Mr. Bodi, would it be of some assistance
18 for you to refer to this chart as you're explaining?
19 A. For my next stage, yes.
20 Q. So as I say, this is one, part of one of
21 the appendices to the affidavit of Paxton Hartmann. I've
22 blown up the map portion and the table portions.
23 MS. ORR: Mr. Bodi, before you get any
24 further, I notice that with respect to the description
25 that you took us through of the bedrock and the soils,

43. 43
1 there is a legend that is located on this document.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes.
3 MS. ORR: And I take it that that legend is
4 the legend that you're using when you're describing the
5 colours; is that right?
6 THE WITNESS: To a certain extent, because
7 this one here doesn't give you the name of the soil.
8 Let's say when they say fluvial deposit on the drawing, it
9 doesn't say what type of soil, but this is when you have
10 soil deposit by flowing water.
11 MS. ORR: All right. So --
12 THE WITNESS: You --
13 MS. ORR: But with respect to the colours and
14 the diagrams, the markings that we do have on here,
15 organic deposits in that legend are referring to peat?
16 THE WITNESS: Yes, that's correct.
17 MS. ORR: And the glacial, lacustrine and
18 glacial marine deposits, that would be sand and -- sorry,
19 the -- what would that be?
20 THE WITNESS: The codes inside, inside the
21 profile, there are actually names of the soils.
22 MS. ORR: I see.
23 THE WITNESS: These are representing much
24 better. If you see one borehole, let's say see the first
25 one --

44. 44
1 MS. ORR: Which, what borehole is that? On
2 the left-hand side?
3 THE WITNESS: On the left-hand side.
4 MS. ORR: Yes.
5 THE WITNESS: The "PT". Very small. "PT"
6 means peat.
7 MS. ORR: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: "M" is means silt. "M" is the
9 code of silt. "L" means low plasticity, and then you see
10 on the next one, there is another one, "CL". So these
11 letters mean exactly, to a geotechnical engineer, exactly
12 the name of the soil, the top of the soil.
13 MS. ORR: I see. All right. Thank you.
14 THE WITNESS: Because once you have to
15 identify the soils in a soil report, you don't want to
16 write the names of the soils all the time. There's an
17 international code. I can't write on this one. The
18 gravel is "G". The sand is "S". The silt is a poor guy.
19 "S" is already gone for sand, so they had to pick another
20 letter, so they use the "M". I don't know why, but that's
21 the code for silt, and the "C" is for clay.
22 So all these profile -- and the "P" is the
23 peat in the soil.
24 MS. ORR: All right. Just one more question
25 so that I -- at least I can get positioned here with

45. 45
1 respect to where this is.
2 Mr. Butler, I think you asked the witness
3 where this particular cross-section could be located on
4 the corridor or where would this cross-section be located?
5 Did you ask the witness that?
6 MR. BUTLER: I'm --
7 MS. ORR: Whether it's south or north or what
8 of this?
9 MR. BUTLER: In fact, what I was planning to
10 do is have Mr. Hartmann explain that a little bit better,
11 but it's perhaps a good time to do that.
12 If the commissioners would turn to Figure 1.3
13 of the report, it will give you some assistance.
14 MS. ORR: I'm just looking for a location at
15 this stage. I'm not asking you to change your --
16 MR. BUTLER: No, no. Absolutely. Absolutely.
17 BY MR. BUTLER:
18 Q. So, Mr. Bodi, with respect to the station
19 numbers that are identified on that particular exhibit --
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. -- if you look at Figure 1.3 from the
22 Material Assessment Availability Report, could you explain
23 to the commissioners how the station numbers on the
24 profile match up with the station numbers in 1.3?
25 A. The station numbers on the drawing at the

46. 46
1 bottom, the zero is at the start of the corridor at the CN
2 Rail. Of course, the reason we have --
3 Q. And maybe you can mention what would be at
4 the very top? What station number is at the top according
5 to Figure 1.3?
6 A. Station number 330.
7 MS. ORR: All right. Thank you. That helps
8 position.
9 THE WITNESS: The reason we have to have 99 of
10 these pages, because they are broken up to smaller
11 sections, the 99 pages cover the entire corridor. So you
12 can see every one kilometre -- one centimetre here on the
13 drawing represents one kilometre in real life.
14 MS. ORR: Thank you very much.
15 BY MR. BUTLER:
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. And if you take a look at the top part of
18 the drawing, this is the side panel. You can actually see
19 the enlarged side panel on the top.
20 Q. So then moving to the next figure, if you
21 could perhaps explain the table to the commissioners and
22 the process by which you achieved that. You can stay
23 seated.
24 A. I want to show it. I don't like to sit.
25 Sorry.

