The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL)

April 29, 1868 The U.S. government and the Sioux Nation sign the Treaty of Fort Laramie, revising the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 (Horse Creek Treaty). The Treaty requires the Sioux Nation to abandon thousands of acres of land guaranteed under previous treaties, though the Tribes retain hunting and fishing rights in those lands. The Treaty also establishes the Great Sioux Reservation “for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation” of the Sioux Nation (Art. II). The reservation’s boundaries include significant portions of DAPL’s current location.

Sep. 2, 2015 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Council adopts Resolution 406-15 stating that “the Dakota Access Pipeline threatens public health and welfare on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation” and the “horizontal direction drilling in the construction of the pipeline would destroy valuable cultural resources.”

Nov. 2015 Dakota Access, LLC submits a draft environmental assessment to the Army Corps rejecting the original proposed pipeline route, which would have crossed the Missouri River 10 miles north of Bismarck, North Dakota. The new route crosses under Lake Oahe south of Bismarck and one half-mile upstream of the current boundaries of the Standing Rock Sioux reservation.

March and April 2016 Three federal agencies – the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of the Interior, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation – ask the Army Corps of Engineers to undertake a full environmental review of the DAPL under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

April 29, 2016 The Standing Rock Sioux petition the Army Corps of Engineers and similarly demand a more thorough environmental review.

July 26, 2016 The Army Corps of Engineers approve the federal easements (including across Lake Oahe) for the Dakota Access Pipeline, after determining the project will have no significant impact on the environment. The Army Corps bases this decision on a truncated environmental review.

July 27, 2016 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sues the Army Corps of Engineers and seeks an emergency stop to all construction. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Sep. 9, 2016 The US District Court for the District of Columbia rejects the request for an emergency stop, and notes that the Army Corps is not obligated to conduct an environmental review of the entire pipeline because most of it is constructed on private land. Later that day, the US Justice and Interior Departments and Army order the U.S. Army Corps to halt construction near Lake Oahe until further environmental assessments are conducted. On Oct. 9, the D.C. Circuit rejects the Tribe’s appeal.

Sep. 22, 2016 The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples calls on the US to halt construction of DAPL, citing risks to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s drinking water supply and potential destruction of burial grounds and sacred sites in violation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. She also calls on the US to protect the right to peaceful assembly, citing the intimidation, harassment, and prosecution of peaceful protestors.

Nov. 14, 2016 The Department of the Interior and the Army Corps announce they will delay a final decision until further consultation with the Tribes.

Dec. 4, 2016 The Army Corps of Engineers denies an easement that would allow the pipeline to cross Lake Oahe pending further review, effectively halting work on the pipeline.

Jan. 18, 2017 The Army Corps announces it will begin a comprehensive environmental review of the DAPL project.

Jan. 24, 2017 President Trump issues a Presidential Memorandum, directing the Army Corps to “review and approve in an expedited manner” the DAPL easement.

Feb. 7, 2017 The Army Corps rescinds the January 18, 2017 notice of its intention to conduct a full environmental review; on Feb. 8, 2017 it approves the easement.

Feb. 14, 2017 The Tribes move for summary judgment (a ruling without trial) in the US District Court for the District of Columbia to vacate the Trump Administration decision. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

March 7, 2017 The US District Court for the District of Columbia refuses to delay operation of the pipeline, but then partially grants the Tribe’s motion for summary judgment on June 14, pointing out flaws in the Army Corps’ decision-making process and remanding for further review. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Aug. 22, 2017 Energy Transfer Partners, the pipeline developer, sues Greenpeace, Earth First and BankTrack for their roles in protesting the pipeline, requesting $1 billion in damages for alleged property damage and fraud.

Oct. 11, 2017 The US District Court for the District of Columbia refuses to halt ongoing operation of the pipeline, but warns its determination does not “excuse Defendants from giving serious consideration to the errors identified. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Oct. 19, 2017 The Standing Rock Sioux and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribes ask the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to impose additional environmental oversight of the pipeline’s operations while the environmental review is pending. The court grants the Tribes’ request on Dec. 4, 2017, ordering an oil spill plan among other safety measures; the plan is submitted to the court in early April of 2018. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

April 17, 2018 The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denies a motion by the Tribes asking the court to require closer consultation between the parties, leaving open the possibility that the Tribes could raise challenges regarding the process for developing the plan at a later stage in the legal process. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Aug. 7, 2018 Energy Transfer Partners modifies its lawsuit against environmental groups protesting the pipeline after the judge dismissed BankTrack as a defendant and ruled that ETP can only target individual members of Earth First. ETP has since added five individual defendants and also added a count of criminal trespass against all the defendants.

