Green Group Sues US Govt For Hiding Tar Sands Plan
National Wildlife Federation says State Department concealed public records about possible plan to move dirty oil through New England
The National Wildlife Federation filed a lawsuit this week charging the U.S. State Department is refusing to disclose public information about a pipeline company's possible plans to transport dangerous tar sands oil from Montreal to the coast of Maine.
The lawsuit takes aim at the oil industry's repeated claims that there is no plan to transport the dirty oil through New England, despite numerous indications that such a plan indeed exists.
A 70-year-old, 236-mile pipeline, owned by Portland Pipeline Corporation (which is majority owned by Exxon-Mobile), currently transports crude oil from freighters in the city of South Portland, Maine to Montreal.
Yet, environmental and community organizations say there are strong signs that PPL and parent company Montreal Pipe Line Company is planning to reverse the flow of the pipeline in order to transport tar sands oil from Canada to South Portland where it would then be distributed to international markets via oil tankers and an upgraded terminal.
NWF is accusing the State Department of refusing to respond satisfactorily to a Freedom of Information Act request (pdf) filed over two years ago for public documents about such plans.
In a statement announcing the lawsuit, the NWF charges that the State Department has neglected to hand over a "key 2008 document from Exxon-owned Portland Pipe Line Corporation's attorney detailing a previous plan to reverse the pipeline for tar sands use"--information the environmental group says provides critical information about the company's future intentions to move tar sands.
"The public has gotten very little information about what the true the intentions are," said Miles Grant, senior communications manager for NWF, in an interview with Common Dreams. "This should be public record."
According to NWF, more than 40 towns in Northern New England have passed resolutions against moving tar sands through the region. In South Portland, a local effort to pass a zoning ordinance to block a future tar sands terminal was narrowly defeated last year after the oil industry poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign to squash the measure. South Portland organizers have vowed to continue the fight to keep tar sands out of their city.
While PPL claims it has no current plan to reverse the pipeline, critics charge that their refusal to share information about their plan casts doubt on this claim.
"Information is power, and that is why they are trying to hide their plans," Robert Sellin, from the group Protect South Portland, told Common Dreams.
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The National Wildlife Federation filed a lawsuit this week charging the U.S. State Department is refusing to disclose public information about a pipeline company's possible plans to transport dangerous tar sands oil from Montreal to the coast of Maine.
The lawsuit takes aim at the oil industry's repeated claims that there is no plan to transport the dirty oil through New England, despite numerous indications that such a plan indeed exists.
A 70-year-old, 236-mile pipeline, owned by Portland Pipeline Corporation (which is majority owned by Exxon-Mobile), currently transports crude oil from freighters in the city of South Portland, Maine to Montreal.
Yet, environmental and community organizations say there are strong signs that PPL and parent company Montreal Pipe Line Company is planning to reverse the flow of the pipeline in order to transport tar sands oil from Canada to South Portland where it would then be distributed to international markets via oil tankers and an upgraded terminal.
NWF is accusing the State Department of refusing to respond satisfactorily to a Freedom of Information Act request (pdf) filed over two years ago for public documents about such plans.
In a statement announcing the lawsuit, the NWF charges that the State Department has neglected to hand over a "key 2008 document from Exxon-owned Portland Pipe Line Corporation's attorney detailing a previous plan to reverse the pipeline for tar sands use"--information the environmental group says provides critical information about the company's future intentions to move tar sands.
"The public has gotten very little information about what the true the intentions are," said Miles Grant, senior communications manager for NWF, in an interview with Common Dreams. "This should be public record."
According to NWF, more than 40 towns in Northern New England have passed resolutions against moving tar sands through the region. In South Portland, a local effort to pass a zoning ordinance to block a future tar sands terminal was narrowly defeated last year after the oil industry poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign to squash the measure. South Portland organizers have vowed to continue the fight to keep tar sands out of their city.
While PPL claims it has no current plan to reverse the pipeline, critics charge that their refusal to share information about their plan casts doubt on this claim.
"Information is power, and that is why they are trying to hide their plans," Robert Sellin, from the group Protect South Portland, told Common Dreams.
_____________________
The National Wildlife Federation filed a lawsuit this week charging the U.S. State Department is refusing to disclose public information about a pipeline company's possible plans to transport dangerous tar sands oil from Montreal to the coast of Maine.
The lawsuit takes aim at the oil industry's repeated claims that there is no plan to transport the dirty oil through New England, despite numerous indications that such a plan indeed exists.
A 70-year-old, 236-mile pipeline, owned by Portland Pipeline Corporation (which is majority owned by Exxon-Mobile), currently transports crude oil from freighters in the city of South Portland, Maine to Montreal.
Yet, environmental and community organizations say there are strong signs that PPL and parent company Montreal Pipe Line Company is planning to reverse the flow of the pipeline in order to transport tar sands oil from Canada to South Portland where it would then be distributed to international markets via oil tankers and an upgraded terminal.
NWF is accusing the State Department of refusing to respond satisfactorily to a Freedom of Information Act request (pdf) filed over two years ago for public documents about such plans.
In a statement announcing the lawsuit, the NWF charges that the State Department has neglected to hand over a "key 2008 document from Exxon-owned Portland Pipe Line Corporation's attorney detailing a previous plan to reverse the pipeline for tar sands use"--information the environmental group says provides critical information about the company's future intentions to move tar sands.
"The public has gotten very little information about what the true the intentions are," said Miles Grant, senior communications manager for NWF, in an interview with Common Dreams. "This should be public record."
According to NWF, more than 40 towns in Northern New England have passed resolutions against moving tar sands through the region. In South Portland, a local effort to pass a zoning ordinance to block a future tar sands terminal was narrowly defeated last year after the oil industry poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign to squash the measure. South Portland organizers have vowed to continue the fight to keep tar sands out of their city.
While PPL claims it has no current plan to reverse the pipeline, critics charge that their refusal to share information about their plan casts doubt on this claim.
"Information is power, and that is why they are trying to hide their plans," Robert Sellin, from the group Protect South Portland, told Common Dreams.
_____________________