Public Comments for 19-0673

1,298 results
  • June 27, 2019

    I just learned that Energy Transfer Partners is requesting to increase the capacity of it's pipeline Dakota Access (DAPL) from 570,000 barrels per day to 1,100,000 barrels per day by adding pumping stations in IL,

    I am absolutely against this and think that Illinois Commerce Commission and state of Illinois should deny this request by Energy Transfer Partners.

    We are currently experiencing the effects of climate change and many scientists say that we are on the brink of climate catastrophe.

    Allowing a private company to increase the amount of oil it can transport is essentially the state of Illinois participating in the transport of oil to go to foreign markets via the Gulf of mexico shipping and be burned which will release more greenhouse gases and further contribute to the problem, which will result in the state of Illinois having to spend money to fix or alleviate effects for citizens. Flooding, heatwaves, and other problems will result which our most vulnerable populations, the poor and elderly and most susceptible.

    Additionally, if there is an oil spill, there will be more oil that can pollute our land and water.

    Would Energy Transfer Partners increase it's insurance amounts with the increase in flow?

    In short, do not grant Energy Transfer Partners a permit to build these pumping stations and increase oil flow because it is not in the best interests of the citizens of the state of Illinois.

    Sincerely,

    Angela Viands
    Angela Viands
  • July 2, 2019

    /Users/keithpuntenney-imac4/Desktop/ IUB Reply 1,100,000 bbl DAP proposal/Reply to DAPL 1,100,000 bbl proposal to IUB.docx/Users/keithpuntenney-imac4/Desktop/ IUB Reply 1,100,000 bbl DAP proposal/DAPL Pipeline Formation and Financing Ex A.docx/Users/keithpuntenney-imac4/Desktop/ IUB Reply 1,100,000 bbl DAP proposal/US Sup CT -knick-v-township-of-scott.pdf Keith Puntenney
  • July 2, 2019

    I just learned that Energy Transfer Partners is requesting to increase the capacity of it's pipeline Dakota Access (DAPL) from 570,000 barrels per day to 1,100,000 barrels per day by adding pumping stations in IL,

    I am absolutely against this and think that Illinois Commerce Commission and state of Illinois should deny this request by Energy Transfer Partners.

    We are currently experiencing the effects of climate change and many scientists say that we are on the brink of climate catastrophe.

    Allowing a private company to increase the amount of oil it can transport is essentially the state of Illinois participating in the transport of oil to go to foreign markets via the Gulf of mexico shipping and be burned which will release more greenhouse gases and further contribute to the problem, which will result in the state of Illinois having to spend money to fix or alleviate effects for citizens. Flooding, heatwaves, and other problems will result which our most vulnerable populations, the poor and elderly and most susceptible.

    Additionally, if there is an oil spill, there will be more oil that can pollute our land and water.

    Would Energy Transfer Partners increase it's insurance amounts with the increase in flow?

    In short, do not grant Energy Transfer Partners a permit to build these pumping stations and increase oil flow because it is not in the best interests of the citizens of the state of Illinois.

    Sincerely,
    Shannon Griffin
    Shannon Griffin
  • July 2, 2019

    I just learned that Energy Transfer Partners is requesting to increase the capacity of it's pipeline Dakota Access (DAPL) from 570,000 barrels per day to 1,100,000 barrels per day by adding pumping stations in IL,

    I am absolutely against this and think that Illinois Commerce Commission and state of Illinois should deny this request by Energy Transfer Partners.

    We are currently experiencing the effects of climate change and many scientists say that we are on the brink of climate catastrophe.

    Allowing a private company to increase the amount of oil it can transport is essentially the state of Illinois participating in the transport of oil to go to foreign markets via the Gulf of Mexico shipping and be burned which will release more greenhouse gases and further contribute to the problem, which will result in the state of Illinois having to spend money to fix or alleviate effects for citizens. Flooding, heatwaves, and other problems will result which our most vulnerable populations, the poor and elderly and most susceptible.

    Additionally, if there is an oil spill, there will be more oil that can pollute our land and water.

    Would Energy Transfer Partners increase its insurance amounts with the increase in flow?

    In short, do not grant Energy Transfer Partners a permit to build these pumping stations and increase oil flow because it is not in the best interests of the citizens of the state of Illinois.

    We have seen the effects of climate change in Southern Illinois by way of extended flooding. Please, do make make your citizens suffer more.

    Sincerely,

    Elizabeth Hartman, MLIS, Certified Archivist
    Elizabeth Hartman
  • July 2, 2019

    I absolutely oppose the proposal by Energy Transfer Partners to increase their pumping capacity for currently certified pipelines. They have demonstrated time and again that they are unable and unwilling to operate safely, without catastrophic spills. We don't need any more pollution in Illinois, thanks...we have enough already. Ann Wheeler
  • July 2, 2019

    We need to phase out fossil fuels not increase them.

    Pipelines always leak and sometimes heavily.

    We are quickly polluting our planet and there will be no way of turning back.

    Put your energies into renewable s which are sustainable and do not destroy our planet!!!
    Cheryl Connolly
  • July 2, 2019

    Please don't install the new pumping station, this will cause more harm than good. Causing more harm to our environment and our drinking water. Pipes all around the world already break and leak so please STOP!!!

    OUR CLIMATE IS ALREADY SUFFERING DUE TO THE USE OF FOSSIL FUEL.

    PLEASE!!!
    Deny Dakota Access their permit.
    Kris Deyne
  • July 2, 2019

    The Dakota Access Pipeline was hastily built, under massive protest, and WITHOUT a full Environmental assessment to carry the dirtiest, carbon-rich oil to refineries. It has also violated the tribal rights of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.

    Energy Transfer Partners' request to increase the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) from 570,000 barrels per day to 1,100,000 barrels per day by adding pumping stations in IL is a terrible idea. This will not only bring more carbon-rich oil to market, to ultimately be released into our atmosphere, but the increased pressure within the existing pipeline will create even more dangerous conditions and increase the risk of a break and spill. If there is one bad weld from this rushed pipeline, the increase in pressure from the doubling of capacity will certainly break it.

    Do not grant Energy Transfer Partners a permit to build these pumping stations and increase oil flow in the pipeline because it is not in the best interests of the citizens of the state of Illinois nor is it in the best interest of having a stable atmosphere for human habitation.

    We, the citizens of Illinois will continue to fight this pipeline until it is shut down.

    Frank Esposito
    Illinois tax payer
    Frank Esposito
  • July 3, 2019

    I do not believe that the ICC should grant Dakota Access, LLC and ETCO, LLC the right to install new pumping stations. Increasing the flow of these pipelines is not in the public interest and is not the type of infrastructure and commerce we need in the state of Illinois. Paul Berland
  • July 3, 2019

    The people of Illinois want to deny the additional pumping stations requested by Dakota Access/Energy Transfer. This is not a public utility to benefit those of us in this state - this is a prive company.

    Illinois is already at risk of hazardous leaks and spills from this pipeline increasing the capacity means increasing the risk. Energy Transfer is corrupt and this pipeline is dangerous. Illinois residents want to move toward a safer cleaner and more sustainable future, which will be realized as we move away from fossil fuels and over to the unlimited potential of renewable energy. We do not want our People, our homes, or our water to be placed in jeopardy because of any private businesses or corporations. We do not trust them to do what it safe or legal as we have already seen them assault people, steal land, and leak oil. Dakota Access is a threat to the health and property of the citizens of Illinois.

    In the interest of our safety, do not allow the additions. I would take it a step further to say they should not be allowed in Illinois at all after witnessing them overstep Treaties and commit human rights abuses against our neighbors.

    Thank you
    Dawn Kwiatkowski
  • July 3, 2019

    As a Citizen of Illinois and someone who is concerned about the health of our people, the health of our environment, and the situation of the climate catastrophe that is happening I do not think Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC should be allowed to pump more crude oil through the pipelines that are under Illinois soil. We need to immediately stop our use of fossil fuels as the carbon dioxide they are releasing are causing havoc in the Earth's atmosphere and disrupting expected weather patterns.

    Both the extraction of oil and the burning of oil release carbon dioxide and other dangerous chemicals. As I mentioned above this is very harmful to our climate. It is also possible that some of the pipes will begin to leak and cause serious pollution to our soil and our water. In order to dilute the oil it is mixed with toxic solutions to thin the oil enough to flow through the pipeline. Why should we live with the risk of this happening? We do gain profit from these pipelines in any way!

    I do not think it is fair to expect all the people who live in the vicinity of the pipelines and the watersheds of the creeks and rivers the pipelines cross to live with the risk of leaks. Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company LLC should pay everyone of us each year for the risks we must put up with. Also, once Farmers' land is disturbed by the placement of the pipelines their soil takes many years before their crops are as plentiful as before the land was disturbed.
    Meryl Greer Domina
  • July 3, 2019

    Please deny this request to nearly double the capacity of this toxic, dangerous fuel through our state. The people of Illinois do not want DAPL. We do not want fracking. And we do not want the health and environmental risk to double.
    You will be weighing the intrests of the residents of this state against the greed of a few already obscenely wealthy entities. Please do the right and just thing.
    You are an appointed, not elected Council. The fact that this critically important decision is being made by some members who were appointed by a major stock holder in ETP, Governor Pritzker, is in my opinion an affront to what is supposed to be democratic government. Prove me wrong.
    Sandra Mayer
    Sandra Mayer
  • July 3, 2019

    Enough already.
    Its 2019. We have the technology to provide affordable and clean and renewable energy now. Right now. Today.
    And yet, we are still in a scary and dangerous place.
    Tara Nelsen
  • July 3, 2019

    Hello,

    I am writing to express my opposition to this request for new pumping stations which would allow for 1.1 million barrels per day to the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    The additional flow will created heightened climate risks and risk to clean air and water. Furthermore, the Illinois General Assembly is actively pursuing legislation such as the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA). This request does not seem to be consistent with that type of policy direction.

    I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to reject this request for additional pumping stations.

    Best,
    Parth
    Parth Patel
  • July 5, 2019

    We are in a climate crisis we must go green. We must change the work and go green for the very near future generations depend on us. DAPL wil never be forgiven for the atrocities they committed on native sacred grounds. Water is life David Rodriguez
  • July 5, 2019

    Climate change should now be our #1 concern.
    Increasing shale oil fracking and the current attempts to increase pumping stations and pumping facilities along the Illinois DAPL pipeline increase the possibility of the following problems occurring.
    1 - Reduction of air quality as a result of dust production during construction and emissions due to the combustion of fossil fuels used for construction equipment, 2 - Soil erosion and contamination from construction and any leaks, 3 - Loss of plant life as a result of construction, surface disturbances, and changes in water flows, and 4 - Water resource disturbances in terms of quantity and quality as a result of erosion, herbicides, and leaks.
    This information should provide sufficient reason for the Illinois Commerce Commission to say No to Energy Transfer Partners.
    Sally Milow
  • July 5, 2019

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline and any plans for its expansion or increase in capacity. This action will substantially increase the volume of oil transported along the pipeline at great benefit to the private corporations who own it. Increased risk and volume of spills due to leaks and other acts of negligence by the private owners is a predictable consequence, as is the exacerbation of the growing climate crisis. Illinois residents, on the other hand, will receive no meaningful benefit from the expansion. Deny this petition. Robert Hartzer
  • July 10, 2019

    I oppose any expansion of pipe lines. Dakota Pipelines has a history of leaks. Taxpayers will sooner or later end up paying for cleanups, damage to clean water sources, and in increased likelihood of illnes caused by pollution. When the fuel is burned, we all pay as it contributes to climate change and all of its consequences. What few jobs it will generate are temporary construction jobs, or cleanup related. The profits will go to a very few. The increased fuel that is generated will not result in lower prices here as much of the fuel is likely to be exported. Pipeline expansion is not worth the risks or costs. Jill Skinner
  • July 10, 2019

    i don't believe an private company has the right to take away our rights by eminent domain. Plus we don't ready need more crude oil to be shipped overseas across our land. Pipeline break, will the ICC clean up the mess. It is time to just say NO! Cameron Smith
  • July 10, 2019

    No to pipeline expansion. This is moving in the wrong direction. Let us move forward not backward. Let us build a sustainable future for our planet and all its inhabitants. We can be so much wiser than this. Let this be the time. Stephanie Solbrig
  • July 10, 2019

    I oppose. The oil and gas industry said Illinois would be the new Saudi Arabia. We don't want to be. Keep it in the ground. Annette McMichael
  • July 11, 2019

    I am apposed to any new or expanded pipeline project to transport oil, especially oil that is intended to be exported from our country. The Illinois residents including animal and plant species will ultimately be the losers in any expansion in Illinois as there will be leaks. That is a given with any man-made structure. So our soil, water, and air will be polluted again and again. Enough is enough. I oppose this permit and want to see Illinois become a leader in environmental issues. Lucia Amoreilli
  • July 11, 2019

    DAPL should not be permitted to build new pumping stations or to increase the volume carried by its pipeline in Illinois. The assumption that new oil and gas infrastructure is a “public good” must be abandoned. The infrastructure enriches a few and brings great risk to people in Illinois, and around the world. If ICC supports this plan it will support obsolete and dangerous thinking at a time when every ounce of fossil fuel still in the ground needs to stay there. Even oil companies are recognizing they will never bring to the surface all the fuel they believe they ‘own’ below ground. If oil companies understand this, DAPL and the ICC need to embrace this new understanding, too. ICC needs to look with great suspicion at any DAPL claims that its new plans will bring good to IL. On the contrary, the plans increase the risks IL already faces from its reliance on fossil fuels of all kinds. Sandra Lindberg
  • July 11, 2019

    Regarding Docket 19-0673,

    Energy Transfer Partners has submitted a petition to install additional pumping stations and pumping facilities along the existing DAPL pipeline route in the State of Illinois. Their goal is to increase the capacity of DAPL to double the carrying capacity from 570,000 barrels per day to 1,100,000 barrels per day or 400 billion barrels of the dirtiest, most carbon-rich oil a year.

    Please deny their request - this doubling of their capacity will accelerate the burning of fossil fuels which is the major cause of disastrous climate change. We MUST keep 80 percent of the known oil, gas and coal reserves in the ground for the foreseeable future or it is game over for humanity! Augmenting the capacity of pipelines is working in the reverse direction of all of the efforts to reverse our horrendous carbon pollution!

    Before you make your decision please review the many IPCC reports on climate change and its impacts. Humanity is in a precarious position right now, and is facing an extinction level event with rising global temperatures, increased violent storms, droughts, massive rains, flooding, forest fires, food shortages, mass migrations and rising sea levels!

    There is NO good reason to approve this petition. If approved it would increase the burning of fossil fuels and accelerate all of humanity's problems with climate change. Please Say NO!
    Lora Chamberlain
  • July 11, 2019

    No pipeline expansion. we must put a brake on fossil fuels. these pipelines always leak polluting oil. Bonni McKeown
  • July 11, 2019

    I am opposed to the Dakota Access Pipeline and any plans for its expansion or increase in capacity. It is past time to recognize that fossil fuels are NOT the future. Fossil fuels have brought us to the brink of destruction and their continued use will bring about the end of civilization. The DAPL is not a public good, it is a public risk. And the risks will continue to mount.
    Climate chaos is not going away.
    Global over-heating is not going away.
    It will take an all-hands-on-deck, all-out, full-on "war effort" to save the Earth's ability to support life!! WAKE UP!
    Delores Logue
  • July 11, 2019

    Strongly oppose! The risk of catastrophic ecological devastation is too great, just compounding the obvious toll foil fuels take on our environment. This is not an issue of cheap gas for convenience or necessity of public utilities-- this has become a burden on taxpayers, humans and non-humans everywhere. ETP is not a public utility!
    Enough is enough!
    No more infrastructure for oil and gas!
    We do NOT consent!
    Mary Swanson
  • July 11, 2019

    Energy Transfer Partners has a poor record of maintaining pipelines that pose no risk, in fact, they have a
    record of damaging spills. Moreover, increasing the oil flow with pumping stations to double, to over a million gallons from 570,000 gallons, will increase the risk of spillage and damage to our water in Illlinois.
    Considering our water is already somewhat polluted with runoff from farm chemicals and plastics, our focus must be on the public good, of preserving quality we have, not squandering our precious water for private profit. The increased pressure is not in the best interest of Illlinois, so the decision to protect the state from harm is the only legitimate choice. No pumping stations!
    Jill Paulus
  • July 11, 2019

    No to pipeline expansion. This is moving in the wrong direction. Let us move forward not backward. Let us build a sustainable future for our planet and all its inhabitants. Jd Paulus
  • July 11, 2019

    I oppose this doubling of DAPL capacity.
    Not only will this for-profit pipeline increase the risk of a spill, it will explode the amount of CO2 that will end up in the atmosphere, exacerbating Climate Change.
    Robin Grooms
  • July 11, 2019

    Energy Transfer Partners is NOT a public utility; they are a private corporation dedicated solely to making money for themselves and their investors. Therefore they should not have the right of eminent domain. The people of Illinois will NOT benefit from additional heavy crude being transported across our lands, potentially polluting water, soil and air. ETP has an egregiously awful record of spills and contamination, and increasing pressure in old lines in order to double their capacity is just an invitation to disaster. This crude will also NOT improve the price of fuel or power generation for Illinoisans; it is all destined to be shipped abroad to be burned there, increasing the climate catastrophe for all of us. It is past time to stop building out more infrastructure for fossil fuels, and start investing in renewable energy sources if humans are to survive on this world.
    Please refuse this permit before it is too late.
    Jan Thomass
  • July 11, 2019

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline and any plans for its expansion or increase in capacity. It is past time to recognize that fossil fuels are NOT the future. Fossil fuels have brought us to the brink of destruction and their continued use will bring about the end of civilization. The DAPL is not a public good, it is a public risk. And the risks will continue to mount.

    All of the crude oil transported by DAPL/ETCO through Illlinois is destined for the Gulf of Mexico and export to China and elsewhere. The refineries in the midwest are already well served by existing pipelines and do not need any additional crude oil from Bakken, so the expansion will not benefit them or US consumers. Illinois and the other states along the DAPL route will get no benefit from the increased capacity, but will endure increased risk from spills and leaks from DAPL, and will have to provide about 1 Mw of power to the pumping stations which will come from Illinois coal and natural gas power stations primarily, delivering millions of tons of Greenhouse Gasses in Ilinois, to say nothing of the additional tons of GHG produced in the fracking process in North Dakota and the millions produced when the 1.1 Mbpd of oil is burned anywhere in the world (outside the US). Regardless of where it is burned, Illinois will suffer from increased extreme weather events as a result, including floods, tornados, extreme hear, droughts. Life for our farmers and residents is bad enough already. Let's not make it worse.

    It is past time to put a freeze on all fossil fuel infrastructure projects that will lock us in to additional fossil fuel use for decades and exacerbate the global climate heating emergency.
    Richard Stuckey
  • July 12, 2019

    I strongly oppose the doubling of capacity being piped through the DAPL. The danger of using an old pipeline is bad enough. Then to add more capacity seems to me like an incident waiting to happen. The increased risk of a break on the pipeline is very high. The amount of oil spill would be massive and destroy the land and water.
    I also pppose the increase in extracting and using this oil. Increased production and use, increases the CO2 level in our atmosphere.
    Allowing increased capacity would in all likelihood cause a rupture. ETP would then be claiming imminent domain to take even more land from private land owners. (A practice already used for profits to ETP but with no benefit to the landowners who give up land. )
    Patti Walker.
    Patti Walker
  • July 12, 2019

    I oppose this doubling of DAPL capacity. This will increase damage to our irreplaceable environment, ecosystem, and natural resources like clean water that we need to live. Lindsay Kania
  • July 12, 2019

    Please refuse this application for increased pumping capacity of this dirty fuel. Additional capacity would endanger the preservation of clean water and a stable environment. Thank you. Georgeann Hartzog
  • July 12, 2019

    I oppose doubling DAPL capacity given that I have opposed every aspect of this pipeline from the beginning. Even without the spills that inevitably occur, it represents an energy source damaging to people and the environment, and it makes us collude in harming everyone living in a wide swath along the pipeline, most especially Native peoples. Norma Field
  • July 17, 2019

    I strongly oppose the proposed facilities for increasing the capacity of this pipeline, on the grounds that such increase will likely have NO BENEFIT to the state of Illinois or its citizens. In addition to that, it is time to halt ALL fossil-fuel infrastructure projects, if we are to have any chance of averting catastrophic effects of climate change. Michael Zurakov
  • July 18, 2019

    As a citizen of Illinois and a member of Chicago Area Peace Action's Climate Group, I strongly oppose Dakota Access and ETCO's petition for additional pumping capacity for their pipelines. First, pumping more oil would increase the threat to the environment through leaks and spills, which have already occurred with these pipelines. Second, with only a few years left to drastically reduce greenhouse emissions to avoid climate catastrophe, fossil fuel supply should be decreased, not increased, and resources shifted to clean energy (wind, solar, etc.). which is abundant and becoming evermore economical. James Gibbs, PhD
  • July 18, 2019

    I oppose the additional pumping stations and facilities. Oil is obviously useful, but it is not good. At a time when we're transitioning to more and more safer energies, we don't need to be doubling down on oil. Supporting oil expansion could negatively impact forward movement in other areas, like solar, as an increased supply of oil could reduce costs and ultimately give it a favorable market, which it doesn't need. There would be a greater risk of oil spills too! Reed Sutman
  • July 19, 2019

    For Fifteen years Energy Transfer Partners pipelines have leaked an average of once every eleven (11) days. (5,475 days, 527 pipelines spills or 10.39 days). The results of these spills and failures released 3.6 million gallons of hazardous liquids, including 2.8 million gallons of crude oil. (Source, PHMSA) Based on ETP"s history, the additional pumps requested will rupture putting Illinois communities at risk of contamination and costly cleanup. Therefore, I ask the ICC not to grant their Petition. Charlie Ryan 7/18/2019. Charlie Ryan
  • July 19, 2019

    I am opposed to the two pumping stations proposed by Dakota Access LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC. For fifteen years, Energy Transfer Partners Pipelines leaked an average of once every eleven days. (5,475 days, 527 pipelines spills equals 10.39 days). These spills released 3.6 million gallons of hazardous liquids including 2.8 million gallons of crude oil (Source, PHMSA). Based on the history of ETP/DAPL,these failures will happen to Illinois communities causing ground contamination and costly cleanup. Charlie Ryan
  • July 25, 2019

    Pumping fossil fuels is a dangerous public hazard and I can state that you know this already, since everyone in the US has seen the results of the ongoing and swiftly moving climate change. There has been devastation all over this and many other countries in the world. We are seeing actual air temperatures in the world of 114 degrees and over. This is not in the Sahara, it is in Paris. I can only think of one reason that anyone would promote this and it is for greed. Greed has always been dominant in the United States and is even buried in its Constitution. If you doubt this read "The Autumn of Black Snake" by William Hogeland".

    We are dying out here and you want to pump more fossil fuels? This is insanity. We near Chicago have had rain for a long time, in fact it rained most of Spring. As a result my cherry tree produced about 5 cherries. The rain washed away the flowers (most of them) which are the first step for the tree to produce cherries. I used to get hundreds of them and share them with friends and neighbors. I live in a developed residential area and yet I could do this. I could do this because the weather allowed it. Furthermore our food producers are underwater and under siege from hurricanes, tornadoes and other severe weather events. Unless global warming is immediately addressed, humanity will perish. Including you, your friends and family. No matter how rich you are, you cannot survive global warming. It will be the end point of our existence. No food, no clean water and no where to hide. We will not be the first species to die from our own waste on this planet, there have been many before us.

    NO MORE FOSSIL FUELS. But only if you want to survive and want your children and loved ones to survive. I do.
    Joan Slezak-Fritz
  • July 26, 2019

    We all love in dire times the call for real charge. Crude oil is a thing if the past but greed and lack of institutional change inhibit widespread much-needed progress. Robert Rush
  • August 5, 2019

    "Pumping fossil fuels is a dangerous public hazard and I can state that you know this already, since everyone in the US has seen the results of the ongoing and swiftly moving climate change. There has been devastation all over this and many other countries in the world. We are seeing actual air temperatures in the world of 114 degrees and over. This is not in the Sahara, it is in Paris. I can only think of one reason that anyone would promote this and it is for greed. Greed has always been dominant in the United States and is even buried in its Constitution. If you doubt this read "The Autumn of Black Snake" by William Hogeland".

    We are dying out here and you want to pump more fossil fuels? This is insanity. We near Chicago have had rain for a long time, in fact it rained most of Spring. As a result my cherry tree produced about 5 cherries. The rain washed away the flowers (most of them) which are the first step for the tree to produce cherries. I used to get hundreds of them and share them with friends and neighbors. I live in a developed residential area and yet I could do this. I could do this because the weather allowed it. Furthermore our food producers are underwater and under siege from hurricanes, tornadoes and other severe weather events. Unless global warming is immediately addressed, humanity will perish. Including you, your friends and family. No matter how rich you are, you cannot survive global warming. It will be the end point of our existence. No food, no clean water and no where to hide. We will not be the first species to die from our own waste on this planet, there have been many before us.

    NO MORE FOSSIL FUELS. But only if you want to survive and want your children and loved ones to survive. I do.

    Joan Slezak-Fritz"
    Kris Flint
  • August 7, 2019

    I am opposed to the two pumping stations proposed by Dakota Access LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC. For fifteen years, Energy Transfer Partners Pipelines leaked an average of once every eleven days. (5,475 days, 527 pipelines spills equals 10.39 days). These spills released 3.6 million gallons of hazardous liquids including 2.8 million gallons of crude oil (Source, PHMSA). Based on the history of ETP/DAPL, these failures will happen to Illinois communities causing ground contamination and costly cleanup.

    Energy Transfer Partners is NOT a public utility; they are a private corporation dedicated solely to making money for themselves and their investors. Therefore they should not have the right of eminent domain. The people of Illinois will NOT benefit from additional heavy crude being transported across our lands, potentially polluting water, soil, and air. ETP has an egregiously awful record of spills and contamination, and increasing pressure in old lines in order to double their capacity is just an invitation to disaster. This crude will also NOT improve the price of fuel or power generation for Illinoisans; it is all destined to be shipped abroad to be burned there, increasing the climate catastrophe for all of us. It is past time to stop building out more infrastructure for fossil fuels and start investing in renewable energy sources if humans are to survive in this world.
    As a citizen of IL, I have a right to a healthy and clean environment to live my life peacefully and with clean air and water. The Illinois Constitution says so.
    Please refuse this permit before it is too late
    Patti J. Walker
    Patti Walker
  • October 7, 2019

    The United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO (“UA”) respectfully submits these comments in favor of the project in this docket. The UA is an international labor organization representing approximately 355,000 plumbers, pipefitters, sprinkler fitters, service technicians, and welders. The UA includes 17 local union affiliates with over 25,000 active members in Illinois. The UA also includes the state-wide Illinois Pipe Trades Association, headquartered in Springfield.

    The facilities the applicants propose to build in Illinois (the “Project”) would allow the Dakota Access Pipeline (“DAPL”) and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline (“ETCO Pipeline”) (the “Pipelines”) to nearly double in output from 570,000 bpd to 1.1 million bpd, without additional miles of pipeline or physical changes to the Pipelines. In Illinois, the combined cost of the proposed facilities would be approximately $200 million. As such, the Project promises significant socioeconomic, energy efficiency, and safety benefits.

    First, this type of project provides important job opportunities for construction workers, including members of the UA and other unions. These are the exact type of skilled jobs–providing good wages, health coverage, retirement security, and training–that are badly needed today. Although pipeline construction jobs are often described as “temporary,” their temporary nature is exactly what makes them so important. Each opportunity for work that is denied is devastating for construction workers who rely on a steady supply of “temporary” projects to provide complete incomes and retirement savings for themselves and their families over their careers. Furthermore, in addition to the construction jobs that would be created, long-term operations and maintenance personnel would be stationed at the new pumping stations. In short, the Project would create jobs, a consideration due significant weight in the Commission’s decision.

    In addition, the Project enables the Pipelines to provide the greatest possible benefit in meeting the demand for shipment of crude oil. Current demand for oil transported by the Pipelines exceeds their capacity significantly and is expected to continue to increase. The Project would enable the Pipelines to meet much more of this demand without any structural changes to the pipeline themselves. In essence, the Project enables the Pipelines to meet their full potential.

    Finally, the Project promotes safe transportation of oil. While many opposing the Project argue that it stands for an increase in the production of “fossil fuels,” crude oil will be produced whether or not the capacity to transport it by pipeline exists. Where pipeline capacity falls short, the excess oil will be transported by rail and truck, presenting significant safety risks and attendant carbon emissions.

    The danger of above-ground transportation of oil should not be underestimated. In just the past several years, Illinois has seen the threat it presents firsthand. In 2015, 21 cars of an oil train derailed near Galena, Illinois where the Galena and Mississippi Rivers meet. Seven of these cars ruptured and 5 caught fire. The train contained 630,000 gallons of crude oil, of which at least 218,000 gallons spilled, threatening contamination of the Mississippi River. In 2017, 20 cars of an oil train derailed in Plainfield, Illinois, spilling 20,000 gallons of crude oil. The primary damage from these derailments was to property and the natural surroundings. But the danger to human life from oil train derailments is also very real. The most chilling example of this danger occurred in 2013, when a 74-car crude oil train derailed in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec and several cars exploded, killing 47 people and spilling 1.5 million gallons of oil.

    In contrast, pipelines are the safest, most efficient way to transport oil. The Pipelines are particularly safe as they were built recently with the most up-to-date materials and techniques. Specifically, the Pipelines were built with high-strength carbon steel with thicker walls in sensitive areas and road and water crossings and cathodic protection systems and fusion-bonded epoxy coating to prevent corrosion. They are monitored 24 hours a day at a dedicated operations center and aerial and ground inspection. These safety features mean the oil passing through the Pipelines is transported in the safest way possible. Increasing their capacity is therefore a net positive in terms of safety.

    For all these reasons, the Project as proposed is a common sense, efficient solution that maximizes existing pipeline infrastructure, avoids new pipeline construction and modifications to existing pipelines, and reduces the need for trains and trucks to transport oil. The UA urges the Commission to keep these benefits in mind and approve the Project.

    David L. Barnett
    UA Director of Pipeline and Gas Distribution
    David L. Barnett
  • October 10, 2019

    I respectfully ask that the Commission honor the request of SOIL/Sierra Club that the Administrative Law Judge's September 12, 2019 ruling denying the August 20, 2019 Motion for Amendment or Dismissal of Joint Petition, for Investigation, and to Stay Schedule be reversed.

    Thank you,

    Mary Shesgreen
    Mary Shesgreen
  • November 26, 2019

    This comment is for the ICC members, which I understand will make the final ruling on whether to double the amount of oil passing through the Dakota Access Pipe Line.

    In September, 2019, 16 year old Greta Thunberg stood at the podium of the United Nations and said, "How dare you destroy the EARTH for my generation?"

    The ICC can help to save the Earth for future generations.

    Please vote "No." when deciding whether to double oil traveling through the DAPL.

    We all need to do our part to save the Earth from climate destruction. Climate despair may not have yet affected you, but it does affect the lesser among us. Did you see the 2014 event on Climate at the UN when a young poet from the Marshall Islands addressed that body with promises to her infant that she will stand in the way of corporate over-reach to destroy her homeland?

    On Sunday, November 24, 2019, I went to the Gene Siskel Film Theatre to see "Anthropocene" a documentary on climate disaster and the 6th Extinction, the one determined by human activity. We have left the Holocene Epoch and are now in the Anthropocene Epoch.

    Please be part of the solution, not an extension of the problem. Some things can not be purchased. Nature is one of them.
    Janice Gintzler
  • December 17, 2019

    If we pay attention to what scientists and frontline communities are telling us, instead of fossil fuel industry deceptions, the message is clear, Humans are causing the rapid onset of climate change, which is already bringing costly impacts across the world. The best way to stop it is by keeping fossil fuels in the ground, and accelerating a just transition to 100 percent renewable energy.

    We need more people to take a stand and say NO to the further pollution of not only our state but the entire WORLD. Greed can only take you so far in life,before the karma of your actions finally catch up.
    Jami
  • December 27, 2019

    I oppose the expansion of the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipe Line.

    Scientists are urgently warning us that, in order to hold the average global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times, we must reduce annual carbon emissions by 7.6 percent per year, for the next ten years [1]. Alternatively, a reduction of 2.7 percent could hold the temperature increase to 2.0 degrees Celsius.

    Peoria is the 22nd fastest-warming city in the United States. Illinois farmers are already facing the impacts of flooded land. 390,000 people currently live in flood-prone areas across Illinois. In a high-emissions scenario (RCP8.5), it is projected that the average number of days classified as having a dangerous or extremely dangerous heat index will increase in Illinois from the current 5, to nearly 50, and heat wave days per year will increase from 10 to over 60 by 2050 [2]. These heat threats can be devastating, especially for vulnerable populations. Health care costs associated with a two-week heatwave in 2006 was estimated at $5.3 Billion [3]. It is projected that labor productivity loss due to heat waves will cost the US economy $2 Trillion nationwide by 2030 [4]. Widespread summer drought is projected to increase in Illinois by 40 percent by 2050. Public health impacts of a warmer planet include the increase of vector-borne diseases such as the Zika virus. Moline, Illinois has already seen an increase of the mosquito growing season from 95 days in the 1980s, to an average of 119 days between 2006 and 2015 [2].

    Considering the unprecedented health and economic challenges we are facing with the changing climate, it would be reckless and irresponsible to increase the fossil fuel energy infrastructure and further lock ourselves into a dependency on those fuels for the long term. Yes, we need energy and we need jobs in Illinois. And yes, the pipeline carries less risk of spills than over-land transport. But – pipelines do leak, and the approach that would carry the least risk of spills would be to phase out fossil fuel energy altogether and to transition to renewable energy sources. Investments in the wind and solar energy sector in Illinois could result in an increase in jobs that would have a longer-term positive impact on the Illinois economy than would the temporary job market created to support the proposed pipeline construction.
    I ask that you consider these arguments, and deny the permit for pipeline expansion in Illinois.

    References

    [1] United Nations Environment Programme (2019), "Emissions Gap Report 2019," UNEP, Nairobi, 2019.
    [2] Climate Central and ICF International, "States at Risk - America's Preparedness Report Card - Illinois," States at Risk, 2015.
    [3] Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), "Health and Climate Change - Accounting for Costs," NRDC, 2011.
    [4] United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), "Climate Change and Labour - Impacts of Heat in the Workplace," International Labour Organization (ILO), 2016.
    Mary Gelder
  • January 2, 2020

    I say the same as 16 year old Greta Thunberg, only I am 70 years old and say 'How dare you destroy the EARTH for my grandchildren and great-grandchildren?"

    Please vote "No." when deciding whether to double oil traveling through the DAPL.

    With regard to energy creation, put money into developing other wind, solar, water...the prices are coming down on these. You should stop using the current methods that are damaging to our environment! Have you heard or installing solar shingles on a roof to gather the sun's energy? Let's get a little more creative here.

    Please work to keep the oil in the ground. Speak with those funding the oil projects to redirect funds to more sustainable methods. Change the system. It is past time to do so. Connect with the Climate Reality Project or others that a looking to change things or create your own sustainable projects.
    Linda Bergwall
  • January 7, 2020

    I SUPPORT the expansion of the DAP expansion .Simultaneously,I reject as baseless, emotional attempts to-somehow-link this expansion to all the purported evils of climate change.The mere possibility of a spill is portrayed as a certainty.Our lands will be despoiled, our air polluted, our climate altered,etc,etc.
    All of this due to the mere expansion of an existing pipeline.

