BSTVLBLTCHNLGRPRT Eng
BSTVLBLTCHNLGRPRT Eng
BSTVLBLTCHNLGRPRT Eng
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 7
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 10
1.1 Terms of Reference ............................................................................................................. 10
1.2 Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................................. 10
1.2.1 Purpose of the Report................................................................................................... 10
1.2.2 Scope: Environmental and Engineering Considerations of Pipelines.......................... 10
1.2.3 Defining Pipeline ......................................................................................................... 11
1.3 Method ................................................................................................................................ 12
1.4 Overview of Federal Pipeline Regulation in Canada .......................................................... 12
1.5 The BAT and Emerging Technology Initiative .................................................................. 13
1.6 Pipeline Lifecycle ............................................................................................................... 14
2.0 DESIGN .................................................................................................................................. 15
2.1 Pipeline Design: Engineering Considerations ..................................................................... 15
2.1.1 Feasibility Designs ....................................................................................................... 15
2.1.2 Front End Engineering Design (FEED) ....................................................................... 15
2.1.3 Modelling for Final Design Conditions ....................................................................... 16
2.1.3.1 Assessing Risk ...................................................................................................... 16
2.1.3.2 Structural and Strength Analysis .......................................................................... 17
2.1.3.3 Design Types ........................................................................................................ 17
2.1.4 Material Selection ........................................................................................................ 18
2.1.4.1 High-Strength Steel ............................................................................................... 18
2.1.4.2 Composite Pipe Material....................................................................................... 18
2.1.4.3 Reinforced Thermoplastic Pipe (RTP).................................................................. 19
2.1.5 Preventing Corrosion ................................................................................................... 19
2.2 Pipeline Design: Environmental Considerations ................................................................ 21
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment (EA) ................................................................................. 21
2.2.1.1 EA in the Context of Canadian Major Pipeline Projects ...................................... 21
2.2.1.2 Some Best Practices for EA .................................................................................. 21
2.2.1.3 Technical Considerations ...................................................................................... 25
2.2.1.4 Species at Risk ...................................................................................................... 26
2.2.1.5 Caribou Habitat Protection and Restoration ......................................................... 28
2.2.2 Route Selection and Facility Siting.............................................................................. 29
2.2.2.1 Route Selection Process ........................................................................................ 29
2
2.2.2.2 Routing and Siting Principles ............................................................................... 30
2.2.2.3 Benefits of Existing Linear Developments ........................................................... 30
2.2.2.4 Best Routing and Siting Solutions ........................................................................ 31
2.2.3 Reducing the Project Footprint .................................................................................... 32
2.2.3.1 Effect of Pipeline Diameter .................................................................................. 32
2.2.3.2 Design Strategy ..................................................................................................... 32
2.2.3.3 Access Strategy ..................................................................................................... 32
2.2.4 Equipment Choices ...................................................................................................... 33
2.2.4.1 Reducing Air Emissions (Including GHGs) ......................................................... 33
2.2.4.2 Storage Tanks........................................................................................................ 33
3.0 PIPE MANUFACTURING .................................................................................................... 35
3.1 Pipe Types (Including Seam Welding) ............................................................................... 35
3.2 Coatings .............................................................................................................................. 35
3.3 Storage ................................................................................................................................ 36
4.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION .......................................... 37
4.1 Pipeline Pre-Construction Planning and Construction: Engineering Considerations ......... 37
4.1.1 Above-Ground Pipeline ............................................................................................... 37
4.1.2 Buried Pipeline............................................................................................................. 38
4.1.3 Brushing, Grubbing and Stripping ............................................................................... 38
4.1.4 Trenching ..................................................................................................................... 39
4.1.5 Pipe Storage and Transportation .................................................................................. 39
4.1.6 Stringing ....................................................................................................................... 40
4.1.7 Bending ........................................................................................................................ 40
4.1.8 Welding and Weld Inspection ...................................................................................... 41
4.1.8.1 Manual and Semi-Automatic Welding ................................................................. 41
4.1.8.2 Automatic or Mechanized Welding ...................................................................... 42
4.1.9 Girth Weld Coating ...................................................................................................... 42
4.1.10 Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE): Radiography (X-ray), Ultrasonic (UT), and
Coating Testing/Examination ............................................................................................... 43
4.1.11 Lowering in and Backfilling ...................................................................................... 44
4.1.12 Horizontal Drilling and Microtunneling .................................................................... 45
4.1.12.1 Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) .............................................................. 45
4.1.12.2 Auger Boring ...................................................................................................... 46
4.1.12.3 Microtunneling .................................................................................................... 46
3
4.1.13 Final Tie-ins (Including Specific Welding Procedures) ............................................ 46
4.2 Pipeline Pre-Construction Planning and Construction: Environmental Considerations..... 47
4.2.1 Eco-Friendly Materials ................................................................................................ 47
4.2.2 Noise and Light Pollution ............................................................................................ 48
4.2.3 Construction Timing .................................................................................................... 49
4.2.3.3 Construction Mitigation for Restricted Activity Periods ...................................... 49
4.2.3.4 Documentation to Communicate Environmental Timing Windows .................... 50
4.2.4 Soil Management ......................................................................................................... 50
4.2.4.1 Soil Handling ........................................................................................................ 50
4.2.4.2 Erosion and Sediment Control .............................................................................. 51
4.2.4.3 Typical Sediment and Erosion Control Measures ................................................ 52
4.2.5 Low Impact Pipelining ................................................................................................. 53
4.2.5.1 Low Impact Practices ............................................................................................ 53
4.2.6 Acid Rock Management .............................................................................................. 54
4.2.7 Watercourse Crossings................................................................................................. 54
4.2.7.1 Below-Ground Trenchless Crossing ..................................................................... 54
4.2.7.2 Above-Ground Pipeline Crossings ....................................................................... 55
4.2.7.3 Isolated Trench Crossing ...................................................................................... 55
4.2.7.4 Instream Works ..................................................................................................... 56
4.2.8 Invasive Species Management ..................................................................................... 57
4.2.8.1 Reducing the risk of spreading invasive species................................................... 57
4.2.9 Protecting Indigenous Traditional Use of Lands and Resources ................................. 59
4.2.10 Reduction of Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas and Methane Emissions ......... 61
4.2.11 ROW Reclamation ..................................................................................................... 61
4.2.11.1 Reclamation Practices ......................................................................................... 61
4.2.11.2 Reclamation Techniques ..................................................................................... 62
4.2.11.3 Facilities Reclamation ......................................................................................... 62
5.0 COMMISSIONING ................................................................................................................ 63
5.1 Hydro Testing ..................................................................................................................... 63
5.1.1 Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 63
5.1.2 Environmental Protection Measures for Water Withdrawal and Disposal .................. 63
5.2 Cleaning and Drying ........................................................................................................... 65
5.3 Baseline Inline Inspection ................................................................................................... 65
6.0 OPERATION .......................................................................................................................... 67
4
6.1 Operation: Engineering Considerations .............................................................................. 67
6.1.1 Condition Monitoring .................................................................................................. 67
6.1.1.1 Inline Inspection (ILI) ........................................................................................... 67
6.1.1.2 In-Service Hydro Testing ...................................................................................... 69
6.1.1.3 Direct Assessment ................................................................................................. 71
6.1.1.4 Leak Detection ...................................................................................................... 71
6.1.2 Pipeline Integrity Activities ......................................................................................... 74
6.1.2.1 Risk Assessment ................................................................................................... 74
6.1.2.2 Defect Evaluation.................................................................................................. 74
6.1.2.3 Defect Repair ........................................................................................................ 75
6.1.3 Failure Investigation .................................................................................................... 76
6.2 Operation: Environmental Considerations .......................................................................... 76
6.2.1 Post-construction Monitoring of Environmental Features ........................................... 76
6.2.2 Noise and Light Pollution ............................................................................................ 77
6.2.3 Erosion and Sediment Control ..................................................................................... 78
6.2.4 Subsidence Over the Pipeline ...................................................................................... 78
6.2.4.1 Subsidence Prevention .......................................................................................... 79
6.2.4.2 Working on Slopes ................................................................................................ 79
6.2.5 Line Patrol .................................................................................................................... 80
6.2.6 Maintaining Access Control of Vehicular Traffic on ROWs ...................................... 80
6.2.7 Invasive Species ........................................................................................................... 81
6.2.8 Rare Species Conservation During Maintenance Activities ........................................ 81
6.2.9 Air Emissions Management ......................................................................................... 82
6.2.9.1 Managing Air Emissions During the Design Phase .............................................. 82
6.2.9.2 Blowdowns ........................................................................................................... 83
6.2.9.3 Reducing Air Emissions During the Operations Phase ........................................ 83
6.2.10 Contaminated Sites: Assessment, Remediation and Monitoring ............................... 84
6.2.10.1 Assessing the Presence or Absence of Contaminants ......................................... 84
6.2.10.2 Soil Contamination ............................................................................................. 85
6.2.10.3 Petroleum Hydrocarbon Contaminant Treatment in Groundwater ..................... 85
6.3 Operation: Emergency Management .................................................................................. 86
6.3.1 Emergency/Spill Response .......................................................................................... 86
6.3.1.1 Clean Up Techniques, Products and Equipment................................................... 86
6.3.1.2 Reclamation and Remediation .............................................................................. 88
5
6.3.1.3 Materials Disposal After Use in a Spill Response ................................................ 89
7.0 DEACTIVATION, DECOMMISSIONING AND ABANDONMENT................................. 90
7.1 Deactivation ........................................................................................................................ 90
7.2 Abandonment ...................................................................................................................... 90
7.2.1 Method ......................................................................................................................... 90
7.2.1.1 Choosing an Appropriate Method for Abandonment ........................................... 90
7.2.1.2 Additional Key Considerations ............................................................................. 91
7.2.1.3 Additional Environmental Considerations ............................................................ 91
7.2.1.4 Potential Long-Term Environmental Effects ........................................................ 92
7.3 Environmental Impact of Recycling and Disposing of Pipelines ....................................... 93
7.4 Station Sites and Pipeline ROW Reclamation .................................................................... 93
7.4.1 Reclamation Interventions on ROW ............................................................................ 94
7.4.2 Reclamation for Facilities ............................................................................................ 94
8.0 ENGAGEMENT SURVEYS.................................................................................................. 95
9.0 CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 97
APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................... 98
APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 100
APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................................. 102
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... 108
GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................... 112
ENDNOTES ............................................................................................................................... 128
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
On 5 February 2015, the Minister of Natural Resources requested the National Energy Board
(NEB) produce a report on Best Available Technologies (BAT) used in federally-regulated
pipelines. The original request from the Minister included a focus on pipeline materials,
construction, emergency management and emerging technology. In the spring of 2016, following
the election of a new government a few months earlier, the new Minister updated the request to
include a focus on environmental considerations.
A Snapshot
This report provides a snapshot of BAT and emerging technology, as research and development
continues to drive advances that are important to increased pipeline safety. However,
technological advances alone do not ensure the integrity of pipelines and pipeline facilities or the
safety of people and the environment. The most important factor in any technology is how it is
put into use. It is clear that technological, human, and organizational factors combine to
determine outcomes, and these factors have to be considered in every aspect of pipeline
functioning.
Consistent with our mandate, this report considers engineering and environmental protection
matters related to pipelines that are regulated by the National Energy Board Act (NEB Act) and
the National Energy Board Damage Preventions Regulations – Authorizations (NEB DPR).
7
The Structure of This Report
This report reviews best available and emerging technologies at each stage of a pipeline’s
lifecycle. Each chapter represents a stage in the lifecycle: 1) design, 2) pipe manufacturing, 3)
pre-construction planning and construction, 4) commissioning, 5) operation, 6) deactivation and
abandonment*. This structure allows holistic coverage of BAT and emerging technologies and
related engineering and environmental issues.
The design stage of the lifecycle includes steps to ensure the physical pipeline structure, route,
and locations of associated facilities are best chosen to ensure the safety of people and the
environment. Front end engineering design practices, risk assessments, structural and strength
analyses, and choice of materials are a few of the engineering considerations in the design stage.
In order to ensure pipeline construction and operation maintain environmental safety,
environmental assessments are conducted that consider how to best mitigate environmental
impacts during the lifecycle of the pipeline, particularly with respect to species at risk and
sensitive environmental features. Environmental considerations of the design stage also include
route selection and facility siting, minimizing the project footprint and equipment choices that
aid in achieving this goal.
Pipe manufacturing considers pipe types, coatings, and storage techniques that contribute to the
integrity of the pipeline, and consequently, the safety of people and the environment.
The pre-construction and construction phases of the pipeline system are particularly important
with respect to taking preventative measures to ensure the mitigation of environmental impacts.
Engineering considerations include how the pipeline route is constructed (e.g., pipe storage and
transportation, digging the trench for buried pipelines, bending the pipe, lowering the pipe into
the trench, welding the pipe together, inspecting the pipe to ensure the integrity was not
compromised during installation, and alternate methods of drilling to avoid sensitive features like
waterbodies). The variety of steps necessary to ensure mitigation of environmental impacts is
also described (e.g., eco-friendly materials, noise and light pollution mitigation, construction
timing and mitigation for restricted activity periods, soil management and watercourse crossings
management, invasive species management, protection of indigenous traditional use of lands and
resources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and reclamation procedures).
Commissioning of the pipeline takes place after construction. This phase of the lifecycle includes
the final detailed testing and inspection of the pipe integrity necessary to demonstrate that the
pipe is suitable for operation (e.g., hydro testing followed by cleaning and drying the pipe and
baseline inline inspection).
The engineering and environmental considerations in the operations phase of the pipeline
lifecycle have some overlap with the construction phase; however, the longer-term effects of
operating a pipeline or facility may require a different combination of BAT than the temporary
*
Bolded words in the body text of this report are defined in the Glossary section.
8
impacts of construction. Engineering considerations in the operations stage primarily focus on
inspection of the pipeline integrity. Environmental considerations include monitoring of
environmental features, reducing noise and light pollution during routine activities, erosion and
sediment control, mitigation of subsidence, line patrol, rare species conservation, air emissions
management, and mitigating and responding to contaminants in soil and water. Emergency
management can be an area of particular importance during the operation stage and includes
clean up response, reclamation and remediation, and materials disposal.
The final stage of the pipeline lifecycle is decommissioning or abandonment. This stage is
associated with engineering and environmental considerations that ensure the safe
decommissioning or abandonment of a pipeline. A company must adequately assess the potential
land and environmental impacts in deciding whether to remove the pipeline completely, remove
the pipeline partially, or abandon the pipeline in place.
When asked about engineering considerations, respondents focused on protection from leaks.
Respondents described the most effective technologies related to each of these points. Their
responses and NEB research shaped each section in this report.
*
35 survey one respondents; 43 survey two respondents.
9
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The report is not a technical thesis on the technologies described. Rather, it is intended to be an
informative communication piece cataloging the major characteristics of the best technologies
available and emerging in the foreseeable future. Moreover, this report is not a regulatory
document that replaces expectations; it is meant to be a reference document for best available
and emerging technologies as they relate to federally-regulated pipelines.
The adoption of new technologies as BAT takes time, even when proven effective. Many new
technologies emerge initially as innovations towards cost reductions or economic opportunities;
however, many technologies, and especially those that may provide public benefit but not
necessarily any direct benefit to a company, may take years before they become sufficiently cost
competitive to be widely adopted. BAT therefore are typically adopted either when their cost-
benefit is competitive, or when required by regulation, or when particular circumstances make
them compelling (e.g., for local acceptance of a project).
10
equipment and other items attached to the pipe (principally mainline sectionalizing
valves and isolation valves);
pipeline facilities like pump stations for liquids and compressor stations for gas
(environmental focus)
the pipeline right-of-way (ROW); and
areas beyond the ROW as appropriate for environmental considerations, including water
course crossings.
It is important to note that current practices described in this report have generally been
identified as BAT. Thus, in the report where BAT is not explicitly stated, the described practice
constitutes current BAT. Similarly, where emerging technologies are not addressed in the report,
it should be understood that beyond advancing BAT, no additional emerging technologies were
identified. This absence should inspire research and development in these areas.
a line that is used or to be used for the transmission of oil, gas or any other
commodity and that connects a province with any other province or
provinces or extends beyond the limits of a province or the offshore area
as defined in section 123, and includes all branches, extensions, tanks,
reservoirs, storage facilities, pumps, racks, compressors, loading facilities,
interstation systems of communication by telephone, telegraph or radio
and real and personal property, or immovable and movable, and works
connected to them, but does not include a sewer or water pipeline that is
used or proposed to be used solely for municipal purposes…
The Guidance to the NEB DPR provides the following guidance with respect to (or interpretation
of) the NEB Act definition:
11
The Canadian Standards Association Standard (CSA) Z662-15* defines pipelines more
restrictively as:
those items through which oil or gas industry fluids are conveyed,
including pipe, components, and any appurtenances attached thereto, up to
and including the isolating valves used at stations and other facilities.
1.3 Method
This report was developed in two phases:
Phase one used research and consulted with industry members, industry associations,
academia, and government agencies to identify engineering BAT and emerging
technologies related to pipeline construction, materials, and emergency management.
Phase two expanded the initial report to consider more engineering factors and include an
environmental focus. It combined research with internal and external consultation (from
the same types of groups as Phase One) to identify BAT.
The information in this report combines research, NEB professional judgment, and information
from both phases. Section 8 (Engagement Surveys) includes stakeholder responses about
technological uptake and regulatory versus industry responsibility for BAT.
*
“Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems”, which is incorporated in the NEB Onshore Pipeline Regulations.
12
supports a strong culture of safety, and is fundamental to keeping people safe and protecting the
environment. Although the use of BAT and emerging technologies can be instrumental in risk
mitigation, ensuring their use within an effective management system is important to best maintain
the safety of people and the environment.
Similar to the CSA Z662-1.8 clause stating: “it is not the intent of this Standard to prevent the
development of new equipment or practices, or to prescribe how such innovations are to be
handled”, the NEB encourages the use of BAT and emerging technologies provided the company
is able to demonstrate that the technology meets performance requirements and that safety to
people and the environment is not diminished. Through this process, the NEB is able to make
decisions and recommendations that represent the ever-changing interests and concerns of
Canadians.
