A76894-17 Attachment 06 - HDD Feasibility Report - A5A0C7

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.
Section 58 Application Attachment 6

Boulder Creek South Lateral HDD Feasibility Report
Attachment 6
HDD Feasibility Report
May 2016
May 2016
May 2016 Page 1 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3
2 HDD Crossings ...................................................................................................................... 3
3 Design Parameters ................................................................................................................ 3
4 Tributary to Simonette River Crossing ............................................................................... 4
4.1 Watercourse Description .......................................................................................... 4
4.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment ..................................................................... 4
4.3 Laydown Area ............................................................................................................ 4
4.4 Geotechnical Review ................................................................................................ 4
4.5 Design Summary ....................................................................................................... 5
4.6 Specific Construction Risks ..................................................................................... 6
4.7 Contingency Crossing Method ................................................................................ 8
5 Ante Creek Watercourse Crossing ...................................................................................... 9
5.1 Watercourse Description .......................................................................................... 9
5.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment ..................................................................... 9
5.3 Laydown Area ............................................................................................................ 9
5.4 Geotechnical Review ................................................................................................ 9
5.5 Design Summary ..................................................................................................... 10
5.6 Specific Construction Risks ................................................................................... 11
5.7 Contingency Crossing Method .............................................................................. 13
6 Summary of HDD Risk Assessments ................................................................................ 14
7 Summary of the HDD Schedules ....................................................................................... 14
8 Drilling Fluid Disposal ........................................................................................................ 14
9 Water Supply ....................................................................................................................... 15
10 Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 15
11 Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 16
12 Reference Documents – HDD Design Drawings .............................................................. 17
Appendix A – Stress Summary ...................................................................................................... 18
Appendix B – Annular Pressure Charts ........................................................................................ 20
Page 2 of 22 Project #: 1590



1 INTRODUCTION
NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada Pipelines
Limited, is proposing to construct, own and operate the Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline
Project to safely delivery natural gas to the existing NGTL system in Alberta.
The Project, located approximately 119 km south east of Grande Prairie, Alberta, consists of
approximately 21 km of 219.1 mm (NPS 8), 168.3 mm (NPS 6), and 114.3 mm (NPS 4) outside
diameter pipe. The pipeline will be constructed in two new sections (Southern and Northern
sections) which will tie-in to and utilize the existing NPS 6 Sturgeon Lake South Lateral to
transport gas between the two sections.
The Southern Section of the Project will begin from a tie-in point on the existing NPS 36
Western Alberta System Mainline Extension (WASME) in SE 27-66-25 W5M and will consist of
NPS 8 pipe for approximately 4 km, then reduce to NPS 6 pipe to continue for approximately 11
km and tie-in to the SLSL in NE 19-67-23 W5M.
The Northern Section will branch off the Sturgeon Lake South Lateral in SE 28-68-22 W5M with
NPS 6 pipe for approximately 6 km to tie-in to NPS 8 Boulder Creek Lateral (BCL) in SE 09-69-
22 W5M, and continue for approximately 100 m of NPS 4 pipe to tie-in to NPS 4 Calais
Extension in NE 09-69-22 W5M. Construction for the two sections of the pipeline will be
concurrent.
Within the scope of the Project, two watercourses have been determined where NGTL is
proposing to utilize the Horizontal Directional Drill (HDD) methodology for the pipeline
installations. This report is provided as a feasibility assessment of site conditions, incorporating
the provided draft geotechnical information and a geometric review of the proposed HDD
alignment and design.
The proposed HDD design drawings and this feasibility report will be reviewed and revised upon
receipt of the final geotechnical report.
2 HDD CROSSINGS
This report will assess the feasibility of the following HDD installations:
 Tributary to Simonette River Watercourse Crossing (SW ¼ 26-66-25-W5M) – NPS 8
Pipe installation
 Ante Creek Watercourse Crossing (SW ¼ 4-67-24-W5M) – NPS 6 Pipe installation
3 DESIGN PARAMETERS
 The HDD crossings are designed to incorporate the geotechnical information provided,
Pipeline Research Council International (PRCI) PR-227-03110 guidelines, access
specifications, above ground/buried facilities in the area, watercourse geometric
parameters and space limitations.
 The geotechnical conditions at the site were considered in an effort to design the drill for
progression primarily through formations that are favorable for horizontal directional
drills, methodology of construction, industry practices, environmental risks, and
engineering tolerances.



 PRCI design guidelines (PR-227-9424, Updated in 2008 to PR-227-03110), as

suggested in CSA Z662, were utilized to model the bending, hoop, and tensile stresses
for the installation, and operating conditions imposed after installation. The calculations
consider the pipe diameter, wall thickness, grade, depth and geometric design of the
crossing.
 The watercourse crossings were designed by completing an annular pressure analysis
to minimize the risk of hydraulic fracture to the water body during the drilling process.
Annular pressure calculations model the potential fracture pressure of the overburden
formation versus the expected downhole pressures created during the pilot-hole phase.
 Space limitations associated with the Right of Way (ROW), points of inflection (PI) and
achievable temporary workspace (TWS) were also considered.
4 TRIBUTARY TO SIMONETTE RIVER CROSSING

4.1 Watercourse Description
The Tributary to Simonette River watercourse is an approximately 150 m wide wetland area with
a small channel meandering towards the Simonette River. The extents of the watercourse are
not clearly defined. The immediate area is expected to be wet and marshy. Beaver dam
development has also been observed at the crossing location.
4.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment

The proposed HDD crossing utilizes the existing ARC ROW in a southwest to northeast
alignment. The entry location is approximately 140 m southwest of the tributary watercourse
while the exit location is approximately 280 m northeast. The drill passes 32 m below the
centerline of the waterbody.
Temporary workspace (TWS) is required at both the entry and exit areas. The TWS dimensions
are 50 m x 50 m on entry side and 30 m x 30 m on exit side. The proposed TWS is expected to
be sufficient for the anticipated construction spread.
4.3 Laydown Area

The design proposes that the product line be laid out in one section on the northeast upland of
the crossing along the ROW and proposed TWS.
The proposed workspace on the northeast upland is 15 m x 450 m for the pullback operation. It
is expected that a minimum of five (5) side booms will be required for the safe pull-back
installation of the product pipe.
4.4 Geotechnical Review

Three (3) boreholes were completed along the proposed crossing alignment as part of a
geotechnical investigation completed by Stantec in March, 2016. At the time of the preparation
of this report and Issued for Review (IFR) HDD design drawings, only the draft geotechnical
report and borehole logs (BH02 through BH04) were made available for use in the design.
At the location of BH02, near the planned entry location, approximately 6 m of clay was
encountered beneath a thin layer of topsoil and sand, underlain by clay (till) which extended



beyond the 8 m depth of investigation. A 1.3 m thick zone within the clay (till) contained frequent
coal pieces/ rafts, at a depth of 6.3 m.
Similar stratigraphy was reported at the location of BH03, with a thin layer of topsoil, 0.7 m of
sand and 2 m of clay overlying clay (till), which extended to the 20.2 m depth of investigation. A
0.5 m thick gravel deposit was reported within the clay (till) at a depth of 9.8 m.
At the location of BH04, near the planned exit area on the northeast approach, 5 m of clay (till)
was underlain by sand, which extended beyond the 12.7 m depth of investigation.
The near-surface clay overlying the clay (till) in BH02 was described as firm, low plastic (high
plastic below 1.4 m depth), sandy, with trace gravel below 4.5 m depth. The near-surface clay
in BH03 was described as firm to stiff, low to high plastic, with sand. The clay (till) was generally
described as low to high plastic and firm to very stiff, with trace amounts of gravel, sand and
bedrock fragments. The sand, encountered at depth in BH04 was reported to be poorly graded
and compact to dense.
4.5 Design Summary

The proposed HDD has been designed by incorporating all specified design considerations
including supplied topographical and geotechnical information, as well as installation and
operating pipe stresses. The entry and exit angles were chosen based on stress analysis,
materials, bending restrictions, the support of the pullback section, and to meet the workspace
requirements.
The drill profile includes an entry angle of 18 degrees on the southwest side of the watercourse.
The angle is achievable by most stock drilling rigs that are sized appropriately for this crossing.
The entry tangent is 52 m long and transitions to a 126 m long, 400 m radius build section. The
designed drill path follows a horizontal tangent for 10 m with 34 m of vertical cover under the
surface. The drill path continues to a 112 m long, 400 m radius build arc, and finally on to the
exit tangent. The exit tangent is 124 m long and exits the ground surface at a 16 degree angle.
This HDD is designed to be completed with the drill and pull method, in which the contractor will
install the pipeline after the pilot hole is drilled. With this method, the pilot hole is the final
borehole and no ream passes are required.
Annular pressure was modeled to simulate the downhole pressure during the pilot hole and it is
shown in Appendix B. The annular pressure values are compared to the expected fracture
pressure of the geological formation above the drill path.
According to the annular pressure chart, the expected overburden fracture pressure is larger
than the expected drilling pressures for the entirety of the drill path design, indicating a low risk
of hydraulic fracture to surface.
Similar to any theoretical modeling, the annular pressure analysis is a tool to better understand
the fracturing mechanism during HDD. Based on this model, drilling pressures exceeding the
overburden fracture pressure don’t necessarily indicate a fracture will occur, but rather higher
risk that a hydraulic fracture may occur in those areas.
For this particular crossing, the operating stresses govern the design of the pipe, and not the
installation stresses. Calculations for the crossing suggest that the pull force will be
approximately 25,000 lbs. (without buoyancy control) for the NPS 8 installation. Calculations



carried out by CCI indicate that a wall thickness of 8.2 mm and Gr. 359 steel is suitable for this
crossing, based upon the operating conditions supplied. A summary of the stress analysis
calculations is attached in Appendix A.
The following is a summary of the design of the Tributary to Simonette River HDD crossing:
Pipe Specifications 219.1 mm OD, 8.2 mm W.T., GR. 359
Preliminary Coating Selection FBE System 2B
Entry Angle (Degrees) 18
Exit Angle (Degrees) 16
Radius of Curvature (m) 400
Length (m) 424
Borehole Size (m) 0.311
Design Depth Under Watercourse Thalweg (m) 32
Design Pressure (kPa) 7,850
Installation Temperature (˚C) -10
Design Operating Temperature (˚C) 49
Design Factor 0.8
Location Factor 1.0
Pullback Force (with safety factor, lbs.) 25,000 (without buoyancy)
Maximum Operating Stress (% of Allowable) 82.3
Maximum Installation Stress (% of Allowable) 24
Drilling Tolerances (R.O.C. per length) 10m-125 m / 30m-200 m / 100m-360 m

Table 1: Design Summary for Tributary to Simonette River HDD Crossing
4.6 Specific Construction Risks

The following are the main construction risks identified, based on the risk assessment
conducted by CCI and previous experience. Also identified are the main mitigation strategies
developed to minimize the challenges that may arise during construction.



Zone 1: 0 - 70 m MD (Measured Depth)

Risk: The presence of medium to high plastic clay/clay till allows some potential to
form mud rings through cutting adhesion. Mud rings in combination with borehole
squeezing can block off the hole around the drill stem causing poor cutting
clearance and annular pressure spikes.
Mitigation: A proper drilling fluid management plan by the HDD contractor should be utilized
to minimize the formation of mud rings. If issues still arise, mechanical swabbing
may be required.
Risk: It is expected that the HDD borehole will penetrate through clay (till). Although no
cobbles were observed during testing, clay (till), by definition, comprises a
heterogeneous mixture of all soil types including a random distribution of cobbles
and boulders. The possible presence of cobble and/or boulder sized material
along any drill path through the clay (till) should be expected.
Mitigation: Properly sized equipment should be used to help minimize deflection while
drilling the pilot hole.
Risk: If encountered, coal seams may cause loss of circulation and be responsible for
some fluid loss into the formation.
Mitigation: Drilling fluid parameters and volume shall be monitored to ensure cuttings are
removed from the borehole and any loss of fluids is quickly identified. Frac walks
shall be in place throughout the drill at a regular scheduled interval to be
determined by the project. Once a loss in a fractured zone is identified, the
contractor should stop, place an approved plug (bentonite, magma fibre, hole
plug) prior to continuing. This plug can be squeezed into the formation on pilot
hole and can be effective if applied correctly.
Zone 2: 70 – 360 m MD
Risk: The drill path passes below the depth of geotechnical investigation. Formation
properties may be different from what was encountered in the geotechnical
investigation.
Mitigation: Continuous monitoring of drill performance, including annular pressure and
cuttings return, should be maintained. The Contractor shall attempt to complete
the crossing by utilizing the mud motor downhole tooling to mitigate any possible
bedrock conditions.
Risk: Fracture to waterbody.
Mitigation: The drill path has been designed to minimize the risk of fracture to waterbody.
The contractor shall closely monitor the annular pressure to ensure it remains
within the designed pressure curve. If the annular pressure exceeds the
theoretical model, the contractor shall trip out the drill string to reduce the
pressure and ensure no fractures occur.



Zone 3: 360 – 424 m MD

Risk: There is a potential risk for sloughing and collapse of the borehole due to the
sand above entry elevation.
Mitigation: It is expected that drilling fluid flow rates will be minimized through this formation
as the pilot hole exits to surface.
Zone 4: Pull-back
Risk: The possible presence of gravel and cobbles along with the unknown
geotechnical condition suggests that the pipeline may become damaged during
pull-back.
Mitigation: The pipe coating for this crossing will be Fusion Bond Epoxy (FBE) System 2B. It
is expected to provide suitable protection from corrosion, moisture, abrasion and
impact damage. Extra care should be taken to ensure a clean and open hole
prior to pull-back. The borehole should be proven with a wiper trip prior to pipe
pull. Additional wiper passes may be required.
4.7 Contingency Crossing Method

In the event that the proposed HDD crossing becomes infeasible, due to unforeseen conditions,
the installation will be completed by the open-cut methodology. The burial depth and length of
the crossing will be reviewed when the hydrological scour assessment and flood plain extents
have been modeled. Upon receipt of the hydrological data, a plan shall be developed to isolate
the watercourse to install the product pipe at the burial depth.



5 ANTE CREEK WATERCOURSE CROSSING

5.1 Watercourse Description
Ante creek generally meanders trending in a southeast to northwest direction, eventually flowing
into the Simonette River. At the crossing location, the creek is located at the bottom of a 20 m
deep and 350 m wide valley, crest to crest. The Ante creek channel is approximately 10 m wide
and 2 to 3 m deep at the crossing location.
5.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment

The proposed HDD crossing of the Ante Creek follows a southwest to northeast alignment
crossing the creek between meander bends. The entry location is approximately 350 m
southwest of the watercourse while the exit location is located 275 m northeast of the
watercourse. The drill passes 48.8 m below the centerline of Ante Creek.
Temporary workspace (TWS) is required at both the entry and exit areas. The TWS dimensions
are 46 m x 46 m for entry pad, and 33 m x 41 m for exit pad. The TWS shown is expected to be
sufficient for the anticipated construction spread.
5.3 Laydown Area

The design proposes that the product line be laid out in one section on the northeast of the
crossing along the proposed TWS. A 20 m x 150 m TWS is required in addition to the available
20 m x 462 m workspace for the pullback operation. A 30 m x 30 m TWS for turnaround is also
proposed at the northeast end of the pullback section. It is expected that a minimum of five (5)
side booms will be required for the safe pull-back installation of the product pipe.
5.4 Geotechnical Review

Four (4) boreholes were completed along the proposed crossing alignment as part of a
geotechnical investigation completed by Stantec in February, 2016. At the time of the
preparation of this report and IFR HDD design drawings, only the draft geotechnical report and
borehole logs (BH07 through BH10) were made available for use in HDD design.
Similar conditions were reported at the location of BH07, BH09 and BH10, located on the west
and east approaches, respectively. Beneath a thin layer of topsoil, 3.3 to 6.6 m of clay was
shown to overlie clay (till), which extended beyond the 15.7 to 30.5 m depths of investigation at
these locations.
BH08, drilled and sampled near the creek within the floodplain area was reported to encounter
1.8 m of sand underlain by 22.6 m of clay (till), which was underlain by a variable sequence of
interbedded clay and sand extending beyond the 37.1 m depth of investigation. A layer of 1.5 m
thick silt and a 0.5 m thick sand deposit were also encountered within the clay (till), at depths of
7.3 m and 18.5 m respectively. The sand deposits at depth, interbedded with the clay, ranged in
thickness from 1.5 to 1.8 m.
The near-surface clay overlying the clay (till) in BH07, BH09 and BH10 was generally described
as low to high plastic and firm to stiff (soft to firm in BH10), with trace amounts of sand and
occasional sand seams. The clay (till), where encountered, was described as low to high plastic
and firm to very stiff, with trace of sand and gravel, and occasional sand seams/layers. The



interbedded clay and sand layers encountered at depth in BH08 underlying the clay (till) were
stiff to hard and compact to dense, respectively.
It is important to note that an artesian groundwater condition encountered at approximately 36
m depth, at the BH08 location. An artesian head pressure of 1.5 to 1.8 m was observed by the
field personnel. The head pressure of the artesian conditions is less than entry elevation and is
not expected to flow to surface.
5.5 Design Summary

The proposed HDD has been designed by incorporating all specified design considerations
including supplied topographical and geotechnical information, as well as installation and
operating pipe stresses. The entry and exit angles were chosen based on stress analysis,
materials, bending restrictions, the support of the pullback section, and to meet the workspace
requirements.
The drill profile includes an entry angle of 18 degrees on the southwest side of the watercourse.
This angle is achievable by most stock drilling rigs that are sized appropriately for the crossing.
The entry tangent is 165 m long, transitioning to a 126 m long arc, following a 400 m radius. The
designed drill path follows a horizontal tangent for 30 m with 49 m of vertical cover under the
surface. The drill path continues to an exit arc 112 m long designed with a 400 m radius, and
moves on to the exit tangent. The exit tangent is 205 m long and exits the ground surface at a
16 degree angle.
This HDD is designed to be completed with the drill and pull method, in which the contractor will
install the pipeline after the pilot hole is drilled. With this method, the pilot hole is the final
borehole and no ream passes are required.
Annular pressure was modeled to simulate the downhole pressure during the pilot hole and is
shown in Appendix B. The annular pressure values are compared to the expected fracture
pressure of the geological formation above the drill path.
According to the annular pressure chart, the expected overburden fracture pressure is larger
than the expected drilling pressures for the majority of the drill path design, indicating a low risk
of hydraulic fracture to surface. Close to exit side, the annular pressure exceeds the overburden
fracture pressure. Although fracture to surface near the exit point is not uncommon in HDD
operations, care shall be taken to minimize the risk of fracture by excavation of an exit pit and
utilizing minimal flow rate for the final 50 metres of the drill path.
Similar to any theoretical modeling, annular pressure analysis is a tool to better understand the
fracturing mechanism during HDD. Based on this model, drilling pressures exceeding the
overburden fracture pressure don’t necessarily indicate a fracture will occur, but rather higher
risk that a hydraulic fracture may occur in those areas.
For this particular crossing, the operating stresses govern the design of the pipe, and not the
installation stresses. Calculations for the crossing suggest that the pull force will be
approximately 28,000 lbs. (without buoyancy control) for the NPS 6 installation. Calculations
carried out by CCI indicate that a wall thickness of 7.1 mm and Gr. 359 steel is suitable for this
crossing, based upon the operating conditions supplied. A summary of stress analysis
calculations is attached in Appendix A.
The following is a summary of the design of the Ante Creek Watercourse HDD crossing:



Pipe Specifications 168.3 mm OD, 7.1 mm W.T., GR. 359
Preliminary Coating Selection FBE System 2B
Entry Angle (Degrees) 18
Exit Angle (Degrees) 16
Radius of Curvature (m) 400
Length (m) 638
Borehole Size (m) 0.251
Design Depth Under Watercourse Centerline (m) 48.8
Design Pressure (kPa) 7,850
Installation Temperature (˚C) -10
Design Operating Temperature (˚C) 49
Design Factor 0.8
Location Factor 1.0
Pullback Force (with safety factor, lbs.) 28,000 (without buoyancy)
Maximum Operating Stress (% of Allowable) 75.8
Maximum Installation Stress (% of Allowable) 23
Drilling Tolerances (R.O.C. per length) 10m-100 m / 30m-150 m / 100m-360 m

Table 2: Design Summary for Ante Creek HDD Crossing
5.6 Specific Construction Risks

The following are the main construction risks identified, based on the risk assessment
conducted by CCI and previous experience. Also identified are the main mitigation strategies
developed to minimize the challenges that may arise during construction.
Zone 1: 0 - 100 m MD (Measured Depth)

Risk: The presence of medium to high plastic clay/clay (till) allows some potential to



clearance and annular pressure spikes.
to minimize the formation of mud rings. If issues are still experienced, mechanical
swabbing may be required.
Risk: It is expected that the HDD borehole will penetrate through clay (till). Although no
cobbles were observed during testing, clay (till), by definition, comprises a
heterogeneous mixture of all soil types including a random distribution of cobbles
and boulders. The possible presence of cobble and/or boulder sized material
along any drill path through the clay (till) should be expected.
Mitigation: Properly sized equipment should be used to help minimize deflection while
drilling the pilot hole.
Zone 2: 100 – 180 m MD

Risk: Artesian aquifers were encountered at BH08 with head pressure estimated about
1.5 to 1.8 m above the ground level. This can lead to fluid control issues caused
by water ingress such as dilution of the drilling fluid and increased drilling fluid
returns.
Mitigation: Drilling fluid parameters and volume will be monitored to ensure drilling fluid
dilution is managed. Temporary onsite storage should be available and proper
drilling fluid disposal plans shall be in place.
Risk: There is a potential risk for sloughing and collapse of the borehole due to the
sand zones.
Mitigation: This risk can be mitigated in a number of ways:
 Utilizing an Engineered Drilling Fluid Plan (EDFP) that includes a fluid
loss additive such as a Polyanionic Cellulose Additives (PAC) will aid in
providing a filter cake on the borehole to stabilize the formation when
circulating.
 Drilling fluid parameters will be optimized for maximum cutting
transportation. The parameters will be established based on the
contractor’s EDFP.
 Additional “tripping” (pulling the drill string out of the borehole and then
running it back in) will be necessary to mechanically remove cuttings from
the borehole. The number of trips required will be based on the borehole
conditions.
Risk: The presence of medium to high plastic clay/clay till allows some potential to
clearance and pressure spikes.



to minimize the formation of mud rings. If issues still arise, mechanical swabbing
may be required.
Zone 3: 180 – 440 m MD

Risk: The drill path passes below the depth of geotechnical investigation. Formation
strength and properties could differ from what was encountered in the
geotechnical investigation.
Mitigation: Continuous monitoring of drill performance, including annular pressure and
cuttings return, should be maintained. The Contractor shall attempt to complete
the crossing by utilizing the mud motor downhole tooling to mitigate any possible
bedrock conditions.
Risk: Fracture to waterbody
Mitigation: The drill path has been designed to minimize the risk of fracture to waterbody.
The contractor shall closely monitor the annular pressure to ensure it remains
within the designed pressure curve. If the annular pressure exceeds the
theoretical model, the contractor shall trip out the drill string to reduce the
pressure and ensure no fractures occur.
Zone 4: 440 – 638 m MD

The risks and mitigation strategies for this zone are similar to zone 1: 0 – 180 m.
Zone 5: Pull-back
Risk: The possible presence of gravel and cobbles along with the unknown
geotechnical condition suggests that the pipeline may become damaged during
pull-back.
Mitigation: The pipe coating for this crossing will be Fusion Bond Epoxy (FBE) System 2B. It
is expected to provide suitable protection from corrosion, moisture, abrasion and
impact damage. Extra care should be taken to ensure a clean and open hole
prior to pull-back. The borehole should be proven with a wiper trip prior to pipe
pull. Additional wiper passes may be required.
5.7 Contingency Crossing Method

In the event that the proposed HDD crossing becomes infeasible, due to unforeseen conditions,
the installation will be completed by the open-cut methodology. The burial depth and length of
the crossing will be reviewed when the hydrological scour assessment and flood plain extents
have been modeled. Upon receipt of the hydrological data, a plan shall be developed to isolate
the watercourse to install the product pipe at the burial depth.



6 SUMMARY OF HDD RISK ASSESSMENTS
Detailed risk assessments of the Tributary to Simonette River Watercourse and Ante Creek
crossings have been completed, summarizing the possible construction issues that may be
encountered. As discussed in sections 4.6 and 5.6, risks and mitigations have been identified
for these HDD installations and, if mitigated properly, the risks are manageable.
7 SUMMARY OF THE HDD SCHEDULES
Overall Schedule
Task
Tributary Ante Creek
Mob./Rig In 1 Day 1 Day
Pilot Hole 4 Days 6 Days
Swab and Pullback 1 Day 1 Day
Demob./Rig Out 1 Day 1 Day
Total 7 Days 9 Days
Table 3: Overall Schedule
Assumptions:
 The schedule is based on 7 working days a week.
 The schedule is based on working 24 hours per day (2 shifts per day).
 Standard production rates with minimal fractures.
 Drill and pull methodology.
8 DRILLING FLUID DISPOSAL

The highland on northeast side of the Tributary to Simonette Rver crossing and highlands above
the valley on either side of the Ante Creek crossing may be feasible for the disposal of drilling
fluids, where land spraying would be applicable on existing ROW or TWS. Land owner consent
and further testing of the ground conditions may be required to ensure the land will be
acceptable for land spraying. Additionally, sumps may be required in conjunction with land
spraying for disposal. Suitable locations for sump development should be investigated prior to
construction.



Crossing Name Fluid Disposal (m3) Solid Disposal (m3)
Tributary to Simonette
120 53
River
Ante Creek 118 52

Table 4: Estimated Drilling Fluid Disposal Volume
Assumptions:
 The contractor provides adequate recycling systems.
 Assumes minimal loss of circulation to provide a conservative disposal estimate.
 Drill and pull methodology.
9 WATER SUPPLY
It may be possible that water for drilling purposes may be withdrawn from the watercourses.
Alternate sources, such as nearby municipalities, should be investigated and Temporary
Diversion Licenses obtained prior to commencement of construction.
Crossing Name Water Volume (m3)
Tributary to Simonette
163
River
Ante Creek 161

Table 5: Estimated Water Supply Volume
Assumptions:
 The volume is based on the estimated initial water requirements, dilution rates, HDD
schedule, and the final borehole size.
 The water required for the pretest of the pipe sections has not been included in these
estimates.
10 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations outline the main action items that should be completed in order
to ensure a smooth progression of the project into the construction phase:
a) The HDD design shall be reviewed and incorporate any new data from the final
geotechnical report, once received.