47. 47
1 MS. ORR: It might be --
2 THE WITNESS: I feel better, I'm sitting
3 and --
4 MR. BUTLER: Okay.
5 MS. ORR: Mr. Butler, it actually might be
6 useful if you just move those maps and tack the diagrams
7 that Mr. Bodi is -- onto that board behind you, so that we
8 see what he's referring to, with binoculars.
9 THE WITNESS: That's correct. Sorry. Okay.
10 My work was to create these tables, and in these tables,
11 you will see numbers in different groups and I will
12 explain how I came up to evaluate these numbers.
13 On the left side, this particular page is
14 between 120 and 150 kilometre on the alignment.
15 BY MR. BUTLER:
16 Q. Could you maybe give some indication for
17 the commissioners where that would be on Figure 1.3?
18 A. Is about right here. On your drawing?
19 Q. If you could show them on -- because they
20 have a copy of that.
21 A. Right here. The station number 120.
22 Station number 120.
23 Q. So just for the record, we're looking at
24 the map in Figure 1.3. On the right-hand side is
25 STA-120+000, and that is the area that Mr. Bodi is

48. 48
1 referring to.
2 A. The first number in the station number is
3 always how many kilometre is that point away from the CN
4 Rail line at Nakina. That is the zero point.
5 Q. That's okay. Go ahead.
6 A. Where you have the soil profile here, and
7 we discussed it, shows different rocks and soils,
8 different formations, this was provided by Golders. They
9 did all the boreholes and they identified approximately
10 what were the soil within the boreholes and they created a
11 profile, and this is what I had to accept, that this is
12 the soil condition along the alignment.
13 Then I received the vertical alignment for the
14 proposed road or railway. Of course, this is the soil
15 profile. This straight line here, that represents the
16 road line or rail line. We have only one, of course, on
17 this one, but for my work, I had two lines, one for the
18 road and one for the railway.
19 Q. And why would you need two? Why would
20 they be different?
21 A. Just usually, with road, you can have
22 higher grades. Usually, the road route, you follow the
23 ground river. When you design a rail line, usually the
24 elevation for the rail line cannot be too steep. It has
25 to follow a certain maximum slope, and so that's the

49. 49
1 reason the rail line usually follows a shallow change in
2 the vertical alignment.
3 Once you have that line, the first what I did,
4 I identified -- I took 10-kilometre section. That's why I
5 have 120 to 130. Within that zone, you can see that when
6 you have the designed elevation for the road or the
7 railway, at certain point, you have to excavate soil
8 because the existing ground is higher, and at certain
9 point, you have to bring in soil because you have to build
10 your embankment. These are the points where the designed
11 road or railway is above the ground level.
12 So for every 10-kilometre section, I
13 identified what is the ratio between the cut and the fill
14 sections. If I would take, if I would take only this
15 part, 100 percent is in fill because there is no cut. The
16 soil doesn't come out from the elevation, doesn't come up
17 above the designed road level.
18 MR. SMITHEMAN: Elevation.
19 THE WITNESS: In this section, that length is
20 in cut, this is in cut, this is in fill, this is in fill,
21 and so on. For every 10-kilometre section, I identified
22 how many percent were being cut, how many percent were
23 being fill.
24 BY MR. BUTLER:
25 Q. And does it show --

50. 50
1 A. These are in these numbers. Cut and fill
2 sections. Of course, the sum of those two numbers must be
3 100, 100 percent. If you see for this, for this
4 10-kilometre section of the corridor, between 120 and 130,
5 7 percent were being cut and 93 percent will be in fill.
6 So this is a good indication for the design
7 that later on, if the design engineer will see these
8 numbers, he realize that most of his alignment will have
9 to -- you have to bring in soil to build up for the -- for
10 build up the grade for your road or railway.
11 In the brackets under those two numbers, I
12 indicated the range for the individual earth work. For
13 the cut, I said based on this profile, the height for the
14 cut will be between 0.5 and 3 millimetre. This is again
15 helping designers later on. If I would have had a number
16 here, let's say 14, then the designer would know in
17 advance that they will have a huge cut on their alignment.
18 The other one, for the fill section, I
19 indicated the height of the fill, approximate range of
20 height, so on. Everything explained here on the header.
21 All those numbers are explained in brackets.
22 The next one -- again, these two numbers add
23 up to 100. These are indicating the ratio between cut and
24 fill for one section.
25 The next one, in the next stage, I wanted to

