Compliance Verification Activity Report: CV2122-184 - NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.

Overview

Compliance verification activity type: Field Inspection

Team:

• Inspector 2408
• Inspector 2648

Regulated company: NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.

Operating company: TransCanada PipeLines Limited

Province(s) / Territory(s):

• Alberta

Discipline(s):

• Safety Management
• Indigenous Monitoring

Related events:

• CV2122-182
• CV2122-185

Rationale and scope:

NGTL 2021 - Elmworth Wapiti Steep Slope. Assess field implementation of construction safety manual and project specific safety plans for ongoing construction activities; worker tasks including identification of hazards and appropriate controls relevant to the job tasks via hazard assessments; company implementation COVID-19 safety protocols; company oversight of contractors - training & competence, monitoring, supervision and accountability; assess execution of work per applicable procedures and documented work practices.

Compliance tool(s) used:

• Information Request (IR) (1)
• Notice of Non-compliance (NNC) (1)

Facility details

Facilities:

• GRANDE PRAIRIE MAINLINE LOOP NO. 3 (ELMWORTH SECTION)

Facility Types

• Pipeline
• Pipeline right of way (ROW)

Life-cycle Phases

• Construction

Regulatory requirements

Regulatory requirements that apply to this activity:

• Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA)
• Canadian Energy Regulator Act (CERA)
• Canadian Energy Regulator Pipeline Damage Prevention Regulations – Authorizations
• Canadian Energy Regulator Pipeline Damage Prevention Regulations – Obligations of Pipeline Companies
• National Energy Board Act (NEBA)
• Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)
• Standards
• CSA Z662-19 - Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems

Observations (no outstanding follow-up required)

Observation 1 - General

Date & time of visit: 2021-09-23 13:00

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

• GRANDE PRAIRIE MAINLINE LOOP NO. 3 (ELMWORTH SECTION) (Pipeline)

Observations:

General

• During the inspection the CER were told that OHS audits at this spread were conducted “when a representative sample of the personnel and work activities can be observed”. As part of a post inspection IR the CER was provided with audits completed in March and June of 2021.
• During the inspection the Lead NGTL Safety inspector for this spread told the CER that they review the work activities and determine which areas to inspect based on high hazard tasks. The inspector also told the CER that they are in the field interacting with the contractor and workers on a daily basis. As part of a post inspection IR, the CER reviewed a sampling of recent inspection reports created by this inspector.
• As part of a post inspection IR, the CER reviewed a sampling of recent TC craft inspector and contractor inspection reports on this spread during various phases of construction.
• Good housekeeping on this spread.

Compliance tool used: No compliance tool used

Observation 2 - Wapiti River – North Side:

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Workplace Exposures and Protections
• Safeguarding
• Personal Protective Equipment
• Hazard Assessment
• Training and Competency
• Training, Competency and Qualification

Facility:

• GRANDE PRAIRIE MAINLINE LOOP NO. 3 (ELMWORTH SECTION) (Pipeline)

Observations:

• Excavator attachment found to have leaked hydraulic fluid on the ground. Once pointed out to the contractor it was immediately cleaned. The CER observed spill kits to be present on site. CER consulted with CER Environment inspectors to verify that the corrective actions taken by contractor were adequate.
• The top of the steep slope was signed identifying the steep slope, authorized personnel only, and appropriate PPE required for entry.
• The CER were told the slope was 16 degrees.
• The CER observed that bentonite plugs were placed along the slope and that each bag weighed approximately 50lbs which is the manual handling limit for workers.
• The CER observed the North side Bell hole at the HDD crossing of the Wapiti River. The excavation was sloped, fenced and signed appropriately.
• CER were told that the slope design was done taking into consideration extreme weather conditions such as heavy rain.
• The CER observed both ATV and UTV on site. The CER were shown current operator training certificates.
• The contractor told the CER that competency assessments were conducted for the workers on steep slopes. 