A key early challenge was to suitably define BAT and emerging technology as it applies to the
broad range of engineering and environmental considerations the NEB identified through
research and engagement. There are a number of definitions for environmental BAT1,2,3,4,5,6 but
few have been developed for engineering. Research and consultation with engineering and
environmental specialists led to the following definitions, which shaped this report:
Best available technology means the application of the most appropriate or required combination
of measures and strategies to ensure the safety of people and mitigation of adverse
environmental effects.
Best means effective in achieving a high level of protection of people and the environment.
Technology is broadly defined and means a collection of techniques, skills, methods, and
processes.
Emerging technology is technology that is currently being developed or field tested, and which
can be reasonably expected to become BAT within a few years. To be included in this report, it
is expected that field testing and experience will better identify and confirm the circumstances
under which emerging technologies will yield better engineering and/or environmental
13
performance and economic benefit than current measures. The emerging technology presented in
this report has been generalized so as to not endorse a particular product or company.
Decommissioning
Design and Pipe Pre-Construction Planning
Commissioning Operation or
Manufacturing and Construction
Abandonment
Pipeline Lifecycle
Emergency Management
Emergency management is an important element that applies to various stages of the lifecycle:
mitigation measures apply at the design and planning stages to mitigate leaks or ruptures
(e.g., ensuring integrity of the pipe and having adequate emergency response procedures
including an Emergency Response Plan); and
emergency response applies when an incident occurs, most often during operation, but
also during construction or deactivation and abandonment.
This report includes emergency management under the operation stage in the context of
emergency response.
14
2.0 DESIGN
The design phase of a pipeline typically considers: pipeline capacity; stability and integrity;
route; facility sites; and equipment choices and operability. Pipeline design also considers
strategies to avoid or mitigate potential adverse impacts to ensure the safety of people and the
environment. This can include consultation with other jurisdictions, Indigenous people, and
landowners in order to better understand the interactive effects of the environment on the
pipeline and the pipeline on the environment. The next sections give examples of engineering
and environmental BAT.
The design methodology depends on the size and nature of the project. BAT typically affects
only the final design stage.
The FEED may identify new technology and specify applications of innovative technologies
such as Alternative Integrity Validation (AIV) or a strain-based design approach. However,
the applicant will not work out the details until the final design; thus, BAT seldom go into the
FEED.
If the regulator recommends approval, it will often impose conditions that companies must
address in the final design.
*
The Regulator's assessment considers project design and safety, environmental matters, socio-economic and land
matters, impacts on directly affected Indigenous groups, impacts on directly affected persons, financial
responsibility of the applicant, economic feasibility and the Canadian public interest.
15
2.1.3 Modelling for Final Design Conditions
The final design generally requires extensive modelling, computation, and calculation, and
different processes and situations require different levels of design complexity. To model a final
design, the operating company:
1. assesses the risks associated with possible failure scenarios;
2. performs a structural and strength analysis of the pipeline; and
3. determines the most appropriate design based on this analysis.
This section concentrates on best available and emerging technologies for risk assessments,
structural and strength analysis, and resulting design types.
Non-quantitative approaches are more appropriate for simpler cases,* for example:
a land use study can determine the likelihood of residential encroachment on a pipeline,
where the effects may be significant; or
a cost estimate can determine whether to increase the reliability of pipe segments during
the construction stage or later, during operation.
Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) methodologies are most appropriate for complex design
uncertainties that risk, for example, a large spill into an ecologically sensitive area, or that could
affect a population’s drinking water. QRA is best where failure frequency data is robust and
established software solutions are available.†
Emerging Technology
Even in relatively simple cases, QRA is emerging as a global technology due principally to the
consistent rigour it brings to the assessment.
*
For example, using a 5x5 matrix will usually suffice (as described in Z662-15, Annex B).
†
Guidance on the use of QRA methods is given in CSA Z662-15, Annex O (Reliability-based design and
assessment (RBDA) of onshore, non-sour service natural gas transmission pipelines).
16
2.1.3.2 Structural and Strength Analysis
Once the level of risk has been determined, designers must analyze the types of stresses the
pipeline could experience. The method of analysis depends on the number and type of stresses.
In very simple cases, applicants can meet code requirements manually.*
Most realistic pipeline configurations require computer analysis, particularly with buried
pipelines where pipe-soil interaction has a large effect on how the pipeline responds to external
loads. For analyzing buried pipelines under combined internal pressure and external loads (such
as geotechnical or thermal where deformation of the pipe can result in permanent deformation),
nonlinear finite element methodology (FEM) that uses application-specific pipe elements is
almost always required.
In this type of design, a maximum stress is set below the level at which the pipe would
permanently deform. For many routine pipeline designs in Canada, stress-based design is
sufficient.
Strain-Based Design
Most pipeline codes incorporate a stress-based approach.† This approach works well for simpler,
routine piping configurations. However, buried pipelines are frequently subjected to loadings
that produce stresses higher than those allowed by stress design. In these cases, a strain-based
approach is required to ensure integrity of the pipeline.
It also:
*
Such as those in CSA Z662-15.
†
Including CSA Z662-15.
17
specifies allowable deformation in the pipe by controlling allowable strains (so-called
limit states) to a safe level;*
requires more stringent control in weld quality, testing, handling procedures and
monitoring during operation; and
usually requires application-specific, commercially available software.†
Tough, high-strength steel is generally considered the BAT for pipe manufacture, however,
careful process control is necessary.
The pipe manufacturers’ processes must maintain the pipe steel’s toughness and
weldability advantages.
Workers must account for the thinner wall when transporting and handling it.
Engineers must consider the thickness when designing for operational loads such as
thermal loading and earth loads. A soda can offers a good analogy: it holds pressure from
the fluid content, but easily crumples if squeezed externally because it is thin relative to
its diameter.
*
Pipe elements must be able to deform plastically once they reach the elastic limit. In these situations, design
software must handle nonlinear response from large deflections, nonlinear pipe-soil interaction, and post-elastic
behaviour in the pipe elements.
†
Guidance on the application of strain-based design is given in Annex C of CSA Z662-15 (Limit states design).
‡
The process of simply hot-rolling plate and subsequently heat-treating the pipe has evolved into one involving
thermomechanical rolling, which incorporates hot rolling, controlled cooling and heat treatment in one process.
Combining micro-alloying and thermomechanical rolling resulted in higher strength steels with reduced carbon
content (which improved the weldability of the steel). In the 1980s, thermomechanical rolling was further
improved by incorporating accelerated cooling, which led to even less carbon content, but improved toughness—
toughness being the property that controls brittleness and enhances resistance to damage due to the formation of
cracks in the steel. More recently, adding molybdenum, copper and nickel has produced even higher strength steel
without decreasing weldability or toughness.
18
Emerging Technology
combining the two processes above—through composite pipe with a steel core, and
polyethylene interiors and exteriors. This produces high-strength pipe with enhanced
corrosion resistance, which is:
• joined by mechanical fittings, rather than welding, to allow rapid installation; and
• limited, at present, to pipe sizes up to Nominal Pipeline Size (NPS) 8.*
Composite wrapped over (lower-strength) steel pipe can achieve the equivalent strength of
higher-strength steel pipe.
Fiber-reinforced composites have been used as permanent pipeline repair methods for over 50
years. RTP leverages this operational experience.9
Emerging Technology
To deal with issues like corrosion, using composite materials in place of steel (such as reinforced
polyethylene and composite reinforced steel) is becoming more acceptable and advanced.
However, the products are currently limited to size NPS 6† or smaller.8
Cathodic Protection
If the coating is damaged and pipe is exposed to the soil, the second line of protection is known
as Cathodic Protection (CP). CP is the practice of negatively charging the pipe and situating
positively charged anodes close to the pipe. The anodes sacrificially corrode and protect the pipe.
The anodes must be replaced periodically.
*
NPS 8–outside diameter 219 mm.
†
Outside diameter 168 mm.
19
Two basic CP options are listed as follows.
Galvanic: the anode material has higher electrochemical potential than the steel of the
pipe, so the pipe is naturally cathodic relative to the anodes, and therefore less likely to
corrode. The most common galvanic anode materials are magnesium or zinc alloys.
Impressed current: a negative charge is applied directly to the pipe and a positive charge
to the anodes. This method is more common on cross-country transmission pipelines.
BAT for CP
The BAT in CP is impressed current, possibly with additional galvanic anodes at locations that
require more protection. However, operating companies must limit voltage. Excessive voltage
(greater than approximately 1.20 volts) can disbond coating.
20
2.2 Pipeline Design: Environmental Considerations
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment (EA)
EA is a planning and decision-making tool. The concept of BAT can be applied to the processes,
practices, and tools of EA, and many of the technical planning, measurement, modelling, and
design steps that contribute to good EA are covered elsewhere in this document. This section
provides a high-level overview of some process elements that contribute to best possible EA, in
the context of major Canadian pipeline projects. Although legislative and administrative rules
may be altered from time to time, the objectives and values of good EA outlined below are likely
to persist.
An EA:
identifies potential adverse environmental effects;
proposes measures to mitigate them;
predicts whether there will be significant adverse environmental effects after mitigation;
and
includes a follow-up program to verify the environmental assessment was accurate and
mitigation was effective.
*
See the NEB Filing Manual on the NEB website for more complete discussion on EA themes explored briefly in
this section.
21
guidance has formalized the process, and optimization of EA remains a topic of active
discussion*.
Timeliness
An EA should be conducted as early as possible in a designated project’s planning stage to:
allow the proponent to consider the analysis during planning; and
support better decision making by companies and regulators.
A clear process will make it more likely an EA is completed without unnecessary delays.†
The public needs a certain amount of time to learn about the project and how it may affect their
rights and interests, to participate meaningfully in the process and process design, and to express
their views and knowledge to decision makers. Like any regulatory process, EA involves
competing demands for timely completion, cost, and quality. Pipeline operating companies and
the public value speedy decisions that are fair, clear, legally sound, and that the public respects.
Time limits may be set out in legislation or by service standards. To ensure flexibility and
fairness, mechanisms to “stop the clock” are typically implemented for circumstances beyond the
applicant’s or the regulator’s control
Precautionary Principle
EA should incorporate a precautionary approach when assessing the project, guided by the
following list of principles.
Precaution helps detect, reduce and manage risk.
Precautionary mitigation should be based on scientific and technical information. This
information should be available to the public and tested through a public process.
Precaution is appropriate when variability and unpredictability in the natural environment
make environmental effects difficult to predict.
Contingency planning and adaptive management tools facilitate dealing with findings of
environmental monitoring that may reveal varied, unpredicted or unexpected outcomes.
*
For example, see Johnston (2016) Federal Environmental Assessment Reform Summit Proceedings. West Coast
Environmental Law.
†
Reasonable flexibility (typically after hearing views from other participants) is essential to preserve fairness when
participants have legitimate reasons for missing deadlines.
22
Effective community engagement and follow-up environmental monitoring can verify or
disprove the assumptions in the EA and help to reduce scientific uncertainty and
unnecessary precaution over time.
A public and transparent assessment process improves the precautionary approach.
Scope of the EA
Regulators must consider all aspects of a proposed pipeline project before making a
recommendation. This includes technical, human, and cultural aspects, such as local, regional,
and national perspectives from affected individuals, Indigenous groups, and other groups along
the route.
Scoping is the foundation of an effective ESA. The scope ensures the assessment focuses on
relevant issues, factors, and level of detail, including:
the physical facilities and activities to include, and
the biophysical and socio-economic elements likely to be affected.
Scoping for any project, including major pipeline projects includes determining the scope of the
project and the scope of the EA itself.
Filing Requirements
The regulatory filing requirements should be transparent and knowable in advance of the EA.
The regulated company must submit all information as part of their application. The NEB’s
expectations and filing requirements for EAs are set out in its online Filing Manual. As the
Board evaluates the application and receives public comment, it will often direct the company to
file additional information.
Regulators do not typically need final design details during the EA. Many final engineering
details can only be determined after the EA is concluded, the project has regulatory approval,
and project construction has begun. As an early project planning tool an EA often results in
conditions of approval which set out direction and expectations for, implementation of
mitigation, any further information needs, or any further final design details.
Public Participation
The review process should be fair, open to the public, safe, respectful, and transparent. It should
encourage and support meaningful public and Indigenous participation. This would typically
include collecting oral traditional evidence, such as Indigenous community knowledge and
testing the technical evidence filed. People should be able to share their information using a
variety of methods (e.g., orally, in writing, by telephone or by videoconference, as appropriate).
23
This approach helps give all eligible participants opportunities to bring evidence and opinions,
despite financial, work, and life commitments or distance.
Consultation aims to inform the public and potentially affected parties to:
assist them to understand the project;
provide opportunities to raise and understand concerns; and
discuss how these may be appropriately addressed.
Hearing directly from those who may be affected by the project, ideally in the language of their
choice (with simultaneous interpretation as necessary), is key when considering sustainable
development. Best practice for public hearings could include:
public input on the draft list of issues, additional information requirements, and locations
of hearings;
oral comments on the process for hearings;
public information sessions to explain the process and opportunities to participate;
process advisors to assist participants throughout the hearing process;
opportunities to hear oral statements and oral evidence from people potentially affected
by the project, and to enable Elders and First Nations to share their oral history and
traditional knowledge;
online workshops to help participants prepare for participating;
transcripts and documents promptly and publicly available (e.g., on regulator’s website);
and
live webcast of proceedings (i.e., audio or video).
Quality and effectiveness of a proponent’s public engagement could be evaluated in terms of:
how the public responded to opportunities to consult on the project;
how the proponent considered and addressed the concerns of potentially affected parties;
and
how input from the public influenced the project's proposed design, construction and
operation.
The proponent’s public engagement is an essential and ongoing activity throughout the project's
lifespan.
The scale of the cumulative effects assessment and the level of effort to create it should be
appropriate to:
the nature and context of the project;
its potential residual effects; and
the environmental and socio-economic setting (e.g., more detail may be required when
the region anticipates or has had rapid or intensive development, or the project includes
particular environmental or socio-economic sensitivities or risks, such as significant
Indigenous traditional use).
Valued components could be elements from the NEB Filing Manual*. The valued components
used for a project must:
capture possible effects from the project over time;
be measurable; and
have baseline data with which to draw comparisons with future conditions.
The assessment of effects should identify any residual effects left over after the application of
project mitigation. In turn, residual effects then need to be carried forward into a cumulative
effects assessment.
Ultimately effects are then assessed for their significance using appropriate criteria and defined
ratings for the criteria.
For more information, consult the NEB Filing Manual and the Canadian Environmental
Assessment Agency's Operational Policy Statement - Assessing Cumulative Environmental
Effects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012.
*
Table A-1 of the NEB Filing Manual
26
There are numerous technologies to mitigate the impacts of projects on species at risk. However,
the extent to which these technologies may be required vary widely across provinces and
territories. Some technologies are legislated (e.g., Fisheries Act, provincial and territorial wildlife
acts, Migratory Birds Convention Act, British Columbia Oil and Gas Activities Act); others come
from resource management guidelines and best practices.
The following list of strategies aids in selection, development and implementation of BAT to
mitigate impacts on Species at Risk.
1. Reviewing the Species at Risk Public Registry to determine which species overlap with
the proposed development. Applicable provincial and territorial registries (e.g.,
Conservation Data Centers) can help determine overlap and locate management planning
documents if available.
2. Reviewing available recovery strategies, management plans, and action plans for the
potentially affected species. The intention here is to design based on consideration of:
the objectives of those documents;
the causes to or threats of decline in the species; and
available definitions of critical habitat or the biophysical attributes that describe
critical habitat.
It is then possible to use available tools (e.g., desktop reviews, field surveys, Geographic
Information System (GIS) mapping) to evaluate potential project effects and
opportunities to avoid or reduce impacts.
3. Determining if the project is likely to impact a species at risk, and whether the
development would be contrary to the objectives of recovery or management.
4. Following the mitigation hierarchy of avoid, reduce, restore, offset.
Avoidance can be achieved by evaluating routing alternatives, adhering to
seasonal timing windows (see section 4.2.3, Construction Timing), and
establishing and adhering to setbacks around important features (e.g., rare plants,
active bear dens, bat maternity roosts and hibernacula, wetlands that support at-
risk amphibians).*,10
5. Developing a project-specific plan, such as an EPP that describes which mitigations will
avoid, reduce, restore or offset an impact to a species at risk.
Standard mitigation measures (e.g., seasonal timing restrictions, setbacks) may
be sufficient to alleviate potential impacts on Species at Risk.
Some species, such as woodland caribou, may require a species-specific
management plan to fully describe the kinds of standard and non-standard
mitigation and monitoring that will be implemented.
*
Most information on timing restrictions and setbacks is available on federal, provincial and territorial government
websites. It can also be found in federal recovery strategies, management plans and action plans, as well as
provincial or territorial management or planning reports. See endnote 10 for one example.
27
6. Monitoring the effectiveness of non-standard mitigation using scientific approaches to
predict the outcome, then testing the predictions (hypothetico-deductive methods),
particularly for methods that are not well-tested or demonstrated to be effective.*
*
It is useful to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation on established targets or endpoints, such as seedling survival
rates, community composition or measures of expected difference among treatments. Where targets are not met, it
is helpful to develop an adaptive management framework to describe remedial measures for achieving
effectiveness targets.
28
Offsetting
After avoidance, minimization and on-site ROW restoration are exhausted, offsets can then be
used to account for residual project effects. Offsets can include off-site restoration, land
securement, conservation covenants.16 There is considerable literature on the principles and
challenges around the development and implementation of offsets*.
Emerging Technology
Line-of-sight management is a practice still being assessed as to its potential effectiveness in
habitat restoration and caribou protection.
Long sight-lines may be reduced naturally where routing traverses appropriate topography (e.g.,
hills) and where a ROW changes direction (i.e., line-bending). In terms of BAT line-of-sight
restoration measures these can include the use of Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) or
boring at intersections to preserve existing vegetation barriers, berms or rollback of sufficient
height, the bending or partial felling of adjacent trees, and the use of constructed visual barriers.
Constructed barriers may require some maintenance. The planting of tree seedlings is also a long
term measure but as with planting for access control or restoration it will be some years before it
becomes effective. Current research suggests an effective line-of-sight may require a height of
approximately 1.5 metres.
