Activists claim Dakota Access Pipeline's permit invalid in Iowa, request halt of oil shipments

William Petroski | The Des Moines Register

Show Caption Hide Caption Bakken Pipeline pipe stockpile near Newton Look at some numbers associated with the Bakken Pipeline, (Dakota Access Crude Pipeline)

Two environmental groups are asking Iowa utility regulators to halt the flow of oil on the Dakota Access Pipeline in response to a federal judge's ruling that some parts of an environmental review in North Dakota must be reconsidered.

But a spokeswoman for Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners, which developed the pipeline, said the record supports the fact that environmental issues in question were properly evaluated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. She suggested pipeline operations can continue as the legal process unfolds.

The ruling Wednesday by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C., prompted the Sierra Club of Iowa and the Science and Environmental Health Network to file a motion Thursday that requests the Iowa Utilities Board to revoke the state of Iowa's approval of the $3.8 billion pipeline project.

More: Iowa regulator recuses himself from Dakota Access Pipeline case

The two groups contend that Boasberg's ruling invalidates the Iowa permit, which was conditioned on Dakota Access obtaining all necessary state and federal authorizations for the pipeline.

"Since the permit issued by the Board is now void, it must be revoked. Furthermore, since the permit is void and must be revoked, Dakota Access must be ordered to immediately cease transporting oil through the pipeline," the motion states.

The motion was signed by Wallace Taylor of Cedar Rapids, a lawyer for the Sierra Club, and Carolyn Raffensperger of Ames, executive director of the Science and Environmental Health Network.

“The house of cards built by Dakota Access has come tumbling down," Raffensperger said in a prepared statement. "The Iowa Utilities Board granted a permit to Dakota Access on the condition that it obtain all of the necessary permits, chief among them the permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. There is no federal permit. The IUB must shut this pipeline down."

Taylor said the federal court decision shows in "stark detail" why the Iowa Utilities Board should have granted Sierra Club's previous request for a more extensive environmental review of the pipeline's impacts in Iowa. "The Board failed in its duty to protect Iowa's environment," he said.

Boasberg's 91-page ruling found the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers complied with some, but not all, requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act before it issued a permit allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to run under the Missouri River in North Dakota.

The pipeline began transporting crude oil on June 1 from North Dakota's Bakken oil patch to a distribution hub at Patoka, Ill. It crosses diagonally through 18 Iowa counties and has capacity to ship about 520,000 barrels of oil daily.

The judge's findings, which responded to complaints by four Sioux tribes in North Dakota and South Dakota, concluded the Corps did not adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, environmental justice, "or the degree to which the pipeline's effects are likely to be highly controversial."

However, Boasberg did not order Dakota Access to immediately stop transporting oil, saying that was a separate question that he would consider after further legal arguments. He has scheduled a status conference for next week.

Lisa Dillinger, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer Partners, said Thursday that Boasberg found that the Corps substantially complied with the federal environmental law, although two "discrete" issues were remanded to the Corps for further explanation and review.

"It is important to note that while Judge Boasberg asked the Corps to provide greater substantiation for its conclusions, the Court did not find the prior determinations to be erroneous," Dillinger said in an email. "Per the Court’s order, there will be further briefing on whether the Corps’s determinations should continue or be vacated while the Corps reconsiders the issues on remand."

Dillinger added that Dakota Access believes the record supports the fact that the Corps properly evaluated both issues, and that the record will enable the Corps to substantiate and reaffirm its prior determinations.

Don Tormey, a spokesman for the Iowa Utilities Board, said the board cannot comment on motions pending before the board, other than to note that the board will act on the motion at some point after Dakota Access and the other parties have had an opportunity to respond.