Aug. 31, 2018 The Army Corps of Engineers concludes its court-ordered NEPA analysis and finds that it doesn’t need to revisit its 2016 approval of the now-operating project.

Feb. 21, 2019 Energy Transfer Partners files a lawsuit against Greenpeace in North Dakota state court, alleging that Greenpeace and activists conspired to use illegal and violent means to disrupt construction and damage the company. The lawsuit seeks millions of dollars in damages. The claims in this filing are similar to the claims in the company’s previous suit against Greenpeace in federal court, which was dismissed by the US District Court for the District of North Dakota on Feb. 14, 2019.

Feb. 28, 2019 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe says that the Army Corps of Engineers failed to comply with a federal judge’s order to consider the effect that the pipeline might have on local Tribes. Standing Rock Chairman Mike Faith refers to an Army Corps document, which states that their analysis “identified no new information” on the pipeline’s impact on the Tribes. This memo, dated February 4, 2018, was produced three months before the Corps met with the Tribes. 

July 29, 2019 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe formally requests a hearing in front of the North Dakota Public Service Commission (PSC) on the proposed plan to double the DAPL’s capacity. Energy Transfer Partners announced in June 2019 that it plans to expand the pipeline’s capacity from more than 500,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day. The three-member North Dakota PSC previously agreed to consider holding a hearing on the proposal if one were formally requested. The hearing is scheduled for Nov. 13, 2019.

Aug. 16, 2019 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe files a motion for summary judgment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging that the Army Corps failed to meaningfully respond to the tribe’s concerns throughout the remand process in violation of NEPA and the National Historic Preservation Act. The Tribe requests that the court vacate an easement that was granted to allow pipeline construction, which would effectively halt pipeline operations until a full environmental review can be conducted. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Oct. 9, 2019 The Army Corps files a cross motion for summary judgment against the Tribes, claiming that “…the Corps undertook a comprehensive analysis of the three limited items remanded for additional consideration” and asking the court to reaffirm its dismissal of Standing Rock’s claims. Oral arguments are scheduled on the motions for summary judgment in the D.C. District Court for March 18, 2020. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Dec. 16, 2019 North Dakota announces it will work with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to develop a pipeline spill response plan as the North Dakota PSC considers the proposal to double DAPL’s capacity to 1.1 million barrels per day. 

March 25, 2020 The District Court for the District of Columbia rules that the Army Corps of Engineers’ latest NEPA analysis did not fully address how the pipeline affects the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and others near its route and orders the agency to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The pipeline is allowed to continue operating while the EIS is prepared. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

July 6, 2020 The District Court for the District of Columbia vacates the Army Corps’ decision to grant an easement for the pipeline and orders that the Dakota Access Pipeline be shut down within 30 days. The pipeline will be drained of oil and shut down until the Corps completes a full Environmental Impact Statement. “[G]iven the seriousness of the Corps’ NEPA error, the impossibility of a simple fix, the fact that Dakota Access did assume much of its economic risk knowingly, & the potential harm each day the pipeline operates, the court is forced to conclude that the flow of oil must cease.” On July 9, Judge Boasberg declines to stay the July 6 order. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.). The same day, Energy Transfer files an appeal in the D.C. Circuit. 

July 10, 2020 Energy Transfer files an emergency motion for a stay of the July 6 order at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit pending the appeal. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 20-5197 (D.C. Cir.).

July 13, 2020 The Army Corps files both an appeal of the July 6 order and an emergency motion for a stay in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The next day, the D.C. Circuit grants an administrative stay of the District Court’s July 6 order, allowing the pipeline to continue operating while the court considers whether to grant the emergency motions for stay. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 20-5197 (D.C. Cir.).

Aug. 5, 2020 The D.C. Circuit issues an order dissolving the administrative stay but staying the District Court’s injunction. The court orders the Army Corps of Engineers to clarify whether they intend to allow the pipeline to operate despite the District Court having facated the easement. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 20-5197 (D.C. Cir.).

Aug. 31, 2020 The Army Corps announces it itends to initiate the Environmental Impact Statement process. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Sep. 8, 2020 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Oglala Sioux Tribe, and Yankton Sioux Tribe request an injunction on continued pipeline operations pending completion of the NEPA process. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Sep. 10, 2020 The Army Corps files a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement regarding the granting of an easement to Dakota Access to cross federal land at Lake Oahe. 

