Proposed ATCO Pipeline Project from 23 Avenue to the Rossdale Power Plant

Recommendation:
  1. That the following report be received for information (Attachment 1).
  2. That City Council approve the City Manager submitting a letter to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board expressing the City of Edmonton’s conditional support for the proposed pipeline project, as described in Attachment 2.

Report Summary

  • Attachment 1 provides a summary of the proposed ATCO pipeline project to provide a high pressure pipeline feed for the new generator(s) proposed for the Rossdale power plant.
  • Council approval of the letter contained in Attachment 2 will allow the City Manager to register the City of Edmonton’s conditional support for the proposed Pipeline Project with the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board (AEUB).

Report

  • EPCOR and ATCO have made two applications to the AEUB, to construct and operate a 170MW gas turbine generator at the Rossdale Power Plant and a gas transmission pipeline from the ethane plant at 23 Avenue to the power plant, respectively.
  • Of the six routes evaluated for this proposed pipeline, ATCO proposes to develop the route along 103 Street.
  • Since March of 1999, ATCO has undertaken discussions and consultation with the agencies and departments affected by the proposed pipeline project.
  • The Community Risk Assessment submitted by ATCO for this project indicated that the risk generated by the pipeline is within acceptable limits due to:
  • the pipeline specifications as described in the report;
  • the location of the pipeline primarily within the road right-of-way;
  • the maintenance of appropriate separation distances from nearby utilities and services; and
  • the development of an appropriate, effective and adaptable Emergency Response Plan.
  • At the meeting of affected departments and agencies, held on March 20, 2000, consensus was reached to forward a recommendation for conditional support to City Council on April 25, 2000.
  • Placing the conditions, outlined in the Draft Letter contained in Attachment 2, upon the City’s support will address outstanding issues for most of the civic departments and affected agencies involved in these discussions.
  • Edmonton Public Schools would prefer that the pipeline not be constructed in the 103 Street Alignment. They are concerned about the safety of occupants of King Edward Elementary School. An independent risk consultant has been retained to determine the level of risk to the school from this pipeline proposal.
  • The AEUB will consider the application of ATCO to develop this pipeline in late May, 2000.

Justification of Recommendation

  1. Attachment 1 provides a summary of the key components of the ATCO Pipeline Project to assist Council in making an informed decision regarding the City’s position as it pertains to this project.
  2. The AEUB will consider the application of ATCO to develop this pipeline in late May, 2000, and has expressed an interest in being advised of the position of the City of Edmonton regarding this project. Authorization of the City Manager to send a letter of conditional support to the AEUB as described in Attachment2 would allow the Board to consider the City’s position in reviewing the application for the pipeline.

Background Information Attached

  1. ATCO Pipeline Project Summary.
  2. Draft Letter of Conditional Support for the Proposed ATCO Pipeline from 23Avenue to the Rossdale Power Plant.

Background Information Available on Request

  1. ATCO Application, with addendums, to the AEUB for the development of the proposed pipeline project.

Others Approving this Report

  • R. Millican, General Manager, Transportation and Streets Department
  • W. D. Burn, General Manager, Asset Management and Public Works Department
  • B. Anderson, Acting General Manager, Community Services Department

(Page 1 of 1 2)

Attachment 1

ATCO Pipeline Project Summary

Project Description

ATCO made an application to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board on December 22, 1999, for a permit to construct and operate a pipeline from their ethane plant at 23 Avenue and Calgary Trail Northbound to the Rossdale Power Plant. If the AEUB approves the associated EPCOR application to construct and operate a the new 170 MW gas turbine generator which is proposed to be installed in the Rossdale Power Plant, a new natural gas feed is required to supply the generator, and thereby accommodate future growth and meet future power supply requirements in the Edmonton area.

