(Fargo, ND) -- The US Army Corp of Engineers says the Dakota Access Pipeline should remain open while the Corp continues to conduct an environmental review. In an update ordered by US District Judge James Boasberg, the Biden Administration held fast to it's earlier position that DAPL should be allowed to continue to operate. Pending new information, the Corp, in it's status report, says they are "not aware of information that would cause it to evaluate the injunction factors differently than in its previous filing." The Corp expects to finish the review by March 2022.

Text of Status Report in US District Court 5/3/21

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS’ STATUS REPORT On April 26, 2021, this Court ordered the Corps to “file a Status Report that gives [1] its latest estimate for the completion of the ongoing EIS and [2] its position, if it has one, on whether an injunction should issue.” The Corps respectfully responds as follows: 1. The Corps estimates that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be completed in March of 2022. The Corps expects to use that timeframe to fulfill its commitment to undertaking an open, transparent, and public EIS process which rigorously explores and objectively evaluates reasonable alternatives. Further, the Corps is committed to robust tribal consultations and to actively engaging with the cooperating agencies, which include several Case 1:16-cv-01534-JEB Document 601 Filed 05/03/21 Page 1 of 3 2 Plaintiff Tribes, to produce a thorough and comprehensive EIS. 2. In response to the Court’s second question, on November 20, 2020, the Corps filed an opposition to Plaintiffs’ request for an injunction on the basis that Plaintiffs have not met the applicable standard as set forth in Monsanto Co. v. Geerston Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010). ECF No. 573. As represented by the undersigned counsel at the April 9 status conference, the injunction motion is fully briefed. Tr. of April 9, 2021 hearing at 15:9-14. This question now rests in the “sound discretion” of the Court. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008). 3. As to whether an injunction should issue, the EIS process in which the Corps is currently engaged examines many factors including some that may be relevant to the permanent injunction standard. It is possible that in the EIS process the Corps would find new information, but to date the Corps is not aware of information that would cause it to evaluate the injunction factors differently than in its previous filing. ECF No. 573 (citing Monsanto Co. v. Geerston Seed Farms, 561 U.S. 139 (2010)).