{
  "id": "R43787",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R43787",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 439946,
      "date": "2015-04-01",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T19:17:55.945373",
      "title": "Keystone XL Pipeline: Overview and Recent Developments",
      "summary": "TransCanada\u2019s proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil sands crude from Canada and shale oil produced in North Dakota and Montana to a market hub in Nebraska for further delivery to Gulf Coast refineries. The pipeline would consist of 875 miles of 36-inch pipe with the capacity to transport 830,000 barrels per day. Because it would cross the Canadian-U.S. border, Keystone XL requires a Presidential Permit from the State Department based on a determination that the pipeline would \u201cserve the national interest.\u201d To make its national interest determination (NID), the department considers potential effects on energy security; environmental and cultural resources; the economy; foreign policy, and other factors. Effects on environmental and cultural resources are determined by preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The NID process also provides for public comment and requires the State Department to consult with specific federal agencies.\nTransCanada originally applied for a Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline in 2008. Since then various issues have affected the completion of both the NEPA and NID processes for the project. In particular, during the NID process for the 2008 application, concerns over environmental impacts in the Sand Hills of Nebraska led the state to enact new requirements that would change the pipeline route. Facing a 60-day decision deadline imposed by Congress, the State Department denied the 2008 permit application on the grounds that it lacked information about the new Nebraska route. In May 2012, TransCanada submitted a new application with a modified route through Nebraska, thus beginning a new NEPA and NID process.\nWith the release of the final EIS for the new pipeline route in January 2014, the State Department began the current NID process. Public comment on the project, allowed under the Executive Order, ended on March 2014. Federal agency comment on the project was interrupted by state court action in Nebraska, but this litigation was resolved. The department subsequently told federal agencies to provide their input by February 2, 2015. The State Department has not committed to a deadline for issuing its final NID or making a Presidential Permit decision.\nDevelopment of Keystone XL has been controversial. Proponents base their arguments primarily on increasing the diversity of the U.S. petroleum supply and economic benefits, especially jobs. Pipeline opposition stems in part from concern regarding the greenhouse gas emissions from the development of Canadian oil sands, continued U.S. dependency on fossil fuels, and the risk of a potential release of heavy crude. There is also debate about how much Keystone XL crude oil, or petroleum products refined from it, would be exported overseas. Relations between the U.S. and Canadian governments have also been an issue. With the fate of Keystone XL uncertain, Canadian oil producers have pursued other shipment options, including other pipelines and rail.\nIn light of what some consider excessive delays in the State Department\u2019s permit review, Congress has sought other means to support development of the pipeline. In the 114th Congress, the most significant legislative proposal has been the Keystone XL Pipeline Approval Act (S. 1), which would have directly approved Keystone XL and put an end to any further review under federal environmental statutes. On January 29, 2015, the Senate passed S. 1 by a vote of 62 to 36. On February 11, the House passed S. 1 by a vote of 270 to 152. The bill was sent to President Obama on February 24th and vetoed the same day. The Senate attempted to override the President\u2019s veto on March 4; however; the override measure failed by a vote of 62 to 37. No further action on S. 1 was taken in the House.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43787",
          "sha1": "44486a0ba61510d51113c3bebc4182153d80c4e6",
          "filename": "files/20150401_R43787_44486a0ba61510d51113c3bebc4182153d80c4e6.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43787",
          "sha1": "febd48aeb27d046a78be46957c12257b9dccd7fe",
          "filename": "files/20150401_R43787_febd48aeb27d046a78be46957c12257b9dccd7fe.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 2481,
          "name": "Oil and Natural Gas Markets"
        },
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 2911,
          "name": "North America:  Canada and Mexico"
        },
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4402,
          "name": "Energy Law and Policy"
        },
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4412,
          "name": "International Environmental Law"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc501972/",
      "id": "R43787_2015Jan05",
      "date": "2015-01-05",
      "retrieved": "2015-03-30T22:03:27",
      "title": "Keystone XL Pipeline: Overview and Recent Developments",
      "summary": "This report describes the Keystone XL Pipeline Project and the process that the State Department must complete to decide whether it will approve or deny TransCanada's permit application. The report also discusses key energy security, economic, and environmental issues relevant to the State Department's national interest determination. Some of these issues include perspectives among various stakeholders both in favor of and opposed to the construction of the pipeline.  Finally, the report discusses the constitutional basis for the State Department's authority to issue a Presidential Permit, and opponents' possible challenges to this authority.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20150105_R43787_809d5c340876f462b171134ebcaf7aba13b53519.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20150105_R43787_809d5c340876f462b171134ebcaf7aba13b53519.html",
          "source": "pymupdf"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Energy",
          "name": "Energy"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Energy transportation",
          "name": "Energy transportation"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Petroleum pipelines",
          "name": "Petroleum pipelines"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc491430/",
      "id": "R43787_2014Nov13",
      "date": "2014-11-13",
      "retrieved": "2015-01-27T19:40:46",
      "title": "Keystone XL Pipeline: Overview and Recent Developments",
      "summary": "This report describes the Keystone XL Pipeline Project and the process that the State Department must complete to decide whether it will approve or deny TransCanada's permit application. The report also discusses key energy security, economic, and environmental issues relevant to the State Department's national interest determination. Some of these issues include perspectives among various stakeholders both in favor of and opposed to the construction of the pipeline. Finally, the report discusses the constitutional basis for the State Department's authority to issue a Presidential Permit, and opponents' possible challenges to this authority.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20141113_R43787_c00a5a2e7f8d8f209afbb11e5d2cd9e05b99051b.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20141113_R43787_c00a5a2e7f8d8f209afbb11e5d2cd9e05b99051b.html",
          "source": "pymupdf"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Energy",
          "name": "Energy"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Energy transportation",
          "name": "Energy transportation"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Petroleum pipelines",
          "name": "Petroleum pipelines"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economic Policy",
    "Energy Policy",
    "Environmental Policy"
  ]
}