Pipeline Specifics and Construction

The pipeline proposed by ATCO will be constructed to the following specifications:

  • a 406 cm (16 inch) diameter pipe;
  • a pipe which has walls which are 7.1 mm (0.280 inches) thick;
  • the maximum operating pressure for the pipeline will be 720 p.s.i., with the expected operative pressure to be approximately 400 p.s.i. for the proposed plant upgrade;
  • the pipeline will be laid at a minimum depth of 1.2 m in roadways;
  • a pumping station will be required at 23 Avenue;
  • a pipeline of 8.8 km in length;
  • there will be no above ground valves along the length of the pipeline;
  • the gas in the pipeline will be odorized for easier detection;
  • fill-crete will surround the pipe to indicate the presence of the pipeline during roadway excavations, as is usual practice for utilities in roadways;
  • there will be isolation valves at both ends of the pipeline, with a remotely controlled shut-off valve at the ethane plant at 23 Avenue;
  • there will be a pressure sensing automatic shut-off valve at the pump station to be located at the ethane plant; and
  • the pipeline will be coated with Fusion Bond Epoxy for cathodic protection, and an additional coating of urethane on portions of the pipeline to be directionally drilled.

The proposed construction of the pipeline will be undertaken in the following stages:

Directional Drill under the North Saskatchewan RiverFeb. to May 2002

Pipeline Construction (primarily trenching from both ends)May to Nov. 2002

Facility Construction (at the Rossdale Plant)Fall 2002 & Winter 2003

Onstream Date for EPCORApril 1, 2003

Route Alternatives

ATCO evaluated three sources of gas for the Rossdale Power Plant upgrade. The three sources considered for supplying the required gas included the Cloverbar Compressor Station, a new compressor station required near Sherwood Park, and the Edmonton Ethane Extraction Plant at 23Avenue and Calgary Trail Northbound. All three corridors were evaluated regarding constructability, safety, environmental disturbance, traffic volumes, residential disturbance, business impact and cost. ATCO deemed the Calgary Trail Corridor to be the appropriate route for further discussion and evaluation due to it being the shortest route (requiring no compression of the gas), comprising an established transportation and utility penetrator corridor into the centre of the city, and resulting in the least disruption to adjacent residential neighbourhoods.

Following their decision regarding the source for the gas, ATCO developed and evaluated five routes for the pipeline feed from the ethane plant to the Rossdale plant. The five routes evaluated, as shown on Attachment 1a and 1b, included:

  • 106 Street route;
  • 103 Street route;
  • Canadian Pacific Right-of-Way route;
  • 99 Street route; and
  • 97 Street/99 Street route.

The routes evaluated by ATCO and the affected agencies were compared for their suitability regarding length, capital cost difference, adjacent land use, constructability, transportation impact, business impact, and safety considerations.

At a meeting held on September 16, 1999, between various affected agencies, ATCO and their consultants, to discuss the five routes proposed by ATCO, the Planning and Development Department proposed consideration of a sixth alternate route using portions of two other routes. The route proposed by this Department was to go through industrial areas along 97 Street and the CNR right-of-way south of Argyll Road to 103 Street, and then north to the river.

Preferred Route SELECTION with Justification

ATCO has stated in their application that they prefer the 103 Street route for the following reasons:

  • it is the shortest route;
  • due to the wide right-of-way and limited avenue crossings, it is the easiest and safest for construction;
  • the existence of the one-way street, boulevards and service roads will result in less disruption to traffic and businesses; and
  • the amount of adjacent residential and institutional uses is limited compared with the other alternatives.

ATCO’s analysis of the alternatives considered for this transmission pipeline is summarized on Attachment 1b. The alternative which proved most comparable with the 103 Street route was the sixth alternative proposed by the Planning and Development Department. However, ATCO has rejected this alternative due to a number of factors, as follows:

  • the CN right-of-way is still an active track, and the vibrations from train movements may pose an unacceptable risk for pipeline integrity;
  • the setback from the commercial buildings along 97 Street would be minimal;
  • the high voltage power lines along 97 Street would create some safety concerns; and
  • the cost of the pipeline would be $1.8 million more than the 103 Street route.

