Enbridge said it will continue seeking approval of its proposed route for the Line 3 replacement through Minnesota despite an administrative law judge’s Apr. 23 recommendation that it use the existing crude-oil pipeline corridor through the state.
In a nonbinding decision, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) Administrative Law Judge Ann C. O’Reilly upheld the need for Line 3 replacement and expansion but said the route through Minnesota should not change.
The 1,097-mile Line 3 carries 390,000 b/d of light crude oil from Edmonton, Alta., to Superior, Wisc., about half the original capacity. Replacement projects in Canada and the US would increase system capacity to an average 760,000 b/d of light and heavy crude and help relieve a transportation bottleneck in Alberta and Saskatchewan.
The existing Line 3 Minnesota segment is 282 miles of 34-in. pipe. Enbridge proposes to lay 36-in. pipe along the existing route between the North Dakota border and Clearbrook, Minn., then deviate to the south and increase the Minnesota mileage to 340 miles.
O’Reilly based part of her objection to the deviation on Enbridge’s plan to leave idle pipelines in place along the original route.
Responding to her decision, Enbridge said concern for sovereignty of tribal communities transited by the original route was among several reasons for its preference for the planned deviation.
“Further, the final environmental impact statement approved by the MPUC demonstrates that, on balance, our preferred route is least impactful on tribal/cultural resources, proximity to drinking water, and high-consequence population areas,” it said.
The company said it “won’t speculate on any potential implications of alternate routes. We will continue to seek approval for our preferred route.”
