{"id":64126,"date":"2015-11-03T04:53:00","date_gmt":"2015-11-03T10:53:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/?p=64126"},"modified":"2015-11-03T04:53:00","modified_gmt":"2015-11-03T10:53:00","slug":"in-major-twist-pipeline-company-asks-u-s-to-pause-keystone-xl-process","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/2015\/11\/03\/in-major-twist-pipeline-company-asks-u-s-to-pause-keystone-xl-process\/","title":{"rendered":"In major twist, pipeline company asks U.S. to pause Keystone XL process"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"(Photo<\/a>
(Photo from Keystone-xl.com<\/a>)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

WASHINGTON \u2013 In a surprise move that could have a political ripple-effect in two countries, the company behind the controversy-plagued Keystone XL pipeline has asked the U.S. government to temporarily suspend its application.<\/p>\n

Monday\u2019s request from TransCanada Corp. adds a new twist to one of the biggest Canada-U.S. political irritants of recent years, potentially making the pipeline a 2016 U.S. election issue to be settled by the next president.<\/p>\n

The administration said it was reviewing a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, in which the Calgary-based company requested a delay while the Nebraska stretch of the pipeline remains disputed.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s another page in an already-epic, years-long battle \u2013 which has spilled into similar fights across the continent over export pipelines for Canada’s land-locked oilsands bitumen.<\/p>\n

\u201cTransCanada believes that it would be appropriate at this time for the State Department to pause in its review of the Presidential Permit application for Keystone XL,\u201d said the letter.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis will allow a decision on the permit to be made later based on certainty with respect to the route of the pipeline.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s also an about-face in the company\u2019s message. Until recently, it would have been unimaginable for TransCanada or its government backers in Ottawa to be requesting a delay, given their repeated demands for immediate approval of a project that would carry nearly one-quarter of all Canadian oil exports.<\/p>\n

With opposition on multiple fronts, opponents say, the company obviously hopes to step back and return to the fray under more favourable conditions \u2013 not unlike a military tactical retreat.<\/p>\n

The Nebraska political activist who organized ranchers against the project urged President Barack Obama to ignore the company\u2019s request \u2013 and reject the pipeline now.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey are doing this for one reason \u2013 TransCanada hopes a Republican gets into office because they all said they would approve (it),\u201d Jane Kleeb said in an email.<\/p>\n

\u201cTransCanada is facing a loss, they know it. So this is their last chance to try and save their project.\u201d<\/p>\n

Its short-term political prospects seem dim indeed. Obama has repeatedly expressed skepticism. His supporters overwhelmingly expect him to reject it.<\/p>\n

All the major Democratic presidential candidates also oppose it. Because Republicans universally back it, the pipeline has potential to become an election wedge issue.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s become so acutely partisan that the Democratic party leapt at the opportunity Monday to use the latest development for political gain. The party issued a letter asking new supporters to sign up and help fight this corporation that\u2019s apparently pining for a Republican victory.<\/p>\n

Monday\u2019s news also holds potential implications for Canada-U.S. relations. With a new Trudeau government hoping to improve ties to the Obama administration, a delay could offer relief from an early sore point.<\/p>\n

A pause on Keystone virtually guarantees the initial Obama-Trudeau encounters could focus on other topics, as they cross paths several times this month at the G20, APEC and Paris climate summits.<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a big question mark, however, hanging over this delay request.<\/p>\n

The U.S. government hasn\u2019t yet responded. The State Department is studying it. Earlier Monday, the White House had signalled plans to announce a final decision during Obama\u2019s term.<\/p>\n

\u201cOur expectation at this point… is that the president will make a decision before the end of his administration,\u201d Josh Earnest told reporters. \u201cIt\u2019s possible (it could happen this year). It\u2019s also possible it could happen next year.\u201d<\/p>\n

The delay idea was billboarded entirely by the company.<\/p>\n

And it featured a hairpin-sharp plot twist. In a reversal of roles befitting this seven-year soap opera, the company is now basing its request on a precedent that infuriated it not too long ago.<\/p>\n

In early 2014, the U.S. announced a delay. It said it couldn\u2019t make a decision on granting a cross-border permit for the pipeline route, because the route was tied up in litigation in Nebraska.<\/p>\n

The company and the Canadian government fumed at that. The route is no longer being fought in court. It\u2019s back to being reviewed by Nebraska\u2019s arm\u2019s-length public-services commission.<\/p>\n

And the company is now citing what happened in 2014 as a custom: \u201cThe company believes there is sound precedent,\u201d it said in a statement, \u201cfor making this (delay) request.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

WASHINGTON \u2013 In a surprise move that could have a political ripple-effect in two countries, the company behind the controversy-plagued …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":33,"featured_media":64127,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[35],"class_list":["post-64126","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-business","tag-original","mauthors-alexander-panetta","mauthors-the-canadian-press"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64126","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/33"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=64126"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64126\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/64127"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=64126"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=64126"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/canadianinquirer.net\/v1\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=64126"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}