For the first time, the Biden administration weighed in on a major cross-border legal dispute that could result in the closure of part of Enbridge’s Canada-U.S. oil pipeline, Line 5.
The opinion was received that Court summary Despite its nuances, it opposed the closure of the pipeline in order to maintain diplomatic relations with Canada.
At more than 1,000 kilometers long, Line 5 transports 540,000 barrels of oil and natural gas liquids daily across Wisconsin and Michigan to a refinery in Sarnia, Ontario.
The legal dispute at issue is one in which the U.S. government is not actually a party. It involves Calgary-based Enbridge Corp. and the Wisconsin-based Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, whose territory the pipeline runs through.
2023, United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. control Supports the Bad River Band and urges Enbridge to close part of the pipeline within three years and pay the band $5.2 million for land trespass after the easement expires. I ordered.
Enbridge and the band, who had asked for an immediate suspension, appealed the ruling.
The Canadian government argued in a brief last fall that closing the line would violate national regulations. 1977 Canada-U.S. Pipeline Agreement In this agreement, each country agreed not to impede the flow of each other’s hydrocarbons.
Wednesday’s filing from the U.S. Department of Justice cited Ottawa’s arguments and asked the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to send the decision back to the lower court.
Government brief seeks further compensation for bands
However, Wednesday’s brief upheld the financial penalty imposed on Enbridge by a lower court. In fact, it says payments to communities should be increased.
However, it asked the appeals court to set aside the part of the ruling that required the closure of several kilometers of the pipeline.
reason? According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the lower court failed to take into account the serious consequences, including the possibility of a costly dispute with Canada.
“The United States has a clear interest in honoring its treaty obligations with all sovereign powers,” the 70-page court brief released Wednesday said.
“The district court…failed to consider what it described as the “significant public policy impact” the closure order would have on the United States’ commercial and diplomatic relations with Canada and on Canada’s treaty obligations.”
![A panoramic view of the Imperial Oil refinery near Enbridge's Line 5 pipeline, which Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer ordered shut down in May 2021, in Sarnia, Ontario, Canada, on March 20, 2021. Photographed on March 20, 2021. Photographed through the fence. .](https://i.cbc.ca/1.7170166.1712797053!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpeg_gen/derivatives/original_780/canada-enbridge-pipeline.jpeg)
Another dispute underway in Michigan
Canada has criticized the Biden administration for years, especially given the fact that it is the same administration that already canceled Keystone XL, one of the Canada-U.S. pipeline projects, on its first day in office in 2021. , has been pressuring the United States to consider the pipeline dispute.
In its filing, the federal government cited Canada’s argument that closing the pipeline would have a devastating economic impact, especially in parts of central Canada. Supporters of Line 5 argue that the line is a critical supply line for refineries in Ontario and Quebec and is essential to jet fuel production for major airports on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border. ing.
The report notes that Canada has already invoked the 1977 Canada-U.S. Treaty, and that closure could result in dispute resolution, arbitration and significant penalties if the U.S. is found to be in breach of its treaty obligations. He said there is a possibility of a connection.
![A series of stairs with yellow guardrails ascends above a large gray pipeline.](https://i.cbc.ca/1.6789169.1695069703!/cpImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_780/enbridge-line-5-pump-station.jpg)
The appeal currently being considered is separate from another ongoing legal dispute between the states. michigan and enbridge Through the same pipeline route through the Great Lakes.
The condition refers to past leaks As evidence of the environmental threat posed by Line 5, they have fought to prevent the aging pipeline from crossing the vital waterway.
Meanwhile, the company wants to build a new tunnel in the Straits of Mackinac, connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron.
Band River chairman “disappointed”
Reactions to the U.S. government’s application in Wisconsin were understandably mixed.
Canadian officials briefed on the submission said the main assessment from government lawyers was that it was neutral to Canadian interests.
Bad River Chairman Robert Blanchard stated in a statement The tribes are grateful that the U.S. agreed that Enbridge was illegally operating on tribal lands, but noted that “the U.S. has not explicitly called for an immediate end to Enbridge’s ongoing trespasses.” I was disappointed in that.”
![This June 29, 2018 photo shows tanks at the Enbridge Energy Terminal in Superior, Wisconsin. For the second time in a year, the federal government is invoking a little-known 1977 energy agreement between Canada and the United States to protect the Line 5 pipeline. . This time it's Wisconsin, the point where Line 5 detours around the southwest shore of Lake Superior and enters Michigan.](https://i.cbc.ca/1.7170066.1712790580!/cpImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_780/us-cda-pipelines-20220829.jpg)
Whitney Gravel, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community, another Great Lakes Chippewa community along the pipeline route, said in a statement that the application leaves the community with “more questions than answers.” Stated.
“This also puts Bad River, other tribal nations in the region, and the 40 million people who depend on the Great Lakes at risk of a catastrophic spill,” Gravel said. “We are concerned that Line 5 will fail again and there will be an oil spill for our position to be taken seriously.”