    Since this is a private project ,it’s promoters will only be guided by it’s presumed profitability. The “public need” component of this then, must,necessarily,be subsumed under the projects profitability- if it didn’t serve a “public need”,it,presumably, wouldn’t be undertaken to begin with. (Who would knowingly put money into a loser!)

    In an effort to discredit the “public need” component, opponents appear to take two different tacks. They contest the project with all manner of”let’s throw it on the wall and see if it sticks” arguments. Typically these involve concocting a climate change outcome resulting in a negative overall benefit to the public.
    Alternatively ,and quite presumptively, some even question the private profitability of the project to begin with; that those closest and most knowledgeable about the project; that those who have demonstrated a willingness to put their money where there mouths are -really don’t realize they are backing a loser!
    Stuart Schulman
  • January 7, 2020

    If we want humanity to survive--not to mention allowing survival for animals, birds, trees, and plants--we need to stop using fossil fuel. We need to switch NOW to other forms of energy that do not release carbon dioxide or methane into the atmosphere.
    DO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE 19-0673 which would allow Energy Transfer Crude Oil Co., LLC and Dakota Access, LLC to increase their pumping stations and pipelines in the State of Illinois!

    Tell these fossil fuel companies to put their money into solar, wind, and other forms of renewable energy!
    Meryl Greer Domina
  • January 16, 2020

    As a landowner who has the pipeline going through our farm, I am vehemently opposed to increasing the flow rate.

    This pipeline crosses the Mississippi River north of Keokuk, IA and there is another pipeline, Enbridge, that crosses the same river north of Quincy, IL., they are within 30 miles of each other. The. Mississippi River is the most important link to the gulf and almost all of our grain uses this river for our grain exports. Allowing even the possibility of a leak would ruin our economy. Increasing the flow enhances the possibility of a leak occurring.

    Plus we are experiencing climate change and need to decrease our dependence on fossil fuels, not produce more!!!

    Then, lastly, this pipeline does not help the economy of our state in any way. None of the oil is used for refineries in our state of Illinois, it is all sent to Texas, with most of it exported to other countries.

    Please consider the people of Illinois and represent us, not the oil companies.
    Donna Clampitt
  • January 21, 2020

    I oppose allowing the pipeline to increase its capacity. Becky kemp
  • January 21, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to this petition for many reasons. The most obvious is that we are barreling headlong into a climate disaster, and instead of doubling down on our addiction to fossil fuels, we must find alternatives. Our children and grandchildren deserve a livable planet. In addition, the companies tasked with monitoring this pipeline have a horrible track record for spills and have proven to be irresponsible stewards of our precious natural resources. Finally, doubling this pipeline's capacity will not benefit the citizens of Illinois, as the oil is slated for export. In short, I implore our elected officials to do act wisely and reject this petition. Janet McDonnell
  • January 21, 2020

    DO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE 19-0673 which would allow Energy Transfer Crude Oil Co., LLC and Dakota Access, LLC to increase their pumping Capacity. This in no way would benefit our area. It is historically proven that all of these pipelines eventually will blow and leak. The result in our area could indeed be catastrophic.
    As a local farm landowner, we are already being affected negatively by the climate, flooding, droughts and now tariffs. Any leaks will affect the economy of all of us by causing contamination of the Mississippi River, our source of water and of commerce. If you’ve seen farms going bankrupt already, imagine the expense of cleanup and loss of economy - what that result would be to all local farmers, communities and businesses, not to mention the environment and wildlife.
    This is a bad idea and I want it known that we do NOT want this passed.
    Thanks for providing us an opportunity to voice our concerns.
    Kathleen Kircher
  • January 22, 2020

    Do not vote to allow pumping capacity to be increased by Dakota Access, LLC. Increasing capacity would risk sn even greater environmental disaster than is already probable. I have never understood why these pipelines have been allowed to be constructed through the United States, when Canada turned them down. This oil does not benefit us. They’re taking the oil through these pipelines to get to the coast where the oil can then be sold and shipped to other countries for processing.
    Also, we must continue our work in IL and everywhere in the U.S. to develop our alternative energy sources, decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels. The Climate Crisis continues to be exacerbated by our use of fossil fuels, and the increased drilling being allowed by the criminal in the White House.
    Linda McNay
  • January 22, 2020

    As a citizen and a resident of Illinois I oppose the construction of two new pumping stations and the upgrade of a third that will allow the flow of crude oil to almost double in the Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC. I am concerned about the land and water quality under and near to the existing Dakota Access and ETCO pipelines. There have been numerous leaks and spills. It is unfair to ask the people of Illinois and the other Midwestern states that have the pipeline to live with the risks from the pipeline especially as the crude oil is not for the people of Illinois but to export.

    I am also opposed to the increase of crude oil through these pipelines. We are now experiencing climate changes. Illinois' seasons are not a smooth change of weather as the seasons were 30 years ago. Illinois also experiences rains and snow that don't fit traditional patterns. The excess rain of 2019 hurt Illinois farmers. Extracting crude oil and shipping it releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Which is the cause of the weather we are now experiencing.

    VOTE TO REJECT THESE NEW PUMPING STATIONS AND INCREASED FLOW OF CRUDE OIL THROUGH PIPELINES IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
    Meryl Greer Domina
  • January 30, 2020

    As a resident of Illinois, I do not want this pipeline to expand capacity to allow for additional pumping stations and additional flows to be going through our state. With the very real and ongoing threat of climate change, we should be moving away from fossil fuel and transitioning to renewable energy sources. More oil = more CO2 in our atmosphere. In Illinois we are already seeing increased flooding events and changes in our normal seasonal weather. This also increases the potential for spills which will further degrade our environment. It is unethical to continue relying on fossil fuels when it is known that human actions, including the burning of fossil fuels are causing widespread ecological destruction. We don't consider the non-market costs to projects like these. Clean air, water, and soil are important to human health and the health of our environment. We are not separate from our environment and should be doing more to protect it, like turning down these projects. No amount of money can replace our natural environment. Ashley Staat
  • February 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipe Line as a resident of Illinois. This will not serve any being in the long run. We should be moving past this poisonous method of fuel, not making it more readily available. Theres not even just the usage of oil to worry about, there is the concern of a possible spill or leak that can decimate the ecosystem. Not only for the region the incident were to occur in but everywhere through our river systems. Lindsay Robinson
  • February 3, 2020

    Hello, I am 21 years old and I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. My generation and our children will witness the devastating affects of climate change within our lifetimes. We need to move away from burning fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Also, this pipeline crosses many waterways and will endanger future generations access to clean water. It isn't a matter of 'if' this pipeline leaks, but 'when'. Expansion of production further increases the devastation that could occur. Please vote No! Be on the right side of history Boadicea Pliml
  • February 10, 2020

    I strongly oppose authorizing an increase of capacity for the Dakota Access pipeline. The first, most obvious reason is that we are in the midst of a climate crisis and in order to ensure a livable planet for future generations, we have to do all we can to end our dependance on dirty fossil fuels now. In addition, this pipeline risks the natural resources of Illinois residents without benefiting them, as the oil is scheduled for export. Finally, Energy Transfer has a poor track record for safety and cannot be trusted. Janet McDonnell
  • February 18, 2020

    I strongly oppose. We need more efficient “mechanisms” not more dirty energy. There is a climate crisis at present. Steven Hall
  • February 24, 2020

    I oppose the permit sought by Dakota Access Pipeline company and Energy Transfer Corporation to build two new pumping stations and upgrade a third. This would allow them to increase the volume of oil carried by that pipeline from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day. This would contribute to the climate crisis which is already causing massive human loss, suffering and death across the globe and causing damaging flooding even here in Illinois. Farmers across our state have been impacted. Also, that pipeline has already leaked eleven times since they began operations. With that disastrous track record, I fear the pipeline will leak again. Mary Shesgreen
  • February 26, 2020

    I oppose anymore pipelines in our state. Before long, they will be empty, anyway, as we are forced to change to renewables or die. Nancy Kneip
  • February 26, 2020

    I oppose any expansion or allowance of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I live in Illinois. We are doing our best to stop use of fossil fuels. I will be getting solar panels installed on my roof next week, weather permitting. If not next week, the next best possible good weather day. Doubling down in the pipeline expansion does not sit well with the people in Illinois, like myself, who are determined to end our dependence on fossil fuels. We don't have a long time to make this happen. PLEASE do not let this pipeline mess up the waterways and land in Illinois and other adjoining states. These pipelines are making our land sick and our children sick. Stop this disaster before it happens. Thank you for your attention to this important problem. Charlotte Jones
  • February 26, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis. Dr James Hansen, world renowned climate scientist has already submitted written testimony detailing the negative statistics. The oil will not even help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits. John Kavalunas
  • February 26, 2020

    I oppose this expansion as there are very clear safety concerns for people and the environment along the path of the proposed doubling -- and of the course the resulting CO2 released. There is no need for this excess product as we wind down the fossil fuel use in this county and elsewhere due to climate change. It looks like you, our unelected representatives, are asking Illinois residents to suffer for the sake of an outside corporation and their profits as NONE of this will come to Illinois and all will be exported. How are YOU, members of the Illinois Commerce Commission, being good stewards of our home and land here in Illinois. There will be spills- as has happened with DAPL already and every other pipeline like it- and your actions to approve this will be remembered. And if you are personally benefiting from this, that information will be found out. Truth will out is not just a saying. It's what will happen. NOT benefiting Illinois at any level and yet we are being askied to consider this. How is this not involving kick backs? Monica Jenkins
  • February 26, 2020

    I oppose this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the climate crisis and will be obsolete soon due to the transition to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water and public health. Christina Krost
  • February 27, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Daniel Henrick
  • February 27, 2020

    I write to register strongest possible opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    The company's request to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station to allow them to increase the volume of oil they transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is insupportable and must be denied.

    The additional oil going into production through this pipeline will be detrimental to the health of our environment and to health of the citizens of our state. The pipeline will greatly expand the use of fossil fuels, will pose a much-increased risk of pipeline spills and accidents that will leak hazardous oil into our land and waters, will greatly increase the global warming generated by oil production and use across the world, and, after all of that, will not even help Illinoisans financially because almost all of the oil to be transported across our state is actually intended for export.

    In financial terms, if this permit request is granted Illinois will be a loser because our state will only get the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and the associated costs of clean up and remediation. The pipeline company and the oil industry will receive the profits while our state will bear the liabilities.

    The most urgent concern about the pipeline expansion, and the crucial reason for not granting this permit, however is that the pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental emergency that the world -- and Illinois -- is already seeing happen all around us. This is the most important concern for the ICC to take into account at this time. The environmental emergency is looming over all of human activity on this earth and by the account of many scientists, including the experts who are consulting with the United Nations, it is becoming ever more likely that the very existence of humanity is under threat.

    The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.
    Cheryl Brumbaugh-Cayford
  • February 27, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I don't see why we we would want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Enough! Christiane Rey
  • February 27, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Tony Fuller
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose this permit. This pipeline is a proven danger to the communities whose land it crosses, and it worsens the climate crisis every day it operates. It unnecessarily endangers our water supply and public health. The ICC should be about protecting the health and welfare of Illinois residents, not fattening the profit margins of energy companies. Jacquelyn Pope
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the Citizens of Illinois are assuming the RISK of the pipeline's rupture with the increased capacity from the added pumps while Energy Transfer Company retains all the profits. That ain't RIGHT!!
    Additionally, the Energy Transfer Company has the worst record in spills and poor response to cleanup. ALL OIL Must Remain in the Ground if we are to save our Planet. That is RIGHT!! So members of the Illinois Commerce Commission..... Do the RIGHT THING and DENY ETCO's PETITION!!
    Charlie Ryan, Chicago, Illinois
    Charlie Ryan
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because increasing the flow rate will make spills more probable, putting the health of our land, water, children, and all people at risk. Carly Visk
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because Illinois would be in great danger of spills or leagage. This pipeline is not contributing to Illinois, so we should not put our lands at risk. Lynne Gonzalez
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. The ongoing spills continue to pollute water and land along the route. The violation of Indigenous rights by routing the pipeline under their water supply is grotesque. Lastly, the investment in fossil fuet infrastructure flies directly in the face of the dire necessity to stop using fossil fuels. Our lives and the future of life as we know on earth depend on stopping the use of fossil fuels. Susan Harney
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline which will poison our land and air and water in Illinois and surrounding states, desecrate American cemeteries, and will do nothing to increase the USA energy independence because it carries oil that will be exported. Do everything necessary to STOP the evil Dakota Access Pipeline. Joseph J Zefran
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in the strongest possible terms. Aside from the dangers of rupture and spillage from this pipeline (from which Illinois will get little if any benefit), the pipeline is a symptom of our tragic attempt to continue a way of life that is moribund and doomed. We need to be breaking our addiction to fossil fuels, not madly scrambling to prolong it.

    The oil industry pulls dirty, substandard oil out of the ground (seriously damaging the environment in the process) and uses the Dakota Access pipeline to send it coursing through sensitive environments where people, plants, and animals live. And the oil, when it reaches its destination and final use, fouls the atmosphere and contributes to climate change.

    The cheap oil party is over, and the sooner we acknowledge that and start turning our attention to what comes next, the better. Illinois doesn't have to be a party to this desperate attempt to cling to a past which is already gone. Let's address the future instead and make sustainable living a reality.
    Madeline Baum
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve anything for Dakota Access Pipelines.
    Thank you,
    Mara Gilfillan
    Maria Gilfillan
  • March 2, 2020

    I am opposed ot the installation of additional pumping stations and faciilities in Illinois along these existing pipelines. Scientific calculations have shown significant C02 will be released as a result of increased capacity in these pipelines. Now is not the time to be releaseing more C02, we should be working on strategies to release less. The predicted climate change as a result of greenhouse gas emissions like C02 is already going to have a devasting impact of our planet. In addition, pipeline spills threaten the water quality in areas where the pipeline is present. There have already been some serious spills in our area, we should not be risking more. This oil is not needed in this country, it is likely going abroad. In the interests of the general public, this petition should be denied. Eileen Sutter
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the existence of the Dakota Access pipeline in ANY state. Time is running out for us to save the planet. Margaret Brady
  • March 2, 2020

    I very strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.

    This has got to stop.
    Dallas Williams
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose this petition and any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline or any other pipeline in Illinois. We are in a climate emergency should be confronting the fossil fuel industry, not allowing it to expand further. This project would only hurt the land and environment of the people of Illinois. The potential for this project to create jobs should not be given more weight than the lives of Illinoisans and the future of the Earth. The Green New Deal ensures a just transition for fossil fuel workers. We need to be decarbonizing, not expanding the fossil fuel industry. Bobby Vanecko
  • March 2, 2020

    I am expecting that the Illinois Commerce Commission will deny the permit application submitted by Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company because the record amount of spills over the years all over the country has been astronomical and we want the state of Illinois to switch totally to renewables and not allow any more destruction to our environment. Savannah Hawkins
  • March 2, 2020

    After the hottest worldwide recorded weather in 2019; the Earth's entering a warming climate change; burning fossil fuels such as oil are part of the problem not the solution. Secondly, these pipelines and trucks have had a record of oil spills; which effect the environment by air soil water. Thirdly, but just as important, for several years I've been following the Standing Rock protests which included Indigenous and non- as protesters fought off arrested and imprisoned by pipeline authorities. Fourthly, under Obama the permits were rejected; just because our so-called new president Trump has decided corporate fossil fuel profits matter more than any environmental dangers doesn't mean Illinois citizens have been persuaded.....There is no Planet B Option if Earth's destroyed by the already changing Climate dan rochman
  • March 2, 2020

    No more gas lines. They are bad for the land, for the air, for the environment and for people. They are only good for rich oil corporations. As an Illinois citizen I demand to deny any more pipelines. Leticia Cortez Leticia Cortez
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly urge Illinois to NOT authorize additional pumping stations and facilities on existing pipelines in the State of IL.

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit

    I also believe we need to invest in renewable energy infrastructure instead of expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. IL should be the example for the rest of the nation. Show the US that IL cares about the future. Please consider these important points.
    Yvonne Besyk
  • March 2, 2020

    DAPL has spilled multiple times already. Expanding the pipeline would be environmentally disastrous and serves only to benefit the rich pipeline owners. Our communities deserve to have potable water and breathable air. Hillary J Colby
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. We need to get off of fossil fuels! The oil will not even help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits. Jo Ann R. Potashnick
  • March 2, 2020

    No additional pipelines transporting fossil fuel. Projects and jobs are needed for sustainable energy to help the economy and future of our planet. Stephanie Bilenko
  • March 2, 2020

    No more pipelines! Celia Jones
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. No pipeline is ever leak/spill-proof, and we have enough problems with climate change as it is. We don't need an oil spill in or near our state to add to the already precarious climate situation. Camilla Stefl
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This expansion would put our communities, land, and water resources at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with more profits for fossil fuel companies. Deny this permit. David Todd
  • March 2, 2020

    We need to invest in clean renewable energy Kathryn Dittemore
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The world should be weaning off fossil fuels, not expanding reliance on them. There is also a high probability of leaks or spills, poisoning the environment and the people around it. Maria Schrater
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not approve this. It will contribute to climate change and condemn our children. John Culver
  • March 2, 2020

    No one needs The Dakota Access Pipeline. It will serve a declining demand for a harmful commodity. Tim Graham
  • March 2, 2020

    I VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE expanding this toxic pipeline through Illinois. Stand up and show some spine by rejecting this environmental disaster! Kevin Paulus
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I don't see why we we would want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Enough! Evelyn Pape
  • March 2, 2020

    Climate change is the direct result of fossil fuel emissions. We need to be encouraging solar energy and wind harnessing, not adding to our Earth's carbon blanket. Kimberly Dungan
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it threatens the well-being of our local ecosystems and the health of residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Yet, evidence indicates DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    It's time we truly make an effort to move away from fossil fuels. Opposing this expansion is a step in the right direction.

    Thank-you for your consideration.
    Catherine Jurgensen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Carmen Kingsley
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline on behalf of our planet, to fight climate change, and strive to use the cleanest and most effective and renewable sources of energy. Do not let us continue down this path of gluttony and greed. Tim Anderson
  • March 2, 2020

    Let's focus our efforts and our funds on clean energy. This pipeline has come at a huge cost to the environment and to native lands. Andrea Nosek
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against the pipeline. Risking long term health and environmental problems is just not worth it.
    Find a different way that is not houng to harm people, health, and the environment .
    Lisa Malmquist
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this request. Illinois is making great progress with wind energy and should not support further development of oil resources due to oil’s significant external costs. Charles Petrof
  • March 2, 2020

    I believe the State of Illinois, for the health of its citizens and the Planet, should be moving away from dependence on fossil fuels and towards renewable energy, especially wind and solar. Barbara Sulivan
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Additionally, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. We must not expand the DAPL! Please say no.
    Ann Blanchard
  • March 2, 2020

    We have played environmental roulette on lower income and public. Lands far too long. If we need the help of dangerous pipelines to live, we are moving headlong in the wrong direction. No more pipelines, much more green energy. Nancy Luiz
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Mike Nielsen
  • March 2, 2020

    STOP THE PIPELINE!! Jane
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We are facing the greatest threat to humankind with the climate crisis. We need to stop extracting fossil fuels and burning them. Ellen Wolcott
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is an unnecessary and unconscionable project that violates the rights and well-being of the citizens of Illinois, as well as the land, water and animals it is our duty to protect. rebecca brown
  • March 2, 2020

    We don’t need expansion of Dakota pipeline Weil Steven
  • March 2, 2020

    I greatly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We are putting our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Please say no to this kind of distraction of our land. Mannat Singh
  • March 2, 2020

    I absolutely oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we can do better for the future of Illinois. We passed breaking solar legislation in this state with FEJA and are poised to accomplish the same with CEJA. Running this pipeline through our state is negating the progress we’ve made towards ensuring a clean energy future for my children.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Let’s continue to set precedence as a leader in the transition to renewables and not an enabler of antiquated, expensive, dirty, dangerous oil.
    Marisa Joyce
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the risk of spills is borne entirely by local residents, who will see no benefits from the profits that the oil companies will reap. More importantly, we must stop building new fossil fuel infrastructure altogether to properly address the planetary climate crisis. Invest in renewable energy, not more pipelines! Alexander McKinley
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against this and have been. We can use alternative energy sources without permanently damaging our planet further. WE HAVE TO PROTECT AND NURTURE THIS EARTH RESPONSIBLY!! Donna M. McRae
  • March 2, 2020

    Please don't. Let's spend money on sustainable, non-polluting energy and vehicles. Jerry Luterman
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents. Angela Bouchard
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. Once again, the oil companies wish to make their vast profits of greater importance than the lives of the populace, endangering our water sheds and our crops to possible destructive leaks and fires.

    We know that pipelines often leak. Why must we build another potential disaster?
    The Rev Charles H Hensel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this expansion as there are very clear safety concerns for people and the environment along the path of the proposed doubling -- and of the course the resulting CO2 released. There is no need for this excess product as we wind down the fossil fuel use in this county and elsewhere due to climate change. It looks like you, our unelected representatives, are asking Illinois residents to suffer for the sake of an outside corporation and their profits as NONE of this will come to Illinois and all will be exported. How are YOU, members of the Illinois Commerce Commission, being good stewards of our home and land here in Illinois. There will be spills- as has happened with DAPL already and every other pipeline like it- and your actions to approve this will be remembered. And if you are personally benefiting from this, that information will be found out. Truth will out is not just a saying. It's what will happen. NOT benefiting Illinois at any level and yet we are being askied to consider this. How is this not involving kick backs? Meredith West
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not continue to burn up our planet with more dirty polluting energy. We need to cut our emissions in half by 2030 to avoid over-cooking the planet and costing ourselves trillions of dollars in adaption costs. It's unfair that polluters are allowed to dump their mess on the land, sea, and air and they rarely have to pay for the damage. The cost of climate change will be dumped on us as the taxpayers while the investors behind the dirty oil will pay little. Benjamin C Gerhold
  • March 2, 2020

    Stop the drilling . Mary Gerrity
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because..." and then, in your own words, cite one or more of the following reasons-

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Jacob Allen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    MICHAEL LUX
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Pipeline expansion as the risk to the environment are too high and too many. The oil companies don’t care about IL and the effect of a spill on its farms, wildlife, streams, prairies, marshes, etc. The “dependence” on crude oil is obsolete. Alternative energy is here and it works! The oil companies don’t want to hear that as it cuts into their bottom line. Adrienne Ray
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not permit the Dakota Access Pipeline Expansion. We do not want deadly oil spills and explosions that you know will happen! Protect our state! Lana Miyagawa
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We don't need to put our communities water, land, wildlife, and climate at risk by doubling the flow rate which only increases the probability and severity of spills. It is not worth the risk just to make oil companies rich. Monica Brown
  • March 2, 2020

    This is going to cause more harm than good.
    The only ones benifited for this woukd be the big Corp and we dont need that
    Not to mention we will be putting our land and water arlt risk I oppose to this
    New pipeline= bad idea
    Tomas
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of this pipeline. Who benefits from this expansion? Not the health of people, animals, or our planet. We need renewable options not pipelines. We are in a climate crisis. Terri Kapsalis
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because of the potential danger of spills. The potential cost is not worth rewards to taxpayers and puts us at risk. It is wrong-headed to permit further expansion of dependence on oil. We as a state need to lead in another direction. Ginevra Clark
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the climate crisis and will be obsolete soon due to the transition to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water and public health. Joanna Brown
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the potential for catastrophic results of a spill or leak. Expanding is not worth the risk if the risk is severe enough to endanger a variety of factors such as the surrounding habitats, plants and animals, contaminating the water table and since all water is connected and the ground is permeable, humans can eventually become ill as a result. Nina
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the negative consequences for climate change. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will result in emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000 megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars. Further, DA/ETCO plans to export this oil -- meaning the citizens of Illinois take on all of the risk while the company reaps the financial benefits. Ross Noecker
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the DAPL. I am a mother of a 1 year old girl and I am absolutely desperate for her to have a long and happy life that won’t be shortened due to the negative impacts of client change and the destruction of our only planet. We are begging our politicians to please listen to us, help us. Stop answering to the corporate interests and finally serve the needs of the people. We need to halt the production of oil and greenhouse gases immediately, not expand it. Please think of the lives of our children. Climate change is real, and it is an existential threat. It is already so painful to look into my daughter’s happy eyes every morning knowing how the generations before have already betrayed her. Please do not approve the expansion of the DAPL and instead invest in a green new deal! Julie Lin
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Glenna Eaves
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose authorizing an increase of capacity for the Dakota Access pipeline.
    Fossil fuels is old energy, it's not the new energy of the future. New clean energy sources are being developed at a rapid race at the moment and it is better to invest in those initiatives than these dirty and old energy sources.

    This pipeline risks the natural resources of Illinois residents without benefiting them, as the oil is scheduled for export.

    Finally, Energy Transfer has a poor track record for safety and cannot be trusted. Beautiful land and natural resources that we depend on are at risk.
    Renee Settels
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for the following reasons -

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Linda Dunal
  • March 2, 2020

    As a home owner and a resident of Illinois I oppose the construction of two new pumping stations and the upgrade of a third that will allow the flow of crude oil to almost double in the Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC. I am concerned about the land and water quality under and near to the existing Dakota Access and ETCO pipelines. There have been numerous leaks and spills. It is unfair to ask the people of Illinois and the other Midwestern states that have the pipeline to live with the risks from the pipeline especially as the crude oil is not for the people of Illinois but to export.

    Do not ask Illinois residents to suffer for the sake of an outside corporation and their profits as none of this will come to benefit Illinois. Be good stewards of our home and land here in Illinois.
    John Chamness
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose expanding the pipeline. The oil companies keep on destroying beautiful and needful land. The native Indians are so much more respectful of this earth while the oil companies are responsible for spills and pollution. We do not need any more of their pipeline destroying and polluting our precious land and water resources. Especially where is it harming people’s lives and resources. They are making enough profit and I see no need for expanding the pipeline that overcomes our need to protect what natural resources we still have. I hope we can get responsible before it is too late Karen Johns
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Additionally, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Jonathon Schening
  • March 2, 2020

    Don't allow a project (or corporation) that is subsidized by the Republican party to potentially pollute Illinois. Fossil fuels are 19-century energy sources. Don't add additional climate risks by giving them free access to our state. James J Arneberg
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the extension on the Dakota pipeline. These nasty, greedy people need to understand that it is not only devastating to the environment, but also very bad for the communities these horrid pipelines go through. The risks to the environment are too great, and for what? A couple of extra bucks? Millions will have to suffer your greediness and egotistical nonsense. Illinois has already crapped enough on their environment with coal mines and nuclear plants. It is now way overdue, but not too late to do the right thing and clean up the messes. Leave IL alone and clean! Annette Cocheret
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.Daniel Henrick
    Janet Simpson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose any pipeline expansion, we have enough environmental issues in Illinois, don’t add oil spills, we already have lead in the water. Nomi Carmona
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for reasons of public safety. Time and again, there is evidence that pipelines are prone to failure. It is not a matter of if but when. Kirk Imoto
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This expansion increases the risk of more frequent and more severe leaks or spills, and we cannot afford to allow that in our state. Brady Hunt
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the increased danger of spills and the air pollution from refining the fuel. We need to conserve energy, that is, use less rather than degrading our environment so we can use more. Eileen M Ferguson
  • March 2, 2020

    I opposed expansion of pumping stations. IL should be focused on clean energy resources, not expanding oil pipelines which would expand greenhouses gasses and threaten ground water. Audrey Farrell
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because...

    1. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    2. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    3. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Thank you.
    Rob Eckmann
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose any further consideration of pipeline construction and it's attendant pollution , toxins, etc., In the state of Illinois. Unacceptable in this era of climate change and therefore indefensible. Shirley A Sutter
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Janet Simpson
  • March 2, 2020

    This shouldn't even still be a conversation. The science is clear that we need to switch to renewable energy, not continue relying on 19th century technology that is less efficient, more expensive, and detrimental to our health. We know that we cannot snap our fingers and get an entirely new grid based on renewables by tomorrow. But we should be taking steps toward that future with every new investment that we make in our energy grid. Not doubling down on fossil fuels, which have a finite amount left and the consumption of which is proven to cause climate change. The switch to renewables is inevitable as the sun, wind, tides, geothermal heat, etc will be around a lot longer than fossil fuels. So, the only question is not if, but when. Please have the foresight to stop investing in dying industries and see that renewables and advanced battery storage are the future that makes the strongest moral and fiscal sense to invest in. Kyle Burkybile
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because our approach to protecting our natural lands have not been aggressive enough.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Andrea
  • March 2, 2020

    Please oppose the pipeline! It is too scary what it can do to the environment and especially to the Native Americans. I am part Native American myself (Ho Chunk). Mary Draffkorn
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in any way through Illinois. I believe this will do more harm than good for the environment and people in its path. There is a lot of risk involved and not enough accountability when something goes wrong. I think it'd be a huge mistake that future generations will pay for. It's time to start working towards smarter solutions. David Flores
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Please stop the pipeline!
    Devon Benton
  • March 2, 2020

    Its like a cancer..
    it cares only for its own growth
    so dont lie about its benefits
    and dont sell us out...or we vote you out
    Leonard Schoenfelt
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do NOT approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit! Melodie Huffman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the industry has been irresponsible with safety, underground leaks are sometimes not discovered right away and leak gallons and gallons of oil and cause untold damage, and because of the horrible treatment of Native American rights and lands. Stephanie E Springsteen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the risk does not benefit the common good.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Christopher Pierson
  • March 2, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to any expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline and any other fossil fuel pipelines within the state of Illinois. Our state must take a position of leadership in the rapid transition away from fossil fuels and to an economy powered solely by clean energy such as wind and solar. It must start with rejecting all pipeline expansions and additions such as Dakota Access, and the ongoing decommissioning of coal-fired power plants. Philip Young
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Karl A. Williams
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because this policy creates an environment to stagnate the economy and delays the inevitable need for energy innovation in our state. This policy is bad for our climate and bad for our economy. Cassidy
  • March 2, 2020

    We are destroying out planet each day by pumping oil out of the ground which then affects the soil levels. To build these stations takes down trees that are vital in helping us breath air and stop the carbon dioxide fumes that come from stations. No amount of oil or pumping stations is worth killing the planet and the human race a bit faster. Kali Shevlin
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for many reasons. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills; consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce more emissions, which facilitates climate change; DA/ETCO can export the crude oil, so the state can bear the burden while the oil companies reap the rewards.

    Remember, the citizens of Illinois are watching the ICC's decision-making process very closely. People will be cross-examined, and it is important to find out the real reasons behind anyone voting in favor of expanding the pipeline.
    Taylor Gillen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline permit because it will contribute to climate change, increase the risk of spills and it is highly likely that most of the oil will be exported, so it will predominantly benefit the oil companies, not people in Illinois. We will accept all of the risk for no benefit. Laura Bianchi
  • March 2, 2020

    Deny permit and protect Illinois land!! Vanessa Marie Guillemette
  • March 2, 2020

    This letter is written in opposition of the Dakota Access Pipeline. My community does not want the Earth To be plowed for more energy. We have enough. Perhaps the government should instead invest in solar and wind power as it is stronger, creates more jobs, and keeps the planet from being destroyed as it has been with the current AND impeached president.

    The earth of the United States is quickly be destroyed thanks to those who believe the Pipeline is beneficial. I oppose this Pipeline.
    E. E. Gryglak
  • March 2, 2020

    I highly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we need to value lives and the environment over the expansion of the use and greed of dirty fossil fuels that only serve to harm everyone.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Scott Thornburton
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose any and all expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipeline never should have been built, and definitely should not be allowed any increase in capacity. Fossil Fuels should have been made obsolete decades ago, and now instead we have a climate crisis that requires a rapid transition to clean energy. This transition should be treated like an emergency, and no excuses should be accepted for its delay. Expanding the capacity of a pipeline that carries filthy oil that will inevitably leak, is the exact opposite of what needs to happen. Jon Williams
  • March 2, 2020

    No new petro-chemical pipelines or pumping stations in IL. Are you willing to risk their potential disasters in your back yard? Jim McDaniel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline as it will increase the chance of rupture by trying to pump an increased amount of oil through the pipes and increased pressure. It will also have adverse ecological effects. At this time we should not be investing more money in fossil fuels, but instead looking for other clean alternatives. Catherine Richards
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. Not only has this pipeline leaked multiple times, it completely disregards the well-being of anyone or anything living in these areas.

    I commend the amazing Native people who organized thousands to fight against this atrocity. This isn't only a Native issue, it's a human issue, it's an environmental issue.

    There are other options than oil. There are other solutions to create jobs. Our planet needs time to heal!
    Monica Rickert-Bolter
  • March 2, 2020

    Please don’t approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit . That would put our communities , land and water at risk. I OPPOSE THE EXPANSION of the Dakota Access Pipeline . Danuta Kotelon
  • March 2, 2020

    Ecosystems are too valuable to destroy them. Linda Karl
  • March 2, 2020

    It's not clear that this is necessary, and it certainly is bad. Dr. Ian Boussy
  • March 2, 2020

    Illinois should deny the permit. The pipeline will increase the use of fossil fuels and lead to additional carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. There are also hazards to the local environment and most significantly- no benefits to the residents of this State. Barton Thomas
  • March 2, 2020

    Pipeline spills are frequent and catastrophic. At a time of rapid global warming now is not the time to facilitate the burning of fossil fuels. Byron Dale
  • March 2, 2020

    I am asking that you NOT approve the Dakota Pipeline extension through Illinois. The history of oil spills from pipelines is proven and Illinois should not allow pristine lands and waterways to be polluted by oil spills. Stephen Keen
  • March 2, 2020

    I cannot fathom the moral disconnect required to allow the Dakota Access Pipeline to go through. This is about justice. Those who are suffering the consequences of this greed are not the ones causing the climate crisis and they are the least equipped to fight for their rights. YOU hold the power to do what is right for them and for our kids, let alone the planet. Rachel Rosner
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis. Dr James Hansen, world renowned climate scientist has already submitted written testimony detailing the negative statistics. The oil will not even help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits. Anne F. Root
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose expansion of all pipelines in Illinois. Let our state be a beacon for the nation regarding reduction and elimination of our dependence on fossil fuels. Invest in renewable energy and lead the nation in combatting climate change.
    Let this be your legacy, Governor Pritzker!
    Alena Laube
  • March 2, 2020

    The Dakota Access Pipeline would be a huge mistake for the residents of Illinois. It will increase the probs vilify and severity of spills, as well as increase our dependency on oil.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate the already critical climate crisis.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while oil companies get all of the benefit. Please do not approve this pipeline!
    Sam van Loon
  • March 2, 2020

    For the safety of our water, land and people I oppose any pipeline expansion. Oil always spills Eric Benson
  • March 2, 2020

    How can anyone in his or her right mind think this is a good idea? We don’t need any more poisonous disasters due to this project which serves no purpose other than put money into the pockets of the big oil companies. Marsha Ann
  • March 2, 2020

    please stop this injustice by putting neighborhoods in jepadary for profits over lives William Best
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I urge the State of Illinois to act in the best environmental interest of its citizens. The expansion of this pipeline is a threat to clean water, our environment, and does not support positive steps in resolving our climate crisis. Sue Novak
  • March 2, 2020

    No to pipeline Carl F Thorne
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not permit pipelines and trains and trucks to transport any fossil fuel in or across Illinois. Linda Groetzinger
  • March 2, 2020

    I OPPOSE the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit. I OPPOSE the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois. The company's request to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station to allow them to increase the volume of oil they transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is insupportable and must be denied. We do NOT want the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and the associated costs of clean up and remediation.
    The ICC's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies.
    Loretta M. Foster
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Christopher Coburn
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against this or any pipeline. Not only are there unreported leaks, but many reported leaks(many don’t get the proper clean up). It’s hurting many of species homes. And it simply is ground pollution which leads to waterways. It’s time for green energy. That’s the future! Shannon
  • March 2, 2020

    Hello, Good morning!

    I want to start by saying Thank you for your time in reading this!! I am going to keep it short and to the point!
    I personally will never support a project like this, simply because the motives aren't clearly supporting the well-being of the community or the Earth. I feel this is a greed/power-based expansion that could harm more than it could help.
    With something like this we always need to consider community first and foremost. Who is it affecting? Are the people more important than the money? What wildlife may be drastically reduced during the process? How much of the piping infrastructure would have to be updated to handle increased pumping? Are the waterways going to be polluted?
    I think that right now Illinois has more than enough pumping stations, and personally with gas prices as they are now, we should necessarily have a NEED for an increased mining or drilling expansion/upgrade. Although import/export is exciting, we always need to consider others feelings and opinions. Also the biggest question should always be, are there alternative solutions?

    Have a great day!!
    Janika
    Janika E Hodge
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I am concerned about the effects it will have on our environment and the health of wildlife and humans alike. Kathryn Lacny
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we are in desperate change of allowing to put profits over the health of the people. A profit is not worth the risk of damage to the environment that all life, including human life rely on for survival. The movement is away from fossil fuels. Stop the bleeding from the shark bites (large corporations)!

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Shanna Miller
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expanding oil access and danger in Illinois. Request that you do too. Linda Groetzinger
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Raymon Grossman
  • March 2, 2020

    I am totally against adding pumping stations and related facilities to Illinois. We need to stop adding dangerous, unhealthy energy systems and implement more green energy solutions to our beautiful prairie state. Georgette Steinberg
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline because of the previous history of spills, and I want to protect the water. It's an unnecessary risk. Tracy Evans
  • March 2, 2020

    I adamantly oppose the permit for the Dakota pipeline access. This does not strongly benefit Illinois or the environment. Much of it will be exported so does not help the U.S. though Illinois takes all the risk from companies that would operate this dirty oil pipeline. We must be proactive against such greed and threat to our people and waterways if a spiill. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE PIPELINE IN OUR STATE for so many reasons!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you for listening and I hope your action will be to NOT permits this pipeline in our sate. Susan Episcopo
  • March 2, 2020

    Just say "NO!" Judith Booth
  • March 2, 2020

    Don’t build the pipeline, don’t pollute the environment ! Use cleaner sources of energy !
    It is time to stop depending on oil in 21st !
    Nazar Dzhuryn
  • March 2, 2020

    Any and all fracking, any and all new, expanded or extended pipelines is going in the wrong direction. We need to put all our money, all our time and all our efforts into alternative energy sources. If no fracking, no additional or expanded or extended pipelines means higher fuel costs, then that will help make other alternatives more attractive. Save the planet, reduce reliance on fossil fuels. Tracy Koppel
  • March 2, 2020

    We need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, not expand access to them. Spend the money on clean energy only. Jane Harazim
  • March 2, 2020

    The proposed expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois is clearly backed by greed. Profits for the fossil fuel companies and their players would be the only winners. Illinois residents are against this doubling of an unnecessary, already unsafe transit system for oil, at a time when we should be transitioning away from it, and toward clean energy. The future of the planet depends on it, and we are in a crisis. I reject any efforts by Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC to expand their reckless empire in Illinois, as it does not benefit the citizens of this state, and could wreak havoc on our environment. The ICC's mission is to balance the interests of consumers and utilities to ensure ADEQUATE, EFFICIENT, RELIABLE, SAFE and least-cost public utility services, while promoting the development of an effectively competitive energy supplier market. I demand that the Illinois Commerce Commission adheres to its mission statement. Jennifer Kfoury
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I am very afraid of spills, and the increase in emissions caused by consumption that have been scientifically proven to accelerate climate change. The oil companies don't need to make more money, they need to invest in clean energy - and Illinois doesn't need to take on this risk while they profit. Gina Miller
  • March 2, 2020

    Strongly oppose. We need to be investing in renewable energy for a clean future, not risking our land and waters to pad the pockets of those involved in fossil fuels. Michele McCormick
  • March 2, 2020

    I appose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline. Instead of focusing our budget and effort on polluting technologies that will be obsolete in the next 20-30 years, I believe we should be investing in in renewable energy systems and grid optimization technologies that will provide long-lasting job markets for Illinois and the Midwest. Jason Franken
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Raymon
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the following reasons

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Penny L Weaver
  • March 2, 2020

    I absolutely oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Climate change is here and there is no denying it is caused by the burning of fossil fuels in addition to the environmental damage caused by the extraction of these fuels and the pollution they create. If the Illinois Commerce Commission approves this request for a pipeline expansion then you should also go ahead and scrap the entire Illinois Clean Jobs Act. We don't live in a bubble. Kevin Cahill
  • March 2, 2020

    As an Illinois resident, I vehemently oppose this pipeline. I have VERY strong environmental concerns. And also, importantly, I do not want my home state of Illinois to participate further in this country's outrageous breach of its treaties with our first nation's people. Amy Epton
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakoya Pipeline Pat Rose
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because,
    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000 megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    I extremely advise the state strongly denies this crude expansion.
    Cora Fick
  • March 2, 2020

    I am absolutely opposed the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is nothing but a short term gain with a long term loss.
    Considering the environmental impact of the pipeline itself, not to mention the eventual burning of any oil flowing through it, there's no good reason to allow the expansion.
    I also don't see a benefit to expanding soon-to-be outdated technology rather than investing in the long term of bringing in new technology and processes such as battery, solar, wind and more.
    I am highly concerned about how short term politics, and losing strategies are going to affect our country's interests, and my children's health and well-being.
    Bret Schwalb
  • March 2, 2020

    This pipeline is unnecessary and destructive. The only beneficiary will be a fossil fuel company that has a bad environmental track record. We must reduce petroleum burning, not increase it. Please do your public service and do what is best for the general population and their children by stopping this pipeline. Brad Walker
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Pipeline. Please don't approve it. Donna Davis
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because climate change is an existential threat to all Illinoisans. We cannot sensibly permit the expansion of infrastructure that enables corporate greed to continue risking our health and well being. The oil this pipeline would distribute would have a directly adverse effect on the future of our communities and the lives of our children. Thank you. M LaPlante
  • March 2, 2020

    As a resident of Illinois and a citizen of the USA, I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline, for many documented reasons by scientists much more versed in this subject than most of us and because we owe it to our children who look to us for leadership and to make the right decision on Climate Change. In Illinois, we are taking a high risk if we approve this action that only helps business interest. Enough!
    Belkis M Santos
    Belkis M Santos
  • March 2, 2020

    To Whom It May Concern,

    I am to express my concern about the expansion of the pipe line into Illinois, we currently have enough pipelines and do not need any more. I understand business and the things that are in place are good, but there is enough in place, and further will damage the already vital environmental balance. Balance in all things is important and we need to take into consideration the environmental impact this would have for years to come. I own a gas station so I understand the need for fuel, but again what we have in place is more than sufficient to handle Illinois. Please consider the environment and our need to have a healthy envioment. Thank you for your time.

    Dorothy
    Dorothy Flisk
  • March 2, 2020

    "I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because,

    1) Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    2) Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois will assume all of the risk while these oil companies reap all of the benefit.

    3) Doubling the flow rate could increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Please protect our already fragile environment! While making this decision, carefully consider all of the ramifications. What happens today will have long reaching and lasting effect on generations to come.
    Sandra Lee
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    The company's application to build two new pumping stations and upgrade a third to allow an increase the volume of oil transported through our state from 500,000 barrels per day to over a million is a danger to the ecology and health of Illinoisans and must be denied.

    The additional pipeline capacity will greatly expand the use of fossil fuels, will pose a much-increased risk of pipeline spills and accidents that will leak hazardous oil into our land and waters, will greatly increase the global warming generated by oil production and use across the world, and, after all of that, will not even help Illinoisans financially because almost all of the oil to be transported across our state is actually intended for export.

    In financial terms, if this permit request is granted Illinois will be a loser because our state will only get the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and the associated costs of clean up and remediation. The pipeline company and the oil industry will receive the profits while our state will bear the liabilities.

    The most urgent concern about the pipeline expansion, and the crucial reason for not granting this permit, however is that the pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental emergency that the world -- and Illinois -- is already seeing happen all around us. This is the most important concern for the ICC to take into account at this time. The environmental emergency is looming over all of human activity on this earth and by the account of many scientists, including the experts who are consulting with the United Nations, it is becoming ever more likely that the very existence of humanity is under threat.

    The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.
    William K. Ponder
  • March 2, 2020

    Please don't approve the passage on Dakota pipeline. Donna Davis
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    In addition, it’s critical we move away from fossil fuels now and invest in alternative forms of energy.
    Jean Des Biens
  • March 2, 2020

    Will cause ckunate change. Jeff
  • March 2, 2020

    I am opposed to any installation of additional pumping stations, or additional pumps in the state of Illinois. This will do significant damage to natural environment and more quickly deplete the non-renewable petroleum resources of our nation. It will allow windfall profits to corporations that will seek to sell our natural resources to other nations. To allow this is bad stewardship, bad policy, and a continuing of the feeding of corporate greed.

    James Anderson
    James Anderson
  • March 2, 2020

    Please, Please, PLEASE, don’t do this, there are other ways!! Chris
  • March 2, 2020

    I too am concerned about the safety issues of said pipeline and how it will effect out environment in all matters. I think about the careless oil spill in Alaska that hurt the wildlife when the Valdez had a spill. Our natural resources and wildlife our the one benefit we have in living here in the United States. We should not allow them to be injured and trashed because of workers and businesses not paying proper care. Our water supply, our nature reserves and our wildlife our a prized resource. claudia bottom
  • March 2, 2020

    We have the science to understand that we cannot continue to burn fossil fuels. We have the data to realize theres already enough fuel reserves in this country to maintain current levels for decades. And we have the technology and aptitude to produce and use only renewable energy. All we need is strong leadership in politics, society and business are ready for a clean economy. Sean Moran
  • March 2, 2020

    I vote no to Dakota access pipeline. Mari E.
  • March 2, 2020

    Clean water is a necessity. Pipeline spills are inevitable and endanger our water supply. Fossil fuels and their use endanger the future of our planet’s liveability. Marianne Stowers
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We need to reduce our use of fossil fuel, not expand it! Mark A. Segraves
  • March 2, 2020

    Don't allow these pumping stations to be built. Nathan Wall
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Accesss Pipeline . I’m concerned about the risk for oil spills. This is not good for Illinois. Mary c Tolan
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Dana Edwards
    Dana Edwards
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this. Cathy Reilly
  • March 2, 2020

    I am asking the ICC to deny the permit requested by Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, the companies that operates the dirty oil pipeline, to build the pumping stations in my state that would increase fossil fuel flow from 570,000 barrels a day to as much as 1.1 million barrels. Most of that oil, experts say, is bound for export.Pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture. The added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    As a citizen of Illinois, I'm asking you to oppose this permit, putting the people and the environment on which we depend before greed. As if threats to our health were not enough, we in this state will gain nothing from this reckless venture. The oil will be exported--making billions for corruption corporation stakeholders and leaving Illinois in peril. Please consider doing the right and just thing. We do not need this oil. We need investment in renewable energy, climate change solution and people's health.
    Toni Louise Oplt
  • March 2, 2020

    Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. ??Flow rate ?? Probability and severity of spills. ??Emissions ?? Climate change. Illinois gets the risk while the company gets the profit. No win for citizens of Illinois! Deborah Bacigalupo
  • March 2, 2020

    Please! No more damage to what we all jointly have. Elizabeth Taylor
  • March 2, 2020

    We cannot afford more damage to our environment. These things always fail and cause irreparable damage Jane Workhoven
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose any expansion of the pipeline due to unnecessary costs of the pipeline to public health Gabriel Harper
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. There are clear health concerns for residents, and this will only exacerbate the climate crisis. Janet Mroczek
  • March 2, 2020

    Think about our children’s future and the true cost of things, which includes clean air and water. Monica Fox
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. The US should be transitioning to and investing in renewable energy sources NOT continuing to support the fossil fuel industry and endangering our communities. Linda Skisak
  • March 2, 2020

    As if Illinois doesn't already have enough environmental problems with the carp invasion of lakes feeding into Lake Michigan, super fund sites still needing cleanup. This state already has enough pipelines criss-crossing the state, just how many environmental disasters can we handle at one time? There has already been an oil spill in the Dakotas, that been cleaned up? Oh and don't forget the New Madrid fault line. Send it through Iowa or Indiana they are red states who must love all the special attention from DC. B. J.
  • March 2, 2020

    I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the expansion of pipelines in Illinois, whether that be additional pipelines or increased capacity through additional pumping stations.

    Where is the benefit to Illinois? Why would we risk our groundwater and the related health hazards of pipeline spills? The expansion is strictly a case of corporate profit.

    Please reject any expansion of this pipeline. Thank you.
    Noreen Winningham
  • March 2, 2020

    I vigorously oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline and resolve to campaign and vote against ANY representative in favor of it. Ethan Sellers
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not vote to expand this environmentally and culturally disastrous pipeline. Illinois does NOT want pumping stations. We would much prefer to take more serious steps towards environmental conservation efforts and renewable energy so we can continue to be a progressive, forward-focused US city. Danine Midura
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Don't enable further use of non renewable energy. Invest in solar. Nicholas Irmen
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose expansion of the DAPL, and the stubborn continued investment in fossil fuel profiteering it represents, with disregard for the current climate crisis. Thomas Brittain
  • March 2, 2020

    Oil is a fading economy to be investing in. There are so many other better ways to attain energy and sustainability of both economy and environment. Oil is not the intelligent way to go forward. I encourage courage in the government to take a new path forward and leave pipe lines in history. Barbara Bickel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. Expansion only means more risk for the people of Illinois to spills and environmental damage. Illinois should stand as an example of people before profit. Fossil fuels are not the answer to the climate crisis and the damage to the environment from this expansion will not be easily healed. Karin Zygowivz
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve any expansion of the Dakota Pipeline, including not installing more pumping stations., Meredith C Tucker
  • March 2, 2020

    Dont grant the permit for this pipeline it's an environmental tragedy don't believe the Corporation about how many jobs or profits John M. Lane
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline because it puts many americans at risk of fresh water. We need to protect our water ways and Indian territory which is ILLEGAL to build on. Elizabeth Kruder
  • March 2, 2020

    I'm opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline through Illinois and the additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing pipelines in Illinois!. All you have to do is see what has happened to Colorado in the past 2 years and you'll know that if you accept MORE of these pipelines, you'll have even more pipelines that the oil industry wants to expand. In Colorado, BIG OIL has tried buying up people's farmland and if they don't sell, they have sued them, using eminent domain, to get what they want and displace the people who have owned this land for generations! A year ago, Colorado had 55,000 fracking wells and now they have nearly 100,000 of them. If any state looks like Saudi Arabia, it's Colorado!! In the past year, there are new fracking wells on both sides of the 20 mile road that goes to DIA.....and, there are two new towns....Windsor and Mead that big oil built for their workers! When looking down from the airplane, it's just one giant oil field as far as the eyes can see. Just think of what will happen if the terrorists want to do some damage! Now the people in Colorado are trying to prohibit their expansion that will never satisfy BIG OIL'S hunger for profits over the health, water supply in an arid state and the methane given off from the wells are known for emitting that is cancer causing! ------"only when the last tree has died and the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realize we can't eat money" JOAN E LINDGREN
  • March 2, 2020

    We know without doubt what the burning of fossil fuels is doing to our climate, our earth, and all the creatures who live on it.To contribute to the expansion of the energy merchants business is to be an accessory to a crime. Thoughtful Illinoisans do no want our state to be an accessory to Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company's money making crime. Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. michael w corcoran
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we need to completely shift our attention to greener alternatives for energy. Continuing to allow for such expansions harms our future and increases the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. It is high time that government officials recognized this and took action in the right direction for our's and our kids' future. Masooma Razvi
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it exacerbates the climate crisis. We need to shift to renewable energy and in doing so the need for this pipeline will be obsolete.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    P. Wilson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Nancy Jara-Hernandez
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of oil spills. Jane Krupicka
  • March 2, 2020

    Tar sands oil is one of the most polluting ways to get very dirty oil. The planet and the climate are in crisis already. Adding more pollution from dirty oil will make things worse in a very few years. Please reject Dakota Access LLC's request to add more pumping stations. Bob Jorgensen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the permit request for Dakota Access installation of additional pumping stations. The risk to people, environment is far too high in an already vulnerable world, especially when renewable and safer energy sources are available. Sarah Sainsbury
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it won't be good for the environment, or Illinois, just for the oil companies. John Czapkowicz
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will increase the probability and severity of spills. Emissions will rise, contributing to climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    You’ll be destroying indian land and putting water ways at risk.
    Elizabeth Kruder
  • March 2, 2020

    I OPPOSE the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is NOT good for our environment! Marcia Ewing
  • March 2, 2020

    It is unconscionable that you would actually permit the expansion of the pump it stations in Illinois to increase the the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipe Line!
    Do you not care about the families, the environment, and the increased damage this effort WILL do to both.
    In the name of all that is sacred in this world, do not approve this expansion. Please, I beg of you, don’t do this.
    Respectfully, Louis Scott
    Louis Scott
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose this act. There is no excuse for the drilling and the proven reckless behaviors that we have seen as a result of similar measures being passed across the country. The State of Illinois should cease and desist any measures that will exploit our resources and that only serve to put money in the fossil fuel industry, which is harming our country, our oceans, our entire planet with their greedy ravaging for resources that are nonrenewable and is ultimately a dead end. Instead, the State should pour its efforts and resources into renewable energy facilities and measures that will limit the disastrous harm that has already been caused through spillages and other toxic disturbance of the land that is the basis for all living things in our ecosystem. Jessica Fleming
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. R Woodson
  • March 2, 2020

    Hello,
    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Sincerely,
    Sarah Devine
    Sarah Devine
  • March 2, 2020

    Indigenous people have suffered enough and the nation's groundwater is under enough threat. Jessica Hester
  • March 2, 2020

    The Dakota Access Pipeline should not be built. Construction will only encourage further reliance on deleterious fossil fuels. Instead of a pipeline, Illinois needs further reliance on renewables such as wind, water and solar power. This is where the future of energy production lies. The pipeline will only continue the current destructive reliance on carbon-heavy technologies. Allan Johnston
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Meredith George
  • March 2, 2020

    I understand the need for petroleum but I do not wish to risk Native American lands and nature reserves for our needs Michael Ress
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not allow Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC, to add capacity by installing additional pumping facilities in Illinois. The risks of serious spills will increase significantly, and any damage will incur great public cost while the company enjoys greater profit. We do not need to expand oil supply when alternative sources, which don't have the negative pollution consequences of burning oil or gasoline, are becoming available. Tell Dakota to invest in alternative energy instead of pipeline expansion. Tim Noworyta
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline expansion. We cannot try to pretend we are working toward a zero carbon economy (which is necessary for the survivor life on earth) while at the same time we are expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. Eric James Dirnbeck
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, or any fossil fuel pipeline. We need to be rolling back this capacity, not increasing it. Illinois has an opportunity here to be a leader in standing up to the criminal fossil fuel companies, or an enabler and collaborator with them in their pursuits of extracting as much wealth as they can from the world as they destroy it. Charles Suggs
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the negative environmental effects this could have on the state.

    The increased flow rate from these additional pumping stations will also increase the probability and severity of spills and the possibility of explosions and fires, negatively impacting the health of the land and the communities around the pipeline - and, since it seems the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company plans to export this crude oil, Illinois and its residents get all of the risk, while these oil companies get all of the benefit and profit.

    Please do not allow this expansion to take place.
    Megan Gensler
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline involvement in Illinois. chris nilsen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will exacerbate climate change and will be unsafe for the residents of our state, both in the present and in future generations. jeff christian
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota oil pipeline in Illinois! Please do not support this! There are plenty of other nonpolluting options
    This is not good for Illinois or America! Big oil must stop this continued expansion into Native American land and our states.
    All pipelines leak! They pollute our land and water systems! This is not what we should be leaving behind for future generations...A big mess! Stop pollution now! My vote will be for a Clean environment! Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
    Cynthia Pantos
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills S
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Expansion will lead to greater risk of spills, as well as increased greenhouse gas output and environmental degradation. Further increasing our dependence on fossil fuels is not the way forward - energy independence will only come from investments in clean renewable energy. Besides, fossil fuel corporations have enough money as it is. No more. Bryan Ericson
  • March 2, 2020

    We strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline. Expansion increases the likelihood of spills which would be an environmental disaster and cause long term public harm for short term private gain -- and that gain based on increasing use of fossil fuels which contributes to a larger looming global disaster. The Midwestern US -- home to one of the world's largest deposits of fresh water -- will assume all the risk for oil that is exported. The constant mantra of more jobs and energy security does not ring true -- and is meaningless when growing soils are contaminated and water is undrinkable. Kathleen and Daniel Moran
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline and urge you to stop it! Turn an eye to the future of the planet, with clean renewable energy, instead of expanding the dirty oil network that has never supported the wellbeing of the planet or it's inhabitants - only the health of it's companies' managing officers and stockholders pockets. Please put your people and land first - protect us from this disastrous project. Veronica R
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will increase the probability and severity of spills. Emissions will rise, contributing to climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    You’ll be destroying indian land and putting water ways at risk.
    Elizabeth Kruder
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it'll further contribute greenhouse emissions on a massive level, equivalent to 20 million vehicles! Kamil Sitko
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline. chris nilsen
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the people of Illinois are above exploitation. We should be using the money and resources to build up our renewable energy infrastructure and lead by example. Increasing oil consumption will only exacerbate climate change and make switching to renewable energy harder in the future. Oil pipelines do have spills, and expanding this pipeline will only increase that chance. Do not approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. Lisa Mende
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. And consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Also evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Tracy Drake
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because there will be an increase the probability and severity of spills by doubling the flow rate. Furthermore, consumption of this additional oil will increase the emissions produced, equivalent to 20 millions cars! Obviously this will only make climate change worse. We cannot have this. We cannot exacerbate this problem for future generations to correct for us. We are supposed to be the most powerful country in the world...how can we still be so reliant on fossil fuels. Especially when evidence shows that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Kelly Lynn Schneider
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose extension of this pipeline and permit approval. The risks to our ground water supply and damage to our environment in general are too great to ignore. Thank you Michael Pasteris
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because spills are inevitable, as recent history has shown.
    Increasing the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    With no spills, which is extremely unlikely, the refining and burning of more oil will cause more greenhouse gasses to be emitted. We here on this planet need time to transition to renewable, clean energy sources. Refining and burning more oil will shorten the time we have before the dire consequences of global climate degradation by the greenhouse effect become irreversible.
    Decent, non-rapaciously greedy people are more concerned with the future of the places we live and work, than with the short-term profits of irresponsible fossil fuel exploiters/traders/pimps.
    John Ritter
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline because it serious threatens clean drinking water as well as the natural Waters that flow through our beautiful state. This decision with affect generations of Illinois residents, and permanently alter the viablility of water in this state.

    Please oppose this decision and make a choice for the future prosperity of our state, not the demands of the rich of today.
    Grace Bell
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will cause more potential dangers to our waters and in turn our lives from spills which we all know as occurred and had a blind eye turned at times too. Any issues to this line will be devastating and effect us for year to come. Not to mention the amount of emissions this will produce without any malfunctions, it is sickening!
    This is too large of a risk and frankly not necessary. Please do not choose greed over lives, do what is right please.
    Jennifer Wawryk
  • March 2, 2020

    Don’t approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit.
    I absolutely oppose it as I'm against the harm it will cause to our environment and the health of your constitutes.
    You can make a difference. Please do not be complacent during these dire times or you will be held accountable to the voters.
    Lee
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the additional pumping stations because there is no way to safely transport oil and gas leakage can be devastating to the land and drinking water supplies. Also, we should not be assisting in the extraction and transportation of fossil fuels. Climate change threatens food production, water supplies, homes and businesses vulnerable to flooding and the extinction of innumerable species.

    I grew up in Texas and saw firsthand the devastation that fossil fuels can cause - air and water pollution, cancer corridors, loss of human lives and threats to wildlife.

    Please do the right thing and deny this request - we should not be assisting fossil fuel companies in any way.
    Candace Colby
  • March 2, 2020

    I write to oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline through Illinois. We are living in a time of Climate Emergency. We cannot afford to expand the use of fossil fuels; rather we must immediately eliminate the use of fossil fuels if there is any hope of saving ourselves from catastrophic overheating of the planet and the extreme disruption if not total destruction of human life.

    The ICC thus has an opportunity and a duty to take all available action to reduce fossil fuel use -- this permit request therefore should be denied.

    Thank you for your attention to this matter.
    Janet Gerske
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because such installations pose more risks than benefits. Instead, we need to expand means to deliver clean energy.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Mayre Press
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it puts our environment at risk through increasing the possibility of oil spills, and increasing emissions into our atmosphere. Amanda Grant
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not allow the Dakota Access pipeline to make any changes to the Illinois pipeline. The additional quantity of oil is not needed for the US economy. Oil is not the future it is the past! Peter Mikolaitis
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Pipeline. Environment is precious! Go solar, wind! Monica Slayman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this permit.
    The pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental/climate emergency worldwide while presenting more risk of leaks and spills to Illinois! DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all the risk, while these oil companies get all the benefits! The additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars while presenting unnecessary risks to our water and public health and will soon be obsolete due to a transition to renewable energy. The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our people, not to the gas and oil companies! Illinois citizens are watching these proceedings. The people of Illinois consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.
    Lili cross
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This additional oil consumption will exacerbate climate change--we cannot afford to make this problem worse. Evan Hahn
  • March 2, 2020

    Protect our Earth! Teresa mcgee
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Neal A Gerus
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because oil consumption is trending downward, generating new capacity is a poor investment. This in addition to the risk of environmental damage make pipeline development a bad idea. Beckay Mezza
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly object to the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company building pumping stations in Illinois. The increased velocity of pushing oil through these pipelines increases the rupture risk. Please do NOT approve their permit requests. SAdnra Justad
  • March 2, 2020

    Stop Dakota Access pipeline. Our children depend on your decisions. Joanne
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of this pipeline in Illinois. No more risking our environment and health for the benefit of the fossil fuel industry. No more pipelines. Period. Jake Carman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we are at a vital time in history when we need to cut back drastically on emissions that effect climate change. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    I want to look forward to having kids, and knowing that my children's children will be able to live on this earth like I did. Stopping companies that exploit the environment for profit is one of the ways I can do this. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    We don't want this in Illinois. We don't want this expansion anywhere.
    Drew Billman
  • March 2, 2020

    I reject the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. This is unacceptable. We must protect our land and water. Tara Haselhorst
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Pipeline extension into Illinois. We do not need more pollution problems and toxic spills. Mitch Siegel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the doubling of the Dakota Pipeline. Let's not support the rich getting richer and let's support the environment and our health. Nicolas Nogueda
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access pipeline to expand their infrastructure for many reasons. The first one being that the global economy is shifting towards clean and renewable energy sources and gaining independence from oil and gas slowly but surely. Hydrocarbons are going extinct and are not the future's source of energy. Secondly, this expansion will inevitably lead to spills and leaks that will contaminate ecosystems and our drinking water. Of course this will most likely affect underrepresented minority groups, which is extremely unjust! Among several other reasons...

    As a university student, an environmentalist, a nature lover, and a human rights activist, I oppose the expansion permit of the Dakota Access pipeline.
    Cecilia Albert-Black
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I do not want to support fossil fuel energy supplies. I would rather build our economic future on renewable and sustainable choices, not choices at the expense of the air we breath and ground we walk on. Weston Tanner
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Meghan Hickey
  • March 2, 2020

    Illinois is host to one of the Great Lakes, the last thing we need are pipelines or fracking anywhere our great state or Lake. Don’t kid yourself constituents are savvy these days and we care about our environment. The citizens of Illinois will not tolerate any one or any thing to ruin our water, land, or air not with leaking pipelines, polluted air, or anything else harmful like cancer the pipelines bring. We have seen the devastation that pipelines bring in other states and we don’t want that for Illinois. Please whatever you do you must protect Illinois from all the negatives that pipelines bring.

    Lindy L. Vandersteeg
    Lindy L. Vandersteeg
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the proposed pipeline from South Dakota running through Illinois. The risks are too high! I am disappointed to hear our great state is assisting the tar sand transporters from other states and countries to go against the safety of the people in our great country. The pipelines are not safe or necessary. The demand for oil is dwindling especially dirty oil like the type that will be in the pipeline. David Gallagher
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve any further permits for the extension if the Dakota Pipeline. Illinois will receive no benefit from it and it will only contribute to further deterioration of our environment (the equivalency of 15 1000 megawatt coal plants) and the only true benefit goes to improved profits for the fossil fuel oil industry. The U.S. is already energy independent and other world nations need to move towards fossil fuel free energy to meet their energy needs. Michael Frankenstein
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this planned action due to risk to our environment when an accident happens and the mistaken action to increaser oil folw; We need to use renewable energy sources and curtail use of fossil fuels.
    I also fear the effects of these pipelines/upgrades to human and soil health
    Dee A Budelier
  • March 2, 2020

    Once again, it's a case of Corporations making profit while we the citizens pay for it. And then they run all the propaganda ads saying how it will create more jobs and be good for the country. They don't tell us about the hazards and safety issues this can cause.
    NO!!!
    Linda Johnson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline. It’s not a matter of whether it will cause spills but when and where. No spills are acceptable. We need to be moving away from fossil fuel’s and towards clean energy like nuclear, geothermal, etc. Tonya Lillie
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of increase oil consumption.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    We should be building our State for a better future, and not dwell in the technologies of the past. Do not approve the expansion of this pipeline.
    Belen Muniz
  • March 2, 2020

    PLEASE READ I oppose the pipe line expansion, regardless of whether this land is already established for this use. I am not saying I want more tanker trucks on the highway to compensate; I am demanding that we find new, cleaner sources of fuel and slow the consumption of oil and oil-based plastic products. Tax paying citizens remain helpless as more and more land is taken away from us and used for others’ profits. If we allow this expansion, we are continuing to support the expansion of the oil and plastic industries which has disrupted wild life, water sources and our entire global ecosystem. I am not denying that there would be temporary economic advantages both for consumers and industries however increasing the output of these pipelines will only fuel our oil and plastic use. Ultimately we need to decrease our global use of oil and find alternative sources. For this reason I oppose the pipeline expansion on Illinois soil! Illinois has already lost over 80 percent of its wild prairies and forests. Look it up. Bridgette
  • March 2, 2020

    we do not neeed any more oil spills and all pipelines leak at some time. We need renewable clean energy and not more pollution of the planet. I object to this in the strongest possible terms. Margery Fraklin
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of increase oil consumption.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    We should be building our State for a better future, and not dwell in the technologies of the past. I do not approve the expansion of this pipeline.
    Cameron Kern
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose this pipeline project. The risks of a major spill, pollution, and destruction would be overwhelming. Our country needs to understand the risks to the enviroment of continued use of fossil fuels. Pipelines will become history when the US begins in earnest to develop alternative energy sources. Please do not grant this pipeline expansion project.

    Ron Bumeister, Rockford
    Ronald Burmeister
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline. We are already experiencing so much crisis with out climate. This is another threat to our health and environment. This is not for the people's benefit. May Leandicho
  • March 2, 2020

    Why are we even talking about building out oil infrastructure when the cheapest form of power in the world is wind power, when red states like Iowa are aggressively moving toward 100 percent renewable sources of power, when scientists tell us that we need to stop burning fossil fuels to protect our children's future on this planet?

    The only way to make sense of a request to lock us into another 50 years of oil consumption is fear of offending powerful oil interests, and that kind of cowardice is what is going to end up killing off most higher forms of life on this planet. Stop. Just stop. Do what is right for America, not what is right for political expediency.
    Paul Crouser
  • March 2, 2020

    The Dakota Access Pipeline is a death knell for our children’s future. STOP IT! Joseph A. Mungai
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because use of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. In addition, this lines the pockets of oil companies and their executives and does little to benefit the taxpayers of Illinois. Please choose the interests of your constituents over the interests of an oil company. David Young
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for many reasons, but primarily because it
    is not needed--The dynamics have changed and the future is in Renewable Clean energy, not in the old
    polluting fossil fuels of the past. We are reminded daily that the Climate Crisis is the existential threat
    of our times--The last thing we want to do is facilitate more carbon emissions into our atmosphere.
    There is no such thing as clean coal technology,which is advertised daily on the local TV and Radio
    stations, and is simply false . Finally , evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. This is unacceptable to the residents of Illinois
    Jack Graber
  • March 2, 2020

    This is not for the people but for private company and for profit. This is a threat to our health and environment. I highly oppose this being built here. Keep our land clean, there is already so much climate changes happening. May Leandicho
  • March 2, 2020

    I am an environmental scientist at a Department of Energy research laboratory. I urge you to deny the permit to expand the DAPL capacity. To approve this is to willingly exacerbate air pollution, water pollution, and greenhouse gas production that will worsen the effects of climate change. Approving the DAPL capacity would be totally irresponsible and an abdication of your responsibilities to Illinois taxpayers to act in their best interest.

    As an environmental scientist, let me assure you that the world is facing an environmental crisis unlike anything encountered in human history. Through our collective willingness to sacrifice the long-term security of people everywhere for short-term benefits that accrue to a relatively small group of people, we have already condemned our children and future generations to untold suffering. There is no magic solution here, but we can and must do our part to lessen the catastrophic effects of climate change.

    The Illinois Commerce Commission is in a position of authority to help control the disastrous effects of climate change by reducing fossil fuel consumption. We ALL know that it is essential to reduce fossil fuel consumption. I beg you, in the name of our children and future generations, please do your part to help combat this unfolding crisis by denying a permit to expand DAPL capacity.
    Robert Sullivan
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly appose the Dakota Pipeline coming through Illinois or anywhere else. Oil is a disaster for our world and needs to be left in the ground. STOP THIS NONSENSE AND WORK WITH MOTHER NATURE sharon welch
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. We don't need to be promoting more consumption of petroleum. We don't need the added risks from leaks. We don't need the destruction of more good land for this purpose. What we need is an all-out effort to have all of our energy come from renewable sources like wind and solar. We also need much more serious efforts to promote energy efficiency. We are in a climate crisis and our environment is being destroyed in so many other ways as well. James Hinton
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not allow Illinois to be "an enabler" for the Dakota Access pipeline expansion. I am strongly opposed.

