In its decision last week approving (with conditions) Union Gas' Hamilton to Milton NPS 48 pipeline project, the Ontario Energy Board ("OEB") filled a number of gaping holes in Ontario's pipeline abandonment regime. As noted by the Gas Pipeline Landowners of Ontario ("GAPLO") in its submissions to the OEB, Ontario has virtually no rules or regulations to deal with the abandonment of provincially-regulated pipelines. Decisions about how a pipeline will be abandoned (mainly, whether it will be removed from the ground or abandoned in place) are left to the pipeline company, with no public approval process or public hearing process in place.
GAPLO requested that the OEB require Union Gas to offer affected landowners a form of easement agreement that includes a landowner option for removal of the pipeline upon abandonment. As part of its project approval function under the Ontario Energy Board Act, the OEB must approve the form of easement agreement to be offered by a company to affected landowners. In its recent decision, the OEB accepted GAPLO's position and ordered Union to offer an easement agreement that includes the landowner option for pipeline removal on abandonment.
The following are excerpts from the OEB's reasons related to this issue:
The overriding consideration for the OEB is the control the landowner should have with
respect to how the land is to be treated upon pipeline abandonment. The OEB heard
evidence from Union that leaving an abandoned pipeline in place would be less
disruptive to the land than removing it. The OEB also heard evidence from GAPLO that
this might be true over the short term, but that over the longer term impacts such as
subsidence could be more disruptive if the pipeline were not removed. GAPLO
witnesses testified that for agricultural land the condition of the land is fundamental.
Their testimony indicated that this is not just a question of a farmer’s passion for the
land; it is that the condition of the land is fundamental to the farmer’s livelihood.
The OEB finds that the landowner should have the right to decide whether an
abandoned pipeline should be physically removed from the ground or dealt with through
whatever other means of abandonment may be proposed by Union. Once construction of a pipeline on a piece of property is approved, the landowner is giving up certain rights to Union, as a distribution utility, in the public interest. However, should that pipeline no longer be needed, the landowner should be able to make the fundamental decision about how the land is to be restored.
This is not a debate about deciding in advance what should be done with a pipeline that
is abandoned at a point potentially decades from now. The issue is who should make
the decision at that time. [emphasis added]
Read the full decision at: Union Gas Dawn to Parkway.