Madison, WI—Environmental groups are criticizing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for a premature and unlawful decision to grant a federal permit for Enbridge Energy’s controversial Line 5 oil pipeline project in northern Wisconsin. The decision, announced today, comes despite ongoing litigation over state-issued permits and before the state’s water quality certification for the project is legally final.
Rob Lee, Midwest Environmental Advocates (MEA) Staff Attorney, said, “This is a clear violation of the Clean Water Act. It appears the Army Corps is fast-tracking a fossil fuel project at the expense of environmental protection and legal due process.”
In formal comments submitted in June, MEA warned that the Army Corps could not lawfully approve the project unless a final Section 401 water quality certification had been issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Although the DNR did issue a water quality certification for the project in November, the decision is the subject of a legal challenge and therefore cannot be considered final.
“Federal law is clear,” said Lee. “The Army Corps can’t approve this project without final water quality certification from the relevant state authority. The DNR’s certification is still being challenged in court, which means it’s not legally final—and that makes this permit premature and unlawful.”
The ongoing legal challenge was initiated by Midwest Environmental Advocates in December 2024 on behalf of Sierra Club Wisconsin, the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin and 350 Wisconsin. Clean Wisconsin and the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa are also challenging the permits.
Debra Cronmiller, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin said, “The League of Women Voters of Wisconsin and its members in northern Wisconsin are horrified that the Army Corps is willing to condone an extremely dangerous project that will irreparably destroy the integrity of the watershed. The damage, not to mention the long term risks associated with the pipeline itself, must be considered before any such project would be granted permits to proceed.”
Emily Park, co-executive Director of 350 Wisconsin said, “350 Wisconsin is deeply disturbed by the Army Corps’ decision to endanger the Great Lakes and other natural ecosystems that are core parts of the Midwest’s natural and cultural heritage. Wisconsinites and millions of other residents of this region depend on clean and healthy water for our lives, food, jobs, and recreation. We are appalled that the Army Corps is willing to appease a foreign corporation by risking the health of our water, the stability of our climate, and the wellbeing of current and future generations.”
Sierra Club Wisconsin Chapter Director Elizabeth Ward said, “In fast-tracking the Line 5 reroute, the Army Corps has backed Canadian oil giant Enbridge at the expense of the Bad River Band, Wisconsinites, and the 40 million people who rely on the Great Lakes for safe drinking water. There’s no safe way to reroute this pipeline. Every day that Line 5 continues to operate, our water, ecosystems, and way of life is in danger.”
Legal proceedings in the fight over state permits and approvals began in August and concluded in early October. During the six-week contested case hearing, attorneys and expert witnesses presented extensive evidence showing that the DNR failed to adequately evaluate the environmental risks posed by Enbridge’s construction plans. Scientific experts testified that methods such as trenching, blasting, and horizontal directional drilling could cause serious damage to wetlands and waterways. They also criticized Enbridge for submitting incomplete and confusing data as part of its permit application.
Key testimony also came from Bad River Band Chairman Robert Blanchard and Natural Resources Director Naomi Tillison, who testified that the project threatens treaty-protected resources and that previous Enbridge projects on the Reservation had resulted in substantial negative impacts to local wetlands.
A decision in the case is expected this winter. Meanwhile, an order issued by the judge in the case prevents Enbridge from moving forward with any construction-related activities pending the outcome of the litigation.