51. 51
1 see the distribution of the different soils along the
2 alignment at the subgrade. What is the type of soil where
3 the design level of the road or railway is? Let's say at
4 this point, at this point, the subgrade will be rock
5 because at this point, the designed elevation is inside
6 the rock, so that will be rock. It will be part of rock.
7 So this is for Station 0 to something. That's
8 why there is zero rock. It means at that part, right
9 here, there was no rock, and then at this part, there is
10 peat and peat, then clay, then peat, then till, and so on,
11 and I collected all the information for a whole
12 10-kilometre section, and I identified that for that
13 length, for that 10-kilometre length within that, let's
14 say I'm going over 100 metre peat, then I go into rock.
15 Then I go to till and so on, and I identify those numbers.
16 For that section, there will be no rock, 5 percent till,
17 no sand, gravel, 9 percent silt and clay, and 86 percent
18 peat.
19 So these, these numbers, these five numbers,
20 these are the different soils along the alignment.
21 That's -- it means for this particular design at -- we
22 have 86 percent of the area where you will build your
23 whatever, road or railway, you have to face that peat.
24 Means for 10 kilometre, anywhere you want to build your
25 railway, you will have 8.6 kilometre where you have to

52. 52
1 deal with the peat, and these are, of course, large number
2 all along because that's what you have. You have a
3 marshland up there.
4 And then I have another group of numbers under
5 the cut. Again, if you add up these numbers, this must be
6 100. 86 plus 9 plus 5. 100 percent. And these numbers
7 here, these are within the cut. Then I went in and this
8 is the one where you will cut, where you will remove,
9 remove soil, and then you will be able to build your road
10 wherever you will need the fill.
11 And I calculated this part and I identified
12 the distribution of different -- if there are different
13 soils within that cut section, that if -- if I would cut
14 into a solid rock mountain, then I would have 100 percent
15 rock. Of course, when you have within the cut, if you
16 have different, more different types of soils, I
17 identified the ratio between them. For this section, with
18 the 120, 130, the excavated soil, what will be excavated
19 from the cut section will be 66 percent peat, 23 percent
20 silt and clay, no sand, 11 percent till, and no rock.
21 Again, for every 10-kilometre section, you
22 have those numbers, and this is basically what I did.
23 Q. Do you want to -- you can probably have a
24 seat. I'm going to ask you some more sort of questions
25 generally about the results.

53. 53
1 So with respect to the role of peat, because
2 you mentioned the amounts of peat that are in the area
3 along the corridor, what is the complication that arises
4 from peat in the road or railroad?
5 A. The peat gives you -- when you have to
6 design an infrastructure like road or railway, you have to
7 build, possibly you have to -- the problem is when you
8 have to build over it. When you remove it, you just store
9 it somewhere. So when it comes up from the cut, you just
10 dispose it somewhere, but when you have to build on it,
11 you have two problems.
12 First of all, the peat has two bad
13 characteristics: One, has no strength; two, highly
14 compressible. These are -- both represent a challenge.
15 Anything you build on it, first of all, if you build a too
16 high embankment, because the strength is too low, the good
17 chance is that you would have lots of problems during
18 construction. Your embankment will keep failing.
19 And I mention that -- you asked what I did for
20 roadwork in northern Ontario, and I mentioned Muskoka 34.
21 This is exactly what happened. They build an embankment
22 over peat and soft clay environment like here, and they
23 continuously have had failure during construction.
24 So the other thing is once you build on it,
25 and you have the problem with potential failure, and the

54. 54
1 biggest problem is the long-term compression because the
2 peat is fully saturated, but like a sponge. When you
3 build on it, you will have settlement. Anything you put
4 on the top, the higher to build up, the more settlement
5 you can experience.
6 And depending on the structure of the peat --
7 see, the peat is a general term for organic material. We
8 have different peats depending on the -- how advanced
9 the -- we have the organic material that is decomposing in
10 a wet environment. Depending on the advanced stage of
11 this decomposition, some of the peats have still wood
12 pieces, wood fragments before they decay. Some of the
13 peats are older, and they are advanced stage and they are
14 mixed a little bit soil, so this compressibility is
15 changing from location to location.
16 Once you have that peat, you have to go in.
17 Possibly you will have to remove. If you don't want to
18 have any trouble during construction, the best thing is to
19 remove. Of course, that can be very expensive at certain
20 time, so that will be a -- it's always a challenge.
21 Again, you have two problems: Strength and
22 compressibility.
23 Q. And so you also mentioned that there are,
24 within the route, areas of rock outcrop which you talked
25 about, the cut areas. What would be the use for that