    It is long overdue to stand up together and protect this planet for future generations.
    Audrey Fischer
  • March 2, 2020

    This is disgusting; we are facing one of the most urgent and existential crises of our generation and corporations (and folks within the government paid by corporations) want to follow the money and profit. Listen to people, respect indigenous communities. SAY NO to more oil pipeline expansion. Dejah Powell
  • March 2, 2020

    The pump-drill-fracking damage is irreversible. Permanent! Forever! Please ??
    Please protect nature, wildlife, human beings and drinking water
    The catastrophic risks are too many, such as
    Infecting waterways and inflicting man-induced earthquakes
    Please support ????
    Katherine Carson
  • March 2, 2020

    Our planet is under an horrific attack. The corporations that can only see monetary reasons for adding
    more”fuel” to the existing serious problem of climate change need to be stopped. There seems to be no
    reason for this proposed expansion! They should not have built the pipe line in the first place! I think the
    politicians who owe their livelihood by kneeling down to big money pressure should be.................!!!!
    Paul Schultz
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline because I believe we need to stop using fossil fuels now to halt catastrophic climate change. We need to invest in solar and wind powered electricity immediately. The health benefits to people and all life on earth will be amazing!!! Please read Saul Griffith an expert on the engineering needed to halt catastrophic climate change. Leslie Ritter-Jenkins
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not let the pipe line into Illinois Tom Campbell
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because -

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Andrew Johnson
  • March 2, 2020

    No to the new piping stations Lisa Detrisac
  • March 2, 2020

    This is not a tough call. Why endanger the environment and people of Illinois to assuage the greed of fossil fuel companies? Do not approve this permit. David Posner
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, irrigation water, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. It is not a matter of IF a pipeline will have a leak, it is WHEN it will leak. They are also highly vulnerable to terrorists of any persuasion. Oil spills are NEVERr completely cleaned up - much leaks into soil and is carried into our waterways. The effects on wildlife is immeasurable.

    In addition, out health and welfare is being put at risk so the oil can be exported - there is NO benefit to the citizens of Illinois.

    Please reject this expansion.

    Thank you.
    F Irvin
    F Irvin
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    P Hosea
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose any new oil pipeline/pump house construction. We must move away from old dirty forms of energy and transition to renewable energy sources. Allowing the flow of existing oil transfer pipeline to be increased is a dangerous step in the wrong direction. Please protect our land, water and people by saying NO to Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Co Graham Willson
  • March 2, 2020

    Stop this action. We need to move our capital to renewable resources. Increase wind and solar production Kathleen Buffington
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against a pipeline as there have been too many accidents and I feel we should spend money on environmentally safe alternative sources of energy. Karen Clausen
  • March 2, 2020

    Illinois needs to step up and be an example of doing what is right for humanity and the environment.

    The additional volume of oil in the Dakota Access pipeline—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of 20 million cars or 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants—would go against efforts to protect communities and to lessen climate change when we should be decreasing our investment in fossil fuels.

    I have also read that pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline would increase the risk of rupture, despite monitoring efforts.

    I’d like to live in a state that exemplifies protecting the regional and global environment and its people instead of putting profit makers first.
    Colleen Leonard
  • March 2, 2020

    No more pipelines! Please. No more. Theresa Glover
  • March 2, 2020

    i oppose the pipeline for exports Timothy Hicks
  • March 2, 2020

    I, and many others who will be disproportionately affected by this pipeline, vehemently oppose its construction. For too long, us Americans have valued profit over people, and the possible construction of this pipeline is another example of that. Not only is this viewpoint intrinsically wrong, but it is also counterintuitive; the short term profits that would be created can, and will, be outdone by the guaranteed destruction it will cause. We must transition to a sustainable economy, otherwise we simply won't have an economy.

    We are calling on those who are making the decision to do the right thing, and in doing so, be an example for the rest of the country. Deny this request outright. We can, and must, do better.
    Mark Tangel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline. An oil pipeline is not going to solve any employment or economic issues. If anything it will create more problems and be a hindrance to our ecosystem. Frankly, anything that facilitates petroleum is a very 20th century way of thinking. It’s not about the need for pill, but it would be better to ask the question “why oil?”
    Regardless there is no need for the DAPL and no need for it to be in Illinois.
    Scott Dunham
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the construction of the pipeline through Illinois, my home, and through all other states as well. All the pipeline leak, even the newly laid ones. So just stop; it is an environmental disaster. Go solar and wind. Armida Alexander
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We put our natural resources, land, water and the climate at a very great risk. What sort of environment will we be leaving for our children? We have to protect the climate and the land for those coming after us. This is just about profits for fossil fuel companies!- with no thoughts of the consequences. Kristin Carlson
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve pumping stations in IL
    Higher pressure means more wear on pipes and increased danger to nearby residents
    Not to mention the environmental impacts of the added carbon
    We should be racing to the top for protecting the environment not the bottom
    Curt Peterson
  • March 2, 2020

    No more pipelines. Ed K
  • March 2, 2020

    Good day,
    As much as we love our fellow friends enjoying economically inexpensive energy, we sternly oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline under section 8-503. As a nation, we need to continue more toward renewable energy sources. As for pipeline jobs, there are plenty of opportunities for employment in developing renewable sources - if indeed, not more. The Chinese subsidize and offer rebates to their customers, inorder to fuel their competition of developing the best electric car. We like to think of our selves as leaders, when sometimes, we head in directions that we won't even allow us to play catchup. Environmentally and economically, we need to focus on new technologies, opposed to maintaining an unsustainable and uninhabitable future.
    Sandor Kovacs Jr
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Jyoti Srikishan
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose expansion of this pipeline in Illinois.
    The state and its residents will bear the ecological and economic cost of any cleanup and contamination from spills, which happen consistently in these operations.
    We will not benefit economically, as the much or all of the oil will be exported.
    Ultimately, increasing production and transport capability of oil benefits only a handful of corporations, while accelerating the negative impact on our climate.
    Our state government must prioritize clean and locally owned energy production and distribution in every situation.
    Stuart Greenspan
  • March 2, 2020

    If we pump more oil than we would increase greenhouse emissions. Christian Schelthoff
  • March 2, 2020

    STOP KICKING THE (OIL) CAN DOWN THE ROAD!!! THINK ABOUT OUR FUTURE GENERATIONS FOR A CHANGE!!! Darcy Gentner
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access line. There are very clear safety concerns for people and the environment along the path of the proposed doubling -- and of the course the resulting CO2 released.
    No need as we are winding down our use of fossil fuel use in this county and everywhere. More and more people are going to electric vehicles and solar energy. Why would you even think of allowing this! We ask you members of the Illinois Commerce Commission to be good stewards of our home and land here in Illinois. We don't want it; we don't need it.
    Dorothy Deer
  • March 2, 2020

    I can't believe this is actually on the docket and we have to continue to oppose this. Truly unsettling. I strongly oppose this and any proposed expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline--for so many reasons. Enough already! Tara Regan Sonnabend
  • March 2, 2020

    I am filing a public comment in vehement opposition to Petition 19-0673. Expansion of the DAPL in Illinois would be nothing short of idiotic when our planet is in the throws of a climate crisis that is already here, already bad, already impacting the residents of the state, the nation, and the world, and will do nothing but worsen unless the government has the guts to do something radical to stop it. The Illinois government can make a small step in the right direction by denying this petition. I urge you reject petition 19-0673 for the sake of our collective future. Kathryn Antonatos
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the climate crisis and will be obsolete soon due to the transition to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water and public health. Charles Stransky
  • March 2, 2020

    I am vehemently against the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We need fewer pipeline facilities in the U.S, not more. There is no reason on this earth why we should give them extended access into Illinois. These pipeline companies are completely asinine and have done nothing to deserve any more help from the rest of us in getting their poisonous fuel around. Not only that, these pipelines are almost certainly going to leak. And they do precious little in restitution. I, for one, want nothing to do with them. Jenna
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a major threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the overall health of ALL Illinois residents. The probability and severity of oil spills will likely increase by doubling the flow rate. Aside from the long-term impact this could have human life. Keeping our water supply clean should be priority. Jackie Root
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline due to the fact that it would increase the chances of an oil spill. Loretta Doyle
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the dakota access pipeline. Allowing our limited natural resources to be utilized for short term gains by a few, will benefit no one. Re-education and the development of alternative energy resources will be more sustainable and create longer lasting careers for the future. Paul Fujihara
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose authorizing an increase of capacity for the Dakota Access pipeline. The first, most obvious reason is that we are in the midst of a climate crisis and in order to ensure a livable planet for future generations, we have to do all we can to end our dependance on dirty fossil fuels now. In addition, this pipeline risks the natural resources of Illinois residents without benefiting them, as the oil is scheduled for export. Finally, Energy Transfer has a poor track record for safety and cannot be trusted. Robin Wilson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. We also should not be encouraging the increased transportation and use of fossil fuels to further enlarge our very heavy carbon footprint. robert terence bonace
  • March 2, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I don't see why we we would want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Enough Fredric Lange
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will perpetuate our country's addiction to climate-changing fossil fuels at a time when Illinois is working hard to eliminate reliance on fossil fuels. It also increases the risk of oil spills, which have happened with this and other pipelines. The track record supports this latter concern. Peter Jackson
  • March 2, 2020

    I motion to deny the pipeline to have access to another pumping station in IL.

    The endangerment caused to our great state of IL in surrounding areas is not worth this type of risk for the financial benefit of few. We need to be thinking about and investing in ways to move away from the use and especially export of crude oil.
    Phil Pace
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not approve of the expansion of the DAPL in Illinois. The people, the land, the future really does count on us taking a stand against oil money and capitalist ventures which continue to harm our overall livelihood. Mark Denny
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for three reasons.

    1.) Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    2.) Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    3.) Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit
    George
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not allow expansion of dangerous pipelines in Illinois! A. Zide
  • March 2, 2020

    As a resident of Illinois, I do not want this pipeline to expand capacity to allow for additional pumping stations and additional flows to be going through our state. I strongly oppose this. With the very real and ongoing threat of climate change, we should be moving away from fossil fuel and transitioning to renewable energy. Here in Illinois we are already seeing increased flooding events and changes in our normal seasonal weather. This also increases the potential for spills which will further degrade our environment. It is unethical to continue relying on fossil fuels when it is known that human actions, including the burning of fossil fuels are causing widespread ecological destruction. We don't consider the non-market costs to projects like these. Clean air, water, and soil are important to human health and the health of our environment. We are not separate from our environment and should be doing more to protect it, like turning down these projects. No amount of money can replace our natural environment. I find it hard to believe that anyone would support this without receiving financial kickbacks. Althea MacMillan
  • March 2, 2020

    This pipeline doubles the possibility of spills, gives the oil company access to lands that are needed for better purposes, and keeps clean energy from being developed. Marge Chesney
  • March 2, 2020

    Do not expand the DAPL in Illinois or in any state Garrett Ellingsworth
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the permit sought by Dakota Access Pipeline company and Energy Transfer Corporation to build two new pumping stations and upgrade a third. This would allow them to increase the volume of oil carried by that pipeline from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day. The company has a bad history of properly maintaining their pipelines and this pipeline has already had 11 leaks since it began operations. Allowing this huge increased in pumping pressure puts Illinois residents and agriculture at risk. Additionally, we are now in the middle of an existential climate crisis that has already resulted in massive flooding, lakefront damage, and increased tornedos in Illinois and the midwest. Illinois residents want their state and national government to do everything it can support a rapid transition to clean, sustainable energy rather than helping the dirty fossil fuel industry continue to increase the destruction of our planetary habitat. The only one we have. This is something we owe our children as well as ourselves. We must stop the expansion of the fossil fuel industry every way we can. Jean Waller
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the proposal to increase capacity in the Dakota Access pipeline because
    -it doesn't benefit Illinois to any relevant degree,
    -it massively increases the risk of oil spills,
    -it is a step in the wrong direction relative to the climate crisis, and
    -it puts the interests of a corporation over those of the local residents and stakeholders.

    Please vote against this proposal.
    Vivek Doshi
  • March 2, 2020

    Hello,

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I am an attorney who represented people arrested in N. Dakota who opposed the pipeline. As a result, I learned a lot about the destruction done by the pipeline. We don't need more or bigger pipelines. We need to change and end our dependence on oil.

    Melinda Power
    Melinda Longford Power
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Also, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Finally, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Lindsey Butler
  • March 2, 2020

    I opposedakota pipeline and all funds diverted to dirty energy that could be invested in solar or wind power James Pszanka
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the DAP because
    evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Keri Pearson
  • March 2, 2020

    I very much oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline -- it is the opposite of the direction we need to go in. We need to protect our environment, and we particularly need to protect our water. Kate Kasserman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose a construction of a new pipeline. What is wrong with the current one? Abel Rivera
  • March 2, 2020

    I am vehemently opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it supports and encourages an industry that is destroying our planet while trampling on the sovereign rights of tribal nation's.

    It also puts Illinois communities at risk, because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Why would we want to do that?!?

    And last, but not least, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. As an Illinois resident, I demand you not put my safety at risk for such a stupid reason as another pipeline that makes another corporation richer.
    Genevra Gallo-Bayiates
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline. Each time a pipeline consistently spills. You need to protect our land NOT destroy it. And eventually the environmental harm will affect you and your family too. The harm a spill creates does not just stay in one spot. It affects the land, the water, the animals and the air. It's time you work for the people and our country. Development in today's world is not corporations that are destroying our land for their own profit, development today is keeping our land intact and safe for us and our children. Please consider this and put our American people first. Dawn Williams
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil. Illinois will absorb all of the risk while these oil companies receive all of the benefits -

    1) Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. These spills create a toxic environment for everyone involved.

    2) Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars. This will exacerbate climate change and furthermore, make the air we breathe unsafe.

    We need to put the health of the people and our environment first!
    Sally Oakes
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access pipeline expansion permit. This project will increase the risk of spills and explosions in Illinois, jeopardizing the health of people and all species in the environment. Instead of increasing our extraction of fossil fuels, we should be keeping them in the ground in order to reduce our carbon emissions and limit global warming. Joan Sophie
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is a threat to our water and our health. State legislators should be doing everything possible to transition our economy away from oil consumption, a direct cause of pollution and climate change, and toward clean, renewable energy. Valerie Baffa
  • March 2, 2020

    February 27, 2020
    I write to register strongest possible opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    The company's request to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station to allow them to increase the volume of oil they transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is insupportable and must be denied.

    The additional oil going into production through this pipeline will be detrimental to the health of our environment and to health of the citizens of our state. The pipeline will greatly expand the use of fossil fuels, will pose a much-increased risk of pipeline spills and accidents that will leak hazardous oil into our land and waters, will greatly increase the global warming generated by oil production and use across the world, and, after all of that, will not even help Illinoisans financially because almost all of the oil to be transported across our state is actually intended for export.

    In financial terms, if this permit request is granted Illinois will be a loser because our state will only get the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and the associated costs of clean up and remediation. The pipeline company and the oil industry will receive the profits while our state will bear the liabilities.

    The most urgent concern about the pipeline expansion, and the crucial reason for not granting this permit, however is that the pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental emergency that the world -- and Illinois -- is already seeing happen all around us. This is the most important concern for the ICC to take into account at this time. The environmental emergency is looming over all of human activity on this earth and by the account of many scientists, including the experts who are consulting with the United Nations, it is becoming ever more likely that the very existence of humanity is under threat.

    The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.
    Emily Flesher
  • March 2, 2020

    Stop the pipeline from being builded David C Workman
  • March 2, 2020

    I am opposed to the Dakota Access Pipeline. We are stewards of the land. This pipeline has potential cause catastrophic harm.
    As our Native American friends have taught us, we must look seven generations into the future when making decisions.
    This is not good for Illinois!
    Susan Cass
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate greatly increases the chance of spills and other accidents.

    This proposal would also increase greenhouse gas emissions and add to the climate change crisis at a time when we need to be divesting in fossil fuels by half.
    Christina Beal
  • March 2, 2020

    February 28, 2020

    “I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.”

    Rose Dombrow
    Rose Dombrow
  • March 2, 2020

    I am petitioning for an Order under Section 8-503 of the Public Utilities Act for authority to install additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on exciting certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois Elizabeth Koltun
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because our world cannot afford to continue to consume oil without thinking about the consequences. Forest fires in CA and Australia, hurricanes in Florida and the Caribbean--not to mention Sandy, heat waves, oceans warming, and small Pacific islands being submerged, etc. All of this is indicating the Climate Change has arrived and we need to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels including oil.

    Consumption of the additional oil from the Dakota Access Pipeline will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk of spills and pollution while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    We need to reject this expansion and invest in renewable resources--electric vehicle infrastructure for example--instead.

    Thank you,
    Faith Bugel
    Attorney-at-Law
    Faith E Bugel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Noah Lepawsky
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because an increase in flow rate will also increase the risk of ruptures and spills. Bernhard Adams
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline; it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.

    PLEASE protect our environment.
    Donna S.
  • March 2, 2020

    Please do not approve the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline being requested to pass through Illinois because it is at risk for leakage, fire and other hazards. In addition we need to focus on alternative fuels instead of more dirty Dakota crude. And since this crude will be exported, we in Illinois face the risks while the pipeline company gets the profits. Henry Bryant
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because increasing the flow will greatly increase the probability and severity of spills. In addition, all the risk will be placed on Illinois, and not the oil companies who plan to export crude oil. Nathan Silverman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the consumption of this additional oil will produce harmful emissions that will disastrously exacerbate the rate of climate change, that to the effect of 20 million cars, further leading to the climate crisis. Illinois should be helping contribute to the solution NOT the problem. Paige Benner
  • March 2, 2020

    I have read the comments of others and wish to agree. Doubling the flow of oil increases the likelihood of a spill. Burning more oil contributes to climate change. We in Illinois are not going to use this oil. I would like to add that, whenever a pipeline or anything to do with oil is under consideration, we are told how very careful you will be, so there will be no spills. And then there is a spill. I no longer have any faith in your reassurances. Susan J Wisniewski
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Pipeline in my state! I don't see why my community, its water and its land, should be endangered by the risky business of Big Oil, especially as the benefits will be exported elsewhere. Donna Pucciani
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is dangerous for our Illinois families and our environment. Doubling the rate of flow will increase the probability and severity of spills. We've already seen what can happen in our neighboring state of Michigan with the Enbridge pipeline polluting the Kalamazoo River and costing millions of dollars in damage.

    Also, enabling the increased use of oil will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Thank you for your consideration.
    John Llewellyn
  • March 2, 2020

    As a family medicine physician, I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. We know spills have significant health risks and more worrying are the unknown risks to our communities from these volumes of spills.
    We need to be scaling back fossil fuel consumption not expanding pipeline flow which we know is linked to climate disruption.

    Furthermore, these companies are putting our communities at risk here in Illinois, but are not planning any benefit for our communities as they export the oil and take in the profits for themselves.

    Please stop the expansion of this pipeline.
    Nicole Baltrushes Hughes
  • March 2, 2020

    I wholeheartedly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which will only increase the amount of global-warming-causing pollution that will further destroy our climate, land, water, wildlife, and ability to survive as humans. We need to believe in science, stop raping the land for short-term profit, quit living in the past, and embrace the present and future of alternative energy methods. No more fossil fuels.

    From a technical side, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Bob Gendron
  • March 2, 2020

    I adamantly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for all of the reasons my colleagues here have already stated. It’s time to move to a green economy. We are well past the deadline on making this move. IL should be a leader not a looser in this fight for climate survival. Becky Beucher
  • March 2, 2020

    As a family medicine physician, I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. We know spills have significant health risks and more worrying are the unknown risks to our communities from these volumes of spills.
    We need to be scaling back fossil fuel consumption not expanding pipeline flow which we know is linked to climate disruption.

    Furthermore, these companies are putting our communities at risk here in Illinois, but are not planning any benefit for our communities as they export the oil and take in the profits for themselves.

    Please stop the expansion of this pipeline.
    nicole B baltrushes Hughes
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for these reasons -

    1. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    2. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    3. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Please consider the welfare of Illinois residents and the protection of our land and deny expansion requests.

    Thank you,
    Hillary A Bean
    Hillary A Bean
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis. Dr James Hansen, world-renowned climate scientist has already submitted written testimony detailing the negative statistics. The oil will not help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits." I agreed with this statement submitted by a concerned citizen of Illinois. Barbara Toczydlowska
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline because the increased flow volume will increase the risk of accidents. In addition, as most of this oil is for export, Illinois will bear the environmental risks without any benefit to our own energy needs. It is past time for Illinois to invest in green energy alternatives rather than further environmental destruction.

    Janet Ferguson
    Janet Ferguson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. The expansion will only exacerbate the climate crisis. Dr James Hansen, world renowned climate scientist has already submitted written testimony detailing the negative statistics. The oil will not even help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits. As a US citizen and an Illinois home owner and taxpayer, I am in complete opposition to the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois or anywhere else in our country. Nancy Holda
  • March 2, 2020

    Don’t support the Dakota Access Pipeline or its expansion. We need to protect our natural resources. Water is life. Elizabeth Tieri
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefits." -Tony Fuller

    I agree with Mr. Fuller.
    Barbara Toczydlowska
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose this expansion as there are very clear safety concerns for people and the environment along the path of the proposed doubling -- and of the course the resulting CO2 released. There is no need for this excess product as we wind down the fossil fuel use in this county and elsewhere due to climate change. It looks like you, our unelected representatives, are asking Illinois residents to suffer for the sake of an outside corporation and their profits as NONE of this will come to Illinois and all will be exported. How are YOU, members of the Illinois Commerce Commission, being good stewards of our home and land here in Illinois. There will be spills- as has happened with DAPL already and every other pipeline like it- and your actions to approve this will be remembered. And if you are personally benefiting from this, that information will be found out. Truth will out is not just a saying. It's what will happen. NOT benefiting Illinois at any level and yet we are being askied to consider this. How is this not involving kick backs? Nancy Holda
  • March 2, 2020

    please listen to us that live in Illionois Mark Campbell
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I believe we must move away from fossil fuels and embrace a green new deal. Our water resources are essential to provide drinking water to our towns and cities and irrigation for our farms and doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Further, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Thanks for your consideration,

    George
    George Honig
  • March 2, 2020

    I am adamantly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for all of the reasons my colleagues have listed previously. It’s long over due time for IL to be a leader not a loser in this fight for climate survival. Becky Beucher
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    We do not need policies that severely threaten safe land and rivers by pollution and would certainly endanger the welfare of the ecosystem which of course affect us all - animals, birds.
    And humans are after all included in the animal group of species.
    Catharine J Jones
    Catharine Jones
  • March 2, 2020

    This pipeline expansion does not serve the citizens of Illinois in any way. Increasing the chances of contamination while sending dirty energy elsewhere is counterintuitive and harmful.

    The US is already the largest energy producer in the world. We do not need more fossil fuels being exported to further climate change while making local farms more likely to experience extreme drought and floods. Please protect the citizens of Illinois and don't further pad the bottom line of this company.
    Michael Caldie
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it threatens our groundwater and the health of our residents.

    Also, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and the pipeline in Standing Rock has already had spills, so it is not if, but when.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Do not give away our future for someone else's profits.
    Margaret Ali
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Frances Surratt
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
    There is simply no reason to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that will export the oil to other countries!
    This has everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies and nothing to do with our needs or energy independence.
    What we truly need are solar and geothermal programs and tax breaks for them that will help the economy of Illinois, employ people and stop the state exodus.
    We are already experiencing environmental change due to global warming. Warm winters = more bugs to destroy Illinois crops. High winds = more downed trees, insurance claims and higher rates.
    We have enough to deal with without adding potential oil spills to the mess that is Illinois.
    Stop the insanity. We only get one chance to do it right. There is no Planet "B."
    Lisanne Freese
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Climate change is already causing severe weather impacts around the world, and I am deeply concerned about what will happen if we don't make changes to reduce the rate of climate change. Please don't approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. Beth Vande Voort
  • March 2, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit." -Daniel Henrick

    I agree with Mr. Henrick
    Barbara Toczydlowska
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Chris Surratt
  • March 2, 2020

    The pipeline should not be needed if everyone would reduce gasoline purchase. Use bicycle for short trips and reduce unnecessary motor vehicle trips and unimportant air travel. Too much rain is happening now in this area. It will het worse. Jerry Peterson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline due to environmental and safety concerns. Cindy Hyland
  • March 2, 2020

    I am against the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion due to the negative effects it will have on our climate and the fact that the government is continuing to ignore the requests from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. Don’t approve it! Brooke Toriani
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline because it endangers the ecosystem, may likely spill, and infringes on First Nation rights. Karen Woods
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we need to curtail fossil fuel usage and focus on developing renewable, sustainable energy sources. The added volume proposed—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Not only this, but also there is evidence suggesting that Dakota Access and Energy Transfer plan to export the crude oil they are pumping through our state, rather than use it to power projects here. This means that the state of Illinois will bear all the risk, including increased probability and severity of oil spills, and reap none of the rewards.

    Dakota Access and Energy Transfer are posing a question to the state of Illinois—do we wish to put our communities, land, water, and climate at risk so they can gain greater corporate profits? My answer is NO, and I hope the Illinois Commerce Commission will concur.
    Erin Orozco
  • March 2, 2020

    Stop this Ridiculous amount of new pipe lines Erika Lang
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change, and is unacceptable. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Jenny Ross
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. The Dakota Access Pipeline has already spilled oil in the short time that it has operated. It is poorly constructed and poorly operated.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while this oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Pat Handlin
  • March 2, 2020

    I passionately oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit

    The Keystone XL pipeline bursting the other year, spilling nearly half a million barrels of oil into the environment, is natural evidence that these pipelines are not structurally sound and do not belong in the environment. There is too much risk of irreversible ecological damage
    Matthew Millington
  • March 2, 2020

    Please oppose the authority to install additional pumping stations and facilities on pipelines in Illinois. Lynn Pearson
  • March 2, 2020

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Mathew Abel
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline and Illinois senators should oppose this as well that is if they want re-elected Cory
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it transports and pollutes toxic materials through our land and cities when we should be focusing on sustainable energy sources. This pipeline should never have been allowed to go through Native lands and it should be stopped from going further. We need to change our energy thinking and find solutions that respect our environment and our citizens. Stop the pipeline! Ro Lu
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Illinois should be a leader in the fight for green energy and combating climate change and fossil fuels, not profiting off its expansion. You ask the Illinois people to deal with the increased emissions, emissions equal to that of a dozen coal plants, and yet we will not see any of the profits. Allowing more oil to be pumped will increase the chance of spills, which we can see despite Dakota Access' insistence of safety, will happen. In 2017 the DAPL dumped crude oil into Patoka, Illinois' soil, contaminating it. Last year the Keystone Pipeline, a oil pipeline similar to the DAPL, leaked 383,000 gallons of oil into North Dakota. Pipelines leak no matter how "safe" they are. Langdon Auld
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Andrew Panelli
  • March 2, 2020

    I want to express my opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    The only benefit is more $ for the fossil fuel industry.
    Chris Parson
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline as it is detrimental to our environment and it’s people and wildlife. It’s not a matter of whether or not it will leak but a matter of when and how long it will take for them to identify and resolve it. Instead of trying to expand the reach of fossil fuels, we should be expanding the reach or renewable energy. Nanelle Whitaker
  • March 2, 2020

    We have to preserve Our Future and this Pipeline will Diminish Them Graetly! Stop It's Expansion jody speckman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    We must draw down the use of fossil fuels and support renewable energy sources.
    It's the right thing to do.
    John Massman
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for numerous common-sense reasons.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills by pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    In other words, there are simply no positive benefits to this pipeline expansion, only harmful and unnecessary negative effects. Illinois does not want more crude oil running through Illinois and that we do not accept hasty economic decisions that would put our communities, land, water and climate at risk. On behalf of our state, I urge you to reject the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion.
    Daniel Goldberg
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for numerous common-sense reasons.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills by pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    In other words, there are simply no positive benefits to this pipeline expansion, only harmful and unnecessary negative effects. Illinois does not want more crude oil running through Illinois and that we do not accept hasty economic decisions that would put our communities, land, water and climate at risk. On behalf of our state, I urge you to reject the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion.
    Daniel Goldberg
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose 19-0673 for obvious reasons. We cannot afford to risk our water and soils to these oil
    Companies that have proven over and over their lack or responsible care of their infrastructure. There have been so many leaks from these pipelines that have destroyed water sources and wildlife. We do not need more of this.
    We should be investing in infrastructure for the future that will deliver from alternative energy sources.
    Marjory Basso
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we need to transition from fossil fuels to renewable energies as quickly as possible. We know that this energy source is the main contributor to our climate crisis. We know that the window to mitigate this emergency is closing. We know that spills occur and that this pipeline will double the damage. We know the harm that this pipeline continues to cause to Native peoples and to those along its path. We know that cancers are rampant where soil and waters have been polluted by crude oil and that ecosystems are decimated. With such knowledge Illinois must take the lead and refuse to participate in the sabotage of a healthy future for our region and for the planet. Hillary Geller
  • March 2, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I opposed it when the Standing Rock Sioux and other Native Tribes banded together to try and save their land and water from inevitable oil spills. Contamination of water and land in the name of profit must end. Mni Wiconi, Water is Life! #NoDAPL Vonda Versical
  • March 2, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipiline. The people of America want to see the beauty of this country preserved. Leave the country natural without the potential for environmental disaster. justin gibson
  • March 2, 2020

    Doubling the amount of flow will cause a greater environmental disaster when, not if, an oil spill occurs. Jack Sitterding
  • March 2, 2020

    With this type of proposal comes the necessity of risk/benefit assessment. As I see it, 100 percent of the risk for spills, pollution, and clean-ups would fall to Illinois, meaning us, the taxpayers. As for benefits, 0 percent! These crude oils are to be exported, while Illinois is working to transition away from fossil fuels and leave them in the ground. This scenario is a lose-lose for Illinois from every possible aspect. This invasive, dangerous, unnecessary pipeline should never be approved. Diane Vandiver
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. This pipeline has already leaked in North Dakota at its current level. Tammy McDonald
  • March 3, 2020

    Don’t approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. No additional pumping stations in Illinois!
    Pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture.
    The added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.
    Justine Bayod Espoz
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline. It poses danger to our environment and communities with disruption and inevitable spillage.
    It is time to rely less on oil and more on healthier energy alternatives. NO DAKOTA ACCESS PIPELINE!
    Cindy Blue
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. At this time we need to be limiting our consumption and encouraging others to do the same.
    Talia Guest
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It's disrespectful to the indigenous community in the area and has already caused a spill as people have been worried about. Tredayne Cabanlit
  • March 3, 2020

    I live in Illinois, and I totally, 100 percent support increasing the pumping capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline! Please do not be dissuaded by the environmental alarmists.

    I want to preserve our environment. But the facts are that moving the oil by pipe line is the most environmentally safe way to transport all this oil. And this is the cheapest way to move all this oil. So please do not impede the approval of this important project.

    Thank you, Chuck Keysor/Elgin Illinois
    Chuck Keysor
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this proposed expansion to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Its true benefit/risk ratio has not been appropriately undertaken. Illinois’ land and water should not have this increased risk added to them.
    It would be an outrage should theDAPL go ahead if reviewed, unapproved and unsafe.
    Kirsten Schelbert
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the increase in oil flow for the Dakota Access pipeline because increased flow increases dangers of ruptures and further environmental degradation, because we need to be reducing our fossil fuel use, extraction and consumption AND because oil companies will continue to massively profit without shouldering ANY of the environmental risks posed by the pipeline, risks shouldered by the people of Standing Rock and illinois residents. dale erwin
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will increase the probability and severity of spills. Emissions will riise and contribute to climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    It will harm native american land and put waterways at risk.
    Elizabeth Kruder
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills, and we all know where that leads. In addition, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions that will exacerbate climate change. All of which will cost Illinois far more in the long term than the amount you're gaining now. This is repulsive, and I would hope our leaders understand we need to do what's best for the people, land and climate of Illinois. Meredith Nabavi
  • March 3, 2020

    I write to ask the Illinois Commerce Commission deny the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company request to build build pumping stations in Illinois that can double its pipeline's capacity. It is past time to reduce the extraction and export of this dirty oil, not permit it. All states, all countries must pull together to make the change to renewable energy. The oil that would flow thru the Dakota Access Pipeline is dangerous. The goal should be to keep as much of it as possible in the ground, not allow for greater capacity to move it for export. Marion Cartwright
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the consumption of the additional volume of oil will exacerbate climate change. It's time to move to renewable sources of energy and to stop sacrificing our environment. Also, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk of increased probability and severity of spills while these oil companies get all of the benefit. Renate Gokl
  • March 3, 2020

    Please oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. We can't tolerate the oil spills that inevitably happen. We need to put our money and energy into enhancing fossil-free options. (not including nuclear) It's a process, but it's a path we must pursue. Margaret Thomas
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not permit the expansion of Dakota Access pipeline facilities within Illinois. Thank you Eric Hendrickson
  • March 3, 2020

    Members of the ICC,
    Except for 4 years away for college, I have lived in Illinois all 58 years of my life. I regularly go fishing, hiking and camping, and as a Boy Scout leader for 15 years I have led hundreds of kids on trips to explore the wild spaces of Illinois. It is very important to me, my family, my friends and the Scouts I have served that the Illinois Commerce Commission DOES NOT elect to extend the DAPL footprint with more pumping stations and expanded capacity in our state. The risk of a spill and catastrophic contamination to our lakes and rivers, wetlands, wells, farmland and residential neighborhoods is too great.

    It is also important to consider that encouraging the expansion of oil exports and global consumption is contradictory to the urgent need to hold in check the use of fossil fuels in the US and being exported across the globe. The consequences of climate crisis are already being felt in Illinois (note high water levels of Lake Michigan causing beach erosion, greater intensity floods, tornadoes and storms across the state, a microburst in the suburb of Schaumburg in 2018, etc) and the ICC should not allow the DAPL to exacerbate the problem for corporate gain.

    I kindly ask you to act in the best interests of the people of Illinois and vote down this petition.
    Thank you,
    Anne Behrens
    Anne Behrens
  • March 3, 2020

    I am writing to strongly oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    Increasing the volume of oil that is transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is unwarranted, unsafe and must not be allowed to happen.

    Pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture.

    The added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Our state will only get the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and also will bear the liabilities.

    The ICC should remember that it's main responsibility is to our state and its people and deny this expansion request.
    Richard L Giovanoni
  • March 3, 2020

    I SPEAK IN BEHALF OF FUTURE GENERATIONS, AND AS AN IL RESIDENT. STOP DESTROYING THIS PLANET! THE IMPACT THIS WILL HAVE IS OBVIOUSLY NOT GOOD, AND THESE COMPANIES LINE THEIR POCKETS WHILE WE DEAL WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. NO, NO, NO... Paul Cokinis
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the dakota access pipeline as it is harmful to the environment and the way of life of indigenous peoples! lia cernauskas
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose allowing Dakota Access to install pumping stations that would double the amount of crude flowing through the pipe and signicantly increase the pressure. The current pipeline goes through our property (very productive farmland). Even more concerning to me is that Mauvestarre Creek runs parallel to the pipeline. It is a large stream that flows into the Illinois River. A spill would wreak our ground and cause terrible destruction downstream and to the river which is fewer than 10 miles from us. Sue Anderson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Manley Mallard
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it shows a reckless risk of Illinois land, ecosystems, and people, for no benefit. We should be stepping away from fossil fuel infrastructure and being a leader in sustainable energy, not becoming the collateral damage for a crude oil company like Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Co. Not even four months ago the Keystone pipeline leaked more than 380,000 gallons of oil in North Dakota - who's to say that pushing more oil at extreme velocities through this pipeline won't cause a similar disaster?

