Two proposed pipelines to ship North Dakota's oil bounty to Minnesota and beyond got adverse rulings from federal regulators on Friday, leaving the projects' next steps uncertain.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates interstate pipeline rates, rejected the rate structure for the $2.2 billion Sandpiper Pipeline proposed by Enbridge Inc. and separately threw out a case concerning the $650 million High Prairie Pipeline.
The regulatory actions could delay, though not necessarily kill, the two pipelines designed to transport 375,000 barrels per day of crude oil from the Bakken region in western North Dakota to oil terminals in Clearbrook, Minn., and Superior, Wis., that feed other pipelines.
North Dakota is now the nation's No. 2 oil-producing state, behind Texas. But construction of pipelines to carry away the crude hasn't kept up, depressing prices at the wellhead. Producers have turned to railroads instead: Tank cars now haul away two-thirds of North Dakota's oil — a business that stands to gain from Friday's rulings.
Enbridge spokesman Larry Springer said the Edmonton, Alberta-based pipeline company still plans to go ahead with the 618-mile Sandpiper line, but will reconsider its rate plan and submit it to the commission. "It really does not affect our planning and timetable," he added.
Greg Ward, vice president and general counsel for High Prairie Pipeline, said the Durango, Colo.-based company still is reviewing what's next for the proposed 450-mile, 150,000-barrel-per-day line. Construction hasn't started because High Prairie complained that Enbridge sought unfair terms to connect the line to Enbridge's Clearbrook terminal — a charge that company denies.
The commission concluded that it was premature to act on the High Prairie complaint because the two companies were still negotiating over the terminal connection. But Ward said High Prairie and Enbridge haven't talked in months.
11 months, then no decision