Enbridge Pipelines Inc.

Condition 14 of NEB Order XO-E101-001-2017

Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project Page 1 of 5

Line 10 Westover Segment

Replacement Project

Condition 14 - Pipeline Construction

Parallel to Overhead Power Lines -
Corrosion Control Studies

June 15, 2017

Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Condition 14 of NEB Order XO-E101-001-2017
Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project Page 2 of 5

Enbridge Response to NEB Condition 14 for the Line 10 Replacement Project

Condition 14 - Pipeline Construction Parallel to Overhead Power Lines - Corrosion

Control Studies
Enbridge must file with the Board at least 30 days prior to commencing construction, the results
of the additional studies required due to the pipeline’s parallel construction along overhead
power lines, in accordance with CSA Z662-15 Oil and gas pipeline systems, CAN/CSA-C22.3
/No. 6 L3 Principles and practices of electrical coordination between pipelines and electric
supply lines, and Enbridge Response to Hydro One Networks Inc. Information Request No 1.
The results must include, but not be limited to the following:
a) a description of the detailed engineering and survey deliverables for the Section 58
Facilities to determine necessary offsets between power lines and the pipeline segment,
taking into account the safety of people and the integrity of both the pipeline and the
power line system;
b) the details and mitigation measures for situations where recommended minimum
separation cannot be maintained between the pipeline and power lines;
c) any other selected measures to mitigate potential negative impacts of these overhead
power lines on the pipeline segment’s corrosion control system; and
d) the details of the program that Enbridge will implement to monitor potential long term
effects of the power lines on the pipeline segment’s overall integrity.
References
• A75552 National Energy Board Hearing Order OH-001-2016
• A77230 Enbridge Response to Hydro One Networks Inc. IR No. 1
• A79406 Proposed Electrical Transmission Corridor Route
Enbridge Response to Condition 14:
Enbridge undertook all appropriate studies to meet the requirements of CSA Z662-15 and
CAN/CSA-C22.3 /No. 6 with respect to the parallel construction of the Line 10 Replacement
pipeline along overhead powerlines.
a) Enbridge prepared a master crossing list containing all overhead powerline infrastructure
within the Project’s footprint. This list was built by completing a desktop (database)
review in the vicinity of the pipeline route, and within the proposed permanent easement
and temporary workspace for the Project. The desktop study was supplemented by field
investigations to confirm the completeness and accuracy of the desktop review, and
obtain field survey data of the identified overhead powerlines and their associated
support structures. The detailed assessments generally utilize conservative assumptions
for soil data in accordance with industry practice; however, considering the potential for
alternating current (“AC”) interference from the colocation of the pipeline alignment with
Hydro One Networks Inc’s (“Hydro One”) overhead transmission lines, Enbridge
obtained site specific soil resistivity measurements for the AC Interference Study
discussed below.
Enbridge prepared infrastructure specific sketches to engage the owners of all overhead
powerlines and communicate the proposed pipeline route and design details. Where
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Condition 14 of NEB Order XO-E101-001-2017
Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project Page 3 of 5

necessary, Enbridge obtained additional electrical asset data such as line voltage and
phasing, load and fault currents, grounding facilities, and structure details from the third
party. This activity supported the required permitting activities for the construction of the
replacement pipeline as well as meet the intent of Annex E of CAN/CSA-C22.3 /No. 6
(Informative), and Enbridge’s Response to Hydro One IR No. 1 Part 1(a).
Enbridge prepared the following detailed engineering deliverables to meet the
requirements of CSA Z662-15, CAN/CSA-C22.3 No. 6-13, and Enbridge’s Response to
Hydro One IR No. 2 a), b), and c) regarding the replacement pipeline’s parallel
construction along overhead power lines.

• CP and AC Mitigation Design Philosophy

o This document outlines the general requirements and project specific
details regarding the design of the cathodic protection (“CP”) system
and AC mitigation systems in accordance with applicable industry and
Enbridge standards.

• Detailed AC Interference Study

o This document contains the assessment of all powerline collocations
with the pipeline route to assess induced AC voltages under steady
state and fault conditions. The analysis ensures that the pipeline
operates within safe limits under steady-state and fault conditions for
touch and step potential, to minimize the risk of AC corrosion, to avoid
an arc striking between the pipeline and any grounded parts of a
powerline structure, and to minimize excessive coating stress. The
analysis also included the specification of mitigation measures where
the assessment indicated acceptable limits were not met.
Temporary hazards during construction are also present due to the induced voltage
generated by the parallel alignment of the pipeline to the overhead powerlines.
Compliance with CSA C22.3 No. 6 Section 7 is ensured through Enbridge’s LP/MP
Safety Manual, which outlines the requirements for detecting and mitigating induced
voltages during construction, and the guidelines for the construction contractor to protect
personnel from touch and step hazards during construction resulting from these hazards.
b) The Project ensured specific attention was given to the minimum separation distance
between the pipeline and overhead powerlines to prevent arcing within the parallel right-
of-ways.
CAN/CSA-C22.3 No. 6-13 states that, “[i]t is difficult to quantify the safe distance
between the pipeline and the fault current discharging facilities. Historically, a distance of
10 m between the pipeline and the tower footings of power lines with shield wires has
appeared to be a conservative safe distance.” The standard further clarifies that, “[t]he
10 m separation distance was established as a reasonable physical clearance during
construction and maintenance activities.” Despite these reservations, the standard states
that, “except where the pipeline and power line companies agree otherwise, it is
recommended that, when the power line has shield wires, the pipeline be located not
less than 10 m from the power line footings.” Hydro One uses the 10 m minimum safe
separation distance as their standard separation requirement and typically does not
agree to reduced distances.
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Condition 14 of NEB Order XO-E101-001-2017
Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project Page 4 of 5