Compliance tool used: Information Request (IR)

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
      • (a) inform the contractor of all special conditions associated with the construction;

Company action required:

Elmworth - Midwest:
Please provide the following:
 

1. Provide copies of any safety audits completed on the project by NGTL or their contractor. If no audits were conducted please provide the rationale. “The audit/formal inspection must be conducted when a representative sample of the personnel and Work activities can be observed.”
2. For Elmworth - Completed inspection forms from NGTL and contractor H&S management - last 3 Wednesdays( Sep 1,8,15 2021)
3. Copies of craft inspector dailies (3 most recently completed for each person):
   • Elmworth:
     • TC Safety Inspector
     • the inspector on the Wapiti North and South steep slope  - one inspection report for each of the following stages clearing grading, stringing, and lowering-in
4. Provide explanation/documentation to identify how requirements of s. 4.2 of TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification CAN-US-MEX have been achieved. 
5. Confirmation if there have been any updates to the steep slope documents required as per the TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification CAN-US-MEX (provide the updates if so. If not, provide rationale for not being completed).  For example. Section 4.6.2 of the TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification (CAN-US-MEX)  states The Hazardous Slope Work Plan shall identify the changes to the site conditions that would effect a change to the Hazardous Slope Work Plan (e.g., tropical rain, ice, snow,
6. lighting storm).
7. Please provide the Machine Stability Risk Assessment for the machines being used by NGTL inspectors on Elmworth. Section 4.5.2 of the TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification (CAN-US-MEX)  states “The Hazardous Slope Work Plan shall identify the equipment and machine manufacturers’ recommended safe working limitations.”
8. Please explain how the TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification CAN-US-MEX Table 3-2: Wheeled and Tracked Machine Stability Risk Matrix was created.
9. Please identify the ‘wheeled machines’ used on the Wapiti North and South slopes and their maximum slope limitations established by the manufacturer.
10. Please provide a rationale for Post Grade ‘Machine Stability Risk Assessment – Risk Value for Wheeled Vehicles’. The CER observed that there appeared to be no assessments for slope limitations of wheeled vehicles.
11. Provide the NGTL inspector training and competency evaluation for ATV/UTV use.
12. Please provide copies of the 3 most recently completed “ATV/UTV Competency Evaluation” forms (Midwest Doc # HSE-FRM-C01)
13. Please provide copies of the 3 most recently completed “Supervisor Steep Slopes Competency Evaluation” forms (Midwest Doc # HSE-FRM-C09)
14. Please provide copies of the 3 most recently completed “Steep Slope Worker Competency Evaluation” forms (Midwest Doc # HSS-FRM-C10)

Due date: 2021-10-21

Date closed: 2021-11-05
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 3 - NNC #1 Failure to ensure company requirements related to identification and analyzing hazard associated with work on slopes are adhered to.

Date & time of visit: 2021-09-23 10:00

Discipline: Safety Management

Categories:

• Contractor Management & Oversight
• Supervision, Inspection and Monitoring

Facility:

• GRANDE PRAIRIE MAINLINE LOOP NO. 3 (ELMWORTH SECTION) (Pipeline)

Observations:

An all-terrain vehicle (ATV) as well as a utility task vehicle (UTV) were observed at the top of slope at the Wapiti River crossing.  Discussions with the vehicle operator (ATV) and site occupants, it was confirmed that these vehicles were utilized on the adjacent river slopes.  The manufacturer recommended limits for slope gradient for these vehicles (a Bobcat UV34 Utility Vehicle and a Kawasaki 650 ATV) were not known by either the operator or other company/contractor personnel on site.  It was later determined that the manufacturer identified safe climbing angle for the Bobcat UV34 Utility Vehicle was 15 degrees. Company personnel indicated that slopes at this location exceeded 15 degrees was identified as a hazardous slope.  The company representatives took action to cease all use of ATVs/UTVs on hazardous slopes across the NGTL 2021 project until the manufacturer safe use recommendations had been confirmed for each UTV/ATV.

Per the 'TES-CT-SLOPE-GL Slope Work Specification (CAN-US-MEX)':
 4.2.1For conventional pipeline construction, the Hazardous Slope Work Plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:

• each phase of construction: equipment mobilization, set up, clearing, right-of-way grading, excavation, blasting, pipe stringing, welding,coating, pipe laying, backfilling, compaction, cleanup, restoration, equipment demobilization, and all other pipeline construction activities
• type of equipment and machinery intended to be used on the hazardous slope (consider configuration of equipment, single, double or triple grousers)
• equipment stability (tracked vs. wheeled)
• coefficient of friction (traction) factors and rolling resistance requirements

Compliance tool used: Notice of Non-compliance (NNC)

Regulatory requirement:

• Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR)

Relevant section(s):

• • 6.5 Management System Processes
    • (1) A company shall, as part of its management system and the programs referred to in section 55,
      • (c) establish and implement a process for identifying and analyzing all hazards and potential hazards;

Company action required:

During the inspection, the company voluntarily halted all UTV/ATV use on all steep slopes across the project until such time as it could ensure that wheeled machines did not exceed their maximum slope limitations established by the manufacturer. 

