Representatives from Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the controversial Dakota Access pipeline, traveled to Cambridge, Iowa, in October to present a series of $20,000 checks to emergency management departments in six counties.
One of the counties had pledged to use its check to purchase “HazMat operations and decontamination training/supplies.” Less than a month later, in Cambridge, the Iowa section of the Dakota Access pipeline would experience its first spill.
According to the standards of most state environmental agencies, it was a small spill that wouldn’t require much attention from emergency managers.
Since the leak was contained at the site, it went unreported to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, although it did make it into a federal pipeline monitoring database.
The Dakota Access pipeline leaked at least five times in 2017.
The biggest was a 168-gallon leak near DAPL’s endpoint in Patoka, Illinois, on April 23.
DAPL went into operation on June 1, along with its under-the-radar sister project, the Energy Transfer Crude Oil pipeline, a natural gas pipeline converted to carry crude.
Most of the Bakken system leaks were considered minor by state and federal monitors.
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation spokesperson Kim Schofinski told The Intercept that reporting the spill to the agency was not required because it was contained within the pumping station where it occurred.
The Line 3 project’s environmental impact statement has underlined that damages to tribal natural and cultural resources along that pipeline’s pathway are “not quantifiable” and “cannot be mitigated.” “Somebody lives there,” LaDuke said.

Crude Oil Begins To Flow Through Controversial Dakota Access Pipeline.
Crude oil is now flowing through the Dakota Access Pipeline, despite months of protests against it by Native American tribes and environmental groups.
It is expected to transport approximately 520,000 barrels of oil daily.
"But protests led to delays in permitting the final stretch of the pipeline under the Missouri River in North Dakota."
At least 761 people were arrested during the standoff, according to The Associated Press.
They fear that a pipeline leak could contaminate their drinking water and sacred lands.
"The tribe wants a judge to shut the pipeline down and says a thorough environmental review of the project must be completed," Sisk added.
During President Trump’s first month in office, he reversed a decision by the Obama administration and called on the Army to expedite the approval process for the section of the pipeline that had not yet been built.
As The Two-Way reported, a federal judge in March denied a motion for a preliminary injunction to stop construction, clearing the way for the completion of the pipeline.
The Associated Press described what happened: "The Dakota Access pipeline and a feeder line leaked more than 100 gallons of oil in western North Dakota in separate incidents in March, and the Dakota Access line leaked 84 gallons of oil in northern South Dakota in April.

Oil isn’t even flowing through the Dakota Access pipeline yet, but already there’s been a leak.
"This is what we have said all along: Oil pipelines leak and spill," said Standing Rock Sioux Tribe chairman Dave Archambault II.
"The Dakota Access pipeline has not yet started shipping the proposed half million barrels of oil per day, and we are already seeing confirmed reports of oil spills from the pipeline."
Watch the VICELAND documentary on Standing Rock: The spill happened April 4 during the testing of a surge pump, according to Brian Walsh, an environmental scientist with the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
The surge pump had a mechanical failure, but the entire spill happened within a lined containment area.
* Walsh told me that South Dakota typically gets 200 to 300 spills a year from fuel leaks, pipelines, oil wells, and various other sources.
State regulations require companies to report spills right away, and Walsh said ETP did (it reported the spill two days after the fact, on April 6).
That decision could take weeks or months.
asks Hasselman.
As for the April spill, Hasselman pointed out that it would have received more attention if it were a major spill that affected drinking water.