Samantha L. Varsalona
Georgetown University Law Center, Class of 2018
Staff Member, Georgetown Environmental Law Review
This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate.  Please post all comments on the original article, which can be found here.
 
Abstract
 
The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) has become a contentious topic in recent months. The controversy centers around Dakota Access, LLC[1], a subsidiary of Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC, and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North and South Dakota[2] (the Tribe or Sioux), a federally-recognized Indian tribe.  The Tribe’s reservation, Standing Rock Indian Reservation, is half a mile upstream from where DAPL’s crude oil pipeline would cross the Missouri River underneath Lake Oahe in North Dakota.[3]  While much of the recent media attention surrounding Dakota Access and the Tribe has focused on the destruction of the Tribe’s ancestral burial grounds, the underlying issue can be traced back to the nationwide permits issued by the Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) in 2012.[4] More specifically, this article will examine Nationwide Permit 12 (NWP 12), which was one of the fifty NWPs issued by the Corps in 2012[5] and is at the heart of the current legal battle between Dakota Access and the Tribe.

By Elizabeth Kuhn. Ms. Kuhn is a J.D. candidate at Lewis & Clark Law School. ​Please send correspondence to elizabethkuhn@lclark.edu.

By Michael Zielinski
William & Mary Law School, Class of 2017

This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate. The original can be found here.

Hume Ross is a member of the Georgetown Environmental Law Review.  This post is part of the Environmental Law Review Syndicate.  Please leave any comments on the original post, which may be found on Georgetown Environmental Law Review's webpage.