Los Angeles Times

Ruling poses new obstacle for pipeline

Dakota Access’ fate is again in question as a federal judge orders additional analyses.

- By Kurtis Lee In a decision the Standing Rock Sioux and their supporters lauded as a potential turning point, a federal judge has ordered the Trump administra­tion to kurtis.lee@latimes.com

conduct additional environmen­tal reviews of the Dakota Access pipeline, renewing the possibilit­y it could be shuttered at a later date.

The ruling is the latest in the back-and-forth legal battles between the Native American tribe and the federal government over the 1,170-mile pipeline that stretches from the Dakotas to Patoka, Ill., and began transporti­ng crude oil this spring.

Last year, the Obama administra­tion blocked the completion of the pipeline, but the move was shortlived. In January, President Trump, a staunch supporter of the pipeline, which can carry up to 520,000 barrels of oil a day, signed an executive order giving the green light for its completion.

For much of the last year, debate over the pipeline triggered massive and prolonged protests and clashes with police in Cannon Ball, N.D., where the Standing Rock Sioux Reservatio­n is located.

Last week, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that although the Army Corps of Engineers “substantia­lly complied” with federal laws in its mandated environmen­tal reviews of the pipeline, “it did not adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmen­tal justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controvers­ial.”

To remedy those violations, Boasberg wrote in his ruling released Wednesday, the Army Corps of Engineers must do additional environmen­tal analyses. Even so, the ruling stopped short of shutting off the pipeline.

“Whether Dakota Access must cease pipeline operations … presents a separate question of the appropriat­e remedy, which will be the subject of further briefing,” Boasberg wrote. A follow-up hearing is scheduled for later this month.

In a statement, Energy Transfer Partners, which oversees the pipeline, called the ruling a “limited remand” and highlighte­d that it did not interfere with pipeline operations.

Yet Boasberg’s decision quickly won praise from the Standing Rock Sioux.

“The previous administra­tion painstakin­gly considered the impacts of this pipeline, and President Trump hastily dismissed these careful environmen­tal considerat­ions in favor of political and personal interests,” Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambaul­t II said in a statement Wednesday. “We applaud the courts for protecting our laws and regulation­s from undue political influence and will ask the court to shut down pipeline operations immediatel­y.”

During its last days, the Obama administra­tion denied a permit for the final phase of constructi­on of the pipeline. Trump quickly reversed the move after he entered the White House, signing an order that gave the goahead to a final easement, which allowed constructi­on to be completed across Army Corps of Engineers’ land and a dammed section of the Missouri River. (In a separate executive order, Trump also made it easier for TransCanad­a to construct the Keystone XL pipeline, which also had stalled under the Obama administra­tion.)

In court filings, the Standing Rock Sioux have argued that the Dakota Access pipeline — nearly half a mile from the reservatio­n — places its water supply from the Missouri River and surroundin­g areas at risk of contaminat­ion. Thousands of environmen­tal activists from around the country traveled to North Dakota to demonstrat­e against the pipeline’s constructi­on. In February, their campsites were cleared as constructi­on forged ahead.

“This decision marks an important turning point,” said Jan Hasselman, an attorney with Earthjusti­ce, a nonprofit environmen­tal law group working with the tribe. “The federal courts have stepped in where our political systems have failed to protect the rights of Native communitie­s.”

Still, while Boasberg’s decision was viewed as a positive to tribal leaders and environmen­talists, he has not always ruled favorably for their cause.

In March, he denied a request by the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe to halt constructi­on on grounds that the pipeline violated its members’ religious freedom. The tribe had claimed that the pipeline was “a terrible Black Snake prophesied to come into the Lakota homeland and cause destructio­n” by desecratin­g water used in religious ceremonies.

The Cheyenne River Sioux and Standing Rock Sioux reservatio­ns border Lake Oahe, the dammed section of the Missouri River in North Dakota where the pipeline was completed.

‘This decision marks an important turning point. The federal courts have stepped in where our political systems have failed to protect the rights of Native communitie­s.’ — Jan Hasselman, attorney working with the Standing Rock Sioux tribe

 ?? Tom Stromme Bismarck Tribune ?? THE DAKOTA ACCESS pipeline, shown here under constructi­on, began transporti­ng oil this spring. A judge’s decision stopped short of ordering it shut down.
Tom Stromme Bismarck Tribune THE DAKOTA ACCESS pipeline, shown here under constructi­on, began transporti­ng oil this spring. A judge’s decision stopped short of ordering it shut down.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States