Pipe Design Specification For Use in Utilities Kingston High Pressure Gas Main

Kingston Reinforcement Pipeline
APPENDIX I
PIPELINE DESIGN DOCUMENT
33830 - December 2004
SENES Consultants Limited
211 Counter Street P.O. Box 790

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
www.utilitieskingston.com
Pipe Design Specification for Use in

Utilities Kingston High Pressure Gas Main
ReInforcement Project
Prepared By: Dale Sopha

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Section
Description
Page
Foreword ..............................................................................4
1.0
Network Simulation...............................................................5
2.0
Gas Main Sizing....................................................................8
3.0
Pipe Grade..........................................................................12
4.0
Hoop Stress as Per Cent SMYS .........................................16
5.0
Coating Requirements ........................................................18
6.0
Material Specification..........................................................19
Appendix A
Peer Review .......................................................................20
Appendix B
Internal Communications ....................................................28
Appendix C
Revised Design...................................................................31
Appendix D
Revised Specification .........................................................35
3 of 35
1425445 Ontario Limited

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Foreword
The following following document outlines the stages that were followed in the
design of the pipe material to be utilized in the construction of the high pressure
gas main to be constructed in 2005.
This document was compiled by Utilities Kingston personnel and then forward to
Mark Wolnick, a consultant retained for peer review. Mr Wolnick was able to
provide a fresh point of view, not considered by internal staff that results in
material design changes that subsequently wil mean cost savings.
The revisions and correspondence from Mr Wolnick are attached to the original
document as appendixes.
4 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
1.0
Network Simulation
The following is a brief summary of the items considered to arrive upon the size
of the main to be utilized in the proposed HP Distribution system.
A simulation of the proposed high pressure distribution system was created using
an arbitrary route.
Several scenarios were run through this simulation with the consideration that :
The current system runs at 325 psi
The peak hour was around 2150 mcfh, December 31, 1999 from 8 to 9
PM (from historical records)
Queens requires 334 mcfh at 400 psi
It was decided to determine the pipe size at the minimum operating pressure
required to satisfy Queens requirements and provide sufficient backup to carry
the load of the existing distribution system in the event of a failure
When the model was run using NPS 8, the pressure leaving City Gate
needed to be at 600 psi and left no room for expansion.
With NPS 10 from city gate to Counter-Sir J.A. the take off pressure at 500
psi delivers 415 psi to Queens.
The following are solutions from the modeling scenarios that were created.
5 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
2.0
Gas Main Sizing
Using NPS 10 seemed a favorable scenario until inquiries where made regarding
availability and cost of materials (future considerations).
The Discussions, and estimates where provided from several firms including:
Larry Myers from AF Hall Ltd. who provide several appurtanances including
valves and cathodic insulators.
Brian Smith of Williamson Industries, they supply Spherical Tees and other
fittings used for future modifications to the system.
Cliff Clarke, Enbridge gas Ltd. Enbridge provides us with some consulting and
perform work on our system, under our direction.
Estimates from the suppliers are attached with this and demonstrate that 10
fittings are more uncommon than 12 and as such are generally as or more
expensive and require a much greater delivery time.
Cliff felt that construction costs between 10 and 12 should not vary much as the
trench preparation and any remedial work is the same. He did state however that
12 would leave much room for future expansion and security if the existing HP
system need to be taken out of service. He was also concerned that if we
required the assistance of Enbridge crews as we have utilized frequently in the
last several years, because they do not use 10 pipe they would not have the
equipment to work on this main.
Phone conversations with representatives of steel manufacturers Bob Colum of
Stelco Inc in Hamilton and Alex Afaganis of the Camrose Pipe Company in
Camrose Alberta also left an uncomfortable feeling about the supply of 10 pipe.
Nothing in particular derogatory was said of the size rather just comments as to
the uncommonness of this size in Canada.
Following these conversations the network simulation was rerun with the same
criteria as before but utilizing 12 diameter main.
When the simulation was changed to NPS 12 from city gate to Counter-Sir J.A.
and the remaining NPS 8, the take off pressure only needed to be at 450 psi to
arrive at 400 at Queens as is demonstrated on the following graphic.
8 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
3.0
Pipe Grade
In order to determine the grade of the pipes to be used in the construction of a

