Home » News » JOHANNS: PIPELINE ANALYSIS INCOMPLETE
News
JOHANNS: PIPELINE ANALYSIS INCOMPLETE
News Articles | Senator Mike Johanns | October 14, 2010
WASHINGTON –Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) today sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlining significant concerns regarding the route selection and permitting process related to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.
“I understand the importance of bringing energy to the United States, particularly from friendly countries, but I also know that we must protect the Ogallala Aquifer,” said Johanns. “The Department of State must assure us that its examination of alternative routes was thorough and that consideration was given to the unique soil of the Sandhills compared to the clay soil along potential alternative routes. Until these concerns are addressed, I cannot support moving forward with this project.”
BACKGROUND
Keystone Pipeline:
· The Keystone XL Pipeline proposed by TransCanada Corporation would deliver oil from its source in Canada through Nebraska to refineries in Oklahoma and Texas.
o The proposed route crosses through Nebraska’s Sandhills and Ogallala Aquifer.
· U.S. law assigns the Department of State with the responsibility of ensuring the impacts and alternatives to this proposed pipeline have been thoroughly examined and assessed.
Letter Overview:
* The letter asks the Department of State to respond to several questions related to the alternative route discussions and the permitting process undertaken by the Department of State and explained in the DEIS. 1. The alternative route discussion in the DEIS appears to consider only routes that originate at or near Morgan, Montana. The letter asks why the document contains no substantial discussion of a route that would run parallel to the existing Keystone pipeline route from Steele City, Nebraska, north to the U.S. border in Cavalier County, North Dakota.To your knowledge, has the Department of State or any other federal agency reviewed this route as an additional alternative to those considered in the DEIS? If the Department of State has not, I ask that such an alternative route be explored.
2. Regarding border crossings other than at or near Morgan, Montana:
Has the Department of State or any other federal agency involved in the permit process considered alternative routes that would include border crossings other than at or near Morgan, Montana? If the Department of State has not, I ask that the scope of the DEIS be broadened to include alternate border crossings.
3. Regarding the relationship between Canadian regulatory requirements and the Keystone XL permitting process:
What impact, if any, does the applicant’s acquisition of required permits in Canada have on the consideration of border crossings other than at or near Morgan, Montana?
4. Regarding soil composition of alternative routes examined in the DEIS:
Has the Department of State or any other federal agency considered or otherwise explored whether there is environmental benefit to a route that avoids the Sandhills region? If so, I would ask that you share that analysis with me. If neither you nor another federal agency involved in the permitting process has conducted such an analysis, I would ask that you broaden the scope of the DEIS to include such an analysis.
Tagged with: keystone xl, nebraska, hillary clinton, ogallala aquifer, mike johanns, sandhills