55. 55
1 material?
2 A. Everywhere where you -- when you have to
3 have the road corridor, railway corridor, we know that you
4 will need a lot of embankment. You have to build your
5 embankment, lots of areas. So you have to have the
6 material. So when you excavate rock or inert soil, which
7 is not organic, rock or inert soil, again, back -- the
8 distinction between inert soil and organic soil, the peat
9 is an organic soil, the others are inert, I-N-E-R-T,
10 because inert soils are coming from rocks. Sand, gravel,
11 all these are from rocks. So even a piece -- a piece of
12 sand is a piece of rock. Is just too small.
13 Q. Perfect. With respect -- and just to
14 bring the commissioners up to speed with respect to the
15 report, much of the methodology that Mr. Bodi has been
16 describing is at pages 15 of the expert report, although
17 in a somewhat truncated fashion.
18 We've talked a little bit about the rock.
19 Could you explain to the commissioners the importance of
20 non-frost susceptible materials?
21 A. Well, we didn't discuss that. We were
22 discussing organic soils so far. We have the first frost
23 susceptibility. When you have water in soil, and most of
24 the time, especially in wetland, we have water that -- the
25 groundwater table is very high, and when -- during

56. 56
1 wintertime, which is quite long in that part of the world,
2 during winter, the water inside the soil is freezing, and
3 once the water is freezing, it changes its volume by 9
4 percent. The volume of the ice is 9 percent greater than
5 the volume of the water that the ice is coming from, and
6 once the ice is, or the water is freezing, it changes its
7 volume, and then it can lift up in certain cases even
8 two-storey buildings. When we have frost-related problems
9 in the north and cracking of buildings, these are related
10 to these ice lenses which are -- ice lenses.
11 Now, when it comes to soil and frost
12 susceptibility, then we have not only this problem that
13 the water is freezing once, because let's say we have
14 gravel, which are the large grapes. Back to the lime,
15 yes? So when you have that and it's full with water, all
16 the voids are filled with water, and the water is
17 freezing, it changes the volume and that's it. That's it.
18 There is no more, no more extra water. If I want to
19 increase the ice volume, I would have to go and get some
20 more water and add.
21 When you have large granular soils like sand
22 or gravel, the void size between them is relatively large,
23 so the water is not climbing up. When you have the
24 smaller soils, like the silt and the clay, which is
25 pediment and soil deposits up there, they have very small,

57. 57
1 very small channels. The voids are very small, and there
2 is the so-called capillary action.
3 If you remember what we learn in physics in
4 elementary schools, when you have the small channels, they
5 bring up the water from lower levels, and the capillary
6 rise is higher when the channels are smaller.
7 If I have a handful of gravel, I put it in
8 water, and the water is halfway to the gravel, no water
9 goes up. If I take the silt, is like a sugar cube. If I
10 put the corner of the sugar cube in the coffee, what
11 happens to the coffee? It goes up all the way to the top
12 because the capillary action in the small channels. The
13 frost susceptible soils are like that.
14 Q. Okay. Now, what I'd like to do -- if you
15 could look at Figure 1.1 of the report. So we understand
16 the importance of non-frost susceptible material. Could
17 you explain based on this figure, which I understand you
18 assisted with, what layers would be non-frost susceptible
19 material and why?
20 A. If I go back to that, we have --
21 MR. VESELY: Excuse me.
22 THE WITNESS: -- all this --
23 CHAIR: I'm sorry. Mr. Vesely?
24 MR. VESELY: I have an objection, depending
25 on, I guess, on how far we're going with this, and that