pipeline several factors must be known:
Desired wall thickness
Outside diameter
Class location factor
Design factor
Joint factor for seamless pipe
Temperature factor
Because of the possibility of development along the studied routes, it was
decided to use a class location 4 for the calculations for determining the pipe
grade.
The typical pipes in our distribution system are 0.250 wall thickness, so for the
sake of consistancy this was also used in the calculations.
This said the following are the known factors:
Material:
Grade:
Wall Thickness:
Outside Diameter:
Outside Diameter:
Outside Diameter:
Class Location:
Design Factor:
Location Factor:
Joint Factor for Seamless:
Temperature Factor:
MOP:
Steel
S = Unknown
t = Schedule 20 6.4mm (0.250)
D = NPS 12 323.9mm
D = NPS 8 219.1mm
D = NPS 4 114.3mm
4 (Z662 4.3.2.5)
F = 0.8 (Z662 4.3.3.2)
L = 0.50 (Z662 4.3.3.3)
J = 1.00 (Z662 4.3.3.4)
T = 1.00 (Z662 4.3.3.5)
4137KPa = 80% of design pressure (Z662 10.11.4.4)
P = 4137
0.8
P = 5171 KPa = 755 PSI
The formulae for design pressure was utilized to determine the grades of pipes:
Design Pressure:
12 of 35
P = 2St x 103 x F x L x J x T (Z662 4.3.3.1.1)

D

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
For NPS 12 diameter pipe:
5171= 2 x S x 6.4 x 103 x 0.8 x 0.55 x 1.00 x 1.00
323.9
S = 5171
17.388
Grade:
S = 297.54
Therefore the 12 dia pipe must be grade 359 (Z245.1-02 Table 1) for class
location 4
Hydrostatic Test pressure is 12.1MPa (Z245.1-02 Table 1)
SMYS = 85% (Z245.1-02 Table 1)
5171= 2 x S x 6.4 x 103 x 0.8 x 0.55 x 1.00 x 1.00
219.1
S = 5171
25.705
Grade:
S = 201.2
Therefore the 8 dia pipe must be grade 241 (Z245.1-02 Table1)
SMYS = 75% (Z245.1-02 Table 1)
Wall Thickness:
t = Schedule 40 6.0mm (0.237)
5171= 2 x S x 6.0 x 103 x 0.8 x 0.55 x 1.00 x 1.00
114.3
S = 5171
46.2
Grade:
S = 111.9
Therefore the 4 dia pipe must be grade 241 (Z245.1-02 Table1)
SMYS = 75% (Z245.1-02 Table 1)
The attached tables demonstrate that these proposed grades will meet or exceed
the pipe grade requirements of Enbridge Consumers and Centra (Union) Gas
specifications.
13 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
4.0
Hoop Stress as Per Cent SMYS
The SMYS is the grade of the pipe in MPa and represents the specified minimum
yield strength of the material.
In order to be classified a distribution company without transmission pipelines in
the system:
The gas in the pipeline must be odorized.
The pipeline must operate with the forces exerted on the main
(hoop stress) at or below 30% of the SMYS (Z662 12.1.1, 12.1.2)
To determine the hoop stress on the main same factors as used in determining
the grade of the material must be known with the exceptions that:
Maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) is used instead of design

pressure
The grade S is as determined previously
The nominal wall thickness tn=t-applicable allowances
Therefore:
Material:
Wall Thickness:
Nominal Wall Thickness:
Class Location:
Design Factor:
Location Factor:
Joint Factor Seamless Pipe:
Temperature Factor:
MAOP
Steel
t = Schedule 20 6.4mm (0.250)
tn=6.4mm
4 (Z662 4.3.2.5)
F = 0.8 (Z662 4.3.3.2)
L = 0.50 (Z662 4.3.3.3) (class location 4)
J = 1.00 (Z662 4.3.3.4)
T = 1.00 (Z662 4.3.3.5)
4.14 MPa=4110 kPa=600 psi
For NPS 12 Pipe:

Grade:
Outside Diameter:
S = 359
D = NPS12 323.9mm
For NPS 8 Pipe:

Grade:
Outside Diameter
S = 241
D = NPS 8 219.1mm
Hoop Stress
Sh=PD
2tn
%SMYS
%=Sh * 100
S
16 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Using this formulae we see that:

For NPS 12 Pipe:
Sh= 4.14 MPa * 323.9mm
2 * 6.4mm
= 104.7 MPa
%SMYS= 104.7 MPa * 100
359 MPa
= 29%
For NPS 8 Pipe:
Sh= 4.14 MPa * 219.1mm
2 * 6.4mm
= 70.8 MPa
%SMYS= 70.8 MPa * 100
241 MPa
= 29%
For NPS 4 Pipe:
Sh= 4.14 MPa * 114.3mm
2 * 6.0mm
= 39.4 MPa
%SMYS= 39.4 MPa * 100
241 MPa
= 16%
17 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
5.0
Coating Requirements
To avoid multiple tendering procedures and deliveries to alternative locations, we

have decided that the most efficient method of procurement would be to solicate
for the supply and delivery of a completed product. That is to tender for coated
pipe rather than purchase pipe and have it shipped to another vendor for coating.
Because of the nature of this project and the expected lifetime of the pipeline an
external coating that provides high cathodic insulation as well as strong
protection against damage from construction activities will be required.
For this reasoning industry tends to lean towards plural component spray
applied coatings.
Rather than specify to the nth degree the composition and procedure for applying
such a coating the specification need only quote the CSA standard that controls
such processes CAN/CSA Z245.20-02.
18 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
6.0
Material Specification
With these factors known and with the assistance of the CSA Standards Z-245.102 Steel Pipe and Z-245.20-02 External Fusion Bond Epoxy Coating for Steel
Pipe the following specification for this project can be generated:
1. Bare Steel Line Pipe
(i)
The bare steel line pipe shall be manufactured and tested in accordance
with the requirements outlined in CAN/CSA Z245.1-02 and subsequent
revisions.
(ii)
The NPS 12, Schedule 20 pipe shall be 323.9mm outside diameter, grade
359, category I pipe with 6.4mm wall thickness.
(iii)
Both sizes and grades shall be seamless pipe manufactured utilizing an

electric arc welding process.
(iv)
The pipe shall be delivered in 15.0m lengths with plain ends, bevelled to
30o and all burrs removed.
2.
Exterior Coating
(i)
The exterior of the bare steel pipe shall be Fusion Bonded, Epoxy Coated
and tested in compliance with the requirements of CAN/CSA Z245.20-02
and subsequent revisions.
(ii)
The nominal thickness of the coating shall be 300m and no more than 1
test specimen per pipe length shall exceed 325m.
(iii)
The pipe shall be kept free of any coating materials for a distance of
150mm from both ends.
(iv)
The test temperature for the flexibility test shall be in accordance with the
powder manufacturers specifications (-30, -18 or 0 C).
(v)
The outside of the coated pipe shall be clearly and indelibly marked in
accordance with the requirements CAN/CSA Z245.1-02 section 15 and
CAN/CSA Z245.20-02 section 9. In addition to these requirements, the
markings shall also include Utilities Kingston Natural Gas Pipe.
19 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Appendix A
Peer Review
From: mark wolnik [kinlow@sympatico.ca]

Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:04 AM
To: Sopha, Dale
Subject: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
Dale
Attached is my review of the pipe specifications for the HP gas main reinforcement project.
Please review the recommendations and lets discuss which MAOP design option is preferred .
We will then prepare a summary sheet of final pipe and material specifications, design and testing
requirements that will be necessary for the OEB Application.
Mark
Prepared By: Dale Sopha
Utilities Kingston HP Pipeline Reinforcement Project

Design and Pipe Specification Review
A review of the Pipe Specifications for Use in Utilities Kingston High Pressure Gas
Main Reinforcement Project document as prepared by Dale Sopha and received on
Nov 11/04, was completed. The following are my comments and recommendations;
1.0 Network Simulation
The purpose of the proposed H.P pipeline from the TCPL/City Gate to Counter
Street and south to Queens University, is to provide backup to the existing
distribution system in the event of a failure and provide natural gas pressure and
volume requirements for the planned cogeneration facility at the Queens University
CHP.
The distribution system load is based on a peak hourly requirement of 2150 Mcf and
the Queens University CHP requirement of 334Mcfh at a required delivery pressure
of 400 psig. Additional demand due to growth is also anticipated.
The network simulation was based on these parameters and a maximum pressure
availability at City Gate of 600 psig. The results indicated that an NPS 8 pipeline
would not provide room for expansion, but a combination of NPS10 from City Gate
operating at 500 psig to Counter St and NPS 8 for the pipeline section from Counter
St. to Queens CHP, would be sufficient to meet pressure and volume requirements.
2.0 Pipe Size Selection
The considerations as outlined in the Utilities Kingston document, regarding the
concerns for specifying NPS 10 for this project are appropriate.
NPS 10 is not a conventional size for transmission or distribution gas pipelines.
Valves and repair fittings- as noted in the document- are available, but as demand is
low, delivery time is longer and only marginal (10-15%) savings, if any, over NPS12
fittings are offered.
To quantify the differences in pipe cost, Table1- Attachment 1- presents a comparison
of pipe cost by diameter and grade, based on estimates provided by Camrose Pipe
Company. The comparison indicates that NPS 10 Grade 290 with a pipe 9.3 mm wall
which would be the likely pipe specification if it were used in the HP pipeline
design (over 550 psig)- is be more expensive than NPS 12 Grade 290 or 359.
Therefore there is a cost disadvantage in this case.
Most important, however is that the selected pipe size should not contribute to
compromising the ability of utility personnel to respond to repairs in the event of an
emergency. If NPS 10 is not a common pipe size in the present distribution system,
specialized tapping and stopping equipment would be required which would add to
expense and inventory. This issue is of particular importance, since as noted in the
document, Enbridge crews- who are not equipped for NPS 10 work- often assist
Utilities Kingston with this type of maintenance and repair work.
21 of 35
Therefore, the selection of NPS 12 for the City Gate to Counter Street section, and
NPS 8 for the remaining portion of the pipeline, is appropriate as proposed.
3.0 & 4.0 Pipe Grade Selection and Hoop Stress
The factors identified to calculate grade of pipe and hoop stress levels for the
proposed HP pipeline conform with CSA Z 662-03 Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems
standard.
The following observations regarding the determination of the design factors are
offered;
Class Location
Class location 4 is appropriate in view of the expected development along the
pipeline route. A case could be made for Class 3 along the northern section of the
NPS 12 pipeline route, however it would not materially effect the design selection of
pipe and fittings.
Railway Crossings
Any railway crossings should be identified along the pipeline route. Method of
crossing should be determined (cased or uncased) and pipeline design and pipe grade
confirmed compliant with Sec 4.8.3 and Table 4.10 & 4.11 of Z662-03.
Pipe Wall Thickness
As stated in the document, the pipe wall thickness 0.250 inches (6.4mm) was selected
since it is typical of the pipes in the Utilities Kingston distribution system. While the
selection based on past practices may prove to be appropriate, other standard wall
thickness corresponding to alternative pipe grades should also be evaluated. This will
determine the most practical and economic design that conforms with distribution
pipeline standards and addresses the conditions under which the pipeline is operating.
For example, some utilities will specify additional wall thickness as an allowance for
corrosion for pipelines operating in urban or built up areas that are intended to operate
at greater than 275 psig (1900kPa). This may be an allowance that should be
considered if history of corrosion or excavation damages on the distribution system
warrant.
MOP Selection
The reference to Z662 Sec 10.11.4.4 as the basis for deriving the MOP applies to
upgrading of existing systems where pressure testing is not practical. In the case of
the proposed HP pipeline hydrostatic testing will be done to 1.4 times the design
pressure of the pipeline.
The Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure of the pipeline is intended to be the
inlet pressure at the TCPL/City gate. This is 600 psig. (4140 kPa)- which will be the
design pressure. The Normal Operating Pressure of the HP pipeline is 450psig (3100
kPa).
22 of 35
Pipe Grade Selection Calculations