    This is not the legacy I want for Illinois. Do not allow the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Company to negatively impact our state and our country for crude oil that will not benefit it.
    Declan Glueck
  • March 3, 2020

    I am writing to ask that you please DENY the permit application for the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion for a number of
    reasons, including - I'm very concerned about the unfolding catastrophe of climate change and the expansion will just exacerbate
    the problems associated with climate change; also, the greater volume per day would increase the likelihood of spills which will
    further harm our already polluted and contaminated environment. More is not always better. We should be caring more about
    being stewards of this priceless Earth rather than enhancing corporate profits at this critical stage in human history.

    Thank you for reading my comments.
    Mary Dosch
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Manley Mallard
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. It's a known fact that pipes ALWAYS leak. In any case the fossil fuels must be left in the ground if life on the planet is to be salvaged. Rebecca Wolfram
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this permit. It is destructive to the environment. Barbara Youngquist
  • March 3, 2020

    I completely oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline in Illinois. Lisa fremont
  • March 3, 2020

    Illinois’valuable land—including rich farmland—and water are all at risk with this expansion. This means the health and safety of our people and wildlife are at risk. I oppose any expansion and urge you to do the same. Bonnie T. Summers
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Sergio Rivera
  • March 3, 2020

    Fuck all you greedy corporations. You are the reason why all of mankind is going to come to an end. Switch to clean power. Don’t do this to your children or your children’s children. Don’t make this their mess to clean up. Louise
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose this reckless action. Do not issue this permit. Joseph Heininger
  • March 3, 2020

    I am against the pipeline because we are seeing the results of global warming everywhere. The pipeline will lead to more emissions and increase the dangers of climate change. CAROL MASUDA
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Penny peterson
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion and increased velocity and pressure rates in the Dakota Pipeline passing through Illinois.

    Increasing the pressures increases the likelihood of rupture and spills that will occur. It's not IF they will occur, it's when. Why should the people of Illinois shoulder the risk while the oil companies gain the reward?

    The pollution hazards and health risks far exceed any gain. Absolutely should not be done.
    Sherry L Sloan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any permits for the expansion of the DAPL through the State of Illinois.

    We need to be focused on alternative energy sources instead of fossil fuels. Even the large oil companies such as Shell and Exxon are aware of this.

    The DAPL imposes on native lands, leaks and violates all principles of climate change. The increased volume that would occur if these permits were issued, would increase the chances of rupture. Why should Illinois citizens who have no stake in this, be subject to possible oil spills?

    Please do not approve any permits for this pipeline through Illinois.

    Thank you.
    Tracy Scaduto
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not allow expansion of this pipeline. It is too risky, will disrupt the landscape and the chance of spills are real. Mr. Jason Sherman
  • March 3, 2020

    Tar sands oil is not a beneficial resource to the American people. It is dirty, difficult to transport, costly to process, dangerous to the environment; it should be left in the ground where it originates.
    The costs outweigh its economic benefits to the United States.
    Tom Kirchner
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for the following reasons

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Thank you.
    Lisa Udel
  • March 3, 2020

    I completely oppose this permit. This pipeline will only exacerbate the climate crisis and will be obsolete soon as we are finishing the transitions to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water, our land, and our public health. JONATHAN JACKSON
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline because it carries very dirty oil that should not be used and we need to get away from fossil fuels anyway. It is ripely time to go to green energy. John Naue
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. At an immediate level, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. At a macro level, we should no longer be relying on oil in 2020, and companies should absolutely not be making money on the destruction of our natural resources and and oppression of and violence against the native peoples serving as water protectors. That we are once again, in 2020 stealing the land of Native Americans and inflicting violence upon them for their activism is abhorrent. Macaire Grambauer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    I respectfully ask that the Commission honor the request of SOIL/Sierra Club that the Administrative Law Judge's September 12, 2019 ruling denying the August 20, 2019 Motion for Amendment or Dismissal of Joint Petition, for Investigation, and to Stay Schedule be reversed.
    Karen O Fort
  • March 3, 2020

    We must protect the environment. Oppose the Dakota pipeline. Joyce Eisold
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois! The additional pumping stations and pumping facilities can only increase the risk of further contamination of our water supply. Do not risk Illinois residents health for oil company profits! CLIFFORD W ROT
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the construction of this pipeline. It is not needed, especially as we develop better and more environmentally friendly sources of power. Tony Gray
  • March 3, 2020

    -stop destroying our lands- Alexandra childs
  • March 3, 2020

    Please refrain from poisoning the water. John Lucia
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Ramya Nath
  • March 3, 2020

    As a voting citizen of Illinois I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.

    Illinois does not want more crude oil running through Illinois and we do not accept hasty economic decisions that would put our communities, land, water and climate at risk.
    Mary E. O'Kiersey
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because Illinois will not benefit from increase economically but takes on the environmental risk. Also, it is at cross-purposes with mitigating climate change. Anne Feder
  • March 3, 2020

    I am writing to voice my opposition to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We are at a pivotal point where we need to utilize policy and regulations to control and limit the expansion of crude oil processing and the release of new greenhouse gas emissions. The DAP is already a risk to our citizens' air and water and we cannot allow those risks to expand. Continued and unregulated oil expansion is not a publicly popular nor is it a wise policy for the future economy and citizen health the economy depends on. The pipelines that exist in Illinois should be inspected for efficiency and should be researched on how to remove. They should not be upgraded to accommodate any more transport and certainly not from DAP. A Lerma
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. In addition, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Also, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. This threatens our state with an oil spill that will be disastrous for our ground water, wildlife and people.

    Thank you.
    Susan Crowley
  • March 3, 2020

    I want to go on record opposing the expansion of the pumping capacity of the Dakota Access pipeline. In an era when Illinois is on the forefront of moving to renewable energy as its primary resource, expansion of this pipeline capacity is clearly a step in the opposite direction. If the crude and its refined products were destined for use by residents of Illinois I would have some acceptance of limited expansion for the short term. However this fuel is mostly destined for other locations and other countries, benefiting no one in Illinois, just the owners of the pipeline. This expansion will bring no new jobs to Illinois and greatly increase the risk of environmental contamination.

    We have collectively done enough damage to our planet and this seem like an unneeded and greed based request.

    I urge you to deny this request.
    Thomas Losiniecki
  • March 3, 2020

    Stop the Dakota pipeline expansion! Larisa Acevedo
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because
    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Edward Whelan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Eric Eisenbeis
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for these reasons.

    1. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    2. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Please protect our land and deny this expansion.
    Connie Frankenfeld
  • March 3, 2020

    The Dakota Access-Energy Transfer pipeline passes through the heart of Southern Illinois, a biologically rich region. The pipeline passes under Lake of Egypt, a drinking water supply for area residents. It parallels the headwaters to the Cache River, a stream that feeds the Cypress Creek National Wildlife Refuge. It also passes within a short distance and within the watershed of the Heron Pond-Little Black Slough Illinois Nature Preserve, a National Natural Landmark. In 1996, the Cache River was designated a Wetland of International Importance by the Ramsar Convention.

    A pipeline rupture could have devastating effects on any of these natural areas. Increasing the capacity of the pipeline would increase the risk to these natural areas. The Illinois Commerce Commission should deny the Dakota Access pipeline expansion permit.
    Patrick King
  • March 3, 2020

    Stop the pipe line and leave the Native American's land alone. BekkGilpin
  • March 3, 2020

    I agree with Tony Fuller. I live in Iinois. IL takes the possible damage with nothing positive. Donna Hriljac
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any expansion of these pipeline operations in the state of Illinois. These companies do not have a good environmental record and have run roughshod over the rights of Native Americans, as well as endangering all who depend on water for their health and safety.

    Fossil fuel companies should be changing their business model to develop environmentally responsible energy sources which do not endanger people and wildlife resources. The elected representatives of the people of Illinois and those individuals who sit on governing commissions should protect Illinois residents, not support the the last gasp attempts of a dying industry to squeeze out the last profits available before they have to close the doors of their businesses. Those who should represent the public trust (not the reckless behavior of corporate owners and management teams which take little or no responsibility for protecting the public) should remember that leaks or spills endanger all of us, but unlike the corporate profiteers, most of us in the public get only the bills for the environmental and health issues caused by corner-cutting business operations which typically seek to maximize profits at the expense of safety.

    Thanks for considering my views on this subject.
    Jim Johnston
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I do not see why we would want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with profits for fossil fuel companies. Please protect our environment and NOT the profits for big oil companies. Dennis Shank
  • March 3, 2020

    No to the increased rate or any rate of sending crude through the state of Illinois. The risks of rupture are too great. The future is in renewable wind and solar power. Protect Illinoisans’ health.

    People working in this field need to be trained for new jobs in renewables; the state, and federal if possible, should create training programs for this purpose. If the Trump administration won’t help, Illinois needs to do it alone. Perhaps we can work with other states having similar plans.
    Patricia Fojtik
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline in Illinois. The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis. Dr James Hansen, world renowned climate scientist has already submitted written testimony detailing the negative statistics. The oil will not even help Illinoisans at the gas pump, because almost all of it is intended for export. Illinois gets only the increased risk of leaks and spills. The pipeline companies and the oil industry get the profits. Robert And Denise Morton
  • March 3, 2020

    We are facing a global climate crisis due to overuse and over reliance on fossil fuels. We should be supporting project that reduce our dependence on fossil fuels instead of creating projects that expand the capacity of fossil fuel consumption. This pipeline will encourage the use of fossil fuels. It creates dangers of leaks. Please vote against this proposal. It is not only not needed it is harmful. John Bartlett
  • March 3, 2020

    The Dakota Pipe line is a grave mistake. The Native Americans have the moral right to oppose this--and I have the environmental right to oppose this.

    You are only interested in making money from a dying industry. You should be supporting green energy--wind or water --certainty NOT fossil fuels.

    Invest in the future--not the past.
    Carolyn Zinke
  • March 3, 2020

    Deny access to any company who doesn’t pay us for land usage! Jane K
  • March 3, 2020

    No additional pumping stations and pumping facilities!!! Do the right thing! History is watching. Katharine Egan
  • March 3, 2020

    I VEHEMENTLY (in the strongest possible terms!) oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The increased flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. The associated costs of clean up and remediation would be Illinois’ problem. UNACCEPTABLE! The pipeline company and the oil industry will receive the profits while our state will bear the liabilities.

    The company's request to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station to allow them to increase the volume of oil they transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is insupportable. The evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois takes all of the risks while these oil companies get the benefits. Lopsided to say the least. Most importantly, we do NOT want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway.

    And as Cheryl Brumbaugh-Cayford has already most succinctly stated,
    ”The most urgent concern about the pipeline expansion, and the crucial reason for not granting this permit, however, is that the pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental emergency that the world -- and Illinois -- are already seeing happen all around us. This is the most important concern for the ICC to take into account at this time. The environmental emergency is looming over all human activity on this earth and by the account of many scientists, including the experts who are consulting with the United Nations, it is becoming ever more likely that the very existence of humanity is under threat.”?
    “The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.”

    Ladies and gentlemen, we stand at a new precipice. It is imperative that we step into the future, not retreat into a falsely remembered “better” past. The past is simply the past. The future is ours to create. If for no other reason, think of your OWN children and grandchildren, and do not continue down this path to the past. Help us INVEST in the FUTURE. There is no greater treasure than clean air and clean water, and Illinois has abundant access to both. We sit on 20 percent of the WORLD’S fresh water! THAT’S our future. Safeguard these treasures. Face fear, act with wisdom, in hope.

    Thank you,
    Barbara Blough
    IL 60645
    Barbara Blough
  • March 3, 2020

    Please a NO to additional pipeline facilities. Enough damage has already been done to human health and habitat! Helen Clesen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Look at the world around us. This is not the legacy you want to leave for your families. Michael Weissbluth
  • March 3, 2020

    I am opposed to the pipeline. Destruction of habitats, natural areas, and watersheds are not reversible. Don Wilson
  • March 3, 2020

    Do what is right for our grand kids and our great great grand kids.do, not build this just make the rich/ richer JLS jerry swearingen
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipe Line as a resident of Illinois. This will not serve any being in the long run, is short sighted and driven by pure greed. We should be moving past this toxic method of fuel, not making it more readily available. The usage of oil aside, there is the concern of a possible spill or leak that can decimate the ecosystem. These oil leaks happen entirely too often. The environment, taxpayers and local residents carry the burden of these spills. We are already so late to the game with addressing the climate crisis. Would welcome some focus on making this right vs this sort of ridiculousness. April McFerran
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline expansion because we need to quit our dependence on fossil fuels. Am also afraid of pipeline spills. Mary Jo Kuffner
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Toni DiDonato
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the DAPL. I see no reason to expose any part of IL to potential environmental damage, for dirty tar sands oil, none of which is used by or benefits this state. People over profit. I pay attention, and I vote. Russell Pesko
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the climate crisis and will be obsolete soon due to the transition to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water and public health. Jane G Ward
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly opose the expansion of the pipeline. We need to protect our environment from potential harm and spillings.
    We need to move towards renweable energy as soon as possible.
    My family in Brazil saw their town in the seashore flood in a way that has never happened before. Climate change is real and happening now!

    Respectfully,

    Regina
    Regina Sant'Anna
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the benefits will only be reaped by those at the top of a dying industry, while all inevitable consequences (exacerbating climate change, heavy pollution from leaks/spills, and the impact such pipelines always have in the landscapes they divide) will be heaped upon residents, wildlife, and the communities at large around the lines.

    Why we continue to fund and expand fossil fuels is beyond my understanding when so many renewable resources are available and evolving every day. This technology is archaic, no other industry would be allowed to dig its heels in against superior systems on such a large scale.

    The ICC should be investing in renewable energy, not subsidizing an obsolete infrastructure.This can't possibly have any support outside of a narrow industry and its deep-pocketed lobbyists.
    Tom Reifenberg
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.I also feel it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Diane L Kasnick
  • March 3, 2020

    Dont allow these pipes and pumping station to be installed in il. Pumping that much oil through those pipes at such vilosity could rupture. A rupture would ruin our land and waters for years to come. Please save our be2autiful state from greedy people Sharon thomeczek
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    It’s annoying that we have to go through this again, that the oil companies keep trying to sneak more benefits for them at the cost of our futures.
    Elizabeth Etten
  • March 3, 2020

    It is vital to protect both land, waterways, from the potential of oil spills across the state. It is both environmentally sound that assures the protection of Illinois Citizens across the state from oil spills that have been deadly and costly to the consumers of past consequences . For future, I support and urge research in clean energy .............thanks angelo sturino
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline expansion. We need to focus our money and attention on more reusable resources. The benefit of keeping our natural resources in tact insanely outweighs the destructive potential of drilling for oil, transferring oil, and using oil to operate vehicles. Megan
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because..

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. The company has a history of under reporting environmentally hazardous events and ignoring basic rights of the public to non toxic environment.
    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. This puts the lands and residents of IL at great risk with no accountability or benefit to the state at all.
    Raven Dodson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this for environmental and climate change purposes. Andy McDonough
  • March 3, 2020

    I OPPOSE the Dakota pipeline - it does not do anyone any good for the state of IL. It doesn't do anyone any good anywhere.
    It's just a big money maker for the companies that want to build it. The percentage of a spill is greater than me finding $1000.00
    in the street. Man has already screwed up the environment, why would IL want to harm Mother Earth more?
    Sandra McGee
  • March 3, 2020

    I would like to formally oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I believe that it is a threat to our water resources. Lauren Wiginton
  • March 3, 2020

    I am opposed to approving the DAPL expansion. This would put our water,land and climate at risk. We cannot continue to exacerbate climate change.
    Please do not approve the DAPL expansion permit. We must save our Mother Earth for our children, for our grandchildren Forever.

    Jean Murphy
    Jean Murohy
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. W. J. Rable
  • March 3, 2020

    I absolutely oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. My reasons are as follows...

    Doubling the flow rate of oil will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Jeff Comerford
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline because it is a threat to both the environment and human safety. Stephanie
  • March 3, 2020

    I live in Savanna, Illinois. We have essentially pipeline trains coming through our village everyday. Three years ago, a train derailed 15 miles from my home; the resulting fire could be seen for miles, and the damage to wildlife, forest and land was severe. When a pipeline is built, the only question is when the leak will happen, because it will happen. This pipeline should not be allowed in Illinois. The contents are to be exported; we are going to be used for the profit of fossil fuel companies. Enough is enough. Carol L. Gloor
  • March 3, 2020

    We should be expanding research and use of Renewable energy sources not providing means for fossil fuels to be transported across our lands and pollute and defile them when these pipelines fail. JEANNE F DOHERTY
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Increasing the flow rate also increases probability and severity of spills, which pose a risk to the lands and citizens of our state. It is time to start moving away from the consumption of oil in order to reduce the effects of climate change, rather than increasing our consumption. Increasing the flow of oil would be irresponsible at best. We owe it to future generations to begin reducing our oil consumption immediately. Hannah Heinzel
  • March 3, 2020

    The last thing we need is another pipeline. No to Dakota Access! Dale Duda
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline not only because of a high probability of spills causing pollution, but also because it is time to dump fossil fuels and develop cleaner and sustainable sources of energy. Dianne G Croft
  • March 3, 2020

    I absoltley oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is a massive hazard to wildlife, our planet’s and our own health. Greta Milingyte
  • March 3, 2020

    We do not need anymore pipelines. We need to maintain and guarantee the safety of what we have. The day of big oil is past. Let us turn our efforts to solar, wind, and other forms of renewable and afe energy---NOW. No more delays. Ralph G. Pifer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the detriment it has on the environment, particularly Native American lands. Grace Atkinson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Linda Albers
  • March 3, 2020

    Pollution and toxic waste are awful! They should be ban! Jessica Blasingame
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Brad Hanahan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose expanding the Dakota pipeline. Please think about the future for our children and what planet and environment we are leaving them with. It should not be about money. These are resources that have to be maintained for all of us to thrive. Your actions have consequences that your decision will not be able to change latter.

    Mrs Jil Slaski
    Jil Slaski
  • March 3, 2020

    There has yet to be a pipeline that hasn't had a leak/spill. Not one. I protest this pipeline and all pipelines until engineering can catch up with the greed of the fossil fuel industry. Anthony Dobrowolski
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because fossil fuels must stay in the ground if we want to have any chance for a livable planet for our descendants! Illinois is committed to fighting climate change and doubling the flow rate on this pipeline is contrary to that goal. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit - and as a citizen of Illinois, I strongly object to our state being exploited in this way! Hendrica Regez
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Linda Foulkes
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of pumping capacity because it will provide no benefit to Illinois residents but will only increase profit margins for the oil and gas industry. The expansion will also further exacerbate climate change impacts and be detrimental to the health and welfare of our citizens.
    Thanks for your consideration.

    David Schulz
    David Schulz
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline. Marcus Gottlieb
  • March 3, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to any action that will expand the use of the Dakota Pipeline. Contrary to claims made by fossil fuel companies, the dirty petroleum compounds in the pipeline will not do anything to directly keep the United States "energy independent". The tar sands petroleum will be processed and then its products will be exported to other nations. More importantly, the extraction, transportation, and processing of this form of petroleum will greatly add to the growing amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and will greatly increase the threat of climate change. We need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels as quickly as possible, not increase our reliance on them. George Milkowski
  • March 3, 2020

    What can I add to the other statements, other than that I opposed the pipeline in the first place, and oppose the expansion even more. How many spills, fires, and polluted water sources does it take before we say, "oh, that wasn't such a good idea"? Eric Moss
  • March 3, 2020

    I was born and raised in Illinois. My family still calls Illinois home, and most of them live in DeKalb County. I've seen my share of pipeline spills in other places through the years. I've seen rivers and streams polluted by them, I've seen lands irreparably harmed, and I've seen homeowners lose property values and their quality of life.

    From cradle to grave, oil production does immensely more harm than good, and only a very few profit in the longterm. Very rarely do the ones who profit have to live with the consequences of the destruction their drilling and pipelines and refineries leave behind. They don't have to suffer the increased instances of respiratory disease or other chronic illnesses associated with oil and tar sands production. They don't have to look at the landscapes that have been torn up, or listen to the drills and other equipment.

    It is time that the ICC puts our futures first and puts an end to this proposal to double the Dakota Access Pipelines' capacity and all of the equipment and facilities that go with it. I urge you, for the sake of my children and all future generations, there are cleaner ways to fuel our economy. We don't need this. It's the right thing to say no.
    Sherri Racine
  • March 3, 2020

    The potential for spill and the destruction of land and water it could cause is not worth the long term impact.
    I oppose expansion of the line
    Travis Solberg
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose this expansion. Stop the pipeline. Kathy Hall
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I believe climate change is a threat to our local communities, our state, and our nation. The oil from this pipeline will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Thank you,
    James O'Donoghue
    James O'Donoghue
  • March 3, 2020

    As a resident of Illinois and the U.S. I do not want the Dakota pipeline to expand capacity and allow for additional pumping stations and additional oil to be flowing through the state. Climate change is a very real and ongoing threat. We should be VERY QUICKLY TRANSITIONING from fossil fuel to RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES. More oil = more CO2 and other hazardous gases in our atmosphere. In Illinois we’ve seen increased flooding events and changes in our normal season patterns. Additionally there is an increase in the potential for oil spills which will continue to degrade our environment. It is unethical to continue relying on fossil fuels when it is very clear that human actions, including the burning of oil and other fossil fuels is causing enormous ecological destruction. Let’s consider the non-market costs to projects like these. How much do you value clean air, water, and soil? These are vital to human health and the health of our environment. Do not separate, but stay connected to the environment. Is the the choice you’re making protecting it or harming it? It’s okay to say NO to destructive action. No amount of money can replace our natural environment. Please. Alejandro Cabrera
  • March 3, 2020

    I am strongly in opposition of this expansion. The increase of oil volumes through these pipes puts more likelihood of it rupturing. Please hear your citizens and do not approve this. It only hurts us further. Madelyn Yvonne
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the project poses great risk to Illinois' environment and its citizens, and will contribute to the imminent threat of climate change.

    The project threatens our groundwater - doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. It threatens our air quality - consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars. And evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    It's time to say "enough" to the fossil fuel industry and put the best interest of our state, our people, and our planet ahead of huge corporate profits.
    Elizabeth Lukehart
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because eventual use of this fossil fuel will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. We must take action to alleviate climate change before even more irreperable harm is done to our environment. Lawmakers must have the courage and intelligence to make decisions with a focus on longterm results and impact, not just short term profit and gain. Jane School
  • March 3, 2020

    I am a business owner and a parent who strongly opposes the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I care about the environment. Pipelines always eventually leak and do irreversible damage. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Nan Warshaw
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. Please protect the water, earth, air, people, plants and animals of Illinois from pollution and climate change. Thank you. Sara Kaplan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline primarily because the consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. I would rather raise my future children in a world where we will be able to sustain ourselves as a global population and I don't want them to be a part of mass die offs due to toxic air pollution, rising sea levels, failing crop yeilds and, in short, a collective failure of the our species to take into account the fact that short term gain resulting in a temporarily comfortable living situation does not override long term damage to the planet and mass consequential suffering in future generations.

    As a citizen of Illinois, I would rather not see potential oil spills (this expansion will double the flow rate of oil through the state) damage public land, effect crop yeilds (which the state relies on for sustained wealth/economic generation) and contaminate ground water, which the citizens of the state rely on for everyday drinking and use on their land.

    Furthermore, the decision to expand of the Dakota access pipeline falls directly counter to one of the city of Chicago's goals (to run on 100 percent renewables by 2040) and would make it easier for for the officials in our city to cut corners, delay the progress made in this area and in the worst case scenario, stall this decision entirely.

    Thank you for hearing me out,

    Austin Lopez
    Austin Lopez
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it has already had a detrimental impact on our environment. This type of consumption of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, our planet cannot afford anything that will exacerbate climate change any further. Mercedes Cervantes
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce huge amounts of emissions, exacerbating climate change at a time when the effects are obvious and dire. Internationally, there are wildfires burning down homes and killing billions of animals, and here in Chicago, we are seeing our warmest winter and highest lakes levels ever--surely not a coincidence.

    Also, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while oil companies gets all of the benefit. Illinois is just starting to right the ship after years of mismanagement, and now is the time for bold action, not corporate giveaways.

    Thank you for your consideration - Paul Devine Bottone
    Paul Devine Bottone
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. Increasing the volume of oil flow increases the risk of ruptures and spills.

    Native Americans knew how to live at peace with Mother Nature. I think I do slightly better than average. We can honor their spiritual heritage by listening to their concerns and following their lead. So many business leaders are obsessed with growth and expansion. It is wise to consider focusing on living within our means and resisting the fear based urge of economic expansion at all cost.
    Emmett Fruin
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, doubling the amount of oil flowing through it.

    Why should we put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil and care nothing for the harm this does to our planet? This is about not about energy independence; it is about short-term profit and greed.

    Illinois should not be party to this ill-advised and destructive venture.
    Laura Bernstein
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of oil pipelines and pumping stations in this state. Well established science and facts show that we are damaging our environment beyond repair with our current usage of fossil fuels. We cannot promote the continued destruction of the planet and must act boldly to stop our dependence on oil. All you need to do is look at what happened in Australia with their constant extraction of fossil fuels and blatant disregard for how their actions effected the environment. Do not bow to corporate greed my children’s future needs to be one where they can breath fresh air and drink clean water. Brian Muhr
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for the following reasons,

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Thank you for your attention.
    Todd Cisna
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    I believe pipeline expansion will ultimately do more environmental harm than the stated benefits.
    Al Loewy
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not approve of the Dakota Pipeline. I don't want oil spills in our water and land. Nor is digging under land and water good for soil or water. Jerry Pendergast
  • March 3, 2020

    This pipeline disruption affects people, businesses, farms, houses, sacred lands, lands where animals exist and you are taking their habitat away!!!!!! Pipelines are dangerous and can pollute the ground including waterways, people’s wells/water source!!!! They kill plants and can cause catastrophic damage to the environment!!!

    It’s a mistake to think that this process is anything but a bad thing for a community!!! Please just say NO to this primitive damaging project!!!

    Sincerely,
    Diane Louis
    Diane Louis
  • March 3, 2020

    Don't do this. It's wrong and there are other, better options. Adam Malak
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We don't need more pollution and more spills while the people making the mess rake in money. Lynnette Newsom
  • March 3, 2020

    With a pipeline it is not if, but when it will leak. Wildlife is losing habitat to urban sprawl and risking a pipelines effectiveness and longevity is no longer worth the long term damage that can be done from crude. We need to protect and preserve what is left of our land and seas for as long as possible. L K
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose this petition giving the Dakota Access LLC and the Energy Transfer Crude Oil Co a permit to install additional pumping stations and pumping facilities in Illinois. We in Illinois must be on the front line in this global climate crisis, demonstrating through our actions, the dire necessity to eradicate the use of fossil fuels. Stand tall, Illinois Commerce Commission, and do what is RIGHT for our state, for our country, for our Earth. Say NO! Krista Clarke-Brownstein
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Bruce Christopher
  • March 3, 2020

    No additional pipelines in Illinois. Linda Salinitro
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for the following reasons -

    1. Doubling the flow rate will INCREASE the probability and severity of spills

    2. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    3. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Joe Anderlik
  • March 3, 2020

    The risks it poses to the environment is not acceptable. Katie Harej
  • March 3, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to allowing Illinois land to be used for expansion of the DAPL pipeline, doubling its flow. Putting our communities at risk of deadly oil spills and explosions for oil that will be exported and will contribute to the ruin of our planet via climate change, makes no sense, except to the companies that will profit from it.

    Deny this permit!
    Laura J Bernstein
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change and evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. I also believe we need to respect the indigenous people of North/South Dakota and other plains natives and deny the Dakota Access Pipeline. Reine Pavlik
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose this permit. This pipeline adds to the already existing climate crisis and brings us in the wrong direction. This form of energy will be obsolete in the coming years. It will unnecessarily endanger our water and public health. Renewable energy is our future. Christine Rattigan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will endanger the people of Illinois by increasing the likelihood of larger and worse oil spills that will endanger our natural environment and our citizens' well-being. Nathaniel Forsythe
  • March 3, 2020

    No pipeline! We need to focus on renewable energy resources. Climate change is all too real, and moving forward needs to begin NOW. Carol Bradstreet
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents and it's flora and fauna, and doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. It's long, past time we invest in CLEAN, GREEN energy and this only exacerbates the problem of carbon in our atmosphere that continues to create issues with climate change. To IGNORE climate change is to put a target on your grandchildren and future generations who will have to experience the results of our incompetence and denial! Why would you want to do that just to increase greedy profiteering? Cheri A. Gaspero
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline. It would allow oil to possibly spill into the water, and increase the severity of spills. This oil will make climate change worse also. Angie
  • March 3, 2020

    I object to permitting Dakota Access LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company LLC to increase the volume and velocity of oil flowing through their pipeline across Illinois. Higher velocity of fluid in a pipeline means higher kinetic energy, which means greater stresses on pipeline junctions and valving, resulting in greater risk of ruptures. At a higher velocity, any pipeline rupture will spill much larger volumes before the flow can be stopped and the break repaired. The history of pipelines worldwide shows one universal fact - Every pipeline will fail. So where there is a pipeline, there will be spills. We should not be risking greater crude oil spills on Illinois land so that a private company can increase their profits. Additionally, pipeline oil spills rarely are completely contained, because they seep into the ground (contaminating groundwater sources),flow off into drainage channels (polluting our shared surface waters), and partially evaporate (dispersing toxic VOC's), so the long-term costs and impacts of the spill end up being dumped on the wider public.

    More broadly, the future of energy in Illinois, and around the world, is wind and solar and other renewable sources, coupled with large-scale battery storage. Oil and coal are fast-becoming obsolete, not just because of concerns with carbon emissions, and not just because they are dirty and toxic and difficult to contain, but because renewable energy is getting cheaper every year. So if Illinois is depending on royalty revenues from oil-related projects, then we are choosing a non-sustainable revenue source. For the future of clean air, water, and land for the people of Illinois, let's stop permitting these oil-related projects.
    Grant Benjamin
  • March 3, 2020

    Protect what's left of the prairie. Deny the permit. Debra Gleason
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline. Its time to get off of fossil fuels. This is a good place to start Robert Handelsman
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because..." and then, in your own words, cite one or more of the following reasons.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000 megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.


    We must protect the land, and leave it the way we received it.
    america aguirre
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not approve the Dakota Pipeline extension. Our forefathers knew what they were doing to preserve our land. Cheryl A Ahrens
  • March 3, 2020

    Illinois does not need more oil pipelines. A leak is almost a certainty, and that is not a risk I am willing to take. We should be using our resources to invest in green energy instead. A solar spill is called a sunny day. I can't say what an oil spill is called. Lynn E. Travis
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will compromise our environment at every point along its length. It is time to say stop. Terry Witt
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline. We need to seriously consider how our actions are affecting the climate. 2019 was the second hottest year ever. Half of Illinois was a disaster area due to the wettest spring ever. This is real. Pipelines are contributing to the problem. Time to wake up. Enough is enough. Jay Futterman
  • March 3, 2020

    I want to add my voice to second the valid comments and concerns already listed. David Marriott
  • March 3, 2020

    We do NOT need and I do NOT WANT this pipeline. We need to shift away, far away, from the use of nonrenewable sources. Plus, I find it immoral that this pipeline was built despite the legitimate protests and fervent protests of the Lakota Sioux and other indigenous peoples and their supporters. Margaret MacDonald Power
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Brian McCullough
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because pipelines always leak. Doubling the amount of dirty tar sands oil doubles the chance for a break or spill.

    It's not out of the question that someone may unintentionally break the line while excavating for some other reason. I know because I did it. My foreman was responsible for calling JULIE before the dig, something he neglected to do.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change
    Tedd Ward Jr.
  • March 3, 2020

    Pipelines always leak. They are the wrong answer. Do NOT allow this one to expand capacity. Oil companies do not absorb the cost to people and environment when spills ruin the water, land and all biological life. Stop this insanity now. Forget the money and riches heaped on by lobbyists and politicians. Think of the poison left behind for our children and grandchildren. I agree with others who have posted facts and analyses. This is insane - show that you can see the big picture and respect those that inherit this earth. Say NO MORE. Marilyn Watkins
  • March 3, 2020

    I absolutely oppose this expansion through Illinois land. As a citizen of Illinois I want no part of this dirty oil running through our stayed with the potential of polluting our land and water supplies. It is vital that are representatives advocate for the people. We do not want this pipeline. Gini Beasley
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for several reasons. Increasing the flow rate is leaving our own land and citizens liable to higher rate of potential mishaps and is a neglectful and ignorant decision against the shared interests of our citizens. Furthermore, consumption of the proposed oil to be transported will exacerbate the damage of climate change by producing pollution roughly equal to 20,000,000 (20 million) gasoline powered vehicles, which is clearly a negative and unwarranted impact. Lastly evidence suggests that this deal will lead to primarily export deals with said oil, leaving us in Illinois with all the potential risk of having the line run through our land, with very little profit to reinvest into our infrastructure or be used elsewhere. Kristopher Ross
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this permit. Our climate crisis can not be solved by more oil. We need to stop increasing production and move to renewable energy course. Furthermore, the risks of pipeline problems is too great to add additional capacity. In short, it will be obsolete soon due to the transition to renewable energy. We should not endanger our water and public health.

    Please, do not grant this permit.

    Thank you for your consideration.
    Nelson Armour
  • March 3, 2020

    We need to spend our money finding better solutions to climate change instead of increasing climate damaging oil capacity. Jody Gosain
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefits."
    WILLIAM A DANNENBERG
  • March 3, 2020

    Pipelines are problems, and we don't need anymore. Fossil-free and renewable sources of energy should be at the forefront of our energy infrastructure plans. Cindy Parrone
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is a very serious issue which will impact countless lives and future generations. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills, which will devastate the environment and public heatlh. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change, at exactly the time when we need to drastically cut back.
    Additionally, it seems likely that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil. The oil companies will take the profit, leaving the risk to be assumed by all of us who live in Illinois.
    Thank you for your attention to this crucial decision.
    Sara Wohlleb
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I don't see why we we would want to put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of oil companies that want to export the oil anyway. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Enough! russ ziegler
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose this expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
    Increasing the volume of oil and the rate of flow will also increase the threat of
    large volume leakages, as well as additional environmental damage due to the emissions that will be produced with the consumption of the resulting fossil fuel products.
    One can only assume the state will profit in some degree from taxation of this venture, but since DA/ETCO appears to plan on exporting this oil, no other benefit to the state will result. The risks outweigh the rewards.
    Please do not allow this project to proceed.
    Meg Howard
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline as it is a great risk to present day water resources with the flow rate increasing the probability and severity of spills. As well the use of this oil that will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars which is a threat to all of survival in greater degrees of climate change in the much nearer future.

    I call for you to reject the DAPL application to pollute Illinois precious resources as well as the Earth for future generations.

    Sincerely
    Criage Lynnette Althage
    Criage Lynnette Althage
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not allow contamination of our water, land and air. This is the only land we have. Cornelius Devlin III
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because oil spills or spilling into the ground will impact the environment negatively with dire consequences. .

    DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, therefore IL residents will feel the effecs negatively. DO NOT EXPAND the DAKOTA ACCESS PIPELINE thru IL.
    Anne Romanow
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the earth can not stand an additional source of greenhouse gas emissions and as a young climate activist I would like my children and grandchildren to have a healthy stable planet to live on. Its time we thought of more than just ourselves and our wallets. Gillian Rowe
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because increased oil consumption adds to climate change. We should be looking to reduce the effects of climate change, rather than increase them. Passing legislature based purely off of economic benefit and apathy toward constituents. Furthermore, Illinois ought to protect the state's lands rather than putting them at an increasing risk of crude oil spills. Morgan Anderson
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This project is not in the best interest of Illinois' citizens or its environment, and it will contribute to the already imminent threat of climate change. We need to stop the expansion of fossil fuel industry projects that put profits ahead of health, safety, and ecological wellbeing.

    This project will threaten Illinois' groundwater. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. It will threaten our air quality and exacerbate climate collapse. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars. And this project is all about lining the pockets of the fossil fuel industry at the expense of people and the planet. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    I strongly urge you not to approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit.
    Elizabeth Lukehart
  • March 3, 2020

    Help protect our state from environmental disaster. Susan Zimny
  • March 3, 2020

    The pipeline is already too dangerous, and should be dismantled, not made even more dangerous.
    Ross DiMarco
    Ross Dimarco
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the present, and all future, expansions of the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company.
    To sum this proposed project up in one word, GREED!
    This is not oil that is needed in Illinois, or even the United States. It is for export by a private company, and for their profit only.
    Some have written that the project promotes safe transportation of oil.
    Does this sound safe?
    Keystone Pipeline Leaks 383,000 Gallons of Oil in North Dakota
    nytimes.com/2019/10/31
    Some say that we need the (temporary) jobs. (So did Philip Morris Tobacco.) What we need is more workers in the fastest growing sector, Clean Energy!
    JPMorgan Chase is warning that climate change is a threat to "human life as we know it."
    Jim Cramer is saying "fossil fuels are done."
    Wake up. Clean up.
    Joseph Appell
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, because double the volume would more than double the risk and their is no benefit for the citizens of Illinois. Kathy Schleicher
  • March 3, 2020

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Sheila Evans
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The land is more important than the oil companies. Barbara Dwyer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline for all the reasons that were already submitted.
    Shame on the people who are even considering it.

    Carol Grabscheid
    Carol Grabscheid
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline because it puts Illinois land at risk for oil spills, besides the other damage it could to do our communities and the damage it has done to other communities elsewhere. There is no benefit to Illinois at all in this proposal. The oil would be for export; we get all the risk and big companies get all the profit. This is a terrible proposal. Miranda Lukatch
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Vote NO!!!
    Wood
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Let us stop giving access to the fossil fuel industry and instead, focus on greener alternatives. Pipelines may seem like a lower cost solution to providing energy, but with all the known and unknown publicly harmful externalities we end up worse off in the long run. Let's make the investments in green energy now! Our children and grandchildren will thank us.

    Doug Skites
    Douglas Skites
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it endangers our drinking water water and public health.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Marie Kahle
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not give a permit for the pipeline. Increasing the pressure will increase the chance that the pipeline will rupture. James Stuhlmacher
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Zach Pospisil
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. Expanding this pipeline is ecologically unsafe. At this state and age, we should be looking for alternative sources of energy that are safer on the environment. Sonia Csaszar
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the installation of additional pumping stations and facilities in the state of Illinois because Illinois needs to recognize the inherent value of her ecological health. Pipeline breaks are inevitable and when they do happen, we need to minimize the damage caused. Increasing the rate of flow in the Dakota Access pipeline from 570,000 barrels/day to 1.1 million barrels/day has the opportunity to increase jobs and taxation in the region of the pumping facilities, but this doubling isn't worth the permanent damage even a minor failure of the Dakota Access pipeline would cause to the Illinois landscape at 1.1 million barrels/day. Even a consideration of this bill would be a major failure to recognize the long term value in quality of life, reputation, extraction, development, and ecological health that would be endangered by an increase in rate of flow. Melissa Mantz
  • March 3, 2020

    I write to register strongest possible opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    Our planetary climate emergency requires us to act quickly to phase out use of fossil fuels.
    Jeff Slepak
  • March 3, 2020

    Dear ICC

    Just Say NO to Global Warming...

    Just Say NO to any Dakota Access expansion whatsoever in Illinois...

    Thank You, from Rev. Damon.
    Rev. Damon Lucero
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the establishment of oil pumping stations in Illinois because the pipeline poses a threat to our watersheds if the pipe ruptures. Doubling the volume of oil coming through the line increases the risk of a pipe rupture and the amount of oil that will be released in a rupture. Neil Dillon
  • March 3, 2020

    Please stop Peggy BREWER
  • March 3, 2020

    I write to oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    Thank you.
    Geri Collecchia
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because by doubling the flow rate the risk of greater probability and severity of spills increases. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so in effect, Illinois assumes all the risk while the oil companies receive all the financial benefit. Eventual consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Nancy Krick
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the potential damage to our air and water.
    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Jennifer Romans Romans
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the fakot a pipeline. There have been far too many tragedies due to oil leaks and besides that it absolutely destroys our water, animals and environment.
    We need to stop profiting the companies that don't care what so ever about the future and what little there will be left.
    Tiffany Pruitt
  • March 3, 2020

    I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to deny Joint Petition 19-0673 because it presents clear and present dangers to Illinois surface and groundwater, agricultural lands, air quality and public health and safety. The Dakota Access, LLC, and affiliate companies' past records of pipeline leaks and spills cause concern. There will be future leaks and spills. Approval of this Petition will enable two new pumping stations and upgrades, essentially doubling the pipeline flow to over a million barrels per day, which greatly increases contamination risks to our state and should not be allowed. Protection of our state water resources, agricultural lands, and public health is paramount during this time of notable unstable climate conditions. Much heavier rains and less predictable seasons have already put huge stress on agricultural communities and maintaining the integrity of farmland in Illinois is essential. Protecting water resources is also essential as clean-ups do not replace the lost aquatic life and can mean degraded environmental resources for some time. I urge the ICC to look closely at the full impacts of this proposal and the greatly increased risks to the public and resources of our state. Who is calculating the climate impacts, air quality concerns, and public health costs of this expansion? I think the full impacts of this proposal must be considered. The well-being of the environment and public health and safety are clearly at much increased risk if this permit is approved .Please deny this permit. Joyce Blumenshine
  • March 3, 2020

    The climate crisis is real, with storms, floods, droughts, fires, and rising sea levels threatening the very existence of life as we know it on our planet. It is urgent that we all oppose, at every opportunity, the increased use of fossil fuels.

    The pipeline embodies all that is harmful and wrong about our current energy programs--the facilitation of increasing carbon emissions, danger to our water supplies, violation of native people's cultures and water rights, and even more concentration of wealth in the hands of the already wealthy, especially those oil executives who have so flagrantly and irresponsibly attempted over the past several, crucial decades to deceive people into thinking that the climate crisis is not real.

    As a senior citizen, I join with those who oppose, in the strongest possible terms, the expansion of pumping stations along this pipeline. We must do everything we can to limit--and, if possible, to reverse--the harms that the fossil fuel industry is doing to us, to our children, to our grand-children--and to all living things around us.
    Thomas Lutze
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the installation of the Dakota pipeline Ashley
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the long term, irreversible damage it will do to ground water, regional impacts to people and wildlife in the event of a spill and the impacts to the already grave threat of global climate change.
    I implore you all to hear the people not only of Illinois, but of every community in the path of this pipeline. We need to work toward a clean energy future together for the betterment of the world, our kids and communities. We are all watching.
    Melissa Romeo
  • March 3, 2020

    At a time when our state is facing flooding risks due to climate change, we should not expand a pipeline network that increases our risks and costs. Rachel Havrelock
  • March 3, 2020

    it Is pure insanity to believe that promises will be kept as of the promises is that this land is set aside for the Indian cultures. Again, just as in the past, our government and greed will ruin the land. The companies who want to profit have already shown a total disregard for life and land. They should be ashamed of what they do. For a few dollars in he here and now, they are ready to risk he fate of the Indians who live and worship here, the pristine area and the fate of the earth's future! I think we should run the pipeline as long as it is under the white house and the homes of the top 10 percent of the companies big wigs who will profit from this ruination. loretta nelson
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Such an expansion would increase both the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of oil is a significant factor in climate change, and expanding the pipeline to speed up how quickly oil can be pulled out, transported, and consumed will make that global problem even worse. These risks and dangers to Illinois provide no real benefit to its citizens. I have no interest in government decisions to serve only to further enrich the wealthy corporation owners, who would be the actual beneficiaries of an expansion. Jason Lukehart
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Pipeline expansion as the benefits go to the petroleum industry investors but the harm is severe to the whole planet. It may leak, it may pollute streams and ground water. It will add to air pollution and respiratory disease. It may slow our shift to renewable energy sources.
    I oppose granting this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the climate crisis and should be obsolete soon and a wasted investment due to the necessary transition to renewable energy. It unnecessarily endangers our water, air and soils and threatens our public health.
    Thomas J Wilson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion because there must be compromise on both sides when it comes to fossil fuel production, transportation, and usage while erring on the side of environmental caution.

    Many Illinois residents and others affected by the pipeline have already had to compromise because they do not want the pipeline traveling through their land or near their communities. Now the oil and gas companies are trying to maximize profits by taking advantage of what they have already achieved.

    Compromise needs to go both ways. It is now the oil and gas companies’ opportunity to show their good faith to the communities that they serve by actually “promoting the security and convenience of the public” through their actions and not just their words.

    Increased flow will increase the inevitable disaster and extreme inconvenience from spills and leaks. Leaks will happen, and denial of this permit will help protect our citizens, our farmers, our land, and the global environment.

    Please let common sense prevail, and do not allow construction of pumping stations that will increase the Dakota Access Pipeline throughout.
    Adam Honegger
  • March 3, 2020

    Deny, please deny. Earth IS your backyard. Would you tolerate an oil spill in your yard? At your home? Harming the health of your children? If you approve this, then that is exactly what you are doing. loretta nelson
  • March 3, 2020

    I’ll keep this brief; me signing this petition means I stand with it. Jadyne Stachowiak
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because,

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Greg Stawinoga
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline. I only live about 10 miles from where the pipeline goes across Illinois. The pipeline goes through many rivers and water ways that supply water to many communities. One rupture could permanently contaminate the water and make it unusable for many people. The expansion is to make someone even richer. It isn’t for the betterment of the people of Illinois. Please do not approve the expansion. Janine Wodtke
  • March 3, 2020

    I do not want the pipeline extended. It will be an ecological disaster that we can no longer afford. We need to get off fossil fuels and this will not help us do so. I strong oppose the pipeline. Andrew Sloan
  • March 3, 2020

    I don’t support the Dakota Access Pipeline Lauren
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion. This will only further increase the risk of spills which will endanger our communities, land, water and climate. It's not a matter of if there will be a spill; it's a matter of when. Preserve what is left of this landscape. Annie Mcpherson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of a spill..

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    MichaelD Berk
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline because as history has shown time and time again it is not a matter of if the pipeline will break but when.

    This ecological disaster can be avoided by rejecting the pipeline.

    In addition for the future of our next generations we should be focused on new clean energy.

    Thank you for your consideration.
    Marcus Pizana
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we need to move to green energy sources and not risk any more spills.
    There are far better alternatives!
    Rebecca Giglio
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because...

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    JANICE FIGMAN
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline. We need to invest in more sustainable energy, not continue with an energy source that is hurting our planet. Leah Corey
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because..

    We have to stop contributing to climate change and switch to all renewable energy. Oil spills kill wildlife and burning fossil fuels make us sick. Expansion literally means the end of life on earth.
    Laura Long
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose due to the increased risk of spills and adding to the climate crisis. Meghan Carter
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. It seriously endangers our environment, our water, our climate, and our wildlife. Rather, we should invest our monies in the green technology of the future. If we do not become leaders in green technology, we will end up having to buy it from other countries.
    Climate change is no small issue. Are we going to continue to blindly ignore the danger to our health and homes, rather than consider available alternative solutions? We need to make the changes NOW before it becomes too late.
    The oil companies will NEVER push for change, even though the safety and future of our planet depends on it. We must do what is necessary. Protect us!
    Linda Owens
  • March 3, 2020

    Enough of the grandiose steps backwards with a continued reliance on fossil fuels just to benefit and line the pockets of those who profit most, all fossil fuel companies.
    Greed has been ruining the globe, the environments, the flora, the fauna all over the years not to the benefit of Mankind, but for the benefit of the owners of the companies and governments hell-bent on forcing an international dependence of fossil fuels. The head of our own government is also hell-bent on the destruction of our water, air and land in the interests of the billionaires and millionaires who own these companies and who grease each others' palms.

    Enough is Enough --what one wants to send through these pipe lines is Oil saturated sand. Really, despicably desperate. Invest in renewable energy, keeping the land pristine for those to enjoy and make profits in a different manner in this regard; it is do-able,,,however one needs to turn away from the immense poison of GREED.
    Mary Catherine Burtch
  • March 3, 2020

    Please deny the permit! Patricia Henry
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Russell Ziegler
  • March 3, 2020

    Thus needs to stop Christine Christine Schmidt
  • March 3, 2020

    I find the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline to be abhorrent and to stand in complete opposition to preserving and maintaining the sanctity of life and access to clean and unobstructed water sources. The risk of contaminating land and water is at too much of a risk to oversee. The environmental impact will exacerbate climate change at a rate greater than the one we currently face. Robert Taylor
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because I feel it puts us all at risk of rupture, and possible explosion should the pipeline not be able to handle the additional oil going through it. I also feel that it should be rejected because there will be not economic benefit to Illinois because the oil will be exported.

    We already have issues with climate change. This will only exacerbate those issues and make things worse.

    Therefore I think you should reject the company's application to expand the pipeline through Illinois.
    Linda Ehmen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the increased probability and severity of spills. Also DA/ETCO plans to export the oil so Illinois get the risks while the oil companies get the benefits. Joan Steele
  • March 3, 2020

    I definitively oppose the expansion of Dakota Access and oppose it's expansion in Illinois. This does not benefit Illinois, America, or Americans. In fact, it greatly harms our environment and threatens our water. Patrice Egleston
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any more pipelines. They have had accidents and we should be spending our money on environmentally friendly sources of energy. Karen Clausen
  • March 3, 2020

    NO pipeline Lisa Barrett
  • March 3, 2020

    All future tax dollars should be spent on solar, wind and water sources of energy. We do not need any more oil, gas, etc. karen s clausen
  • March 3, 2020

    We need to find a better way than dirty oil that spills and damages the environment all along the process from being taken from Earth to the process of burning it and contaminating the soil, air and water. Connie Dunn
  • March 3, 2020

    The reason I am opposed to the Dakota Access line is twofold.
    1. Nationwide, Oil/gas is not needed. There is no shortage of oil. Gas prices are reasonable. Let's not solve a problem that does not exist.
    2. Related to 1. above, as I drive in Central I see many local oil wells. In fact, some have just been drilled in the last 2-4 months.
    So this re-enforces number 1 above. Additionally, let us not hurt our local oil producers by helping out-of-state or out-of-country
    oil production. Local oil production helps local jobs and local economies. Non local oil production not-so-much.
    Alan Lee Rider
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Monica Aniszewski
  • March 3, 2020

    Dakota Access, LLC doesn't need any more pumping stations in my state. They are a dirty company that endangered lives in North Dakota. I would prefer that they remove all pipelines in Illinois. Karen Stacey
  • March 3, 2020

    If there is a leak into one of the great rivers that the pipeline passes through, it would devastate our ecosystem. The oil industy has made a huge contribution to our current climate crisis and it enrages me to know that we continue to tolerate and encourage such a destructive industry. Julien Acosta
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose granting a permit to the Dakota Access Pipeline. There are no real benefits to the people of Illinois since most of the oil is going to be exported. Our state would bear all the risks associated with pipelines, and the oul company would walk away with all the profits.

    Because we are already facing a climate crisis worldwide, it seems irresponsible to allow a pipeline that would produce emissions that are equivalent to 15 coal-fired plants. We cannot afford to go backwards in our efforts to curb emissions when our planet is close to a tipping point.

    For the health of our state, its people, and the environment, I urge you to deny this permit.
    Kathleen McTighe
  • March 3, 2020

    I'm writing to urge you not to approve the permit for installation of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. The pipeline will contrubute to the current worsening climate crisis, endangering our water, land, and public health. Cynthia Dvorak
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois to install additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois.

    There have already been a multitude of spills, and the rationale of more jobs created does not excuse usurping more land and allowing more heavy equipment to foul the environment.

    Doubling the flow rate seems to invite more stress on the pipe, and more chance of leakage.
    Jan Elbert
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The area of Will County where I live has recently seen the extension of a different line that currently runs through our farm fields on its way to the BP Refinery in Whiting, IN. Another line is currently under construction just west of my home, again running through our farm fields. Both of these lines suddenly 'sprung up', and I only became aware of their existence after they were well under way - imagine that.... It is abundantly clear that staying ahead of these greedy corporate entities is nearly impossible. That somehow has to change. The planned doubling of the flow rate will increase the likelihood and severity of spills. The consumption of that additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will only exacerbate climate change. It appears that the company behind this expansion plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois will take on all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit. Please do not approve the expansion of this line through our state.
    .
    Jocelyn Davis-Beck
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional oil will produce emissions equivalent to 20 million cars which will have a drastic impact on climate change. It appears that DA/ETCO will export the crude oil and Illinoi will be at risk therefore. Pam Babler
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we don't need the pipeline running through our state. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois carries all of the risks while these oil companies reap all of the benefits. Oil spills are a devastating environmental hazard, putting wildlife and our precious ecosystem at great risk. Instead of setting up our beautiful state for a potential disaster, let's use our resources to protect and improve our natural treasures. Julia Muther
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. Our environment cannot stand any more abuse. We need to be eliminating fossil fuels, not encouraging more use of them. Any expansion of the pipeline will adversely affect our lands, animals, and people in Illinois. It is dirty and it is unnecessary. Spills are inevitable. There have been many spills in North Dakota that the public is not made aware of. All of these pollute our environment even worse than is happening now.

    Stop pipeline expansion. We don't need it and we don't want it.
    Carol Kussart
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not approve the Dakota access pipeline expansion. Terribly afraid of spills that could threaten drinking water and the soil. Arlene Rakoncay
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the unnecessary and dangerous expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline and urge the ICC to recognize that Illinois residents do not want more crude oil running through our state. Please make decisions that support a safe and sustainable climate. Rebecca Walker
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemenrly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. There is no need to expand this pipeline as there are other ways to transfer the crude, existing pipelines and rail to name two.

    This proposal will increase the risk of leaks and accidents, with no benefit over the alternative transportation options. There is no benefit to the State of Illionois and its residents.
    Chris Mowthorpe
  • March 3, 2020

    Our planet is already dying. Our reliance on crude oil is the source of the problem. We do not need to perpetuate this critical issue by lining the pockets of the oil industry. Say no to Dakota Access. Kailey Mullins
  • March 3, 2020

    Water is life! Money cannot undo the damage pipeline leaks cause to the potable water table. Many forms of renewable energy available to replace the dirty oil. Bonita Jane
  • March 3, 2020

    Please oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. This pipeline will endanger water supplies for indigenous communities - and we should be building infrastructure for renewable energy, not fossil fuels. Susan S. Pastin
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate eco system change and damage the health of the planet we call home. Devin
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because more fossil fuel projects are literally THE LAST thing that we need, for the future health of our children and the ecosystems we all depend on.

    Doubling the flow rate makes it all the more likely that there will be more severe spills, and will create more greenhouse gasses, which—as we know—are already effecting our state, nation and world in ways more severe than scientists initially predicted.

    Tackling climate change is the great challenge of our time. Perhaps even the great challenge of the human era. Don't work against history and against life. Please don't double the DAPL.
    Jenny Kendler
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and produce emissions equivalent to fifteen1000 megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars which will exacerbate climate change.
    Ellen Wallace
    Ellen Wallace
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Beth Braun
  • March 3, 2020

    I do no approve of the Dakota pipeline access expansion permit. It endangers sacred land ecology. Our environment is polluted almost beyond repair. Please stop. Pearl Callaghan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of pumping stations and facilities. We need to reduce and stop consumption of CO2 emitting fuels that will increase the rate of climate change and the devastating effects it will have on our children and grandchildren and those around the world.

    Please stop!
    Michael Cobo
  • March 3, 2020

    Pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture.

    The added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure.
    terrence ward
  • March 3, 2020

    Oil is on its way out and electrification is on its way in for energy. This is the future of our society on both a local basis and on a world wide basis. Oil burning desroys our climate and the spills that will happen ruin the land and water. Its time to stop the forward momentum of fossil fuels. Jeffery S. Green
  • March 3, 2020

    Please don't approve the Dakota access pipeline expansion permit!!! Nick Chrisos
  • March 3, 2020

    I somewhat oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline. There are risks involved including contributing to climate change and damaging the environment and hurting wildlife. They should build more solar panels and windmills instead of more pipelines. Chris Dybala
  • March 3, 2020

    The expansion permit for the Dakota Access Pipeline, if granted, will put the environmental health of our state at risk by increasing the chance of oil spills and explosions due to higher pressures. It will exacerbate climate change by increasing the day-to-day supply of fossil fuels in an especially dangerous way, since the oil flowing in this particular pipeline originates in tar sands and thus requires more energy to clean and refine than most other oil. Because the Dakota Access pipeline runs through lands that are environmentally sensitive and culturally significant to Native Americans, who demonstrated in large numbers prior to its construction, approving the permit is also a sign of profound disrespect to the original inhabitants of this country. Our state should support environmentally responsible energy rather than fuels that are endangering the well-being of life on earth. David Vayo
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    joann butkus
  • March 3, 2020

    As a resident of Illinois I oppose more pipelines and pumping stations in our state. We need to find alternative energy sources to replace oil!!! Janice Duplex
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota access pipeline. Janine
  • March 3, 2020

    Please stop the pipeline Grace Bell
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the proposal of installing additional pumping stations and facilities on behalf of Dakota Access, LLC, and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC, in Illinois. These installations would contribute to the already catastrophic global warming caused by human activity, and disregard predictions of oil and fossil fuel demand, especially in light of the current rise in demand for renewable energy. These companies already have pumping stations and facilities in Illinois, and providing them with the authority to build additional stations and facilities would come at the expense of my, and future, generations. Zoe Alden Greenfield
  • March 3, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is not in the best interest of good stewardship of the land. Becky Dees-McMahon
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because I am very concerned about climate change. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Not only that, I understand that DA/ETCO will likely export this crude oil, with no benefit to the people of Illinois. We simply assume the risk. Jeffrey L Gahris
  • March 3, 2020

    I completely oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, wether in Illinois or any other location. We have a global climate crisis going on that is irrefutable and must be addressed. Instead of doing further damage to our planet, let’s work on solutions to climate change and certainly not actively work to worsen it. Dawn Fiali
  • March 3, 2020

    As a lifelong resident of Illinois I strongly oppose any permit that would allow the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Co. to build additional pumping stations in Illinois.

    Such a permit would allow oil to flow at extreme velocities increasing the risk of rupture that would cause severe spills endangering land and water and, thus, the animals and humans living here.

    On a larger scale, the emissions produced by the consumption of the additional volume of oil will greatly exacerbate climate change. Climate change is REAL. We should be doing everything possible to gravitate away from fossil fuel usage.

    Please, do NOT approve this expansion permit that would only put our communities, land, water, and climate at greater risk.

    Sincerely,
    Arlene Krizanic
    Arlene Krizanic
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We are living in the beginning of an extreme climate emergency. You have decision-making power. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce greenhouse gas emissions which will exacerbate climate change. It is too late to be building infrastructure for continued fossil fuel consumption, locking us in for decades. Please consider a serious and immediate shift to renewables, and an economic shift as set out in the Green New Deal. Please, this is an emergency. Sarah Gaines
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is a huge threat to drinking water and the health of Illinois residents. Catherine King
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do NOT approve the permit to expand the DAPL! We need to move towards renewable energy now. Michelle Wrona
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which puts our water and land at risk. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while the oil companies get all of the benefit.

    Besides the risk, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. We need to move to clean energy, NOT support oil and gas.
    Elonna M Weigel
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline and am horrified that you are even considering it. Dale Johnson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for so many reasons, including the fact that doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. This is unnecessary. maria dabrowski
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota access pipeline. There is no reason for its existence when there are better more environmentally friendly alternatives. Building it will not only destroy land, but disrupt the way of life for many hard working people and prompt mistrust between the community of people and the ones creating the pipeline. More damage will be done and there won't be a solution to fix the environment or the broken trust caused by the pipeline. Brie McClose
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    JOSHUA ZYSKOWSKI
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because we should be focusing on ecological sustainability as a society rather than allowing even the possibility of further endangerment to an already collapsing environment. There's no way to extract or transfer natural resources without poisoning our sail, air, water, and destroying our climate along the way. Say no to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Borys Niewiadomski
  • March 3, 2020

    Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline! Dangerous, dirty power is outdated. Illinois need not enable the destruction of our planet. We can do better. Margaret Miller
  • March 3, 2020

    The fact that there even is a Dakota Access Pipeline is appalling. It should never, ever have been built. The US has long ridden roughshod over Native American rights and people, and this is yet another example. After President Obama stopped the pipeline, our demagogue current president overrode this in his zeal to drill everywhere possible, and in all sacred places. This is just one example. Others abound.

    More drilling equals more pollution, more contaminated waterways, more environmental devastation and, of course, ultimately more climate change. Our myopic president clearly believes that as long as he and his are making money, the world will just keep turning in the ways he wants it to. Anyone with a brain knows that the health of the planet is made worse by more drilling and more burning of fossil fuels.

    DO NOT APPROVE THE ADDITIONAL PIPELINE!!!
    Elizabeth Darovic
  • March 3, 2020

    Please protect our planet from fossil fuels we need a world with clean air water and soil. They are natural rights and need to be protected!! Robin Pinsof
  • March 3, 2020

    The last thing our poor, abused environment needs is more pipeliness and oil! Ann Mallow
  • March 3, 2020

    We need to stop hurting the environment , or we stand to lose our way of life and the environment that surrounds , if it goes so do we , so stand up against this please !!!
    Before it's too late
    Juan Alfredo Hernandez
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose any more installation of any pumping stations and any pumping facilities. The existing pipelines were haphazardly built. The contamination is horrendous. We cannot stand by and watch them continue to poison our land. We need to clean up. Not make it worse. Anastasia Cavallari
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Kate Goetz
  • March 3, 2020

    Keep the oil in the ground. It is the only way for Earth to survive. Be part of the solution. Do not lose your soul by caving to corporate overreach. Janice Gintzler
  • March 3, 2020

    As a lifelong resident of Illinois, I adamantly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. These pipelines have devastating and irreparable impact to our environment, including our water supply and farmlands, when they leak. This particular pipeline has already leaked numerous times, and Sunoco Logistics, its future operator, has disclosed more than 203 leaks to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration--one of the worst track records of any US pipeline operator ("Sunoco, behind protested Dakota pipeline, tops U.S. crude spill charts". Reuters. September 23, 2016. Retrieved from www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-pipeline-nativeamericans-safety-i-idUSKCN11T1UW on February 28, 2020). This project in no way benefits the people of Illinois, involves unacceptable risk to our communities, and further contributes to the global climate crisis. Jacob MacGregor
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not permit the expansion. Anna wasilewska
  • March 3, 2020

    STRONGLY OPPOSE the pipeline coming through our state. It shouldn't be coming through any state.
    We need to end fossil fuels, this is a great place to stop. Here. Now.
    Illinois gets not direct benefit, but we'll be stuck with the clean-up, should something happen.
    And the entire industry has a very bad track record in being able to stop leaks, fix them or clean up.

    The Mayor, the Governor, and all elected legislators and officials, please believe me when I say that
    I've sent money to all other states to fight the pipelines in other state, but I live in this one,
    and I will actively join any protests against this project. Every step of the way.
    S A GOULD
  • March 3, 2020

    I am totally opposed to an expansion of the Dakota Pipeline project. I was opposed to the original access and find that this expansion only adds to my greatest fears for our environment and continued desecration of Native American territory. Pipelines leak and cause damage that affect our ground water that we all share. Also, continued reliance on fossil fuels is archaic and only increases the rapid deterioration of our planet. Maxine Gere
  • March 3, 2020

    We need to recover from our addiction to fossil fuels altogether in order to create a livable future on this planet. Adding pipeline to a system that is destined to destroy our water air and soil is beyond foolhardy. We must find alternatives and dismantle this dying industry before it is too late. Wendy Ray
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the risks and negative outcomes outweigh any benefits. Doubling the flow of the rate on new and existing pipelines will increase the probability and severity of spills occurring. The environment is already compromised with current pipelines, and the consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 millions cars. This massive extra production will exacerbate climate change. I urge you to find an alternative solution that does not involve increasing risks and negative outcomes. Ashley H
  • March 3, 2020

    Please use electricity instead Michael Rubenstein
  • March 3, 2020

    Bad for renvironment and climate change.Rely on carbon neutral renewables R.A. Rosenstein
  • March 3, 2020

    I write to register strongest possible opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois.

    The company's request to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station to allow them to increase the volume of oil they transport through our state from 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day is insupportable and must be denied.

    The additional oil going into production through this pipeline will be detrimental to the health of our environment and to health of the citizens of our state. The pipeline will greatly expand the use of fossil fuels, will pose a much-increased risk of pipeline spills and accidents that will leak hazardous oil into our land and waters, will greatly increase the global warming generated by oil production and use across the world, and, after all of that, will not even help Illinoisans financially because almost all of the oil to be transported across our state is actually intended for export.

    In financial terms, if this permit request is granted Illinois will be a loser because our state will only get the increased risk of leaks and spills out of this deal and the associated costs of clean up and remediation. The pipeline company and the oil industry will receive the profits while our state will bear the liabilities.

    The most urgent concern about the pipeline expansion, and the crucial reason for not granting this permit, however is that the pipeline expansion will exacerbate the environmental emergency that the world -- and Illinois -- is already seeing happen all around us. This is the most important concern for the ICC to take into account at this time. The environmental emergency is looming over all of human activity on this earth and by the account of many scientists, including the experts who are consulting with the United Nations, it is becoming ever more likely that the very existence of humanity is under threat.

    The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted.
    John Locascio
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the harms this will cause to the Standing Rock Native American people and homelands, American waters and farmland, and the world climate. These true and inevitable outcomes of this pipeline are intentionally ignored in the interest of increasing profits for the fossil fuel industry at the expense of our water and land. And every human being will now face the danger of increased oil production as our climate warms. The proposed expansion will double the existing pipeline flow rate which increases the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. And evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. The time has come to stand up for our children's future and say no to more fossil fuels and to instead require investment in renewable sources of energy. John Coughlin
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the consumption of this oil will produce emissions equal to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. This state should be moving forward and innovating with new forms of clean, environmentally sustainable energy--serving the people, present and future, of Illinois, not the bottom lines of oil corporations who care nothing for the environment. Colluding with these corporations is a slap in the face to future generations. Kristen Macur Brousil
  • March 3, 2020

    I am in opposition to allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to have access to any Illinois land. Martha Hernandez
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    1) Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    2) Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    3) Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while the oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Gwenna Weshinskey
  • March 3, 2020

    The DAPL is a threat the to health and welfare of the people who live near it and poses a huge threat to the environment. It should not be allowed to expand. Steffanie Adams
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose increased capacity on the pipeline in order to reduce the increase of future spills; acknowledge and hold accountable the operator's sloppy performance to date; and, instead, support energy choices that decrease, not increase, our carbon footprint. Andrew Tonachel
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doris Verkamp
  • March 3, 2020

    I absolutely oppose any pipeline going through Illinois. Our energy and time should be directed to divestment from fossil fuels and utilizing renewables.

    No pipeline!
    Deborah Chabi
  • March 3, 2020

    Please don't approve expansion of Dakota pipeline. Corporate greed should not over shadow the needs of the people and mother nature. Yadon Santana
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline extension.

    We should be working towards using renewable energy rather than polluting our home with fossil fuels.
    Morgan Marie DiDomizio
  • March 3, 2020

    This project will mean increased risks of spills and damage to wildlife and our drinking water sources. Investments need to be made in renewable energy not dirty energy from the past. Taxpayers will end up subsidizing the damage and extra costs from this. This proposal should be rejected. Linda Wegrzyn
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Also, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Jennifer Malik
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the Dakota access to install additional pumping stations and facilities. Why do not want to put our land and water at risk! Sandra Noel
  • March 3, 2020

    'tis ridiculous that with the scientific clock almost down to zero, that we are still relying on fossil fuels and not renewable energy to help save our planet. As Regan said in "the Exorcist, "Mommy,please make it stop!" Mark Snyder
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. There is also evidence that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Bridget Heneghan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills allowing further destruction of our environment and natural resources. DENISE TORRI
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the permit for Dakota and the increase in volume in oil transmission in the Illinois.
    The short term benefits (jobs, minimal tax revenue) do not all make up for the increased world wide climate change that will occur and permanently damage future generations ability to live and enjoy life on this planet. The ICC can play a part by denying the permit and saying YES to saving Earth!
    Ronald Kurth
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline expansion. Maureen Verwiel
  • March 3, 2020

    The further expansion of the pipeline is cause for serious concern.
    First, leaks will accur. Energy transfer has had a history of leaks and spills. They are not easily cleaned, before wildlife and water sources are permanently damaged. Second, this oil is predominantly being shipped out of the country for maximum profit.
    This isn't about U.S. energy independence - it's about profits to a monopolistic business!! That's all.
    paul wnek
  • March 3, 2020

    Illinois does not need any further environmental disasters. Carp invading Ill rivers with near access to Lake Michigan, pipelines already criss-crossing the state, the oldest 3 units of the Dallman Coal Plant scheduled to shut down. Are you replacing one environmental degradation with another? No additional facilities, none. BTW, has Dakota Access cleaned up the last spill in the Dakota's from just last year? Just asking. B J Alexis
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline. It’s vital that we protect our Illinois natural resources, including the best soils in the world, and our vital water supply. Alice Henry
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the probability of spills will increase and equally pressing is that this additional consumption will exacerbate climate change--the additional volume is the sam at 20 million cars! Unacceptable. We need to be addressing climate change, not contributing to it!!! IL should be leading the way. Audrey Clarke
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. I'm against having more crude oil running through the state of Illinois. We do not need more pumping stations.

    You're endangering our land, farms, water, people, wildlife and climate with the inevitable chance of a leak and an oil spill, all for oil that will be exported out of the USA. This risk is not worth the potential profits the oil company stands to make by running more oil through Illinois!

    Please put the safety of our environment, farms and people first. Please do not approve this permit.
    Cisley Celmer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The risks outweigh the benefits. We need to divest of fossil fuels rather than invest in them. Sharon Monday Sharon Lee Monday
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose this pipeline, and believe that any economic benefits will be tangential to the communities most impacted. This pipeline is an environmental disaster waiting to happen and the consumption of the of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to, I believe, fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. This is bad for our state and our planet. Sinead O'Donovan
  • March 3, 2020

    I, too, vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We should NOT put our communities, land, water and climate at greater risk for the benefit of foreign oil companies that want to export the oil from this continent to Asia, which has more oil than we do. This has nothing to do with our needs or our energy independence and everything to do with huge profits for fossil fuel companies. Enough is enough! We are putting the human race at risk, but our planet will survive. This project is unsustainable and is not in our national interest. I resist the notion that is in our economic interest as well. Kirk D Sheckler
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit. Darryl T ERICKSON
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills putting the health and safety of the people of Illinois and our precious environment at unacceptable risk.

