Safety Performance Portal - March 2015

The safety of Canadians and protection of the environment in the construction, operation and abandonment of pipeline facilities regulated by the NEB are the Board’s top priorities, and have been a part of our mandate since 1959. We hold those we regulate accountable so that the safety of Canadians and the environment is protected.

In 2013, the NEB regulated approximately 73,000[1] kilometres of interprovincial and international pipelines. See a map of the NEB’s regulated pipelines. The safety and environmental performance data and information that follows relates to the NEB’s regulated pipelines.

[1] Total kms include pipeline that is approved, under construction, operational, deactivated, decommissioned, and pending abandonment.

Pipeline Incidents

Under the National Energy Board Onshore Pipeline Regulations (OPR), companies must immediately notify the National Energy Board (NEB) of any incident that relates to the construction, operation or abandonment of a pipeline.

Incident means an occurrence that results in:

  • the death of or serious injury to a person;
  • a significant adverse effect on the environment (referred to below as significant adverse effects);
  • an unintended fire or explosion;
  • an unintended or uncontained release of low vapour pressure hydrocarbons (referred to below as Liquid releases) in excess of 1.5 m³;
  • an unintended or uncontrolled release of gas or high vapour pressure hydrocarbons (referred to below as Gas releases); and,
  • the operation of a pipeline beyond its design limits (OBDL).

To enhance the analysis of the reportable incident data, the NEB has separated serious injuries incidents from fatalities, and unintended fires from unintended explosions.

See a map of reportable OPR incidents (2008 - present)
map of reportable OPR indicents

Dashboard

Figure 1: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 1: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 1: Details
  • Figure 1 shows the number of events which occurred from 2008 through to 31 March 2015 that resulted in a reportable incident (or incidents).
  • For the first three months of 2015 there were 17 events reported under the OPR; 16 events had a single reportable incident and one event had multiple reportable incidents.
  • An event resulting in both a fire and a serious injury is an example of an event with multiple reportable incidents. Figure 2 breaks out each of these incident types by year.
Table 1: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Single Reportable Incident Event Multiple Reportable Incident Event Total Events
2008 50 0 50
2009 78 5 73
2010 110 2 108
2011 99 2 97
2012 155 5 150
2013 121 4 117
2014 73 1 72
Jan-Mar 2015 17 1 16

Figure 2: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 2: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 2: Details
  • Figure 2 compares the number of reportable incidents by type in 2014 with the number of reportable incidents for January – March 2015. Subsequent figures further detail a selection of the different incident types.
  • With respect to significant adverse effects on the environment, no incidents were reported in the first three months of 2015.
  • Most reportable incidents do not result in threats to the safety of people or the environment.
Table 2: Total Number of Events Resulting in Reportable Incidents
2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Gas Releases Fires Explosions Serious Injuries Significant Adverse Effects Fatalities Liquid Releases OBDL
2012 71 35 7 9 0 0 2 37
2013 55 15 0 2 0 1 10 42
2014 43 16 0 2 2 0 7 4
Jan-Mar 2015 9 3 1 0 0 0 1 3

Figure 3: Number of Serious Injuries 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 3: Number of Serious Injuries 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 3: Details
  • There were no serious injuries in the first three months of 2015.
Table 3: Number of Serious Injuries 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Serious Injuries
2008 3
2009 5
2010 1
2011 1
2012 9
2013 2
2014 2
Jan-Mar 2015 0

Figure 4: Number of Fatalities, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 4: Number of Fatalities, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 4: Details
  • There were no fatalities in the first three months of 2015.
Table 4: Number of Fatalities, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Fatalities
2008 2
2009 0
2010 0
2011 3
2012 0
2013 1
2014 0
Jan-Mar 2015 0

Figure 5: Number of Operation Beyond Design Limits (OBDL) Incidents, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 5: Number of Operation Beyond Design Limits (OBDL) Incidents, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 5: Details
  • There were three incidents related to OBDL so far in 2015 as follows:
    • Two were related the testing of newly installed equipment at a station, which caused the pipelines to shut down and lead to an over-pressure in nearby meter stations; and,
    • One involved an over-pressure that occurred when thermal expansion caused an increase in pressure in the pipeline, and the thermal relief valve failed to relieve the pressure.
Table 5: Number of Operation Beyond Design Limits (OBDL) Incidents, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Total
2008 0
2009 5
2010 25
2011 6
2012 37
2013 42
2014 6
Jan-Mar 2015 3

Figure 6: Number of Fires and Explosions, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015 

