Re: Excess Soil Management…

Re: Excess Soil Management Regulatory Proposal ERO # 013-5000

Enbridge Inc. (“Enbridge”) is pleased to provide the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) with comments on the draft Excess Soil Regulatory Proposal ERO #013-5000 (“Regulation”). We appreciate MECP’s consideration in our previous comments on ERO #013-0299 and ERO #013-2774, which were specifically related to the expansion of the “infrastructure” definition to include oil and gas pipelines, and the modification to the concept of “assessment of past uses study area”. With these changes, linear infrastructure projects can be completed effectively while maintaining environmental due diligence. Enbridge respectfully submits additional comments on the draft On-Site and Excess Soil Management Regulation for MECP’s review and consideration.

Enbridge is North America's premier energy infrastructure company with strategic business platforms that include an extensive network of crude oil, liquids and natural gas pipelines, regulated natural gas distribution utilities and renewable power generation. Enbridge's regulated utilities, including Enbridge Gas Inc., serve approximately 3.7 million retail customers in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. Enbridge also has interests in more than 1,700 MW of net renewable generating capacity in North America and Europe.

Enbridge remains committed to working with the Government of Ontario, including providing access to safe and reliable natural gas including in Ontario’s rural, northern and indigenous communities. With efficiencies created and the removal and avoidance of red tape hindrances, Enbridge is expected to be well-positioned to deliver timely and cost effective energy in Ontario, including the expansion of affordable new natural gas service to up to 70 communities and 33,000 customers over the next 10 year period.

As summarized in our MECP letter dated June 15, 2018, Enbridge may generate excess soil during operation and maintenance (O&M) activities and/or installations of new services to end users (i.e. our customers). On a daily basis, our soil excavation activities generally include work in rights-of-way (ROWs) and on customer properties. Due to health and safety precautions, we often complete hydroexcavation and horizontal directional drilling (HDD) methods to minimize soil disturbance and to facilitate infrastructure work in dense urban settings. It is noteworthy that the majority of Enbridge’s work is within municipal ROWs and not on Enbridge-owned land and, as such, we are required to comply with municipal requirements for backfilling excavations whereby excess soil may be generated. As MECP can appreciate, many infrastructure companies complete work within the same ROW/trench footprint and contribute to dynamic soil conditions within these joint trenches.

With the above information in mind, Enbridge has the following specific comments on the proposed Regulation and Soil Rules. For ease of MECP’s review, Enbridge’s comments are in regular text while Enbridge’s requests for MECP’s considerations are in bold italics:

1. Clarification on definitions in the Regulation and Soil Rules:

a. “enhanced investigation project area” - Enbridge offers the following rationale to support the removal of subset (e) “gas or oil pipeline or any associated facilities” from the “enhanced investigation project area” definition:

Enbridge System Description

Enbridge notes that “gas or oil pipeline or any associated facilities” was included in the definition for “enhanced investigation project area”. Enbridge understands that MECP’s intention for the “enhanced investigation project area” was to ensure that additional environmental due diligence was completed for high risk activities. Enbridge notes that the definition, as it is currently written, would include all gas pipelines including gas distribution pipelines and gas services to end users. Gas services to end users includes small diameter service lines (1/2 to 1-1/4 inch) to residential properties (and would also include private residential gas lines to service gas barbecues, fire pits and/or other structures, etc.). Enbridge surmises that this was not MECP’s intention.

For MECP’s reference, Enbridge would like to provide context that our natural gas system network is approximately 147,600 (linear) km (enough to circle the world 3.5 times) and primarily located in ROWs. As such, any infrastructure company completing work in a ROW shared with Enbridge infrastructure would also trigger the “enhanced investigation project area” requirements.

Enbridge’s natural gas system can be divided into two distinct categories – transmission and distribution. Transmission pipelines are large diameter pipelines that transmit high pressure unodourized gas to a gate station where the gas is conditioned and prepared for distribution purposes. The gas is then distributed through smaller diameter pipelines at lower pressures to the end users (i.e. residential, commercial, or industrial customers).

Enbridge also operates interprovincial pipelines that convey a variety of hydrocarbon liquids including crude oil, refined liquids and condensates. Many of these pipelines are regulated under the National Energy Board (NEB) as described in the NEB Onshore Pipeline Regulation, Section 27 Operation and Maintenance, which includes integrity and monitoring management, and an environmental protection program. As with the natural gas system, Enbridge uses many highly advanced tools and processes to ensure the pipelines are safe and the commodities contained within the pipeline are isolated from the environment. Since these pipelines are already regulated by NEB, the addition of Excess Soil Management Regulation requirements would create additional administrative requirements that achieve similar objectives of environment protection.
Record of Site Condition Considerations

Enbridge also notes that oil and gas pipelines are not identified in Table 2 - Potentially Contaminating Activities in O.Reg. 153/04 – Records of Site Condition (RSC) – Part XV.1 of the Act and, as such, are not included as an Area of Potential Environmental Concern (APEC) as part of a RSC filing. Pipelines on their own do not pose an unacceptable environmental risk, as the commodities within are intended to be enclosed and separate from the environment. Enbridge completes routine preventative maintenance activities (i.e. inline/in-pipe inspections and integrity digs) to ensure that the integrity of our infrastructure is maintained for ongoing safe and reliable operations. Enbridge deems that the investigations outlined in Section 7 of the draft Excess Soil Regulation require significant time and financial resources in project planning, but do not yield an environmental benefit that equates to the incremental resource effort, specifically related to pipeline infrastructure. Enbridge’s cost are directly relayed back to the rates billed to the end users (i.e. Ontario residents). The additional requirements proposed in the draft regulation would add delays and increased costs for project execution including delivering natural gas community expansion projects for new families, communities and businesses across the province, which the Government of Ontario has identified as a priority.

Health and Safety Considerations

In terms of health and safety considerations, Enbridge works to limit soil disturbance in and around our pipelines and has requirements to expose the line if any soil sampling is completed. This work is typically done by hydroexcavation. As such, completion of additional soil disturbance activities pose a safety risk, and has the potential to add strain to the pipelines thereby adding unnecessary risk to health and safety with marginal environmental benefits. Additionally, there would be additional time spent in ROWs, putting workers at increased risk and adding congestion to thoroughfares. Should investigations be completed off-set from the pipeline (i.e. up to 30 metres, based on pipeline operation pressure), the results will unlikely yield unuseful data for excess soil management. Enbridge acknowledges that activities within an oil/natural gas station (i.e. gated and company-owned property) may be characterized as industrial use, and as such would be captured by the current proposed wording of “enhanced investigation project area”. Enbridge suggests that the definition of “enhanced investigation project area” be modified to remove the reference to oil and gas pipelines and associated facilities. Enbridge suggests that the wording for “enhanced investigation project area” be consistent with Table 2 Potentially Contaminating Activities in O.Reg. 153/04, and that both regulations remain harmonized and consistent for regulatory compliance purposes. Enbridge suggests that the definition for “enhanced investigation project area” be modified by removing subset (e).

b. “project leader” – This definition states that the person/persons “who are ultimately responsible for making decisions relating to the planning and implementation of the project.” Enbridge suggests that the wording “ultimately responsible” be changed to “ultimately or contractually responsible” to allow construction partnerships to contractually assign roles and responsibilities associated to excess soil management.

2. As MECP is aware, infrastructure entities – either private or publicly owned – commonly share the same infrastructure/utility trenches. The inclusion of all infrastructure companies/entities into Section 16 would allow for soil processing and re-use of excess soil by all infrastructure companies/entities that generate it, and not provide preferential opportunities for public bodies. Similar to public bodies, all infrastructure companies may experience emergency situations that require immediate attention, potentially during after-hours. Enbridge proposes to update the wording of Section 16 – Excavated Soil Processed at Local Waste Transfer Facility Operated by Public Body to include all infrastructure companies/entities and not only the ones operated by a public body. This will allow all infrastructure companies the ability to manage excess soil in a timely fashion and ensure the opportunity for beneficial excess soil re-use following an emergency situation.

3. In Section 7.(3)3., Enbridge notes that Section 7 subsection 2 does not apply to the following infrastructure categories: public highways, transit lines and associated corridors and facilities, and sewage collection systems and water distribution system and associated facilities. As MECP can appreciate, ROWs are similar to public highways and transit lines in terms of potential risk of environmental impact to soil quality. Enbridge proposes that public Rights-of-Way be included in Section 7.(3)3. as they are similar to public highways and transit lines and associated corridors and facilities. As noted above, many infrastructure projects are completed within the same trench footprint, and Enbridge requests that a consistent excess soil management approach be applied throughout Ontario.
 
Should MECP require additional clarification on the above comments, we would be pleased to coordinate a meeting. Enbridge values MECP’s main objectives to protect human health and the environment while enhancing beneficial re-use of excess soil in Ontario. The comments and feedback outlined above would allow Enbridge to implement the excess soil regulation in a practical, environmentally protective, and diligent manner. If you have any questions or require additional information regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Brad Lattanzi, Government Affairs Strategist at (416) 495-6461 or brad.lattanzi@enbridge.com