It's not exactly a full stop. This can only be considered as a delay at most, as the reason stated was, "The consideration of alternative routes would be best accomplished through an environmental impact statement with full public input and analysis. "That should be a normal part of any extensive project. I think "somebody" just underestimated the time needed to finish that task and somebody else said "let's go now, or you'll go now."
After downloading and reading the environmental impact assessment, or at least what seems to pass for one, I have changed my opinion. I believe it to be wholely below the level of any acceptable international standard. In fact it is far less the amount of work than what is normally submitted for any FERC regulated gas pipeline.. within the USA. Oddly enough, or maybe not in the case of USA oil pipelines, in this case the COE is the only federal authority that has any jurisdiction at all, which is why the spotlight has focused on them. There is nobody else on stage. Oil pipeline routings are not regulated by any fed agency (no FERC is only gas pipelines. Go figuare.), so I guess you could say that only the foxes are watching this chickenhouse.
One very interesting thing I noticed, since only COE water crossing permits are required, most of the current problems could easily have been avoided by what I would consider as only minor reroutings that would have cost far less than these delays to the project will entail. IMO somebody needlessly shot themselves in their own foot. To quote Forest Gump, "Stupid is, as stupid does."
I haven't read the environmental impact statement so I can't comment on your value judgement, but I did read the decision of the district court that cited the Corps of Engineers had held nearly 400 open meetings on this line (which the Standing Rock Sioux refused to attend, and which caused the line to be rerouted 140 times); that the company had far exceeded all relevant state and federal requirements; that the line was in an existing disturbance; that both the Arch report from the original line, the arch report from the power line on the same ROW, and the current arch report were without any sites of historic interest in the area of the river; and that the bore plan for the line had the bore 90 ft below the riverbed. The court did review the environmental impact statement and found it to be competent and adequate.
Just saying that what they did here would not reach anywhere near the customary work which is done for every FERC regulated pipeline. Just wondering why?
On the other hand, I can see the landowner's point too. It's their land nation. They said that they didn't want it. Now it appears that they weren't kidding. The real shame is that a quick little relatively inexpensive reroute or two would probably have avoided all this mess. Even Forest would have understood that. Now everybody loses. Way to go.
To cross navigable waters, designated wetlands and federal dams and their flow easements, and cross through dredged channel approaches (such as the Gulf of Mexico entrance to the Houston Ship Channel) and the Intercostal Canal, you must first obtain a permit to do so from the Corps of Engineers. This pipeline attempts to cross through flow easements and under a gov reservoir, so they need a COE permit.
Keith
in general, Section 404 of the clean water act requires the corps of engineers to evaluate and permit any project that impacts Waters of the United States. Given that the pipeline went below a lake, presumably that was considered to be a potential "impact to WUS". It is likely that the pipeline has impacts to other WUS also which requires that a 404 permit address the cumulative impacts to all waters for the entire project. Contrary to previous posts, the corps is required to go through the public involvement process and consult with all environmental agencies which includes USFW, USFS, et al, even though these other agencies may not technically have any jurisdiction. It appears that they did this but got hung up on the public comment process since the tribe objected to it and refused to meet and discuss it. I think this is one of those cases where the can is being kicked down the road until the new administration comes in.
Somebody must have taken my advice! Just this very minute a flash headline on Euronews said "Protestors rejoice as the Dakota Access Pipeline was redirected away from tribal land."
CVG,
The tribe did not object. They didn't bother to attend. Finally the head guy of the tribe was paid a lot of money by several eNGO's to put the Standing Rock Sioux name on the paid-protesters actions. 80% of the people arrested so far have been from out of state. 3% of the people arrested are from various Indian tribes in North Dakota.
BigInch,
It isn't on tribal land. The protesters are "rejoicing" because their checks from Soros came through.
I agree the tribes didn't attend. And I agree, many of the protesters are paid. However, it appears, at least from the published accounts that the tribes did object because of long standing bad feelings going back to the 1960's when the dams were built, flooding parts of the reservation. Apparently, they claim Sitting Bull is buried somewhere along the lake.
I posted this for information. A personal opinion is that I think pipelines are the safest manner of transportation of fossil fuels... if they must be transported...
The tribes feeling is that they do not have to attend any meeting to make an objection. They objected before meetings began, apparently totally and made that well known to both ET and the COE. Afterwards they did not choose to attend meetings aimed to resolve "outstanding issues", as their was nothing to resolve. No means no, right?
1960s, yes definitely, however bad feelings go back at least another 100 years.
We can discuss politics around this for the next year, but at a different website. Don't miss the real engineering issue here. What I object to is the pipeline company's previously chosen route. As I understand they could have avoided all of this simply by a few reroutes costing at most 1.25% of the cost of the project. Apparently Energy Transfer, for some reason, was not willing to do that. This controversy has already lost them more in delay time.
Engineering Issue is
Why was this not rerouted before?
BigInch,
I don't get the revisionist history you are posting. The facts are:
[ol 1]
[li]The line is not on the land of the Standing Rock Sioux land[/li]
[li]The various agencies held 389 public meetings on this line, failing to give input does not give the tribe a veto on a line that is not on their land[/li]
[li]The route was changed 140 times in response to public input[/li]
[li]There is no archaeology around the river crossing[/li]
[li]The river crossing takes place where another pipeline and a power line crosses the river (no new disturbance)[/li]
[li]The bore is designed to be 90 ft below the river[/li]
[li]The Standing Rock Sioux tribe does not have standing to stop the line since it isn't on their land, doesn't disturb their sacred sites, and has a much lower than normal risk of polluting the river[/li]
[li]The Federal courts ruled that the protest did not have standing for a number of reasons including that the actual land owner was fine and remains fine with the pipeline.[/li]
[/ol]
In other words, both the camps and the administration actions are illegal, ill conceived, and simply staged for media attention.
And you didn't read enough. The tribe does not recognize the present supposed border of their lands. They claim land as deliniated in previous treaties (that were also ignored).
If they made 140 reroutes, why couldn't they make 141?
Along the lines of not recognizing the supposed borders, there was a 80's Supreme Court Decision (448 U.S. 371 (1980)) pertaining to the Sioux Nation and the Badlands (SD) where it was decided the US had to repay (with interest) for taking lands from the Sioux Nation which had been allotted to them in the Ft Laramie Treaty. Since the Sioux Nation did not want the money, but the land, the money owed was put into an interest bearing account and as of 2011, exceeds $1,000,000,000.
That tells me they value the land of their ancestors more than money.
When will the US stop the policy of dealing unfairly with the Native American?
Not relevant my aching butt. I don't recognize my neighbor's fence as being on his land. I can just tear it down? Nonsense. Bloody Nonsense.
Another reroute to WHERE. The site under contention has been under the ownership of the current family for nearly 100 years and the title is free and clear and has been reviewed by the court. For today's activists to say "those guys 100 years ago didn't know what they were doing so we are repudiating that agreement" is just not the way it works. The site under construction has previous disturbance and has been cleared by arch three times. The water issue is identical to saying "a comet may hit the earth tomorrow so all contracts can be voided". Garbage.
I've been watching this pipeline for a couple of years and Energy Trading Partners has done an outstanding job of trying to satisfy the demands of people who just hate mankind and manifest that hatred in the guise of "love for the environment". If I was running that company I would have declared bankruptcy 5 years ago and gone to live on a mountaintop with guns and trip wires. I guess they are more tolerant of an adversarial government and dishonest press than I would have been in their place. They are going to start having contracts cancelled in early 2017 and the ultimate viability of the line comes into question shortly after that. The alternative to the pipeline is putting the oil on trains which reminds me of the short period of time that the people of the west coast put their dirty laundry on clipper ships and sent it to Hawaii for processing. Then they found out that there was a better way. The "Save the Planet, kill a human" crowd seems to have won this round because they own this President every bit as much as his ancestors might have been owned by a Plantation-Owner. He is willing to break the law to further the agenda of criminals and terrorists. I am sickened by this process as much as I'm sickened by this discussion.
This really is a black-and-white issue. Energy Trading Partners exceeded the letter and the intent of all state and federal regulations. They had valid permits and ROW agreements in hand prior to starting construction. They went way beyond any rational requirement to engage the affected communities. And then the eNGO's and their paid activists stepped in with a sympathetic government and press. The facts were distorted (search back to the first news stories--the narrative as morphed from the "sacred sites" lie, to the "repudiated sale of the land" lie, to the "fear of water contamination" lie, to the "save the earth" lie, to whatever lie will get them column inches in the world press. The people telling these lies know full well that they are lying and don't care. When the lies were thrown in their face in the courtroom they said "so? we are fighting the good fight and any tactic necessary will be used". Rather than putting that statement under press scrutiny, the sympathetic world press ignored it. Just like they've ignored every swing in the narrative. It is like a weatherman saying "it WILL rain tomorrow" and then the next day saying "another beautiful day" without apology for his previous incorrect assertion.
The rule of law has meaning. Or at least it has had meaning for 232 years of our history. Maybe it will have meaning again under the next administration.
If you want "rule of law", then what about all the convenient treaties which the US broke in the interest of desirable land for settlers, manifest destiny, gold rush, and other things the US citizens wanted.
Heck, the land in SD is called Bad Land for a reason.
The Native American has absolutely no trust in the US rule of law.
I am not Native American, so I don't have a dog in that fight, but am a student of history.
I agree there has been misrepresentation on both sides, environmentalists have joined the fight for nefarious reasons, it is not a simple situation, and likely will end with the pipeline being built where it is intended, but please do not throw rule of law.