Figure 6: Number of Fires and Explosions, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015 
Figure 6: Details
  • Three fires and one explosion have been reported so far in 2015 as follows:
    • One small flame was found at the connection of a welding tool;
    • One flare occurred when a worker was using a propane torch to prepare a pipe joint for coating, and gas released from the propane tank that the torch was attached to;
    • One flash occurred along a propane hose when a worker was preheating a weld; and,
    • An explosion happened in an electrical switchgear room when attempting to start a pipeline.
Table 6: Number of Fires and Explosions, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Fire Explosion
2008 9  
2009 14 2
2010 13 1
2011 22  
2012 35 7
2013 15  
2014 16  
Jan-Mar 2015 3 1

Figure 7: Total Volumes of Liquids Released Vs. Number of Liquid Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 7: Total Volumes of Liquids Released Vs. Number of Liquid Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 7: Details
  • In the first three months of 2015, one reportable liquid release occurred from a valve which overflowed the secondary containment around the valve and spilled 1.5 m3 of crude oil which did not leave company property.
Table 7: Total Volumes of Liquids Released Vs. Number of Liquid Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Total Volume Released (m³) # of Releases
2008 188.4 9
2009 495.05 7
2010 337.60 7
2011 284.60 6
2012 97.44 2
2013 58.34 10
2014 234.85 7
Jan-Mar 2015 1.5 1

Figure 7(a): On/Off Company Property Liquid Releases by Location, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 7(a): On/Off Company Property Liquid Releases by Location, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 7(a): Details
  • Between 2008 and 2014, there have been a total of five liquid releases off company property.
  • The one liquid release which was reported in the first three months of 2015 was entirely contained within company property.
Table 7(a): On/Off Company Property Liquid Releases by Location, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
On Company Property Off Company Property
44 5

Figure 8: Number of Natural Gas and Other High Vapour Pressure Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 8: Number of Natural Gas and Other High Vapour Pressure Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 8: Details
  • There were 9 reportable natural gas and other high vapour pressure releases in the first three months of 2015. Of these, six were sweet natural gas, one was sour natural gas, one was propane and one was fuel gas.
Table 8: Number of Natural Gas and Other High Vapour Pressure Releases, 2008 – Jan-Mar 2015
Year Total
2008 24
2009 51
2010 63
2011 63
2012 71
2013 55
2014 43
Jan-Mar 2015 9

Please note that ruptures are a type of unintended or uncontrolled liquid or gas release incident. For more detailed information on ruptures, please refer to the Pipeline Ruptures section of the NEB’s website.

Unauthorized Activities

Figure 9: Number of UAs by Province, 2013 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 9: Number of UAs by Province, 2013 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 9: Details
  • The eight UAs in British Columbia included seven ground disturbances and three encroachments. The six UAs in Alberta included one ground disturbance, three encroachments and two vehicle crossings. The three UAs in Ontario were all ground disturbances. There was one unauthorized vehicle crossing in Saskatchewan.
Table 9: Number of UAs by Province, 2013 – Jan-Mar 2015
Province 2014 2015
Alberta 30 6
British Columbia 59 8
Manitoba 5 0
New Brunswick 0 0
Nova Scotia 1 0
Ontario 16 3
Quebec 18 0
Saskatchewan 7 1

Figure 10: Number of UAs by Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 10: Number of UAs by Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 10: Details
  • The data so far in 2015 shows that ground disturbance continues to be the most prevalent type of UA.
Table 10: Number of UAs by Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
  2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jan-Mar 2015
Ground Disturbance 86 61 122 97 111 11
Encroachment 12 7 12 9 13 3
Vehicle Crossing 6 4 10 7 12 4

Figure 11: Number of UAs by Violator Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 11: Number of UAs by Violator Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 11: Details
  • Consistent with trends from 2010 through 2014, contractors continue to be the leading type of violator so far in 2015.
Table 11: Number of UAs by Violator Type, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
  2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jan-Mar 2015
Contractor 62 41 78 70 82 11
Landowner 37 20 51 34 30 4
Municipality 4 11 15 9 18 1
Unknown 0 0 0 0 6 2

Figure 12: Number of UAs by First-Time Vs. Repeat Violators, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015

Figure 12: Number of UAs by First-Time Vs. Repeat Violators, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
Figure 12: Details
  • The trend in the number of first-time vs. repeat violators continued in the first three months of 2015, with more first-time violators than repeat violators.
Table 12: Number of UAs by First-Time Vs. Repeat Violators, 2010 – Jan-Mar 2015
  2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Jan-Mar 2015
First Time 86 58 106 109 107 16
Repeat 10 7 22 15 29 2

Please note: The incident data shown represents a single point in time. As investigations are completed for open incidents, or as new information becomes available, the incident record is updated and may change certain aspects of the incident record including whether the incident remains reportable under the applicable regulations. Accordingly, the incident data shown is subject to change.

Your comments on the information presented on the Safety and Environmental Performance Dashboard are important to us. Please send any feedback on the content of this page to: dashboard@neb-one-gc.ca. For inquiries, reports or requests on this content, please refer to the NEB’s Contact Us page.

Date modified: