Upland Pipeline

[oneoff]

"Upland Pipeline: In November 2014, we completed a successful binding open season for the Upland Pipeline. The $600 million pipeline would provide crude oil transportation between multiple points in North Dakota and interconnect with the Energy East Pipeline at Moosomin, Saskatchewan.

Subject to regulatory approvals, we anticipate the Upland Pipeline to be in service in 2018. The commercial contracts we have executed for Upland Pipeline are conditioned on Energy East Pipeline proceeding."



Two hours ago; the news wires reported on this statement.

This is what someone else was trying to figure out two years ago.

So whats an "open binding season". Reminds me of "exploitation engineers"

[Oliver88]

Either way, the more oil pipelines the better.

[oneoff]

Here's some background reports from three sources

Proposed Upland Pipeline

TransCanada Markets Upland Pipeline and Energy East Pipeline System

TransCanada has launched an Open Season to obtain binding commitments from interested parties for the Upland Pipeline and Energy East Pipeline System. The Upland Pipeline would provide crude oil transportation from multiple points in North Dakota and interconnects with the Energy East Pipeline System at Moosomin, Sask.

The Open Season follows a successful expression-of-interest phase and subsequent discussions with prospective shippers. Following the completion of the Open Season, if it is successful, TransCanada intends to proceed with the necessary regulatory applications for approvals to construct and operate the required facilities.

During the Open Season period, which expires on September 8, 2014, at 12 MT, interested parties may submit binding bids for transportation capacity of crude oil at multiple points between North Dakota and the interconnect with the Energy East Pipeline System. Additionally, interested parties may submit binding bids for transportation capacity of crude oil for the Energy East Pipeline System.

Potential and existing shippers will have equal opportunity to review the options on the Upland Pipeline and Energy East Pipeline Service Offerings by contacting Andy Asplund or Amanda Jackson, as noted below.



Reuters

Pipeline company TransCanada Corp is planning to ask the U.S. government for a permit to build a new 200-mile (322 km) pipeline from North Dakota across the border into Canada, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing a source.

The company expects to announce the $600 million Upland Pipeline Project proposal in its earnings report on Friday, the newspaper reported.

The project aims to transport up to 300,000 barrels a day of North Dakota crude to a connection in Saskatchewan and on to TransCanada’s planned Energy East pipeline, the Journal reported, citing an unnamed source.

TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline, which received approval from Congress on Wednesday, had been criticized by environmentalists who say mining the oil sands increases emissions linked to climate change. Labor and oil interests say the project will increase North American energy security and offer thousands of construction jobs.

If the Upland pipeline project receives a permit, it would be projected to go into service in 2018, the Journal said, citing a person briefed on the plan.

TransCanada could not be reached for comment.


By
Amy Harder and
Amy HarderThe Wall Street JournalCANCEL BiographyAmy Harderamy.harder@wsj.com@AmyAHarderAmyAHarderGoogl e Alison Sider
Alison SiderThe Wall Street JournalCANCEL BiographyAlison Sideralison.sider@wsj.com@alyroseFeb. 12, 2015 7:56 p.m. ET
The company behind the Keystone XL pipeline plans to ask the U.S. government to permit a new and different pipeline project.

Despite the yearslong fight over Keystone XL, TransCanada Corp. will apply to the U.S. State Department to build a 200-mile pipeline from North Dakota’s booming oil fields across the border into Canada to connect to another proposed pipeline, according to a person briefed on the plan.

In its earnings report Friday, the company will announce it is proposing the $600 million Upland Pipeline Project, which aims to transport up to 300,000 barrels a day of North Dakota crude to a connection in Saskatchewan, according to the person briefed on the plan. From there, the oil can flow on TransCanada’s planned Energy East pipeline, which aims to ship up to 1.1 million barrels of oil a day nearly 3,000 miles across Canada to refineries and ports along the country’s East Coast.

U.S. laws restrict American oil exports, but companies are generally allowed to sell crude to Canada if they apply for a license. U.S. oil exports to Canada have been on the rise in recent years. During the first 11 months of 2014, close to 106 million barrels of oil pumped in the U.S. was exported to Canada—more than double the volume exported in 2013, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The Upland pipeline is scheduled to go into service in 2018, subject to regulatory approvals, which includes a permit from the State Department to cross the U.S.-Canadian border, the person briefed on the plan said.

Related

House Passes Keystone XL Bill; Obama Veto Expected TransCanada Rebuts EPA Comments on Keystone XL Pipeline .The announcement indicates TransCanada isn't backing down on its oil-shipping plans despite an increasingly political fight over Keystone XL. The U.S. House cleared legislation Wednesday approving the proposed pipeline, the latest—but not the last—twist in a saga that has escalated into a broad debate on the economy, energy production and climate change.

President Barack Obama has cited his administration’s ongoing review of the project as the reason he is threatening to veto the legislation, which should reach his desk later this month.

The State Department, which has jurisdiction over cross-border pipeline construction, has been reviewing Keystone XL since September 2008. The department is in its final stage of review, but has no deadline to make a final decision. Vetoing the legislation doesn't interfere with the State Department’s process.

Plans for Keystone XL call for transporting up to 830,000 barrels of oil a day, mostly from Canada’s oil sands region to Steele City, Neb. From there, Keystone XL would connect with existing pipelines that could move the oil south to refineries along the Gulf Coast. As proposed, up to 100,000 barrels of that crude oil could come from North Dakota, though it isn’t clear whether TransCanada’s new Upland Pipeline Project changes those dynamics. If completed, the entire Keystone XL Pipeline system would span 1,700 miles and cross six U.S. states.

The years of delay and increased permitting costs have doubled Keystone XL’s cost to $10 billion. So far, TransCanada has spent $3 billion on the project.

The company’s move comes at a tenuous moment for North Dakota’s oil patch, where prices have crashed and oil companies are slowing down drilling efforts. In recent years, refineries along the east coast of the U.S. and Canada have opted to buy North Dakota crude instead of importing pricier foreign oil from countries like Nigeria. Much of the oil pumped in North Dakota moves to the Atlantic seaboard on trains because few pipelines exist to take it that far. As of November—the latest data available—oil trains carried roughly 60% of the crude leaving the region, according the North Dakota Pipeline Authority.

But the plunge in oil prices has made foreign crude oil much cheaper, and some refiners have recently imported more foreign crude.

Tom Nimbley, chief executive of PBF Energy Inc., which operates refineries in Delaware and New Jersey, said North Dakota crude will to make its way east, but it isn’t as popular as it once was. PBF has been buying more South American oil instead this year, he added.

Some small pipelines have been built to move crude out of North Dakota in recent years, and a few larger ones are proposed. It is cheaper to transport oil on a pipeline than in trains, but building new lines can take years and is an expensive and politically charged process, even when they don't cross an international border.

Phillips 66, one of the biggest refiners in the U.S., and Energy Transfer Partners, a Dallas-based pipeline company, have proposed a Bakken pipeline that aims ship oil from North Dakota to Texas by way of Illinois. But regulatory obstacles have delayed plans by Enbridge Energy Partners of Canada, which wants to build a $2.6 billion, 600-mile pipeline system to deliver North Dakota crude to Wisconsin and other points in the Midwest and on the East Coast