Back to all blog posts

Posted in: Facilities | Ontario | Practice & Procedure

Apr 3, 2020

OEB Approves “Hybrid” Option for Replacement of Natural Gas Pipeline

By Fred D. Cass

In August 2019, Enbridge Gas Inc. applied to the Ontario Energy Board for leave to construct a natural gas pipeline and ancillary facilities replacing approximately 64 kilometres of its Windsor pipeline. The Windsor Line receives gas from the Enbridge Gas Panhandle Transmission System and provides natural gas service from Port Alma to the City of Windsor. Much of the Windsor Line was installed in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. Enbridge Gas had identified pipeline integrity issues with the Windsor Line that, if not addressed, were expected to impact both the safety and security of supply of the pipeline.

The OEB’s decision and order with respect to the Enbridge Gas application was issued on April 1, 2020. In its decision, the OEB approved a “hybrid” option for the proposed project.

Enbridge Gas had assessed a number of alternatives and proposed to replace the existing pipeline with new pipe of 6-inch Nominal Pipe Size (NPS 6) operating at a pressure such that the proposed pipeline would be a “like-for-like” replacement, in terms of capacity, for the existing pipeline. Enbridge Gas said that, in addition to operational benefits, maintaining capacity on a “like-for-like” basis would enable it to meet an increasing unforecasted demand from greenhouse customers in the general area of the project.

The “hybrid” option approved by the OEB combined the use of NPS 4 and NPS 6 pipeline sizes and was estimated to cost less than the project as proposed using only NPS 6 pipe. In its decision, the OEB acknowledged the potential benefits of planning to meet unforecasted demand by the construction of NPS 6 pipeline throughout the length of the project. The OEB said that Enbridge Gas may choose “of its own volition” to construct the project as proposed with only NPS 6 pipe, but that the incremental increase in cost over the hybrid option would not be eligible for inclusion in rate base until “the need for NPS 6 actually arises.”

Areas of Expertise

Related Blogs

Federal Court of Appeal Dismisses Challenges to Cabinet Approval of Trans Mountain Expansion Project By David Stevens Feb 10, 2020 On February 4, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) released its decision in Coldwater First Nation v. Canada (Attorney General), dismissing judicial review applications challenging the federal Cabinet’s approval of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project.

Posted in: British Columbia | Facilities | Practice & Procedure

Insights EnergyInsider
Supreme Court of Canada Confirms B.C. Cannot Stop Trans Mountain Expansion By David Stevens Jan 17, 2020 On January 16, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed an appeal from the Government of British Columbia that sought to confirm that BC has jurisdiction to regulate the shipment of “heavy oil” through the province. In a unanimous judgment issued from the bench the same day as the appe...

Posted in: Canada (Federal) | Practice & Procedure | Facilities

Insights EnergyInsider
The Federal Court of Appeal Grants Leave to Six Judicial Review Applications That Seek to Quash the Reapproval of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project By David Stevens and Codie Mitchell Sep 11, 2019 The Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project is once again in the hands of the Federal Court of Appeal after the September 4, 2019 decision in Raincoast Conservation Foundation v. Canada (Attorney General).