CONSULTATION WITH AFFECTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

Since March of 1999, ATCO has undertaken discussions and consultation with the agencies and departments potentially affected by the proposed pipeline project, as follows:

March 2, 1999ATCO met with Planning and Development Department staff to discuss the project and a review and approval process for the civic administration.

July 15, 1999ATCO delivered copies of a pipeline alternative routes (2) map to this Department for circulation to various civic departments and affected agencies for their review and consideration.

August 6, 1999ATCO delivered a revised pipeline alternatives routes (3) map for circulation and consideration of the affected departments and agencies.

September 16, 1999Planning and Development Department held a meeting of affected departments and agencies, ATCO and their consultants to discuss concerns, options and requirements.

September-November, 1999ATCO met individually with various affected departments and agencies to resolve outstanding issues and requirements.

December 21, 1999Planning and Development Department provided written comments regarding the ATCO Draft application for construction and operation of the pipeline to the AEUB.

December 22, 1999ATCO submitted their application for construction and operation of the pipeline to the AEUB.

January 4, 2000ATCO submitted copies of their application to AEUB to the Planning and Development Department for review and information.

January 18, 2000Planning and Development Department provided written comments and concerns regarding the ATCO application for construction and operation of the pipeline to the AEUB.

January 20, February 7Meetings with ATCO and/or their consultants to discuss the

And February 15, 2000Departments comments and concerns regarding the information contained in the application to the AEUB.

February-March 2000ATCO continued to meet with individual departments to discuss concerns and requirements regarding construction and operation of the pipeline.

March 20, 2000 The various civic departments and affected agencies met to formulate a recommendation to City Council regarding the Administration’s position relative to the application before the AEUB for the construction and operation of the proposed pipeline.

The Departments and agencies involved in these discussions included:

  • Planning and Development Department
  • Asset Management & Public Works Department
  • Community Services Department
  • Edmonton Police Service
  • EPCOR Water and EPCOR Distribution
  • Edmonton Public Schools
  • Edmonton Catholic Schools
  • Emergency Response Department
  • Transportation and Streets Department
  • Alberta Culture
  • Alberta Environment
  • Capital Health Authority
  • Telus Communications (Edmonton) Inc.

Community Risk Assessment

The Community Risk Assessment information contained in the application to the AEUB, and an addendum supplied to the Planning and Development Department on March 10, 2000, have been reviewed by both the Planning and Development and Emergency Response Departments. This Assessment is satisfactory in addressing concerns regarding the risk generated by the pipeline as being within acceptable limits.

The Community Risk Assessment for this project investigated the various potential routes for the pipeline by comparing the following risk factors:

  • accident frequency (probability for loss of containment);
  • ignition potential (given loss of containment, the likelihood of ignition);
  • consequence severity (the duration and area coverage for potential casualties);
  • public risk (likelihood and number of residents, workers, property and sensitive facilities exposed to danger); and
  • mitigative potential (prospects for reducing accidents, accident characteristics and/or severity of consequence).

A great many components are considered in evaluating the risk associated with a gas transmission pipeline. Pipeline failures can be attributed to either leaks or ruptures. These failures can be caused by corrosion, external forces, weld or joint failures, installation or other failures. According to the submitted risk assessment, approximately 70% of the natural gas pipeline ruptures in Alberta between 1983 and 1997 occurred due to third party damage, with another 10% occurring due to construction damage and earth movement.

The conclusion of the Community Risk Assessment review is that the risk generated by this proposed pipeline is within acceptable limits, provided the following measures are undertaken:

  • the pipeline specifications are as described by ATCO, including but not limited to: odorized gas, in-line inspections (pigging), cathodic protection through fusion bond epoxy coating, thick pipe walls, pressure sensing shut-off valve at the 23 Avenue pump site;
  • location of the pipeline primarily within the road right-of-way, where the City maintains direct control over excavation through implementation of Utility Line Assignment and On Street Construction and Maintenance permits and processes;
  • the manner of construction of the pipeline is such that appropriate separation distances are maintained to ensure nearby utilities and services’ integrity and adequate maintenance opportunities; and
  • ATCO continues to work with the Emergency Response Department to ensure that an appropriate, effective and adaptable Emergency Response Plan is in place and ready to deal with potential failures.

