No imminent move on Line 5, White House says

This item is part of Watching Washington, a regular dispatch from CBC News correspondents reporting on U.S. politics and developments that affect Canadians.

What's new

The White House sought to clarify Tuesday some earlier remarks about the disputed Line 5 oil pipeline from Canada.

The bottom line: There's no news for now.

A White House spokesperson had said earlier this week that the Biden administration would await a full environmental review before making a decision on the pipeline.

On Tuesday, that same official, Karine Jean-Pierre, clarified that the environmentalreview in question was abouta future version of Line 5 and separate from an ongoing dispute over the existing pipeline.

She said thatenvironmentalreview would guidea long-term decision about whether to eventually grant apermit for a newtunnel foran upgraded pipeline under the Great Lakes.

On the current Line 5, she said, there's a court dispute playing out between the Canadian company Enbridge Inc.and the Michigan state government, which is trying to shut down the line.

Jean-Pierre wouldn't comment on that case.

"Those parties can speak more to the [legal] process," she said Tuesday.

TheU.S. government isinvolved in talks aboutthe existing lineafter the Canadian government invoked a 1977 treatylimiting either country's ability to impede a cross-border pipeline.

But Jean-Pierre said there are no developments on that front, either.

"[There's] nothing new to share on the current line. We expect the U.S. and Canada to engage constructively on it. I don't have anything else to share about that," she said.

What's the context

At issue is an old pipeline carrying 540,000 barrels per day of oil and other petroleum fuels from Canada, across the Great Lakes, then into Michigan, and finally into Ontario as a major fuel source for Eastern Canada.

The Michigan government has ordered the pipeline shut down, prompting a legal fight and court-ordered mediation. After Michigan moved to end mediation talks in September, Canadainvoked the1977 treaty.

The issue presents a political conundrum for Biden.

On one hand, the president's political allies in Michigan, a critical presidential swing state, want the pipeline shut down amid fear of potential damage to the Great Lakes.

On the other hand, he faces pressure to keep the fuel flowing. That pressure comesnot only from Canada,but from domestic critics,asfuel prices have surged.

The context for recent exchanges at the White House: oil and gas prices and inflation, which have become a political headache for the administration.

Last weekend,Biden's energy secretary acknowledged that home heating prices will be higher this winter.

A Fox News reporter, Peter Doocy, brought up those remarks atMonday's White House briefing and asked why, given current fuel prices, the president is considering closing another pipeline from Canada.

Biden has already cancelled one Canadian oil pipeline, Keystone XL.

The issue has become fodder in American partisan politics;the Republican Party tweeted out video of Monday's exchange at the White House and prepared to holdDemocrats responsible for higher energy costs.

What's next

Jean-Pierre has made repeatedly clear this week that Biden has no plans toshut the current pipeline, saying: "That is something that we're not going to do."

At the same time, she didn't comment on another relevant scenario: Whether Biden might intervene to save the pipelineif necessary, depending on court developments.

In the meantime,Calgary-based Enbridgeis applying to build a new tunnelunder the Straits of Mackinac, the narrow passageway connecting Lake Michigan and Lake Huron,to housean updated version of its pipeline.

That's the project being evaluated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

A spokespersonfor the Army Corps of Engineers said an evaluation like this generally takes two years. It starts witha preliminary phase, then a main phase of the work, then a draft environmental impact statement, which is followed bya final environmental impact statement, and ultimatelya decision on a permit.

The review has just begun and is in its preliminary phase, said William R. Dowell.

"From start to finish [it's] about two years long.The process varies but that's the approximate length of time it takes," he said.