[All] PHMSA report & Line 9 informationB

Sat May 2 01:28:31 EDT 2015

FYI
Lulu 
    ----- Forwarded Message -----
  From: Louisette Lanteigne <butterflybluelu at rogers.com>
 To: Ken Seiling <kseiling at regionofwaterloo.ca>; Chris Gosselin <cgosselin at regionofwaterloo.ca>; Kevin Eby <ekevin at region.waterloo.on.ca>; Rob Horne <rhorne at regionofwaterloo.ca>; Eric Hodgins <ehodgins at regionofwaterloo.ca>; Tim ( MAH) Ryall <tim.ryall at ontario.ca>; MPP Kitchener-Waterloo Catherine Fife <cfife-co at ndp.on.ca>; "minister.moe at ontario.ca" <minister.moe at ontario.ca>; Minister (MAH) <minister.mah at ontario.ca>; "kwynne.mpp at liberal.ola.org" <kwynne.mpp at liberal.ola.org> 
 Sent: Saturday, May 2, 2015 1:27 AM
 Subject: PHMSA report & Line 9 informationB

Hello everyone
The US regulator of pipelines, the PHMSA released an advisory recommending the revisiting of older pipeline infrastructure based on outdated codes which was a concern I tapped into at the Line 9B hearings. 
The concerns voiced in the report reflects concepts that can impact all kinds of pipelines from oil to gas to water mains etc. and as we advance into infrastructure renewal projects and source water protection policies, this knowledge might be of help so I wanted to pass it along. I've shared this with the Lake Erie Source Water protection team earlier and I thought it would be good for you to have as well. It is in the attachments.
Another thing I came across this week is an hour long interview with Richard Kuprewicz who is an independent pipeline expert from the US with over 40 years experience in the industry. His Accufacts report was submitted as sworn evidence during the NEB Line 9b hearings.
A conference organized by Citoyens Au Courant was held in Cornwall last year with R. Kuprewicz. The meeting lasted approx 1 hour and the video of the entire meeting is on youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_40M4UtVAo&feature=youtu.beRock

Enbridge has said publicly that a hydrotest is not needed and could cause unnecessary damage. This link is to a Toronto Star article where they mention this.http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontopipeline/2014/01/24/enbridge_ramps_up_repairs_on_controversial_line_9_pipeline.html
Mr. Kuprewicz states there is no existing evidence to suggest that hydrostatic testing can damage a pipeline. Look at 19min of that Youtube video. 
He states reversing flow or changing fuel types in pipe, augments where pressure is applied inside the pipe. This line already experience reversal of flow once previously. That process required hydrostatic testing and it was done without issue by Enbridge With the Line 9B proposal,  Enbridge wants to reverse flow again and introduce a different fuel type: diluted bitumen. Why are they now saying a hydrostatic test is not needed? 
He states Canadian Pipeline Regulations are an illusion at 45:28 minutes into the video.  Being a delegate of the Line 9 hearings I agree. I secured  documents from the NEB using freedom of information that showed how the NEB hearing manager stated the lack of cross exam regarding the technical merits of engineering concerns and integrity issues was deemed a "success".I notified the press and a story was done on this:  http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/waterloo-woman-finds-neb-e-mail-lauding-public-s-inability-question-pipelines
The NEB hearing completely negated our ability to cross examine Enbridge or merits of the pipe which is in my view is completely unreasonable. 
Another concern raised in the video with Mr. Kuprewicz notes that blasting to install a pipeline through solid rock can damage other pipeline lines in the area.  As they install Energy East through rock in close proximity to Line 9 to the West of Montreal, there are significant risks. 
When he mentioned that, it makes me wonder about blasting taking place in regards to quarry pits in proximity to Line 9. Has that been considered as a threat to our source water?  Do we face issues like that in our Region? I don't know. 
At the end of the video Mr. Kuprewicz states the only likely reason why Enbridge doesn't want to do hydrostatic testing is that this line would fail the test. My Dad is a retired RCAF Flight Engineer and fuel systems expert and he agrees 100% on that concept as do I. The Enbridge integrity did data we have suggests that line will actually suffer cataclysmic failure if they run the line at the recommended pressure level of 1000 psi. The pipe was installed based on the codes that existed in 1971 and the line is too thin and the PE code is not up to date. It's got crack clusters and features all along the way.  A new report found contaminated sites along the route. Here's the info on that: http://line9communities.com/contaminated-land/ We need hydrostatic testing strictly mandated with this project to protect Canadian interests. We have more to loose in allowing a rupture and assuming the costs overruns than we do in paying a quarter of a million dollars to do the job right. 

The pipe's reversal has been permitted along the Sarnia to Westover route via the Leave to Granted process but the augmentation of fuel type and pressure has yet to fully happen and that puts our community at risk. 
I would encourage the Region to consider adopting a resolution to mandate hydrostatic testing as many municipalities have done and are continuing to do. 
I strongly advise the Region start to pay some attention to the ongoing Duffy Scandal because it lines up perfectly with the timing of Line 9 phase 1 which impacts our region. 
Using media stories, I can provide a bit of an overview of how this happened: 
Dec. 08, 2011: The Joslyn oil sand project had Minister Oliver saying NEB approval processes was too long: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/9b-joslyn-oilsands-project-gets-green-light-1.1026988
Jan 9, 2012: The demonizing of charities begins and again expressed need to shorten the NEB process. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/radicals-working-against-oilsands-ottawa-says-1.1148310
DUFFY DIARY: Feb.17, 2012 - “PM asks “Send me a note on Enbridge Line #9 problems” Many meetings and calls took place between Mike Duffy and Enbridge staff during this period. Visit here to view the diary entries with dates mentioned. http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/04/21/news/redacted-diary-reveals-oils-hidden-route-harper

May 23 2012, Harper Government officials, CSIS and Energy Industry meet in Ottawa http://www.vancouverobserver.com/world/canada/harper-government-officials-spies-meet-energy-industry-ottawa

June 10, 2012: The motion to allow Cabinet to override NEB rulings via the Omnibus Bill. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/riding-roughshod-over-diefs-legacy/article4246062/

June 12, 2012: The passing of the Billhttp://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-tale-of-2012s-omnibus-budget-bill/article4249856/
July 27  2012: The NEB approves Line 9 phase 1. 

I was at both Line 9 hearings. There was NO CROSS EXAM of technical merits surrounding engineering or pipeline integrity. It was the same thing I saw with Line 9B hearings. All we had was a closing argument from Enbridge that in my view, was written more by the marketing department than the technical experts. 
Either way I thought it was important for you to know of this because Waterloo is vulnerable with that line running through our Region. We are the byproduct of the Duffy/Enbridge/Prime Minister communications that afforded us an inferior hearing protocol than previous NEB processes. The leave to open for phase 1 has already been granted but I highly recommend the Region proceed to create a motion for the hydrostatic testing to protect the Grand River. 
Yours in good faith. 
Louisette Lanteigne700 Star Flower Ave.Waterloo Ont.N2V 2L2

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20150502/31d4299d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PHMSA---2014-0040.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 147828 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20150502/31d4299d/attachment.pdf>