58. 58
1 has to do with the role of these, of these two experts and
2 their relative expertise, and in particular, there was an
3 exchange when I cross-examined Mr. Bodi in advance of
4 this, which read as follows, at page 54 onwards of the
5 transcript. Mr. Butler said -- and why I couldn't answer
6 a question:
7 "If he is not an expert in -- if he is not
8 tendered for the purpose of an expert in construction,
9 then he shouldn't be giving expert opinion on that. I
10 believe that is a point of law."
11 And this ended with the following exchange. I
12 said:
13 "Here is the point at which I want to be clear
14 though. I tried to ask him some questions. You have
15 objected to the questions on the basis that he doesn't
16 have -- he is not being put forward on the basis as having
17 expertise in that area.
18 "MR. BUTLER: That is not quite right. I said
19 he has not been tendered for the purpose of this hearing
20 as an expert in those areas."
21 And then I said:
22 "So to the extent that there are matters
23 falling within those areas, we are all clear that it will
24 not be Mr. Bodi's evidence or contribution to the report
25 that will support those?

59. 59
1 "MR. BUTLER: That's correct."
2 And the topic that is -- we're talking about
3 is construction. So he was not put forward and I was not
4 permitted to ask him questions about construction. What
5 he has done, as he said, is done a study of the soil, and
6 then what's done with that after is a matter for
7 construction expertise. So I simply ask that that same
8 line be respected in the hearing.
9 MR. BUTLER: And I completely agree. I am
10 focused on the materials. We will hear testimony from Mr.
11 Hartmann regarding construction, how they're put together,
12 why.
13 I'm simply taking Mr. Bodi quite near to the
14 end of the logical conclusion of why certain materials,
15 from a geotechnical perspective, are incorporated. I'm
16 not talking about the -- and I don't think I'm -- I'm
17 trying not to lead or foreshadow where I'm going with Mr.
18 Bodi here, but I'm not talking about the construction of
19 the embankment. I just want to discuss the perhaps
20 strength of materials within. Mr. Paxton will -- excuse
21 me. Mr. Hartmann will discuss the construction, the
22 design elements, why decisions were made in that regard.
23 I hope to keep to that boundary.
24 CHAIR: Okay. We'll allow it for now. We'll
25 see where you --

60. 60
1 MR. BUTLER: If I go too far or --
2 CHAIR: We'll hear from Mr. Vesely, I'm sure.
3 MR. BUTLER: Exactly.
4 THE WITNESS: Okay.
5 BY MR. BUTLER:
6 Q. So with that in mind, what I'd like you to
7 do is looking at that design, and as I've mentioned to the
8 commissioners, I'm not looking for an explanation of the
9 entire construction, but we discussed non-frost
10 susceptible materials, and what I'd like you to explain
11 is, in an embankment of that nature, why certain materials
12 are put in certain places.
13 A. Without going into construction details.
14 Q. Right.
15 A. The situation is, anywhere where the water
16 in the soil can freeze, it will create problems. Create
17 problem by heaving the structures, and this is only once.
18 This is a potential problem once to a structure.
19 The biggest problem in the long-term is when
20 you have a situation when you have a type of soil
21 environment that has not only water once, but is bringing
22 up water from the deeper levels, and the ice that is
23 generated within the zone that is freezing, there will be
24 a growing ice during the winter period.
25 Now, that ice not only create extra uplift on

61. 61
1 the structures, whatever is there, we can talk about
2 building, don't have to talk about road or railway, and
3 then it brings up so much extra water that wasn't there,
4 in the spring and the summertime, when that large amount
5 of ice will start to melt, you will have much more water
6 in that part of the soil environment than you had before.
7 And that, that large amount of water,
8 especially in the smaller soils, the silt and clay, will
9 change the consistency of the soil from a stiff
10 consistency to a softer consistency that can generate
11 potential failures. It can generate settlement of
12 buildings, failures, embankment, and so on.
13 So that's the reason, if you have a zone that
14 can freeze, and up there, that zone is quite deep because
15 we know that the first penetration is at least eight feet,
16 which is 2.4 metre, so if you, within that zone, if you
17 have a soil that can bring water from the groundwater and
18 build up the ice lenses and weaken the whole soil
19 environment in the long term, whatever structure is on the
20 top, it will create problems.
21 Q. So with respect to non-frost susceptible
22 material and the estimations that were made in this
23 report, is this an overestimation or an underestimation?
24 A. Can you repeat that again? Regarding
25 what?