It should be noted that Edmonton Public Schools would prefer that the pipeline not be constructed in the 103 Street Alignment. They are concerned about the safety of occupants of King Edward Elementary School. An independent risk consultant has been retained to determine the level of risk to the school from this pipeline proposal.

Development setback requirement

City Policy regarding the integration of pipelines with the urban environment was approved by the Municipal Planning Commission in 1983, following consultation with pipeline companies, UDI, HUDAC, the Energy Resources Conservation Board, the Department of Municipal Affairs, the School Boards and the Planning and Development Department. This policy was established to achieve a clear definition of pipeline rights-of-way as special purpose corridors and reduce the potential for third party damage to pipelines that result from development occurring in close proximity. The policy states that a development setback of 15 m is required for all subdivisions adjacent to transmission pipeline rights-of-way, and that institutional uses such as schools, hospitals, and community meeting places must be separated from transmission pipelines by at least 200 m. Although the final alignment of the proposed pipeline within the road right-of-way has not been established, a number of sectors of the pipeline project would not be able to meet these setback requirements as proposed, to-date.

The Planning and Development Department received a letter from ATCO, dated March 2, 2000, which requested that the required setback be reduced to 7.5m for the length of the proposed pipeline. Their reasons for believing that adequate protection from third party damage exists within the proposed pipeline project and requesting this reduction in setback included:

  • no uncontrolled digging can occur within the 103 Street road right-of-way;
  • no risk of heavy equipment movements associated with construction, such as site grading, foundation excavation, service line trenching, and installation of fencing and landscaping; and
  • the City of Edmonton Transportation and Streets Department maintains control over all excavation within road right-of-ways through the Utility Line Assignment Permit Process and the requirement to meet On Street Construction and Maintenance Permit guidelines.

The letter further stated that in addition to the reduction in setback, “… specific measures will have to be put in place with the City and any potential purchaser of the land to ensure that the risk of third party damage to the pipeline due to installation of signs and/or landscaping is minimized.”

The request from ATCO was submitted to the Subdivision Authority for consideration on March 16, 2000. The Subdivision Authority stated that since this is a new pipeline passing through a developed urban area, the opportunity exists now, during the planning of the final alignment design, for a safe and proper separation between the pipeline and adjacent existing or future development to be established along the pipeline. There should be no need for the Subdivision Authority to impose any setback upon adjacent properties wanting to subdivide and redevelop their parcels, and adjacent property owners will not be penalised to provide protection for this pipeline.

Emergency Response Plan and Procedures

The Emergency Response Plan for the proposed pipeline is the result of concerted efforts by the municipal emergency respondents, such as police, ambulance and fire services, and the pipeline operator. The Emergency Response Plan incorporates the following elements:

  • risk reduction at the source;
  • risk reduction through appropriate separation from adjacent land use;
  • emergency preparedness;
  • emergency response; and
  • risk communication and public participation.

ATCO Pipelines emergency response procedures and Control Centre procedures identify:

  • procedures for notifying appropriate fire, police, ambulance, or the public in the event of an emergency;
  • availability of personnel to respond to the scene of an emergency;
  • making safe an actual or potential hazard to life or property where identified;
  • procedures for emergency shutdown and depressurization of a pipeline; and
  • establishing and maintaining communications with appropriate local emergency response agencies.

The Emergency Response Department has indicated that a comprehensive plan that takes into account potential natural, technological, and man-made threats and involves key personnel in the planning process assists an organization to systematically manage emergencies. The planning process is a key element that forces organizations to explore viable options that can be employed in case of an emergency or disaster. The Emergency Response Department and ATCO Pipelines utilize this approach.