Skip to main content

Enbridge Inc.’s pipeline to carry tar sands oil between Oklahoma and Illinois can proceed, a federal judge ruled, as companies expand their capacity to move petroleum in the U.S.

DANIEL ACKER/BLOOMBERG

Enbridge Inc.'s pipeline to carry tar sands oil between Oklahoma and Illinois can proceed, a federal judge ruled, as companies expand their capacity to move petroleum in the U.S.

"Because a private company is constructing the 589-mile pipeline on mostly privately owned land that is entirely within the territorial borders of the United States, no federal statute authorizes the federal government to oversee or regulate the construction project," U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in Washington said today in a written ruling.

The judge rejected arguments by the Sierra Club and the National Wildlife Federation that the failure to conduct an environmental impact review of the pipeline violated the National Environmental Protection Act.

Story continues below advertisement

"Plaintiffs are wrong to insist that any federal agency had an obligation under NEPA or any other statute to conduct an environmental review" of the pipeline's impact, Jackson wrote.

The environmental groups said in their complaint that the pipeline would have significant impacts, requiring a cleared right of way "through thousands of water bodies, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other sensitive areas," and "a vast network of pump stations, electric transmission lines, and access roads."

The pipeline will carry crude oil from Pontiac, Illinois, to Cushing, Oklahoma, according to court papers. Enbridge and TransCanada Corp., both Calgary-based, and Kinder Morgan Inc., based in Houston, are expanding capacity to move growing volumes of oil from oil sands and shale.

The case is Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1:13-cv-01239, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).

Report an error
Tickers mentioned in this story
Unchecking box will stop auto data updates
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter