Jaret Sprott: Good morning, Pat. Jaret here. So yeah, right now the investigation continues, but all indications are pointing to stress, corrosion cracking. And that is a result of a poor coating repair during construction. That was done about 25 years ago and so right now, one of the costs increased from about $30 million that we put out last quarter to the $54 million, was us getting more integrity work done, real great work from our surface land group and our integrity group to be able to go out and do that work quicker than we thought. So we did — we’ve done a substantial amount of integrity work on the pipeline to date, and all indications are showing us that we don’t have a systemic problem on the asset, this — looking like it should be a one-off.
With respect to your question on future integrity and drag on cash flow, right now what we’re doing is obviously we’ll have a little bit of incremental integrity work to do on other like assets, but it’s not material in nature. But what I would say is that we’re reevaluating just the — we spend about a $100 million and I think around $150 million to $175 million a year on integrity geotech environmental work. We’re just reevaluating our full suite of the 16,000 pipelines in our risk assessment on prioritization of that capital.
Patrick Kenny: Okay. Thanks for that chair and then I guess on the flip side, it’s a bit of a rarity to see pipeline projects under budget these days. So perhaps you could just, walk us through some of the positive highlights of the Phase VIII expansion that’s helping to drive costs below budget there?
Scott Burrows: You bet. So great question. So Pat, obviously, like we have a fairly extensive knowledge of pipelining in Western Alberta, Northeast BC. I think, our seasoned team, we know where the tough spots are. We know how to cross some of the really tough river crossings. We know when — what work needs to be done in what season. I think in partnering with — we have great partnerships. We align ourselves on our values. Our safety commitment, and our partners are aligned with that and I think through our great contracting strategies, the win-win with our partners, it’s allowed us to continue to even outperform what our expectations are. Yeah, and that’s — I think it’s just great experience, great track record and knowledge.
Patrick Kenny: Okay. Thank you. And then last one for me, if I could maybe for Cam, just in terms of deciding whether or not to execute the NCIB is the target lever leverage ratio still, that 3.75 to 4.25 quarter range, and would — managing the buyback program be towards the midpoint of that range? Or do you prefer to keep leverage below that long term target range for now? Or at least until interest rates start to come back down?
Scott Burrows: Yeah, I think we recognize Pat that we are, below that stated range. Obviously, as Scott mentioned earlier, we have a number of exciting opportunities looking forward and obviously as we’ve done in the past, we’ve always positioned our balance sheet to be able to seize opportunities and be in a strong position to be able to weather cycles as they as they or as opportunities may come. And so when we look at the decision to use cash flow towards reducing debt this year, it is largely a function of seeing the opportunities come in the next two to three years here and also, looking at the pure economics of it, we sort of look at interest rates obviously and where our cost of debt is. We look at that relative to the alternative and right now taking all that into account, we think it makes sense to temporarily retire some debt, with free cash flow and have that capacity available for opportunities in the future.
