Compliance Verification Activity Report: CV2122-095 - Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC

Overview

Compliance verification activity type: Field Inspection

Team:

• Inspector 2935
• Inspector 2936

Regulated company: Trans Mountain Pipeline ULC

Operating company: Kinder Morgan Canada Inc

Province(s) / Territory(s):

• British Columbia

Discipline(s):

• Safety Management
• Indigenous Monitoring

Related events:

• CV2122-308

Rationale and scope:

TMX Spread 5B - Assess field implementation of construction safety manual and project specific safety plans for ongoing construction activities; company oversight of contractors - training & competence, monitoring, supervision and accountability; assess execution of work per applicable procedures and documented work practices. Verify compliance with condition 73 filings including the Ohamil camp traffic management plan filed with the CER in October 2020.

Compliance tool(s) used:

• Information Request (IR) (3)
• Inspection Officer Order (IOO) (1)

Facility details

Facilities:

• TRANS MOUNTAIN EXPANSION PROJECT

Facility Types

• Pipeline
• Pipeline

Life-cycle Phases

• Construction

Regulatory requirements

Regulatory requirements that apply to this activity:

• Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA)
• Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA)
• National Energy Board Act (NEBA)
• Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)
• Plans And Procedures
• Project-specific Contractor/Project Safety Plan (CSP)
• Trans Mountain Expansion, Project Specific Safety Plan - Spread 5B. doc# 01-13283-S5B-HS-PLN-0002 Rev. 3
• Project-specific plan or procedure
• TMEP Health and Safety Management Plan, TMEP Doc No. 01-13283-GG-0000-HS-PLN-0001 R4
• Standards
• CSA Z662-19 - Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems

Regulatory instrument number(s):

• OC-065

Observations (no outstanding follow-up required)

Observation 1 - Information Request (IR) -1

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

Observations:

Information Request (IR) -1 
- Spread 5B Contractors Project Hazard Assessment

Compliance tool used: Information Request (IR)

Regulatory requirement:

• Project-specific Contractor/Project Safety Plan (CSP)
• Trans Mountain Expansion, Project Specific Safety Plan - Spread 5B. doc# 01-13283-S5B-HS-PLN-0002 Rev. 3

Relevant section(s):

• "1.11.4. Project Hazard Assessments; All hazards noted in the PHA, including the controls implemented to mitigate these hazards, are added to site specific orientation and weekly safety meeting agendas. As the project develops, changes may occur, resulting in revisions and updates to the PHA, in addition the PHA will be reviewed at a minimum of every 6 months to ensure that project hazards are adequately managed. Updates will be communicated to all workers during weekly safety meetings."

Company action required:

1. File to the CER for review - the latest applicable version of the contractors (Kiewit+Bonatti) Spread 5B pipeline construction, Project Hazard Assessment. (Also known as CHRR - Contractors Hazard Risk Registry)
2. Have on hand for review at the Inspection Opening Meeting for review or use, the Unified Hazard Risk Registry (UHRR)

Due date: 2021-08-02

Date closed: 2021-08-03
Note: the date closed is the date that the inspector completed their review of the company corrective actions for adequacy and determined that no further actions are required.

Reason closed: Requirement met

Compliance achieved: Yes

Observation 2 - General Observations - Spread 5B

Date & time of visit: 2021-08-05 11:00

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Industrial Sanitation and Personnel Facilities
• Fire Protection
• Flammable and Combustible Liquids
• Labels and Documentation
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification
• Temporary Structures
• Signage

Facility:

Observations:

