Minnesota utility regulators will try to fix their flawed environmental review of Enbridge's proposed $2.6 billion oil pipeline rather than take the issue to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission said Wednesday it won't petition the high court to overrule a June 3 decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
The appeals court shot down the PUC's approval of the environmental impact statement (EIS) for Enbridge's controversial and much-delayed project, which would replace the current aging Line 3. The court deemed the EIS "inadequate," saying it didn't properly address the effect of an oil spill in the Lake Superior watershed.
Wednesday was the deadline for the PUC, Enbridge or any other party to appeal the appellate court's decision directly to the Supreme Court. Calgary, Alberta-based Enbridge also has not asked for a Supreme Court review.
At this point, it appears that a successful Supreme Court appeal could actually take longer than any PUC attempt to fix the EIS.
"The [PUC] has concluded the public interest will be best served by addressing the deficiency identified in the Court of Appeals decision rather than appealing to the Minnesota Supreme Court," Katie Sieben, the PUC's chairwoman, said in a statement.
She said the PUC will seek public comment and "work expeditiously" to address the issue. However, she offered no timeline, and the PUC declined to comment beyond the statement.
The PUC voted 5-0 in March 2018 to approve the EIS, and unanimously approved a "certificate of need" for the pipeline — its most critical permit — in late June 2018. Environmental groups and some Ojibwe tribes have appealed both decisions.