12 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS – HDD DESIGN DRAWINGS

This report is based on the following HDD design drawings.
Crossing Type Drawing Number Sheet
Tributary to
HDD 1559-EG-01-A 1 of 1
Simonette River
Ante Creek HDD 1559-EG-02-A 1 of 1



APPENDIX A – STRESS SUMMARY

Tributary to Simonette River HDD Crossing
Owner: TCPL
Project: BOULDER CREEK
Date: 03/16/2016
Calculation Description: Stress Assessment NPS 8 HDD
Applicable Crossings: TRIBUTARY TO SIMONETTE RIVER
Completed By: SW Reviewed By: JT
Pipe Information Design Criteria Crossing Characteristics
Max. Maximum
Pipe Pipe Operating Installation Design Depth From HDD
Diameter W.T. Pipe MOP Temperature Temperature Radius Entry Location Length
(mm) (mm) Grade (kPa) (°Celsius) (°Celsius) (m) (m) (m)
219.1 8.2 359 7,850 49 -10 400 36 424
The pipe section installated stresses are modelled in 5 sections (exit tangent (5), exit arc (4), bottom tangent (3),
entry arc (2), entry tangent (1)) incorporating effects of buoyancy, soil friction, curvature, fluidic drag and pipe weight.
The calculated stresses are evaluated using the AGA method (PRCI). Operating stresses incorporate hoop, bending,
tensile, and thermal expansion.
Variable Definitions:
SMYS - Specified Minimum Yield Strength
D - Outer Diameter of Product Pipe
E - Young's Modulus (Steel)
t - Wall Thickness of Product Pipe
0
Tensile Stress: Allowable Tensile Stress % of Allowable
5 9.5 MPa F(t) = (0.9)* SMYS 2.9%
4 11.6 MPa F(t) = 323.1 MPa 3.6%
3 11.6 MPa 3.6%
2 13.3 MPa 4.1%
1 13.2 MPa 4.1%
Bending Stress: Allowable Bending Stress % of Allowable

5 0.7 MPa F(b) = 0.75 x SMYS 0.3%
4 54.8 MPa F(b) = 269.2 MPa 20.3%
3 0.7 MPa 0.3%
2 54.8 MPa 20.3%
1 0.7 MPa 0.3%
Hoop Stress: Allowable Hoop Stress % of Allowable

5 4.3 MPa F(h)= [0.88 x E x (t/D)^2] / 1.5 3.2%
4 7.3 MPa F(h) = 137.3 MPa 5.3%
3 7.3 MPa 5.3%
2 7.3 MPa 5.3%
1 3.6 MPa 2.6%
Operating Stresses: Allowable Shear Stress % of Allowable

5 105.9 MPa F(v) = 45% of SMYS 65.6%
4 132.9 MPa F(v) = 161.5 MPa 82.3%
3 105.9 MPa 65.6%
2 132.9 MPa 82.3%
1 105.9 MPa 65.6%
Combined Stress (Tensile and Bending) % of Allowable
5 0.03 Unity Check (<1) 3%
4 0.24 24%
3 0.04 4%
2 0.24 24%
1 0.04 4%
Combined Stress (Tensile, Bending, and Hoop) % of Allowable

5 0.00 Unity Check (<1) 0%
4 0.06 6%
3 0.00 0%
2 0.06 6%
1 0.00 0%
Estimated PullForce (without Buoyancy Control)

16,261 lbs 24,391 lbs (including 1.5x Safety Factor)