For all caribou habitat related measures monitoring is important. Monitoring is used not only to
ensure implementation, but to assess effectiveness of the measures implemented and any
assumptions. With monitoring and adaptive management BAT can be further refined. Light
detection and ranging (LiDAR) and remote cameras are technologies being more commonly
adopted and which can be used in measuring the effectiveness of access and restoration
mitigation where implemented and comparing this to baseline conditions, unmitigated ROWs,
and undisturbed forest areas.
29
selecting the preferred route.
When selecting the route, applying companies consider potential effects on the environment,
constructability and economic factors, and typically input from stakeholders. After selecting the
route and siting the facilities, the company evaluates interactions with environmentally sensitive
areas, and then performs adjustments if they are warranted and feasible.
Linear development has prompted innovation such as narrower or shared ROW to allow co-
location with power lines or other utility corridors. Developing new greenfield routes is often a
last resort when parallel routes are not constructible or feasible due to additional length and cost
or public interest.
30
2.2.2.4 Best Routing and Siting Solutions
GIS software makes it possible for environmental considerations to guide pipeline route selection
and facility site planning.22
GIS is used:
most typically to produce maps showing multiple route options (these maps usually
identify areas to target or avoid and are important during both preliminary corridor
selection and the ROW and facility site size and selection, i.e., micro-routing);
to connect a place on a map to digital information about that area,22 which allows
operating companies to analyze route options as they relate to environmentally sensitive
areas and features;
during routing and siting to map the project plans to the environmental constraints that
apply to the project type, location, product being transported, local regulatory regime, and
stakeholder interests, among other factors; *
to derive quantitative metrics (e.g., total hectares of old growth forest) and mapping
(e.g., constraints maps, heat maps, and no-go areas);
to derive predictions for incidents based on existing data sets (e.g. prediction of the
spread of a fire using wind direction, vegetation and terrain data, or predict affected area
of a pipeline spill by interpreting the terrain and volume of liquid) and generate maps
related to these predictions; and
possibly to automatically derive or select potential routes (e.g., the Electric Power
Research Institute (EPRI) model used in transmission line siting); 23 however, it is more
common for interdisciplinary experts to evaluate and select routes, supported by GIS-
derived metrics.
31
capturing data and assessing applications based on tablet and web-GIS (these are
becoming standard tools for pipeline routing and are continually being upgraded to be
more functional and accessible in both the field and office).
32
reclaiming and revegetating access roads after construction (if not required for
operations).
Emerging Technology
Geogrid roads use synthetic materials to reinforce existing soil materials, reduce permanent
access road widths, and decrease the amount of aggregate material needed provide access to
construct, and to maintain the pipeline. In addition, at station sites, geogrid is used to reduce the
amount of imported clay or aggregate relative to traditional construction methods.
These construction and operation infrastructure decisions relate to the placement of pipeline
valve sites, launcher-receiver sites, meter stations and compressors and pump stations.
Section 4 (Pre-Construction Planning and Construction) discusses these factors more fully. The
following examples focus on installed infrastructure.
Emerging Technology
Emerging technology for pipeline and facilities is being directly incorporated into projects at the
design stage and are often tied to asset management needs over the life of the project. These
technologies include:
fiber optic sensing technology that facilitates real-time, early detection of pipeline and
facility leaks using glass (or plastic) fibers to transmit data; 28 and
fiber optics on storage tanks to monitor the status of floating roofs and prevent over-filling.*
*
These design options become an integral part of Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) programs, which are
discussed in section 6.2.9 (Air Emissions Management).
34
3.0 PIPE MANUFACTURING
Pipe manufacturing includes construction of the physical pipe, which is usually completed before
it arrives at the location where it will be used. Manufacturing considerations include:
pipe material;
welding practices used to form the pipe; and
the type of coating used to protect the pipe.
Eco-friendly materials are discussed in the context of pipe manufacturing and facility
construction.
Pipe Manufacture
Both seam-welded and seamless pipe can be considered BAT. For seam-welded pipe, the quality
of the seam weld is critical. Earlier welding techniques that borrowed from water and other low-
pressure pipeline applications (such as forged lap joints) are no longer used. Modern methods
(dating from the 1980s) when properly applied and inspected in the steel mill, produce a sound
seam weld with the same or greater strength as the pipe body.
Seam-welded pipes, formed before 1970 by low frequency electric resistance welding, are still in
operation, however, they are no longer manufactured. Since this method has been found to
introduce flaws into the seam weld, particular attention (in the form of in-service integrity
monitoring) remains necessary to ensure the soundness of the weld.
3.2 Coatings
Coating applied to the pipe in the pipe mill is the main protection against external corrosion. The
coating must:
adhere well to the pipe;
*
Outside diameter 711 mm.
†
Outside diameter 1219 mm.
‡
Outside diameter 1828 mm.
35
be flexible to allow bending of the pipe without damaging the coating;
have adequate electrical and chemical resistance; and
be able to resist load from movement of the soil (called “soil stress”).
Early coatings were mainly based on coal tar and asphalt derivatives, and many remain
successfully in service today. Field-applied polyethylene tape was used for a period of time, but
operating companies found it disbonded in a way that impeded CP and allowed electrolytes from
the soil to contact the pipe, generating an environment susceptible to stress corrosion
cracking (SCC).
Pipe Coating
Many modern coatings are available. The BAT is to select one that suits the degree of impact
resistance and flexibility the pipeline segment needs. Some examples include:
two-layer polyethylene, a good general-purpose coating that has been available since the
1950s;
multilayer coatings, available where greater impact and abrasion resistance is required;
and
fusion bond epoxy, a high-performance coating with the advantage of not shielding CP if
disbonded, which makes it particularly suitable in locations where conditions make the
pipe susceptible to SCC.
Emerging Technology
Efforts are underway to identify how to make pipeline coatings more environmentally friendly,
by removing environmentally harmful components such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
that can be released into the atmosphere while the coatings cure.
3.3 Storage
Major damage considerations when storing pipe are:
ultraviolet (UV) and other environmental damage to the coating;
corrosion damage due to uncoated steel being exposed to the atmosphere; and
local overstress of the pipe wall due to loads from wood skids and blocking used to
support and separate the stacks of pipes.
The industry understands these considerations well. If operating companies account for them
correctly, they do not need any additional technology.
36
4.0 PRE-CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION
Pre-construction and construction phases of a pipeline system can adversely affect a number of
environmental elements. These include:
atmospheric (e.g., air quality, GHG emissions);
acoustics and light;
soils;
geology and terrain (e.g., landslides);
vegetation (e.g., old growth forests, rare plants);
wildlife (including species at risk);
water quality and quantity;
fish and fish habitat;
heritage resources; and
groundwater.
This section includes examples of BAT and emerging technologies to mitigate adverse
environmental impacts based on a range of materials and strategies.
Movement
Above-ground construction separates (decouples) the line from the surrounding soil in areas of
sharp or uncertain slope movement and zones of extreme seismic activity.
River crossings
Above-ground pipelines can use pre-existing road or rail bridges to carry pipe, which avoids the
expense, construction, and environmental consequences of a conventional crossing under the
watercourse.
Most pipeline projects have several construction phases. The following sections detail the current
technologies and methods for each phase.
*
See discussion section 4.1.12 (Horizontal Drilling and Microtunneling).
37
4.1.2 Buried Pipeline
Burying pipelines minimizes land
use, and has security, protection
and aesthetic advantages.
The pipeline construction industry
has worked extensively to make
this process as safe and efficient as
possible. While technology,
machinery and equipment in the
pipeline industry have changed
significantly over the last 50 years,
today’s machinery looks relatively
similar to that of decades ago.
Specialized groups such as welding
or coating crews perform many
small tasks repeatedly in a Marker indicating a buried pipeline
production line approach. Ideally,
this strategy maintains consistent expertise, quality, and production levels, and minimizes repairs
and delays.
Brushing involves cutting trees, levelling shrubs, and other vegetation that would interfere with
constructing the ROW. Typically, brushing is done with logging machinery (e.g., feller-
bunchers, bulldozers, chainsaws), mowers, and excavators. Large debris that does not fit into the
spoil pile is segregated and burnt or hauled away.
Stripping is the removal of top soil to expose subsoil and create a somewhat level working
surface. Best practices and legislation for stripping conserve topsoil through separate activities.
First, the (organic) top soil is skimmed or stripped from the ROW. Then, as the trench is dug,
the subsoil is stored in a separate location. Once the pipe has been lowered into the trench it is
backfilled (meaning re-filled) with the subsoil, and then finally the whole area is re-covered
with the stored top soil.
Separating topsoil has widened the pipeline construction area. A typical ROW now has a topsoil
pile, an area for the excavation spoil and width for the trench. The working space comprises an
area for stringing out the pipe material to be welded, space for the welding equipment, side
booms and excavators, and an overlap area for equipment to be moved around or used in the case
of emergency.
*
Environmental considerations related to the practices of clearing the ROW and managing topsoil are numerous,
and are described in section 4.2 (Pipeline Pre-Construction Planning & Construction: Environmental
Considerations).
38
4.1.4 Trenching
Trenching involves installing pipe by trenching or digging a slot in the ground with machinery.
Transmission pipeline projects commonly use wheel trenching, a continuous cycle of buckets on
an assembly line that scrape the trench face and deposit soil nearby. Resulting trenches are
typically clean and uniform with high vertical walls.
In general, wheel trenching (using a device also known as a bucket wheel) is the best available
and most often used technology, terrain and clearance from other utilities permitting. However,
various trenchless installation methods are available, such as ploughed-in construction where the
pipe is fed through the toe of the plough blade making the trench. This form of construction is
particularly suited to small diameter steel pipe and high density polyethylene pipe. These
methods are attractive because of speed, ease of pipe burial and reduced ROW width. There
appears to be no emerging extension to larger diameter steel pipe. However, this method r might
well be further developed where decreasing the ROW width is necessary or desirable.
39
particularly prone due to its greater length (and therefore greater flexibility) and the presence of
the girth weld joining the two joints.*
In these cases, the BAT is to calculate the dynamic stresses due to typical highway transportation
loads, then design and place supports and separators to avoid fatigue damage.
4.1.6 Stringing
Stringing, or placing pipe material on the ROW, begins when sufficient space has been cleared
and the pipe is aligned on the ground, staked out by markers to keep ahead of the pipe placement.
Current practice constitutes BAT. Apart from improvements in operating equipment, there is no
notable emerging technology related to stringing.
4.1.7 Bending
Cold Bending
Bending (if required) occurs between stringing and welding. “Cold bending” allows the pipe to
remain at a constant depth as the surface of the ROW undulates. This process accommodates
gradual changes in elevation and alignment in the field. A bending machine uses hydraulic rams
to forcibly bend the pipe beyond the plastic limit of the steel. The pipe deforms to the point that
it springs back to the required bend radius rather than to its original straight shape. A useful
analogy is to picture straightening and bending a paper clip.
Hot Bending
Larger changes in direction and corners with a tight turning radius require pre-fabricated bends.
These bends are most often shop-fabricated. The process entails using induction coils to heat and
*
This type of pipe has two lengths (pipe joints) girth-welded together in the pipe mill to reduce the number of welds
necessary to make on site. However, the length of these double joints and possible small defects in the girth weld
can be conducive to fatigue cracks in or near the weld.
40
then bend a straight piece of pipe, followed by a quenching or cooling period which stabilizes the
pipe’s material properties. A further heat treatment may be necessary to stabilize the pipe’s
material properties, like strength, yield and toughness. To determine if this additional treatment
is necessary, one or more of the production bends representative of the entire bending procedure
undergoes a final mechanical test.
Other methods can form the shape of these so-called “hot bends.” For example, steel plates can
be heated and formed into open half bends; the two halves are then welded along the intrados
(inside seam) and extrados (outside seam) to form the completed bend.
Current practice constitutes BAT. Apart from improvements in operating equipment, there is no
notable emerging technology.
A welder on a large diameter pipeline may take hours to complete a single weld. With many
variables to control, there is potential for a poor weld, especially when completing it may require
multiple passes, each with setting adjustments. The welder must ensure:
the weld is uniform;
the weld has no contamination, gas pockets or cracks; and
the structure of the surrounding material has not been compromised from the heat from
the welding.
Any deviation from the qualified welding
procedure could result in flaws. Flaws may
develop into injurious defects during the
operating life of the pipeline. This type of
welding is generally limited to repair work, tie-
ins, small diameter pipe and/or short
pipeline lengths.
Once the weld is complete, the clamping system is released and the welder continues to the
next weld.
Regardless of welding system, it is important to know that all welding must meet a welding
procedure specification. The specification is developed by qualifying the welding procedure by
both non-destructive inspection and destructive testing of a sample weld or welds to ensure the
procedure has the required properties. Welders train to be able to meet the procedure
specification before applying it in practice.
In summary, welding the pipe joints is an integral and important part of pipeline construction.
Advances in welding have improved weld quality, reduced weld repair rates and increased
production rates. Although individual mechanized welding processes continue to improve (such
as increasing the number of welding heads laying in welding material per pass), mechanized
welding is generally accepted as BAT, especially for large-diameter transmission pipeline
projects.
Emerging Technology
Pipeline operating companies are considering a range of emerging automated welding
technologies to improve on what already exists or to replace traditional stick welding.
An emerging technology routinely used in the auto manufacturing industry is Hybrid Laser Arc
Welding (HLAW). At present, the laser equipment is large and costly, and is more suitable for
industrial applications. However, more cost-effective, smaller and more powerful lasers capable
of use in pipeline construction are in development.31 The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) is developing guidelines and standards to apply HLAW to pipeline welding,
which will allow operating companies to use this technology.
42
around it with a corrosion-resistant layer before lowering the pipe into the ditch.
A number of protection schemes have been tried in the past, notably tape coating and shrink
sleeves. Although these methods produce stable results for a period of time, long-term
interaction with the soil that surrounds the buried pipes causes the corrosion-resistant material to
disbond from the pipe.
The most robust current technology for large diameter pipeline construction to avoid this
deterioration is to field-coat the girth weld areas with epoxy.
Common methods include X-ray and ultrasound. Mounted on the pipe exterior, the equipment
can provide a cross-sectional view of the completed weld. If a defect is found, it could be weld-
repaired depending on the type of flaw. If it cannot be, the pipe weld will be cut out and a new
weld performed.
44
Once the pipe is lowered into the open trench and tied in, the trench is backfilled with soil.
Low impact techniques are available or under development to minimize the disruption from
conventional trenching. In some cases, these techniques completely avoid the need
for backfilling.*
This approach can be used to traverse steep or unstable slopes. Some regulatory agencies have
developed guidelines to use HDD to install a pipeline channel under sensitive environmental
features that cannot otherwise be avoided (such as watercourses, wetlands, rare plant sites and
archaeological features).32
HDD is becoming more cost effective with a higher certainty of success, resulting in increased
use of this and other trenchless methods.
Geotechnical evaluations aid in selecting the most successful drill path, since HDD can fail
when an unforeseen obstacle or soil condition is encountered that snags the drill or makes
steering difficult.
HDD Challenges
Innovations in trenchless technology continue, but HDD does present some challenges. These
challenges are listed as follows.
*
We discuss these techniques later in section 4.2.4 (Soil Management) and section 4.2.5 (Low Impact Pipelining).
45
Frac-out, a hazard in which the drilling fluid inadvertently releases into the soil creating
an undesirable environmental impact.*
Difficult soils, where granular soils such as sand and gravel make it difficult to maintain
drilling fluid in the borehole used to take cuttings away from the drilling head. Also,
granular soils make it difficult to maintain a clean hole because the soil sloughs in as
drilling fluid dissipates into the pore spaces in the soil, creating a fluid environment. This
issue has largely been resolved by combining HDD technology with auger boring
technology in a new practice called microtunneling.
Microtunneling is an emerging and maturing technology that can overcome many of the
challenges of the other methods. It combines guided auger boring with the steering ability of
HDD, which has enabled successful drilling in problem soils like sand.† Microtunneling is
typically only used when HDD would be preferable but is not feasible.
BAT is to make the tie-in welds carefully, with low-hydrogen electrodes, and examine them 360
degrees with UT or radiography 24 hours after the weld is completed to check for possible
delayed cracking.
While tie-in welds are performed for new pipeline, a “cut in” weld is used for pre-tested pipe
sections or assemblies that have to be welded to an existing pipeline (for example in repairs
following a failure, or when inserting mainline valve assemblies). Unless the tie-in is to an
existing valve, clearly the pipeline has to be emptied of product. Particular attention has to be
paid to the welding process (especially in the case of oil pipelines) to avoid the possibility of
igniting residual traces of product.
Note that as with all individual sub-segments that are tied in to form the pipe segment, in HDD,
microtunnelling, and auger boring, the pipe string will be hydro tested and all of the girth
welds radiographically or UT tested before the pipe string is installed and tied-in to the rest of
the pipeline.
Examples of eco-friendly materials relevant to pipeline and facility construction are listed as
follows.
Biodegradable geotextile fabrics (e.g., coconut matting and coir wrap) to control
erosion, instead of plastics or polypropylene fabrics. Biodegradable geotextile fabrics are
an alternative to non-biodegradable materials whenever geotextile material is required.
Reusable timber mats to create temporary construction access roads, usually through
wetland areas instead of layered materials that have been hauled in to construct the road
and then hauled out to reclaim road access.
Geogrid roads for temporary access roads to minimize the volume of fuel used to haul
aggregate (e.g., gravel) to site; they also reduce rutting.33
Biodegradable or ecofriendly hydraulic fluids (e.g., vegetable-based or biodegradable
fluids) in heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, HD drills) when working in and
around water (e.g., watercourse crossings and wetlands).34
Environmentally friendly drilling muds and systems for trenchless pipeline crossings at
watercourses (typically bentonite-based drilling mud, remove cuttings and stabilize the
hole). Aquatic habitats can be negatively affected by the release of bentonite-based
47
drilling mud. Careful monitoring of drilling operations and immediate responses to
drilling mud releases (called frac-outs, see section 4.1.12.1) can minimize any negative
effects of using bentonite-based drilling fluids.
Geotextile pipeline weights instead of conventional concrete weights to control
buoyancy. Additionally, screw piles can be used to anchor pipelines in high buoyancy
areas.
