TransCanada Keystone XL Hits New Turbulence As South Dakota Permit Hearing Implodes Over Pipeline Corrosion, Market Demand

Julie-Dermansky-022
on

Holes too big to fix were poked in TransCanadaโ€™s narrative that its Keystone XL tar sands pipeline will be the safest pipeline ever built. And questions were raised about how the pipeline companyโ€™sย financial dealings are set upย during Public Utilities Commission hearings in Pierre, South Dakota this week where state regulators are tasked to decide if the company is capable of following the rulesย the state set when the original Keystone pipeline permit was granted inย 2010.

A team of lawyers representing Native American tribes and the grassroots groupย Dakota Rural Action took the upper hand during theย proceedingsย as they tried to have a TransCanada executiveโ€™sย testimony impeached.ย The proceedings took on a circus-like atmosphere when TransCanada was unable to prevent lines of questioning it didnโ€™tย like.ย 

The commissioners seemed unsure of its own procedures. At one point, Commissioner Gary Hanson expressed frustration that he was having trouble drawing a distinction between TransCanadaโ€™s evidence and its advertisingย statements.

The testimony of TransCanadaโ€™s key witness,ย Corey Goulet, president of Keystone Pipeline Projects, turned out to be an important centerpiece of theย hearing.

In pretrial testimony filed by Goulet, he stated the company would have no problem meeting the Commissionโ€™s amendedย conditions.

However, TransCanadaโ€™s promises to build safe pipelines have been called into question with several high-profile incidents involving its existing pipelines, particularly the corrosion problems with the Keystone 1ย pipeline.ย 

A TransCanada ‘root cause analysis’ document, made available online by DeSmog on Tuesday, shed troubling light on the external corrosion encountered on the Keystoneย 1.

โ€˜ROOT CAUSE ANALYSISโ€™ DOCUMENT CREATES HEADACHES, QUESTIONS FOR TRANSCANADA

When Gouletย was questioned about the significant corrosion discovered on the Keystone 1 pipeline in Missouri in 2012 โ€” when the pipelineโ€™s wall had corroded in one spot to the thickness of a dime โ€” he downplayed the incident, claiming thatย none of the defects were close to rupturing.ย 

โ€œNone of the defects, in my experience in 30 years of pipelines, would be injurious from the perspective of being close to rupturing. Therefore the only problem would have been the depth of corrosion,โ€ Goulet testified. (Audio of Goulet testimony, relevant corrosion section at ~ 32:45 โ€“ 33:40)ย ย ย 

Bruce Ellison, one of the lawyers for the intervenors, had handed Goulet a copy of the companyโ€™s root cause analysis report of the incident, before pointing out the corrosion areaย was much larger than Goulet had described. One of the defects involved a section of pipe where the wall had eroded 96.8 percent, which Ellison noted was close to a ruptureย incident.

TransCanada lawyers objected to any reference to the report because Goulet claimed he had never seen it and that it was classified. But since the report had already been entered into evidence, theย intervenorsโ€™ lawyers were allowed by the Commission to continue questioningย him.ย 

In the course of discovery, TransCanada provided the report in question as part of the unclassified documents, and therefore could not exclude the report from evidence, the Commissionย said.

After that dispute was settled, Goulet admitted he knew the location of sites where the pipeline had been dug up for inspection andย repair.ย 

As indicated in the โ€˜root causeโ€™ report, Site 5 was only 200 feet from theย Mississippi River, the primary drinking water source for 18 million Americans, as well as agricultural water for cropย production.ย 


Image of Site 5 defect from TransCanada’s report pg.ย 22.ย 

Evan Vokes, former TransCanada employeeย turned whistleblower,ย and an expert witness for the intervenors, told DeSmog he has never seen a pipeline coatingย corroded as badly asย the failed coating of the Keystone 1. It looked as if โ€œit had been gnawed at by rats,โ€ he toldย DeSmog.

Anotherย former TransCanada employee reviewed the report and found it shocking.ย The fact that damaged sections of the pipe were repaired instead of replaced concerned himย greatly.ย โ€œWe cut out better pipe than what Iโ€™ve seen in those pictures,โ€ he toldย DeSmog.ย 

TRANSCANADAโ€™S TAX REVENUE CALCULATIONS OFF BY A LOT

Goulet testified that the considerably lower amount of taxes TransCanada paid was less than had been estimated before construction โ€” although the tax rate has sinceย increased.ย 

While he stated he didnโ€™t know the technical details of how the taxes are applied, he went on to testify that โ€œTransCanada Pipeline LP is the owner of the Keystone XL pipeline,โ€ explaining that it is a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada Corporation. While TransCanada Corporation has assets in excess of $50 billion, not all of that value would be assessed for tax purposes. Only the subsidiaryโ€™s assets would, Goulet explained. While TransCanada estimated that Keystone 1 would deliver at least $45 million in tax revenue to communities, Goulet admitted that the company has only paid $18.4 million over the first 5 years of the pipelineโ€™s operation. Thatโ€™s roughly a third of what TransCanada had estimated as the benefit it would deliver in tax revenue to affectedย communities.

ย Goulet cited higher capital and operating costs for the discrepancy, blaming regulatory delays, technical changes, and inflation were responsible for the costs ballooning to nearly $2 billion for the Keystone 1 project.ย (Audio of hearing, relevant section on taxes at ~ 1:22:15 โ€“ 1:32:00)

The tax revenue discrepancies could have real impacts on communities that bank on the future of the Keystoneย pipeline.

โ€œIn Harding County a bond was passed and a new school was built on the premise that TransCanadaโ€™s pipeline taxes would help pay for it,โ€ Bret Clanton, a member of Dakota Rural Actionย said.

TRANSCANADA BULLISH ON BUILDING KEYSTONE XL DESPITE OIL PRICE SLUMPย 

In afternoon testimony (audio from ~1:48:00 on), David Diakow, TransCanadaโ€™s Vice President, Commercial, Liquids Pipelines, opened the door to information that related to TransCanadaโ€™s business dealingsย related to the project.ย ย 

Diakow revealed thatย the company intends to build the pipeline no matter how low the price of oil goes. (audio ~ 1:54:40 โ€“ 1:57:15)

Robin Martinez, a lawyer for the intervenors, described what came next as unusual in an email toย DeSmog,

โ€œPaul Blackburn, one of the attorneys for the intervenors in the proceedings, started to question Mr. Diakow about market demand for the KXL pipeline. He began inquiring as to whether TransCanadaโ€™s customers were demanding changes to their contracts, which TransCanada objected to, claiming their contracts and communications with customers were highly confidential. TransCanada then argued that Mr. Blackburnโ€™s questions relating to market demand for the pipeline were not relevant to the question of whether or not TransCanada could meet the conditions imposed by the Commission when it granted the original permit in 2010. However, by placing Mr. Diakowโ€™s written testimony into the recordย they opened the door to full cross-examination of him under the applicable administrative procedure rules. Apparently not wanting to have him questioned, TransCanada withdrew him as a witness and asked the Commission to strike his testimony from theย record.โ€

The Commission limited the scope of all further testimony for both parties to be pertinent to the amended conditions of the original 2010 permit, strictly limiting evidenceย presented for the remainder of theย trial.

Peter Caposella, the lawyer representing the Rock Sioux Tribe said in all his years as an attorney, he had never seen a plaintiff remove their own witness in such a manner.ย ย 

As the near failure of the Keystone 1 line proved, the consequences of siting TransCanadaโ€™s bitumen-carrying export lines so close to drinking waterย supplies is a risk we can ill afford to accept in an age of water scarcity and climateย disruption.ย 

Even if President Obama denies the permit for the pipeline to crossย international borders, the next administration could reverseย thatย decision.ย 

However, if the South Dakota Public Utility Commission decides TransCanada isnโ€™t up to the job, TransCanada will have to start the entire re-permitting processย again.ย 

Image credit: External corrosion pitting on Keystone 1 Pipeline, via TransCanada ‘root cause analysis’ report, pg.ย 28.

Julie-Dermansky-022
Julie Dermansky is a multimedia reporter and artist based in New Orleans. She is an affiliate scholar at Rutgers Universityโ€™s Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights. Visit her website at www.jsdart.com.

Related Posts

on

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.
on

Ahead of a city council vote, Resource Works launched an influence campaign with stock submissions for restaurant owners, hospitality workers, and residents.

Ahead of a city council vote, Resource Works launched an influence campaign with stock submissions for restaurant owners, hospitality workers, and residents.
on

Ahead of the November 29 election, dairy producers tell Irish government to step off the โ€œtreadmillโ€ of unsustainable milk production โ€“ and share a more holistic vision.

Ahead of the November 29 election, dairy producers tell Irish government to step off the โ€œtreadmillโ€ of unsustainable milk production โ€“ and share a more holistic vision.
on

The head of the CO2 Coalition tells DeSmog that Wright agrees carbon dioxide is โ€œnot the demon molecule, itโ€™s the miracle molecule.โ€

The head of the CO2 Coalition tells DeSmog that Wright agrees carbon dioxide is โ€œnot the demon molecule, itโ€™s the miracle molecule.โ€