Ante Creek HDD Crossing

Owner: TCPL
Project: BOULDER CREEK
Date: 03/16/2016
Calculation Description: Stress Assessment NPS 8 HDD
Applicable Crossings: ANTE CREEK
Completed By: SW Reviewed By: JT
Pipe Information Design Criteria Crossing Characteristics
Max. Maximum
Pipe Pipe Operating Installation Design Depth From HDD
Diameter W.T. Pipe MOP Temperature Temperature Radius Entry Location Length
(mm) (mm) Grade (kPa) (°Celsius) (°Celsius) (m) (m) (m)
168.3 7.1 359 7,850 49 -10 400 70 638
The pipe section installated stresses are modelled in 5 sections (exit tangent (5), exit arc (4), bottom tangent (3),
entry arc (2), entry tangent (1)) incorporating effects of buoyancy, soil friction, curvature, fluidic drag and pipe weight.
The calculated stresses are evaluated using the AGA method (PRCI). Operating stresses incorporate hoop, bending,
tensile, and thermal expansion.
Variable Definitions:
SMYS - Specified Minimum Yield Strength
D - Outer Diameter of Product Pipe
E - Young's Modulus (Steel)
t - Wall Thickness of Product Pipe
0
Tensile Stress: Allowable Tensile Stress % of Allowable
5 19.5 MPa F(t) = (0.9)* SMYS 6.0%
4 21.4 MPa F(t) = 323.1 MPa 6.6%
3 21.3 MPa 6.6%
2 23.1 MPa 7.1%
1 22.1 MPa 6.8%
Bending Stress: Allowable Bending Stress % of Allowable

5 0.6 MPa F(b) = 0.75 x SMYS 0.2%
4 42.1 MPa F(b) = 269.2 MPa 15.6%
3 0.6 MPa 0.2%
2 42.1 MPa 15.6%
1 0.6 MPa 0.2%
Hoop Stress: Allowable Hoop Stress % of Allowable

5 9.4 MPa F(h)= [0.88 x E x (t/D)^2] / 1.5 6.5%
4 12.0 MPa F(h) = 145.3 MPa 8.3%
3 12.0 MPa 8.3%
2 12.0 MPa 8.3%
1 8.7 MPa 6.0%
Operating Stresses: Allowable Shear Stress % of Allowable

5 101.7 MPa F(v) = 45% of SMYS 63.0%
4 122.5 MPa F(v) = 161.5 MPa 75.8%
3 101.7 MPa 63.0%
2 122.5 MPa 75.8%
1 101.7 MPa 63.0%
Combined Stress (Tensile and Bending) % of Allowable

5 0.06 Unity Check (<1) 6%
4 0.22 22%
3 0.07 7%
2 0.23 23%
1 0.07 7%
Combined Stress (Tensile, Bending, and Hoop) % of Allowable

5 0.01 Unity Check (<1) 1%
4 0.05 5%
3 0.01 1%
2 0.05 5%
1 0.01 1%
Estimated PullForce (without Buoyancy Control)

18,644 lbs 27,966 lbs (including 1.5x Safety Factor)


APPENDIX B – ANNULAR PRESSURE CHARTS
Tributary to Simonette River HDD Crossing



Ante Creek HDD Crossing


A76894-17 Attachment 06 - HDD Feasibility Report - A5A0C7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A76894-17 Attachment 06 - HDD Feasibility Report - A5A0C7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd.

Section 58 Application Attachment 6

HDD Feasibility Report

May 2016 Page 1 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

Page 2 of 22 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 2 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

Page 3 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 3 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

 PRCI design guidelines (PR-227-9424, Updated in 2008 to PR-227-03110), as

4 TRIBUTARY TO SIMONETTE RIVER CROSSING

4.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment

4.3 Laydown Area

4.4 Geotechnical Review

Page 4 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 4 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

4.5 Design Summary

Page 5 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 5 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

Pipe Specifications 219.1 mm OD, 8.2 mm W.T., GR. 359

Preliminary Coating Selection FBE System 2B

Entry Angle (Degrees) 18

Exit Angle (Degrees) 16

Radius of Curvature (m) 400

Length (m) 424

Borehole Size (m) 0.311

Design Depth Under Watercourse Thalweg (m) 32

Design Pressure (kPa) 7,850

Installation Temperature (˚C) -10

Design Operating Temperature (˚C) 49

Design Factor 0.8

Location Factor 1.0

Pullback Force (with safety factor, lbs.) 25,000 (without buoyancy)

Maximum Operating Stress (% of Allowable) 82.3

Maximum Installation Stress (% of Allowable) 24

Drilling Tolerances (R.O.C. per length) 10m-125 m / 30m-200 m / 100m-360 m

4.6 Specific Construction Risks

Page 6 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 6 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

Zone 1: 0 - 70 m MD (Measured Depth)

Page 7 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 7 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

Zone 3: 360 – 424 m MD

4.7 Contingency Crossing Method

Page 8 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 8 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

5 ANTE CREEK WATERCOURSE CROSSING

5.2 Horizontal Directional Drill Alignment

5.3 Laydown Area

5.4 Geotechnical Review

Page 9 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 9 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project

5.5 Design Summary

Page 10 of 21 Project #: 1590

May 2016 Page 10 of 21

The Boulder Creek South Lateral Pipeline Project