Oct. 15, 2020 The Illinois Commerce Commission grants Dakota Access permission to expand pumping in Illinois. This action allows the pipeline to nearly double its capacity.

Oct. 16, 2020 The Tribes renew their motion for an injunction, seeking to shut down the pipeline following the D.C. Circuit’s finding that the District Court failed to make the necessary findings to sustain injunctive relief. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

Nov. 2, 2020 The Army Corps provides an update on the status and timing of its EIS process, informing the court that it will take longer than the initial forecast of 13 months. 

Nov. 4, 2020 The D.C. Circuit hears oral arguments in the appeal by the Army Corps and Dakota Access of the District Court’s July 6 ruling. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 20-5197 (D.C. Cir.).

Jan. 26, 2021 The D.C. Circuit reaffirms a lower court decision finding the Army Corps of Engineers violated NEPA by issuing an easement for the pipeline to cross federal lands without preparing an environmental impact statement and directing the Corps to prepare an EIS. However, the court reverses the lower court’s order that the pipeline shut down because it had not made the findings necessary to issue such an injunction. It leaves to the Corps to determine how to “vindicate its property rights” as the pipeline no longer has an easement and is therefore encroaching on federal property. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps of Engineers, D.C. Cir., No. 20-5197.

April 23, 2021 The D.C. Circuit rejects a request from Energy Transfer Partners to rehear the company’s appeal of a decision finding the oil pipeline’s federal easement violated NEPA. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.C. Cir.).

May 3, 2021 The Biden Army Corps says in a court filing that it plans to complete a court-ordered EIS evaluating the risk of spills from Dakota Access, but that it will allow oil to continue to flow in the meantime. The Corps plans to complete the new EIS by March, 2022. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

June 22, 2021 The District Court for the District of Columbia dismisses the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s challenge, holding that if the Tribe seeks to challenge the outcome of the Corp’s EIS, it must file a new suit. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Army Corps, No. 1:16-cv-01534 (D.D.C.).

July 23, 2021 The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issues a notice of probable violation (NOPV) to Energy Transfer LP, stating the company could face $93,200 in fines for several probable violations of federal law in operating the pipeline. 

Sep. 20, 2021 Dakota Access, LLC petitions the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit decision in Dakota Access, LLC, v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, et al. In their petition, the company raises questions about whether NEPA requires an agency to resolve criticisms of its environmental analysis before finding no significant impact and whether a NEPA procedural error is cause for vacatur. Dakota Access, LLC, v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, et al., No. 21-560 (US).

Oct. 19, 2021 The District Court for the District of North Dakota holds that federal law permits North Dakota to seek $38 million from the federal government to cover law enforcement costs related to protests against the pipeline. State of North Dakota v. US, No. 1:19-cv-00150, (D.N.D.).

Dec. 16, 2021 Both the federal government and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe file briefs urging the Supreme Court to not grant certiorari to review the D.C. Circuit Court’s invalidation of the Army Corps’ easement issued to Dakota Access LLC. Read the federal government’s brief opposing cert here; read the Tribe’s brief opposing cert here. The Corps is currently preparing a new environmental review, to be completed by November 2022. Dakota Access, LLC, v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, et al., No. 21-560 (US).

Jan. 27, 2022 The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe withdraws as a cooperating agency in the Army Corps’ preparation of the EIS, citing transparency concerns.

Feb. 22, 2022 The Supreme Court issues an order denying a petition for writ of certiorari to review the D.C. Circuit’s invalidation of the Army Corps of Engineers’ easement and requirement to conduct a more robust NEPA. Dakota Access LLC v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, No. 21-560 (US).

Sep. 8, 2023 The Army Corps releases its draft EIS analyzing the impacts of issuing an easement under Lake Oahe for Dakota Access, LLC, under the Mineral Leasing Act (MLA). The Corps is accepting public comments on the draft through Nov. 13, 2023. The agency assessed five possible alternatives in addition to the no action alternative, including denying the easement and requiring restoration to pre-pipeline conditions. The Army Corps did not select a preferred alternative, but will do so in the Final EIS after considering public comment. For more information on how to submit comments and future public meetings, click here.

Oct. 31, 2023 The Corps extended its public comment period on its draft EIS to Dec. 13, 2023. For more information on how to submit comments or appear at public meetings, see here.