Initial Environmental Statement Rejected by Standing Rock Sioux

STANDING ROCK – Three years after a federal court mandated the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) “to conduct a full environmental impact review” of the Dakota Access Pipeline, the preliminary Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was unveiled on September 8, 2023.

This very pipeline triggered the notable resistance at Standing Rock spanning from April 2016 to March 2017. During this period, a multitude of tribal members from various parts of Indian Country, along with environmental advocates, rallied in protest. The pipeline’s path is significant: it runs through the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s “unceded treaty lands,” lying just shy of a half mile from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation and diving below the Missouri River.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (SRST) Chairwoman, Janet Alkire, expressed her reservations about the draft EIS, suggesting it should be “invalidated” and urging the Corps to “start from scratch” for a new environmental evaluation. The Tribe’s apprehension mainly stems from the company the Corps engaged for the review, given its intimate associations with the American Petroleum industry. Alkire’s recommendation was clear: the Corps should partner with a company that doesn’t carry bias.

In a public statement, the SRST disclosed that the USACE entrusted Environmental Resources Management (ERM) with the creation of the EIS. Crucially, the SRST pointed out, “ERM is a member of the National Petroleum Institute, which submitted in favor of DAPL and against Standing Rock,” the SRST said in a statement. “The Tribe sees this as a clear conflict of interest.”

“Today, DAPL presents a clear and enduring threat to delicate ecosystems and Standing Rock’s primary source of freshwater,” the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe said in a press release on Sept. 8. “DAPL’s parent company, Energy Transfer, has an abysmal safety track record. It’s responsible for numerous spills and toxic chemical releases, and it has been cited and fined tens of millions of dollars for a host of callous public safety violations.”

During the events at Standing Rock, hundreds found themselves singled out and detained by local authorities for their opposition to the pipeline’s construction. This action by the local police was bolstered by backing from numerous law enforcement bodies from across the nation. North Dakota shouldered over $40 million in policing expenses amid these demonstrations. While Dakota Access Pipeline LLC covered some of these costs, North Dakota’s legislative body allocated funds for the remaining expenses.

On December 4, 2016, the USACE declared it would not permit the pipeline’s passage beneath Lake Oahe – an expanse of the Missouri River located upstream from the Standing Rock Indian Reservation. Instead, they committed to an EIS to explore potential alternative pathways.

However, the tide turned on January 20, 2017, with the advent of former President Donald Trump’s term. He promptly issued a “memorandum and an executive order” urging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to hasten their deliberations concerning the pipeline’s easement application. Consequently, USACE retracted their prior decision to commission a fresh environmental investigation for the pipeline section slated to pass beneath the Missouri River.

In the aftermath of the 2016 easement suspension, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe vocalized their gratitude on Dec. 4, 2016, noting, “The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and all of Indian Country will be forever grateful to the Obama Administration for this historic decision.”

By April 2017, the pipeline’s construction was finalized, and it commenced oil transportation the subsequent month. The SRST subsequently instigated legal action against DAPL. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit endorsed the tribe’s standpoint, asserting the need for an exhaustive environmental assessment of the pipeline segment set to traverse beneath Lake Oahe. The Supreme Court, in February 2022, corroborated the verdict of the inferior court, choosing not to entertain Dakota Access Pipeline’s appeal.

Yet, despite these legal developments, the pipeline remains operational. Subsequent endeavors by the company to amplify the pipeline’s activities encountered resistance, particularly from stakeholders along its route, who invoked a scrutiny of the firm’s safety record. Following the judgment of the Court of Appeals, a renewed draft EIS has been legally mandated.

In their commentary on the ongoing situation, the Tribe stressed that due to persistent deferments in the draft EIS, DAPL “continues to operate illegally without a valid federal easement to cross the river.”

“We’re furious that the Army Corps has addressed none of our major concerns during the review process,” said SRST Chairman Janet Alkire in a press release. “The pipeline is an imminent threat to the Missouri River, sensitive habitat and sacred burial sites along the riverbank. The oil company’s emergency response plans are inadequate, its safety track record is horrendous, and there’s been a stunning lack of transparency with Standing Rock throughout the environmental review process, including inaccurate characterizations of tribal consultation.”

Additionally, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe said that the draft EIS overlooks “virtually every major concern voiced by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe” and omits information on what it calls a “poor safety record.”

The USACE is now reviewing the situation and proposing changes that would enable the Dakota Access Pipeline to increase the amount of oil that is being transported via the pipeline.

On its website, https://standingrock.org/dapl-eis/, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe encourages the public to comment on the draft EIS for the Dakota Access Pipeline. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should begin the new EIS from scratch and shut down the pipeline while doing so, the Tribe is pleading with the people to demand.