JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — The Halcyon Days Are Gone

In the halcyon days of the 1970s in North Dakota, when the state was a quieter, kinder, friendlier, more thoughtful place, the Legislature passed a bill, and the governor signed it, designating the Little Missouri River as our state’s only official State Scenic River and creating a commission to look out for it.

The Little Missouri Scenic River Commission did its job through the administrations of four governors who cared about the Bad Lands and its river — Art Link, Allen Olson, George Sinner and Ed Schafer — two Democrats and two Republicans. It met regularly, rerouted proposed pipelines to protect trees, kept gravel miners, oil drillers, seismologists and road builders out of the river valley, made sure oil wells and tank batteries were above the bluff line well away from the river and even passed rules regulating barbed-wire fences across the river.

Then came the administrations of John “Good-Paying Jobs Uber Alles” Hoeven and Jack Dalrymple, and the commission faded into obscurity. It ceased to meet, and its rules ceased to be enforced, and soon the industrialization of the Little Missouri State Scenic River Valley began.

Oil wells started showing up on the riverbank, just yards from the river. The state engineer began issuing industrial water permits to take water from the river for fracking, in direct violation of the law (600 of them at last count). The roar of diesel trucks and jake brakes, and the steady thump, thump of one lung pumpjacks, echoed throughout the valley.

With the election of Doug Burgum, who was an easterner, but owned a Bad Lands ranch, there was some hope that the state’s only Scenic River might once again get some special attention at the highest levels of government. Didn’t happen. Oh, Burgum reformulated the commission, but then he asked it, as its first official act, to ratify a policy making it legal, for the first time in more than 40 years, to use Little Missouri State Scenic River water for industrial purposes — read: fracking. They did that this week.

The commission is an interesting mix of folks. By law, it is composed of six Bad Lands ranchers, one from each of the six Bad Lands counties, and three bureaucrats — the state engineer, the state health officer and the state parks director. For the first 25 years of its existence, it carried out its mission, with reasonable ranchers who really cared about the river valley, and dedicated state employees from the State Parks and Health Departments and state engineer’s office, teaming up to fulfill its mission, as outlined in Chapter 61-29 of the North Dakota Century Code: “to maintain the scenic, historic, and recreational qualities of the Little Missouri River and its tributary streams.”

The law also says the commission “shall also have the power and duties of promulgating management policies to coordinate all activities within the confines of the Little Missouri River when such action is deemed necessary.”

One of the things they did with that authority, to help “maintain the recreation quality” of the river, was to adopt a fencing policy, which said that fences across the river “must have a gated opening of at least 8 feet.” They adopted that policy at a meeting in April 1995.

Now, I’ve been canoeing the Little Missouri for more than 40 years, and for the first 35 years, I rarely encountered a fence across the river. Once or twice in all those years. But a few years ago, Lillian and I canoed from the Logging Camp Ranch, south of Medora, into Medora, a trip we’ve done probably half a dozen times. And in that 40 or so river miles, we encountered eight fences across the river, none of which had gates. We were forced to get out and portage around every one of them. On about fence No. 6, I angrily vowed to bring a wire cutter with me the next time I canoed that stretch of the river. I cooled down after a couple of beers in Medora, and instead just decided to never canoe that stretch of the river again. And I haven’t. Which is too bad, since it is the stretch that goes around Bullion Butte, one of the nicest places on the entire river. Entire planet, for that matter.

Later, I asked a rancher down in that country why there were so many fences all of a sudden. He said, “Jim, neighbors don’t get along like they used to.”

Well, he’s right, of course. In the halcyon days, cattle along that stretch ran free and were rounded up and sorted in the spring for branding. Now, fences keep everyone’s herds separate.

I’m writing all this on the heels of this week’s Scenic River Commission meeting in Dickinson, at which the commission was asked to weigh in on three issues.

The first was Burgum’s policy of allowing for industrial use of water from the river for fracking. The policy was adopted by the State Water Commission, which Burgum chairs, about a year ago, but the Scenic River Commission mulled it over for a while before finally giving it the okay this week.

So instead of looking out for the river, maintaining its “scenic, historic and recreational qualities,” the first official action of the newly formed commission was to give its blessing to the industrialization of the Little Missouri State Scenic River. There are already approved industrial water permits at 10 ranches on the river right now. Who knows how many there will be in a year, or five years.

The second was a request for support for the new bridge across the Little Missouri River north of Medora. The group discussed it for more than an hour before commission member Gene Allen from Beach made a motion to support the “no-build” alternative laid out in the Environmental Impact Statement, which would have put the commission on record as opposing the new bridge. That brought Billings County Commission chairman Jim Arthaud roaring from the audience to the front of the room, where he took over the meeting and said in no uncertain terms that Billings County needed and deserved the bridge.

Well, after more discussion, the motion failed on a 5-3 vote, with only Allen, Slope County rancher John Hanson and Parks Director Melissa Baker voting in favor of it.  Then there was silence while commission chairman Joe Schettler, Dunn County’s representative on the commission waited for a motion to support the bridge. No motion was forthcoming. So, after a long pause, Schettler recessed the meeting for a bathroom break. So the commission took no position on the bridge.

The third was a discussion of the illegal bridge already built over the river in Dunn County by Wylie Bice, which I wrote about the other day. After some discussion, the group decided that since the bridge is already there, not much can be done about it. So they gave it tacit approval.

But the discussion turned to the idea that it was actually the Corps of Engineers fault the bridge was there because they signed off on the bridge but hadn’t checked with the Bureau of Land Management, on whose land the bridge is located, to see if it was OK with them. So the group passed a motion to send a letter to the Corps asking them to please share information on things like this.

I found it a bit ironic that a bunch of conservative ranchers were urging the government agencies to share personal information with each other. Guess it depends on the situation.

So now, the commission moves on to other things — what other things I am not sure. It’s an interesting group. The county representatives are appointed by the county commissioners. They must be ranchers who live on the river, except for the Golden Valley County representative (lawyer Gene Allen from Beach). (Golden Valley is one of the Bad Lands counties even though the river doesn’t flow through it.)

A couple of them take their responsibility to protect the river seriously. More of them are there to protect their county’s economic interests by not letting environmental protection get in the way of the industry that fuels their county’s economy — oil. The chairman himself has an industrial water permit and sells water from the river to the frackers. To be fair, he hasn’t been voting on these things, saying he will only vote to break a tie.

State Parks director Melissa Baker is there to protect the river. State Engineer Garland Erbele is there to do what engineers do — build things. He’s no friend of the river. The Health Department is represented by Dave Glatt, head of the state’s Department of Environmental Quality. He’s a lackey for the energy industry, Burgum’s worst appointment to date, who can’t be trusted to stick up for the river. He voted FOR the industrial water permit policy and AGAINST the motion to oppose the new bridge in Billings County, even though it has the potential to be the worst environmental problem ever to face the river if the oil trucks start crossing through the valley by the hundreds, or thousands, as the county has predicted. I told him after Monday’s meeting that, as the state’s top environmental officer, he ought to be ashamed of himself.

So what we’ve got, I was moaning to a friend of mine who knows these issues, is what we asked for: an active Little Missouri Scenic River Commission. I guess we have to be more careful about what we ask for. It’s just a rubber stamp for the energy industry, I complained to my friend. And that is bad because their approval of things like industrial water permits and bridges (and who knows what else in the future) gives those who would abuse the Little Missouri State Scenic River the credibility of having been approved and endorsed by an official state government commission.

A couple of years ago I began writing about the need to reactivate the commission. I really, really wanted to bring it back and put it to work protecting the river from industrial development. I remember those halcyon days when the Little Missouri Scenic River Commission members really, really cared about the river. And I really, really long for those days again, I told my friend.

“Jim,” he said, “things are different now. You need to lower your expectations.”

I guess.

RON SCHALOW: Of Course, He Did

Well, at least he didn’t kiss the brutal dictator on the lips and/or grab him by his small organ. That’s something, I suppose. He didn’t sniff Kim’s butt, as far as we know. The action is tough to translate.

Instead, our president just slobbered up a storm and beamed radiantly like a teen dork picking up his best girl. This Kim Jong-un character is quite the looker. Anyone can see that. He favors a young Raymond Burr in the dark.

Unconventionally handsome, one person might have said, before being tossed into a superornate pit crawling with 13 skinny Himalayan Hairy crocs. Very rare. Not the execution. The reptiles. When KJ slides on those shades, he can get anything. Because he is a ruthless tyrant. Not due to the cool sunglasses.

There might be seven people in all of North Korea, who given the chance, wouldn’t beat “Big Boy’s” twin brother to death with a Dennis Rodman sock full of D-cells. Batteries not included. And Rodman can be a little squirrely, especially if he’s wearing the sock you need. A length of lead pipe is probably a better choice.

But Trump didn’t even lunge at the murderous, torturing, people-starving, shaved panda a-hole. Dough boy could have merely tipped over on the garden gnome and ended him in a splat. But DJT was too busy saluting doormen.

Did he see the concentration camps as features or bugs? The starving people? Not that impressive. Hell, we have those, and kids in cages, too.

The Donald actually admired the mini murderer and marveled at North Koreans sitting up at attention when in KJ’s presence and wishes “his” people would do the same. Some do. They’re called white nationalists. Most of them look like POTUS son, Eric. It’s not pretty.

Did they strike the deal Trump promised? No. Was it at least as good as the Iranian nuclear deal, chipmunk chins tossed in the trash? Not by a long shot.

But the Iranian deal was a really bad deal. Trump said so. He should know. He’s screwed thousands of people. Donnie declared the Iran deal the worst deal since the Flintstones — it’s on right before Fox & Friends — bought that car with no engine. Dim bulb thinks all of the missing parts should have been an obvious deal breaker for Fred. Like he’s ever driven a car — or looked under a hood.

The worst deal ever in the world, ever. Ever! It was 159 pages, so I don’t how a semiliterate like the doofus would know what was in it, but it took more than two fat guys with a sharpie to hammer out the details over a bucket of chicken.

The Iranian nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action because that is what it is called, took a zillion smart people 12 years to formulate.

So, meanwhile:

The ocean is full of plastic, as are the inhabitants of the sea. The plastic breaks down into tiny fragments and absorb toxins in the water. Fish and birds are full of the stuff. Humans who eat the fish also ingest the toxins, which can also be referred to as poisons.

Things like that don’t bother the puffy POTUS. It’s more handsome — and younger — leaders, like Justin Trudeau, that really get on his nerves.

Besides, Donnie is made up of 37 percent plastic. It’s a little known fact. He used to get a little overaggressive when McD’s Quarter Pounders were sold in foam containers. It could happen to barely anyone. Anyway, you can tell by the 4-pound tensile monofilament fishing line that thrusts out and tangles on his head.

Most regions of the ocean are overfished. The trawlers with huge nets trap everything in their path, including bycatch, the incidental but inevitable capture or killing of non target species such as dolphins, sea turtles, sharks, rays, seabirds, whales and porpoises. Also, fish too small for processing that deplete the species even further. And critters that make up the food supply of other species. It’s not good.

Just so the ignorant McAss can have a cheap McFish. His precious boys like to shoot rare land mammals, for fun, so dingus has taught them well.

As for global warming, which is caused by man, dipshits like 45 and Kevin Cramer don’t believe it, since they can’t digest complicated information, plus they were told not to believe it. These clowns are more concerned about bathroom usage, even though the pervert-in-chief used to just walk into teen female dressing rooms and peep up close.

Most of the carbon dioxide that is emitted into the air has been absorbed by the oceans and have acidified the water, which kills coral reefs that are the nurseries of the sea.

And most people know that the oceans are warming and rising. We’ve already seen the extra-powerful weather disasters fueled by the warmer air and water. Many citizens have died, but DJ tossed out some paper towels, so his ass is covered.

Those are just a few of the problems with the water that covers most the Earth. Harm to the oceans will eventually harm us all. It certainly will be expensive.

Our land-based issues aren’t any better, but those problems can wait because we’re in North Dakota, which is in the United States of Trump, where the future is a liberal concept.

More importantly, mister beluga whale carcass endorsed Congressman Lite in a Tweet. Bigot Cramer was giddy, but more compliments were showered on Kim Jong-un by the mad grifter, which most humans would call a red flag.

Kevin will need to kill a few thousand liberals, and starve some children, before he gets any real respect from the sleaze.

And since we can’t go a full hour without a Trump scandal, it turns out that he solicited money for charitable purposes, but used the loot for personal use.

Of course, he did.

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — ‘I So Declare It!’

My day started out OK this morning. My pillbox told me it was Thursday — it’s always nice to know what day of the week it is right away in the morning. I had a pretty good bowel movement — for you young readers, that‘s pretty important for someone my age. I got my belt through every belt loop but one and got my shoes on without untying them.

And then it all went to hell, when I opened the paper to see the headline screaming from the front page: “Davis Refinery permit approved.”

Yikes!

I turned the paper face down on the kitchen counter so it wouldn’t be the first thing Lillian saw before she even had a sip of coffee. And then I went and sat down on the patio and sipped my coffee and looked at the beautiful, clear blue sky over North Dakota and thought to myself, “What kind of monsters would want to do this — put an oil refinery right next to Theodore Roosevelt National Park? And what kind of state regulators would permit that to happen?”

And who, at the highest level of North Dakota state government, will step in and say, “No. We’re not going to let you do that.”

Surely, Doug Burgum, you have a soul. Surely you won’t let this happen on your watch. Surely, you don’t want this to be your legacy.

Let me ask you this, Gov. Burgum:

  • Would the state of Wyoming allow an oil refinery to be built three miles from Old Faithful in Yellowstone National Park?
  • Would Montana put a refinery three miles from the Going To The Sun Highway in Glacier National Park?
  • Would Alaska permit a refinery at the base of Mount Denali? Well, maybe, Alaska is an even bigger whore to the oil industry than North Dakota. But let’s not give them any ideas.

These places — Yellowstone, Glacier, Denali, and yes, Theodore Roosevelt — these national parks are our national treasures. There are only 59 of them. The federal government — our elected Congress members and senators — agreed to protect these most spectacular places in our states, passing laws that said, “We’ll take care of what’s inside these park boundaries. Now you, people of these states, you take care to not let anything mess them up from the outside.”

Theodore Roosevelt National Park is the only national park in America named for a president of the United States — in fact the only national park named for a person. That’s how revered Theodore Roosevelt is. He was afforded this honor because of his great conservation record, which includes setting aside more than 230 million acres of public land during his presidency from 1901 to 1909.

He didn’t set aside the land where Theodore Roosevelt National Park is today. That was done by Congress in 1947, to honor him. But he lived and ranched there and developed his strong conservation ethic there and said if it was not for the time he spent in the North Dakota Badlands, he never would have been president of the United States.

The National Parks Conservation Association, a national parks watchdog group, has suggested that the Health Department attach a condition to the permit — perfectly allowable in the law — requiring the refinery to undergo a PSC site review. Here’s a story with some background on that.

I asked an official with the Health Department a couple of weeks ago if they were considering attaching such a condition. He responded, “We will address the PSC siting review issue in our response to comments, which will be made available upon completion of the document.”

They did that. In response to comments requesting them to attach the condition of a site review by the PSC (you can take a look at the Health Department’s response here–look at Comment 3), the Health Department said:

“Imposing a condition in the permit to construct requiring PSC siting would not be reasonable because a permit to construct is intended to address air pollution-related issues, not siting issues. See N.D.A.C. § 33-15-14-02(9) (authorizing the Department to impose “reasonable conditions” in a permit to construct). Concerns regarding the PSC’s requirements must be addressed to the PSC.”

Well, that’s complete and total bullshit.

I did go “see N.D.A.C. § 33-15-14-02(9).” It says:

“The department may impose any reasonable conditions upon a permit to construct, including …” and then it goes on to list various things, like

  • 1. Sampling, testing, and monitoring of the facilities or the ambient air or both.
  • 2. Trial operation and performance testing.
  • 3. Prevention and abatement of nuisance conditions caused by operation of the facility.
  • 4. Recordkeeping and reporting.
  • 5. Compliance with applicable rules and regulations in accordance with a compliance schedule.
  • 6. Limitation on hours of operation, production rate, processing rate, or fuel usage when necessary to assure compliance with this article.

Well, I guess I could make a pretty good case that any refinery operating beside a national park could create “nuisance conditions,” for the park, but that should not be necessary. There’s nothing in 33-15-02(9) that says they cannot require a PSC review. They could certainly attach that condition and let Meridian challenge it in court, if they want to.

I am reminded of a story about Theodore Roosevelt. When he heard that yachtsmen in Palm Beach, Fla., were shooting brown pelicans for sport as the ponderous birds flew to their nests on a small island not far away, Roosevelt asked an aide, “Is there any law that will prevent me from declaring Pelican Island a federal bird reservation?”

“No,” the aide replied. “The island is federal property.”

“Very well, then, I so declare it.”

And that was the birth of our National Wildlife Refuge system.

If there’s nothing in state law preventing the Health Department from attaching specific conditions to a construction permit, then it should “so declare it.”

Or, if Meridian wants to be a good North Dakota corporate citizen (yeah right) they could simply comply and go through a site review, like every other major energy conversion facility in our state has done, and using the best legal and scientific methods, find out if this is really a good place for a refinery.

That’s what should happen, Gov. Burgum. Those folks over at the Health Department work for you. Call them up and insist that they attach a condition for building that refinery next to our national park requiring Meridian to go through a PSC site review. As I have written here before, there is precedent for that.

Way back in 1974, in the face of a massive development of coal gasification facilities and coal-fired electricity generating plants, with the state lacking laws to regulate things like pollution and mined-land reclamation, Gov. Art Link and his state Water Commission attached a set of conditions to water permits granted to Michigan Wisconsin Pipeline Co. and a pair of Minnesota electric cooperatives, United Power Association (UPA) and Cooperative Power Association requiring them to take substantive measures to guard against pollution and land destruction. Those conditions, later adopted by the Legislature, became what are still today, I think, the strictest land reclamation laws in the country.

The companies, of course, challenged the Water Commission’s right to attach the conditions. On behalf of the Link administration, then-State Tax Commissioner Byron Dorgan asked Attorney General Allen Olson for an attorney general’s opinion on whether such conditions were legal. Dorgan wrote:

“I know that the Water Commission and the Governor are attaching these conditions in order to provide the best possible protection for North Dakotans as a result of the approval of these projects.

“The conditions are designed to make certain that developments of the type that were approved are subject to very stringent regulations in order to protect North Dakota’s quality of life.

“However, if these conditions should not be able to stand the test of a court challenge, then we are all living with a false sense of security about these conditions.

“For this reason, I believe that the Water Commission and more importantly, the people of North Dakota, should have the opinion of the Attorney General whether the imposition of conditions attached to water permits is legally binding action that the Water Commission has the authority to take.”

Olson wrote in his opinion:

“It is our opinion that the conditions on the Michigan-Wisconsin Pipeline Company and United Power Association/Cooperative Power Association Conditional Water Permits granted by the State Engineer and approved by the State Water Commission are basically valid.”

Olson then went on to say “However, as in all such cases, the courts would make the final dispositive determination as a validity.” You can look at the full exchange here.

In the end, the courts did that. Link won his battle “to protect North Dakota’s quality of life.”