62. 62
1 Q. With respect to the non-frost susceptible
2 material issue, you've mentioned its use in the
3 embankment. Taking this report as a whole, is it an
4 overestimation of the material that will be needed or is
5 it an underestimation?
6 A. On this particular section, when you have
7 to have the material, again, we would like, or
8 theoretically, we would like to have non-frost susceptible
9 soil wherever the soil will freeze, and theoretically, we
10 would have to use that material unless we will be facing
11 maintenance problems in the long term.
12 Q. Okay, but just to -- more precisely, so
13 the report itself, does it overestimate or underestimate
14 the amount of material?
15 A. I wasn't involved in estimating the
16 material itself. So I --
17 Q. Okay. Well, then we'll leave that.
18 A. Leave it.
19 Q. But in terms of your expertise in geotech,
20 is it preferable -- well, which -- as you said, the
21 non-frost susceptible material -- I think I'll leave it
22 there. Otherwise, I'm going to have to -- I think that's
23 when I was starting to cross closer to Mr. Hartmann's
24 evidence.
25 MS. ORR: All right. So this witness is not

63. 63
1 able to tell us what is non-frost --
2 MR. BUTLER: Susceptible?
3 MS. ORR: -- susceptible material?
4 MR. BUTLER: He can, yes. Well, I hope to.
5 MS. ORR: And will you --
6 BY MR. BUTLER:
7 Q. It doesn't form part of the construction
8 elements, but if you could describe where non-frost
9 susceptible material is sourced?
10 A. Non-frost susceptible soil, I explained,
11 is a soil that has very low percentage of silt and clay.
12 The silt and the clay is the one, those are the small
13 soils that can take water up into the higher level.
14 So if I would want to build a good embankment
15 here, I would love to build it from non-frost susceptible
16 soils, but again, it was my investigation that looked all
17 the soils and I do not see natural, non-frost susceptible
18 soil up on the drawings, up on the alignment I
19 investigated.
20 Q. The drawings.
21 CHAIR: Excuse me. When you say "non-frost
22 susceptible soils," are you looking at sand and gravel as
23 being ideal?
24 THE WITNESS: The ideal is if the silt content
25 is less than 15 -- the silt content controls it. The silt

64. 64
1 is the one that is the biggest troublemaker and certain
2 clays, which are very highly plastic.
3 So when they identify non-frost susceptible
4 the soil, they do a gradation test. Every soil has
5 different fractions, most of the soils. There are very
6 limited numbers where you have 100 percent clay or 100
7 percent sand. They have different fractions, especially
8 the till up there which is mixed together by the ice.
9 When they separate all those fractions and
10 they identify the percentages, if the silt content is more
11 than different -- there are different classifications,
12 highly frost susceptible, medium and so on, there are
13 different, different levels of frost susceptibility, but
14 when you have silt content up there, then you have -- even
15 you have sand. If you have sand soil, but the percentage
16 is 15 percent or more, then the good chance is that you
17 will have problems with -- frustrated problems in the long
18 run, wherever you are using that material, it's under
19 foundations or buildings or wherever.
20 And because this environment up in the lower
21 land, I said most of the soils are the silt and the clays,
22 the predominant soils. On the top of the solid rock, even
23 the till, the till is definitely -- has high percentage of
24 silt and clays, and then in the lake that was left after
25 the melting ice, most of the soils that were brought in

65. 65
1 sedimented to the lake bottom. These are silts and clays,
2 and those are mostly frost susceptible.
3 MR. BUTLER: And I don't mean to leave the
4 point hanging, but at this point, without foreshadowing
5 too much, the implications for construction will be
6 addressed, but I'd like to stay to the boundary that I
7 kept with my friend to some degree.
8 CHAIR: Understood.
9 MR. BUTLER: So I see that we're at 1 o'clock.
10 I wonder -- what I'd like to do is just check my notes and
11 make sure I've got everything, but I didn't know if we
12 wanted to break for lunch at this point.
13 CHAIR: Why don't we just break for lunch, and
14 do you need more than an hour to check your notes and have
15 lunch?
16 MR. BUTLER: No, an hour for lunch seems fine.
17 CHAIR: Okay, and this -- are we going to --
18 can we mark this as Exhibit --
19 MR. BUTLER: Absolutely.
20 CHAIR: -- 18? No objections?
21 MR. VESELY: None.
22 CHAIR: And what do we call it?
23 MS. ORR: How would you like to label this,
24 Mr. Butler, Exhibit 18?
25 MR. BUTLER: That is a portion of the

66. 66
1 appendices.
2 MR. VESELY: I would suggest an extract of
3 Appendix 12 from the Hartmann affidavit.
4 MR. BUTLER: I think an extract is more
5 accurate.
6 CHAIR: Thank you.
7 MR. VESELY: Fortunately, it has the page
8 numbers on it, so we can see which it is.
9 CHAIR: And the page, with the page numbers
10 noted. Thank you very much.
11 EXHIBIT NO. 18: Extract of Appendix 12 from
12 the Hartmann affidavit.
13 CHAIR: Okay. We'll see you at 2 o'clock.
14 --- Recess at 1:00 p.m.
15 --- Upon resuming at 2:00 p.m.
16 MR. BUTLER: Just before I begin, Mr.
17 Smitheman is just on a quick call, but Ms. Potter was
18 required back at the firm, so with your leave, she's not
19 joining us this afternoon.
20 CHAIR: Okay. I have one logistical question,
21 if you can indulge me, and that is, if we finish with Mr.
22 Hartmann before the end of tomorrow, will we be going
23 straight to argument or will we wait over until Wednesday
24 morning to start?
25 MR. BUTLER: I haven't discussed that with my

67. 67
1 friend, and I think it could cost me my job if I give
2 Neal's answer for him, so --
3 CHAIR: Okay. All right. Well, then during
4 the next break, perhaps it can be something up for
5 discussion. I prefer to take notes on my laptop and I
6 just want to know if I should be bringing it in tomorrow
7 or Wednesday. As I say, nothing major turns on it.
8 Do we require Mr. Smitheman for you to finish
9 your examination?
10 MR. BUTLER: No, not at all. Not at all. And
11 in fact, I am, I believe, complete in my questions.
12 BY MR. BUTLER:
13 Q. One point that I wanted to raise with Mr.
14 Bodi, and it was just really with looking at these two
15 figures, and this is really just clarification for the
16 commissioners.
17 Mr. Bodi, are those -- the figure that's at
18 the top there, and then the chart that you have, are those
19 for the same station areas?
20 A. No, no. This is from Station 0 to 3.7,
21 this 120. This is the first page, what you have to go to
22 page number 50 something to bring up the -- but you can
23 see the station, 120 to 150, so you have the station
24 numbers on the drawing. Just look up on the list.
25 MR. BUTLER: And I just wanted to clarify that

68. 68
1 for the commissioners because, at some points, I know Mr.
2 Bodi was talking about rock cuts, and in the top figure,
3 but one might wonder why, in the bottom table, the rock
4 numbers are zero, and it's because they don't actually
5 represent the same point on the land.
6 CHAIR: I actually had a question, and it
7 might be something that you may wish to address in-chief
8 and may come up in cross-examination, but you did this
9 distribution of anticipated soil types for the entire
10 length of --
11 THE WITNESS: 330 kilometres, yes.
12 CHAIR: Okay. And overall, is there
13 sufficient subgrade material within the location to
14 adequately provide an embankment for a road or a railroad,
15 or would materials -- because you talked about
16 permeability and water seeping in and causing the
17 embankment to be degraded, to be unstable. Is there
18 sufficient there?
19 THE WITNESS: When we discussed there are
20 different types of soils and when you build an embankment,
21 you would try to find the one that has the low percentage
22 silt and clay, and there is almost none by nature, because
23 most of -- you can see clay, clay, clay, clay, clay, clay,
24 and rock. Clay, clay, peat, clay, clay, silt, till.
25 So there is not much, but when I was working

69. 69
1 up there in the north, I had different resources when I
2 was searching for this and that. It's a well-known fact
3 that clean, clean, I mean, clean I think it means low
4 percent silt and clay is hard to find, or you have to
5 produce from some sources.
6 CHAIR: When you say "produce from some
7 sources," what do you mean?
8 THE WITNESS: You can create. If I take the
9 rock and I break it up and I crush it, when you crush it,
10 then you can minimize the amount of smaller grains.
11 CHAIR: As long as it doesn't have too high a
12 percentage of silt.
13 THE WITNESS: When you keep crushing it, you
14 keep -- you know, the crushing process, you have primary,
15 secondary and so on. First, you crush everything. You
16 have the cobbles and the boulders, the lime and the
17 orange. You go into the second stage of crushing, you
18 have the gravel size, and then if you don't go, when you
19 stop at certain point, you control the size, what you
20 create.
21 CHAIR: Okay.
22 THE WITNESS: It's in your control. You
23 create something, depending what is the purpose.
24 CHAIR: So if you have rock --
25 THE WITNESS: If you have boulder --