Controversial Dakota
pipeline to go ahead after Army approval
Send a link to a friend
[February 08, 2017]
By Valerie Volcovici and Ernest Scheyder
WASHINGTON/
HOUSTON
(Reuters) - The U.S. Army will grant the final permit for the
controversial Dakota Access oil pipeline after an order from President
Donald Trump to expedite the project despite opposition from Native
American tribes and climate activists.
In a court filing on Tuesday, the Army said that it would allow the
final section of the line to tunnel under North Dakota's Lake Oahe, part
of the Missouri River system. This could enable the $3.8 billion
pipeline to begin operation as soon as June.
Energy Transfer Partners <ETP.N> is building the 1,170-mile (1,885 km)
line to help move crude from the shale oilfields of North Dakota to
Illinois en route to the Gulf of Mexico, where many U.S. refineries are
located.
Protests against the project last year drew drew thousands of people to
the North Dakota plains including Native American tribes and
environmental activists, and protest camps sprung up. The movement
attracted high-profile political and celebrity supporters.
The permit was the last bureaucratic hurdle to the pipeline's
completion, and Tuesday's decision drew praise from supporters of the
project and outrage from activists, including promises of a legal
challenge from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.
"It's great to see this new administration following through on their
promises and letting projects go forward to the benefit of American
consumers and workers," said John Stoody, spokesman for the Association
of Oil Pipe Lines.
The Standing Rock Sioux, which contends the pipeline would desecrate
sacred sites and potentially pollute its water source,
vowed to shut pipeline operations down if construction is completed,
without elaborating how it would do so. The tribe called on its
supporters to protest in Washington on March 10 rather than return to
North Dakota.
"As Native peoples, we have been knocked down again, but we will get
back up," the tribe said in the statement. "We will rise above the greed
and corruption that has plagued our peoples since first contact. We call
on the Native Nations of the United States to stand together, unite and
fight back."
Former President Barack Obama's administration last year delayed
completion of the pipeline pending a review of tribal concerns and in
December ordered an environmental study.
Less than two weeks after Trump ordered a review of the permit request,
the Army said in a filing in District Court in Washington D.C. it would
cancel that study. The final permit, known as an easement, could come in
as little as a day, according to the filing.
[to top of second column] |
A
North Dakota National Guard vehicle idles on the outskirts of the
Dakota Access oil pipeline protest camp near Cannon Ball, North
Dakota, U.S., January 29, 2017. REUTERS/Terray Sylvester
There
was no need for the environmental study as there was already enough information
on the potential impact of the pipeline to grant the permit, Robert Speer,
acting secretary of the U.S. Army, said in a statement.
Trump issued an order on Jan. 24 to expedite both the Dakota Access Pipeline and
to revive another controversial multibillion dollar oil artery: Keystone XL.
Obama's administration blocked that project in 2015.
At the Dakota Access construction site, law enforcement and protesters clashed
violently on several occasions throughout the fall. More than 600 people were
arrested, and police were criticized for using water cannons in 25-degree
Fahrenheit (minus 4-degree Celsius) weather against activists in late November.
"The granting of an easement, without any environmental review or tribal
consultation, is not the end of this fight," said Tom Goldtooth, executive
director of the Indigenous Environmental Network, one of the primary groups
protesting the line.
"It is the new beginning. Expect mass resistance far beyond what Trump has seen
so far."
LEGAL CHALLENGE TOUGH
Any legal challenge is likely to be a difficult one for pipeline opponents as
presidential authority to grant such permits is generally accepted in the
courts. The tribe said in a statement the decision "wrongfully terminated"
environmental study of the project.
Deborah Sivas, professor of environmental law at Stanford and director of
Stanford's Environmental Law Clinic, said a challenge by the tribe would likely
rely on the reasons the Army Corps itself gave for why more review was needed in
December.
"The tribe will probably argue that an abrupt reversal without a sufficient
explanation for why the additional analysis is not necessary is arbitrary and
should, therefore, be set aside," she said in an email.
Supporters say the pipeline is safer than rail or trucks to transport the oil.
Shares of Energy Transfer Partners finished up 20 cents at $39.20, reversing
earlier losses on the news.
(Additional reporting by Liz Hampton in HOUSTON and Brendan Pierson in New York;
Writing by David Gaffen and Simon Webb; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)
[© 2017 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2017 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |