Hi Brian -

Thank you for clearing up what you were referring to when you used the term ¨damaged reservoir¨. As you, I am also not happy with what I would call simply poor production so far from the Great Divide. I understand Connacher's reasons for the delay in reaching full production. I take Pete Sametz' word that everytime the engineers have increased production, that one off incidents have cropped up ..ex... the 1st ESP that was installed was faulty and had to be removed and this entailed a one week reduction in steaming, one of the original well pairs failed and had to be redrilled and steaming had to be reduced, 4 more ESP's were installed and steaming had to be reduced for another week during their installation, then an evaporator got plugged and had to be repaired and steaming was reduced, then the flare stack malfunctioned and steaming was reduced, and now Great Divide has shut down for a week for shcheduled maintenance work with the attendant steaming reduction. So the Great Divide has in essence started to ramp up to full production at least around 8 times in the last 9 months. In addition, Pete Sametz stated during the conference call that the Great Divide's total operating production would be limited to 9,500 bbl/d of bitumen so this will be the new ¨full production¨number. 2Crude has also stated that to date, none of the SAGD plants in operation in Alberta have reached their full production numbers. My main concern with anyone using the words ¨damaged reservoir¨ is that using this implies that there is a serious event in a SAGD operation which cannot be overcome without redrilling the well pairs in a new location at great cost in money and lost time. There have been damaged reservoirs in one or two SAGD operations in Alberta so far in large companies SAGD operations but for a small company like Connacher a damaged reservoir would have major consequences. It would be catastrophic for a small SAGD operator.

Best Wishes; Scott