48
Light Pollution
Construction equipment accounts for much of the light pollution tied to pipeline and facility
construction. BAT to mitigate such light pollution focuses largely on site-design planning to
achieve targets such as:
installing full horizontal light fixtures to control light spill;
locating parking and fueling stations so that headlights are not directed towards receptors
(e.g., nearby residences) and key wildlife areas; and
leaving standing vegetation in place when possible to block light from construction
traffic.
Emerging technology for light pollution includes:
energy efficient light-emitting diode (LED) lights that produce warm-toned lighting,
which is less disruptive to animals and humans; and
motion-activated lights at facilities to reduce disturbance when light is not required.
It is best to construct pipelines and associated facilities when the potential for environmental
effects are lower, which is region- and project-specific. For example, fall and early winter may
be best on native prairie since:
native vegetation is dormant;
soils are suitably dry or frozen; and
RAPs for migratory birds and other wildlife species of concern are not in effect.
Traditionally, these documents were on paper, with infrequent updates. Today, they are usually
digital, and are regularly updated throughout the construction season. This practice ensures the
most appropriate mitigation—during the right timeframe and at the correct locations.
Emerging Technology
Emerging technology for RAPs includes tablet-based field recording and submitting real-time,
daily nest survey and denning information via GIS. Construction contractors can use this
information to plan their daily schedules. Many systems now link GIS data on environmental
restrictions directly with Global Positioning System (GPS)-enabled construction equipment to
help ensure that construction activities do not occur inside RAPs. Exceptions include pre-
construction environmental surveys that clear the company to construct in the area, or alternative
mitigation, in place to protect the resource.
Thermal imaging cameras are increasingly identifying den or nest occupancy before
construction. These cameras use infrared radiation to look through vegetation or snow cover into
den and nest sites. Advancements in the camera technology and image quality represent areas of
emerging technology.
*
See section 2.2.1.5 (Caribou Habitat Protection and Restoration) for a discussion of management approaches for
caribou, including relevant, existing and emerging technologies. Fisheries timing windows are similarly discussed
in section 4.2.7 (Watercourse Crossings).
50
using specialized equipment (e.g., narrow trenching buckets, wheel trenchers and low
ground pressure equipment) during unsuitable weather conditions, such as high rainfall
periods, snow melt and extreme drought;
using geotextile erosion control blankets that cover exposed soils;
using chemical tackifiers that effectively create a sticky top layer on exposed soils; and
using straw crimping to stabilize disturbed areas or spoil piles and reduce wind erosion
risk (erosion and sediment control are discussed below).
The following backfilling practices are suggested as to prevent excessive subsidence or erosion
of the backfill and support material: 42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49
investigating soil characteristics along the pipeline route during project planning and
identifying soils that do not meet the specifications for backfilling,
completing backfilling with local native material as soon as possible after pipeline
installation to avoid water in the trench;
If suitable, replacing segregated soil horizons in reverse order from excavation in
appropriate lift thickness and compaction densities;
using approved earth fill or sand padding over the pipe where local material is too rocky
and may damage the pipe or pipe coating;
backfilling by bucket placement, rather than by blading in material;
dewatering flooded trenches before backfilling;
monitoring and maintaining compaction records;
applying topsoil over the backfilled spoil to facilitate revegetation;
grading the surface of the trench to a crown, to prevent water ponding on the trench and
to mitigate against minor subsidence and settlement; and
providing crown breaks where necessary to maintain drainage conditions.
A number of the other environmental practices in this section, such as low impact pipelining
techniques,* include measures that will reduce the amount of soils that must be handled and
managed. They suggest how to avoid areas of specific concern, like those at risk from wind and
water erosion, such as steep slopes or areas near watercourses.
*
See section 4.2.5 (Low Impact Pipelining).
51
4.2.4.3 Typical Sediment and Erosion Control Measures
Environmental BAT for pipeline construction are included in the following list. 50,51,52
Sediment barriers (silt fence, fiber logs, geo logs) designed to remove silt from surface
runoff during rain/storm events. They are placed at the boundary of work areas.
Interceptor dikes/slope breakers (compacted soil, fiber logs, geo logs) installed to divert
storm water off the ROW and into areas of undisturbed vegetation. They also prevent
runoff reaching velocities that will cause exposed soils to erode.
Dewatering (from trenches and ROW) by pumping water from the trench and/or ROW
through filtration devices, such as filter bags or sediment basins, in areas of undisturbed
vegetation. This will minimize silt and sediment released into adjacent features.
Diversion ditches (similar to interceptor dikes) to divert water to vegetated areas or
natural surface drainage features, such as swales or ditches. They also slow water
velocities to minimize erosion during rain events.
Non-vegetative soil stabilization (e.g., rolled erosion control blankets, netting, stone
coverage) and temporary measures installed following construction cleanup, or if soil is
exposed for more than 30 days. This will prevent soil erosion when insufficient
vegetation is established to prevent silt and sediment release.
Temporary seeding with nurse crop species, such as annual rye or oats, when soil will be
exposed for longer timeframes (i.e., soil stockpiled for more than 30 days).
Permanent restoration measures, including seeding with native seeds, along with nurse
crops consisting of annual rye or oats.
Geotextile fencing consisting of non-woven material backed by wire mesh. This allows
water to flow through fencing while removing some silt and sediment.
Sediment logs consisting of wood or mulch material surrounded by a polymer mesh that
allows water to flow through a three-dimensional filtering material. This limits
overwhelming of sediment control often seen with woven silt fencing. Logs are also used
on steep slopes to slow water velocities during rain events and prevent erosion.
Hydro mulching or bonded fiber matrix are materials blown onto exposed soils. They
contain materials such as mulch or soil amendments with seeds mixed into the mulch,
which stabilize soil while vegetation establishes.
Qualifications
Best practice recommends that a qualified person inspect erosion and sediment control
measures. Qualifications emerging in Canada include Certified Inspector of Sediment and
Erosion Control (CISEC) and Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control
(CPESC).53
Emerging Technology
Minimizing impacts during pipeline construction, the Innovative Pipeline Strategies
project54—part of the Evergreen Centre for Resource Excellence and Innovation55—is
conducting research and development in low impact soil handling. Its work has focused
on testing new excavation methods, soil salvage equipment, compaction wheels and
finishing blades.
52
To reduce sediment released from construction sites, polymers applied directly to
exposed soils have proven effective, and they have also been used in flocculation of
turbid water released from construction sites. 56
To document inspections and revisions to sediment and erosion control, web-based
construction inspection tools are now being used. These tools can include SECPs,
inspection reports, photographs and approved revisions to the plans. The pipeline
company, environmental inspectors, engineers, contractors and regulatory bodies can
access the documentation. This promotes transparency between project personnel and
other stakeholders.53 The tools also facilitate information transfer during the construction
phase, during operation of the pipeline and associated facilities, and when abandonment
is being conducted.
Low impact methods are common in sensitive locations that are difficult to reclaim or
revegetate, such as wetlands and native prairie. However, they may also be warranted or feasible
for longer distances or entire projects.
53
4.2.6 Acid Rock Management
Shallow bedrock and bedrock outcrops may be disturbed during pipeline construction activities,
including surface clearing, trenching and blasting.58 In certain natural conditions, acid rock
drainage and metal leaching can result when freshly exposed or excavated rock containing
sulphide minerals comes into contact with air and water. The resulting run-off can be toxic to
aquatic and terrestrial organisms.4,58
During pre-construction planning, rock excavation areas that may create acid rock drainage can
be identified through existing information or field sampling programs.4,59,60 Typical acid rock
drainage mitigation measures include avoidance, covering exposed acid rock with non-acid
generating rock material, blending acid rock with neutralizing materials, diverting water, and
collecting and treating acid drainage. 4,59
*
See Pipeline Associated Watercourse Crossings, Fourth Edition (2012) 42
54
Microtunneling can be used over shorter distances—depending on method, pipe
diameter and local ground conditions.
Direct tunneling uses less drilling fluid and operates at lower pressures than HDD or
microtunneling techniques, and can reduce the risk of unplanned releases of drilling
fluid.
Horizontal punching and boring techniques operate without using pressurized drilling
fluids, and so avoid any unplanned releases. However, they often involve increased
surface disturbance compared with other methods.
Water quality monitoring for drilling fluid release is conducted during trenchless crossings.
Automated instream remote monitors with alarm systems can be used to warn and potentially
shut down drilling operations.
Site specific watercourse crossing plans also consider depth of cover. Depth of cover (the
vertical distance from the top of a buried pipe to the surface) is important to consider in
trenched watercourse crossings. The two common approaches to specify the minimum depth
from the channel bed for a watercourse crossing are:
a conservative crossing depth, based on the minimum depth of cover required by
• industry standards (e.g., CSA Z662),
• operating company standards and guidelines (e.g., 43, 44), and/or
• regulatory criteria developed by local regulatory agencies; and
56
individually assess the erosive, downgrading and lateral movement potential of a
watercourse to determine long term loss of cover potential to subsequently inform
pipeline crossing design* 64, 65
The upcoming fifth edition of the Pipeline Associated Watercourse Crossings guidance
document contains a fisheries self-assessment tool. This tool is based on the Fisheries Act and
helps to assess the likelihood that pipeline and associated temporary vehicle watercourse
crossings could cause serious harm to fish. The tool helps pipeline companies to meet the legal
obligations of the SARA, as it relates to aquatic species.
Procedures
Implementing an equipment cleaning protocol so that equipment is washed before
moving from an infested site to a non-infested site. Equipment cleaning will reduce the
risk of spreading invasive species, and will also reduce transfer of soil-borne diseases,
such as clubroot and soybean cyst nematode. The Clean Equipment Protocol for
Industry68 contains relevant protocols and checklists.
Limiting disturbance that could create conditions favourable to invasive species
becoming established.
Maintaining soil/spoil piles within the work area boundaries, especially when invasive
species are present within the work area and not in surrounding areas.
Revegetating disturbed areas as quickly as possible to prevent aggressive invasive
species establishing and outcompeting native species. A fast-growing nurse crop, such
as annual rye or oats, will minimize invasive species growth and prevent erosion at the
same time. 66,67
*
This can be assessed using methods developed by Lacey (1931) and Blench (1970), with relationships developed
by Pemberton and Lara (1984), described in the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) 2007. National
Engineering Handbook. Part 654 – Stream Restoration Design.
57
Using certified seed suppliers to minimize the potential for invasive species’ seeds to be
present in seed mixtures.
Obtaining aggregate supplies from weed-free sources.
Ensuring every piece of equipment used to construct the project is cleaned of weed seeds
prior to entering the work site.
For sensitive sites, such as organic farms, cleaning every piece of equipment prior to
entering the property.
Educating operations and construction staff about the risks of invasive species, including
how to identify them.
Emerging Technology
Emerging technologies for managing invasive species on pipeline ROWs include handheld
devices such as smartphones, tablets and GPS units with which an operating company can
identify and record the locations of invasive species, save the locations to an online mapping
tool, and indicate:
the preferred sites for equipment cleaning stations;
locations to obtain clean aggregate and soil material; and
revegetation and weed management areas of concern.
Such information, provided in field-accessible digital formats that are easy to update, makes it
much easier for construction contractors to avoid areas with invasive species and to implement
mitigation where required.
*
See www.clubroot.ca
58
4.2.9 Protecting Indigenous Traditional Use of Lands and Resources
The regulatory requirements and guidance on the environmental consideration of traditional use
(TU) and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) in pipeline planning and construction are
largely found in the NEB Filing Manual. Federal and provincial guidelines direct that Indigenous
traditional knowledge be considered in different aspects of the pipeline project, particularly
regulatory applications and project planning. 71,72,73 Practices and procedures for addressing TU
and TEK are largely developed project-by-project, and often appear as approval conditions or
corporate policy rather than a standardized code of practice.
BAT and emerging technologies that mitigate environmental effects on traditionally used
resources in other disciplines—such as wildlife, vegetation, aquatics, historical resources,
acoustic environment, and atmospheric environment— would apply in this domain, as would the
ecosystems that support them.
Several current practices that can be considered BAT for the protection of TU include:
Engagement (Early and Throughout the Project) With Indigenous Groups to:
identify site-specific traditional use areas and locations during detailed routing;
develop measures that eliminate or minimize effects on access and quality and quantity of
traditional resources, especially during key periods of use;
obtain input about construction timing and the planning process;
engage Indigenous cultural monitors from potentially affected Indigenous groups to
identify and implement mitigation for traditional use interests that may be affected
during construction;
provide an opportunity to hold a ceremony or cultural observance before disturbance, if
the Indigenous group deems it appropriate; and
provide compensation for Indigenous trappers’ and harvesters’ trapping and harvesting
losses.
Other Strategies:
engage more broadly with Indigenous groups to develop TU and TEK study programs
that gather meaningful material to incorporate into project planning and the regulatory
process;
collaborate with potentially affected Indigenous people;
include traditional land and resource use as a valued component to consider in ESA;
identify opportunities for pre-disturbance harvesting of traditionally used resources;
implement mitigations to reduce environmental effects to traditionally used resources
and the ecosystems that support them;
implement minimal surface disturbance techniques to reduce impact on traditionally used
plants; and
follow-up with post-construction monitoring to determine effects on viability.
59
Emerging technology and practices include:
developing native plant nurseries;
training in collecting seed and replanting local vegetative species; 74
using native species for reclamation;
advancements in the replanting of medicinal plants or other important vegetation in the
area;
including TU and TEK in land reclamation planning; 74
undertaking habitat offsetting for affected important wildlife;
consulting with Indigenous groups to develop Indigenous reclamation standards; 74
creating a project advisory committee with Indigenous groups to facilitate more effective
information exchange; 74 and
clearly communicating to potentially affected Indigenous groups how TU and TEK
information has been considered and incorporated into project planning and the
regulatory process. 75
60
4.2.10 Reduction of Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas and Methane Emissions
GHG emissions from pipeline and facility construction largely come from construction
equipment emissions. BAT to reduce construction-related GHGs during construction is to select
energy efficient construction equipment. 25
Planning principles and mitigation measures can collectively reduce project-related air
contaminants and GHGs released into the atmosphere during construction.* Several of these
include:
using well maintained, modern equipment with the lowest available emissions ratings;
using electrically driven or alternative fuel equipment;
minimizing idling or operating time;
using locally available equipment;
minimizing the number of vehicles required to transport people and equipment, and the
distances travelled (e.g., using multi-passenger vehicles, locating camps in proximity to
the work site); and
planning ahead to minimize the number of haul routes required for construction
materials.
New technologies that reduce equipment energy requirements can further reduce construction-
related emissions and include: low-energy lighting systems and energy efficient accommodations
and supporting infrastructure.
Tracking and offsetting GHG emissions is a relatively new approach in the pipeline sector, and
may be required as a regulatory condition. The following types of information, for example,
could be required for verifiable offsetting of pipeline construction-related GHG emissions:
a description of the offset options and the criteria against which they are assessed;
the magnitude of the proposed offset;
confirmation that the offset may be registered with a third-party verification body; and
verifiable accounting, confirming that no net increase in GHGs occurred during the
construction phase. 76
*
Information on emission management that occurs during the operation stage can be found in section 6.2.9 (Air
Emissions Management).
61
implementing measures to address any effects of construction on soil capability, such as
compaction, admixing and excess stoniness.
Ongoing monitoring and maintenance of the reclaimed ROW is necessary to confirm its success.
This means meeting regulatory approval conditions and landowner expectations (e.g., weeds are
properly controlled, trench has not subsided).
Reclamation practices vary by jurisdiction, biogeographic region, vegetation type and existing
land use. For example, revegetation of agricultural land relies mostly on creating suitable
conditions on the reclaimed ROW for crop growth. Reclamation of native vegetation areas
requires a wider range of processes from seeding and planting to allowing natural regeneration to
proceed. Reclamation may also include measures to maintain or enhance wildlife habitat.*
Emerging Technology
Reclamation is an area of ongoing and active research and monitoring. Emerging technology for
establishing rapid vegetation are described in the following list.
Using engineered soil, where a mulch/soil matrix is mixed with a seed mixture and
sprayed onto exposed soils. The mulch/soil matrix provides erosion control and nutrients
that will promote rapid establishment of vegetation following construction; and
Greenhouse-grown fescue plugs for an ecologically sensitive plant community (e.g.,
foothills rough fescue grassland) that is difficult to revegetate through seeding or natural
regeneration. These plugs have been tested with some success on abandoned well-sites,
and could be used as part of a revegetation strategy on pipeline ROWs that cannot avoid
traversing rough fescue communities.77
*
See section 2.2.1.5 (Caribou Habitat Protection and Restoration).
62
5.0 COMMISSIONING
Commissioning of the pipeline takes place after construction. It is the final detailed testing and
inspection of the pipe integrity necessary to deem the pipe suitable for operation. The following
sections describe BAT and emerging technology related to the commissioning phase.
5.1.1 Procedure
1. To test for both strength and leaks, a pipeline is filled with water and pressurized to a
level that exceeds maximum operation pressure. This will reveal any defects in the
pipeline or the welds at pipeline joints.78
2. To validate the strength of the pipe, it is subjected to a pressure from 125% to 150% of its
intended maximum operating pressure (depending on location), and held for a prescribed
period of time (typically four hours).*
3. To check for leaks, the pressure is then lowered to 110% of the maximum operating
pressure and again held for a prescribed period of time (again typically four hours).
Should failures occur in either test, the pipe is repaired and the test re-run.
Water Withdrawal
Different methods determine ecological flow requirements, including hydrological, hydraulic
rating, and habitat simulation.79 Existing methods differ drastically in scope and implementation
costs, 79 making appropriate scoping important. For instance, for rivers with natural flows where
site-specific information is not available, a conservative desk-top method to calculate the flow
requirements has been developed in Alberta.80
Typically, water withdrawal rates in environmental permits issued for a project by the Provincial
regulator will require a maximum withdrawal rate is 10% of flow. Provincial regulatory bodies
provide guidance related to volumes, often require registration of water withdrawals, and often
request data related to the hydrological information discussed above.81 Screens on intake pumps
must be appropriately sized to avoid fish impingement and mortality as required by regulation.
*
As specified in CSA Z662-15.