North Dakota’s leaders had balls in those days. It took a special kind of courage for Art Link and Byron Dorgan and Allen Olson to stand up to the industrial giants of their day and say “Not so fast. Let’s take a good look at this and make sure we’re doing it right.”

In the end, we got a coal gasification plant, and some power plants, built under specific conditions that protected the environment. That’s the model Gov. Burgum needs to take a good hard look at.

We can have a refinery here if we want one. And I think we do. But we can put it somewhere else, down the road, not beside the national park named for the greatest conservation politician in the history of our country.

Let’s do that.

One more thing: Shortly before 7 a.m. this morning .I sent an e-mail to Mike Nowatzki, the governor’s press person, asking for 10 minutes with the governor today to talk about this. Here’s his response:

“The Governor is completely booked today with things that can’t be changed and is not available for an interview. Below is a quote you can attribute to him.

“The North Dakota Department of Health has determined that this project is expected to comply with all applicable federal and state air pollution rules and regulations and meets the requirements for a permit to construct. The project is going through the proper regulatory authorities as prescribed in North Dakota state law, and the Governor’s Office will continue to stay apprised of its progress.”

I wonder how Art Link,  Byron Dorgan and Allen Olson would feel about a response like that.

Finally, the entire document allowing Meridian Energy Group to build a refinery next to Theodore Roosevelt National Park is available online. You can go here to look at it.

You can also take a look at Meridian’s response to the public comments received by the Health Department in this document. Pay particular attention to its response to comment 4(e). The company has the nerve to say that there is more pollution from the cars visiting Theodore Roosevelt National Park each year than there will be from the refinery. They even built a fancy chart purportedly showing how much tailpipe emissions are coming from the cars visiting the park.

Great! There’s a way to protect the park. Keep everyone out.

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — Another Set Of Eyes On Our Wild Bad Lands

North Dakota has more than a million acres of public land, most of it in western North Dakota, our Little Missouri National Grasslands, managed by the U.S. Forest Service.

Most of it is grazing land, although it’s grazed by more than cattle and sheep. Pretty much every creature that lives in North Dakota has a presence there. For some — mule deer, sharp-tailed grouse, sage grouse, prairie dogs, coyotes, bighorn sheep, pronghorn antelope and countless species of birds, including our state bird, the Western Meadowlark — it is critical habitat. Studies done by state and federal agencies and numerous wildlife organizations confirm that most of those species are stressed. Some are in danger.

As recently as 40 years ago, more than half of those million acres were wild lands, roadless, designated as “suitable for wilderness.” Countless species thrived there, and the human presence was infrequent and temporary, limited to those of us who wanted some form of wilderness recreation — hunting, birding, hiking, camping, canoeing, photography, or just sitting in the shade of a cottonwood tree watching fluffy white clouds float through a crystalline blue sky. And the ranchers and their cows, of course.

Then came oil. In two booms, the Billings Anticline boom of the 1970s, fueled by the creation of OPEC, and the Bakken Boom of the 21st century, a product of horizontal drilling and fracking. And there went our wilderness.

Eager to pour oil royalty dollars into the federal treasury, the government opened the grasslands to oil development, and today we have just 40,000 acres out of that million — about 4 per cent — available as “suitable for wilderness.” I’ve bemoaned these facts and numbers endlessly on this blog, and I won’t apologize because it is important to remember and realize what we have done — to the land and to the critters who live there — or used to.

So imagine my joy to hear that a new organization was making its way into North Dakota, an organization made up of people who really CARE about those public lands, and are doing things to preserve and protect them.

An e-mail from a friend in early January told me there was going to be an informational gathering — attractively called a “Pint Night,” and I know what pints are all about — in a downtown meeting room, sponsored by a group called Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. The group, my friend said, was interested in public lands in the western part of the United States and access to that land for hunting and fishing, as well as other outdoor activities.

“Oh, Damn!” I thought. Access. A bunch of crazy four-wheelers trying to find new ways to get their noisy machines into our roadless areas. I Googled them. Much to my surprise, it turns out just the opposite — the group wants to protect public lands and maintain habitat for the birds and animals who live there.

Keeping wild places like this wild is the goal of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. (Photo by Bill Kingsbury)
Keeping wild places like this wild is the goal of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers. (Photo by Bill Kingsbury)

The “access” issue they’re talking about is dealing with the purchase of large tracts of private lands, blocking gateways into these public areas — a more and more common practice across America’s West these days. Well, I thought, hooray for them. At the appointed hour on the appointed night, I drove to downtown Bismarck to learn more about these people.

As I walked through the door and looked around the room, I got the feeling that about half of all the testosterone in North Dakota was gathered in one place. Perhaps 50 or 60 young men — big, strong, young men, most between the ages of 25 and 40, I’d guess, not the paunchy aging baby boomers we’re used to seeing at wildlife club meetings and DU banquets — had gathered to learn about these Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

The uniform of the evening was plaid flannel shirts, jeans and well-worn boots, and most were wearing baseball caps (with the brims pointed forward), with a smattering of battered cowboy hats. And there were a few women, also dressed like they were ready to venture outdoors, with their husbands or boyfriends, or on their own.

The men and women were leaning casually against the walls of the room, almost all holding a bottle of beer, and a few sat at scattered tables, listening to a fellow,  dressed like they were, talking about organizing to influence public officials.

BHA’s trademark is these “Pint Nights,” a familiar scene in the 34 states and two Canadian provinces that already have their own chapters of the organization (including South Dakota), dedicated to the protection of public lands and waters and providing responsible access to those lands and waters for Americans who want to enjoy our country’s great outdoor resources.

I’ve been a member of a lot of conservation, sporting and outdoors organizations (and now a member of this one), but this was the first I had heard of BHA. Founded in 2004 by small group of Montanans who saw a lot of problems with the management of our nation’s wild places and public lands, they came up with an idea for addressing the problems. They set out to create a grass-roots organization focused not on protecting one specific species, river or hunting area but on ecosystem-wide conservation across the continent. They wanted to create a voice for the silent wilderness. A wilderness they enjoyed as hunters and anglers.

Today they have grown an organization approaching 20,000 members. BHA President and CEO Land Tawney (yes, that’s his real name), who was the one speaking that January night in Bismarck, and at subsequent gatherings in Fargo and Minot, to help launch a North Dakota BHA chapter, told me later that North Dakota’s been on his radar for a while, and now volunteers have stepped forward to help get it going.

South Dakota’s chapter was formed in 2017, rallying around the issue of stopping the transfer of Black Hills National Forest land to the state for creation of a park in Spearfish Canyon. So far, they’ve succeeded, but the issue is long from resolved. One of the chapter’s founders, Jessie Kurtenbach of Deadwood, S.D., said the group will continue to work to protect Spearfish Canyon and is also deeply involved in the South Dakota meandered lakes law controversy, as well as working to protect all of South Dakota’s 2.6 million acres of public land.

In North Dakota, two volunteer co-chairs, Russ Senske of Bismarck and Adam Leitschuh of Minot, have started organizing a chapter whose initial mission, Senske says, is to promote responsible use of North Dakota’s Little Missouri National Grasslands. The key word there is “responsible.”

Tawney and the North Dakota men, Senske and Leitschuh, are concerned about our federal roadless areas, and stress their importance to men and women who enjoy the outdoors.

“Theodore Roosevelt came here to find solace as a young man, and this is where he developed his conservation ethic,” Tawney told me. “He preserved a lot of wild lands. We’re not making wild lands any more. We need to protect what we have.”

Tawney, a native Montanan and wildlife biologist with a B.S. degree from the University of Montana (and, he says, a Ph.D. in Post Hole Digging while fencing in the family quarter horses and mules), is a veteran of the conservation battles, spending time with the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and the National Wildlife Federation before coming to  BHA in 2013.

Both he and Senske stressed that stopping the illegal use of off-highway vehicles in the National Grasslands is a priority. Senske, a Wisconsin native and restoration ecologist by training who works as an environmental scientist for the North Dakota Department of Transportation, said increased signage in the grasslands is a high priority, with an eye to protecting sensitive wildlife habitat. Wetland wildlife habitat and enhancement of the PLOTS program will also be high on the priority list in North Dakota.

Additionally, at the federal level, Tawney says BHA maintains a presence in Washington, D.C. to keep an eye on outdoors issues, like monitoring attacks on the Clean Water Act and preserving and enhancing the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a key funding source for outdoor recreation and habitat improvement in both Dakotas.

All the organization’s leaders stressed the importance of keeping young people involved in issues concerning outdoor recreation. “We do reach out to a new generation of sportsmen and women, using a lot of social media,” Tawney said. “I think young people today like the fact we call it like we see it — we stand up for the resource.”

Senske said the North Dakota group will be submitting a formal letter of intent to form a BHA chapter here in April, and they hope to have an active chapter here soon after that.

Anyone looking for more information, or who wants to become a member (dues are just $25 per year and that include a subscription to a slick quarterly magazine), can look at the organization’s website, backcountryhunters.org (just click to go there). North Dakotans who want to talk to someone about being part of the new chapter can send an e-mail to backcountryhuntersnd@outlook.com.

The organization is a welcome addition to both the Dakotas. Our public lands need all the friends they can get. As Tawney says, they’re not making wild land any more.

LILLIAN CROOK: WildDakotaWoman — Wild Lands In North Dakota: A Red-letter Day In North Dakota History

Today was a red-letter today in North Dakota history, specifically N.D. conservation history.

This morning, at the Bismarck Public Library, the film “Keeping All the Pieces” was released by the Badlands Conservation Alliance and the North Dakota Wildlife Federation. Presented by Jan Swenson, BCA executive director, and Mike McEnroe, of the North Dakota Wildlife Federation, this 15-minute film dramatically captures the critical stage we find ourselves in with respect to the Bad Lands landscape and the future of this hauntingly beautiful place.

Jan Swenson (left) and Mike McEnroe introduce the film "Keeping All the Pieces," released by the Badlands Conservation Alliance and the North Dakota Wildlife Federation.
Jan Swenson (left) and Mike McEnroe introduce the film “Keeping All the Pieces,” released by the Badlands Conservation Alliance and the North Dakota Wildlife Federation.

Many North Dakotans stepped up for interviews in this film, sharing their deeply felt personal perspectives and concerns. In the months leading up to this release, Swenson and McEnroe have shown the film in communities across the state to more than a thousand interested parties. Now the film is out there for everyone to see. I urge you to watch it and to share it with your family and friends.

From the flyer available at today’s release:

“The Badlands are in crisis. Ninety-five percent of the Little Missouri National Grassland is open for oil and gas development. The future of the Badlands should be a decision made by the people, not the oil industry.”

This landscape is the heart of my personal geography, my sense of place. I grew up in rural Slope County, in the southern portion of the Little Missouri National Grassland. Jim and I have been working on these issues for decades, with BCA and other organizations, and in his entries on his blog. Together, on our own, or with friends and family, we’ve spent countless days and nights in the Bad Lands, camping, hiking, canoeing, kayaking, star-gazing, birding and hunting. As Swenson says in the press release for this film, “We do this now or we lose our Badlands.”

Also on my mind are two publications that were released some time ago, documenting the lands worth saving and calling for more permanent protections. The first was “Badlands on the Brink: North Dakota Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River Proposal,” published by the Teddy Roosevelt Group of the Sierra Club in May 1993. I hope to have a link to the pdf of this proposal in the future to post on this blog, as copies are difficult to locate.

The second is a document that I contributed to, along with Jan Swenson, Bart Koehler, Kirk Koepsel, Carol Jean Larson, Larry Nygaard, Mary Sand, Wayde Schafer and Webster Swenson. “Prairie Legacy Wilderness: North Dakota’s Citizen’s Proposal for Wilderness on the Dakota Prairie Grasslands” is a proposal by the North Dakota Wilderness Coalition, a broad variety of N.D. citizen organizations, made up of people who believe that the remaining fragments of wild lands in North Dakota are deserving of lasting protection. It was published in February 2008 and is available on the Badlands Conservation Alliance webpage by following this link.

What is important in this issue to remember is this: In the early 1970s, 500,000 acres of the Little Missouri National Grassland qualified for wilderness designation, By 1993, when “Badlands on the Brink” was published, only slightly more than 150,000 acres of potential wilderness remained. By the time “Prairie Legacy Wilderness” was released, less than 40,000 eligible acres remained wild.

“If we the public are not engaged, we likely will not like the results 10, 20 and 30 years from now.” Jan Swenson, BCA Press Release Feb. 1, 2018

Please get involved in these discussions. View the film. Join a N.D. conservation organization that is actively working on these issues. Make your voice heard for wild North Dakota lands to endure for the enjoyment of future generations.

My heartfelt thanks to Jan Swenson, Mike McEnroe and everyone else who contributed to the making of this fine film. I will confess that when I was shown an early version of this moving film, I shed tears.

“… where Nature can heal and cheer and give strength to body and soul alike.”
John Muir

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — Charlie Creek To Belfield — A History Lesson

The last major threat to the visual integrity of Theodore Roosevelt National Park, at least that I can recall — though there have been many skirmishes with the oil industry — was in 1989, when the Western Area Power Administration came really close to putting a huge transmission line along the east boundary of the South Unit of the Park.

I’m reminded of that in the context of the Meridian Energy Group’s horrible idea to put their proposed Davis Oil Refinery in about the same place, along the east edge of the park.

In the 1960s, WAPA, one of four federal power marketing administrations that serves our part of the United States, determined there was going to be a need for more electricity in part of its region in the future, and Basin Electric, headquartered in Bismarck, had surplus power to sell. All that was needed was a way for Basin to get its power into the WAPA system.

They determined that the best way was to build a transmission line — one with those big metal towers — from Basin’s Charlie Creek substation in McKenzie County, near the junction of state Highway 200 and U.S. Highway 85, to tie into an east-west WAPA power line near Belfield, N.D., about 40 miles south. WAPA commenced a federal Environmental Impact Statement process to find the best location for the line and its towers (unlike Meridian, which refuses to even submit to a state site review process) in 1969, and issued a draft EIS.

Some 20 years later, when demand reached the point that WAPA decided it needed the extra power, it commenced a review process with a public comment period and public hearings on the project. The review process focused on two identified corridors for the power line: a western line, called W1-1, which was four miles shorter and a million dollars cheaper than one farther east, called E-4-1R. WAPA recommended using the shortest, cheapest route, W-1-1.

Unfortunately, that route ran beside the eastern boundary of Theodore Roosevelt National Park and would have been visible from most high places in the park. The eastern route ran alongside Highway 85, five miles or so east of the park, and out of sight from the park.

So in the spring of 1988, WAPA published a notice of its intent to build the line next to the park and opened a public comment period. Tracy Potter and I were running the State Tourism Office at the time, and if WAPA could have picked any two people on the planet it did not want in THAT office at THAT time, it would have been the two of us. Our boss, Gov. George Sinner, turned us loose to organize against building the line next to the park.

In advance of the public hearings, which were to be held in Belfield and Grassy Butte, N.D., on July 26-27, 1988, we got on the phone and began rounding up supporters to send letters to WAPA, asking it to move the line east, to the highway, out of sight of the park. We did a pretty good job.

U.S. Sen. Quentin Burdick wrote:

“In recent days, I have received a number of letters from concerned citizens who believe that the route recommended for the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) will have long term negative effects on the Theodore Roosevelt National Park. As well, the North Dakota Tourism Office and the State Highway Department have also expressed opposition to the recommended route.

“It seems clear from the concerns raised by the opponents that WAPA should reconsider the options and seek a more acceptable routing for the line. Granted, the additional $1 million in construction costs must be an item of consideration. However, when viewed in the context, it seems the additional $1 million is not too large a price to pay to protect such a national treasure as Theodore Roosevelt Park.”

How about that! Why don’t we have U. S. senators like that anymore?

And Congressman Byron Dorgan wrote:

“The visual impact (on Theodore Roosevelt National Park) is unacceptable. I hope you will hear the concerns of myself and of many others who are committed to protecting the natural, scenic beauty of the Badlands.”

I know that our newest senator at the time, Kent Conrad, weighed in on this as well, but I can’t find his letter.

Even our boss, Gov. Sinner, and his lieutenant governor, Lloyd Omdahl, sent a jointly signed letter (although I think Tracy probably wrote it for them):

“North Dakotans have jealously guarded the Badlands scenic areas from avoidable intrusions. Consequently the Park today still provides awesome views of natural beauty unmarred by artificial structures. Whether or not future generations will be able to share this beauty will be determined by this generation and the decisions it makes about development in the area. We must proceed cautiously in the consideration of proposals to change the landscape.”

Other letters came from concerned citizens, and the usual suspects — the National Parks Conservation Association, the Sierra Club, the Theodore Roosevelt Nature and History Association and others, many of whom are now involved, 30 years later, in the current fight to move the Davis refinery away from the park.

Tracy led the testimony at the public hearing in Belfield, followed by TRNP’s Chief Ranger Bob Powell, Gary Redmann from the State Highway Department representing then-Commissioner Walt Hjelle, Wally Owen from Medora, who ran the horse concession in the park, and finally, batting cleanup, Medora Mayor and President of the Theodore Roosevelt Medora Foundation Rod Tjaden, who I think was also state chairman of the Greater North Dakota Association, the state’s chamber of commerce, at the time. (Humorous aside: Tjaden, not known for hanging out with the environmental crowd, sent me a note a few months later that said “Dammit, Fuglie, I’m getting mail from the Sierra Club, and it’s YOUR FAULT!”)

After the public hearings, WAPA went into hibernation for about six months, and in early 1989 released its final EIS, with its final recommendation on a route for their transmission line, which concluded with this statement:

“Through public comment, it was determined that visibility of the line from residences, local urban areas and TRNP was of significant importance. In particular, a large number of comments expressed concern for the visibility of the proposed line from TRNP. It was determined that the agency-preferred route would be changed from W1-1, as specified in the DEIS, to E4-1R (the environmentally preferred route).”

A loud cheer could be heard throughout western North Dakota. The system worked. The park was protected.

Well, that’s our history lesson for today. Sadly, history doesn’t often repeat itself. A month or so ago, I sent letters to our current governor, Doug Burgum, and to our congressional delegation, asking them to meet with the Meridian people and ask them to move the proposed refinery away from the park. I got a couple of responses.

This in an e-mail from Jodee Hanson in the governor/s office:

“The Governor respects the public comment period, which is still ongoing, and is staying apprised of the Department of Health’s permitting process being conducted within the boundaries of the law.”

To which I responded:

“Thanks for the note Jodee. Relay to everyone there that the ‘boundaries of the law’ are the minimum standard for action by public officials. There is much more that can, and should, be done. Like a one-on-one between Burgum and Prentice, heart to heart, CEO to CEO. I am inspired by Julie Fedorchak and Connie Triplett seeking a PSC review. The governor could make that happen by putting the hammer down on Prentice: “Y’know, Bill, we’re in this together for the long haul. We’re going to be looking at each other and talking to each other for a long time. Let’s be responsible and see what a PSC site review tells us.”

I also got an e-mail from a staffer for Congressman Kevn Cramer:

“Congressman Cramer has been in contact with both the N.D. Department of Health and EPA ensuring the project meets human health and environmental requirements.”

To which I responded:

“Relay to everyone there that meeting the “human health and environmental requirements” is not enough in this case. There is much more that can, and should, be done. As a former State Tourism director, Kevin understands the impact on our National Park. I’d suggest a one-on-one between the congressman and Meridian CEO Bill Prentice, heart to heart. I am inspired by Julie Fedorchak and Connie Triplett seeking a PSC review. The Congressman could help make that happen by meeting with Prentice:”

I’ve not heard anything from our two senators. I’m going to send them, along with Cramer and Burgum, a copy of this blog post to remind them of what can be done if everyone pulls their own weight.

Maybe. Just maybe …

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — What Will Happen To The Newest Bridge Across The Little Missouri State Scenic River?

Last summer, I wrote an article about a North Dakota Bad Lands rancher who built himself a big bridge across the Little Missouri State Scenic River on federal land without getting permission. I wrote then, last July, “The folks at the BLM office don’t seem to know anything about the bridge or the road or the water pits, but they should, since things like that would certainly need ‘permission slips …”

Well, I asked the federal land agent at the Bureau of Land Management office in Dickinson, N.D., about it. He promised to get back to me. When he did, it was with these succinct words: “We’ve got a situation here.”

Since then, Loren Wikstrom, the manager of the BLM’s North Dakota field office, and I have talked by phone, e-mailed and even snail-mailed a few times, and a couple weeks ago, I spent some time with him in his office. He’s pretty close to getting to the bottom of this “situation.” Here’s an update.

The rancher’s name is Wylie Bice. His ranch is a few thousand acres beside the Little Missouri State Scenic River in Dunn County, just west of the Killdeer Mountains, in western North Dakota. Bice made a fortune — $100 million or so — selling his oilfield trucking company before the bust hit the oil patch. I guess he really wanted to be a rancher instead of a trucker, so he used some of the money to buy the ranch adjacent to his, which happened to be on the other side of the river.

It’s a pretty nice bridge! Cross over and you’re on federal land.
It’s a pretty nice bridge! Cross over and you’re on federal land.

That ranch had a federal grazing lease on some BLM land. which just happened to be right up against the river, where Bice wanted to put his bridge. So he did.

And not only did he put a bridge there, but he built a road to get to it, and he built a couple of large water ponds for storing water for sale to the oil industry for fracking, and he also spilled his farming operations over onto that BLM land. All of that without telling the BLM, or asking permission. Yep, I’d say that qualified as a “situation.”

So the BLM dispatched one of its employees up to see Bice. They went out and stood beside the bridge and talked about it. And then the employee came back to the office and wrote up a report for his superiors. And the BLM began taking action.

What they did is, they opened up what they call a “trespass file.” I don’t think it is a criminal file, just a civil matter, but the BLM considers it a serious violation, because they told me the trespass file is closed to public inspection until it is resolved. They did, however, tell me what is going on.

First, they told Bice he had a bridge and a road on BLM land without a permit, and they sent him an application for a right-of-way permit, which would essentially grant him permission to build a bridge and a road on their land (never mind that both of them are already there). They told him to fill out the application and to send it back, along with the engineering plan for the bridge and the road, so they could see if it meets their specifications.

Once he’d done that, if everything was in order, they would consider giving him the missing permit for the bridge and the access road. I thought that was a pretty nice reaction. It’s a pretty expensive bridge, probably a million dollars worth or more. I’m sure Bice would not want to have to tear it down.

The BLM gave him until January 15, 2018 — a couple of weeks ago now — to submit his paperwork. When I met with Loren Wikstrom a couple days after that deadline, he thought he might be able to give me the paperwork to look at in early February. I’m going to take him up on that.

If they do decide to issue a permit, Bice is going to have to pay rent on the land that the bridge and the road are on, and there’s going to be an administrative fine. They haven’t told me what the fine is going to be.

Along with the application, the BLM is requiring him to send his plan to “reclaim” his water depot. That’s right. Bice built two big ponds — I mean really, really big — into which he pumps water from the Little Missouri, where it is stored until an oil company needs it for fracking. Then he sells it, and the oil company comes and hauls it away.

A number of Bad Lands ranchers are doing this right now, thanks to our North Dakota State Engineer’s office, which issued more than 600 illegal water permits in the last few years to help out the oil industry. I wrote about that here last year. Seems like North Dakota’s state government is a lot more willing to just look the other way to help the oil industry than the federal government is.

It turns out that part of Bice’s water depot is also on BLM land, and the BLM isn’t going to allow that, so he has to remove the ponds and reclaim that land. The BLM also is going to charge him back rent on that land and fine him for putting that water depot on their land.

Bice also started a farming operation on that side of the river, although I don’t know what he planted. But part of what he planted was on BLM land. The BLM didn’t like that at all. It’s probably going to fine him for that as well and make him reclaim that land.

The BLM told me in a letter dated December 7, 2017, “BLM will oversee application of the National Environmental Protection Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act and other applicable laws in considering the proposed right-of-way.”

The BLM guys went on to say that Bice “remains responsible for all applicable fines and back rent during the application processing period. In the event a right-of-way is granted, all fines and rent must be paid before issuance of right-of-way. Should the right-of-way be denied, the bridge, access road and other developments must be removed and the sites fully reclaimed to their original state at the expense of the responsible party (Bice).”

Well. Sounds like the BLM means business.

Then there’s another consideration. When someone wants to build something on federal land, especially in areas near Indian reservations, that darned old Historic Preservation Act comes into play. The BLM guys told me they never did get archeologists out there to do a cultural survey. That will likely have to take place once they get a completed application from Bice. The worst-case scenario, they told me, is “if they were to find artifacts or stone circles in the vicinity. That would be bad.”

I’m not sure exactly what “that would be bad” means, but I suppose it could mean denial of the right-of-way, and/or additional fines for violation of the Historic Preservation Act. The law is pretty clear on things like that, I suspect. I’m not going to look it up. I’ll let them tell me if that’s the case.

The water depot on BLM land, which is going to have to be removed.
The water depot on BLM land, which is going to have to be removed.

I don’t know if Bice is going to peaceably go in there and rip out the plastic liner in his pits, bulldoze them back to level ground, plant grass for the critters, pay his fines for trespassing, catch up on his back rent for the road and the pits and the bridge and the farming operation, or if he’s going to resist and set up another Cliven Bundy standoff situation. We’ll have to see how this plays out.

I did ask the BLM what happens if Bice doesn’t cooperate. The BLM’s response: “The BLM first tries to work with the responsible party in resolving trespasses amicably. However, if a trespasser is uncooperative, applicable civil or criminal measures may be pursued by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.”

Uh-oh. As we saw in the case of Jason Halek, the fellow who violated the U. S. Safe Drinking Water Act by dumping 800,000 gallons of saltwater down an abandoned oil well near Dickinson, which I wrote about here a few months ago, the U.S. Attorney in North Dakota doesn’t take these things lightly. So that’s when the lawyers get involved. Bice has plenty of money for lawyers. And things can drag on for years.

I also learned this week that Bice has obtained two new industrial water permits (one issued just last week) to pump water from the Little Missouri into his water pits. (You can look at them here and here if you want to.) Nothing surprising there. The water’s free, and the State Water Commission engineers love giving it away. They did place some restrictions on the permits, pretty standard stuff, such as taking precautions to minimize the visual and audible disruption to the scenic Little Missouri River valley, by keeping the shorelines in and around intake locations free of construction debris and litter, keeping pumps and motors sheltered from view of canoeists, setting pumps and motors away from the shoreline to make sure gas and oil leaks don’t get into the river, and putting mufflers on internal combustion motors “to maintain the tranquility and ambiance and minimize audible disruption of the scenic river experience.”

Uh, huh. We’ll see how that’s going when I canoe through there this spring (which I am surely going to do). I’ll also see if his scrapers and bulldozers have completed the job of getting rid of those big water pits on land you and I and the rest of the people of the United States own, and if Bice has planted some grass and a few cottonwoods alongside the river. I get the feeling the bridge will still be there. For a long time. I’ll let you know what I find.

Meanwhile, if you want to have a look for yourself, I can tell you the legal address is the West half of Section 33, Township 148 North, Range 97 West.

That’s it on the left, on the Forest Service map. White is private land, yellow is public land – owned by the BLM. You’ll have to get a Forest Service map and follow the winding gravel and sometimes two-track, roads. The road from the east is a private road through private land, so you probably should go there from the west, across public land. And you probably shouldn’t cross the bridge, like I did, because you’ll be trespassing once you get about halfway across the river.

As I wrote last summer: “Y’know, with all the things I’ve learned, and all the stories I’ve heard, about the Bakken Oil Boom, this takes the cake.”

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — The Refinery Needs A Site Review

A pair of former Democratic-NPL state senators challenged the North Dakota Health Department to demand a site review by the State’s Public Service Commission before issuing an air pollution permit allowing Meridian Energy Group to build a refinery three miles from Theodore Roosevelt National Park at a marathon public hearing by the Department Wednesday night.

Former Sen. Connie Triplett of Grand Forks told Health Department administrators near the end of a four-hour public meeting in Dickinson that they should attach a condition to the permit if they issued it, stating that the permit to build the Davis refinery would only be valid if the company submitted to a full site review by the PSC. And former Sen. Tracy Potter of Bismarck went a step further, saying the Health Department should just put the permit application on hold, and not consider it, until the PSC reviews the site.

Damn, I wish I could get rid of the word “former” in front of those two senators’ names. Out of the 40 or so people testifying on issuing an air pollution permit to the company at Wednesday’s public hearing, their Legislative experience showed their understanding of the government processes that could be brought into play before a refinery is built on the national park’s border.

To review: North Dakota has a law that says any energy conversion facility, such as a refinery, that is going to process more than 50,000 barrels of oil per day (bpd) needs to undergo a site review by the Public Service Commission to “ensure the location, construction, and operation of energy conversion facilities … will produce minimal adverse effects on the environment and the welfare of the citizens of this state …”

Further, it says “The policy of this state is to site energy conversion facilities … in an orderly manner compatible with environmental preservation and the efficient use of resources. Sites and routes must be selected to minimize adverse human and environmental impact …” (emphasis added)

To get around that requirement, Meridian now says it is going to process only 49,500 barrels per day, a sleazy, transparent move to avoid having the PSC tell them it this is a lousy place for a refinery and that Meridian should put it somewhere else where it won’t detract from our national park.

Meridian’s number of 49,500 bpd is 99 percent of the PSC’s jurisdiction limit of 50,000 bpd. Fifty thousand barrels is 2.1 million gallons. 49,500 barrels is 2.079 million, just 21,000 gallons less than the threshold for regulation. So Meridian’s tactic is to stay just 1 percent under the threshold for regulation. It would be a laughable move by the refinery people if it weren’t for the fact that by staying just barely under the threshold, THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING MERIDIAN FROM PUTTING AN OIL REFINERY BESIDE THEODORE ROOSEVELT NATIONAL PARK.

I can’t shout that loud enough. Nothing stopping them except, of course, issuance of an air pollution permit, which was the matter at hand at Wednesday night’s public hearing. And that’s why Triplett and Potter’s requests are so important. Because in its initial review, the Health Department says it thinks that the refinery could come in under the pollution limits allowed by the federal Clean Air Act to protect the Class I Air Quality Status of a nearby national park.

Now whether we believe that — the Meridian people haven’t said much that is believable so far in this process — Triplett and Potter pointed out that this is just one very narrow — albeit very important — look at whether the refinery should be built there. North Dakota state government needs to take a holistic approach to siting something as big as this — and there’s no doubt this is big, the biggest industrial plant to be built in our state since the Great Plains Coal Gasification Plant near Beulah 35 years ago, which at the time, was labeled the largest construction project in North America.

That’s what the PSC siting process brings. A look at the big picture.  And then once the PSC has completed its site review, the Health Department, the Water Commission, the Game and Fish Department, the State Parks Department, the Agriculture commissioner, the Tourism director, the Transportation director, maybe some other directors and, most importantly, the governor need to sit down around a table and decide what’s really good for the state, and  if this is really the best place to put an oil refinery. That’s how state government should work, whether we trust all those people or not. I guess we have to trust them, since they’re in charge here right now.

I don’t think anybody’s questioning whether we should have an oil refinery in North Dakota. Of course we should. As Triplett has pointed out, it is certainly more environmentally — and economically, I’ll add — desirable to refine oil here and ship a finished product out in a pipeline than it is to ship out raw crude in a pipeline and then ship refined gasoline and diesel fuel back here in trucks or another pipeline.

So the only real question is, where should the refinery be? Public Service Commissioners Julie Fedorchak and Brian Kroshus pushed hard at Meridian officials at a meeting last month to get them to consider other locations away from the park but to no avail. Barring that, they asked politely to be allowed to conduct a formal site review to “ensure the location, construction and operation of the refinery… will produce minimal adverse effects on the environment and the welfare of the citizens of this state …”

Meridian officials told them to stuff it. The 49,500 bpd refinery is under the threshold for a site review, they said, and they are complying with the law. Well, yeah 1 percent under the threshold, and in terms of impact on the environment and the welfare of our citizens, that’s a pretty slim — and sleazy — standard they set for themselves.

In fact, it prompted PSC Chairman Randy Christmann to tell me and a few others after the meeting that he won’t be surprised if some legislator introduces a bill in the next legislative session to get rid of the threshold altogether and make all energy conversion facilities of any size subject to a site review. Good for him. Christmann is not a big government regulation guy, but I think he’d like that. In the case of Meridian, that would be closing the barn door after the cows are out, but it certainly would keep this from happening again in the future.

Shortly after that meeting between Meridian and the PSC, when Meridian snubbed its nose at three elected officials, I sent a letter to Gov. Doug Burgum asking him to call Meridian CEO William Prentice into his office and ask him politely — CEO to CEO — to move the refinery away from the park. I think I’ll just put my letter at the end of this post because it’s been a month now, and I’ve not had a response from the governor.

I’m disappointed in that. It used to be in North Dakota, when you wrote a letter to an elected official, you got a response in a pretty timely manner. I worked for a governor for eight years, and I don’t recall a constituent letter ever going unanswered. Especially on a matter as important as this. I’ll write a little more about that subject in a few days.

Meanwhile, subsequent to Wednesday’s Health Department hearing, a public comment period on this issue remains open until Jan. 26. Then the Health Department will read all the public comments and respond to them, I think. Often the response is just to thank you for commenting and telling you they are taking your comments into consideration, but at least you know your comments have been read by someone. I submitted mine a few weeks ago and shared them with you in this space. You can read them by going to my old blog. I urge you to join me in commenting. I’m putting the address for your comments at the end of this post, too.

I’m adding to mine by strongly urging the Health Department to take the advice of Sens. Potter and Triplett and attach conditions to any permit, requiring Meridian to undergo a site review. Triplett, an environmental attorney, knows North Dakota law, and she says they can attach conditions to a permit. There’s precedent for that, even.

Way back in the 1970s, when a company named Michigan Wisconsin Pipeline Co. asked for a state water permit to construct some coal gasification plants here (one of which ended up being the Great Plains Synfuels Plant I mentioned earlier), the North Dakota Water Commission attached a series of conditions to the permit, which ended up being the beginning of North Dakota’s Mined Land Reclamation Laws, now the strictest reclamation laws in the country.

I think the conditions were challenged in court, and they held up. We’re all winners because of that. Strict regulations were followed, the coal gasification plant got built, and it’s still operating successfully today.

And I’m going to go a step further and ask the governor to strongly advise the Health Department — they work for him, after all — to attach the condition of a site review to the permit, if they issue one. Or to just tell the company they’re holding the permit until a site review is done. If Meridian is confident they’ve got the right project in the right place, they won’t have any problem undergoing a site review.

Let me repeat that.

If Meridian is confident it has got the right project in the right place, it won’t have any problem undergoing a site review.

One more time.

If Meridian is confident it has got the right project in the right place, it won’t have any problem undergoing a site review.

Here’s the address for your comments, to be submitted to the Health Department by Jan. 26. You might want to use the line “If Meridian is confident they’ve got the right project in the right place, they won’t have any problem undergoing a site review.”

Terry O’Clair, P.E., Director

Division of Air Quality

ND Dept. of Health

918 E. Divide Ave.

Bismarck,ND 58501-1947

And here’s my letter to the governor:

 December 21, 2017

Dear Gov. Burgum,

Late in the afternoon on this shortest day of the year, my mood is as dark as the 5 p.m. sky. I close my eyes and think back to the meeting between the PSC and William Prentice from Meridian Energy Group the other day, and I see him smirking as he says “We are going to comply with the law.”

So that’s what it’s come to for Meridian. It’s about the law. It’s not at all about anything North Dakotans might feel about having a refinery smack up against their national park. A national park named for our Greatest Conservation President.

“If these stupid North Dakota hicks are willing to put that kind of a loophole in their siting law, I’m going to use it,” the snarky Californian says.

So now, Governor, it’s up to you. You need to get that asshole in your office and tell him he needs to move that refinery. You can do that. He’ll respect you, a fellow businessman and North Dakota’s CEO.

Randy and Julie and Brian did their best, but they carried no authority. They’re not used to dealing with this kind of character. “I don’t see why you don’t just go through the siting process” won’t work with this guy. It’s kind of like the salesman who says “I don’t suppose you’d like to buy some insurance, would you?”

Please, Governor, call this guy up and get him in your office. And tell him to move the damn refinery.

Please let me know if you are willing to do this, so I can stop writing about it (and you) for a while. Even if it does no good, I need to know that at least you were willing to try.

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Jim Fuglie

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — We’ll See You In Court

At the end of the meeting between Meridian Energy Group executives and the North Dakota Public Service Commission a couple of weeks ago, Commission President Randy Christmann pretty much told William Prentice, Meridian CEO and the man who wants to build an oil refinery next to Theodore Roosevelt National Park, that the next time they meet will probably be in a courtroom.

“I expect when you break ground, somebody’s going to bring a complaint,” Christmann said. “You could be in court a long time.”

And commission member Julie Fedorchak added, “There are a lot of compelling reasons why you should go through our siting process. In the long run, it would be much better for you to have completed that process.”

Prentice’s reply: “We’re going to comply with the law.”

And later he told a reporter: “In the private sector, we very seldom look for excuses to have another regulatory layer on what we’re trying to do,”

What an asshole.

This is what a refinery looks like. Every refinery.
This is what a refinery looks like. Every refinery.

As you probably know from reading about that refinery, which Meridian plans to put alongside I-94 just east of the Park, the company is doing everything it can to just slide past legal impediments to its plans.

By claiming to be a “minor” source of pollution, Meridian takes a short route past the State Health Department’s Air Quality Permit process. As a result, the Health Department is just one public meeting away from issuing a “Permit to Construct.”

By telling the PSC it is only going to be processing 49,500 barrels of oil per day (bpd), Meridian skirts the Public Service Commission’s 50,000 bpd threshold for undergoing a site review to determine if this is a good place for a refinery. So the PSC has no legal authority to keep the refinery from being built near the national park.

That makes Fedorchak and fellow commissioners Christmann and Brian Kroshus very unhappy.

“It’s really a mixed message from the company,” Fedorchak says. “They’re telling us one thing directly and telling a whole bunch of other audiences something very different.”

To wit, this statement from Prentice on Meridian’s website early last year:  “We fully expect that the finalized refinery will be well above 55,000 barrels per day in capacity.”

That’s what Prentice and Meridian are telling potential lenders and investors. Maybe it’s time to get the North Dakota Securities commissioner’s office involved.