Based on the MAOP design of 600psig (4140 kPa) that will allow Utilities Kingston
to operate the HP pipeline at that pressure in the future and conform with the
distribution pipeline design limit of 30% SMYS, calculations were performed to
verify the recommended pipe grades. Attachment 2 Pipe Grade Selection
Calculations, provides the detail.
As an alternative to the 600 psig MAOP design, a 550 psig (3800 kPa) design was
also evaluated for the specified pipe grades to determine if any economic advantages
could be gained by adopting this more conventional design for HP urban pipelines.
The following Table summarizes the results;
Design
Pressure
4140kPa
Pipe
Diameter
NPS 12
NPS 8
3800 kPa
NPS 12
NPS 8
Wall
mm
6.4
7.1
6.4
6.4
4.8
6.4
7.1
6.4
4.8
6.4
Grade
290
290
359
241
290
290
290
359
290
290
Hoop stress
% SMYS
36 %
33%
29%
29%
33%
33%
30%
27%
30%
22%
5.0 Coating Requirements

The proposal to tender for coated pipe to comply with CSA Z 245.20 20 is
appropriate.
6.0 Material Specifications
The results of the Pipe Grade Selection calculations confirm that:
For 4140 kPa design pressure;
Grade 359 NPS 12 pipe x 6.4 mm wall is appropriate
Grade 241 NPS 8 pipe x 6.4 mm wall is appropriate
For 3800 kPa design pressure;
Grade 290 NPS 12 pipe x 7.1 mm wall and Grade 359 NPS pipe x 6.4mm, meet
requirements.
Grade 290 NPS 8 pipe x 4.8 mm or 6.4mm wall, meet requirements.
The 3800 kPa design provides more flexibility in specifying the pipe material and
therefore the opportunity to obtain competitive quotes for pipe supply should be
exercised.
All fittings should be minimum Grade 241, Category 1.
Pipeline coating specified as Fusion Bonded, Epoxy Coated in compliance with CSA
Z 245.20 is appropriate.
23 of 35
Recommendations
The following are recommendations regarding the HP pipeline design specifications:
A design based on NPS 10 should be rejected and NPS 12 selected.
The NPS 12 specifications should be based on a Grade 369 and 6.4 mm wall pipe,
unless history of corrosion and excavation damage warrants increasing the wall to
7.1mm.
Utilities Kingston should decide if the 600 psig (4140kPa) MAOP is critical to
future operation of the HP pipeline or if 550 MAOP (3800kPa) is acceptable to
meet future requirements.
If 600 MAOP is required (or can in fact be delivered at Counter St) the NPS 8
specification should be Grade 241 and a 6.4mm wall pipe.
If 550 MAOP is acceptable, the NPS 8 specification Grade 290 and a 4.8mm wall
pipe is recommended. This will result in a saving of approximately $120,000 for
the NPS 8 HP pipeline section based on comparative pipe costs for Grade 214
specified and Grade 290 recommended. (ref. Attachment 1).
Once final route selection is completed, pipe specifications for railway and road
crossings should be verified.
Submitted Nov.18/04
Mark A. Wolnik P.Eng
24 of 35
Attachment 1- Comparison of Pipe Costs- HP Pipeline

The following table was prepared on the basis of an estimate of
comparative pricing information from Camrose Pipe Company as of
November 12/04. Local delivery and steel price fluctuations may
vary at time of purchase order placement.
Pipe
Diameter
NPS 12
NPS 10
NPS 8
25 of 35
Grade
MPa
359
359
290
290
290
290
241
290
Wall
mm
7.1
6.4
7.1
5.6
9.3
7.1
6.4
4.8
Estimated
$ cost/m
84
76
83
55
90
56
50
38
Attachment 2- Pipe Grade Selection Calculations HP Pipeline

Using Design Pressure formula (per Z662-03 sec 4.3.3.1.1) the following
calculations were done to arrive at recommended pipe grade selections that will
meet the required distribution design criteria that pipelines must operate at a
hoop stress level at or below 30% of the Specified Minimum Yield Strength of the
pipe.
For NPS 12 and 6.4 mm wall pipe @ 4140kPa
4140 = 2 x S x 6.4x10*3 x 0.80 x 0.5 x 1.0 x1.0
323.9
S= 260
Select Grade 290 minimum
Hoop stress = PD = 4.140 x 323.9 = 104.8
2t
2x 6.4
For Grade 290 Pipe Hoop stress as % SMYS = 104.8 = 36% - (Exceeds 30%
design)
290
For Grade 359 Pipe Hoop stress as % SMYS = 104.8 = 29%
359
For NPS 12 and 6.4 mm or 7.1 mm wall pipe @ 3800 kPa
3800 = 2 x S x 6.4x10*3 x 0.80 x 0.5 x 1.0 x1.0
323.9
S= 240
Select Grade 290 minimum
For Grade 290 and 6.4mm wall pipe
Hoop stress = PD = 3.800 x 323.9 = 96.2
2t
2x 6.4
For Grade 290 Pipe Hoop stress as % SMYS = 96.2 = 33% - (Exceeds 30%
design)
290
If Grade 290 and 7.1mm wall pipe
Pipe Hoop Stress as % SMYS = 86.6 = 30% - ( Meets 30%
design)
290
26 of 35

359
1. For NPS 8 and 4.8mm or 6.4 mm wall pipe @ 4140kPa
4140 = 2 x S x 6.4x10*3 x 0.80 x 0.5 x 1.0 x1.0
219.1
S= 178
Select Grade 241 minimum with 6.4mm wall
Hoop stress = PD = 4.140 x 219.1 = 70.9
2t
2x 6.4
241
If Grade 290 and 4.8mm wall pipe
Pipe Hoop Stress as % SMYS = 94.5 = 33% - ( Exceeds 30% design)
290
Note For uncased railway crossings a higher Grande than 241 will be required at the design pressure.
2. For NPS 8 and 4.8mm wall pipe @ 3767kPa

3767 = 2 x S x 4.8 x10*3 x 0.80 x 0.5 x 1.0 x1.0
219.1
S= 215
Select Grade 290 with 4.8 mm wall
Hoop stress = PD = 3.767 x 219.1 = 85.97
2t
2 x 4.8
For Grade 290 Pipe Hoop stress as % SMYS = 85.97 = 29.6%
290
27 of 35
-( Meets 30% design)

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Appendix B
Internal Communications
From:
Sent:
To:
Sopha, Dale
Monday, November 22, 2004 10:24 AM
Sopha, Dale; Miller, Jim; Phippen, Chris; Quinn, Don; McIvor, Randy; Taylor,
Nancy
Subject:
RE:
The links that were in the previous E-mail are here
The report I created:
<file://\\Csw2k1\utsyseng\Projects\E11 Natural Gas\E11-14-2004 High Pressure Gas Main
Study\Pipe Specification.pdf>
The reply from Wolnick:
<file://\\Csw2k1\utsyseng\Projects\E11 Natural Gas\E11-14-2004 High Pressure Gas Main
Study\Utilities Kingston -HP Design Review from Wolnick.pdf>
_____________________________________________
From:
Sopha, Dale
Sent:
Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:10 PM
To:
Miller, Jim; Phippen, Chris; Quinn, Don; McIvor, Randy; Taylor, Nancy
Subject:
This is in regards to a review done by Mark Wolnick, he is a consultant we have retained to

