Reuters July 28, 2012

CALGARY – Canada’s Enbridge Inc. said an oil spill in Wisconsin had forced it to shut down part of the main pipeline system delivering Canadian crude to U.S. refiners on Friday, a fresh blow for a firm already facing fierce criticism from regulators.

Almost two years to the day after a major spill on a different part of its network, Enbridge shut down Line 14 after a leak that it estimated at around 1,200 barrels of oil. The 318,000 barrel per day (bpd) line, part of the Lakehead system, carries light crude oil to Chicago-area refineries.

“Enbridge is treating this situation as a top priority,” said Richard Adams, vice president of U.S. Operations at Enbridge. “We are bringing all necessary resources to bear.”

The cause of Friday’s spill was undetermined and Enbridge Energy Partners said it had no estimate on when flows would resume. Line 14 is one of four lines that ship mainly Canadian crude via Lakehead, a 2.5 million bpd network that is the principle route for Canadian exports.

The news will not help Enbridge build public trust in its network, which has come under scrutiny following several high-profile incidents, including a spill in Alberta last month and a massive leak in Michigan two years ago.

Just weeks ago, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board delivered a scathing report of Enbridge’s handling of the July 2010 rupture of its Line 6B near Marshall, Michigan, which led to more than 20,000 barrels of crude leaking into the Kalamazoo River. U.S. pipeline regulators fined it $3.7 million for the spill, their largest ever penalty.

The incidents have caused furor just as the company seeks approval for its C$6 billion Northern Gateway pipeline to Canada’s West Coast from Alberta amid staunch opposition from environmental groups and native communities that warn against oil spills on land and in coastal waters.

This month, Enbridge Chief Executive Pat Daniel acknowledged in an interview with Reuters that the criticism of the company, especially from the U.S. regulator, makes it more difficult to convince Canadians to support Northern Gateway.

KEYSTONE COPS

In its report earlier this month, the NTSB said it found a complete breakdown of company safety measures, and that Enbridge employees performed like “Keystone Kops” trying to contain it. The rupture, which went undetected for 17 hours, spilled more than 20,000 barrels of heavy crude.

The board said the main failure was due to multiple small “corrosion-fatigue cracks” that grew over time to create a breach in the pipe over 80 inches long. It said Enbridge knew for years that the section of pipe was vulnerable.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, or PHMSA, said its probe uncovered two dozen regulation violations related to the leak, which spawned a massive clean up that the company has estimated will cost more than $700 million.

In response to the report, Enbridge said it believed its personnel were trying to do the “right thing” at the time.

Enbridge said Line 14 was a 24-inch diameter pipe that was installed in 1998, making it a relatively new line. In most cases, smaller pipeline leaks can be repaired quickly allowing operations to resume pumping, although regulators may require significant work if they find any cause for alarm. Following the leak two years ago Line 6B was shut for over two months.

No injury was reported at the line, which is near Grand Marsh, Wisconsin, Enbridge said.

© Copyright (c) Reuters

Thursday, 31 May 2012 02:01 Letter to the Editor

I must admit I am getting very tired of hearing ads on the radio from AltaLink and the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) telling us how much we need new transmission lines and how wonderful they are.
I asked myself why they would be advertising on the radio. Advertising is normally used by someone trying to sell something. Then I realized this is exactly what they are trying to do. They are trying to sell me something I don’t need. Why would they bother to do this? Because AltaLink stands to profit immensely from the planned transmission lines that Albertans don’t really need.
Interest rates today are amazingly low. The Canada Treasury Bill rate is currently under one per cent. Five-year mortgages at three per cent. Government of Canada 10-year bonds yielding 2.6 per cent. So we must be paying a low rate on these new transmission lines, right? Wrong! The generic return on equity for 2011 and 2012 is set at 8.75 per cent by the utility board.
Wow. How do I get a piece of that action? No wonder AltaLink is advertising. I would be doing everything I could, too, if I could get an 8.75 per cent return.
It is time for Albertans to rise up and be heard. Contact your MLAs and tell them that you are tired of big business profiting at the expense or ordinary Albertans.
John R. Davies
President, Lethbridge Iron Works Co. Ltd.

Saturday, 31 March 2012 02:01 Letter to the Editor

For over seven years my family has been forced to become familiar with how our laws work, what our property rights actually are, and how transmission lines are approved and built.
The Montana Alberta Tie Line, a 230,000-volt power line, will be constructed 120 feet from my bedroom window, and we may not be compensated one penny. Our regulatory boards, NEB, AUC, SRB, all know this and do not care. The industry standard minimum setback for a power line of this size is 60 metres from its centre line; my house is less than 50 m and no one cares. We have had hearings, appeals, access to the courts, everything Greg Weadick mentions, but it has not mattered.
Alberta has no rules for power companies to follow. Our laws would allow a power line to be constructed leaning against your home, and with no compensation if the line was on your neighbour’s land. Our regulatory boards are told what to do by the companies, and they do it, because they have no legislation to tell them to do otherwise.
I quote the Honourable Judge Miller from our most recent failed appeal, “[79] . . . it appears entirely possible that an individual landowner could suddenly find herself receiving notice of the potential construction of a huge power line tower only metres from her home, or right in the middle of her cattle operation, or right beside the dugout her family uses for drinking water, while the operator has been planning this use of the landowner’s property for years. This entire regulatory process exemplifies a weakened concept of landowner right.
“[81] As the legislative and regulatory scheme now stands the position and actions of a meticulous corporate entity can certainly supersede the rights of a landowner who naively assumes that they enjoy the right to enjoyment of their property. A careful judicial review in the current legislative climate cannot yield a result in favour of an aggrieved landowner. In order for landowners to gain enhanced protection of their property rights, the answer can only be found in legislative changes.”
He could not have stated the problem any clearer. It’s not just NIMBY landowners complaining, there is a real problem here. I was a naive landowner, but no longer. I now know Albertans do not have property rights. Your property is yours to enjoy only as long as a company can’t profit from it; once it can, it will.

David Swanson
Milk River