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.
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.
[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
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. |