General Observations - Spread 5B 

• CER IOs called in to the morning TMEP Inspectors Meeting and took notes of work activities occurring on the right-of-way
• CER IOs and IMs completed a Spread 5B Safety Orientation at the Laidlaw Field Office
• CER IOs discussed with TMEP the upcoming Joint Venture change and the new Contractors safety programs
• CER IOs and IMs completed a Level 3 truck wash and bleaching prior to going to the field 
• CER IOs asked for a received a copy of the plan or procedure that described the UHRR/CHRR process.
• CER IO inspected several locations on Spread 5B noting:
  • Traffic Control Plans were in place for each work location and facilitated safe entry and exit from the highway and roads to the active work sites
  • Contractor and TMEP site representatives were present at each location, as was notable signage - indicating each visitor to the site is required to participate in a Field Level Risk Assessment, and a review of the Daily Toolbox Talk form.
  • CER IO reviewed Safe Work Agreement forms, noting documented coordination of work activities between Contractors and TMEP
• CER IO noted several measures in place in alignment with a Wildfire Prevention and Protection process
  • IO visited and observed a work site where pipeline welding (Hot Work) was ongoing, and verified several fire prevention measures in place to conduct the work safely
  • Several project personnel at each site had received S100 Wildland Fire Fighter Training
  • IO observed fire hoses strung out and pre-charged ready for use for soaking or response
  • Portable water tanks and a water supply were stationed at each site, along with water pumps and water hoses; used to wet and prepare work areas, and to fight fire if needed
  • Pickup trucks were observed to be equipped with portable fire fighting equipment including back-pack water cans, hand tools including shovels and Pulaski, and fire extinguishers
  • Documentation issued by BC Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development (FLNROD)  was available on site for review, and noted several required work measures and work limitations specific to work being conducted by TMEP; CER IO observed TMEP to be following these specified measures at each of the locations
  • Two-hour Fire Watch was assigned for any post hot work sites
• CER IO observed several heavy equipment interface work sites and questioned TMEP Inspectors and Contractors on the safe work processes that control the people and equipment interface hazard:
  • IO Observed practices in place to communicate safety controls relevant to heavy equipment, including:
    • Site safety orientation including Field Level Risk Assessments noting safe work distances,
    • A review of practices for when people must approach heavy equipment; 6 meter no-go zone, make eye contact with the operator or do not proceed, or when available use radio communications
    • IO observed a designated 'work controller' who had radio communication with equipment operators (at one of three sites) 
• CER IO observed an active blasting work task and engaged with the blasting contractors and TMEP Blasting Inspector
  • (See separate Blasting Observation) 
• CER IOs observed no items of non-compliance for worksites controlled by the Spread 5B GCC - Macro.

Compliance tool used: No compliance tool used

Observation 3 - Blasting Work Process

Date & time of visit: 2021-08-05 11:00

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Fire Protection
• Labels and Documentation
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

Observations:

Blasting Task - Road 5/ (KP1003 + 350)

• CER IO and IM arrived to location where blasting was a scheduled work task
• IO and IM safely exited the highway through a defined Traffic Control Plan, which separated the work site access from the main highway
• IO and IM took part in basic introductions, site safety documentation and verbal orientations, being informed of site protocols and numerous hazards
• IO reviewed a completed Daily Tool-Box Talk form, a completed Safe Work Authorization (SWA) form and a Field Level Risk Assessment
  • Noting major hazards identified for control included: steep slopes, heavy equipment operations, blasting and active falling operations
• IO engaged with Blasting Contractors and a TMEP Blasting Inspector who were prepared and waiting to blast a large rock on the ROW
  • IO noted visible signage and persons controlling the blasting area
  • IO reviewed and acknowledged the FLRA of the blasting crew
  • IO verified the Blaster in charge, had a provincially issued Blasters Certificate
  • IO reviewed a blank template of a TMEP Inspectors Focused Inspection for blasting safety, and received a copy of a completed focused inspection, completed for this observed blasting task
  • IO discussed Peak Particle Velocity(PPV) as a measure of blasting seismic impacts to adjacent and other infrastructure  
  • IO observed there to be two fire extinguishers mounted on the blasting contractors truck, as required by provincial OHS regulation
• IO reviewed the provided Contractors Hazard Risk Registry (CHRR), noting Blasting as a separate hazard heading, with identified safety controls - and was able to validate a connection from the CHRR listed safety controls to field level implementation; as well as TMEP oversight of the listed safety controls being verified through the focused inspection form.

Compliance tool used: No compliance tool used

Observation 4 - Mountain Crossing 1 and Laidlaw Bluffs

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding

Facility:

• TRANS MOUNTAIN EXPANSION PROJECT (Pipeline)

Observations:

Laidlaw Bluffs (LLB) KP 1060+050 to KP 1061+250

• While observing welding activities CER Inspection Officer (IO) and TMX-IAMC Indigenous Monitor (IM) became aware of a worksite (LLB) adjacent to the TMEP worksite which had an open ditch.
• A physical barrier delineated the two worksites. Upon further inquiry, TMEP field safety inspector (FSI) indicated the site was controlled by another contractor performing highway realignment work. IO and IM were told that the site is transferred to the TMEP spread 5B GCC (Macro) and then back to the highway realignment contractor depending on the work activity.
• FSI told IO and IM that TMEP FSIs have been instructed not to enter the worksite when it is controlled by the highway realignment contractor.
• IO and IM proceeded to the highway realignment contractor's trailer. The senior construction manager told IO that ditching work for TMEP Line 2 such as excavations and backfill were performed by the contractor on behalf of TMEP in addition to highway realignment work. The senior construction manager told IO that any work that involved touching the pipe was performed by Macro.
• IO and IM left the contractor's worksite and regrouped with TMEP representatives.
• IO questioned TMEP regulatory advisor and TMEP spread 5B lead health and safety (LHS) regarding TMEP oversight of the highway realignment worksite.
  • IO was told that highway realignment work was considered a different project and could not speak to the details of how TMEP provided oversight. IO asked TMEP regulatory advisor to provide this information by end of day.
  • IO learned of an additional worksite where highway realignment work was performed by a different contractor.

