Reply With Quote
if the restraining order is still in effect, what's your gripe? it is unclear to this reader.
who has been harmed?
A new conundrum for the Drill Here, Drill Now crowd.
The celebrated Keystone pipeline is having to ride roughshod over at least one farmer who won't sell using eminent domain.
the farming jobs, we need oil jobs. Right?After Crawford repeatedly refused to allow TransCanada onto her land, the company sought eminent domain last fall. Crawford is appealing that claim of eminent domain in a court hearing scheduled for late April.
In the meantime, she sought a temprorary restraining order against the company. Just days after the restraining order was removed last week, the company announced it intended to go ahead and start construction on a southern portion of the pipeline from Cushing, Oklahoma to Port Arthur, Texas.
The reinstated restraining order this week from the Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District in Texarkana says that TransCanada “is restrained from entering on the Crawford Family Farm Partnership land and from performing any and all on-site activities that disturb the surface or subsurface of the land.” TransCanada has five days to respond to the restraining order.
Oh wait, the government isn't supposed to pick winners and losers...
http://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/201...e-xl-pipeline/
if the restraining order is still in effect, what's your gripe? it is unclear to this reader.
who has been harmed?
I was reading about this. The pipeline was not approved but despite it not being approved, the oil companies who need more crude in the American south so they can refine and export the gasoline already started the ED process.
Now how on Earth can they claim ED for a public works progress that has not even been approved. Its like the RR barons of the 19th century.
Why can't they just run it along the route of the original Keystone pipeline?
Well, if the railroad commission is consistent the temporary restraining order will be just that....temporary.
Its multiple states and jurisdictions and they are trying it all over the place and seeing what sticks. Might as well use the lawyers if your paying the retainer anyway i suppose. There should be punitive action taken.
Asked and answered.
Good job.
Because it stopped in Oklahoma.
then what?
No one yet.After Crawford repeatedly refused to allow TransCanada onto her land, the company sought eminent domain last fall. Crawford is appealing that claim of eminent domain in a court hearing scheduled for late April.
It does appear the company is looking to do so though. The restraining order is temporary, the real fight seems to be the eminent domain fight.
Lets just say that the RR commission has favored the pipelines in ED lawsuits by a huge margin.
Ahh you going to troll me now? Well I am guessing you think that i answered my own question but how is saying that it seems like something doing that? Seeming is not equating or are you saying that I missed the answer somewhere?
homeboy effed up by holding out too long?
Hard call for me.
I *really* dislike weakening property rights, but I do have to allow for the occasional ED when it comes to energy supplies, simply for the greater good.
In this case though, the energy will still be produced, one way or another.
The only thing that will be effected is where the Canadian eventually ends up.
Given that, I think that property rights should win out here.
I suspect the final solution will involve more money than has been offered but the easement will be granted.
From the link in the OP, the appellate court has it, so I think it's out of the RRC's hands.
The basis of the restraining order is that the project does not have approval and private firms do not have the ability to declare public works otherwise. if the pipeline is approved then the RR commission will rescind the order that day.
I'm talking about the part that gets to Oklahoma, genius.
I assume you are referring to the Denbury ruling. I suspect that TC will sidestep that by producing a contract to carry a little oil for someone else, thus qualifying them as a common carrier.
We were talking about a lawsuit involving the pipeline in Texas. Try to keep up, genius.
Eminent domain is an issue every place this pipeline will run. There are already pipelines between Texas and Oklahoma too. Why not use existing right-of-ways?
A contract with a private firm? I don't see a less significant private work passing muster given the language that I have read but in this state's legal system I would be disappointed but not surprised to see ti happen.
Because those right of ways were granted specific to the pipeline they contain. New pipeline, new ROW.
The trick is that common carriers AUTOMATICALLY get eminent domain. TC will just have to come up with some transport contracts to qualify as a CC...maybe even from some oil fields in Oklahoma.
So there's no actual reason to not use the same land. Just red tape.
OK.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
