State Department firms up timetable for Keystone XL Pipeline decision

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The State Department is pointing to November as the time frame for a final decision on the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline.

In a July 22 conference call, department spokesman Daniel Clune said a final environmental impact statement is likely to be issued in August on the $7 billion project.

Clune said that State Department officials would come to Lincoln, Neb., and to the Nebraska Sandhills in September to give residents two more chances to weigh in on the controversial project. Similar meetings are planned for state capitals in the five other states the pipeline would cross on its way from the oil sands of Alberta to refineries along the U.S. Gulf Coast.

While the agency is standing by its commitment to act by the end of the year, "we won't make a decision until we complete a thorough review process," Clune said.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or her designee will answer the pivotal question of whether the project is in the national interest.

That determination "will take into account the environmental and safety issues covered in the final environmental impact statement," Clune said, "as well as additional issues related to the national interest, such as energy security and economic considerations."

El Paso opens Pandora’s Box in deal with environmental groups

VERNAL, Utah - Uintah County is the latest government unit to join in opposing a $20 million agreement between energy company El Paso Corp. and two conservation groups.
“There’s nothing secret about it, it’s an agreement between two private parties,” said Jon Marvel, executive director of Western Watersheds Project conservation group.
The other group, the Oregon Natural Desert Association, is aligned with Marvel’s group in the effort to preserve wildlife habitat along the pipeline corridor.
Marvel told the Vernal Express that the partnership evolved from El Paso’s 680-mile Ruby Pipeline Project, which is building the Ruby natural gas pipeline from Wyoming to Oregon.
Uintah County has joined with a dozen counties from Wyoming, Utah, Nevada and Oregon in opposition to the conservation agreement. The group calls themselves the Multi-County Pipeline Coalition and commissioners question the wisdom of paying-off conservation groups in order to do business on federal lands.
“We oppose the precedent of paying private groups not to sue,” said Uintah County Commissioner Mike McKee, “not the pipeline itself.”
“The money will be used by the Sagebrush Habitat Conservation Fund to mitigate the negative effects of construction on 14,000 acres of federal land,” said Marvel.
But, county commissioners allege that the agreement is really a concerted effort to eliminate livestock grazing on public lands.
At issue is the voluntary relinquishment of grazing permits by stockmen to develop wildlife conservation easements in the path of the pipeline.
“It’s not a buyout to get rid of grazing on public land, but, if it was - it wouldn’t be a bad thing,” Marvel said.
His comments quickly raise the ire of stockmen who use public lands.
Opponents of the agreement, who met in Salt Lake City on Aug. 9, dispute Marvel’s comments, saying the agreement presents a bad precedent.
“We’re against converting livestock grazing units to wildlife (conservation easements),” said McKee.