Corps: Dakota Access oil pipeline to stay open during review: “The Biden administration on Monday reiterated that the Dakota Access oil pipeline should continue to operate while the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducts an extensive environmental review, although the Corps said again that it could change its mind. The Standing Rock Sioux and other tribes have filed for an injunction asking U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to shut down the pipeline while the Corps conducts a second review, expected to be completed by March 2022. The tribes and environmental groups, encouraged by some of Biden’s moves on climate change and fossil fuels, were hoping he would step in and shut down the pipeline north of the reservation that straddles the Dakotas border. Instead, the Corps in an update ordered by the judge repeated its stance from last month’s hearing that the shutdown issue remains in Boasberg’s lap. “It is possible that in the EIS process the Corps would find new information,” the document stated, referring to the environmental impact statement, “but to date the Corps is not aware of information that would cause it to evaluate the injunction factors differently than in its previous filing.” Earthjustice attorney Jan Hasselman, who represents Standing Rock, reacted by citing Biden’s discussion with world leaders on addressing climate change and the president’s promise to be more sensitive to concerns by Indigenous leaders and tribal governments. “Given all this, it’s baffling that when it comes to the Dakota Access pipeline, Biden’s Army Corps is standing in the way of justice for Standing Rock by opposing a court order to shut down this infrastructure while environmental and safety consequences are fully evaluated,” Hasselman said.”

[AP, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3eR2ey3

DAPL’s environmental review could be finished March 2022, according to the U.S. Army Corps: “The Army Corps of Engineers gave their status report ordered by Judge James Boasberg, saying the environmental review should be finished by March of next year. However, the Corps added no new information has been found that would lead to shutting the pipeline down during the review. In more filings Monday afternoon, tribes in opposition to the pipeline made it clear through court documents they don’t support the state intervening in the Dakota Access Pipeline case. Although the Dakota Access Pipeline has been transporting oil for about four years, it’s clear the pipeline’s operation is still the subject of debate. Judge James Boaseberg could soon decide whether to halt the pipeline’s operation, but there’s also potential for the case to end up in a higher court. Energy Transfer, the owner and operator of the Dakota Access Pipeline, made a request for the U.S. Supreme Court to get involved. They want the Supreme Court to review lower court decisions regarding the potential shut down of the pipeline while the environmental review is ongoing and a ruling that found the pipeline is operating without a key permit due to a pending environmental review. The DAPL debate has been ongoing for years and bringing it to the highest court in the nation could finally offer a final answer on whether the pipeline should be allowed to operate. Energy Transfer won’t comment on legal matters, but said they’re “taking the proper steps to move through the legal process.” However, there’s lots of people involved other than just the company that built the pipeline.”

[KFYR Bismarck, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3vIBd74

Biden admin holds firm on Trump-era Dakota Access defense: “The Biden administration says it will leave the decision to temporarily stop the flow of crude oil through the Dakota Access pipeline up to the "sound discretion" of a federal court. In a filing last night, the Army Corps of Engineers told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that it plans to complete a court-ordered environmental impact statement (EIS) evaluating the risk of spills from the 1,172-mile pipeline in March 2022. In the meantime, it is allowing the pipeline to keep carrying oil. The position is in keeping with that of the Trump administration. "The Corps expects to use that timeframe to fulfill its commitment to undertaking an open, transparent, and public EIS process which rigorously explores and objectively evaluates reasonable alternatives," the agency wrote in an update to the court. The Army Corps' update appears to show the agency's timeline has slipped slightly last month, ClearView Energy Partners LLC said in a note to clients yesterday. The agency previously said it would issue a record of decision (ROD) in March 2022. It can take an agency 30 days or longer to issue an EIS after an ROD. The Army Corps filing follows a decision last year by Judge James Boasberg to shut down Dakota Access, which is currently in operation, after he found that a key permit for the project violated the National Environmental Policy Act. A panel of judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit then overturned Boasberg's shutdown order, but it affirmed his NEPA finding earlier this year. Dakota Access opponents had hoped that the Army Corps, which is now under the Biden administration's leadership, would take up the D.C. Circuit's invitation to shut down the pipeline pending completion of the EIS.”

[E&E News, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3uigiqR

Environmental groups sue Army Corps of Engineers over pipeline permitting: “A coalition of five environmental groups on Monday sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, saying the corps did not properly analyze environmental impacts when issuing a broad pipeline permit. The plaintiffs, which include the Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, Waterkeeper Alliance and Montana Environmental Information Center, filed the lawsuit in federal court in Montana. The permit at issue, Permit 12, is a so-called nationwide permit that streamlines the pipeline permitting process. The corps estimates its 2021 version will be used more than 40,000 times over the next five years. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs argue that although national permits are intended for activities with negligible environmental impacts, the projected uses of Permit 12 will affect more than 3,000 acres of U.S. waters and threaten endangered species. It would also allow major pipelines to begin construction under the nationwide permitting process instead of undergoing stricter regulatory scrutiny. The lawsuit further argues that the permit violates the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. While the Biden administration has called for a review of nationwide permits, it has also allowed the 2021 version of Permit 12, reissued in the final days of the Trump administration, to take effect, according to the lawsuit.”

[The Hill, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3tf7qRz

Lawsuit targets Army Corps permitting program: “Environmental groups today sued the Army Corps of Engineers over its streamlined permitting program for authorizing pipelines to cross through rivers, streams and wetlands. The groups, led by the Center for Biological Diversity, say the newly reauthorized Nationwide Permit 12 (NWP 12) program greenlighting dredge and fill activities in federal waterways to construct new oil and gas pipelines violates federal endangered species and water protections. The permitting program is meant to speed up the permitting process for projects that are deemed to have minimal environmental impact, but the groups challenging the program say it should not be applied to major pipeline construction. "NWP 12 permits pipeline projects to use the NWP numerous times along a pipeline or utility route — even if there are high concentrations of water crossings in specific areas — with no mechanism to ensure impacts would be minimal," the challengers wrote. Pipeline projects are able to get approval under the program because the Army Corps considers each water crossing as a separate use for NWP 12, said Jared Margolis, a senior attorney at CBD. "There [can be] 10 or more crossings within a mile or two, and they are testing those as if they are completely unconnected," he said. The environmental groups noted in their lawsuit that there was "no limit" for the number of times a single project could use the permitting program or the total number of acres of federal waters a pipeline could affect. In their complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana today, the challengers warned the program violates the Endangered Species Act as well as the Clean Water Act and the National Environmental Policy Act. They argue that the Army Corps did not do enough to consider direct, indirect and cumulative environmental effects of the program.”

[E&E News, 5/3/21] https://bit.ly/3uhrjJ2

Arizona Republicans Make Climate Fears Their Latest Anti-Immigrant Tactic: “When Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich accused the Biden administration of failing to protect the environment in a recent lawsuit, it seemed like an unusual claim from a Republican better known for distorting climate science in legal briefs defending oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. That is, until you read what Brnovich considers the source of pollution: immigrants. In a lawsuit filed April 12, Brnovich seeks to reinstate President Donald Trump’s immigration policies, on the argument that Biden has failed to carry out mandatory environmental reviews on how more immigration could increase climate-changing pollution. “Migrants (like everyone else) need housing, infrastructure, hospitals, and schools. They drive cars, purchase goods, and use public parks and other facilities,” the suit reads. “Their actions also directly result in the release of pollutants, carbon dioxide, and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, which directly affects air quality.” Using pro-environment arguments to defend anti-immigration views dates back decades, to a time when the environmental movement harbored a powerful faction of Malthusians who believed the preservation of nature merited harsh, even violent, restrictions on immigration and childbearing. That faction faded to the fringes over the years as the political right moved to championing both climate denial and hardened borders, and environmentalists marginalized any openly racist elements in their camp.”

[Mother Jones, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/2RlqOz6

David Bernhardt returns to law and lobbying firm: “Former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt is returning to the law and lobbying firm where he used to work. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck said today that Bernhardt is now working there part time as a senior counsel. "David's counsel, expertise and perspective will complement our teams and add immediate value to our clients," BHFS spokesperson Lara Day told E&E News. "He is the only person in the 172-year history of the Department of the Interior to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as the solicitor, which is the chief legal officer; the deputy secretary; and the secretary," she said. "In addition to his experience leading this Cabinet department," Day said, "he has decades of experience working on some of the most complex administrative and regulatory issues associated with energy and natural resources." While Bernhardt's work will touch on many of the high-level issues he oversaw at Interior, he does not plan to lobby the department, Day said. This is Bernhardt's third stint at BHFS, which is headquartered in Denver, in his home state of Colorado. He previously worked there from 1998 until 2001, when he left for an Interior stint under former President George W. Bush. When Bush left office, Bernhardt returned to the firm as a lobbyist and partner, and stayed until going back to Interior in 2017 under former President Trump. His legal and lobbying clients the last time he worked at BHFS included Halliburton Co., Cadiz Inc., the National Ocean Industries Association, the Westlands Water District, Sempra Energy and Rosemont Copper. As a former high-ranking government official, Bernhardt is subject to certain restrictions on lobbying regarding some matters he worked on. He would have been subject to stricter rules, including a prohibition on lobbying anyone at Interior for five years, under an ethics pledge Trump appointees had to sign. But Trump repealed that pledge hours before leaving office.”

[E&E News, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3eQwTeV

Sullivan talks tough on jobs, China: “In his first address to the Alaska State Legislature in two years, Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, described a guarded relationship with the new presidential administration that he said has taken an aggressive stance toward Alaska workers and families. But, while cautious, Sullivan said he saw areas where he could work with the Biden administration. “I’m calling for a cease-fire in the Biden administration’s war on Alaska,” Sullivan said, standing behind a lectern encased in plexiglass at the Alaska State Capitol. Sullivan spoke to a joint session of the Legislature, the first since the beginning of the pandemic. Gov. Mike Dunleavy gave his State of the State address virtually in late January and Sen. Lisa Murkowksi, R-Alaska, met with lawmakers but did not address the body as a whole. Alaska’s way of life is under attack by the Biden administration, Sullivan said, asserting that the administration’s environmental policies would cost hundreds of jobs in Alaska, particularly in the energy sector. But state resources, he said, could help make the U.S. more independent in its supply chains, which have become too dependent on foreign countries, particularly China. Throughout his speech, Sullivan warned that Biden’s environmental agenda would force jobs abroad, particularly to China, which is expanding politically and militarily. Sullivan asserted that China has some of the worst environmental policies in the world, and criticized the country’s labor practices, particularly in regard to Uyghur Muslims in the Xinjiang region. But the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted America’s dependence of foreign countries for many resources, Sullivan said in a news conference with reporters following his speech. That caused an awakening among many of his colleagues in Washington, he said, asserting that there was increased bipartisan interest in the security of U.S. supply chains.”

[Peninsula Clarion, 5/4/21] https://bit.ly/3ukoh71

Justin McCarthy

He/Him/His

Director, NEPA Campaign

The Partnership Project
C: 540-312-3797

E: jmccarthy@partnershipproject.org

protectnepa.org

The Partnership Project, a registered 501 (c) (3) non-profit, is a collaborative effort of over 20 of the country’s most influential advocacy organizations, including Sierra Club, Earthjustice, League of Conservation Voters, and Natural Resources Defense Council.