Documents obtained by DeSmogBlog reveal an alarming rate of corrosion to parts of TransCanada’s Keystone 1 pipeline. A mandatory inspection test revealed a section of the pipeline’s wall had corroded 95%, leaving it paper-thin in one area (one-third the thickness of a dime) and dangerously thin in three otherย places, leading TransCanada to immediately shut it down. The cause of the corrosion is being kept from the public by federal regulators andย TransCanada.
โIt is highly unusual for a pipeline not yet two years old to experience such deep corrosion issues,โ Evan Vokes, a former TransCanada pipeline engineer-turned-whistleblower, toldย DeSmogBlog. โSomething very severe happened that the public needs to knowย about.โ
When TransCanada shut the line down, the company and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) told the press that the shutdown was due to โpossible safety Issues.โ And although an engineerย from PHMSA was sent to the site where TransCanada was digging up the pipeline in Missouri, no further information hasย been made availableย publicly.
Only after DeSmogBlog made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to PHMSA in August 2013 โ which the agency partially responded to this April โ was the information revealing the pipeline had deeply corroded in multiple spots exposed. The documents also disclosed a plan to check for a possible spill where the corrosion wasย detected.ย
However, documentsย explainingย what caused the corrosion and findings concerning a possible spill were not included in response to DeSmogBlog’s request.ย According to PHMSA spokesman Damon Hill, documents that might impact an ongoing compliance review the agency is conducting of TransCanadaย wereย withheld.
A list of the documents withheld was not provided with the FOIA or a date when the remaining documents would beย released.
An email included with the documents suggests Ken Crowl, a representative ofย TransCanada, sent an email to PHSMA stating the he would provide the agency with โthe media talking pointsโ about what the parties hadย discussed.
When asked why a list of the talking points would not have been included in the FOIA request, PHMSA spokesman Damon Hill told DeSmogBlog such a list might not have been provided, and insisted theย agency would have no use for such a list. Yet, TransCanada’s email indicates the two entities compared notes before sharing information with theย public.ย
Richard Kuprewicz, a pipeline safety expert with more than forty years of experience in the energy sector, reviewed the few documents that were obtained.ย While he found it unusual to see such extensive wall loss in such a short period of time, he was happy to report, โThe processย worked.โ
โTransCanada caught this before it went to failure,โ Kuprewicz told DeSmogBlog. โFinding some corrosion issues resulting in anomalies in a pipeline this big is to be expected,โ he said. โBut the severity of a wall loss of 80% or greater would result in theย operator looking for aย leak.โ
Once a pipeline experiences corrosion โsomewhere around 80% โ you’re in Never-Never land,โ Kuprewicz said. โYou have to be real careful, because the engineers will act like the calculations are exact, but when you getย to that kind of wall loss it doesn’t take much change in the corrosion rate to take you toย failure.โย
Kuprewicz wouldn’t speculate on the cause of the corrosion because he didn’t have the documents he would need to make such a determination.ย The missing documents also made it impossible for himย to ascertain if a spill took place before the line was shut down, but he said it would not surprise him if a small spill hadย occurred.ย
However, the onlyย PHMSA-generated document included in the FOIA response, anย internal email sent by PHMSAย representativeย David Barrett,ย confirms the possibility of aย spill.ย
Though Kuprewicz commends TransCanada for taking the appropriate steps after finding the initial problem,ย the question remains why the company didn’t catch the problem before there was 95% wall thicknessย loss.
Vokes, who also reviewed the documents, isn’t surprised the pipeline had major issues. To him, it was a predictable outcome. Not only has he witnessedย TransCanada’s risky behavior first-hand during his five years on the job, Canadaโs National Energy Board had foundย TransCanadaย guilty of non-compliance prior to his working for theย company.ย
An advocate for pipelines, Vokes had hoped to help TransCanada clean up its act.ย He believes pipelines are the best way to transport crude oil and tar sands product, as long at operators comply with the rules.ย
But if the rules aren’t followed, all bets are off. Better a train carrying petroleum products fail than a shoddily built pipeline, because a train accident would have a limited scope, while a pipeline failure could cause damage on a catastrophic scale.ย (Caveat, of course, would be a โbomb trainโ oil-by-rail incident in a populationย center.)
Anย analysis of what caused such deep corrosion in Keystone 1 in a short period of time would show that โa bunch of professional engineers were behaving badly,โ Vokes said, โbecause there are adequate checks and balances in the regulations to avoidย this.โ
According to Vokes, โThe direct effect on shareholders of the estimated revenue loss for the shut down lasting four and a half daysย is 20 million dollars.โย He believes that the shareholders, himself included,ย are entitled to know what caused theย shutdown.
TransCanada’s non-compliance with regulations is nothing new. Vokes shed light on the company’s risky behavior in 2011 by turning over internal documents to the Canadian National Energy Board and PHSMA. Later, he gave the same documents to the Canadian Senate, resulting in a probe of the companyโs complianceย practices.
According to a recent report by Reuters, Canadian regulators beganย investigating TransCanada’s safety practices again, after it received documentsย submitted by anotherย whistleblower.ย
The final inspection report of the Keystone XL southern route (now known as the Gulf Coast pipeline) was also obtained by DeSmogBlog. It offers further evidence that TransCanada is not code complaint.ย Theย report concluded TransCanada’s work to be unsatisfactory in more then seven areas itย considered.
Furthermore, last year, when theย Keystone XL‘s southern line was shut downย shortly after it was put into operation, many questioned TransCanadaโs claim that it was due to planned routine work, since shutting down a pipeline costs a company millions of dollars.
PHSMA confirmed it lookedย into the shutdown. However the agency โdid not dispatch an inspector since the shutdown was not reported to have involved any safety issues,โ Hill wrote in an email toย DeSmogBlog.ย
Meanwhile, TransCanada is seeking a recertification of the Keystone XL pipeline permit from the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission.ย The permit expired lastย year.
The grassroots citizens group Dakota Rural Action has retained lawyers Robin Martinez and Bruce Ellisonย to challenge recertification.โ The Dakota Rural Action group plans to challenge TransCanada on its inability and/or unwillingness to put safety first in its construction and operations,โ Ellison wrote to DeSmogBlog.ย The lawyers believe they have enough documentation to show the companyโs pipeline should not beย recertified.
The hearing, scheduled to take place on May 5, was postponed until sometime this summer after pressure was put on the Public Utility Commission to give those testifying against TransCanada more time. Many of those opposed to the pipeline made allegations that they were given insufficient time toย complete discovery before theย hearing.
Vokes, who will be testifying as an expert witness for the Dakota Rural Action group, recently reviewed pre-hearing testimony that TransCanada’sย expert witnessesย submitted to the Public Utilitiesย Commission. The companyโs experts failed to disclose the corrosion incident in the Keystone 1 line, and the fact that the company is under a compliance review by U.S. regulators.
The Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicist of Alberta’s guidelines for giving testimony make disclosing such information mandatory, according toย Vokes.
The results of PHMSA compliance review of TransCanada could impact the permit hearing in South Dakota, as well asย onย the permit the company needsย approved byย President Obamaย to complete theย northern route ofย theย Keystone XLย pipeline.ย
When President Obama vetoed the Senate bill that would have enabled TransCanada to finish building the Keystone XL, he didn’t rule out the possibility he might grant the permit once the State Departmentโs review of the pipeline is complete. The fate of the Keystone XL completion is still in the president’sย hands.ย
If PHMSA has evidence TransCanada is not adhering to the rules, we can only hopeย the agencyย willย release that information before decisions regardingย additionalย pipelines TransCanadaย seeksย permission to build are made.ย
Image credit: 2/18/2013ย Southern route of the Keystone XL pipeline being installed inย Douglas,Texas ยฉ2013 Julie Dermansky
Ed. note 5/1/15:ย DeSmogBlog has repeatedly asked Davis Sheremata, a TransCanada spokesman, if the Keystone 1 pipeline had issues with the cathodic protection. On May 30, 2014, Sheremata wrote in an email to DeSmog, โ I don’t think we have had issues but will get back to you on Monday. โย However he never did. DeSmogBlog reached out to him again before publication of this report asking the question, butย againย did not hearย back.
Blog Image credit:ย 2/18/2013ย Southern route of the Keystone XL pipeline being installed inย Douglas, Texas ยฉ2013 Julieย Dermansky
Subscribe to our newsletter
Stay up to date with DeSmog news and alerts