provide peer review and comments on the key issues we may have in the design of our HP
Pipeline.
<< File: Summary from Wolnick.pdf >>
This may create a policy surrounding gas main materials. Could you review this memo and
comment back to me SVP so I may include some background into our project file.
Dale R. Sopha, CET
Engineering Assistant
Utilities Technical Services
Utilities Kingston
613-546-1181 ext 2259
28 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
From:
Phippen, Chris
Sent:
Wednesday, November 24, 2004 2:28 PM
To:
Sopha, Dale
Subject:
RE:
Dale,
The cost savings that we could expect, as well as the understanding that our existing 8" HP line
has a 4.8mm wall thickness (in effect standardizing for this size), would have me agree with you
on this selection. Does the 6.4mm wall on the 12" transition to the 4.8mm wall on the 8" present
any difficulties? (I can't imagine it would).
Chris
_____________________________________________
From:
Sopha, Dale
Sent:
Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:10 PM
To:
Miller, Jim; Phippen, Chris; Quinn, Don; McIvor, Randy; Taylor, Nancy
Subject:
This is in regards to a review done by Mark Wolnick, he is a consultant we have retained to

provide peer review and comments on the key issues we may have in the design of our HP
Pipeline.
This may create a policy surrounding gas main materials. Could you review this memo and
comment back to me SVP so I may include some background into our project file.
Dale R. Sopha, CET
Utilities Kingston
613-546-1181 ext 2259
29 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
From:
Homer, Ray
Sent:
Wednesday, November 24, 2004 7:14 AM
To:
Sopha, Dale
Subject:
RE:
Reads well for a technical documentwill this mean that NPS 12 Grade 290 will be used
under the hwy 401 and any northern rail crossings? Can we expect this same analysis to apply
should we install any future steel pipeline?
_____________________________________________
From:
Sopha, Dale
Sent:
Tuesday, November 23, 2004 9:07 AM
To:
Homer, Ray
Subject:

Probably be easier to comment on this if I actually send it to you.
Dale R. Sopha, CET
Utilities Kingston
613-546-1181 ext 2259
30 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Appendix C
Revised Design
.From: mark wolnik [kinlow@sympatico.ca]

Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 9:11 AM
To: Sopha, Dale
Subject: Re: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
Dale
It probably doesn't matter if we dont do it before snow- which could be next week. So when you
are ready with the route plans of the line on paper we can do a physical review to see that we
have planned valves where we need them etc. So early next year is fine.
Mark
----- Original Message ----From: Sopha, Dale
To: mark wolnik
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 9:23 AM
Subject: RE: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
The route is finalized in my mind, did you want to look it over before snow?
I will probably not have it on paper until Early next year.
From: mark wolnik [mailto:kinlow@sympatico.ca]

Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 6:48 PM
To: Sopha, Dale
Subject: Re: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
Dale
On the assumption that we will adopt the 550 psig design , I will prepare a pipeline design spec
sheet including pipe, fittings, coating and testing criteria for the pipeline and testing for the OEB
Application.
Once you finalize the routing of the HP pipeline it would be useful for me to do a field visit with
you to review the proposed pipeline routie to see if there are any issues we have to address in
the description.
Mark
----- Original Message ----From: Sopha, Dale
To: mark wolnik
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
This is a scenario I just never looked at. It makes perfect sense to me. We have .188 wall pipe in
our HP distribution system now so it does not create any issues I can foresee.
We will have one CN crossing and we are going to utilize an existing 48" tunnel that has 1-18"
Watermain in it. It was approved for both when the application was made in '90.
As far as designing for 600, the pressure from TCPL fluctuates enough that you are really only
getting 550 on a peak day always.
31 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
From: mark wolnik [mailto:kinlow@sympatico.ca]

Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:04 AM
To: Sopha, Dale
Subject: Utilities Kingston - HP Pipeline - Reinforcement Project
Dale
Attached is my review of the pipe specifications for the HP gas main reinforcement project.
Please review the recommendations and lets discuss which MAOP design option is preferred .
We will then prepare a summary sheet of final pipe and material specifications, design and testing
requirements that will be necessary for the OEB Application.
Mark
32 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
From: mark wolnik [kinlow@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 8:26 AM
To: Sopha, Dale
Subject: Pipe Specifications
Dale
Attached is Pipe and Material Specification summary for the HP reinforcement gas mains as
discussed . If there are other pipe diameters -ie NPS 6 or NPS 4 that will be part of the HP
pipeline- we should also include those in the spec sheet that will form a part of the Application.
Pls review and advise
Mark
33 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Pipe and Material Specifications

