US Army denies DAPL easement, AFPM responds to decision
HOUSTON (Reuters) -- The US Army's denial of an easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline, after permitting and legal obligations were followed, sets an uncertain precedent for new projects despite President-elect Donald Trump's promise to support energy infrastructure.
The decision came after months of protests by the Standing Rock Sioux tribe and others who said the line could desecrate tribal grounds, or a spill could contaminate drinking water.
While most of the 1,172-mile pipeline is complete, Energy Transfer Partners, the line's owner, needed an easement from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to drill under Lake Oahe. The lake, a water source formed by a dam on the Missouri River, has been the focus of protesters.
The Army's intervention sets an unsettling precedent, analysts and industry groups told Reuters, because Energy Transfer had undergone the necessary environmental reviews and permitting processes to move ahead with construction.
"I think it sends a horrible signal to anyone wanting to invest in a project and I strongly suspect those policies will be discontinued on Jan. 20th," said Brigham McCown, the former head of the US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) under George W. Bush, referring to the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump.
Still, the decision to deny the easement tempers some of the optimism pipeline companies assumed following the election of Trump, who is seen as more supportive of oil and gas projects.
Energy Transfer Partners said in a statement the decision was politically motivated and it did not intend to reroute the line.
The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers’ (AFPM) President Chet Thompson responded to the decision.
“The administration’s decision to deny the permits needed to complete this last leg of the project, which has followed the letter of the law throughout the entire approval process, is irresponsible and inappropriate,” Thompson said. “This action demonstrates that even if you follow the rules, you cannot win if you go against the administration’s political agenda. The decision could unfortunately result in higher costs and lost work for our refiners and manufacturers and will discourage future infrastructure development that is badly needed. We hope that President-elect Trump will reconsider and reverse this decision.”
Reporting by Liz Hampton in Houston; Editing by Tom Hogue
Comments