1. The company will review documentation developed and provided by their contractors across the NGTL 2021 System Expansion Project as required by the Slope Work Specification and identify any information gaps.
2. The company will ensure work by any vehicles/mobile equipment on hazardous slopes does not occur until information gaps identified in part 1 above have been corrected and it is confirmed that the use of vehicles/mobile equipment is deemed safe and within manufacturer recommended limits. Where manufacturer recommended limits do not exist, outline mitigation measure to address the hazard.
3. The company will review their internal processes for reviewing and accepting contractor documentation associated with the Slope Work Specification to determine how submissions that did to meet the requirements were accepted.
4. The company will identify and implement measures to prevent acceptance of contractor submissions that do not fulfill the requirements of the Slope Work Specification as identified in part 3 above.

Due date: 2021-12-24

Date closed: 2022-07-04
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 4 - Indigenous Monitoring

Date & time of visit: 2021-09-23 09:00

Discipline: Indigenous Monitoring

Categories:

• General
• General

Facility:

• GRANDE PRAIRIE MAINLINE LOOP NO. 3 (ELMWORTH SECTION) (Pipeline)

Observations:

The following section contains independent observations made by an Indigenous Monitor who accompanied the Canadian Energy Regulator Inspection Team during this inspection, as part of the CER’s commitment to the NGTL's Indigenous Monitoring Program. They are reproduced and publicized within my report for greater transparency. They are not my conclusions but represent one source of information among others I have considered throughout the inspection along with my own direct observations and information received from the company.

IMAC – Sucker Creek First Nation - SCFN Services – IM:
Safety Inspection - September 21-24,  2021 CV2122-185 Grande Prairie area accompanied with CER and NGTL/Midwest Environmental Team

1. September 22, 2021: Karr Yard with the CER, NGTL/Midwest Environmental Team and Emerinskin IM, for site Orientation and discuss the day activities
2. September 23, 2021: Midwest Elmworth Yard with the CER, NGTL/Midwest Environmental Team and Emerinskin IM, for site Orientation and discuss the day activities

• We were on a Safety Inspection, most of the pipeline was already buried or being buried
• Signage and silt fence in place
• Saw one water crossing under construction with coco matting in place
• Fencing and signage around open excavation
• Bentonite being used to help with erosion control and rainfall areas on slopes or near crossings
• Hydro testing completed day before
• Equipment was clearing and pushing backfill on Right of Way in areas
• There were Crews doing tie in and stringing of pipe
• Berms under construction on slopes
• Safety Inspection included working on and around slopes with equipment
• As an indigenous Monitor my observation of plants and medicine were not found on Right of Way due to the timing of our Inspection close to the end of construction, pipe already buried or being buried as we were on site. Company IM accompanied us for the day and we shared our experiences as IM’S
• Foreman provided FLHA and documents when requested. Any concerns were addressed immediately.
• Very clean, organized and well maintained sites on the Right of Way
• Distance between sites we Inspected were very far apart that our visits had to be planned appropriately allowing time to see what we needed and time spent doing Inspection

• Met crew to get rapid testing done (CER-IAMC)
• talk about looking at active work activities, step slopes, safety of the workers, introductions between the (CER-IAMC) IOs, IMs, Tc energy representatives workers were all wearing masks and practicing physical distancing.
• CER staff and monitors were asked to show a completed Tc energy -COVID 19 self-declaration screening form by the Tc energy -COVID-19 Response Plan 
• Temperature screenings stations were in place in facilities great practice measures to stop the spread of COVID-19, rapid testing also available for all workers whenever they want to get tested, went over visit site orientation 

• Observed backfilling activities and tie ins activities 
• 16 degrees for most of the slopes 
• Signage in places for classes of slopes degrees 
• Observed bentonite in 5 diversion berms to prevent run off they opened a couple bags to get a little wet to start forming a plug 
• Observed side by sides manual and atv manuals to see what class or level they fit in for various degrees for slopes 
• Observed a piece of heavy equipment attachment sitting on the side, was leaking from Hydraulic hoses, corrective action Tc was notified and crew deployed absorbent pads.
• Crew was cleaning up the spill as we demobilized 

• Observed bottom of the step slope 
• Signage in place 
• Observed tie ins from the river crossing and step slop approach.
• Fencing and signage in place for open excavations. 
• Most slopes are not wheel ready depending on the slopes conditions and classes. 
• HDD was completed at night and went smooth as Tc representative mentioned

Compliance tool used: No compliance tool used

Observations (company follow-up required)

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