Utilities Kingston HP Natural Gas Pipeline
Pipe & Material

Diameter
Wall Thickness
Grade
Specification
Category
Pipe Coating Specification
Cathodic Protection
Fittings
Flanges
Valves
Class Location
Minimum Cover
Max Allowable Operating
Pressure*(MAOP)
Hoop Stress at MAOP
Maximum Operating
Pressure*(MOP)
Hoop Stress at MOP
Hydrostatic Test Pressure
NPS 12
NPS 8
323.9 mm
6.4 mm
API 5LX52-359Mpa
CSA Z245.1 Cat. 1
CSA Z245.1 Cat.1
CSA Z245.20(External Fusion
Bond) or Z245.21 Yellow
Jacket
CGA OCC-1
CSA Z245.11
CSA Z245.12
CSA Z245.15
4
1.20 m
3,800 kPa
219.1 mm
4.8 mm
API 5LX52-290Mpa
CSA Z245.1 Cat. 1
CSA Z245.1 Cat.1
CSA Z245.20(External
Fusion Bond) or Z245.21
Yellow Jacket
CGA OCC-1
CSA Z245.11
CSA Z245.12
CSA Z245.15
4
1.20 m
3,800 kPa
27% SMYS
3,100 kPa
29.5% SMYS
3,100 kPa
22% SMYS
5,300 kPa
24% SMYS
5,300 kPa
*Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure-(MAOP)- Maximum allowable

operating pressure to which a pipeline can be operated due to design, material
and test parameters.
*Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP)-Maximum working pressure existing in
a pipeline during normal annual operating cycles.
34 of 35

Kingston ON K7L 4X7
Tel: 613. 546.1181
Fax: 613. 542.1463
Appendix D
Revised Specification
Specification for pipe and coating are as follows:

Bare Steel Line Pipe
(a) The bare steel line pipe shall be manufactured and tested in accordance with the
requirements outlined in CAN/CSA Z245.1-02 and subsequent revisions.
(b) The NPS 12, Schedule 20 pipe shall be 323.9mm outside diameter, API 5LX52
grade 359, category I pipe with 6.4mm wall thickness.
(c) The NPS 8, Schedule 20 pipe shall be 219.1mm outside diameter, API 5LX52
(d) The NPS 4, Schedule 40 pipe shall be 114.3mm outside diameter, API 5LX52
(e) Both sizes and grades shall be seamless pipe manufactured utilizing an electric arc
welding process.
(f) The pipe shall be delivered in 15.0m lengths with plain ends, beveled to 30o and
all burrs removed.
Exterior Coating
(a) The exterior of the bare steel pipe shall be Fusion Bonded, Epoxy Coated and
tested in compliance with the requirements of CAN/CSA Z245.20-02 and
subsequent revisions.
(b) The nominal thickness of the coating shall be 300m and no more than 1 test
specimen per pipe length shall exceed 325m.
(c) The pipe shall be kept free of any coating materials for a distance of 150mm from
both ends.
(d) The test temperature for the flexibility test shall be in accordance with the powder
manufacturers specifications (-30, -18 or 0 C).
(e) The outside of the coated pipe shall be clearly and indelibly marked in accordance
with the requirements CAN/CSA Z245.1-02 section 15 and CAN/CSA Z245.2002 section 9. In addition to these requirements, the markings shall also include
Utilities Kingston Natural Gas Pipe.
35 of 35

Pipe Design Specification For Use in Utilities Kingston High Pressure Gas Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Pipe Design Specification For Use in Utilities Kingston High Pressure Gas Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kingston Reinforcement Pipeline

33830 - December 2004

SENES Consultants Limited

211 Counter Street P.O. Box 790