Enbridge Line 3 Receives Minnesota Regulator Approval
WINNIPEG, Manitoba (Reuters) — A Minnesota regulator ruled on Monday that a revised environmental impact statement for Enbridge Inc’s Line 3 oil pipeline replacement is adequate, helping to clear a significant hurdle for the long-delayed project.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission voted 3-1 to find the revised statement from the state's Department of Commerce adequate. It was to move on Monday afternoon to consider reissuing a certificate of need and route permit for the project.
Enbridge shares jumped 1.5%, hitting their highest level since May 2017.
Line 3, built in the 1960s, carries oil from the Canadian province of Alberta to Superior, Wisconsin. Because of age and corrosion, it carries less oil than it was designed to transport.
Enbridge has argued that replacing it will reduce the chances of leaks.
Replacing Line 3 would allow Calgary, Alberta-based Enbridge to double its capacity to 760,000 barrels per day, providing relief to congested pipelines carrying Canada's oil.
A shortage of pipeline capacity has forced the Alberta government to curtail production.
The Minnesota Department of Commerce revised its environmental impact statement for Line 3 after the Minnesota Court of Appeal ruled last June that the original statement was insufficient regarding a single issue -- assessment of a potential spill on Lake Superior and its watershed.
At Monday's hearing, Line 3 opponents urged the regulator to stop the project.
"I see continuous permitting and continuous risk," said Frank Bibeau, representing the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. “It's just giving them something for free at our risk and peril.”
A spill would be "catastrophic" to Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe and its way of life, including its wild rice harvesting, said Benjamin Benoit, the band's environment director.
Enbridge lawyer Christy Brusven argued the revised environmental statement achieved what the court ordered - addressing a spill impact on the watershed. Opponents' arguments that modeling should have been done at more than one location exceed the court's ruling, she said.
Oil can also spill if it travels by rail, the main alternative to pipelines, said Kevin Pranis, a spokesman for Laborers International Union of North America, which supports the project because of the jobs it would create.
The purpose of opposition "is indefinite delay," he said.
The Line 3 project is one of three, along with TC Energy Corp's Keystone XL and the Canadian government-owned Trans Mountain, that have been stalled for years by opposition.
Related News
Related News
- Enbridge Plans 86-Mile Pipeline Expansion, Bringing 850 Workers to Northern B.C.
- Intensity, Rainbow Energy to Build 344-Mile Gas Pipeline Across North Dakota
- U.S. Moves to Block Enterprise Products’ Exports to China Over Security Risk
- Strike Pioneers First-of-Its-Kind Pipe-in-Pipe Installation on Gulf Coast with Enbridge
- 208-Mile Mississippi-to-Alabama Gas Pipeline Moves Into FERC Review
- U.S. Pipeline Expansion to Add 99 Bcf/d, Mostly for LNG Export, Report Finds
- A Systematic Approach To Ensuring Pipeline Integrity
- 275-Mile Texas-to-Oklahoma Gas Pipeline Enters Open Season
- LNG Canada Start-Up Fails to Lift Gas Prices Amid Supply Glut
- Kinder Morgan Gas Volumes Climb as Power, LNG Demand Boost Pipeline Business
Comments