Page 5 - NorthAmOil Week 39

NorthAmOil COMMENTARY NorthAmOil
original pipeline, which has been operating at around half of its original capacity of 760,000 bpd. Enbridge has previously said that it expects the Canadian portion of the replacement line to enter service by the end of this year. Permitting issues in Minnesota have already pushed back completion of the US portion of the pipeline to at least the second half of 2020, and while Enbridge has sought to downplay the impact of the latest permit decision, it still comes as another blow.
The permit, which covered the project’s 401 certification, was denied by the Minnesota Pol- lution Control Agency (MPCA). Such permits are awarded by a state’s regulators if the project’s impact on water falls within the state’s stand- ards. Federal agencies cannot issue a federal permit without the state first approving the 401 certification.
The MPCA said it needed more informa- tion in three areas – “oil spill response model- ling in the Lake Superior watershed, a pre- and post-construction monitoring plan for aquatic resources and a revised proposal for mitigating more than 400 acres [1.62 sq km] of forested wet- lands that will be impacted during construction”.
The agency added that the denial “without prejudice” would not prevent Enbridge from reapplying for the permit with the additional necessary information being supplied.
An Enbridge spokeswoman, Juli Kellner, said the company had anticipated the denial, adding that she expected it to have minimal impact on the timeline for hiring and obtaining additional permits for the Line 3 replacement.
It is rare for the MPCA to deny a 401 certifica- tion. But local media cited MPCA spokesperson Darin Broton as saying previously that this was not a “true denial”, but rather a request for more information, which requires a resubmission of the permit application.
The MPCA’s decision came days before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) is due to reconsider the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Line 3 replacement pro- ject on October 1. In June, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the environmental review for the project was “inadequate” because it did
not consider the effects of an oil spill in Lake Superior’s watershed. The PUC will now con- sider what additional hearings may be required in order to revise the EIS. Once this process is completed, the PUC must take public comments on the findings before finalising the revised EIS. Some permits would then have to be reissued by the PUC and other agencies.
Progress
Enbridge has had some positive news over the past week as well. On September 24, the com- pany said it had received a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers to install 54 steel supports along its Line 5 pipeline in Michigan’s Straits of Mackinac. This comes after erosion cre- ated a gap – or span – between the pipeline and the bottom of the lake that exceeded the maxi- mum of 75 feet (23 metres) allowed by the State of Michigan.
The state has launched a lawsuit against Enbridge in a bid to have the underwater por- tion of Line 5 shut down and decommissioned, having also rejected the company’s suggestion that it build a tunnel under the Straits to house the pipeline. However, Enbridge maintains its support for the tunnel proposal.
“Enbridge believes that the tunnel project is the best long-term solution for Line 5 moving forward. Placing the pipeline inside a tunnel, 100 feet [30.5 metres] below the lakebed, would eliminate any span issues, and the need for sup- ports,” an Enbridge spokesperson, Ryan Duffy, told Reuters last week.
Enbridge said in August that it intended to apply for permits for the tunnel project early next year. The Michigan Attorney General’s office has not yet commented publicly on the latest devel- opment with Line 5.
The company’s halting progress illustrates the complexity of the permitting process for pipe- lines – especially when they cross international and state borders. The company continues to push ahead with its plans, despite a few setbacks. However, some uncertainty still remains over its major projects, not helped by the dispute over contracting terms on its Mainline.™
The company’s halting progress illustrates the complexity of the permitting process for pipelines.
Week 39 01•October•2019 w w w . N E W S B A S E . c o m
P5