Washington, D.C. \u2013 Today, Oregon\u2019s U.S. Senator Jeff Merkley and Representative Ra\u00fal Grijalva (D-AZ-07) led colleagues in a bicameral letter to the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or Corps) expressing their concerns with the agency\u2019s climate analysis in the court-ordered Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). The lawmakers\u2019 letter calls to light problems with insufficient climate analysis and lack of transparency regarding environmental impacts of the DAPL, specifically spotlighting how the Corps\u2019 policies limit the ability of the environmental justice community of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to protect itself in the event of an oil spill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cThe Corps’ climate analysis in the DEIS systematically underestimates the climate impacts of DAPL,\u201d the lawmakers write. <\/strong>\u201cIt is especially troubling that the Corps ignores the pipeline’s climate impacts, including downstream emissions, because the Corps claims the oil would be transported through other means or extracted from a different region if the pipeline were shut down. Simply assuming away the no-action alternative by saying limiting fossil fuel supply would not affect emissions ignores a robust and growing body of literature, and it is not acceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
As it stands currently, the DEIS relies on outdated climate projections, does not report climate impacts beyond 2050, and uses flawed greenhouse gas and social cost of carbon calculations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cIn the Final EIS, the Corps should account for both upstream and downstream emissions by evaluating climate impacts from the project, consider the impacts of climate change on DAPL, quantify the emissions from the project, and recalculate the social cost of carbon and GHG estimates to include the project’s complete lifecycle emissions,\u201d the lawmakers urge.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Aside from the climate impacts the DEIS fails to account for, the lawmakers expressed concern about the long history of limited transparency the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has experienced from the Corps and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHSMA). The Corps and PHMSA are redacting documents that underpin the DEIS.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cIt is impossible for the Tribe and the broader public to draft substantive comments on the DEIS when the supporting justification remains undisclosed. If the public is to provide substantive comment on a DEIS, the Corps must find a way to provide access to the underlying information,\u201d the lawmakers write.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
The Tribe is still waiting to receive unredacted versions of documents that detail potential pipeline spills and provide information essential to the creation of emergency plans needed to prepare an adequate spill response plan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cAs federal agencies, you have a trust responsibility to not only consult with Tribes but to protect and support Tribal lands, assets, and resources \u2013 a responsibility enshrined in countless treaties. Tribal consultation is paramount in recognizing Tribal sovereignty and self-determination,\u201d the letter continues.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Senator Merkley has been a long time voice<\/a> and advocate sounding the alarm on the justice and environmental harms<\/a> the Dakota Access pipeline creates. Last month, Merkley joined advocates and leaders of the Standing rock and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribes<\/a> <\/em>to call on the Biden Administration to shut this pipeline down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n“In our Lakota culture, water is considered our first medicine. Protecting our water is a cultural imperative. That is why we need the information being hidden from us by the Corps of Engineers – in order to protect our water, today, and for future generations,\u201d said Doug Crow Ghost, Director, Standing Rock Department of Water Resources.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Joining Merkley and Grijalva on this letter are U.S. Senators Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and 26 other House members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This letter is endorsed by NRDC, Sierra Club, League of Conservation Voters, Center for Biological Diversity, Food and Water Watch, Earthjustice, Oil Change International, Women’s Earth & Climate Action Network, and Elected Officials to Protect America.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Full text of the letter can be found here<\/a> and follows below:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dear Assistant Secretary Connor,<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We write to express our concerns with the climate analysis in the Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps) court-ordered Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) and how Corps’ policies limit the ability of the environmental justice community of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to protect itself in the event of an oil spill. Thank you for the extended timeframe for public comment to allow the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other stakeholders more time to meaningfully engage. We believe that a thorough Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is essential to ensuring projects are well-designed and protect the environment. We urge you to ensure that the Final EIS thoroughly examines the climate impacts of DAPL and to work with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and any other relevant agencies to provide the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other stakeholders with the information they need to meaningfully participate in the public comment and Tribal consultation process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Insufficient Climate Analysis<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Corps’ climate analysis in the DEIS systematically underestimates the climate impacts of DAPL. The DEIS relies on outdated climate projections, fails to report impacts beyond 2050, uses flawed greenhouse gas (GHG) and social cost of carbon calculations, and limits relevance to such a narrow scope to make the assessment meaningless.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is especially troubling that the Corps ignores the pipeline’s climate impacts, including downstream emissions, because the Corps claims the oil would be transported through other means or extracted from a different region if the pipeline were shut down. Simply assuming away the no-action alternative by saying limiting fossil fuel supply would not affect emissions ignores a robust and growing body of literature[2]<\/a>, and it is not acceptable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The environmental analyses required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) are valuable tools that must not be shortchanged or neglected. Unfortunately, we believe this DEIS does just that. In the Final EIS, the Corps should account for both upstream and downstream emissions by evaluating climate impacts from the project, consider the impacts of climate change on DAPL, quantify the emissions from the project, and recalculate the social cost of carbon and GHG estimates to include the project’s complete lifecycle emissions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Transparency<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has repeatedly expressed concerns with the Corps’ and PHMSA\u2019s lack of transparency. The Tribe has still not received unredacted versions of documents relating to potential pipeline spills and emergency planning that it needs to craft an adequate spill response plan. Now, PHMSA and the Corps are redacting documents that underpin the DEIS.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The DEIS justifies its findings by citing these redacted materials in the spill model report and facility and geographic response plans, which remain undisclosed. It is impossible for the Tribe and the broader public to draft substantive comments on the DEIS when the supporting justification remains undisclosed. If the public is to provide substantive comment on a DEIS, the Corps must find a way to provide access to the underlying information. With respect to the DAPL DEIS, the Corps should reconsider the redactions in Appendices F, the Facility and Geographic Response Plans, and G, the Optimization Modeling Reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Conclusion<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
As federal agencies, you have a trust responsibility to not only consult with Tribes but to protect and support Tribal lands, assets, and resources \u2013 a responsibility enshrined in countless treaties. Tribal consultation is paramount in recognizing Tribal sovereignty and self-determination. Per the White House’s Uniform Standards for Tribal Consultation, this process is “a two-way, Nation-to-Nation exchange of information and dialogue between official representatives of the United States and of Tribal Nations regarding Federal policies that have Tribal implications.” Therefore, an open exchange of information and communication is central to ensuring meaningful consultation \u2013 and continuing to withhold documents that are the basis of the DEIS, and that the Tribe needs to develop their own spill response plan, prevents achieving meaningful engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We ask that the Corps reevaluate the assumptions made in the DAPL DEIS to provide a thorough, quantitative analysis of climate impacts, consistent with the intent of NEPA, by considering the full scope of the climate impacts in the Final EIS for the DAPL project. Transparency and scientific integrity are essential to the NEPA process and vital to any community’s ability to meaningfully review and respond to an agency’s conclusions about a project’s environmental impacts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We look forward to your response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sincerely, <\/p>\n\n\n\n
###<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n[2]<\/a> https:\/\/www.rff.org\/publications\/reports\/partners-not-rivals-the-power-of-parallel-supply-side-and-demand-side-climate-policy\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n