All Eyes on MPCA as Judge Ignores Line 3 Threat to Clean Water

St. Paul, MN -- Today, ignoring evidence about the serious threat Enbridge’s Line 3 tar sands pipeline would pose to Minnesota’s clean water, an administrative law judge issued a determination downplaying the impact of the pipeline on waterways along its route. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Commissioner Laura Bishop is expected to make a decision on a water crossing permit for the pipeline by November 14. 

MPCA rejected the permit for the controversial tar sands pipeline last fall in order to conduct further review. If built, Line 3 would cross more than 200 bodies of water, including lakes, wetlands, and rivers, endangering freshwater resources and the pristine lake country of northern Minnesota where Native Americans harvest wild rice and hold treaty rights. The judge’s analysis did not even consider the impact of possible oil spills on wild rice.

“If the judge had followed the science, there would have been only one logical conclusion: that Line 3 would pose a permanent and unacceptable risk to Minnesota’s clean water,” said Sierra Club North Star Chapter Director Margaret Levin. “The evidence is clear: Line 3 would be a disaster for our state. The MPCA must do the right thing and reject its water crossing permit once and for all.” 

"What we're seeing here is the result of narrow thinking," said Andy Pearson, Midwest Tar Sands Coordinator with MN350. "Today's report notes that many of the larger concerns that grassroots groups and Native nations brought to the table were excluded from the scope of this hearing by MPCA Commissioner Laura Bishop. These critical questions -- about climate, treaty rights, and the need for Line 3 -- were not heard in this process and are not reflected in the judge's report. Commissioner Bishop can't sidestep these questions, so now all eyes turn to her as she makes her final decision on Line 3's water permits. The law and science is clear that these permits must be denied."

"The Administrative Law Judge had his hands tied by the MPCA before the hearing even started," said Winona LaDuke, co-founder and Executive Director of Honor the Earth. "Even though the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is the state agency charged by law to protect Minnesota from oil spills, the agency chose to prohibit the ALJ from considering the potential impacts of oil spills on our waters and resources including wild rice.  Despite repeated requests, the MPCA has never evaluated the impacts of a Line 3 oil spill  and has never evaluated Enbridge's oil spill response plan. The system is still not working."

"Friends of the Headwaters is disappointed that the judge simply rejected the evidence that river, stream, and wetland crossings for a pipeline of this size can cause permanent damage to water bodies that extends well beyond the narrow boundaries of the pipeline trench itself," said Friends of the Headwaters attorney Scott Strand. "The biggest issues in this case remain whether the MPCA can abdicate its clean water and wetland protection responsibility to the Public Utilities Commission, whether the MPCA can ignore the potential impacts of a major oil spill, and whether the MPCA can pretend that climate change is not happening when it assesses projects like this.  Those are legal questions that are the MPCA’s, and eventually the courts’ responsibility to decide."