Enbridge has proposed to Hydro One to construct the pipeline such that the edge-of-
pipe will be at least 10 m away from their structure. Of specific consideration is the
approximately 3.57 km section corresponding with the Electrical Corridor Transmission
Route filed with the Board in September 2016 [NEB Filing ID: A79406], where the
proposed edge of easement is as little as 5.6 m away from the footings of the Hydro One
V586M/M585M 500 kV powerline. .
Enbridge also undertook an in-depth analysis of the risk of arcing under reduced
separation distances up to 6 m. The results indicate that the voltage between the
powerline towers and the pipeline under fault conditions are well below the critical values
required to sustain a power arc.
As such, Enbridge confirms that the pipeline design is compliant to CAN/CSA-C22.3 No.
6-13 and will meet the expectations of Hydro One, who is currently reviewing Enbridge’s
applications.
c) Enbridge has designed the Line 10 Replacement pipeline such that all risks associated
with AC interference from Hydro One high voltage powerlines were mitigated in
accordance with the requirements of CSA Z662-15 and CAN/CSA-C22.3 /No. 6.
The AC Interference Study indicated that the following AC interference hazards
exceeded allowable limits without the specification of AC mitigation. All other AC
interference hazards did not require AC mitigation as they were already within
acceptable limits.

• Steady-State Conditions (Unmitigated)

o Touch potential for approximately 17.9 km of the pipeline route, and
above grade appurtenances at valve sites MLBV1 and MLBV2
o AC current density for approximately 24.5 km of the pipeline route

• Fault Condition (Unmitigated)

o Touch potential for approximately 17.3 km in open field and at valve
sites MLBV1, MLBV2, and MLBV3 (Nanticoke Junction)
o Metal-to-metal potential at any pipeline discontinuity (i.e. an isolating
flange), or where an individual can touch both the pipeline and a
grounded metallic structure at MLBV1, MLBV2, and MLBV3
(Nanticoke Junction)
Note: The assessment already considered the implementation of dead-front test posts
as per CSA C22.3 No. 6 Clauses 5.2.3 and 5.2.7 to eliminate concerns with touch
potential at these locations.
To mitigate the preceding hazards, Enbridge implemented the AC mitigation measures
described below as part of the design. The system was remodeled with the mitigation
applied to validate that the hazards were effectively eliminated.

• Installation of approximately 7,100 m of bare mitigation wire along the

pipeline at select locations to eliminate concerns associated with touch
potential and AC-induced corrosion under steady state conditions
Enbridge Pipelines Inc. Condition 14 of NEB Order XO-E101-001-2017
Line 10 Westover Segment Replacement Project Page 5 of 5

• Installation of AC coupons, direct current (“DC”) coupons, and electrical

resistance (“ER”) probes at select locations to monitor actual conditions post-
construction and proactively identify areas of potentially accelerated corrosion
as part of Enbridge’s overall Integrity Management Project.

• Installation of DC decouplers at MLBV1 and MLBV2 to ensure AC continuity

and eliminate the risk associated with metal-to-metal potential at pipeline
discontinuities

• Additional bonding at MLBV 1 and MLBV 2to eliminate the risk associated
with metal-to-metal potential between the pipeline and grounded metal
structures.

• DC interference testing will be conducted on the Hydro One tower

foundations to examine if any stray current from the replacement pipeline’s
cathodic protection system will affect Hydro One`s assets. Testing will be
conducted after energization of the system and, should any DC interference
be detected, mitigation measures will be implemented as required.
d) AC coupons and ER probes installed as part of the L10 replacement project will be
monitored using continuous, real-time telemetry. Monitoring ensures that worst case
conditions (peak induced AC potentials and AC current density) are captured and
evaluated to ensure proper operation of the AC mitigation system. All other mitigation
equipment (DC de-couplers, bonds, and grounding systems) are examined annually in
conjunction with cathodic protection surveys. These practices in conjunction with
Enbridge’s Integrity Management Programs ensure the safety of people and long term
integrity of the pipeline.