• TMEP representatives escorted IO and IM to the second highway realignment contractor's trailer.
• IO and IM questioned MC1 Superintendent for the purpose of understanding the scope of work performed by the contractor, and how TMEP provided oversight.
  • MC1 Superintendent stated they excavate the trench line for TMEP Line 2 and backfill, confirming they do not touch the pipe itself.
  • IO noted a TMEP safe work agreement dated 5 Aug 2021 had been issued to the contractor. Scope of work included 'excavate trench line for TMEP Line 02, backfill any remaining holes on trench, and [haul rock to First Nation]'.
  • The safe work agreement had been signed by the issuer (TMEP) and receiver (Contractor), but not by workers. MC1 Superintendent indicated craft workers do not sign the SWA but are aware of the contents.
• TMEP special projects manager (TMEP SPM) arrived at the contractor trailer and informed IO and IM of a daily SimOps meeting between the highway re-alignment contractors and TMEP.
• IO and IM asked to tour the MC1 worksite. No work was occurring during the tour.
• IO asked MC1 Superintendent of any near miss events or incidents. MC1 Superintendent replied that a near miss involving heavy equipment had occurred approximately three weeks prior.

• IO and IM returned to Popkum construction yard
• Through inquiry IO and IM learned the highway realignment work was Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) work and managed by a special projects group within TMEP.
• IO and IM were told that TMEP Spread 5B LHS had no awareness of incidents or near miss events that occurred on the LLB or MC1 worksites. TMEP representatives were not able to demonstrate TMEP oversight of project related work on MC1 or LLB in accordance with the TMEP Health and Safety Management Plan (HSMP).

Compliance tool used: Information Request (IR)

Regulatory requirement:

• Project-specific plan or procedure
• TMEP Health and Safety Management Plan, TMEP Doc No. 01-13283-GG-0000-HS-PLN-0001 R4

Relevant section(s):

• s. 7.9 Reporting to the Sr. Project Managers (or equivalent), communicating with the Sr. Manager Health and Safety, the TMEP Manager, Health and Safety will be responsible for the safety oversight of small and large contractors. The role primary includes ensuring key health and safety deliverables are meeting targets and that documented health and safety plans are executed with internal and external requirements. • Verify that the EPC/GCC Project Specific Safety Plans (PSSP) and Site-Specific Emergency Response Plans (SSERP) in all aspects is implemented and managed and followed through by Contractors. • Conduct safety inspections to identify any Health and Safety Management System gaps through use of the Inspection Measuring and Monitoring Plan (*IMM) and Safety team.

Company action required:

At the conclusion of inspection activities on August 5th, CER Inspection Officers asked TMEP to provide an answer to the following question during the closing meeting on August 6th. 

Demonstrate to CER Inspection Officers (IOs):

1. Work activities including trench excavation and back filling on MC1 and LLB worksites are not subject to the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity OC-065, or
2. How TMEP is taking all reasonable steps to ensure that construction activities are conducted in accordance with the condition 64a and 64b filings (HSMP and PSSP), specifically:
   1. evidence that the construction safety manuals (CSMs) being used by the MC1 and LLB contractors met the requirements of the TMEP HSMP/PSSP,
   2. safety oversight was performed in accordance with the HSMP (field safety inspections, daily reports)
   3. incidents and near misses were managed in accordance with the HSMP, including a copy of the TMEP CSM-001 form related to the near miss communicated to the IO on August 5th).

Due date: 2021-08-06

Date closed: 2021-08-06
Note: the date closed is the date that the inspector completed their review of the company corrective actions for adequacy and determined that no further actions are required.

Reason closed: Requirement met

Compliance achieved: Yes

Observation 5 - IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED)

Date & time of visit: 2021-08-06 17:25

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding
• Labels and Documentation
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

Observations:

Note: Mountain Crossing 2 (MC2) and Laidlaw Bluffs (LLB) refer to the same location and are used interchangeably.

IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) - RELEVANT FACTS
 

1. On 5 August 2021 CER Inspection Officer No. 2927 (IO) learned through interviews and document review that TMEP construction activities were occurring outside of and not in adherence to project Certificate OC-065 on worksites referred to as Mountain Crossing 1 (MC1) and Mountain Crossing 2 (MC2).
   1. Trenching and backfilling activities had been performed on MC1 and MC2 by two contractors who were not operating under the construction safety manuals filed by Trans Mountain with the CER, specifically:
      1. Health and Safety Management Plan July 2020 CER File: OF-Fac-Oil-T260-2013-03 61 (HSMP), and
      2. Spread 5B, Macro Project Specific Safety Plan (Rev. 3) – Doc. #01-13283-S5B-HS-PLN-0002 (PSSP). 
2. Trans Mountain was unable to demonstrate that construction activities authorized by Certificate OC-065 (construction activities) on the MC1 and MC2 work sites have been inspected to ensure that they meet the requirements of the HSMP and PSSP.
   1. When asked by the IO, TMEP Spread 5B field safety inspectors stated they do not conduct oversight of MC1 and MC2 work sites.
   2. When asked by the IO, the TMEP Spread 5B Project Manager (PM) and Health and Safety Lead (HSE) stated they do not receive notification of all incidents or near-miss reports that occur on the MC1 and MC2 work sites.
   3. The TMEP Spread 5B daily work plans for August 4th and 5th provided to the IO by Trans Mountain for the purpose of planning the compliance verification activity with the CER did not fully encompass all scopes of work related to MC1 and MC2.
       
3. Inspection officer order DRP-002-2021 was verbally issued to Bryan Weir, Project Manager, Trans Mountain Expansion Project Spread 5B 17:25MST 6 August 2021, and in writing on 7 August 2021.

Compliance tool used: Inspection Officer Order (IOO)

Regulatory requirement:

• Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)

Relevant section(s):

• • 18. Construction Safety
    • (1) If a company contracts for the provision of services in respect of the construction of a pipeline, the company shall
      • (c) take all reasonable steps to ensure that construction activities are conducted in accordance with the manual developed under section 20; and

Company action required:

IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) Specified Measure 1

1. Cease construction activities on MC1 and MC2 work sites that are not being performed in accordance with the HSMP and PSSP until it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the IO that construction activities will be performed in accordance with all conditions of OC-065 including the HSMP and PSSP. IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) Specified Measure 2

2. Provide to the IO on or before 27 August 2021 a written description of the actions Trans Mountain has taken or will take to ensure construction activities on MC1 and MC2 work sites are conducted in accordance with the HSMP and PSSP. IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) Specified Measure 3

3. Provide to the IO on or before 18 August 2021 a response confirming if work on the MC1 and MC2 worksites has been conducted under the following approved plans, filed with the CER under OC-065.

1. Rare Plant Population Management Plan (condition 40);
2. Wetland Survey and Mitigation Plan (condition 41);
3. Watercourse Crossing Inventory (condition 43);
4. Wildlife Species at Risk Mitigation and Habitat Restoration Plans (condition 44);
5. Contamination Identification and Assessment Plan (condition 46);
6. Grizzly Bear Mitigation Plan (condition 56);
7. Riparian Habitat Management Plan (condition 71);
8. Pipeline Environmental Protection Plan (condition 72);
9. Old Growth Management Areas Mitigation and Replacement Plan (condition 76);
10. Acid Rock Drainage Management Plan (condition 72 and 78);
11. Plan for Indigenous Group Participation in Construction Monitoring (condition 98);
12. Heritage Resources and Sacred and Cultural Sites Plan (condition 100);
13. Condition 100 a) and b), specifically with regards to all permits, clearances and conditions required by Province of British Columbia.

1. If the work has not been conducted under the approved plans, provide to the IO a corrective action plan to mitigate all instances on or before 27 August 2021.

Due date: 2021-08-27

Date closed: 2021-09-01
Note: the date closed is the date that the inspector completed their review of the company corrective actions for adequacy and determined that no further actions are required.

Reason closed: Requirement met

Compliance achieved: Yes

Observation 6 - IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) Measure 1 - IR 1

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding
• Labels and Documentation
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

Observations:

CER has reviewed Trans Mountain’s response to measure 1 of IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED) submitted on August 13th, 2021 and requires additional information.

Compliance tool used: Information Request (IR)

Regulatory requirement:

• Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA)

Relevant section(s):

• • Administration and Enforcement
    • Terms of order
      109 (2) The order may require work associated with a facility, including a regulated facility, abandoned facility or ground disturbance to be suspended until the hazardous or detrimental situation has been remedied to the satisfaction of an inspection officer or the order is stayed or rescinded.

Company action required:

Provide the following information to supplement Trans Mountain's response to measure 1 of IOO DRP-002-2021 (AMENDED).

 

Due date: 2021-08-27

Date closed: 2021-08-16
Note: the date closed is the date that the inspector completed their review of the company corrective actions for adequacy and determined that no further actions are required.

Reason closed: Requirement met

Compliance achieved: Yes

Observations (company follow-up required)

Identified non-compliances to company plans or procedures are non-compliances either to: