The short version
- Montana's Department of Environmental Quality withdrew a waiver that allowed the Bridger Pipeline Expansion to exclude key financial and baseline environmental data from its state permit application.
- The reversal follows a legal complaint filed by Earthjustice on behalf of two residents, arguing that the public was commenting on an incomplete record during a recent review period.
- While federal agencies have expedited reviews for the project, construction cannot proceed until the developer submits the required information to satisfy state law requirements.
A major infrastructure initiative designed to transport crude oil from Canada through Montana and Wyoming has encountered a significant regulatory obstacle in Helena. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality recently withdrew a waiver it had previously issued to Bridger Pipeline Expansion, LLC. This decision forces the developer to provide specific financial details and baseline environmental data that were initially excluded from the state permit application. Without this complete documentation, the project cannot advance through the necessary state approval channels.
The pipeline project represents a substantial investment of approximately two billion dollars and spans 650 miles. It is intended to serve as one of three legs connecting Alberta oil sands to the trading hub in Cushing, Oklahoma. Proponents have drawn comparisons to the canceled Keystone XL Pipeline, referring to this new venture as 'Keystone Light.' However, environmental advocates argue that the scale of the project suggests a much larger impact than the nickname implies. At full capacity, the infrastructure is projected to move 1.13 million barrels of oil per day, significantly exceeding initial estimates of 500,000 barrels.
The regulatory shift occurred after Earthjustice, an environmental law firm, filed a complaint in June on behalf of two Montana residents. The legal challenge targeted the department's earlier decision to grant the waiver in February. Under Montana’s Major Facility Siting Act, large energy projects must undergo rigorous evaluation of their economic, community, and environmental impacts. The statute permits the omission of information deemed irrelevant, but attorneys argued that the excluded data was essential for a thorough review. The complaint highlighted that the public comment period held in May was based on an incomplete application.
Jeremiah Langston, a lawyer representing the Department of Environmental Quality, confirmed that the agency is now requiring Bridger to produce the missing information. He stated that permitting cannot proceed until the application is fully complete and emphasized that the responsibility lies with the developer to submit the additional data. This move effectively pauses the rapid momentum the project had gained under federal oversight. The Bureau of Land Management had announced an expedited environmental review, and the administration granted a cross-border permit in late April.
The timeline for construction has been ambitious. Permitting documents indicated that Bridger Pipeline Expansion hoped to break ground as soon as July 2027, pending final approvals from both state and federal authorities. The subsidiary of Wyoming-based True Companies had moved through the process with unusual speed until this recent development. The withdrawal of the waiver introduces uncertainty into the schedule, as the company must now compile and submit the previously waived information before regulators can issue a final decision.
Critics of the project have raised concerns about the potential environmental risks associated with the proposed route. Shannon James of the Montana Environmental Information Center described the pipeline as a major climate threat that has not received sufficient public attention. The path crosses water bodies approximately 150 times, raising fears about potential leaks and contamination. James noted that pipelines are prone to failures and argued that approving a company with a questionable track record without full disclosure of impacts was premature.
Lars Phillips, an attorney with Earthjustice, welcomed the department's reversal but expressed concern over the initial decision to issue the waivers. He stated that the law is clear regarding the necessity of comprehensive data for proper evaluation. Phillips noted that without the legal action taken by the residents, the public would likely never have known they were reviewing an incomplete file. He viewed the current requirement for full disclosure as a positive step toward transparency and compliance with state statutes.
The situation highlights the complex interplay between federal prioritization and state regulatory authority. While federal agencies have moved quickly to support the project, Montana’s environmental regulators are enforcing local laws that demand detailed scrutiny of large-scale energy developments. The outcome will depend on how swiftly Bridger Pipeline Expansion can gather the required information and whether the data reveals significant concerns that could further delay or alter the project's scope. The next steps involve the submission of the complete application and subsequent review by state officials.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- Grist↗In Montana, a controversial $2B pipeline hits a speed bump