So that’s where we are today, as we begin 2018, the year in which Meridian says it will build a refinery just three miles from the national park named for our country’s greatest conservation president.

Meridian came to North Dakota in 2016 and told us it is going to build an oil refinery in Billings County that will process 55,000 barrels of oil a day. It’s going to build it in two phases, it said, of 27,500 barrels each, in rapid succession. Then it found out it has to go through a site review by the PSC if it’s going to process more than 50,000 bpd. Meridian changed its story, saying it is only going to process 49,500 barrels per day. How blatant is that? I’m surprised it’s not saying 49,999 bpd. Hey, they’d be one barrel within the limits of the law!

The State Water Commission (actually, the State Engineer’s office) received Meridian’s request for a water permit to take enough water out of the ground for the refinery to process 55,000 bpd. After reading Meridian’s website and press releases, the commission decided to grant a permit for just 90 percent of Merdian’s request, which might keep it from processing more than the 50,000 barrels per day threshold set by the laws governing the PSC’s siting process. So what’s 90 percent of 55,000? 49,500. The Water Commission’s math gives them, in theory, just enough water to process 49,500 barrels of oil per day. Now isn’t that convenient?

According to a Bismarck Tribune story from last summer, “Meridian requested enough water for use in a refinery that can process 55,000 barrels of oil per day. However, the company has told the Public Service Commission it plans to build a facility to process 27,500 barrels of oil per day and has not applied for a siting permit from the agency. A capacity of 50,000 barrels per day triggers a requirement for PSC approval.”

That lit up a light bulb at Meridian. Hey, if we change our story one more time, and tell the PSC we’re going to use 49,500 barrels a day, we’re under their threshold, and we don’t ever have to go through their siting process.

So, thanks, Water Commission staff, for planting that seed.

To be fair, Water Commission staffer Kimberly Fischer expressed some regrets about the permit, telling the Tribune “While there may be an impact to visitors’ experiences due to the construction of a refinery, it is outside of the authority of the state engineer to deny a water permit application due to the visual impact of having an industrial development near a national park.”

Hmmm. I’m trying to decide the difference between granting only part of a request for a water permit and not granting it at all. Both seem pretty arbitrary to me. State law says the state engineer needs to consider the effect of granting a water permit on “public recreational opportunities” (like a nearby national park?) or “harm to other persons resulting from the proposed appropriation” (like ruining the visitor experience at the national park?). I might be able to make a pretty good case that those two things are not “outside the authority” for denying the permit based on those two parts of NDCC 61-04-06.

But right now, the jurisdiction of the other two agencies — the State Department of Health and the Public Service Commission — are foremost in everyone’s minds. PSC Chairman Christmann had some harsh words for Meridian’s CEO, Prentice, and his bevy of lawyers. Not only did he pretty much say “We’ll see you in court,” at the end of the December meeting, but he started the meeting by telling the Meridian team “You’re not under oath today, but we are recording this meeting so it can be used as evidence if we have a case, so tell the truth.”

And Fedorchak actually drew a chuckle from the audience with a comment that was a little bit snarky: “I don’t see what’s special about this that makes it look any different than any refinery I’ve driven by, which I want to get by as soon as possible.”

The Health Department, meanwhile, is in the midst of a public comment period on its decision to issue an Air Quality “Permit to Construct” the refinery. The agency’s scientists and engineers have reviewed the numbers Meridian used in its application for the permit, and they apparently believe that they can run the refinery in that location and not affect Theodore Roosevelt National Park’s Class I Air Status.

If that’s the case, I told the Health Department’s Terry O’Clair, the director of the Department’s Air Quality Division, in a letter this week, he’s probably about the only one on the face of the earth who believes them. Because their record is so riddled with changing numbers and cover-up stories that very few people believe anything they say anymore.

“Listen, Director O’Clair,” I said in my letter (you can read the whole thing below if you want to), “if their record of using any number that is convenient in any given situation to justify their project is not enough to convince you that the numbers they provided you in their application cannot be trusted, then Heaven help North Dakota. Because we certainly can’t count on the North Dakota Department of Health.”

Before the Health Department can issue the final “Permit to Construct,” it is accepting public comments and will have a public meeting to discuss the project. I hope that everyone who reads this will write a letter and attend the meeting. The meeting is in Dickinson State University’s largest auditorium, in May Hall, on Wednesday, Jan. 17, at 5:30 pm MST. The deadline for submitting letters is Jan. 26. The address is at the top of my letter, below. You have until Jan. 26 to send your letter, so you can write it now, or you can wait and attend the public meeting and then react to that in your letter. In any case, send a letter!

All of the documents associated with the permit are on the Health Department’s website. There are hundreds of pages of documents. No one can be expected to read them all before the public meeting. I scanned through them. They are dated Nov. 30, 2017. Just about exactly five weeks ago. This paragraph jumped out at me:

“The facility is planned to be constructed in two phases; however, for air quality permitting purposes the impact of the entire planned project was taken into consideration. Upon completion of Phase 1, the Davis Refinery will have the capacity to process an annual average of approximately 27,500 barrels (bbl) per day of crude oil. Upon completion of Phase 2, the capacity will increase to 55,000 bbl per day of crude oil. The crude oil feedstock is expected to be generated from the North Dakota Bakken formation.”

That paragraph is part of the “Air Quality Effects Analysis for Permit to Construct” written by David Stroh, an environmental engineer with the Health Department’s Division of Air Quality. So what that means is the Health Department’s analysis of the refinery’s impact on our state’s air quality is indeed based on a refinery processing 55,000 barrels of oil per day, not the 49,500 Meridian now claims. A minor point perhaps, but maybe not. Because Meridian can reassure potential investors and lenders they have been approved by the North Dakota Department of Health to process 55,000 barrels of oil per day. That last 10 percent might just be important to money people.

Further, the ENTIRE Permit to Construct issued by the Department of Health is based on a refinery capable of processing 55,000 barrels of crude oil per day. Meridian officials are now flashing the permit in front of money people, especially the front page of the massive document, which reads:

3. Source Type: Petroleum Refinery with a rated capacity of up to approximately 55,000 barrels of crude oil per day.

Just click here for a quick look at that front page.

No wonder the Public Service Commission is pissed off. They’re being duped. It would seem to me that a phone call is in order, from Randy Christmann, chairman of the PSC, to Terry O’Clair, director of the Air Quality Division of the Health Department. “Hey, Terry, you’re about to give Meridian an Air Quality Permit to construct a 55,000 bpd refinery, but they were in our office three weeks ago and said it was only 49,500. You should probably change the permit.”

Back last summer, I wrote on this blog that Meridian is the sleaziest company to show up in North Dakota since the beginning of the Bakken Boom. Meridian is proving me right. I’ve said all along that everyone wants an oil refinery in North Dakota, just not there, beside our national park. I’m going to add one more caveat to that statement: Not that company, either. Not Meridian. They’ve proven they have no North Dakota values. They don’t belong here — anywhere — in our state.

Here’s the letter my wife Lillian and I sent to the Health Department.

Terry L. O’Clair, P.E.

Director

Division of Air Quality

North Dakota Department of Health

918 East Divide Ave,

Bismarck, ND 58501-1947

January 2, 2018

Dear Director O’Clair,

We have looked through the Permit To Construct issued by your agency to Meridian Energy Group to build the Davis Oil Refinery three miles from Theodore Roosevelt National Park (or as you describe it, approximately 2 miles west of Belfield) in Billings County, North Dakota.

We are not scientists, so we have no scientific basis from which to challenge your decision to issue the permit. But we are avid readers, and cautious conservationists, so we have followed news reports about this project, and have carefully reviewed Meridian’s website, including all of its news releases and its stock offering documents for prospective investors in the project.

You, on the other hand, are a scientist, so you have some basis for making a decision on whether this project will adequately meet the standards set by the National Environmental Protection Act to protect North Dakota’s environment and Theodore Roosevelt National Park’s Class I Air Quality.

At the end of the draft permit you issued to Meridian, in a section called “General Conditions,” you state: “This permit is issued in reliance upon the accuracy and completeness of the information set forth in the application.”

With those words, your department says that you are relying on them to provide complete and accurate information about what they will do to North Dakota’s air, which you are charged with protecting.

If your agency believes Meridian is providing you with “complete and accurate information,” then you are probably about the only people on the face of the earth who believe them. Because their record is so riddled with changing numbers and cover-up stories that very few people believe anything they say anymore.

We’re not going to go into the long list of discrepancies — 27,500, 55,000, 49,500 bpd — and how their story changes depending on which agency of state government they are trying to bamboozle, or which lender or investor they are trying to suck in. You have seen those changing stories. You already know that the numbers in their permit application are pure speculation, untested by science. And you believe them?

Listen, Director O’Clair, if their record of using any number that is convenient, in any given situation, to justify their project, is not enough to convince you that the numbers they provided you in their application cannot be trusted, then Heaven help North Dakota. Because we certainly can’t count on the North Dakota Department of Health.

Meridian is still telling investors that they are building a 55,000 bpd refinery and it will be in operation in early 2018. But now they’re giving North Dakota government agencies different numbers and saying they hope to have the refinery operative sometime in 2019. Perhaps it’s time to be talking to the State Securities Commissioner.

Former Theodore Roosevelt National Park Superintendent Valerie Naylor told a reporter last year that one of the problems with regulation of this refinery is North Dakota state government hasn’t taken a broader look at the project. She’s right. State government agencies need to review the project as a cooperating group, not just as individual agencies charged with examining specific parts of the project, such as water, emissions, and location. Superintendent Naylor said “You have to look at the whole picture. The whole project is more than the sum of its parts.”

