About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (February 1, 2021)

handle is hein.crs/govebrv0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Congressional ______ a Research Service informrng the egisI tive debate since 1914___________________ Court Rules Dakota Access Pipeline Needs Further Environmental Review Updated February 1, 2021 UPDATE: On January 26 2021, the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the district court's decision requiring the Army Corps of Engineers to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prior to issuance of an easement across federal land for the Dakota Access Pipeline, but reversed the district court's injunction prohibiting the operation of the Pipeline and directing that it be emptied of oil. The original Sidebar discussing the district court case is below. The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), a crude oil pipeline developed by Energy Transfer Partners, carries crude oil from the Bakken fields in northwest North Dakota to southern Illinois. As discussed in this Legal Sidebar, the DAPL has been the subject of extensive debate and media attention, as well as prolonged litigation. Much of the attention on the DAPL centers on the portion of the pipeline route that is near or runs under Lake Oahe in North Dakota, a lake that has particular significance to Native Americans in the region. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (D.C. District Court) recently held that this controversial portion of the route needs further environmental review. Background on DAPL Environmental Review Because the pipeline crosses waters subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act and land controlled by the federal government, federal law required the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to issue several authorizations for the project, including authorization for the stretch of pipeline under Lake Oahe. The Corps' federal actions triggered the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of a proposed action before making a decision about that action. Under NEPA, agencies considering actions not eligible for categorical exclusions must prepare Environmental Assessments (EAs). If the federal action will significantly affect the quality of the human environment, agencies must prepare an EIS. (Sometimes the agency skips the EA and moves directly to prepare the EIS.) Despite a previous determination that the Corps should prepare an EIS to assess the environmental impacts of the Corps action in depth, a 2017 Presidential Memorandum encouraged the Corps to consider a previously published EA-one that concluded with a Finding of No Significant Impact- sufficient to satisfy NEPA. Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10457 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most