BISMARCK, ND (Legal Newsline) - Protests of the Dakota Pipeline and not other factors caused the project to be delayed for months causing it to miss a crucial deadline, according to Energy Transfer officials testifying Thursday in its case against environmental advocacy entities Greenpeace.
Under questioning by plaintiff attorney Gregg Costa, Energy Transfer's project manager for construction and engineering Michael Futch said that before protests escalated in September 2016, the company was on track for completion by mid-October 2016. Futch said protests delayed the pipeline from going online as planned Jan. 1, 2017, until June 1, 2017.
Dallas-based Energy Transfer seeks $300 million in damages for trespass, nuisance and defamation from Netherlands-based Greenpeace International, its U.S. affiliate Greenpeace USA and the group's financier, Greenpeace Fund Inc. The suit is based on Greenpeace's 2016 and 2017 protests over the oil pipeline’s planned Missouri River crossing, upstream from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation.
In its defense, Greenpeace says it was not protests, but delays created by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' easement approval process and other incidents that prevented the pipeline from meeting its deadline.
Futch said Energy Transfer went to great expense and effort constructing barriers that would "create time and distance" so that workers could avoid violent confrontations with protestors. These so-called "hesko" barriers would give workers time to do their work and the ability to escape if necessary from protestors.
He also said the company invested in their own security because local law enforcement told them "we cannot protect you."
Energy Transfer senior vice president Joey Mahmoud, who worked for the company until the pipeline went online in June 2017, also testified Thursday, saying the route picked for the Dakota Pipeline was chosen as the one with the "least amount of impact to the most amount of stakeholders."
Mahmoud explained that whenever possible Energy Transfer would try to avoid federal land, Native American reservations and wetlands because of the extra costs, approval processes and disruptions to local citizens.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was the first stakeholder the company communicated with along the planned route as it would be the most impacted community.
He said the project had an "unanticipated discovery plan" in case workers came across something that risked any kind of harm or destruction to tribal gounds.
He denied allegations made in media reports that Energy Transfer deliberately descecrated sacred and sensitive grounds.
"That's far from the truth," Mahmoud said.
Mahmoud explained in response to questions about his thoughts on protesting that he had no problem with peaceful and lawful protestors.
He said protests became violent in May or June 2016 when Standing Rock Sioux Tribe chairman David Archambault "slapped a police horse and was arrested for it."
While protests were going on, Mahmoud said he met with Archambault at the Phoenix airport to try to come to an understanding to de-escalate things.
He said Energy Transfer security brought in dogs only in response to the protestors having dogs. He said that their security personnel suggested dogs as the best way to counter protestor dogs and avoid dogs versus people attacks; ideally to have any potential conflicts be dog versus dog.
After the Phoenix airport meeting, Mahmoud and the company agreed to remove its dogs and Archambault agreed to ask protestors to remove their dogs. Mahmoud said Energy Transfer removed its dogs, but protestors did not remove theirs.
When later asked if he was surprised that this meeting and agreement didn't result in de-escalation, Mahmoud firmly stated he was not surprised at all.
He said the nature of the protest changed when it went from a native led protest to outsiders and non-natives seemingly leading the protests.
The trial being held in Morton County is expected to last five weeks.