63
Water Disposal
Prior to the release of hydrostatic test water, required environmental considerations include: 82,83
testing of the chemical properties of water at the source and after hydrostatic test use at
the discharge point;
appropriate soil erosion control at the discharge location on land or into a watercourse;
and
avoidance of inter-basin water transfers to prevent unwanted transfer of invasive
species.84
Emerging Technology
The commissioning hydro test has been part of pipeline
construction since the 1950s. Its purpose is to
demonstrate the pipeline’s pressure containment capacity
and soundness when operating at maximum pressure.
Improved performance due to advances in steel making,
pipe manufacture, welding and pipe handling have led to
the concept of an alternative approach to demonstrating
pipeline reliability through the application of an AIV that
is equivalent to hydrostatic testing.
Water Testing
The AIV process is an emerging technology based on
explicitly integrating and documenting the quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC)
procedures for design, pipe manufacture and transportation, construction and commissioning.*
Key elements of the process are:
a third party that is completely independent of the operating company and construction
contractor must oversee the entire process; and
comprehensive, post installation leak detection.
The AIV process is based on a focused audit of the company’s management system comprising
the following key elements:
management commitment;
procedures and processes;
QA/QC;
communication and planning;
monitoring and assessment (including process review, analysis, improvements, and
corrective actions as required);
risk management;
management of change (MOC);
documentation management;
training and qualifications; and
*
In British Columbia, regional information on water availability is provided by provincial tools, including the
NorthEast Water Tool and the Omenica Water Tool. The tools are based on regional downscaling of hydrometric
data, derived from 30-year average conditions.
64
demonstrated implementation of the management system throughout the design,
manufacturing, transportation, construction, and commissioning processes.
The environmental protection advantages of a successful AIV implementation over hydro testing
include:
elimination of water management issues (including water withdrawal, contamination, and
disposal); and
ability to implement in very cold conditions without the need for the chemical anti-
freezing agents that could potentially be accidentally released into the environment.
Several major pipeline companies continue to refine and promote AIV, which is complex and
difficult to demonstrably implement. Therefore, it is generally only applied in a partial and
controlled implementation mode where consequences of an in-service failure are low, and
external loadings are also low and can confidently be predicted.
Drying is achieved by passing a drying agent, such as methanol, through the line to absorb
residual water that may remain at low points in the line.
Before it is put into service, cleaning pigs are passed through it to remove any debris that may
have entered the pipe during construction and manufacturing. Bullet-shaped, polyurethane-
coated foam “pigs” with imbedded wire brushes are one type of pig that is used to perform this
task.
With the pipe cleared, a gauging pig is sent through the pipe to determine if the pipe has been
affected by the backfill process (e.g., the cross section of the pipe deformed or the pipe dented
during backfilling). This will help ensure that any such defects are remediated and that in-line
inspection tools can subsequently pass through the pipeline without getting stuck. Specific
provisions pertaining to the cleaning and drying of pipe can be found in the NEB OPR.*
The use of high-resolution caliper tools in addition to running a gauge plate pig (gauging pig)
represents the BAT for detecting possible damage during lowering in and backfilling.
*
NEB Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)
65
Inertial mapping unit technology can determine the profile
of the pipeline at the time of inspection. If a subsequent
inspection is carried out a few years later, changes in the
profile can be detected. The changes in profile can be readily
understood by converting strains imposed in the pipeline over
this timeframe from such geotechnical loads as slope
movement, settlement, or frost heave.
66
6.0 OPERATION
Construction and operation phases have overlapping engineering and environmental
considerations. However, the longer-term effects of operating a pipeline or facility may require a
different combination of BAT than the temporary impacts of construction. These differences
may also stimulate new technology in different ways. Section 6 (Operation) provides examples
of engineering and environmental BAT and emerging technologies for the operation phase.
MFL tools detect metal loss defects in or on the pipe, such as corrosion or mechanical damage.
MFL tools induce a magnetic field and when the tool passes a defect, the magnetic field is
disturbed. That is, it “leaks” and the disturbance pattern is used to determine the extent and depth
of the defect. ILI tools have magnetization oriented longitudinally (parallel to the axis of the
pipe) or circumferentially. The likely orientation of the defect in the pipe wall determines which
magnetization direction is appropriate. With complex metal loss, it is sometimes necessary to run
both types of tools.
MFL tools fall into two basic groups:† standard (low) resolution, and high resolution. Although
some applications may require low resolution (such as for screening purposes), high resolution is
the BAT, and is the industry standard on both oil and gas pipelines.
*
This differentiates them from cleaning pigs—the term “pig” most likely originating from the appearance of the
cloth bundles and the likelihood that they were used to clean wax and debris from early oil lines.
†
The groups differ on the level of magnetization, and number and type of sensors.
67
UT can detect cracks, crack-like defects, and metal loss (often associated with welds, but also
with a damage type known as SCC in the body of the pipe). In UT tools, an acoustic transmitter
sends out a signal. The signal’s flight and echo return times are used to determine the location,
type, extent, and depth of defects. UT can only run in a liquid pipeline because it requires
acoustic coupling between the tool and the pipe, although it can run in a liquid slug in gas
pipelines (often a slug of diesel oil carrying the UT ILI tool batched between two
“dummy” pigs).
EMAT, an acoustic technology for both liquid and gas pipelines, also detects cracks in pipe.
EMAT electromagnetically vibrates the pipe and measures the response, much like the difference
between the difference in the tone of a bell with and without a crack. By analyzing the acoustic
signal the pipe transmits from the vibration, the tool determines the location and dimensions of
crack-like features. EMAT does not need an acoustic coupling like UT does, so is particularly
useful in gas pipelines.
The following list describes how Caliper tools† detect and size dents in a pipe.
External forces on buried pipelines can distort the cross-sectional shape of the pipe.
The two most usual types of damage are ovalization and dents, with dents typically being
more serious.
Dents on the bottom of the pipe can occur when the pipe is laid in the trench and rests on
a rock. Dents on the top can indicate mechanical damage (from excavation on or near the
pipe centerline).
High-resolution caliper tools can also determine the shape of a distortion, allowing the
operating company to evaluate the seriousness of the damage. This is particularly useful
where a sharp change in the dent profile can indicate high, damaging local strains in the
pipe that can lead to cracks (and subsequent failures).
High-resolution caliper tools can be considered BAT for detecting, sizing and profiling dents in
oil and gas pipelines.
Profile measurement and mapping (inertia measurement unit or IMU)) can identify strains in a
pipe. When combined with GIS, IMU is the BAT for strains from soil movement, changes in
direction, and mapping of the pipe centerline. When run in the as-installed state, the IMU tool
can map and validate the design of construction bends.
*
EMAT replaces an earlier technology known as Elastic Wave, which relied on acoustic coupling through liquid-
filled wheel sensors between the tool and the pipe.
†
A caliper tool has a circumferential array of sensor “fingers” that ride on the inside surface of the pipe, which
deflect when they encounter a distortion of the cross-section.
68
The Use of ILI Tools in Combination With Other Tools
Calipers and metal loss detection tools
A serious complication with dents (particularly top side dents likely from mechanical damage) is
that it can have a gouge. When the stress concentration of a gouge combines with cross-sectional
distortion, a leak or rupture is quite likely to occur.
Caliper tools alone cannot detect this damage, so they must combine with a metal loss detection
tool (MFL or UT). Although not its principal purpose, MFL can very successfully detect both top
and bottom side dents and their orientation. If an MFL detects dents (especially where metal loss
is also detected), the BAT is to evaluate the dent and gouge damage based on the information
from both tools.
*
The IMU consists of a series of accelerometers and gyroscopes. The unit determines profile changes by measuring
changes in accelerations, pitch, roll and yaw of the tool detected by the gyroscopes. This technology originally
guided missiles and other unmanned aerial vehicles. It essentially works in reverse for pipelines. Rather than the
IMU directing the vehicle, the pipe directs the vehicle (ILI tool) and the IMU records the changes in direction.
This provides information to determine the longitudinal profile of the pipe.
†
Since the tool is generally propelled by the oil or gas flowing in the pipe, and since this and the loads on the ILI
tool vary with vertical profile of the pipeline, a speed excursion can be a source of measurement errors.
Advanced ILI tools have “by-pass” capabilities that allow the flowing oil or gas to pass by the tool in a controlled
manner and thereby provide better control of the speed of the tool.
69
occurred from excavations carried out close to the line or even accidentally on the ROW (during
maintenance activities for example).
Typically, ILI best detects and sizes defects. In cases where ILI is not feasible (due to
constrictions in the line for example), an in-service hydro test best assesses integrity.
Hydro testing can also be considered a BAT in some cases where cracking is suspected
(as explained below).
In an in-service hydro test, water is pumped into a pipe segment to see if water releases into the
ROW, which indicates a failure in the pipe body. The breach then must be repaired and the test is
repeated or continued until successful at the required test pressure.
The difference with an in-service test is that the water might be contaminated by residual product
in the pipeline segment, so disposal is more complex. It is also possible to pressure test using the
product in the line. This is seldom conducted, however, because a rupture or leak of oil could
cause ecological damage, and gas (being a compressible fluid) could cause an explosive rupture,
creating a safety hazard.
Spike tests are best practice, particularly with possible cracking damage (such as Stress
Corrosion Cracking).The stress during a spike test can be between 100% to 110% of the steel’s
specified minimum yield stress, or SMYS (the stress level at which permanent deformation of
the steel under a load starts to occur.)
70
ILI and In-Service Hydro Testing BAT
ILI is now universally accepted as the BAT to assess blunt defects like corrosion damage. While
ILI crack-detection has developed significantly in the last 5 to 10 years, a hydro test with a spike
test component is the BAT for assessing crack-susceptible pipe segments.
However, the best use of available technology is to identify the most critical segments in the
pipeline if reliable ILI results are available, then subject only those segments to a hydro test.
Whatever the pressure test methodology, the test only provides a snapshot at the time of the test,
and offers no predictive information. Pressure testing also only addresses the threat of
overpressure. It gives essentially no information on the pipe resistance to other threats, such as
ground movement, incorrect operation or mechanical damage.
Using DA
Full protocols are only available for external corrosion and stress corrosion cracking hazards.
Therefore, pipeline operating companies that consider DA on segments they assess to be un-
piggable by ILI must account for DA’s limitations to assess the pipeline for other hazards (such
as geotechnical loads, mechanical damage, or incorrect operation).
Operating companies only totally rely on DA to assess integrity when in-service failure risks are
low. That said, the best use of available technology is either DA combined with ILI, or with in-
service hydro testing when a pipeline segment is demonstrably non-piggable.
In principle, leaks can be detected at the pipeline control center through mass balancing
measurements. Mass balancing compares the amount of product entering a pipeline segment with
the amount exiting. If less comes out than went in, there is most likely a leak in the segment.
71
Limitations to Mass Balancing
1. Mass balancing techniques can fail to detect very small leaks, due to possible
measurement inaccuracies or variations in operating conditions.
2. Slack flow in liquid pipelines can send ambiguous signals to the control center. Slack
flow is when voids in the product stream develop from large pressure differences over a
section of pipeline. These voids often result from rapid and large elevation changes.
Where possible, the detailed pipeline design should minimize slack line flow.
Other leak detection methods available and in development are included in the following list.
Acoustical, in which equipment passing through the pipe in the product stream detects
acoustic signals associated with leaks. This can also be considered an emerging
technology as it is in controlled implementation.
Computational monitoring systems (CMS), which use input from hydraulic modeling
and operating condition measurements (e.g., flow and temperatures).
Land owners and land users’ reports (including odours and sheen on water bodies).
Aerial surveillance, which uses laser technology and flame ionization technology to
detect vapour associated with a leak. It also directly observes product on the ground, dead
vegetation and so on.
Aerial and ground-based line patrols. Depending on risk considerations, the frequency
of these can vary from bi-weekly to bi-annually.
BAT for leak detection currently combines, principally, mass-balancing, CMS, and surveillance.*
Flows, pressures, and temperature measurements used in mass-balancing and CMS are
monitored and relayed to the control center via SCADA. SCADA operates with coded signals
over communication channels – typically using one communication channel per remote signal
source (programmable logic controllers at compressor and pump stations; remote terminal units
at key locations). In addition to logging data, this system is capable of analyzing and displaying
the data and interacting with data from compressors and pumping units and valves through
human-machine interface software.
Emerging Technology
Locating the Exact Leak Source
For a successful emergency response, crews must identify the exact leak source. Three promising
emerging technologies are described in the following list.
Aerial-based optical and infrared thermographic methods that can detect underground
leaks, and that appear to be more precise than either flame ionization or laser-based
technologies.
Fiber optics applications that either detect temperature differences or acoustic vibrations
associated with leaks. These might not be practical or feasible to install on existing
pipelines, so should be carefully evaluated at the design stage.
Complementary computational pipeline monitoring (CPM) capability, which uses
parallel systems with different technology to add computational redundancy—that is, to
gather data by several methods. In this method, one server has different hardware and
technology than another, and each has independent field data gathering systems to
*
See section 6.2.5 (Line Patrol).
72
recognize leaks. The two systems measure results of different physical variables (e.g.,
flow, pressure, temperature, density). For example, if one CPM system relies on flow
measurements (such as the line balance method), the second CPM could measure
pressure.
Detecting Leaks
UAVs (more commonly known as drones)
may make aerial ROW surveillance and leak
detection more frequent and cost effective.
These advanced, remotely piloted aircraft:
typically already have cameras to
record photo, video and audio, and can
stream to the controller on the ground;
and
could be developed to carry other leak
detection apparatus such as infrared
heat signature detectors and other Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)
hydrocarbon and GHG detecting
technologies.
Barriers to using these drones in pipeline surveillance include:
undeveloped regulatory approvals in North America;
weather conditions; and
keeping the drone within the visual line of sight of an operating company for non-military
purposes.
CPM includes hardware and software advancement to better detect and locate leaks. Its
advantages include:
software that identifies intelligent flow balance, negative pressure wave, dynamic
pressure, flow rate modelling and acoustic-noise correlation;
communication abilities that include internet computer and communication protocols,
line-of-sight radio, GSM and satellite uplink;
electrical or solar powering; and
a control panel that allows on-board data storage to ensure that data are saved during
long communication outages.
Canadian research and controlled implementation of technology able to detect and analyze very
small concentrations of leaked hydrocarbons associated with facilities has the potential for more
general application to pipeline leak detection. An aspect of this work that could facilitate this
application is the miniaturization of the measuring and real time analyzing equipment so that it
can be routinely deployed continuously or pipeline maintenance vehicles, thereby providing
essentially continuous, wide-ranging surveys. Further miniaturization is planned to allow the
equipment to be deployed using unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) to carry out more focused
surveys. In short, technology advancements drive leak detection improvements with better
real-time data collection, analysis, location identification and communication.
73
6.1.2 Pipeline Integrity Activities*
The BAT to assess risk is QRA, though semi-quantitative methods are often used, based on risk
indices that consider design and operating conditions and consequences of failure.
The BAT to assess such defects is one based on detailed direct measurement of the metal loss
dimensions and depth profile on the excavated pipe at the point of indicated damage, and use of
these measurements in conjunction with standard algorithms to determine the failure pressure at
the damaged area.
Laser-based technology:
can be rapidly applied;
is at least as accurate as mechanical measurements;
gives consistently repeatable measurement results; and
provides useful graphical visualization of the damage in addition to basic defect data
profile information.
Assessing Cracks
Assessing cracks and crack-like defects considers two failure modes:
brittle fracture starting at the tip of the crack and proceeding rapidly through the
uncracked ligament of steel; and
ductile failure of the ligament itself, due to over-stress in the ligament from loss of pipe
wall thickness caused by a crack.
*
It is beyond the scope of this document to give detailed accounts of all possible defect assessment methodologies.
A useful reference that provides procedures and assessment methods is the Pipeline Defect Assessment Manual
(PDAM) compiled and developed by PENSPEN Ltd, UK.
74
Which of these two mechanisms causes ultimate failure depends on the stress level at the crack
and the toughness of the steel (toughness simply being the property of a particular steel that
resists cracking).
Whereas simple failure assessment diagram (FAD) approaches are available (see, for example,
API 579 and BS 7910), the BAT (in terms of accuracy and general applicability to complex
cracking) is to use commercially available crack assessment software.
75
6.1.3 Failure Investigation
If pipelines are designed, constructed, operated and maintained to NEB regulations and Canadian
national standards, the likelihood of a failure of any particular segment of the pipeline is very
low. However, no method of transportation is infallible. In the unlikely event of a pipeline leak
or rupture, priorities are described in the following list.
1. To secure the site and prevent further harm to people or the environment, or damage to
property. This might involve isolating the failure site, evacuating personnel or dealing
with the outflow of product (fire or spilled product) and is generally as described in
section 6.3.1 (Emergency/Spill Response).
2. To perform a preliminary investigation of the failure and to secure evidence (including
mapping and retrieving damaged parts).
3. To perform a detailed analysis on the failure. In this step, metallurgical examination of
the failed parts is generally required, and the results of this examination, combined with
site observations, are used to determine the root cause of the failure and complete the
investigation.
The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) has the mandated right by legislation to choose to be the
lead investigator. In this case, only the TSB is authorized to determine cause and contributing
factors of the failure. Nonetheless, the NEB will always also investigate the failure as a
regulatory oversight action and to communicate the findings to industry in the effort to mitigate
or prevent any future loss-of-containment incidents.
Monitoring programs are project specific and may include soil, crops, native vegetation
communities, watercourses and wildlife habitat features. Post-construction monitoring programs
76
(PCMPs) for projects in the caribou range typically assess vegetation recovery and the
effectiveness of offset measures.* For example, minimizing brushing can accelerate natural
recovery of vegetation along the ROW. An example of emerging technology includes handheld
devices that can be used to accurately determine monitoring locations and to capture and upload
monitoring data to remote databases.
Operating companies are increasingly using high-definition digital aerial photos and satellite
images to monitor and measure:
post-construction changes in streambeds at crossings;
changes to stream armouring;
impoundments of water across the ROW;
wetlands size and function indicators;
on- and off-ROW vegetation height and crop health;
ATV and vehicle tracks on the ROW; and
changes in the location of valves/risers/pipeline markers due to terrain movement.
During construction, the operating company can fix the precise location of each element or
feature. Subsequent automated scans can indicate changes to these metrics and indicate where an
on-the-ground inspection must be made. These metrics could be used for future decisions about
reclamation success and for criteria for measuring reclamation and mitigation effectiveness.
