Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Scope of the Court-Ordered Environmental Impact Statement for an Easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline November 24, 2020 This report was prepared under the direction of Mike Faith, Jr., Chairman Standing Rock Sioux Tribe With the assistance of the following Tribal agencies: Department of Water Resources – Errol “Doug” Crow Ghost, Director Department of Game and Fish – Jeff Kelly, Director Tribal Emergency Management Commission – Elliot Ward, Emergency Manager Department of Environmental Regulation/EPA – Allyson Two Bears, Director Tribal Historic Preservation Office – Jon Eagle, Sr., Historic Preservation Officer Office of In-house Counsel – Erin Shanley, Attorney at Law And the #NoDAPL Technical Consulting Team: Don Holmstrom, Esq., Boulder, Colorado Patrick Flanders, PE, Houston, Texas Peter Capossela, Attorney at Law, PC, Eugene, Oregon Thomas K.G. Mohr, Mohr HydroGeoScience, LLC, Santa Clara, CA i “We want to be heard, and we want justice.” Chairman Mike Faith, Jr., Standing Rock Sioux Tribe ii Table of Contents I. DAPL MUST BE SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY .............................................................. 1 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... 3 III. DAPL VIOLATES THE FORT LARAMIE TREATIES OF 1851 AND 1868 .................. 6 IV. THE CORPS VIOLATED FEDERAL CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS BY PUBLISHING THE NOTICE OF INTENT AND COMMENCING THE NEPA PROCESS PRIOR TO CONSULTATION WITH THE STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE ...................... 13 A. The Corps Routinely Acts without Tribal Consultation .................................................... 13 B. Overview of Tribal Consultation Requirements ............................................................... 13 C. The Corps Failed to Consult with the Tribe on the Environmental Assessment and Remand Report ......................................................................................................................... 17 D. “Meaningful and Timely” Consultation in the EIS Process .............................................. 24 V. THE ANTICIPATORY DEMOLITION OF NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORIC PROPERTIES DISQUALIFIES ENERGY TRANSFER; STANDING ROCK THPO CONCURRENCE IS REQUIRED FOR DAPL ........................................................................... 28 VI. THE CORPS MUST EVALUATE DAPL OIL SPILL RISK BY UP-TO-DATE, RIGOROUS PIPELINE SAFETY, ENVIRONMENTAL RISK AND INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT STANDARDS ................................................................................................ 31 B. The Corps Must Evaluate DAPL Oil Spill Risk by Up-to-Date, Rigorous Pipeline Safety, Environmental Risk and Integrity Management Standards ....................................................... 33 VII. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MUST ELEVATE ITS SCRUTINY OF ENERGY TRANSFER’S VERY TROUBLED SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD ............... 44 VIII. THE EIS MUST DISCLOSE THE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND PROPERTIES OF BAKKEN CRUDE ................................................................................................................. 48 A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 48 B. The Elevated Hazards of Bakken Crude Must be Disclosed in the EIS ............................ 48 C. Importance of Proper Sampling and Testing Techniques ................................................. 51 D. The Corps Must Accurately Assess DAPL’s Environmental Impacts Incorporating the Latest Science on the Components of Bakken Crude ............................................................... 54 IX. DESIGN FLAWS PRESENT AN IMMINENT HAZARD AND UNDERSCORE THE NEED FOR PERFORMANCE TESTING AND VERIFICATION ............................................. 59 A. The Lake Oahe High Consequence Area Lacks Safety-Critical Surge Relief Protection .. 59 B. DAPL Failed to Supply Back-up Power to Safety-Critical Emergency Flow Restriction Devices at Lake Oahe ............................................................................................................... 62 X. THE WORST CASE DISCHARGE MUST BE RECALCULATED ................................... 65 iii A. Introduction – Worst Case Discharge and Risk ................................................................ 65 B. The Environmental Analysis Must Include an Estimate of the Worst Case Discharge in Compliance with PHMSA Regulations .................................................................................... 66 C. DAPL’s Leak Detection System is Unreliable .................................................................. 68 XI. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS MUST INCLUDE ADDITIONAL SPILL MODELING TO INCLUDE A REALISTIC WORST CASE DISCHARGE .............................. 72 XII. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS MUST FULLY EVALUATE DAPL’S DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACT ON THE STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE ..................... 78 A. Environmental Justice for Indian Tribes ........................................................................... 78 B. Scoping and Environmental Justice .................................................................................. 79 C. Environmental Justice and Risk ........................................................................................ 80 D. Corps of Engineers’ Pick-Sloan Program Impacts to Standing Rock................................ 83 E. Heightened Environmental Risk of DAPL to Standing Rock Tribal Members ................. 87 XIII. THE CORPS MUST CONDUCT A TECHNICAL HYDROGEOLOGIC EVALUATION OF THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF A RELEASE OF OIL BELOW THE RIVERBED .................................................................................................................................. 91 XIV. THE EIS MUST ADDRESS THE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY OF THE TRIBE OVER ALL EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND OIL SPILL REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES OF THE STANDING ROCK INDIAN RESERVATION .......................................................................................................................... 94 A. The Standing Rock Tribal Emergency Response Commission shall be the Lead Response Agency Under Tribal Law ........................................................................................................ 94 B. The Corps Must Acknowledge Tribal Law in the EIS and Energy Transfer Must Comply with Tribal Law ........................................................................................................................ 94 C. Current ET Emergency Plans are Inadequate and Put Tribal Emergency Responders at Undue Risk ............................................................................................................................... 95 XV. BASIC DOCUMENTATION RELATING TO PIPELINE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAVE BEEN IMPROPERLY CONCEALED AND MUST BE DISCLOSED IN THE EIS PROCESS ....................................................................................... 100 XVI. THE PROPOSAL TO SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE CAPACITY OF DAPL MUST BE CRITICALLY EVALUATED ................................................................................. 103 XVII. THE EIS MUST IDENTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF DAPL, INCLUDING THE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TO PEOPLE, LAND, WATER, AND THE EARTH A. DAPL Disrupts Existing Tribal Land Uses ..................................................................... 107 B. DAPL’s Cumulative Impacts with Corps of Engineers’ Management of Missouri River Water Flows ........................................................................................................................... 107 C. The Corps Must Reject DAPL due to the Cumulative Impacts to Global Climate.......... 108 iv Table 1 Summary of Consultation Requirements Applicable to the EIS on the Easement for DAPL .......................................................................................................... 17 Table 2 Corps of Engineers’ Violations of Consultation Requirements in the NEPA Process for DAPL ............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 1 Map showing Sioux Nation Treaty Boundaries .............................................. 9 Figure 2 Atmospheric CO2 concentration measured at Mauna Loa observatory from 1958 to the present. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ ................................. 109 v I. DAPL MUST BE SHUT DOWN IMMEDIATELY On March 25, 2020, District Court Judge James Boasberg ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to prepare an environmental impact statement for the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL).1 On September 10, the Corps published a Notice of Intent in the federal register to prepare the environmental impact statement (EIS), and solicited comment on the scope of the document.2 The first step in the NEPA process must be to shut down DAPL. On July 6, 2020 Judge Boasberg ordered the pipeline to be shut down pending completion of an EIS in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act.3 The court “vacate(d) the Corps’ decision to grant Dakota Access an easement under the Mineral Leasing Act and order(ed) that the Dakota Access Pipeline be shut down within 30 days.”4 As the court opinion stated, “allowing the oil to flow through the pipeline during the remand risks… a spill under Lake Oahe.”5 The Corps of Engineers, working in tandem with Energy Transfer, the owner and operator of DAPL, immediately appealed. On