Appeals court: Line 3 study falls short

Citing a failure to address the potential effects of an oil spill in the Lake Superior watershed, the Minnesota Court of Appeals on Monday reversed a state decision on the adequacy of the final environmental impact statement on a new Line 3 oil pipeline. The court ruled that the Public Utilities Commission erred in accepting the final environmental study for the Enbridge Energy line that cuts across the northeast corner of Carlton County on its way to terminals in Superior.

The statement will now need to go back to the PUC. Enbridge could also appeal the June 3 decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Environmental groups and Native American bands appealed the 2018 PUC decision to accept the final report. The appeals court said that despite public comment and legitimate environmental concern from the groups, the final impact statement included no scenarios about an oil spill in the Lake Superior watershed. In the ruling, the court said there were seven such spill impact studies in the report but none of them included the final watershed for the line. The court said the reasoning was not explained, and that at one point a representative for Enbridge "asserted that a spill at a potential modeling site within the watershed would be unlikely to reach Lake Superior."

The new Line 3 would replace one that has been in use for decades and currently clips the northeast corner of Carlton County. The new line route was originally shifted to avoid reservation lands, including Fond du Lac, showing the line entering the county near Cromwell. Enbridge and Fond du Lac agreed last year to keep the current route the bisects reservation lands that straddle the Carlton and St. Louis county line.

The state Department of Commerce and other environmental groups have their own formal objections to the PUC approval that need to be processed as well. Some of those objections deal with the stated need for the new line in light of changing energy markets.

The EIS is not a green light for the project. Enbridge would need several state and federal permits approved before it could start erecting new pipe. The company had planned to begin work by 2020.

Enbridge needs a "certificate of need and a pipeline routing permit" from the PUC to continue the process toward the construction of 337 miles of new 36-inch diameter pipeline to replace 282 miles of the existing 34-inch line. If a new Line 3 pipeline is installed, tested, and operational, the existing Line 3 pipeline would be deactivated.

Enbridge issued a statement later on Monday:

"We are disappointed with the court's decision given that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission unanimously found the Line 3 Replacement Project's 13,500-page FEIS adequate, based on the most extensive environmental study of a pipeline project in state history," a press release stated. "We are in the process of a detailed analysis of the court's decision and will consult with the MPUC and other state agencies about next steps."