Time is getting tight for Enbridge to break ground on its controversial $2.6 billion crude oil pipeline across northern Minnesota if the company sticks to its current schedule.
The company has told shareholders it expects the replacement for its current Line 3 to be shipping oil by Nov. 1, yet Enbridge is still waiting for key federal and state permits. And the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has yet to formally finish its approval process.
All those machinations aren't likely to be completed until at least April.
The company last summer had hoped to start construction of the 330-mile pipeline during the final three months of 2018. Then, the start time was moved up to 2019's first quarter. This week, Enbridge said in a statement it is "working toward mobilizing for construction in Q1 of 2019." That includes moving construction equipment and material into place.
"We are actively working with the new [state] administration and agencies to develop a clear sense of the schedule for permitting activities moving toward construction of the Line 3 project and are doing everything we can to meet our project construction milestones," Enbridge said. The company declined to make someone available for an interview.

The PUC, the state's primary pipeline regulator, verbally approved the new Line 3 in late June. But Enbridge must still get permits from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the state's Department of Natural Resources. Also, it must secure critical construction permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
"It's really hard to say how long the process will take," said Scott Strand, an attorney for Friends of the Headwaters, one of four environmental groups challenging the PUC's decision to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. "We think there is a lot of work to be done."
The Minnesota Department of Commerce under former DFL Gov. Mark Dayton also appealed the PUC's ruling on Line 3. The administration of new DFL Gov. Tim Walz said it is reviewing that action. But even if Commerce drops out, its legal arguments are similar to those in the other parties' appeals, which are another possible impediment to the pipeline.