Reducing Noise
Methods to reduce noise include:
selecting equipment with lower sound power levels; 87
installing silencers for combustion air inlet, gas exhausts and blowdown vents;
installing noise emitting equipment inside buildings with acoustic wall and roof designs;
designing equipment buildings with sufficient ventilation so that doors and windows
remain closed;
considering acoustic design for building ventilations, such as louvers, ridge vents, inlet
fans and exhaust fans;
orienting noise emission sources away from noise sensitive receptors;
using an acoustic barrier for outdoor noise sources; and
using structures or natural terrain to screen noise sources from receptors.
*
See section 2.2.1.5 (Caribou Habitat Protection and Restoration).
77
Reducing Light
Operating facilities can be significant light sources. Measures to address potential light pollution
are best developed at the design stage. Mitigation strategies include:
installing full horizontal;
cutting off light fixtures to maximize the control of light spill;
planning the parking and fueling stations so that headlights are not directed toward
human receptors or key wildlife areas;
using motion-activated lights to minimize unnecessary light; and
leaving standing vegetation in place to form a light block from the facility (whenever
possible).
Emerging Technology
Various advances include:
noise monitoring stations with web-based connectivity that provide real time information,
such as noise level, audio recording and text messaging, if a certain sound level is
exceeded;
Helmholtz systems to suppress noise at compressor stations;88 and
energy-efficient light-emitting diode (LED) lights on the warm (red light) end of the light
spectrum. These replace the more common blue light LED that are more bio-active
(disruptive to animals and humans).
During upset events, such as slope failure or pipeline exposure, the BAT and the emerging
technologies listed in pre-construction planning and construction‡ may apply to sediment and
erosion concerns.
*
Covered in section 4.0.(Pre-Construction Planning and Construction)
†
See section 6.2.5 (Line Patrol).
‡
Section 4.2.5 (Low Impact Pipelining).
78
wider scale geotechnical instability or failure* such as washout, ground movement
caused by cyclic freezing and thawing, unauthorized excavation activities near the
pipeline, movement from earthquakes, or slope instability.
Emerging Technology
Emerging technology includes:
remote sensing, aerial or satellite-based digital terrain mapping to detect subsidence along
the ROW—such as LiDAR that uses lasers to get detailed surface elevation data;
GIS tools to identify and map zones that have higher potential for subsidence based on
criteria such as material texture, time of construction and construction equipment used;
and
monitoring zones of known or possible subsidence using settlement meters or
inclinometers equipped with telemetry data transfer capability.
*
As noted in CSA Z662- 15—Oil and Gas Pipelines Section H.2.6.8.
†
Other BAT for subsidence are those in section 4.2.5 on backfilling.
79
6.2.5 Line Patrol
Line patrols involve operating companies visually inspecting the pipeline and associated
ROW to:
identify anomalies for further investigation, such as erosion, trench subsidence or
pooling, and evidence of leaks; and
document encroachment onto the ROW by third parties.
Fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters are typically used to conduct line patrols. Operators do
localized or follow-up surveys with ground-based vehicles, such as pick-up trucks, all-terrain
vehicles (ATVs) and snowmobiles.
Most patrols have little environmental effects, although the impact of line patrols varies by
location. Where a pipeline crosses an important wildlife habitat, and particularly during sensitive
periods such as nesting and calving, line patrols may sometimes cause a sensory disturbance. As
well, ground-based line patrols may cause localized rutting and vegetation damage, if operating
companies conduct them during unsuitable weather or use inappropriate vehicles (i.e., 4x4 trucks
rather than ATVs or on foot).
Some sites may require seasonal avoidance measures if pipelines are close to grouse leks, raptor
stick nests or ungulate breeding and lambing or calving areas.
The general recommendation is to provide line patrol contractors with sites and their associated
timing, setback, and altitude restrictions embedded in GPS files.
Emerging Technology
Line patrols by UAVs have great potential.* Remote sensing options and high resolution
imagery are also becoming more common and accessible, which may reduce the need for
manned aerial or on-the-ground visits.89
Pipeline projects often include effective access control as an approval condition, and some have
developed access management plans. However, these plans may be difficult to implement for
legal and jurisdictional reasons, particularly on publicly owned land. Controlling access in
*
As described in section 6.1.1.4 (Leak Detection).
80
certain areas may be a condition of regulatory approval. There may also be legislated restrictions
on vehicle use on public land.
Current Methods
At present, operating companies use the methods in the following list to discourage access to or
along pipeline ROWs.
Placing physical barriers at access points, including road trail crossings. Examples
include boulders, vegetated soil mounds, post-and-rail fences, chain-link fences and
rollback of cleared vegetation. These barriers interfere with line of sight so people are
less likely to seek access or travel along the ROW. Rollback, if properly applied, can
discourage people from riding their all-terrain vehicles in these areas (even when they
can navigate around many other barriers).
Deactivating and removing off-ROW access roads used during construction (if they are
not required for operations).
Placing signage at access points to alert the public to the presence of the pipeline.
Educating the public—especially hunters, ATV and snowmobile users—on the need for
access control.
With consideration of the pipeline, re-establishing shrubs and trees across the ROW.
Using remote cameras and ROW patrols to provide evidence that will assist local or
provincial policing agencies with enforcement (e.g., fines) in situations of trespass and
damage to private property.
Emerging Technology
Remote camera technology is currently being piloted to monitor wildlife activity (e.g., caribou)
and human use of pipeline ROWs in northern Alberta and BC.
A critical factor in protecting rare species sites in this phase is managing and transferring
information from the planning, construction and commissioning stages as they hand off to
operations. This is best accomplished by GIS-based systems that can store and transfer spatial
data sets tied to specific locations along the ROW, such as the location of rare plant
communities, wildlife habitat features or mitigation measures implemented during construction.
*
See section 4.2.8 (Invasive Species Management).
†
Such as section 4.2.3 (Construction Timing), section 2.2.1.4 (Species at Risk), and section 2.2.1.5 (Caribou Habitat
Protection and Restoration).
81
If baseline data for rare species does not exist for an operating pipeline, the company will
conduct a screening and develop mitigation for rare species (and other environmental resources)
before maintenance activities commence. This may include:
reviewing online registries of rare species to determine if they may be present in the
maintenance location;
consulting with local authorities on rare species and their habitats near the proposed
maintenance activities;
reviewing pipeline company’s files for known rare species’ locations and their habitats
along the pipeline ROW;
conducting pre-construction screenings to determine if a species’ habitat is near the
proposed maintenance activities. If warranted, conducting field surveys using qualified
biologists and follow provincial species survey protocols may be appropriate;
consulting with local authorities on timing activities and mitigation measures to
minimize disturbance to rare species and their habitats during sensitive time periods;
recommending mitigation measures for construction if rare species are present, such as
avoidance, timing windows, temporary setbacks, or physical measures. Exclusion
fencing is one physical measure to minimize species of concern entering work areas
during maintenance activities; and
managing vegetation along the ROW to regenerate and enhance habitat for rare species.
Leaks from valves, pumps and connectors can release VOCs and methane into the atmosphere
during operation. Additional strategies for operating companies include:
monitoring programs to assist in managing air emissions;
*
See section 2.2.4 (Equipment Choices).
82
conducting routine maintenance on a schedule; 90 and
structured leak detection and repair (LDAR) programs along ROWs and at facilities to
identify leaks and prioritize repairs25, 90 (LDAR programs include aerial surveys along
pipeline ROWs and passive or active plume imaging at facilities and along pipelines).
6.2.9.2 Blowdowns
Blowdowns of pipelines are necessary for various reasons, such as repairs or replacement of a
section of pipe. Often, blowdowns vent gas directly into the atmosphere. However, it is also
possible to:
flare the gas;
retain and re-compress the gas;
reduce the pressure of the gas (a planned activity);
reduce the volume of gas (a planned activity); and
avoid a blowdown.
Venting is currently most common due to associated reduced outage length. However, an
operating company can plan to flare the gas or to use a portable compressor unit to redirect gas
from the section of pipe requiring de-pressurization to the adjacent, normally pressurized pipe
section. Pull-down compressors are most appropriate for large pipelines operating at high
pressures.26
Emerging Technology
Emerging technologies in optical gas imaging include aerial access to remote locations fixing
infrared cameras or other imaging equipment to helicopters, aircraft or UAVs. These
technologies may be particularly useful for surveys of long linear pipeline ROWs.
Carbon capture and sequestration is an emerging method used to dispose of facility CO2. This
process captures post-combustion CO2 or stripped CO2 from the raw gas stream, and injects it
into a deep geological formation, which serves as a storage site. This technology is not yet
widely used in Canada, however, some demonstration and commercial projects are underway.
New federal regulations will impose performance standards on equipment such as stationary
spark ignition gaseous fuel-fired engines and non-utility boilers and heaters. The Base Level
Industrial Emission Requirements (BLIERs) have been developed under the Multi-Sector Air
*
Discussed in section 4.2.10 (Greenhouse Gas and Methane Emissions Reduction).
83
Pollutant Regulations (MSAPR) and limit the amount of NOX that can be emitted from this
equipment. Operating companies can manage NOX emissions from existing compressor stations
by installing engine/compressor control and monitoring systems. The systems can control the
fuel-air mixture in the turbine to optimize combustion and reduce emissions.91
Recently, the CSA published standard Z620.1-16 “Reduction of fugitive and vented emissions
for upstream petroleum and natural gas industry systems. This standard applies to unintentional
and intentional (leaks and vents) hydrocarbon releases into the atmosphere and is to be used as a
resource to inform management of fugitive and vented emissions from wells, pipelines and
facilities associated with specific sectors (e.g., natural gas production, natural gas processing,
crude oil production and shale oil). The standard outlines basic control strategy considerations
and LDAR program design as well as quantification and mitigation options for a variety of
common equipment types in the upstream sector.
The risk of product release is confined to the operations phase when the pipeline and associated
facility are in active use. However, soil and groundwater contamination could occur at every
lifecycle stage. Consequently, much of the information provided below applies also to section 4
(Pre-Construction Planning and Construction) and section 7 (Deactivation, Decommissioning,
Abandonment).
Operating companies often advance and characterize soil conditions and impacts with drilling
techniques or test pit excavations. For example, Ontario’s Guide for completing Phase II ESAs
under Ontario Regulation 153/0492 identifies appropriate investigation techniques, sampling
devices, laboratory requirements for sample analysis and documentation standards for the field
program.
Groundwater assessment techniques are also prescribed in many jurisdictions, including how to
appropriately construct groundwater monitoring wells and sampling techniques. Ontario’s
*
Examples include CSA Z769.1 (R2013) by the CSA and the British Columbia Contaminated Site Regulation
(under the Provincial Environmental Management Act).
84
Guide92 requires standard operating procedures for monitoring well installation and
groundwater sampling. Operating companies must use methods appropriate for the site
conditions including access method, soil type, depth to groundwater and depth of suspected
contamination.
Risk Assessment
If infrastructure or on-going facility operations interfere with accessing or removing
groundwater or soils, a risk assessment can determine if residual petroleum hydrocarbons
remaining in the soils/groundwater pose a risk to human health or the environment. Most
provinces and the federal government have frameworks for approaching and completing a risk
assessment, to allow closure of a contaminated site.
86
vacuum units.
If product thickness is minimal, adsorbent material (soft) booms can be set to sorb product on
contact.
Under frozen conditions in continuous ice, slot-cutting of trenches perpendicular to the estimated
trajectory downstream of the release can intercept and recover product using vacuum trucks and
extended hoses. This makes it possible to reach the locations from land or from safe locations on
the frozen water body.
In discontinuous ice, fragmented ice, ice packs, or if the recovery team breaks the ice, it is
possible to burn the product on site in areas where it accumulates. Responders must determine
that risks of associated with burning and any potential environmental or socio-economic effects
are acceptable or mitigated.
Dispersants
Dispersants are commonly used spill-treating agents (STA) and can be the most effective
approach when factors such as the risks and rewards of applying them, weather conditions, and
environmental and socio-economic sensitivities are considered. Sometimes conditions (e.g., large
impacted areas or an area too remote for other possible strategies) make it difficult or impossible
to implement traditional spill response strategies for releases on water. In such cases,
dispersants can be considered if using them will:
distribute the product at lesser concentrations in the water column or more evenly over the
impacted area;
reduce overall risk/toxicity to any receptor or to the overall ecosystem (e.g., higher
protection of more sensitive receptors); or
reduce the amount of oil migrating to shorelines, where it could strand or have adverse
impacts on more sensitive environments or receptors (e.g., wetlands, estuaries with habitat,
waterfowl).
87
BAT includes research and development around classes of chemical dispersants, which
traditionally have been formulated and applied in marine environments.95 The appropriate
approval must be obtained from regulators prior to application of dispersants.
88
the natural ability of an ecosystem to recover from a spill. Operating companies and regulatory
agencies must monitor the indirect effects of the inoculation and of the nutrient addition usually
associated with it, to evaluate the net overall effect on the site. They must also conduct a
risk/reward analysis, especially for potential migration and impacts to domestic and potable
groundwater supplies.*
Emerging approaches to manage waste generated during spill response have focused on finding
innovative solutions to divert or reduce waste streams from disposal by landfilling, where
feasible.
*
Emerging technologies in this area are the same as those described in section 6.3.1.1.
89
7.0 DEACTIVATION, DECOMMISSIONING AND ABANDONMENT
A company may apply to the NEB to deactivate, decommission or abandon a federally-regulated
pipeline or facility. To abandon pipelines specifically, a company may choose to remove the
pipeline completely, remove it partially or abandon the pipeline in place.
The decision to remove or abandon a pipeline in place often depends on the current and future
use of the land and potential environmental impacts.97 The NEB provides guidance to industry
about developing Abandonment Plans for federally-regulated pipelines, including requirements
to seek input from landowners, technical experts and other stakeholders.97
Decommissioning involves the same activities as abandoning in place. However, the regulatory
requirements are different in that decommissioning does not require a public hearing before it is
approved. Decommissioning can only be used where it can be demonstrated that the service
originally supplied by the decommissioned line can be continued by some other means.
7.1 Deactivation
When an operating company wishes to temporarily deactivate a pipeline segment, typically it
must:
isolate the pipeline segment to be deactivated (including closing valves to block off
incoming and outgoing flow from the segment);
remove existing product from the isolated segment;
block off the segment at each isolation point (by installing blind flanges for example);
confirm that the piping segments can be drained and vented;
remove instrumentation and plug sensor connections;
remove residual products from the isolated segments by pigging, steam or water jetting,
chemical agents or other suitable means, and purge and fill the segment and components
with low pressure nitrogen;
monitor the pipe segments by checking the nitrogen pressure; and
maintain cathodic protection current and voltage levels, and continue to monitor these to
meet CSA Z662-15 requirements.
7.2 Abandonment
When a line is to be abandoned, a company must demonstrate that it will abandon the pipeline in
a way that protects the environment and the public. Further, the company must plan for, prevent,
manage and mitigate potentially dangerous conditions associated with the abandoned line.
7.2.1 Method
In all cases, CSA Z662-15 (section 10.16.3)101 requires removal of all above-ground facilities
associated with the abandoned pipeline, such as:
block valves;
cathodic protection, for example thermoelectric generators, rectifiers and test leads;
SCADA; and
buildings.
91
protection of sensitive cultural and environmental features, and reclamation and
monitoring plans.98
Adding a proportionate volume of soil may be necessary where pipeline is removed, to prevent a
sunken ditchline. This includes compaction of the site, roaching and testing soils for suitability
(e.g., weeds, texture).98,99
Soil Subsidence
This condition may arise after operating companies remove cathodic protection. Segments of
the pipe that are abandoned-in-place will undergo pitting corrosion, which may eventually
weaken the pipe to the point of collapse.103 Det Norsk Veritas (DNV) (2015) predicts that
although highly variable, the resulting subsidence would typically be expected to be less
than 10 cm.103
Subsidence may affect some land uses (e.g., agriculture) or infrastructure (e.g., roads and
railroads). Subsidence at road crossings can be mitigated by plating and filling the pipeline
under the crossing, using concrete, fillcrete or other suitable material.98,99
In other areas, subsidence may be managed through natural soil forming processes (e.g., soil
development and associated vegetation growth) or normal agricultural operations. If ground
subsidence becomes problematic, it may be mitigated by adding fill (e.g., soil from the trench)
or topsoil to affected areas.
Contamination Purge
To mitigate the potential for contamination purge, BAT include:
cleaning the pipeline before abandoning it, whether abandoned-in-place or removed;
98,100,104
and
conducting environmental site assessments to support planning for contamination
containment and removal.
Potential contaminants (e.g., PAHs) derived from the breakdown of pipe coatings following
abandonment have low solubility in water, sorb to soil carbon and can be broken down over time
by soil microorganisms.105 As a result, it is unlikely that contaminants leached from pipe
coatings will move in conduits, in association with water flow.105
The pipeline may perforate through corrosion, potentially creating conduits that could locally
divert surface water or shallow groundwater.98,100 Conduits may also result in flooding and
erosion.99
92
Strategies to mitigate potential contamination to surface water or shallow groundwater include:
segmenting the pipeline through cutting and capping;
plating at strategic locations, such as road crossings, near shallow groundwater features
or top of slopes; or
installing plugs.98
Pipeline Exposure
Although there is some risk of pipeline exposure in watercourses from scouring following
abandonment, leaving the pipeline in place is still generally preferred as this will avoid further
disturbance to the beds and banks of watercourses.99 Where required, pipelines may be pulled
from under watercourses to avoid disturbing riparian areas and the watercourse itself.100
Pipe exposure may also occur in wetlands once the pipe is purged of product and if buoyancy
control mechanisms, such as swamp weights, are no longer effective.99 Still, leaving buoyancy
control mechanisms in place will reduce the potential for exposure. Although frost heave is a
documented potential concern related to abandonment in place, pipe exposures as a result of
frost heave are not frequently reported in the literature.106 BAT related to pipeline exposure in
the context of pipeline abandonment includes:
reviewing the pipeline ROW for areas where operating companies have previously
observed geohazards, such as steep slopes, or which have the potential to result in
pipeline exposure; and
considering erosion control measures and/or monitoring for these areas.
93
7.4.1 Reclamation Interventions on ROW
Significantly, many ROWs were seeded after construction with agronomic species and are
maintained in a grass-dominated state by mowing, which may suppress natural succession and
colonization by native species. Although ROW maintenance, including vegetation management,
typically ceases as part of abandonment, vegetation on the abandoned ROW may not readily
revert to pre-construction conditions without intervention, such as tree planting or transplant of
shrub cuttings such as willows.
*
See section 6.2.10 (Assessment, Remediation and Monitoring of Contaminated Sites).
94
8.0 ENGAGEMENT SURVEYS
The NEB consulted with industry members and associations, other governments and academia to
acquire perspectives on BAT and emerging technology in the Canadian pipeline industry. Part of
the survey included questions on how technology incorporates into operations.
Phase two survey questions were adapted from phase one survey questions.
*
35 survey one respondents; 43 survey two respondents.
95
Engagement Survey Results Summary
In summary, results demonstrate that incorporation of new technology into pipeline systems can
be a lengthy process as introducing new technology requires cost/benefit analysis and
demonstration to the pipeline regulatory agency that safety to people and the environment will be
maintained or improved. This includes completion of required product testing and pilot or field
trials.
A prominent theme among survey responses was description of equipment and best practices
regarding leak and spill prevention and response planning. Respondents’ focus on incident
prevention is understandable as incidents can result in significant human, environmental, and
financial costs. Respondents also described the importance of improved information-sharing with
regard to BAT. This includes development and dissemination of BAT and emerging technology.
Although differences of opinion existed regarding who should lead this initiative (i.e., regulatory
versus industry), it is clear that identifying and disseminating this type of information is a
collaborative effort that requires the involvement of multiple stakeholders. See Appendix C for
table summaries of survey responses.
96
9.0 CONCLUSION
This report provides an overview of BAT and emerging technologies in federally-regulated
pipelines. It focuses on BAT as it relates to environmental considerations, materials, construction
and emergency management. As mentioned, it is a snapshot of technology in the year the NEB
developed the report. Stakeholders must continue to be informed as technology advances.
Respondents’ Concerns
Many respondents focused on BAT for leak and spill prevention and response because such
incidents can result in significant human, environmental and financial cost.
97
Minister Ministre
of Natural Resources des Ressources naturelles
Further to discussions with you and your staff, I am writing to seek guidance, through study
and a subsequent report, on the application of “best available technologies” used in
federally-regulated pipeline projects. This is an initiative that I announced in May 2014 as
part of new world class pipeline safety measures, but for which no amendments to the
National Energy Board Act are required.
The Government of Canada recognizes the need for dialogue and information on the use of
best available technologies for pipelines, which take into account new innovations to
continuously improve pipeline safety. I note that, with the National Energy Board’s (NEB)
recently announced ‘Listening to Canadians’ tour, the NEB is well-positioned to connect and
convene discussions with experts and other stakeholders with relevant expertise to help
shape the study in this area.
I firmly believe that technology can and will ensure safer pipelines and protection of the
environment. I also believe that guidance from the NEB regarding how companies use best
available technologies and how new technologies are being developed, tested and
implemented to meet demands for safer pipelines will contribute towards achieving these
important goals. The study should consider the economic feasibility for companies
operating pipelines to implement the technologies in the construction and operation of
pipelines.
Some of the areas of focus the NEB should examine in its study and report on best available
technology include:
- construction methods;
- materials;
- emergency response techniques; and,
- emerging technological developments.
It is expected that the NEB will need to consult and convene discussions with stakeholders,
including industry, associations and academia, with relevant technical expertise and
knowledge to develop a final study that can be disseminated broadly and contribute to the
safety of pipelines and protection of the environment in Canada.
It is through subsection 26(2) of the National Energy Board Act that I am making this
request. I would ask that the NEB undertake this study and provide the report to me by
March 31, 2016. Such a timeline will provide the opportunity to consult with relevant
stakeholders. As this matter falls under the Board’s expected operational requirements
from time to time, no additional funding will be allocated to the Board for this request.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to receiving the NEB’s study
with respect to the application of best available technologies in federally-regulated pipeline
projects.
Sincerely,
102
Environmental Considerations (Survey Two)
Critical Concerns Preventing leaks and spills
Responding to leaks and spills
Pipeline design and pre-construction is an important phase that entails
appropriate assessment and mitigation planning, followed by
implementation and monitoring
Pipeline impact on water bodies, including watercourse crossings and
water quality
Waste disposal techniques, especially hazardous waste and pipeline
abandonment
Air emissions from pipeline construction and operation (including
facilities)
Best Available Technology for:
Leak Prevention and Routine monitoring (line patrol) and shut down
Response Measures Fiber optics
Depth of cover
ILI
External pipe inspection (e.g. NDE)
Cathodic protection (CP)
Design and Pre- Trenchless construction
construction Topsoil management and backfilling
Reclamation procedures
Herbicides and equipment washing to control spread of invasive species
Pipe material and coatings
Welding procedures
Biometric pipeline repair procedures
Line patrol, including aerial video
Pipeline Impact on Horizontal direction drilling (HDD)
Water Bodies Field analysis techniques
Watercourse monitoring
Leak detection
Trenchless installation of pipe
Environmental protection planning
Construction timing
Sensitive species breeding windows
GIS and aerial/satellite imagery
GIS mapping
Light detection and ranging (LiDAR)
Pipeline material (high-quality steel)
Spill management procedures
103
Waste Disposal Computer-based waste tracking programs
Techniques Recycling of materials (e.g., pipeline coating)
Removal of contaminated soil
Pipe abandonment in place
Awareness and understanding of the impact of abandoning pipe in place
versus removal
Management Strategies Carbon capture storage and use
for Air Emissions High quality steel
Active monitoring of pipelines
104
Table 3: Phase Two survey results: Emergency Management
105
Cathodic Protection
Barriers affecting Mitigation effectiveness (safety of people and the environment)
technology uptake Economic feasibility
Regulatory compliance—constraints on use
Social impacts (e.g., landowner concerns)
Staying aligned with changing policy in multiple jurisdictions
Properly testing and validating
Commercial availability
Accessing information on new technology
Strategies for keeping Trade shows
up-to-date Industry association publications
Professional networks (CEPA, the American Petroleum Institute (API),
and the Association of Oil Pipe Lines (AOPL)
Workshops and conferences
Regulator-shared information
Inter-company sharing of lessons and best practices
In-house research, development, and innovation that benchmarks with
other companies
Regulator’s role in Some comments that regulator maintains separation with industry for
developing and impartiality, which may be hindering communication
disseminating Industry may be fearful of requesting information from regulator since
regulator has enforcement role
Others stated regulator promotes stakeholder interaction through annual
forums (e.g., the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA))
Small number said limited or no dissemination
How should regulator More face-to-face interactions
be involved in Review regulations to ensure they promote BAT
developing and Understand and support that BAT should be economically viable
disseminating Clear guidance and endorsement of new and best technology
Make information available through electronic mediums, conferences,
workshops and trade shows
Share successful implementation with industry
Small number said regulator should have minor or no role
Industry’s role in Participation with organizations (e.g., CSA, CEPA)
developing and Joint industry involvement with subject matter experts in companies who
disseminating collaborate and share
Participate in and fund research
Reports, tradeshows, conferences for information from associations,
vendors, consultants
106
Ideal role of industry in Continue to develop and share information through associations
Emerging Technology Continue to seek and assess BAT
Engage in outreach to promote industry improvement
Engage with public and media to hear concerns and proactively develop
new technology and information
Support field testing
Use new technology wherever practical
Who should develop Industry
and disseminates Regulator
information on BAT Industry and Regulator as partners
and emerging
technology
107
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AIV Alternative Integrity Validation
CP cathodic protection
DA direct assessment
EA environmental assessment
108
EAS environmental alignment sheet
109
MOC management of change
ROW right-of-way
RT radiographic
110
SCC stress corrosion cracking
TU traditional use
UT ultrasound
UV ultraviolet
111
GLOSSARY
the processes and actions a company takes at the end of the life
abandonment of a pipeline or facility to obtain approval from the regulator to
abandon the pipeline or facility
admixing of soils unintentional mixing of topsoil and subsoil during soil handling
112
amphibious track-based
a tracked vehicle that can operate on both land and water
vehicles
anionic polymer substance used to bind together soil to reduce erosion potential
a valve installed in a pipeline that can block the flow of oil or gas
block valves
through the line.
113
mechanical trenchless pipeline crossing method that does not use
boring
a mud system, often used to construct road or rail crossings
carbon capture and a process that captures carbon dioxide and stores it in a deep
sequestration geological formation
114
to bypass the in stream construction area
the vertical distance from the top of the pipe to the ground
depth of cover
surface when a pipe is buried underground
mulch and soil mixed with seed sprayed along disturbed areas to
engineered soil
help with reclamation
115
costs
a storage tank with a roof that floats on the surface of the stored
floating roof tank liquid, commonly used to store large quantities of petroleum
products such as crude oil
116
flora the plants of a particular region or habitat
large pipe through which water from the upstream side of a dam
flume
flows downstream of the work area
117
ground-based line patrol inspection on foot or, in some cases, by automobile
horizontal directional drilling trenchless method of installing underground pipe that uses a
(HDD) mud-based system to maintain circulation around a drill bit
118
a body of water which is confined within an enclosure, for
impoundments
example, a reservoir
logging decks sites for storing salvaged timber cleared during construction
warm, safe places where bats gather to rear young. Some groups
maternity roosts
of bats return to the same maternity roost site every year
120
nurse crop an annual crop used to help establish a perennial crop
polycyclic aromatic a group of over 100 different chemicals that can be harmful to
hydrocarbons (PAH) human health under some circumstances
121
project footprint the area of land disturbed during construction of a project
122
of, relating to, or situated on the banks of a wetland or water
riparian
body
the first line of weld laid down when joining two parts (such as
root pass two pipe joints) using a multi pass welding procedure, the last
pass being known as the cap
123
temporary pond built on a construction site to capture soil that is
sediment basins washed off during rain storms, and protect the water quality of a
nearby stream, river, lake, or bay
materials which are worked into the soil to enhance the soil's
oil amendments
properties.
soil horizons a layer of soil whose physical characteristics differ from the
layers above and beneath. Horizons are defined by physical
124
features, like colour and texture
125
subsoil the soil lying immediately under the surface soil
trenchless watercourse a crossing method in which there is no disturbance to the bed and
crossing banks of a waterbody
126
recovering the vapours of hydrocarbons so that they do not
vapour recovery
escape into the atmosphere
volatile organic compounds organic chemicals that can evaporate under normal atmospheric
(VOC) conditions
low dam built across a river to raise the level of water upstream
weir
or regulate its flow
127
ENDNOTES
1
OSPAR (Oslo and Paris Commission). 2016. Best Available Techniques (BAT) & Best
Environmental Practices (BEP). Available at: http://www.ospar.org/about/principles/bat-bep.
Accessed July 2016.
2
US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. BAT. Available at:
http://www.epa.ie/licensing/info/bref/. Accessed July 2016.
3
European Union. 1996. Council Directive 96/61/EC Integrated Pollution Prevention and
Control. Available at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/council-directive-96-61-
ec-ippc. Accessed July 2016.
4
AMEC (AMEC Earth and Environmental). 2009. Identification and Mitigation of Acid Rock
Drainage and Metal Leaching During Construction, Enbridge Northern Gateway Project.
Submitted to Northern Gateway Pipelines Inc. October 2009, revised February 16, 2010.
Available at:
http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents_staticpost/cearref_21799/2213/Volume3/Vol_3_Appe
ndix_E-1-2.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
5
OMECC (Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change). 2016. Guideline for
identification of Best Available Control Technology- Economically Achievable (BACTEA).
Available at: https://www.ontario.ca/page/guideline-identification-best-available-control-
technology-economically-achievable-bactea. Accessed July 2016.
6
BC MOE (British Columbia Ministry of Environment). 2015. Factsheet: Waste Discharges
Best Achievable Technology. Available at:
http://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/waste-management/industrial-
waste/industrial-waste/pulp-paper-wood/best_achievable_control_tech.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
7
Dr. Ing. Christoph Kalwa, Dr. Ing. Hans-Georg Hillenbrand, Dr. Ing. Michael Graf, High
Strength Steel Pipes: New Developments and Applications, Onshore Pipeline Conference
Houston Texas, USA, June 10-11, 2002, Print.
8
A. Parvez, A. Sakr, M. Yeats & B. Weller, Suitability of reinforced thermoplastic pipe in
crude oil Containing Aromatic Solvents and additionally Alkaline Liquids for Enhanced Oil
Recovery. Gas & Oil Expo and Conference North America 2011GEOC11-GOXC11-
102. Print
9
Canadian Standards Association, CSA Z662-11 (2011) - Oil and Gas Pipelines
Systems, Print.
10
BC MFLNRO (British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource
Operations). 2014. A compendium of wildlife guidelines for industrial development projects
128
in the north area, British Columbia. Interim Guidance. 206 pp. Canadian Environmental
Assessment Act, 2012. S.C. 2012, c. 19, s. 52.
11
BC MOE (British Columbia Ministry of Environment). 2013. Implementation plan for the
ongoing management of South Peace Northern Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou pop. 15)
in British Columbia. Victoria, BC. 16 pp.
12
McNay, R.S., D. Cichowski, and B.R. Muir. 2013. Action Plan for the Klinse-Za Herd of
Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada [Draft]. Species at Risk Act
Action Plan Series. West Moberly First Nations, Moberly Lake, British Columbia. 28 pp.
13
Environment Canada. 2014. Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou, Southern
Mountain population (Rangifer tarandus caribou) in Canada. Species at Risk Act Recovery
Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa. viii + 103 pp.
14
Golder Associates. 2012. Boreal caribou habitat restoration. Prepared for BC Ministry of
Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, Prince George, BC. 24 pp.
15
COSIA (Canada’s Oil Sands Innovation Alliance). 2016. Caribou habitat restoration.
Available at: http://www.cosia.ca/caribou-habitat-restoration. Accessed July 2016.
16
BC MOE (British Columbia Ministry of Environment). 2014. Procedures for mitigating
impacts on environmental values (Environmental Mitigation Procedures). BC Ministry of
Environment, Victoria, BC. 68 pp.
17
Petter, T. and Mutrie, D.F. 2009. Environmental Conservation Practices for Pipelines, in
Pipeline Engineering, in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), Developed under
the auspices of the UNESCO, EOLSS Publishers, Paris, France. Available at
http://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c08/e6-187-10-00.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
18
NEB (National Energy Board). 1991. Reasons for Decision TransCanada Pipelines Limited
GH-1-91. July 1991. Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/NE22-1-
1991-11E.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
19
OEB (Ontario Energy Board). 2011. Environmental Guidelines for the Location,
Construction and Operation of Hydrocarbon Pipelines and Facilities in Ontario, 6th Edition.
Available at:
http://www.ontarioenergyboard.ca/oeb/_Documents/Regulatory/Enviro_Guidelines_Hydroca
rbonPipelines_2011.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
20
Neville, M. 2003. Best Management Practices for Pipeline Construction in Native Prairie
Environments. Prepared for Alberta Environment and Alberta Sustainable Resource
Development. October 2003. Available at
https://www.aer.ca/documents/applications/BestManagementPracticesPipeline.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
129
21
Pembina Institute. Undated. Pipeline Construction & Operation - Environment & Energy in
the North, A Primer. Available at: https://www.pembina.org/reports/nps_Pipeline.pdf.
Accessed July 2016.
22
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Association). 2015. Six Pipeline Technologies You'll
Want to Know About. Available at: http://aboutpipelines.com/en/blog/6-pipeline-
technologies-youll-want-to-know-about/. Accessed July 2016.
23
Georgia Transmission Corporation (2010). “GTC-EPRI Siting Model.” Available at:
https://www.gatrans.com/planning-construction/gtc-epri-siting-model/Pages/default.aspx.
Accessed July 2016.
24
INGAA (Interstate Natural Gas Association of America) Foundation Inc. 1999. Temporary
Right-of-Way Width Requirements for Pipeline Construction. Gulf Interstate Engineering.
Available at: http://www.ingaa.org/File.aspx?id=19105. Accessed July 2016.
25
IFC (International Finance Corporation) World Bank Group. 2016 draft. Environmental,
Health, and Safety Guidelines-Petroleum Refining. Revised 2016. Available at:
http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/3a4f9f804c364938a6c1a6d8bd2c3114/Petroleum+Refi
ning+EHS+Guideline+-+2016vs2007+version+in+tracked+changes.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
Accessed July 2016.
26
Blue Source Canada. 2011. Blowdown Protocol for Pipeline Systems, prepared for Province
of British Columbia, April 2011, Final.
27
IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2007a. Environmental Health and Safety Guidelines
for Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Terminals. IFC World Bank Group, April 30, 2007.
Available at:
http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/81def8804885543ab1fcf36a6515bb18/Final+-
+Crude+Oil+and+Petroleum+Product+Terminals.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. Accessed July
2016.
28
Yan, Si Zhi and Chyan, Lee Sheng. 2009. Performance enhancement of BOTDR fiber optic
sensor for oil and gas pipeline monitoring, Optical Fiber Technology 16 (2010): 100-109.
Available at: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1068520010000027/1-s2.0-S1068520010000027-
main.pdf?_tid=e68a4228-541a-11e6-a0ee-
00000aacb362&acdnat=1469638699_158db7cdd91d5e68281019f931fdc1d0. Accessed
July 2016.
29
Genalta Power. 2015a. Waste Heat to Power. Available at:
http://www.genaltapower.com/solutions/#waste-heat. Accessed July 2016.
30
Genalta Power. 2015b. Waste Solution Gas. Available at:
http://www.genaltapower.com/solutions/#wastesolution-gas. Accessed July 2016.
130
31
Blomquist, Paul. 2010. Hybrid Laser Arc Welding (HLAW). Available at:
https://app.aws.org/conferences/newweldingtech/blomquist.pdf Accessed January 2016.
32
TRCA, 2015 (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority). Horizontal Directional Drill
Guidelines.
33
Tensar. 2016. Oil and Gas. Refining Exploration and Operations in the Oils and Gas
Industry. Available at: http://www.tensarcorp.com/Market-Sectors/Oil-and-Gas. Accessed
July 2016.
34
CAPP (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers). 2004. Planning Horizontal Directional
Drilling for Pipeline Construction. Available at: http://www.capp.ca/publications-and-
statistics/publications/83652. Accessed July 2016.