    In addition, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. At this time of climate crisis, Illinois must show leadership in taking decisive action protecting our citizens by reducing consumption of fossil fuels. This project would be a disaster for our state and the planet as a whole.
    Susan Blauwkamp
  • March 3, 2020

    I'm appalled that anyone would consider allowing the Dakota Pipeline to be approved. We have many issues addressing the urgency of climate change and the potential pollution of our water resources. We need to stop the pipeline from being sunk into the porous ground as if it breaks, millions on people would be adversely effected.

    Ed Krantz
    Ed 1165 Nottingham Lane
  • March 3, 2020

    Pumping more oil through existing pipelines seems like a guarantee of more leaks and spills . The pipelines have a history of spils, so the question is not will they leak, but when, how many times, and how much. These spills, poison Illinois farmland, ground water and streams. We can live without oil, but we can't live without clean, drinkable water for Illinois crops, livestock and humans.
    Please do not approve the petition.
    Libby Reuter
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Helen Martyniuk Baird
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the DAPL project.
    Please vote against this project.
    DAPL is a continuation down the wrong path for our state, our country, and our world.
    The people behind this project do not have a good environmental not safety record. Their TV adds are grossly distorting the truth.
    These are the same people that caused the Kalamazoo River spill that almost polluted Lake Michigan.
    A leaking pipeline underground cannot be seen and can be ignored until the damage is too great.
    It would be a more prudent step to focus our investments and our futures toward renewable energy sources.
    Thank you for not supporting this endeavor.
    mike mieszala
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the People of Planet Earth need to reduce the use of oil to help stem the rising tide of climate change.

    Also, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills, which can harm humans and pollute waterways.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Before it's too late, we need to take many actions to reduce consumption of petroleum, not increase it.
    Bonnie Gahris
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Allison Gosser
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion. Cory
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Paola Castano
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the world does not belong to corporations, it belongs to all people including our children, our children's children and our children's children's children. The Dakota Access Pipeline is not needed. The planet Earth is needed. Please block this pipeline. Mitchell Orman
  • March 3, 2020

    This pipeline is a bad idea. Transporting oil this way always leads to spills-cutting the costs in transportation doesn't lead to more funds for pipe maintenance and hiring enough engineers for pipe upkeep. Then there is the cost to local communities. Once the pipe is built the jobs revolving around the pipeline become nil because there's no more work to be done. And once again, when a company wants to make a buck, it violates the sovereignty of a First Nation to get it. The brutality inflicted upon the Lakota tribe is proof enough that no good will come of this pipeline. Thalla Thall Rothach
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not expand the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the flow rate will increase the chance and severity of spills and DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefits. Mark Giardina
  • March 3, 2020

    As a person who was born, raised and educated in central Illinois, I strongly oppose allowing the Energy Transfer Company from Dallas,Texas to increase the volume of oil being pumped through our state by the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    This increase may benefit the oil companies, but it does little for the economy of Illinois at a great risk to the health and welfare of our population. I have seen the commercials running during the evening news showing the smiling faces of Patoka citizens living in such a "vibrant" area of our state due to its "wonderful" tank farm. Energy Transfer would like us to believe that we are reaping benefits from the Dakota Access Pipeline. In reality, the town of Patoka has been decreasing in population for years despite the growth of its tank farm. It currently has a population of 546 and is located in a fairly remote area. Building pumping stations and more tanks may bring temporary employment, but that will end once they are operational. However, building these pumping stations will bring a much greater risk to our state's greatest natural resource, its water. The increased oil flow will traverse our rivers and our farmland through pipes that were not originally built for this new amount of pressure. And resulting leaks would contaminate our water and threaten our state's future. In fact, most of the oil from this pipeline goes directly to the gulf for refining and export.

    Therefore, Illinois does not benefit from approving this permit. We are being manipulated by self-serving companies that view our state as nothing more than a convenience for them. We need to stand up and protect our land and water by denying Petition 19-0673.
    Kirsten Holzhauer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Leann Flesch
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the flow rate will increase the likelihood of a spill, and will make any spill that does occur worse.

    Illinois is already suffering the effects of climate change, through more erratic winters and more floods, interspersed with droughts. Consuming the extra volume of oil that would go through the expanded pipeline will produce greenhouse emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars. So, lots more climate change to come.

    Last, but not least, there is reason to believe that DA/ETCO will export this crude oil. So Illinois won't even get much short-term economic benefit, just the risks of the possible spills and the certainty of helping to make climate change significantly worse.

    Oil is the fuel of yesterday. We can't stop using it exactly today, but we have to work today to take serious steps toward phasing out oil and other carbon-based fuels. If we continue to look on oil as an on-going fuel source, our future will be pretty grim. Stand up for our future, and don't let big companies bulldoze our hopes for a better tomorrow.
    Amy Hasfjord
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the opposition to this pipeline with these comments -there have been very minimal effects on the environment, ie spills, etc when and after these pipelines have been installed-ex Alaskan pipeline where caribou now congregate more near the pipeline-warmer? Secondly, the day, if it really comes-check unbiased reports-when we can efficiently and financially depend on newer energy sources is still way out there in the future. Until then you and I are going to continue to depend on oil based sources to keep our fuel available and affordable. Above and beyond personal use, we have to think of our major services-transportation, services like medical and security, military, etc. I hope you get the point. I cannot imagine a scenario where a company builds a pipeline across Illinois without our politicians demanding a piece of the “pie”! If the oil isn’t for us then it is still a part of our bigger economic picture which may benefit us all in the long run. Nuff said! John Brook
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this! To risk more oil spills and detriment to our land and animals for it to be EXPORTED?!!!

    STOP!!
    Kathryn Quinn
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because
    doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Cynthia Carlson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills, and we have already seen the detrimental effects this can have on our environment and communities, particularly communities that are already vulnerable. Furthermore, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. I urge you in the strongest terms to stand for the people of Illinois, and not the companies who profit from the exploitation of our resources at our own very real risk. Julia Andersen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. The devastation to wildlife from oil spills is heartbreaking. We are responsible to protect our planet and all life living here. The joy one receives from walking in a wildlife area be it forest or lake is far more important to humanity than the dirty oil profits.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Ellen Henaghan
    Ellen Henaghan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access pipeline for the those of us who believe in science and how this pipeline will negatively effect climate change, water, soil, environmental and natural resources. Astrid Laimins
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills Philip Jolliffe
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. As a country we are moving towards reducing our need for fossil fuels. Expanding a pipeline that is not sustainable is a waste of our resources. There is no real benefit for the state of Illinois. Please do not allow this to happen! Jennifer Crawford
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because increasing the flow of the pipeline greatly increases the risk of spills. It is said that the danger and probability of oil spills is lower in underground pipelines as opposed to overground methods of transportation like trains, but the risks presented by pipelines cannot be ignored. A spill would contaminate the environment, which would cause costly clean up, have the potential to harm human health, and hurt the economy if important recreational or agricultural areas are harmed. Given these risks, the benefits of this pipeline are not worth it. The jobs created would only be temporary construction jobs, while the risk of spills would continue long after the jobs created for construction are done. Additionally, the crude oil going through the pipeline will not be processed in Illinois. Our refineries are not equipped to process the grade of Bakken oil the pipeline will be used for. The line will transport oil to the coast where it will be processed, meaning that Illinois will be taking on all the risks of transporting the oil with little reward. Moreover, we should not be looking to expand our oil consumption. It is proven that climate change is a real and pressing issue, and that we should be lowering our carbon emissions not looking to expand them. For these reasons I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Emma Ziegler
  • March 3, 2020

    In their decades long pursuit of profit at any cost, short-sighted fossil fuel corporations now threaten our planet and life as we know it. This is unacceptable. Scientists are sounding the alarm like the proverbial canary in a coal mine. I fear we ignore their warning at our own peril. Mike Hansen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because the likelihood of spills will increase. This and the increased consumption of fossil fuel causes harm to the environment. Illinois will hardly see any benefits from this, yet we are the ones who will have to deal with it and the issues it causes. Kate
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline or any additional pumping stations within Illinois. To add any additional facilities would go against state policy to protect the citizens of Illinois from harmful effects of potential spills or other exposure to environmental contaminants. It will do nothing to help the state economy or improve access to energy for the people who live here. Joshua Schleman
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills!
    Just another disaster to have to possibly deal with! Enough is enough!
    F. Jesser
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Pushing more oil at extreme velocities through the pipeline increases the risk of rupture. The added volume—roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars—will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure. My community does not want more crude oil running through Illinois and we do not accept hasty economic decisions that would put our families, land, water and climate at risk. Jennifer Kochan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    - Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    - Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    - Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Michele Mazur
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    John D Hachtel
  • March 3, 2020

    I've never liked "exploitation" of "anything" vs. "anyone" for any reason.

    "Exploitation" exists as a very "unethical" method of "using up" all of Planet Earth's resources both "prematurely" as well as "without just cause" for the benefit of "a few" at the expense of "the many"; depriving future generations of the necessary resources utilized for common good.
    Future generations "suffer" greatly when "exploitation" occurs with OUR Planet's limited resources.

    Therefore, "responsible use," even "renewable use" of OUR planet's "limited, i.e., finite" resources whenever possible, exists as the only, very well-educated, intelligent as well as important manner of responsibly handling/disbursing/using/renewing our Planet's finite resources.

    Additional "pumping stations' elevated, fluid dynamics-comprehended 'pumping' pressures," greatly multiply the very negative consequences of any/all foreseeable "pipeline" leaks' occurrence (these leaks will occur, no doubt about it; as no "pumping" system's 100 percent "perfect") in these "relatively pristine," important areas of the Country.

    Close Federal/State ("joint supervision" would be best!) supervision of existing "pipelines' flow" exists as "the only method" of preventing these "leaks' occurrence."
    David Russell Jacobson
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The fossil fuel companies will get huge profits, while we get spills that contaminate our water and land. Also, the oil, when burned, will result in more carbon in the atmosphere worsening climate change. Lynne A Scheve
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. This is documented science that must be respected to protect our communities and environment.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Considering the science that is proving the dire situation with our climate, we must work together against climate change and this pipeline does the exact OPPOSITE.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Our state has been financially derelict for some time now, We oppose anything that puts our state at needless risk, particularly when we receive no compensatory, appropriate benefit in return.

    As a lifetime Illinois resident i FULLY OPPOSE the Dakota Access Pipelline Expansion through our state of Illinois. Please respect our wishes as the people of the state. Thank you.
    Alexandra Marsala
  • March 3, 2020

    The State of Illinois needs to continue to open avenues of research and funding for 100 per cent clean energy. Any further development for the extraction, storage, and distribution of fossil fuels presents not only the large potential for environmental damage but also a distraction from the focus needed to foster a healthy future. Stop approving the development of fossil fuel transport, distribution, and delivery systems. Patrick Comer
  • March 3, 2020

    I'm against Dakota Access Pipeline expansion given the threats it poses to Illinois's people, natural resources, and wildlife. Leaks are almost inevitable and the Dakota Pipeline is no exception. The system leaked several times within its first year of operation! Do we really need more spills, more damage to our ecosystem, and more dollars wasted?

    Please deny this permit.

    Thank you!
    Clayton Carr
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not approve this permit. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Emily Callan
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion. An expansion of the pipeline in Illinois would provide no benefits to the state of Illinois or those of us residing, and would increase the likelihood of tarnishing our lands via potential spills as well as increase the wealth and power of a environmentally dangerous and self serving industry. Gabriel Cope
  • March 3, 2020

    DO NOT EXPAND! Expanding the pipeline through Illinois land will only serve to jeopardize the lively hood of native flora and fauna, in the event of a spill or leakage. Have the protests of the Lakota Sioux and other Americans at standing rock not said enough? Protesters fought vehemently for months in order to halt construction. Now the same company wishes to double the daily flow of oil through further expansion? ICC members, I implore to look into your hearts and discern who you serve the common everyday Illinoisian who lies under your stewardship or the greedy corrupt oil men who wish only to fill their pockets with money in order to live in luxury before they destroy this world and allow the rest of humanity to suffer. Stand with those from whom you come from. The eyes of history are upon each and every one of you. Do not fail us. Jackson Colclasure
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will increase the possibility of a spill and resulting problems that industry never can seem to successfully remediate. In addition, development of energy resources should be forward thinking. New technology and environmentally friendly energy development is where investment should be encouraged and guided.

    Ira Brown
    Ira L Brown
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because...

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Astarte Abbott
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the DAPL expansion permit vehemently. This is not where Illinois should be heading with its energy production. We need to lead in clean energy. Not to mention the ridiculousness of expanding the volume capacity to twice that which it was designed and originally permitted to handle. The height of absurdity. Watching this closely. This would be a stain on our state legacy. Think of how the Native Lakota people feel about this. They are rightfully scared and this would further continue a pattern of disrespect towards our nation's First People. NO! Ernie Hendrickson
  • March 3, 2020

    I STRONGLY oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Locking ourselves further into fossil fuel technology while simultaneously increasing the massive health and environmental risks for those who live along the pipeline is a terribly poor decision to make, and one that hurts the people of Illinois more than it helps them. I this commission should put the interests of the people ahead of those of the already-wealthy corporations and reject this proposal. Adam Hemauer
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline because the residents of our state should not have to put up with the risk of a spill for oil that is just going to be exported! Donna Hippensteel
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Judith Collins
  • March 3, 2020

    I am writing to oppose additional pumping on the Dakota Pipeline.

    It stands to reason that doubling the flow of oil through a pipe necessarily increases the stress on the line, and thus the possibility of rupture or spill. If this pipeline was built to handle twice the flow it has been receiving, why would they not have started with this heavier flow?

    Also, I understand that this oil is to be exported. Why should the citizens of Illinois support the extra risk when we would suffer all the consequences of a spill and yet receive no benefit from taking this risk?

    Finally, and importantly, it is long past the time when Illinois should stop supporting fossil fuel extraction and switch to renewables. Withdrawing support will hasten the day when it stops.
    Linda S Englund
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. This is terrible for the environment! Australia was on fire a short time ago. It's time for all of us to wake up to the realization of climate change and to protect our environment! We only have one earth! Mary Robbins
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Laura Nussbaum-Barberena
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any action for the Dakota pipeline, unconditionally. Mark Anderson
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Climate change doesn't need any more help. The earth is already heating up too much. It's time for us to wake up and work to save the planet.
    Anna Zehr
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Climate change doesn't need more help. The earth is already warming up too much, leading to higher sea levels and extreme storms. It's time we wake up and do our part to save the planet.
    Anna Zehr
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose. We need more efficient “mechanisms” not more dirty energy. There is a climate crisis at present. Pamela S Hermes
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Not only will it not benefit Illinois residents in any way (as it has been indicated that DA/ETCO is going to export the oil), simply putting them at risk for the profit of oil companies, but the expansion of the pipeline will exacerbate spills--of which there are already too many. We must transition to renewable energy as quickly as possible, and fossil fuels are not a sustainable resource to expect to be able to rely on. Angeliki Vassilatos
  • March 3, 2020

    I wish to register my deep opposition to this project.

    The world is burning and this project has the goal of burning the world more quickly. It's that simple when the logic of endless supply comes up against the reality of the limits of the Earth to absorb the manifold damages created by our extraction, manufacturing, and agricultural industries. We should be planning how we soon we can start taking this pipeline down. And taking it down isn't such a terrible idea, both considering future energy needs and considering some sections of DAPL are way over 50 years old, or at least so I've been told.
    Barry Feldman
  • March 3, 2020

    Enough is enough. No more increasing the rate of flow or any extension of any further pipelines. You lied that your pipelines would not leak. Well, they leaked and have caused irrepairable damage to our precious land. So NO new pumping stations and NO increase in the flow rate! I can not cry anymore tears for the loss of Mother Earth. STOP! Susan Flanders
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Pumping more oil will increase the likelihood of spills and rupturing. Laurel Evans
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Erin Van Ness
  • March 3, 2020

    You already have pipelines going through the fields that supply food, over or near streams that the wildlife needs, over water tables that supply drinking water to wells for humans, and my feeling is that we need to move towards renewable energy rather that oil that needs to be piped, trucked, or railed to its first destination of refining. What happened in North Dakota still does not sit well with me for the Dakota Access Company. They did not take into consideration that the Native American Tribes in the area only has limited sources of water for themselves or their livestock, the wildlife, and fresh fish and instead fought them with local and state police. With the sight of seeing rubber bullets and water shot at the horses and the people in very cold temperatures. This was their land tp protect. I haven’t read what contingency Dakota Access has and what they will pay if, no when, there is a spill. A spill will be catastrophic to humans, livestock, and all wildlife. No I cannot condone more pipelines through Illinois. Doris Shultz
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this action. We have done enough damage to the environment as it is. Especially with this sorry excuse for a president. And I use that title in the loosest way imaginable. Call me crazy, but I'd like to be alive, not ridden with toxins from an already toxic world. I have lyme disease and am struggling plenty as it is. Danielle B Masek
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this permit. This pipeline exacerbates the carbon issue, climate change and the health of our shared lands. It is not needed to meet our needs. It is the role of government to protect us from such things; when the health and well being of the many is sacrificed for the profit of a few. It is not worth it. Tonya Barlow
  • March 3, 2020

    I am against expanding the permit to allow for more pumping stations and increased flow though existing pipelines. Nearly doubling the flow of oil will increase the risk of leaks, which will put surrounding land, water, and people at risk. Furthermore, easier access to this oil will increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and we are already experiencing the negative of effects of this. We need to put the brakes on global heating, not exacerbate it. And because this crude oil will mostly be bound for export, any state that it flows though, including Illinois, will shoulder the risks with only the company seeing any benefit. This frankly sounds like a terrible idea all around, and so I am asking the ICC to deny the permit expansion. Anne Bargar
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose an expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. This kind of "technology" is old and dangerous, and is imminently obsolete. An expansion would hurt the people of Illinois in their health, their land, their pocketbooks, and their future, without bringing benefit. Kaara Kallen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is a threat to the health of Illinois residents because it is a threat to the purity of our water supply. Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. This has been shown time and time again. Look at the statistics regarding pipeline leaks and spills and you will see that this is the case.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    DA/ETCO will be exporting this crude oil, so the ordinary citizens Illinois shoulder all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit. Furthermore, this will decrease the amount of oil available to the U.S. citizenry, as the domestic supply is drained for one company's gain. Shame on them!
    John Toenjes
  • March 3, 2020

    I care about what kind of world I leave for future generations. It is so sad that you refuse to understand that if we destroy the only planet we have, there is NOTHING for ANYONE, including YOU and your descendants! Resources ARE NOT infinite; when any resource is gone it is gone FOREVER, and all the money in the universe won't protect you or buy what doesn't exist. How long do you think "human beings" can go on RAPING Mother Earth? You should all be sent into space to see this beautiful Earth as the ONE WORLD WITHOUT BOUNDARIES OR BORDERS that it is. There IS no "Planet B"! "Human beings" are tying the noose around their own necks by ravaging the Natural World upon which ALL life depends, whether they acknowledge it or not. Every strand in the Web of Life is critical--what we do to Mother Earth we do to ourselves; every extinction "human beings" cause hastens our own--the Truth is the Truth and DOES NOT depend on what YOU believe. Unless you don't eat food, drink water or breathe air, YOU ARE affected by all the poisons being spewed into the environment.

    Think about it, if you dare, and stop hiding your heads in the tar sands. Please don't sacrifice future generations; come at least partway into the 21st Century. We don't have to go back to the Stone Age to be environmentally responsible--fossil fuels ARE the stone age. Put those jobs and revenues into clean, safe, renewable, SECURE industries for today and beyond. We can be the problem or the solution.

    Your greed and hypocrisy make informed, reasonable Americans want to weep--and then SPRING INO ACTION. We will not be silenced.
    Barbara Fry
  • March 3, 2020

    Please! May we not continue to foul our land by first robbing it of resources that, when burned, contribute to the world's demise, and second when it leaks from its container, makes an environmental disaster? Finally, for whose benefit is this? certainly not for the People. Bill King
  • March 3, 2020

    I am totally opposed to the transportations of any pumping stations and pumping facilities anywhere in Illinois, the midwest, the rest of the country and the world. Quit destroying mother Earth and all our lives from this nasty theft from mother Earth. There have been alternatives for decades which have been buried by the fossil fuel industry even though there are countless spills and accidents. Savannah Hawkins
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Miles Paris
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit.

    Citizens of Illinois deserve better environment for now and for future generations.
    Radha Kaipa
  • March 3, 2020

    NO to the pipeline.....our energies and resources need to be directed to environmentally friendly energy NOW. NO more effort to continue on the unhealthy path on which we are presently treading. Sharon Button
  • March 3, 2020

    As a citizen of Illinois, I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The expanded flow puts our communities’ clean water, air, and health at risk to increase the already ridiculously huge profits of oil companies. They should be investing their money in developing viable alternative fuels and bringing them to market, not in more dirty fossil fuels that caused the climate we are all now paying for. Investment in clean, sustainable energy is the only way for the US to become truly energy independent. This expansion is a step backward and we need to be be moving forward. Dawn. Larsen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    Also, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Eric Morris
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do your jobs to protect the people of Illinois. Sandra OConnor
  • March 3, 2020

    We can do better than the Dakota Access Pipeline! Keep our communities safe and healthy by opposing the construction of pipelines and instead supporting the growth of renewables. Kimberly Rigger
  • March 3, 2020

    No access to Illinois for dirty fossil fuels, especially shale oil transit . Thomas E. Harris
  • March 3, 2020

    Pipeline construction has proved time and time again to be detrimental to our communities! The seeming inevitability of spills, the cost and effects of construction, the frequent invasion of public or native-owned lands are all reasons why pipeline construction must be stopped! Not even to mention the end result, which is pumping even more carbon emissions into the air we're all trying to breathe. Oppose pipeline expansion! Kimberly Rigger
  • March 3, 2020

    I write with two concerns.

    1) I believe the pipeline represents a distinct environmental risk for all states through which it passes.
    2) I understand the benefits in job opportunities for the people of Patoka, IL, a small town just 11 miles north of my own childhood home in Sandoval, IL.
    Jeanne M Parker
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota access pipeline expansion in Illinois. This has nothing to do with improving our energy crisis and only goes to put profits into the fossil fuel companies. Our money and time will be better spent coming up with clean less expensive sources of energy. Barbara Penzato
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. In fact, I vehemently oppose any expansion of the extraction, production, and distribution of oil and natural gas. Our climate is changing in increasingly distressing ways due to the burning of fossil fuels. It is past time for us to move to alternative forms of energy. Additionally, with the natural world facing the combined threats of climate change, habitat loss, and pollution, it is irresponsible to promote projects that will inevitably lead to oil spills. Our state, nation, and world deserve better policy. Jill Bartelt
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose expanding the pipeline because of the following reasons

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Gloria Charland
  • March 3, 2020

    Spills happen. I work in a boiler plant. Increasing line pressure results in fatigue in all the valves, joints, flanges, reducing stations and the pipe it’s self. This request does NOTHING for the taxpayers and residents of Illinois. This oil is low grade and is reportedly being shipped outside the U.S. vote NO if you have a conscience. David thornton
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Bob Rowlands
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline because the increase in flow will also raise the likelihood of spills or leaks. Kim Kalosky
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline permit. The added volume (roughly equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions of fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars) will exacerbate the negative effects of climate change at a time when we need to immediately halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure. We must protect the climate at all costs. Verlena Simms
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose expanding the pipeline. I stand with the Native Americans who advocate for the environment, not oil companies who advocate for their own profits. Deena Sherman
  • March 3, 2020

    I write to register strongest possible opposition to the permit for the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois. I oppose this idea.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Why would such an environmental risk even be considered when supporting the environment is even more critical than ever.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. This is reckless and unwarranted.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Illinois needs to look to environmentally sound ways to produce energy where we reap the rewards.

    The ICC should be well aware that it's primary responsibility is to our state and its people, not to the gas and oil companies. Many ordinary citizens throughout Illinois are watching these proceedings carefully and care a great deal about the outcome. We care about our state and so should you. The people of Illinois will consider the commission and the state to be acting irresponsibly if this permit request is granted. Thank you.
    lisa simonin
  • March 3, 2020

    Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline Permit.
    Exporting fossil fuels is not in the public interest, whether measured environmentally, economically, or ethically.
    Jim Maginel
  • March 3, 2020

    I went to fight the pipeline in North Dakota . They forced it through Lakota territory anyway. Took away farmers land. In October it leaked 380,000 gallons. They want to expand this pipeline , fill it with dirty oil and export it. Our future generations , animals and earth will be destroyed. We need to go green. I urge you to search your heart and rule for the people, not corporations. We are at a serious turning point! Janis mahaffey
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this. New report on the number of spills and the amount of methane released from fracking makes it clear that we need to stop building pipelines that support the extraction industry. Annette McMichael
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline due to environmental and public health concerns and as a way to support brothers and sisters in the Standing Rock Sioux community in their efforts to stop the pipeline and its expansion.

    The future of energy must be in renewables, and IL has been moving in that direction, which will help our state's economy with new, clean jobs, and which will, in turn, help ensure a healthier environment for our people. Allowing DAPL and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company to double the capacity of the pipeline by approving a new pumping station in IL (among other measures) would, according to the Sierra Club, add the equivalent of greenhouse gas emissions from "fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars"! Why would IL want to contribute to such climate threats, when we are trying to take a different course toward cleaner energy options?

    The Standing Rock Sioux protested the construction of the pipeline on the grounds that it would disrupt sacred lands and pollute water and land. As constructed, the pipeline crosses hundreds of waterways, and in many places runs deep under large bodies of water. For the Standing Rock Sioux, the Missouri River, their key source of water, is most threatened. In IL, DAPL affects the Mississippi, the Illinois and the Kaskaskia Rivers. Increasing the capacity of the pipeline will only increase the risk of environmental hazards.

    Please weigh the future health of our people, our environment, and our potential for a "clean energy" economy when you make your decision. I urge you to do your part to safeguard our future; I urge you not to approve the requests for additional pumping stations.

    Thank you.
    Nikoletta Antonakos
  • March 3, 2020

    I am absolutely apposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The risk of a major oil spill so a few people can make a lot of money is not a risk I am willing to take. Stop this expansion! Douglas Zimmerman
  • March 3, 2020

    I am against the Dekota Access Pipeline. the sooner it is stopped, the better. Henry Mulnik
  • March 3, 2020

    I completely oppose the granting of permission for the crude oil company using the Dakota Access pipeline to add pumping stations to this horrible project. There is absolutely no benefit to anybody but the pockets of the oil company and associated entities. Our state, nation, and human race should be laser focused on reducing the use of fossil fuels, such as crude oil, instead of increasing it. The pollution, waste, and contamination that result from building and using large oil pipelines makes rejecting this request a no-brainer for we Illinoisians.

    Tim Dever
    Tim Dever
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipeline has already experienced significant spills and doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. The company behind the pipeline have shown they have not reported spills timely and accurately and should not be trusted to put more of environment at risk.
    Please deny this request!
    Judith Rosowicz
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. There is no question that it is a direct, predictable and irreversible threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of ruptures and spills, which will have immediate detriment to our groundwater aquifers and water supplies. The Economic Risk from spills, leakages and ruptures is far greater than the benefit to Illinois and America.

    In addition, processing and consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants. Coal plants are a proven and indisputable health risk to all American Citizens now and far into the future.

    Exporting this crude oil does not eliminate the risks here at home. Illinois gets all of the risk while the oil companies get most of the economic benefit.

    Approval of this plan to expand this pipeline pumping in any form is an abdication of the Public Utilities Authorities responsibility to protect our citizens and needs to be viewed as a cynical decision to increase the use of oil-based industry and oil-company profits at the expense of the health and well-being of the public. Petition 19-0673 should be rejected.
    Stuart Greene, M.D.
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline on the basis of its short- and long-term negative impacts. In the short term, any expansion that increases transmission of product will inherently increase leaks and spills. Each leak or spill creates both direct and indirect health risks to humans, animals, and the ecosystem at large. In the long-term, expansion both represents and manifests a commitment to fossil fuels which is unsustainable. We have known since the 1970s that our energy needs must be powered by sources that are drastically less polluting than oil. The pipeline's capabilities should not be expanded because we need to phase out the use of the material it carries.

    We have reached the critical point at which capitalism is at odds with our needs as humans. The short term benefits of expanded pipeline capabilities are economic and are concentrated in the hands of Dakota Access and Energy Transfer. Some of those benefits might flow to workers who build and operate the new stations. However, the short-term costs, and the long-term costs as well, would be borne by all of the people of Illinois, and indeed the world.

    Illinois should reject the request to add pumping capabilities, in order to avoid the short- and long-term damage they would cause to living things in Illinois and beyond.

    Thank you.
    Jeffrey Oremland
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not let these pipelines go through. Trump shows great disrespect towards the environment and the Native peoples of this country, and should not be allowed to rape their lands at will or gamble with our future. I am not Native American in the least, but I have seen through history lessons, books, and documentaries of the atrocities committed against the native peoples of our country for the last 470 years from the first Spanish explorers to Mr. Trump. Trump is a heartless egoist with no regard for the welfare of certain peoples, and should not be allowed to commit the same crime our ancestors committed to the Native peoples for centuries, raping their lands and denying them the rights to live on them or worship on them. Beth Di Bartolomeo
  • March 3, 2020

    I appose the additional pumping stations and facilities and ask the ICC not to approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. The probability of spills is just too great for a material for which my state is just a conduit. All risk and very little reward. Scotty R Dossett
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because...

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Tracy Goldberg
  • March 3, 2020

    ICC, hear us out! Please DENY the permit for expanding pumping stations/facilities proposed by Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company! There is more than enough evidence demonstrating WHY this project, if approved, would be DETRIMENTAL to the environment, public health, wild and aquatic life, and ALL the systems that are INTERCONNECTED, no matter how small. Needless to say, the COSTS and CONSEQUENCES will only dig us deeper into the hole humanity is in!

    The ICC's mission is to SUPPORT "reliable, safe and least-cost public utility services"--this project does NOT abide by those VALUES!
    Roshelle Rodriguez
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it is the wrong direction needed to address the existential threat of climate change. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    This pipeline, from beginning to end, is an attack on life, indigenous peoples rights, and on the planets future. The only moral thing to do is to say no.

    We all need to priorities life over profits, production and consumption.
    Aaron Joseph Hughes
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to continue being built. It’s negative impact on our environment and irreversible damage it will most certainly cause is not something we can tolerate in these changes times of our climate and ecosystems. Daniel Guerrero
  • March 3, 2020

    Increased capacity of these pipelines is unnecessary. It will create a glut of unwanted, dirty fossil fuel energy. The world is transitioning towards renewables. Illinois has, so far, committed to transitioning to 25 percent renewable energy. This year, we may be committing to 100 percent clean energy with the passage of the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a bill written with input from hundreds of constituents. Other states are following suit along with us while businesses and consumers are increasingly seeking clean energy. If there’s high demand for their product, they can raise their prices instead. The era of oil and gas is over and we need to act on behalf of our citizens to protect our health and safety while assuring our state’s natural resources aren’t jeopardized. It’s risky, it’s unnecessary and it’s unwanted. We need to prioritize long-term, necessary goals and that’s renewables only. Jennifer Linton
  • March 3, 2020

    This pipeline and it’s expansion are not only a waste of money but destructive to our environment,NO more money to finance the destruction of our environment,KEEP THE OIL IN THE GROUND! Robert J Fassbender
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. In addition, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change Angel Robles
  • March 3, 2020

    The continued use of pipeline, truck and rail transport for crude oil and LNG is increasingly problematic. While this continues our use of fossil fuel use it also delays the real emergency transition to wind, solar and other renewables. As an environmental scientist I was able to examine and work on projects dealing with pipeline and energy transport problems, spills and cleanups. I don't have confidence in the proper maintenance of these transport methods in terms of public safety. These systems are not properly monitored for safety or leakage.

    My reading of the current fracking industry also points to rapid declines in output and future supply. If this is true, and I believe that it is, then we face a very uncertain future by continue to be blinded by the petroleum industry's fuzzy and inaccurate statistics.

    All of this is why I am opposed to expansion of this industry. We should be moving asap to wind and solar with proper energy infrastructure in the electrical grid.

    Sincerely,

    Mark T. Lundholm
    Mark T. Lundholm
  • March 3, 2020

    STOP DESTROYING THE EARTH! we do not need more gasoline use. WE NEED CLEAN ENERGY! Politicians should stop taking corporate bribes to keep the oil industry in business! If we keep relying on oil we will all die from climate change complications. Not just the poor people of the world. ALL LIFE ON EARTH WILL CEASE TO EXIST IF WE KEEP DESTROYING THE PLANET FOR FINANCIAL GAIN! that means you too! Whomever is reading this... I will, our families, communities, everyone who works for this company and the CEOs. MONEY MEANS NOTHING WITHOUT A PLANET TO LIVE ON! Meredith R Brunner
  • March 3, 2020

    I vehemently oppose this permit. The pipeline creates additional risks for our population, fauna and flora, and all natural resources. The risks for the majority of us (stakeholders) are not worth the benefits for a minority (shareholders). It's time to get ready to the transition to renewable energies, not to transport oil around. Thank you for caring for the citizens you are representing. sylvie bendier
  • March 3, 2020

    We must look for more ways to increase renewable resources, not add on to existing old ways of energy that are harmful to the environment. We need to transition away from these outdated processes to look to the future as a way to protect our public safety, our health, the health of the planet and the resources of our great grandchildren. I can't even understand why this is still even an option. Don't let short-term monetary greed cloud judgment. Act responsibly for today and our future!!!!! Nicole Petrich
  • March 3, 2020

    I have grown up in Chicago my whole life. It is no secret that neighborhoods, predominately black and brown, are already at risk due to fossil fuel projects. I oppose the Dakota Access pipeline because it is time we move towards renewable energy and stop poisoning innocent people for profit. Kyrsten Jovita Bilkey
  • March 3, 2020

    I am writing to express my opposition to 19-0673 - Dakota access. This pipeline is a project this state and our country DOES NOT NEED. In the absence of federal leadership on climate change, Illinois and other states need to take up the battle to stop increased greenhouse gasses. We owe this to our children and future generations. Thank you. Kevin Carroll
  • March 3, 2020

    We do not need more dirty energy! Please stop this project! This insanity has to stop! Martin Wentzell
  • March 3, 2020

    Please don’t put Illinois land and water at risk by allowing the pipeline to flow through the state. We don’t need another pipeline that services a commodity that needs to be and by necessity will be replaced by renewable sources of energy. Nancy Joseph
  • March 3, 2020

    No more pipelines! They inevitably damage local ecosystems and spills can destroy habitats. No more pipelines, clean energy now! Amelia Ryan
  • March 3, 2020

    No expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline! Protect our land from spills! Brad DeZur
  • March 3, 2020

    No more pipelines! We need clean energy now - think of your children and grandchildren's future! Fossil fuels are killing the planet. We need less oil, not more. Amelia Ryan
  • March 3, 2020

    I unequivocally oppose the construction of two new pumping stations and the upgrade of a third that will allow the flow of crude oil to almost double in the Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC. First the extraction of heavy tar sands involves heavy use of energy and significantly harmful greenhouse gas emissions in the process. Second,I am concerned about the land and water quality under and near the existing Dakota Access pipeline through the route. With the leaks, resulting in thousands of gallons a tar sands oil--events that commonly do not make headlines--any expansion of the pipeline absolutely should be opposed. We do not should not expose lands in Illinois to continued use and potential abuse of tar sands pipeline expansions.

