Line 3 Environmental Review Deemed Adequate in Spite of Failure to Address Environmental, Tribal Concerns

St. Paul, MN -- Today, an Administrative Law Judge issued a recommendation to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that the Minnesota Department of Commerce (DoC)’s final environmental impact statement (FEIS) on Enbridge’s proposed Line 3 tar sands pipeline is adequate, in spite of significant flaws in the report. The FEIS included numerous calculation errors, used Enbridge’s own data without any independent verification, and failed to adequately explore alternatives to this pipeline expansion or any no-build scenario.

Following the release of this analysis and in spite of the FEIS, the DoC submitted testimony to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) concluding that that there is no need for Line 3 and that the risks outweigh any limited benefits, suggesting no-build alternatives that aren’t covered in the FEIS analysis, and thus confirming that the project would be even worse for Minnesota than their report showed.

In response, Margaret Levin, State Director for the Sierra Club North Star Chapter, issued the following statement:

“The people of Minnesota deserve a full accounting of the risks of this project, not a half-baked, incomplete review of a project that would dramatically increase the amount of toxic tar sands running through our state. This analysis does not address citizens’ concerns about Line 3, nor does it adequately assess alternatives.

“We urge the PUC to listen to the thousands of Minnesotans who have spoken out against this project, as well as the Department of Commerce’s own recommendation, and recognize that this project is not in Minnesota’s best interest.”