NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD

PIPELINE PERFORMANCE MEASURES

and
INTEGRITY INSPECTION INFORMATION

REPORTING FORM

March 2013

2016 Calendar Year

Page 1 of 18
Introduction
The National Energy Board (NEB) requires certain NEB-regulated companies that own or operate pipelines
to annually report on pipeline performance measures and integrity inspection Information. These
companies comprise 96 percent of the length of operating pipelines that the NEB regulates. This report
form is for the 2015 calendar year. The information is on six key management system programs that
companies must maintain in accordance with the National Energy Board Onshore Pipeline Regulations.

Guidance
To enhance the accuracy and consistency of company reporting, guidance on definitions, descriptions of
terms, and interpretation is on the NEB website (www.neb-one.gc.ca).

Use of This Form

1. The full use of this Excel spreadsheet requires that macros be enabled.

2. A numerical value is required for all fields other than the comment fields. Where there is no data to be
entered (e.g. the field is not applicable) then the field is to be left blank. The comment field should be used
to explain more detail or identify any unusual events, trends or results.

3. Please submit only one workbook per pipeline system. There may be several workbooks for a given legal
company name depending on the number of pipeline systems. For any given system, only pipelines of 50
kilometres or more are to be entered in the form. A company can select their legal name on record with the
NEB from the dropdown on the "Main" tab and can fill out the pipeline system name. Data from each
pipeline in the pipeline system should be located on a separate Pipeline tab. You can add a tab using the
"Add Pipeline" button at the bottom of a pipeline page.

4. Where multiple companies utilize joint employees or other information, do not enter the same
information on each company report form. The aggregation of information results in duplicate entries. The
comment box can be used to identify where staff or activities are recorded on another company form.

5. For some of the Integrity Management Performance Measures (Section IV -1, 5 and 6) and the Integrity
Information (Section V) a separate worksheet (see the Pipeline tab at the bottom of the report form) is used
to capture data for each pipeline that makes up the pipeline system. The name of each pipeline must be
entered on a separate tab as well as in the pipeline specific form at Section IV-1.

This report form must be submitted on or before 1 April 2016, by email for each pipeline system to:
pipelinemeasures@neb-one.gc.ca

Further Information
If a company or person requires more information about the performance measures or the program for
managing the measures, please contact the NEB via mail, email, fax or telephone as follows:

Andrew Benson Sarah Shaw

National Energy Board or National Energy Board
517 Tenth Avenue S.W. 517 Tenth Avenue S.W.
Calgary, AB T2P 0A8 Calgary, AB T2P 0A8

Telephone: 403-463-6641 Telephone: 403-617-1158

Page 2 of 18
Email: pipelinemeasures@neb-one.gc.ca

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Safety Management
1. Facility Safety Inspections
2. Corrective and Preventative Actions
3. Near Misses
II. Security
1. Training and Competency
III. Emergency Management
1. Emergency Response Exercises
2. Communication
3. Training and Competency
4. Coordinating Operational Activities
IV. Integrity Management
1. Pipeline Condition
2. Equipment Inspection
3. Facility Piping Inspection
4. Facility Inspection Effectiveness
5. Assessment of Pipeline Hazards
6. Shutdowns for Hazard Control
V. Integrity Inspection Information
1. General
2. Kilometres of Integrity In-Line Inspections
3. Integrity Actions Taken Based on In-Line Inspections
4. Pipeline Condition Features Exceeding Integrity Criteria
VI. Environmental Protection
1. Program Training
2. Site-Specific Training
3. Restoration of Agricultural Land
4. Resolution of Environmental Issues
5. Environmental Inspections
VII. Damage Prevention
1. Public Awareness - Contractors
2. Public Awareness - Municipalities
3. Public Awareness - Landowners
4. Public Awareness - Others

Page 3 of 18
PIPELINE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REPORTING
General Information
Pipeline Company Name:
Pipeline System Name:
Reporting Year: 2016
Contact Person:
Contact Email:
Contact Telephone:
I. Safety Management 1. Facility Safety Inspections
Data

a. The total number conducted

b. The total number planned 1

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
I. Safety Management - 2. Corrective and Preventative Actions
Data
A. Operations and Maintenance Corrective and Preventative Actions
a. The total number of
operation and maintenance
corrective and preventative
actions corrected

b. The total number of

operation and maintenance
corrective and preventative 1
actions identified for the
calendar year

c. Percentage 0.00%
B. Construction Corrective and Preventative Actions

a. The total number of

construction corrective and
preventative actions corrected

b. The total number of

construction corrective and
1
preventative actions identified
for the calendar year

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
I. Safety Management - 3. Near Misses
Data
A. Company Employee Near Misses

Page 4 of 18
a. The total number of company
employee near misses reviewed
by a competent person and
addressed

b. The total number of company

employee near misses reported
1
c. Percentage 0.00%
B. Contractor Near Misses
a. The total number of
contractor near misses reviewed
by a competent person and
addressed

b. The total number of

1
contractor near misses reported

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
II. Security Measure - 1. Training and Competency
Data

a. The total number of company

employees who have current
security training

b. The total number of company

employees 1

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
III. Emergency Management - 1. Emergency Response Exercises
Data
A. Drills
a. The total number of drills
conducted
b. The total number of drills plan 1
c. Percentage 0.00%
B. Tabletop (i.e. Mock) Emergency Response Exercises

a. The total number of tabletop

exercises conducted

b. The total number of tabletop

1
exercises planned
c. Percentage 0.00%
C. Functional (i.e. Simulation) Emergency Response Exercises

Page 5 of 18
d. The total number of
functional exercises conducted

e. The total number of 1

functional exercises planned
f. Percentage 0.00%
D. Full Scale (i.e. Major) Emergency Response Exercises
g. The total number of full scale
exercises conducted
h. The total number of full scale
1
exercises planned
i. Percentage 0.00%

j. Percentage for all Emergency

0.00%
Response Exercises

Comments
III. Emergency Management - 2. Communication
Data
Consulting With All Agencies During the Updating of Emergency Procedures Manuals and Response
Plans
a. The number of liaison
activities conducted
b. The number of liaison
1
activities planned
c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
III. Emergency Management - 3. Training and Competency
Data

a. The total number of company

employees and contractors
identified as having a role and 1
responsibility during an
emergency (Same as line 79)

b. The total number of company

employees and contractors that
have up-to-date training to carry
out their expected emergency 0
management roles and
responsibilities

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
III. Emergency Management - 4. Coordinating Operational Activities
Data

Page 6 of 18
a. The total number of company
employees and contractors who
have participated in emergency
response exercises and drills

b. The total number of company

employees and contractors
identified as having a role and 1
responsibility in an emergency
(Same as line 71)

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
IV. Integrity Management
Go to Individual Pipeline Section
IV. Integrity Management - 2. Equipment Inspection
Data
A. Tank Inspections
a. The total number of tanks 1

b. The total number of routine

staff tank inspections

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
d. The total number of
scheduled routine staff tank 1
inspections
e. Percentage 0.00%
Comments

f. The total number of certified

maintenance tank inspections

g. Percentage 0.00%
Comments

h. The total number of

scheduled certified 1
maintenance tank inspections

i. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
B. Mainline Valve Inspections
a. The total number of mainline
1
valves

Page 7 of 18
b. The total number of routine
staff mainline valve inspections

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
d. The total number of
scheduled routine staff mainline 1
valve inspections
e. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
f. The total number of certified
maintenance mainline valve
inspections
g. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
h. The total number of
scheduled certified
1
maintenance mainline valve
inspections
i. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
IV. Integrity Management - 3. Facility Piping Inspection
Data
A. Liquid Pump Stations
a. The total number of pump
stations

b. The total number of pump

stations where piping had
routine maintenance
inspections

c. The total number of pump

stations where the piping was
1
scheduled for routine
maintenance inspections
d. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
e. The total number of pump
stations where piping had
certified maintenance
inspections

f. The total number of pump

stations where the piping was
1
scheduled for certified
maintenance inspections
f. Percentage 0.00%

Page 8 of 18
Comments
B. Gas Compressor Stations
a. The total number of
compressor stations

b. The total number of

compressor stations where the
piping had a routine staff
inspection

c. The total number of

compressor stations where the
1
piping was scheduled for a
routine staff inspection
d. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
e. The total number of
compressor stations where the
piping had a certified
maintenance inspection

f. The total number of

compressor stations where the
piping was scheduled for a 1
certified maintenance
inspection

g. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
IV. Integrity Management - 4. Inspection Effectiveness
Data
A. Liquid Facility Incidents
a. The total number of
reportable incidents at liquid
facilities
b. The total number of liquid
1
facilities
c. Ratio 0.00
Comments
B. Gas Facility Incidents
a. The total number of
reportable incidents at gas
facilities
b. The total number of gas
1
facilities
c. Ratio 0.00
Comments
V. Integrity Inspection Information
Go to Individual Pipeline Section

Page 9 of 18
 Go to Individual Pipeline Section
VI. Environmental Protection - 1. Environmental Protection Program Training
Data

a. The total number of company

employees with training on the
company-wide Environmental 0
Protection Program

b. The total number of company

employees required to have
training on the company-wide 1
Environmental Protection
Program

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
VI. Environmental Protection - 2. Site-Specific Environmental Protection Plan Training
Data

a. The total number of

construction staff, both
contractors and employees,
with training on the site-specific
Environmental Protection Plan

b. The total number of

construction staff, both 1
contractors and employees
c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
VI. Environmental Protection - 3. Restoration of Disturbed Agricultural Land
Data
A. New Pipeline Construction within last 5 years

a. Kilometres of NEB-regulated
right-of-way on agricultural land
that is restored to a condition
similar to the surrounding
environment and consistent
with the current land use with
an in-service date within the last
5 years (including the current
reporting year).

Page 10 of 18
b. The total kilometres of NEB-
regulated right-of-way that is 1
disturbed agricultural land
within the last 5 years (including
the current reporting year).
c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
B. Operational Excavations within the last 5 years

a. Number of operational
excavations on agricultural land
that are restored to a condition
similar to the surrounding
environment and consistent
with the current land use for
excavations within the last 5
years (including the current
reporting year).

b. The total number of

operational excavations on
agricultural land within the last 1
5 years (including the current
reporting year).

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
VI. Environmental Protection - 4. Resolution of Environmental Issues
Data

a. The total number of

operational environmental
issues identified in the
Environmental Protection
Program or Environmental
Protection Plan that have been
addressed over a five-year
period (five year period began
with issues addressed in 2013
and carries forward)

Page 11 of 18
b. The total number of
operational environmental
issues identified in the
Environmental Protection
Program or Environmental
1
Protection Plan over a five-year
period (five year period began
with issues identified at the
start of 2013 and carries
forward)

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
VI. Environmental Protection – 5. Environmental Inspections
Data

a. The total number of

inspection days by a qualified
environmental inspector for
newly constructed pipeline

b. The total number of

construction days for all the 1
company’s newly constructed
pipeline
c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
VII. Damage Prevention - 1. Pipeline Awareness - Contractors
Data
a. The total number of
unauthorized activities by 1
contractors

b. The total number of

permissions granted to
contractors
c. Ratio 0.00
Comments
VII. Damage Prevention - 2. Pipeline Awareness - Municipalities
Data
a. The total number of
unauthorized activities by 1
municipalities

b. The total number of

permissions granted to
municipalities
c. Ratio 0.00
Comments

Page 12 of 18
VII. Damage Prevention - 3. Pipeline Awareness - Landowners
Data
a. The total number of
unauthorized activities by 1
landowners

b. The total number of

permissions granted to
landowners
c. Ratio 0.00
Comments
VII. Damage Prevention - 4. Pipeline Awareness - Others
Data
a. The total number of
unauthorized activities by 1
others

b. The total number of

permissions granted to others

c. Ratio 0.00
Comments
Report Validation Information
Pipeline Company Name:
Pipeline System for This Report:

Reporting Year: 2016

Report Date:

Page 13 of 18
Pipeline Specific Reporting
Return to Main Form
IV. Integrity Management - 1. Pipeline Condition
Data
Pipeline Name:
a. The total number of features
identified by ILI for field investigation,
1
according to IMP dig criteria, for metal
loss

b. The total number of field verified

features found to be defects which
were repaired by permanent or
temporary methods, or mitigated by
pressure reduction, for metal loss

c. Percentage 0.00%
Comments

d. The total number of features

identified by ILI for field investigation, 1
according to IMP dig criteria, for dents

e. The total number of field verified

features found to be defects which
were repaired by permanent or
temporary methods, or mitigated by
pressure reduction, for dents

f. Percentage 0.00%
Comments

g. The total number of features

identified by ILI for field investigation
according to IMP dig criteria, for 1
cracks with a depth greater than 40%
of the nominal pipeline wall thickness

h. The total number of field verified

features found to be defects which
were repaired by permanent or
temporary methods, or mitigated by
pressure reduction for cracks with a
depth greater than 40% of the
nominal pipeline wall thickness
i. Percentage 0.00%
Comments

Page 14 of 18
 Return to Main Form to Fill Out Part IV - 2, 3, & 4
IV. Integrity Management - 5. Assessment of Pipeline Hazards
Data

a. The kilometres of pipeline where

metal loss hazard assessment was
received in this calendar year

b. The kilometres of pipeline that are 1

susceptible to metal loss hazard prior
to any form of mitigation
c. Percentage 0.00%
d. The kilometres of pipeline where
cracking hazard assessment was
received in this calendar year

e. The kilometres of pipeline that are

susceptible to cracking hazard prior to 1
any form of mitigation
f. Percentage 0.00%
g. The kilometres of pipeline where
external interference hazard
assessment was received in this
calendar year

h. The kilometres of pipeline that are

susceptible to external interference
hazard based on depth of cover 1
surveys and prior to any form of
mitigation

i. Percentage 0.00%
j. The kilometres of pipeline where
material, manufacturing or
construction hazard assessment was
received in this calendar year

k. The kilometres of pipeline that are

susceptible to material,
1
manufacturing or construction
hazards prior to any form of mitigation

l. Percentage 0.00%
m. The kilometres of pipeline where
geotechnical and weather-related
hazard assessment was received in
this calendar year

Page 15 of 18
n. The kilometres of pipeline that are
susceptible to geotechnical and 1
weather-related hazards prior to any
form of mitigation
o. Percentage 0.00%
Comments
IV. Integrity Management - 6. Pipeline Integrity Shutdowns for Hazard Control
Data

a. The total number of shutdowns of a

pipeline segment or facility to protect
the public, property and the
environment as a result of
emergencies

b. The total number of shutdowns of a

pipeline segment or facility to protect
the public, property and the
environment as a result of
precautionary measures (i.e. false
alarms)

c. The total number of shutdowns of a

pipeline segment or facility to protect
the public, property and the
environment as a result of unplanned
repairs

d. The total number of shutdowns of a

pipeline segment or facility to protect
the public, property and the
environment as a result of planned
integrity testing, maintenance or
repair

e. The total number of shutdowns for

0
all hazards
Comments
V. Integrity Inspection Information - 1. General

a. Total length of pipeline system in

kilometres
b. Reinspection frequency in years based on Integrity Management Plan for:
i. Corrosion or metal loss tool
ii. Dent or deformation tool
iii. crack or long seam feature
detection tool

iv. Any other internal inspection tool

Comments

Page 16 of 18
c. Reinspection frequency in years for pipeline specific criteria based on hazardous conditions for:
i. Corrosion or metal loss tool
ii. Dent or deformation tool
iii. crack or long seam feature
detection tool

iv. Any other internal inspection tool

Comments
V. Integrity Inspection Information - 2. Kilometres of Integrity In-Line Inspections
Data
a. Kilometres inspected in the calendar
year using corrosion or metal loss in-
line inspection tools

b. Kilometres inspected in the

calendar year using dent or
deformation in-line inspection tools

c. Kilometres inspected in the calendar

year using crack or long seam feature
detection in-line inspection tools
d. Kilometres inspected in the
calendar year using any other internal
in-line inspection tools
Comments
V. Integrity Inspection Information - 3. Integrity Action Taken Based on In-Line Inspections
Data
Features Excavated

Based on in-line inspection data, the

total number of features excavated in
the calendar year because they met
the company Integrity Management
Program criteria for excavation.

Comments
V. Integrity Inspection Information - 4. Pipeline Condition Features Exceeding Integrity Criteria

Data
Features Excavated

Based on excavation data, the total

number of features exceeding CSA
Z662 criteria, for metal loss.

Page 17 of 18
Based on excavation data, the total
number of features exceeding CSA
Z662 criteria, for dents.

Based on excavation data, the total

number of features for cracks with a
depth greater than 40% of the
nominal pipeline wall thickness.

Comments
Return to Main Form

Page 18 of 18