Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Oil and water: The Line 3 debate
St. Paul

Minnesota regulators to decide this week on Enbridge Line 3

Line three proponents and opponents' buses sit across the street.
Line 3 proponents' and opponents' buses sit across the street from each other on Robert Street outside the Public Utilities Commission in downtown St. Paul.
Lacey Young | MPR News

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

State regulators reconvene this week to decide whether to approve or reject Enbridge Energy's proposal for replacing its Line 3 oil pipeline across northern Minnesota.

The Public Utilities Commission meets Tuesday so its members can resume questioning Enbridge officials as well other supporters and opponents of the project. The panel could then deliberate as long as until Friday before making its decision.

Line 3 was built in the 1960s. It runs from Alberta across North Dakota and Minnesota to Superior, Wis. Enbridge says it needs replacing to ensure safety and restore capacity because the existing pipeline is increasingly subject to corrosion and cracking.

But climate change and tribal activists object because it would carry Canadian tar sands crude and risks spills in pristine waters where Native Americans harvest wild rice.