35
Health Canada. (2011). DRAFT: Guidance for Evaluating Human Health Impacts in
Environmental Assessment: Noise. Environmental Health Bureau, Healthy Environments and
Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Available at:
https://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/eal/archive/2012/summaries/5471_appendix2.pdf
Accessed July 2016.
36
AER (Alberta Energy Regulator). 2014. Principles for Minimizing Surface Disturbance in
Native Prairie and Parkland Areas. Manual 007. April 2014. Available at:
https://www.aer.ca/documents/manuals/Manual007.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
37
Government of Alberta. 2011. Recommended Land Use Guidelines for Protection of
Selected Wildlife Species and Habitat within Grassland and Parkland Natural Regions of
Alberta. Available at: http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/wildlife-land-use-
guidelines/documents/WildlifeLandUse-SpeciesHabitatGrasslandParkland-Apr28-2011.pdf.
Accessed July 2016.
38
Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd.). 2013. Migratory Bird Convention Act: A Best
Management Practice for Pipelines, Draft For Discussion. Prepared for Canadian Energy
Pipeline Association. Available at: http://www.cepa.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/01/Migratory-Birds-Sept-26-2013-for-Publication.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
39
CAPP (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers). 2014. Beneficial Management
Practice to Mitigate Risk of Incidental Take: Upstream Oil and Gas Construction and
Development Activities. Environmental Dynamics Inc. Prince George, BC.
40
AENV (Alberta Environment). 1995. Manual on Soil Conservation and Pipeline
Construction – Draft. Based on a report prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants and
Pedology Consultants. Available at:
https://extranet.gov.ab.ca/env/infocentre/info/library/6857.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
131
41
Pettapiece, W.W. and M.W. Dell. 1996. Guidelines to Alternative Soil Handling Procedures
During Pipeline Construction. Prepared for Soil Handling Sub-committee of the Alberta
Pipeline Environmental Steering Committee. June 1996. Available at:
https://extranet.gov.ab.ca/env/infocentre/info/library/6861.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
42
CAPP (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers), CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline
Association) and CGA (Canadian Gas Association). 2012. Pipeline Associated Watercourse
Crossings, Fourth Edition. Prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants. Calgary, Alberta.
Available at: http://www.cepa.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/01/FourthEdition_WatercourseCrossingManual_Nov2012.pdf.
Accessed July 2016.
43
Enbridge 2012a. Construction and Maintenance Manual.
44
Enbridge 2012b. Environmental Guidelines for Construction.
45
TCPL (TransCanada Pipelines Ltd). 2011. Engineering Specification TES-PROJ-COM
Compaction Control Measures for Pipeline Excavations.
46
TCPL (TransCanada Pipelines Ltd). 2014. Engineering Specification TES-DV31-2333
Excavation, Backfilling and Grading. Item ID: 000006457.
47
TCPL (TransCanada Pipelines Ltd). 2015a. Engineering Specification TES-PROJ-SSW
Steep Slope Work Specification. EDMS No.: 009199892.
48
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Associations). 2014. Pipeline Watercourse Management-
Recommended Practices, 1st Ed.
49
CEPA Foundation and INGAA Foundation, 2016. A Practical Guide for Pipeline
Construction Inspectors.
50
IECA (International Erosion Control Association). 2015. Appendix P: Land-based Pipeline
Construction in Best Practice Erosion and Sediment Control. Available at:
https://www.austieca.com.au/documents/item/608 . Accessed July 2016.
51
GGHACA (Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Conservation Authorities). 2006. Erosion and
Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction. Available at:
http://www.sustainabletechnologies.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ESC-Guideline-
December-2006.pdf . Accessed July 2016.
52
USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 2016. Erosion and Sediment Control
Guidelines for Pipeline Projects. Available at:
http://www.swl.usace.army.mil/Portals/50/docs/regulatory/Sedimenatation-
Erosion%20Control.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
132
53
TRCA (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority). 2009. Erosion and Sediment Control
Practices Evaluation. Prepared by TRCA under the Sustainable Technologies Program.
Available at: http://www.sustainabletechnologies.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ESC-
Practices-Evaluation-Final.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
54
AEP (Alberta Environment and Parks). 2014a. Innovative Pipeline Strategies. Available at:
http://aep.alberta.ca/about-us/partnerships/partners-in-resource-excellence/innovative-
pipeline-strategies.aspx. Accessed July 2016.
55
AEP (Alberta Environment and Parks). 2014b. Evergreen Centre for Resource Excellence
and Innovation. Available at: http://aep.alberta.ca/about-us/partnerships/partners-in-resource-
excellence/evergreen-centre-for-resource-excellence-and-innovation.aspx. Accessed
July 2016.
56
TRCA. 2014. Polymer Backgrounder: the Nature, Efficacy and Safety of Polymers for
Erosion and Sediment Control. Available at: http://sustainabletechnologies.ca/wp/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/Polymer-Backgrounder-Final.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
57
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Association). 2016. Adapting to Regulatory Changes for
Protection of Wetlands and Transmission Industry Opportunities. Available at:
http://www.albertacga.ca/resources/Documents/Events/Albertas-New-Wetland-Policy-
Seminar-2016/Canadian%20Energy%20Pipeline%20Assn%20Presentation.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
58
JRP (the Joint Public Review Panel Report). 1997. Sable Gas Project. Prepared by the
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency and Natural Resources Canada. October, 1997.
Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/Collection/NE23-91-1997E.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
59
Spectra (Spectra Energy). 2010. Environmental Manual for Construction Projects in Canada,
Second Edition. May 2010. Available at: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-
eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90550/450547/650696/647058/A1V8G5_-
_Environmental_Manual_for_Construction_Projects_in_Canada_2nd_Edition_May_2010.pd
f?_gc_lang=en&nodeid=647062&vernum=0. Accessed July 2016.
60
TCPL (TransCanada Pipelines Ltd). 2015. Energy East Project Blasting Management Plan.
Available at: https://docs.neb-one.gc.ca/ll-
eng/llisapi.dll/fetch/2000/90464/90552/2432218/2540913/2543426/2995824/2957429/A7694
5-4_V7_Appendix_7-4_Blasting_Management_Program_-
_A5A3E8.pdf?nodeid=2958097&vernum=-2. Accessed July 2016.
61
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Association). 2012. How does the industry protect
Canada’s rivers, streams and lakes during a pipeline crossing? Available at:
http://www.cepa.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CEPA-
Factsheet_WatercourseCrossing_web.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
133
62
DFO (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). 2013a. Fisheries Protection Policy Statement.
Ecosystem Programs Policy, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Available at:
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pnw-ppe/pol/PolicyStatement-EnoncePolitique-eng.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
63
CAPP (Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers), CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline
Association) and CGA (Canadian Gas Association). 2005. Pipeline Associated Watercourse
Crossings, Third Edition. Prepared by TERA Environmental Consultants and Salmo
Consulting Inc. Calgary, Alberta. Available at: http://www.cepa.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/01/Pipelines-Associated-Watercourse-Crossings.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
64
TRCA, 2013. ((Toronto and Region Conservation Authority). Interim Technical Guidelines
for the Development of Environmental Management Plans for Underground Infrastructure.
65
TRCA, 2015a (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority). Crossings Guideline for Valley
and Stream Corridors.
66
TRB (Transportation Research Board). 2006. National Cooperative Highway Research
Program Synthesis 363: Control of Invasive Species: A Synthesis of Highway Practice.
Prepared by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. Available at:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_363.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
67
CIPC (California Invasive Plant Council). 2012. Preventing the Spread of Invasive Plants:
Best Management Practices for Transportation and Utility Corridors. Cal-IPC Publication
2012-01. California Invasive Plant Council, Berkeley, CA. Available at: http://www.cal-
ipc.org/ip/prevention/tuc.php. Accessed July 2016.
68
OIPC (Ontario Invasive Plant Council). 2013. The Clean Equipment Protocol for Industry.
Available at:
http://www.ontarioinvasiveplants.ca/files/CleanEquipmentProtocol_Mar152013_D3_FINAL.
pdf. Accessed July 2016
69
ISCBC (Invasive Species Council of British Columbia). 2014. Zebra and Quagga Mussels.
Available at: http://bcinvasives.ca/invasive-species/identify/invasive-species/invasive-
animals/zebra-and-quagga-mussels/. Accessed July 2016.
70
Pejchar, Liba and Mooney, Harold A. 2009. Invasive species, ecosystem services and human
well-being in Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24, 9 (July 2009): 497-504. Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26647743_Pejchar_L_and_H_Mooney_Invasive_s
pecies_ecosystem_services_and_human_well-being_Trends_in_Ecology_Evolution.
Accessed July 2016.
71
CEAA (Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency). 2012. Considering Aboriginal
traditional knowledge in environmental assessments conducted under the Canadian
134
Environmental Assessment Act -- Interim Principles. https://www.ceaa-
acee.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=4A795E76-1. Accessed July 2016.
72
Government of Alberta. 2016. The Government of Alberta’s Guidelines on Consultation with
Metis Settlements on Land and Natural Resource Management.
http://www.indigenous.alberta.ca/documents/GOA-Guidelines-Consultation-Metis-
LandNaturalResourceManagement-2016.pdf?0.1898236863107831. Accessed July 2016.
73
NEB (National Energy Board). 2015a. National Energy Board Filing Manual. Available at:
https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/bts/ctrg/gnnb/flngmnl/index-eng.html. Accessed July 2016.
74
Powter, Chris B., John J. Doornbos, and M. Anne Naeth. 2015. Aboriginal Participation in
Land Reclamation: Enhancing Dialogue – Report on a Workshop held March 23, 2015.
Prepared for Land Reclamation International Graduate School, University of Alberta and the
Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, Edmonton, Alberta.
75
JRP (Joint Review Panel for the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project). 2013. Considerations:
Report of the Joint Review Panel for the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Volume 2. The
Publication Office, National Energy Board. Calgary Alberta. http://gatewaypanel.review-
examen.gc.ca/clf-nsi/dcmnt/rcmndtnsrprt/rcmndtnsrprtvlm2-eng.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
76
NEB (National Energy Board). 2016. Emergency Management Information. Available at:
https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/sftnvrnmnt/mrgnc/rspns/index-eng.html. Accessed July 2016.
77
Government of Alberta. 2010. Industrial Activity in Foothills Fescue Grasslands. Available
at: http://aep.alberta.ca/lands-forests/grazing-range-management/documents/Grassland-
MinimizingSurfaceDisturbance.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
78
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Association). 2013. How hydrostatic testing helps
maintain pipeline integrity. Available at: http://aboutpipelines.com/en/blog/how-hydrostatic-
testing-helps-maintain-pipeline-integrity/. Accessed July 2016.
79
DFO (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). 2013b. Framework for assessing the ecological flow
requirements to support fisheries in Canada. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat, Science
Advisory Report 2013/017. http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/Publications/SAR-
AS/2013/2013_017-eng.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
80
AENV (Alberta Environment). 2011. Alberta Desk-top Method for Determining
Environmental Flows. Water Policy Branch, June 2011. Available at:
http://esrd.alberta.ca/water/programs-and-services/water-for-life/healthy-aquatic-
ecosystems/documents/DesktopMethodEnvironmentalFlows-Jun2011.pdf. Accessed
July 2016.
81
Alberta Environment. 2016. Hydrostatic Testing of Pipelines: Facts at your fingertips.
Available at: http://esrd.alberta.ca/water/education-
guidelines/documents/HydrostaticTestingPipelines-FactSheet.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
135
82
Government of Alberta. 1999. Code of Practice for the Release of Hydrostatic Test Water
from Hydrostatic Testing of Petroleum Liquid and Gas Pipelines. Available at:
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/codes/RELEASE.PDF. Accessed July 2016.
83
Government of Saskatchewan. 2014. Hydrostatic Testing, Saskatchewan Environmental
Code Edition 1. Chapter C.3.1. Adopted Pursuant to the Environmental Management and
Protection Act, 2010. Available at:
http://environment.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=95348c74-0798-4b37-
8a55-2f2ada35c394. Accessed July 2016.
84
Alberta Environment. 2001. Guide to the Code of Practice for the Temporary Diversion of
water for hydrostatic testing of pipelines (water act) and the Code of Practice for the Release
of Hydrostatic Test Water from Hydrostatic Testing of Petroleum Liquid and Gas Pipelines
(Environmental Enhancement Act). Available at: http://aep.alberta.ca/water/legislation-
guidelines/documents/HydrostaticTestingGuide-Mar2001.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
85
BC OGC (British Columbia Oil and Gas Commission). 2009. British Columbia Noise
Control Best Practices Guidelines. Available at: https://www.bcogc.ca/british-columbia-
noise-control-best-practices-guideline-0. Accessed July 2016.
86
AER (Alberta Energy Regulator). 2007. Directive 038: Noise Control. Available at:
https://www.aer.ca/rules-and-regulations/directives/directive-038. Accessed July 2016.
87
IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2007b. Environmental Health and Safety
Guidelines (EHS) General EHS Guidelines: Environmental – Noise Management. IFC World
Bank Group. Available at:
http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/06e3b50048865838b4c6f66a6515bb18/1-
7%2BNoise.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. Accessed July 2016.
88
National Grid. 2015. Review of Best Available Techniques for Mitigation of Pipework
Noise. Nia Final Report. Available at:
http://www.smarternetworks.org/NIA_PEA_Docs/NIA_NGGT0053_Pipeline_Noise_Mitigat
ion_-Final_Repo_150714111738.pdf. Accessed July 2016
89
Mulhall, Louise. 2015. Engery Global Oilfield Technology: Latest Capabilities of Satellite
Imaging. Available at: http://www.energyglobal.com/upstream/special-
reports/28082015/Latest-capabilities-of-satellite-imaging/. Accessed July 2016.
90
US EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2015. Control Techniques
Guidelines for the Oil and Gas Industry (Draft). EPA-453/P-15-001. Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs
Division, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Available at:
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/pdfs/og_ctg_draft_081815.pdf. Accessed July
2016
136
91
Malm, Howard. 2015. REM Technology Inc: A Comparison of Emissions Reduction
Technologies. Available at:
http://www.spartancontrols.com/~/media/resources/rem%20technology%20inc/papers/rem%
20emission%20reduction%20technology%20comparison%20june2015.pdf?la=en. Accessed
July 2016.
92
OME (Ontario Ministry of the Environment). 2011. Guide for Completing Phase One
Environmental Site Assessments under Ontario Regulation 153/04. Available at:
https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/996/3-6-1-phase-one-environmental-site-
assessments-en.pdf. https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/996/3-6-1-phase-one-
environmental-site-assessments-en.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
93
Vroblesky, D.A., 2008, User’s guide to the collection and analysis of tree cores to assess the
distribution of subsurface volatile organic compounds: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Report 2008–5088, 59 p. Available at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/sir2008-
5088. Accessed July 2016.
94
Golder Associates. 2013. Final Report. Region of Waterloo. Sustainable Approaches to Soil,
Sediment and Materials Management - Feasibility Study. Available at:
http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/aboutTheEnvironment/resources/Soil_Management_Feas
ibility_Study_Report.pdf. Accessed July 2016.
95
Lee, Kenneth (chair), Michel Boufadel, Bing Chen, Julia Foght, Peter Hodson, Stella
Swanson, Albert Venosa. 2015. Expert Panel Report on the Behaviour and Environmental
Impacts of Crude Oil Released into Aqueous Environments. Royal Society of Canada,
Ottawa, ON. ISBN: 978-1- 928140-02-3
96
RSC (Royal Society of Canada). 2015. The Behaviour and Environmental Impacts of Crude
Oil Released into Aqueous Environments. Available at: http://www.rsc.ca/en/expert-
panels/rsc-reports/behaviour-and-environmental-impacts-crude-oil-released-into-aqueous.
Accessed July 2016.
97
NEB (National Energy Board). 2015b. Pipeline Regulation in Canada: A Guide for
Landowners and the Public, Chapter 12: Abandonment of a Pipeline. Available at:
https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/prtcptn/lndwnrgd/lndwnrgdch12-eng.html. Accessed July 2016.
98
PASC (Pipeline Abandonment Steering Committee). 1996. Pipeline Abandonment – A
Discussion Paper on Technical and Environmental Issues. Prepared for PASC by: Canadian
Association of Petroleum Producers, Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, Alberta Energy
Utilities Board and the National Energy Board.
99
CEPA (Canadian Energy Pipeline Associations). 2007. Pipeline Abandonment Assumptions:
Technical and environmental considerations for development of pipeline abandonment
strategies. Prepared for the Terminal Negative Salvage Task Force of the Canadian Energy
Pipeline Association.
137
100
DNV (Det Norske Veritas). 2010. Pipeline Abandonment Scoping Study. Prepared for the
National Energy Board, Report No. EP028844.
101
CSA (Canadian Standards Association). 2015. Z662-15: Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems.
Available at: http://shop.csa.ca/en/canada/petroleum-and-natural-gas-industry-systems/z662-
15-/invt/27024912015. Accessed July 2016.
102
NEB (National Energy Board). 2011. Remediation Process Guide. Available at:
https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/sftnvrnmnt/nvrnmnt/rmdtnprcssgd/rmdtnprcssgd-eng.pdf.
Accessed July 2016.
103
DNV (Det Norske Veritas). 2015. Understanding the Mechanisms of Corrosion and their
Effects on Abandoned Pipelines. Prepared for the Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada,
Calgary, Alberta, Report No. TAOUS813COSC (PP079627, Rev1).
104
AITF (Alberta Innovates Technology Futures). 2015. Cleaning of Pipelines for
Abandonment. Prepared for Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada (PTAC). Available
at: http://www.ptac.org/projects/400. Accessed July 2016.
105
NOVA Chemicals. 2015. Fate and Decomposition of Pipe Coating Materials in Abandoned
Pipelines. Prepared for Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada (PTAC). Available at:
http://www.ptac.org/projects/402. Accessed July 2016.
106
Stantec (Stantec Consulting Ltd.). 2014. A Study of Frost Heave-related Exposure Risk to
Abandoned Transmission Pipelines in Cropland Areas of Southern Canada Stage 1
(Literature Search and Numerical Modeling) Volume 1 (Technical Report). Prepared for the
Petroleum Technology Alliance of Canada, Calgary, Alberta.
138