Crs Report for Congress: Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Key Issues

In 2008, Canadian pipeline company TransCanada filed an application with the U.S. Department
of State to build the Keystone XL pipeline, which would transport crude oil from the oil sands
region of Alberta, Canada, to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Keystone XL would ultimately
have the capacity to transport 830,000 barrels per day, delivering crude oil to the market hub at
Cushing, OK, and further to points in Texas. TransCanada plans to build a pipeline spur so that oil
from the Bakken formation in Montana and North Dakota can also be carried on Keystone XL.
As a facility connecting the United States with a foreign country, the pipeline requires a
Presidential Permit from the State Department. In evaluating such a permit application, the
department must determine whether it is in the "national interest," considering the project's
potential effects on the environment, economy, energy security, foreign policy, and other factors.
Environmental impacts are considered pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, and
documented by the State Department in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The final EIS
was released for the Keystone XL pipeline permit application in August 2011, after which a 90-
day public review period began to make the national interest determination. During that time the
State Department determined that more information was needed to consider an alternative
pipeline route avoiding the environmentally sensitive Sand Hills region of Nebraska, an extensive
sand dune formation with highly porous soil and a shallow depth to groundwater recharging the
Ogallala aquifer.