What’s most troubling, we think, is Meridian’s obvious consistent pattern of avoiding serious scrutiny of their project by North Dakota government. By applying for a Synthetic Minor Source Air Quality Permit they are avoiding serious scrutiny from you. And by artificially setting their new production projection at 49,500 bpd, they are avoiding serious Public Service Commission scrutiny.

Even North Dakota Public Service Commissioner Julie Fedorchak doesn’t believe them. After being told Meridian was going to process an amount of oil which would keep them under the 50,000 bpd threshold for a full PSC site review, Commissioner Fedorchak told a newspaper reporter “They’ve been clear that they intend up to 55,000 barrels per day capacity, which would put them within our siting jurisdiction.” Fedorchak said “It’s really a mixed message from the company. They’re telling us one thing directly and telling a whole bunch of other audiences something very different.”

Julie Fedorchak’s no dummy. If she doesn’t believe them, or trust them, neither should you. And it’s a clear example of why state agencies need to be talking to each other.

Referring to Meridian’s application for a “minor” source permit, Meridian’s CEO, William Prentice, said in a press release from his own company “it is ‘unheard of’ for a refinery with Davis’ scale and scope to meet such strict emissions criteria.” But even though he admits it is “unheard of,” he’s got a big smirk on his face, because he’s convinced you to let him go ahead and build his refinery right next to a national park anyway.

And then, admitting that he is doing all he can to avoid serious environmental scrutiny, he told a reporter in December “In the private sector, we very seldom look for excuses to have another regulatory layer on what we’re trying to do,”

Good grief! Pure arrogance. And yet you are willing to gamble North Dakota’s future air quality by allowing industrial development by a company run by a man like this, within eyesight and earshot of Theodore Roosevelt National Park?

As we said at the beginning of this letter, you’re the scientist, Mr. O’Clair, not us. But sadly, we have to reject the science in this case. We don’t trust anything William Prentice and Meridian say. Neither should you.

We urge you to, at minimum, require Meridian to submit to examination as a Synthetic Major Source, and at most, we urge you to completely reject the Meridian application for an Air Quality Permit at this proposed location, because we just should not be taking chances with unproven science near Theodore Roosevelt National Park.

We believe you have the authority to tell Meridian to move the refinery away from the park if they want a permit to pollute North Dakota’s air. Your job is to protect our air, and our national park. Please do your job.

Respectfully,

 

Jim Fuglie

Lillian Crook

JIM FUGLIE: View From The Prairie — Refinery Near National Park Gets Preliminary OK

Tuesday’s announcement by the North Dakota Department of Health that it is preparing to issue an Air Quality Permit to Meridian Energy to build the Davis Oil Refinery three miles from Theodore Roosevelt National Park should come as no surprise.

Once again, the state of North Dakota rolls over to the energy industry, but this time it’s threatening more than just North Dakota’s environment. This time it is threatening a national park. This time, maybe, the state has rolled too far.

The Health Department would seem to have a narrow focus — numbers — but the documents it released Tuesday to back up those numbers are rife with judgments. There’s never been a refinery built like this one, the company brags in its public relations efforts, so there’s really nothing to compare it to in arriving at those numbers.

But there are a lot of people concerned about a lot more than just some numbers that purport to show that pollution from the refinery will not cause deterioration of the park’s Class I Air Quality Status.

In its announcement Tuesday, the Health Department said, “A complete review of the proposed project indicates that the facility is expected to comply with the applicable federal and state air pollution rules and regulations.”

Good. That means if the scientists at the Health Department are right, no matter where the refinery is located, in their judgment, it will not pollute North Dakota air.

But this is about more than air pollution. This is about putting a major industrial complex with stacks emitting big white plumes on the entrance road to the gate of a national park named for America’s greatest conservation president.

What are we thinking?

Part of the Health Department’s decision to issue a permit for the plant is based on the fact that Meridian is claiming to be a “minor source” of pollution, rather than a “major source.” I can’t go into a bunch of details about that, but basically it means that because the Department accepts that claim, the refinery is subject to different rules when it comes to determining if it will affect the park’s Class I Air Quality status. Less stringent rules.

That’s the first sham the refinery folks are pulling.

The second is, Meridian are avoiding having to get a siting permit from the Public Service Commission because it says it are going to build a refinery smaller than what it earlier applied for to the Health Department and the State Water Commission.

In North Dakota, a refinery planning to process more than 50,000 barrels of oil per day must go through a stringent siting process to determine the impact of such a facility on the surrounding area, such as a national park. Meridian’s applications to the Health Department, for an Air Quality Permit, and to the North Dakota Water Commission, for a water permit, are for a 55,000 barrels per day refinery. The siting permit process goes beyond just a numbers game. Let me quote from the PSC’s website:

“The purpose of the Siting Act is to ensure that the location, construction and operation of energy conversion facilities and transmission facilities will produce minimal adverse effects on the environment and upon the welfare of the citizens of this state by providing that no energy conversion facility or transmission facility shall be located, constructed and operated within this state without a certificate of site compatibility or a route permit issued by the Commission.

“The Legislature stated that it is the policy of this state to site energy conversion facilities and to route transmission facilities in an orderly manner compatible with environmental preservation and the efficient use of resources. Site and routes should be chosen to minimize adverse human and environmental impact while ensuring continuing system reliability and integrity and ensuring that energy needs are met and fulfilled in an orderly and timely fashion.”

Well, good for the Legislature! I think that law dates back to 1977. It’s a pretty safe bet it wasn’t passed any time in the last 10 years.

Again, the trigger for requiring a siting permit is 50,000 barrels per day. But now, Meridian now has changed its story and says it is only going to process 49,500 barrels per day, sneaking in under the 50,000 barrel limit and avoiding the siting process.

To her credit, Public Service Commissioner Julie Fedorchak said Tuesday she wants to meet with Meridian officials to discuss the proposed location. She’s not been happy with the refinery company’s shenanigans. She’s going to meet with Meridian CEO Bill Prentice on Dec. 19. I think I’m going to be there, too.

I’ve asked Fedorchak to get the governor involved in this process as well. Between them maybe they could convince the refinery people to move the plant 10 miles east, maybe even 20. There’s another refinery already located just west of Dickinson, N.D., about 20 miles east of the proposed location of this one. And it sits next to a transload facility with the capacity to move hundreds of tank cars of refined products a day to Eastern markets. I’d think that is a good location for another refinery.

But back to the Health Department. For now, the Health Department says Meridian complies with Chapter 33-15-14 of the North Dakota Administrative Code, which requires the facility to obtain a Permit to Construct and a Permit to Operate. In other words, the Health Department believes the pollution projections given to them by Meridian. Here are their words:

“The facility has met all requirements necessary to obtain a Permit to Construct. Once the Davis Refinery completes construction and meets the permit to construct requirements, a facility inspection will be performed by the Department. Upon a satisfactory inspection and performance testing, the Davis Refinery will be issued a Permit to Operate.”

Damn!

Here are a couple other excerpts from Tuesday’s announcement by the Health Department:

“Chapter 33-15-15 — Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality. This chapter adopts the federal provisions of the prevention of significant deterioration of air quality (PSD) program. A facility is subject to PSD review if it is classified as a “major stationary source” under Chapter 33-15-15. The Davis Refinery will be subject to federally enforceable emission limitations via a synthetic minor permit to construct to remain below “major source thresholds” and therefore is not subject to PSD review under this chapter.” (Note there the significance of being classified as a minor source rather than a major source.)

“Chapter 33-15-16 — Restriction of Odorous Air Contaminants. This chapter restricts the discharge of objectionable odorous air contaminants which measures seven odor concentration units or greater outside the property boundary. Based on Department experience with sources having similar emissions, the facility is expected to comply with this chapter.” (Basing this decision on possible sources with similar emissions, this does not pass the smell test, in my humble opinion. They ever been in Mandan when the wind is from the northeast?)

“Chapter 33-15-19 — Visibility Protection. This chapter applies to major stationary sources as defined in section 33-15-15-01. The facility will not be a major stationary source and therefore is not subject to the requirements of this chapter. Given the minor source levels of the visibility impairing air pollutants, such as NOx, SO2, and PM2.5, it is expected that the Davis Refinery will not adversely contribute to visibility impairment within the three units of the Theodore Roosevelt National Park (nearest federal Class I areas).” (Note again the different standards for major and minor sources. And what about the plume rising hundreds of feet high above the park?)

Finally, here’s the summary at the end of today’s announcement:

“Summary: A complete review of the proposed project indicates that the facility is expected to comply with the applicable federal and state air pollution rules and regulations. Therefore, Meridian Energy Group Inc. has met all the requirements for obtaining a Permit to Construct and a draft Permit to Construct will be made available for public comment. Given the level of public interest, a 30-day public comment period (PCP) and concurrent 30-day EPA review period is required prior to permit issuance. In addition, the Department will hold a public meeting followed by a public hearing in Dickinson, N.D., for interested parties. Upon completion of the PCP, the Department will address all comments applicable to the state and federal air quality rules and regulations and make a final determination regarding the issuance of a Permit to Construct for the Davis Refinery.”

The public comment period begins Friday and runs through Jan. 26, 2018. Sharpen your pencils. Written comments should be sent to the North Dakota Department of Health, Division of Air Quality, 918 East Divide Ave, 2nd Floor, Bismarck, ND 58501-1947. Or e-mailed to AirQuality@nd.gov.

Mark your calendars now to attend the public hearing on the refinery at 5:30 p.m. (MST) Jan. 17 in Dorothy Stickney Auditorium in May Hall at Dickinson State University. That’s a big room. Let’s fill it up.

Here’s Tuesday’s announcement, if you want to take a look. It’s a few hundred pages.

I am reminded that President John F. Kennedy kept a small wooden plaque on his desk in the Oval Office for days like this. It read, “Oh, God, thy sea is so great and my boat is so small.”

Indeed, Big Oil and North Dakota government rule a mighty sea.