    As a state, we need to take a stand against corporations and businesses continuing to extort the land and residencies of people to promote and expand the use of fossil fuels. It is time, past the time, to walk away from efforts to increase production of them, especially Tar Sands! Thank you. Mother of three.
    Laura Derks
  • March 3, 2020

    I also oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline as a threat to drinking water, groundwater, and the health of Illinois residents.
    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.
    Former Senator Mark Kirk understood the dangers of pipelines with toxic contents when he opposed the pipeline from Indiana to Wisconsin that crossed state lines in Illinois under Lake Michigan.
    It is high time that we started thinking long term in our policy making and consider the health of our children and grandchildren instead of the quick making of profit, for out-of-state interests.
    Tom Konar
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not approve the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. We need to move towards a more-sustainable energy system, and move away from a fossil-fuel-based system. Marcus Ricci
  • March 3, 2020

    There is so much wrong with allowing DAPL to course through Illinois, one has difficulty picking the most salient reasons this would be a blunder.

    1. The pipeline will not serve us because fossil fuels must be SOON relegated to the production of consumer products only — none for fuel, none for electricity production or any other direct burning. And the product list must eliminate single-use plastics, especially plastic bags, one-use greater-than-No.5 plastic food containers, planned obsolescence of bottles and laundry baskets — I’m sure you get my drift. ALL STYROFOAM MUST BE ELIMINATED, for example, take-outs, drink cups, and packing materials including shipment of valuable instruments and contraptions necessary for modern living. We have to find a non-fossil substitute for styrofoam blocks.

    2. Pipelines always leak — and in the places where the population leasts expects it (didn’t even know the pipeline was there) and has the least ability to deal with it. A list of pipeline leaks is beyond the scope of this or any other negative comment about DAPL. Leaks aren’t trained for, as was shown by the leak into a Michigan river near Kalamazoo last decade. The people trained to watch the pressure gage, when they saw the pressure go down, ramped up the pressure two times, making sure the spill was huge. At that spill it was finally decided more environmental damage would be done in cleaning up the last bit than leaving it in place.

    3. Pipelines always encroach on sacred territory (isn’t all territory sacred?). Remember the Notre Dame fire when those who cared rallied to donate for rebuilding? Multiply the dismay of the Notre Dame “Stakeholders” by 1000 times (a wild guess on my part) when our indigenous sisters and brothers see their sacred sites torn up by heartless industrialists for a pipeline. Capitalists who look at a delicate ecosystem and see only dollars, dollars, dollars are to be pitied. (Some people look at beautiful Lake Michigan and see a toilet where they can defecate their industrial waste — For Free!!)

    4. It’s not going to pay. We have to transform our economy in the next very few years to renewable sources of energy. THIS IS NECESSARY. The pipeline will not be useful for its intended lifetime.

    5. The pipeline is costing lives and livelihoods. Tourism is an industry that supports families in the long term — for generations. When it is destroyed by an industrial installation, nobody counts the locals who have lost their way of life and their employment.

    6. Pipelines lead to “man camps”. Besides the alienation caused by man camps, the local population is changed and offended by them.

    I could go on, but this is enough.
    Jan Boudart
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose any expansion of gas or oil pipelines or fracking. I absolutely oppose any public funds to be spent on such expenditures and I oppose any land appropriation to support such measures. Government time, effort, and money should be spent on increasing access to renewable energy - solar and wind. Investment must NOT be made to protect or expand fossil fuels Naomi Leighton
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose development of the Dakota Access Pipeline, or its ongoing existence. At a time when Climate Damage is an existential threat to the planet we must radically decrease the use of fossil fuels, not increase them. Further, this pipeline has been proved to leak in numbers of places, so its expansion poses an immediate threat to the health and safety of many Illinois residents. Rev. Taigen Dan Leighton
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline- please deny their expansion permit. We need to be moving away from extractive fossil fuel industries that pollute and destroy the environment, including communities, at every stage from extraction, transport, refinement to end use. Expanding and building more pipelines will only extend the time it will take for us to transition to clean, renewable sources. Indigenous communities have been on the front lines of this fight, and we need to follow their lead and make structural change, in addition to recognizing their sovereignty. Becky Lyons
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota access pipeline.

    Please do not approve this.
    Josh Clark
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline. Protect indigenous rights. Noam Hasak-Lowy
  • March 3, 2020

    This pipeline has already had failures. The company--and the industry behind it-- shouldn't be rewarded for repeated incidents of incompetence and bad faith. Elisabeth N.
  • March 3, 2020

    I hope this Dakota Pipeline stops. You the govenments and any powerful politician are responsible for our climate change and everything bad that is happening around us. Whatever happened to keeping our families safe from harmful chemicals. Little by little your killing our families and our animals. I want prairie farms to come back to Illinois. And want our state to be the cleanses of them all. But your not making this possible with you outrageous and selfish project. Bri Velasco
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline! Alicia McGhee
  • March 3, 2020

    I am opposed to this petition. We should not be creating more fossil fuel infrastructure. We need to choose energy sources that do not contribute to global warming or environmental degradation. Brent Barker
  • March 3, 2020

    Please do not approve the permit to install additional pumping stations for the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. Pumping more oil through the same pipe will lead to certain rupture. A rupture will spill oil that cannot be cleaned up and will affect the land and water for our communities downstate. All of this risk and clean-up costs will be paid by Illinois taxpayers.

    The Dakota Access Pipeline terminates in Illinois where it connects to another network of pipelines that go down to the Gulf Coast. Therefore all of the oil will be destined for export, for the profit of Energy Transfer Partners. Nothing about this pipeline benefits Illinois consumers.

    Lastly, this pipeline is intended to oil produced by fracking in North Dakota. Expanding this pipeline will incentivize an expansion of fracking there with all of its negative environmental impacts. Our climate is already warming. We cannot afford anymore acceleration of fossil fuel production which will add more greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane to the atmosphere. The city of Chicago just declared a Climate Emergency due to the risk of weather-related illnesses and the flood-related damage due to rising Lake Michigan levels. Climate impacts m Ean that The Dakota Access Pipeline expansion must not be approved.
    Ivy Czekanski
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the North Dakota Access Pipeline. The reasoning for my decision is that even though the pipeline allows for more jobs to be created and allows for the transportation of crude oil to be streamlined and more efficient, I think that the pipeline has too many negatives and the one major one being the danger of an oil spill. An oil spill of the pipeline would not only affect the wildlife of the surrounding environment it also as a possibility of leaking into water wells and the public drinking water. This reason only would be a reason for me not to build and expand this pipeline. I would also argue instead of putting money into fossil fuels we should look into renewable energy and alternatives that would lower carbon emission instead of increasing them. Energy sources that are not used to the max potential such as solar, wind, and water are just few that come to mind. Shrey Patel
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipe line in the name of nature conservation, moving beyond fossil fuels, and the safety of citizens and wildlife. Don’t fucking do it guys. Abbey Francis
  • March 3, 2020

    I am in opposition of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the use of this massive amount of oil will create a burden of emissions comparable to 20 million vehicles which will only further aggravate climate change, putting us in a very dire position. Michelle Curtin
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Sheryl Hansen
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I believe that the pipeline would create many jobs and other opportunities, but I also think that with this pipeline expansion it would create a possibility of a major disaster. This disaster would, of course, be an oil leak. An oil leak would cause not only major harm to the wildlife of the surrounding area it would also have a possibility of leaking into nearby water sources and that could start to affect public tap water. This possibility of endangering public water is just one of the many reasons that this pipeline is dangerous and should not be expanded. I also believe that instead of funding money into fossil fuel development, we should start to look into funding renewable energy development and try to lower carbon emissions instead of increasing them. Shrey Patel
  • March 3, 2020

    Our water and soil are already contaminated! We the people oppose your pipeline! You have killed enough plants and animals to fill your pockets. We don't want your man camps, and we do not want your oil! Karen Bell
  • March 3, 2020

    I adamantly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline! These pipelines are ticking bombs, and as we’ve seen, broken pipelines result in disastrous environmental catastrophes! Remember how they said the Titanic was unsinkable? Exactly! Your fancy commercials are propaganda, and anyone with half a brain can see right through them! NOT in Illinois, or anywhere else for that matter! Elizabeth Huntley Roberts
  • March 3, 2020

    Do not allow the dangerous, unsafe Dakota Access Pipeline to expand. It should not exist at all! Beverly Ann Conroy
  • March 3, 2020

    please vote down this pipeline expansion that poses environmental risks to farmland and safe drinking water supplies across numerous states.
    and really...shouldn't we be putting our resources into renewable sources of energy?
    thank you for your time.
    cathryn gran
  • March 3, 2020

    "I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Spills that the IL voters and taxpayers will be liable for. Our future is at stake and allowing the pipeline expansion would be lighting the match on our climate emergency. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Do not allow the pipeline expansion. catherine gearhartschinske
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose to expand the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is a detriment to the entire Indigenous population and the last thing anyone needs is contaminated water just to poison the rest of the living creatures. Catrina Roberts
  • March 3, 2020

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Rob Leadaman
  • March 3, 2020

    This will create unnecessary risk to the environment and should not be approved! Dean
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I opposed it when the Standing Rock Sioux and other Native Tribes banded together to try and save their land and water from inevitable oil spills. Contamination of water and land in the name of profit must end. The irresponsible management of this pipeline and repeated spills as a result is a fair indication of how it will operate in Illinois. Thank you for your consideration. Nancy J. Tikalsky
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose building the Dakota Access Pipeline. Our aquifers and waters of Illinois are far too valuable and irreplaceable to be placed at risk from an inevitable spill from this pipeline. It is especially unnecessary because this pipeline will deliver oil for export. Keep the oil in the ground. Deny this pipeline and help us build a more beautiful, healthy and safe environment for everyone’s future. June Keibler
  • March 3, 2020

    I and Elgin Green Groups 350.org oppose doubling the Dakota Access pipeline.
    In addition to the climate emergency----
    Illinois will get the risk and ETCO gets the profits and it's mostly for export and MORE PROFIT for ETCO.
    Sandra Kaptain
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because there is no long term benefit to Illinoisians from this expansion.
    The risk of spills and the increase of emissions exacerbating the rate of climate disruption make this expansion unthinkable.
    Audrey Aabey
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Davila Access Pipeline. It greatly increases risk of oil spills and its moving us in the wrong direction in terms of dependence on fossil fuels. This is not something to play with as it impacts us all Ana Mercado
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is a dangerous and unnecessary project which puts our communities, land, and water at great risk. Janice Figman
  • March 3, 2020

    I would ask the Commissioners and the Commission staff to take a moment and consider the things you most love in this world. your children? your favorite stretch of beach? a particular thing you own? Just pause, for a moment, and think about them.

    Know that this ruling is about those things. Catastrophic climate change is here. If we continue extracting and unnecessarily using fossil fuels like the fuel in DAPL we run a very real risk of damaging or destroying everything we love. Our children's futures are already guaranteed to be deeply effected by climate change. Every natural ecosystem we love is already guaranteed to be stressed by climate change. Every part of our global system of goods will be severely tested by the coming sustained, catastrophic shocks that will be caused by climate change.

    If we are to get on a path to change the direction of climate change we need to get our global emissions to at least 45 percent lower than our 2010 levels by 2030. This is what the science demands. There is no way we do that if we continue to invest in new projects like DAPL or doubling the capacity of our current projects. We need to immediately stop investing in new capacity and extraction.

    We are on the verge of a massive transition to a global economy powered by renewable, electric energy. Fossil fuels are no longer cost competitive. Every major auto manufacturer has ceased spending R and D capital on the internal combustion engine. The Commission is responsible for safeguarding not only our environment but our economy here in Illinois. The Dakota Access Pipeline, and the jobs associated with it, is a technology of the past. Do the right thing. Look to the future. Turn your back on the past. Do not double the capacity of this pipeline. Protect what you most love.

    Sincerely
    David O'Donnell
    David ODonnell
  • March 3, 2020

    Spills happen. During a mere 2 years of operation, DAPL has had at least 12 spills. Increasing the operating pressure of the pipeline inevitably will increase the risk of more spills, thereby endangering our drinking water supply. It would be both reckless and unethical to risk the wellbeing of our children and grandchildren, not to mention the flora and fauna of our region and the livability of our state, to oblige an industry that must be stopped altogether in the foreseeable future if humanity is to survive. Kathleen Hamill
  • March 3, 2020

    “I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline Expansion. The people of Illinois assume all the risk and receive no benefit.” teece bowman
  • March 3, 2020

    I definitively oppose the expansion of Dakota Access and oppose it's expansion in Illinois! This does not benefit Illinois, America, or Americans. In fact, it greatly harms our environment and threatens our water. Oil pipelines spill. We need to invest in clean energy. Melissa Gray
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because;
    -Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills;
    -Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change;
    -Evidence indicates that Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company plan to export this crude oil, so Illinois takes on all of the risk while these oil companies receive all of the benefit.
    Ann Chang
  • March 3, 2020

    Climate change is an existential threat and expanding pipelines now is incredibly reckless. Do not expand the Dakota Access Pipeline. Colin Young
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline installation. Life should be valued over profit Delaney
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This is a dangerous and unnecessary project which puts our communities, land, and water at great risk. It devastates me to see how money Trumps common sense!

    Gayle Donohue
    Gayle Donohue
  • March 3, 2020

    Taking public land for business is just wrong, but very Trump like. We as human beings have the right to our natural beauty without the blight of pipelines And the animals who dwell there have the right to remain in nature, the way it is meant to be. I feel this is a wasted effort, because money always wins out in the end, but sttill must protest Rochelle L Wasserman
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of DAPL (Dakota Access Pipeline) because these companies are reckless and do not care if these oil pipes end up leaking and harming the people around them. They just want money. Don’t give that to them. Chloe Adamo
  • March 3, 2020

    We do not need another pipe line. Eugene WICKHAM
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline. The danger to our water and environment is not acceptable. Rosalie Johnson
  • March 3, 2020

    It's appalling that we have to be fighting such a measure now.

    We know that corporations, despite the Supreme Court's reckless ruling in Citizens United granting them free speech protections, have no regard for the well-being of their "fellow" citizens or the earth which they do, after all, also inhabit.

    Norma Field
    Norma Field
  • March 3, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities. I also oppose the existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. The Dakota Access Pipeline should be dismantled, and the state of Illinois should not cooperate with corporate interests that put all forms of life in danger. The Illinois Commerce Commission should listen to the Standing Rock Sioux community instead of corporations profiting from exploitation. Respecting land rights and protecting water, our most precious resource for life, were not priorities for Dakota Access LLC, but they should be priorities in the State of Illinois. The pipeline has already leaked 168 gallons near Patoka, IL April 23rd, 2017. As a commission, you state that your mission is "to balance the interests of consumers and utilities to ensure adequate, efficient, reliable, safe and least-cost public utility services, while promoting the development of an effectively competitive energy supplier market." The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says we have less than a decade to change our patterns of consumption and our reliance on fossil fuels before life on this planet becomes unlivable. The United States is about 4 percent of the world population, but uses over a quarter of the world's resources. Increasing the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline is a step in the wrong direction. The benefits of property tax dollars from Dakota Access and the creation of jobs mean nothing if this planet becomes inhabitable. Our culture's addiction to fossil fuels must be stopped. The least you can do is not increase the supply. People can not be consumers if they are dead. I urge you as a commission to courageously act. Use the power you have for the greater common good. Remember Illinois' future generations as you make your decision. Molly Greening
  • March 3, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline because it will increase emissions and climate change. It will also have a high risk of polluting our ground water. The company will make money by causing harm to Illinois. elizabeth kruder
  • March 3, 2020

    COMMENTS OPPOSING THE EXPANSION OF THE DAKOTA ACCESS PIPE LINE IN ILLINOIS
    ICC DOCKET NUMBER 19-0673
    Prepared by David A. Kraft, Director
    March 3, 2020

    On behalf of the over 850 members of our Organization, we wish to register our opposition to the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) in and through Illinois, for the following reasons--

    1. Water is Life. The existing pipeline has already threatened water several times. Illinois, an agricultural state, does not need this threat to the well-being of its citizens, the environment, and its economic future.

    2. Whatever has already happened is therefore possible. The existing DAPL and other pipelines have already experienced several substantial leaks, casting extreme and very realistic doubts about the safety of this project, the ability of the owners to manage it properly, and the government agencies to regulate it.

    3. The existing DAPL is already being built in violation of the treaty rights of the Standing Rock Band of the Lakota Sioux Nation--

    “The position of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is that the Dakota Access Pipeline violates Article II of the Fort Laramie Treaty, which guarantees the "undisturbed use and occupation" of reservation lands surrounding the proposed location of the pipeline. In 2015 the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, operating as a sovereign nation , passed a resolution regarding the pipeline stating that "the Dakota Access Pipeline poses a serious risk to the very survival of our Tribe and ... would destroy valuable cultural resources."

    Any approval of expansion of this pipeline is by extension aiding and abetting this illegal activity.

    4. Peaceful and legal protest against DAPL by the Standing Rock Sioux and the many national and international supporters and allies who came to Standing Rock to oppose the DAPL were met by deliberately violent and at times illegal use of force on the part of the State of North Dakota, local police and private security firms. Approval of this DAPL docket would be by extension a statement that the Illinois Commerce Commission condones the illegal use of violent force to override the legal rights of peaceful protesters in favor of the illegal economic gain of the pipeline owners through violent force – continuing the century old pattern of violent seizure of Indigenous lands for economic gain.

    5. Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker and numerous members of the Illinois Legislature have stated that it is the intention of the State to move to 100-percent renewable energy and eliminate fossil fuel use by 2050. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has announced a climate emergency due to fossil fuel abuse, and stated that at best humanity has a decade remaining to radically alter energy use and eliminate fossil fuels to prevent the initiation of potentially irreversible climate disruption, some of which Illinois has already experienced.

    Approving the DAPL runs diametrically opposed to both intended State policy, not to mention human intelligence and self-survival instinct.

    Thank you for consideration of these views. Please deny any and all future DAPL permits.
    David A. Kraft, Director, Nuclear Energy Information Service
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Joshua Fox
  • March 4, 2020

    Oil will soon become less used as we convert to solar electric and wind energy. So why add to oil pipeline that will soon become unnecessary. And pipelines create spills It;s not a question of if there will be a spill, it's just when. So save $, save environment and save the cost for cleanups and stop the nonsense. Andy Heller
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline. The expansion will only continue the futile expansion of dependence on destructive fossil fuel resources rather than acknowledging that the damage to the environment is FAR more costly than transitioning to already cheaper renewables. Burning all of existing assets of this industry will be the DEATH of the earth.
    The volume of oil proposed in this project will produce emissions equivalent to 15 1,000megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, exacerbating the already too high levels of CO2 in the air and climate change. WE MUST preserve inhabitable conditions for out children.
    Also, the oil is intended to be exported. Why should Illinois hold all the risk and environmental loss for no gain, but rather for profit for DA/ETCO? PLEASE reject this plan!
    Nancy J Bennett
  • March 4, 2020

    I ask that the Illinois Commerce Commission deny the permit application submitted by Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company. The proposed expansion would double the volume from 570,000 to 1.1 million barrels a day. The added horsepower would result in oil being transported through the line at extreme velocity of 15 feet per second greatly increasing the 'worst case' oil spill event. Energy Transfer has stood out as having the worst safety record in the oil and gas industry. If DAPL capacity expansion is approved, it will set the stage for yet another pipeline spill with devastating consequences for the citizens of Illinois. I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies get all of the benefit. Stephanie Bilenko
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not approve the doubling of the capacity of the Dakota Access pipeline by allowing the construction of additional pumping stations in Illinois. Since opening in 2017, this pipeline has already had ten leaks. With doubling capacity, the amount of oil spilled in a rupture would be significantly increased.
    Illinois has some of the richest farmland on Earth. Why would we want to put that at risk for the profits of private corporations? There is also every indication that most of this oil is destined for export. How is that a benefit to our state?
    The climate crisis is with us now and primarily caused by the combustion of fossil fuels. We need to invest in renewable energy quickly, not the technology of the last century which this pipeline represents.
    Mary Griswold
  • March 4, 2020

    I need to register my opposition to the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) in and through Illinois. The pipeline is largely unwanted by any inhabitant of the land that it is proposed to pass through or be near. The pipeline and its contents threaten numerous natural resources, while providing one that is already largely easily obtainable by the citizens from other sources. Pipeline infrastructure and technology has already been shown to be prone to leakage and outright breakage, resulting in disasters at levels of human, animal, and land-level health. The pipeline and its contents are quickly becoming obsolete, as many governments, businesses, and nonprofits have proposed to be fossil-fuel-free by midcentury. This indicates the purpose of the pipeline to be for short-term profit, as well as profit from sources other than those whose land it harms; those whose lands and livelihoods are impacted by the pipeline will derive no improvement in their lives from it. I also oppose the expansion of the pipeline for the many other ethical and legal arguments that other commenters have mentioned. Robert Stanton
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. We know that the pipeline route runs from the northwestern North Dakota Bakken and Three Forks sites. It starts in Stanley, North Dakota, and travels in a southeastward direction to end at the oil tank farm near Patoka, Illinois. It crosses 50 counties in four states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois). In particular, in Illinois, the 177-mile (285 km) route traverses 12 counties [REF#1, REF#2]. One of the main fears is that the Missouri River might become contaminated in an event of a spill or leak, contaminating a source of drinking and irrigation water that millions of people depend on. On top of that, it would disturb the land, tiling, soil erosion, and soil quality.
    The supporters might say that the expansion will bring a few new jobs but to be honest, we should look at some numbers - according to [REF#3], the pipeline is estimated to have created 51 permanent jobs across the 4 states. Also there are more job possibilities in renewable energy domain and that should be the main priority.

    [REF#1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline
    [REF#2] "Dakota Access Pipeline Facts". Dakota Access, LLC.
    [REF#3] JUHASZ, ANTONIA (September 12, 2018). "DEATH ON THE DAKOTA ACCESS". Pacific Standard.
    Subhajit Sengupta
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. We know that the pipeline route runs from the northwestern North Dakota Bakken and Three Forks sites. It starts in Stanley, North Dakota, and travels in a southeastward direction to end at the oil tank farm near Patoka, Illinois. It crosses 50 counties in four states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois). In particular, in Illinois, the 177-mile (285 km) route traverses 12 counties [REF#1, REF#2]. One of the main fears is that the Missouri River might become contaminated in an event of a spill or leak, contaminating a source of drinking and irrigation water that millions of people depend on. On top of that, it would disturb the land, tiling, soil erosion, and soil quality.
    The supporters might say that the expansion will bring a few new jobs but to be honest, we should look at some numbers - according to [REF#3], the pipeline is estimated to have created 51 permanent jobs across the 4 states. Also there are more job possibilities in renewable energy domain and that should be the main priority.

    [REF#1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline
    [REF#2] "Dakota Access Pipeline Facts". Dakota Access, LLC.
    [REF#3] JUHASZ, ANTONIA (September 12, 2018). "DEATH ON THE DAKOTA ACCESS". Pacific Standard.
    Subhajit Sengupta
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. We know that the pipeline route runs from the northwestern North Dakota Bakken and Three Forks sites. It starts in Stanley, North Dakota, and travels in a southeastward direction to end at the oil tank farm near Patoka, Illinois. It crosses 50 counties in four states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois). In particular, in Illinois, the 177-mile (285 km) route traverses 12 counties [REF1, REF2]. One of the main fears is that the Missouri River might become contaminated in an event of a spill or leak, contaminating a source of drinking and irrigation water that millions of people depend on. On top of that, it would disturb the land, tiling, soil erosion, and soil quality.
    The supporters might say that the expansion will bring a few new jobs but to be honest, we should look at some numbers - according to [REF3], the pipeline is estimated to have created 51 permanent jobs across the 4 states. Also there are more job possibilities in renewable energy domain and that should be the main priority.

    [REF1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline
    [REF2] "Dakota Access Pipeline Facts". Dakota Access, LLC.
    [REF3] JUHASZ, ANTONIA (September 12, 2018). "DEATH ON THE DAKOTA ACCESS". Pacific Standard.
    Subhajit Sengupta
  • March 4, 2020

    PLEASE do not allow the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline.

    Even if there are short-term, economic incentives to expanding fossil-fuel energy projects in Illinois, there are extraordinary, long-term ecological impacts to our society's over-consumption of fossil fuels.

    Climate change is a national and global emergency. Take steps to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels.
    James H Johnson
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the pipeline, just as I opposed its original construction. I implore the governement to choose people over profits. Time is running out for our planet. Eliza Weber
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not approve the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. Pipelines always leak and this one has leaked multiple times. Companies usually respond poorly and are not held accountable for all of the damage they do. Much of the damage can’t be remediate. Victims’ efforts to enforce accountability pit individuals against multinational corporations. Lastly, we cannot allow further investment in massive fossil fuel infrastructure. Refuse this expansion. Susan Harney
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. We know that the pipeline route runs from the northwestern North Dakota Bakken and Three Forks sites. It starts in Stanley, North Dakota, and travels in a southeastward direction to end at the oil tank farm near Patoka, Illinois. It crosses 50 counties in four states (North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Illinois). In particular, in Illinois, the 177-mile (285 km) route traverses 12 counties [REF1, REF2]. One of the main fears is that the Missouri River might become contaminated in an event of a spill or leak, contaminating a source of drinking and irrigation water that millions of people depend on. On top of that, it would disturb the land, tiling, soil erosion, and soil quality.
    The supporters might say that the expansion will bring a few new jobs but to be honest, we should look at some numbers - according to [REF3], the pipeline is estimated to have created 51 permanent jobs across the 4 states. Also there are more job possibilities in renewable energy domain and that should be the main priority.

    [REF1] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dakota_Access_Pipeline
    [REF2] Dakota Access Pipeline Facts. Dakota Access, LLC.
    [REF3] JUHASZ, ANTONIA (September 12, 2018). DEATH ON THE DAKOTA ACCESS. Pacific Standard.
    Subhajit Sengupta
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the pipeline. I am concerned about increased emissions, climate change, and groundwater pollution. This company should not be allowed to make money at the expense of Illinoisans and the planet. Please deny all expansion and future permits and dismantle the existing pipeline. Consider the future of Illinois and the planet and make the right decision. KELLY STOCK
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not increase the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois.
    It leaks as is. It already leaked in our state (Patoka, IL).
    I believe that most people in Illinois are opposed to the DAPL in the first place. We are definitely opposed to increasing capacity and risking more environmental disasters.

    Even those who support it call it a temporary and transitional source of energy. Please don't allow Illinois to be subject to the potential of significant environmental damage for some temporary scheme profiting oil companies.
    Edwin A Pliml
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the pipeline. I am concerned about increased emissions, climate change, and groundwater pollution. This company should not be allowed to make money at the expense of Illinoisans and the planet. Please deny all expansion and future permits and dismantle the existing pipeline. Consider the future of Illinois and the planet and make the right decision. Lilia arroyo flores
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose expanding the Dakota Access Pipeline because it increases the risk of a leak to Illinois and it doesn't help us move forward on clean energy goals. Julie Strauss
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not vote to continue the Dakota Pipeline!
    Thank you
    Margaret Smithe
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the pipeline. I am concerned about increased emissions, climate change, and groundwater pollution. This company should not be allowed to make money at the expense of Illinoisans and the planet. Please deny all expansion and future permits and dismantle the existing pipeline. Consider the future of Illinois and the planet and make the right decision. Rick
  • March 4, 2020

    We do not need more pipelines or pumping stations. We do not need fossil fuels. Water is Life, ecological conservation is crucial and green energy is critical. REJECT DAKOTA ACCESS PIPELINE M Wines
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois because the risk of a spill or leak overshadows potential monetary benefit. Think about the repercussions of 1 million barrels of oil spilling into the most fertile soil in the country, especially to the agricultural industry. This is not a good idea, and it lowers the incentive to pursue alternative energy. Olivia Clausen
  • March 4, 2020

    We don’t need the pipeline. It’s time to work hard on alternative and pro-planet options! Marie Ara
  • March 4, 2020

    We do not need this pipeline. We are already sending the oil we have overseas, The oil does not help the U.S. Bettina Perillo
  • March 4, 2020

    Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker and numerous members of the Illinois Legislature have stated that it is the intention of the State to move to 100-percent renewable energy and eliminate fossil fuel use by 2050. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has announced a climate emergency due to fossil fuel abuse, and stated that at best humanity has a decade remaining to radically alter energy use and eliminate fossil fuels to prevent the initiation of potentially irreversible climate disruption, some of which Illinois has already experienced.

    Approving the DAPL runs diametrically opposed to both intended State policy, not to mention human intelligence and self-survival instinct.

    I am in opposition to expanding the pipeline capacity.
    William Koehl
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose expanding the pipeline and its operations. Having the oil pipeline there at all is already horrible, but expanding it would just be a bigger slap in the face to the Standing Rock Band of the Lakota Sioux Nation. The pipeline already violates the Fort Laramie Treaty, and instead of making amends for its presence, corrupt lawmakers want to expand the pipeline. Any reasonable citizen from either political party recognizes that, morally, this pipeline is, at best, ignorant, and at worst, yet another instance of the United States' utter disregard and lack of care for indigenous peoples. Since our country's inception, we have over and over again committed crimes against our indigenous peoples. It is unacceptable that not only do we avoid reparations for our sins, but we CONTINUE to treat indigenous peoples and their lands poorly. Do not expand this pipeline. If Illinois allows this to happen, I will be more ashamed of my state than I already am. Sarah Lev
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not increase the capacity of the pipeline, for the following reasons --

    1. This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater.
    2. The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3. The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Sara Shacter
  • March 4, 2020

    The Climate Crisis is real.

    We need to keep fossil fuels in the ground--we don't need them and we don't want them.

    The company transporting the fuels has already had a spill. Please.

    Let's not feed the wolf (our constant need for more and more fossil fuels. Let's conserve, move to renewable.

    Let's save the planet for another day.....
    Mark P Krivcheina
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose any additional pumping stations or pumping facilities on he existing certified pipelines in the State of Illinois. My reasons are plentiful and this is the crux of the matter. We are in a time when lessening our dependence on fossil fuels should be the goal. We do not need more oil (going to other countries btw) passing through pipelines that will always pose the danger of rupture. We should be looking for more ways to clean our waterways, not present more ways to pollute them.

    I urge you to reject this petition and work instead to create more sustainable options for the sake of the future of the State of Illinois.

    Thank you.
    LOIS K PHILLIPS
  • March 4, 2020

    I just wrote a thoughtful message and it disappeared. In summary, please oppose the expansion of the pipeline. Doing so will help to protect Illinois’ unique ecology. We don’t need to help oil companies with such a large risk to the the state and people of Illinois. Thank you. Rebecca John
  • March 4, 2020

    1. This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater.
    2. The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3. The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Lisa Gilley
  • March 4, 2020

    We are in an environmental crisis. We're facing the 6th mass extinction, and it's caused by us humans and specifically by the consumption of fossil fuels. Expanding and investing in fossil fuels is exactly the wrong direction. Please consider our children and future generations and do NOT install additional pumping facilities/stations. It's critical to our future that our leaders start to LEAD in this issue. Matt Cardoni
  • March 4, 2020

    My family opposes the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the capacity also doubles the possibility for spills or leaks from such an expansion. Please consider Illinois's residents, not an oil company whose goal is profiting from actions that contribute to our global warming crisis. We know this pipeline well; in the summer of 2017 we watched the trenching advance across our county. The pipe lies 1000 feet from our house. The company sent letters to landowners about pipeline spills caused by uninformed digging. Please - let's not permit even bigger quantities to flow. Marla Gursh
  • March 4, 2020

    The expansion of the DAPL would be an action that ignores the bigger picture of what it means. Many things have claimed to be super, or very rare, yet, those events are often the most disastrous due to the negligence of those in charge. It is one thing to say that the pressure will be managed, or that a possible spill will be controlled effectively and immediately, but unless that situation comes to fruition or is practiced, I have my doubts. The spill could possibly harm animals and birds, and there is no recourse if these creatures are severely damaged; a vital part of our biodiversity could be adversely affected. Additionally, there are moral and precedent issues with this expansion. No matter how vital to the economy, it is my belief that resources should never trump the lives of others. To deal with higher gasoline costs is worth it if it means that we start switching to more renewable energy, as then gasoline will hopefully dwindle or become obsolete. It is a dangerous precedent to say that, as a state, we value short run economic growth over long run environmental sustainability. To use protected native land to build an oil pipeline is just horrible and should be avoided at all costs, especially since these people have worked tirelessly to try to stop this in every way possible. This whole operation seems as if it is a company preying on the oil-centric economies of North and South Dakota, and Illinois doesn't need to follow suit. Matthew DiMillo
  • March 4, 2020

    For the sake of our children and grandchildren, it is time to transition from a fossil fuel based economy to one grounded in sustainable, affordable renewable energy that produces thousands of jobs for the citizens of Illinois. Climate Change is settled science. It's time to be a true patriot and heed the moral imperative to stop subsidizing and supporting the fossil fuel industry which seeks only short-term financial gain at the expense of the health and well being for the citizens of the great State of Illinois. I strongly oppose 19-0673 - Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC's Joint Petition for an Order under Section 8-503 of the Public Utilities Act for authority to install additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the State of Illinois. Michaael Terrien
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for several reasons, firstly the increased tons of oil that are going to be pumped at higher velocities will be putting the nearby community at risk for safety (there's higher chance of the pipeline's rupture), thus rendering it an economic and political risk as well. And of course, it is taxing on our environment as well. We are in an age where we do not have the luxury of using up more natural resources, or harming the land that we do have at our disposal. It is estimated that greenhouse emissions will total about 20 million cars, and I ask too, what does the future hold? Finally, it greatly undermines progress made towards restoring relations with previously neglected groups of Native Americans. For centuries, the American government has been resettling tribes and promising land, and then taking it away for reasons morally unbecoming. Now is the time to demonstrate changing ideals. Please consider the following arguments before making this decisions. It truly is an issue that strikes to heart. Jackie Samandas
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose expanding pumping stations and facilities for the Dakota Access Pipeline because
    1. This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater.
    2. The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3. The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Catherine Maxwell
  • March 4, 2020

    Please do not approve the expansion of Illinois' portion of the pumping facilities. The company involved has an unsatisfactory safety record and the risks of an accident will be borne by Illinois citizens while the oil itself will, as I understand it, be sold elsewhere.

    Please do NOT approve this dangerous expansion.

    aaron freeman
    Aaron Freeman
  • March 4, 2020

    I would to express my opposition to the increase in capacity of the Dakota access pipeline.
    The company monitoring the system has a bad track record regarding safety and leaks.
    Illinois puts up all the risk ( to our water and land) and reaps no benefit. And most important, this digs us deeper into a commitment to fossil fuels which are literally destroying our planet.
    Thank you.
    seth marcus
  • March 4, 2020

    Please vote no.
    This will only lead to more fossil fuel consumption.
    The company in charge of monitoring this pipeline has a lousy track record.
    The risk/benefit ratio does not add up for Illinois residents. Its our land And water with the majority of the oil exported.
    Nancy pepe
  • March 4, 2020

    I write to express my opposition to Joint Petition 19-0673. Please do not execute the Order for installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in Illinois in order to accommodate the expansion of Dakota Access Pipeline. The resources and time that would be spent on this project, both by the Illinois government and its departments as well as the company who wishes to execute the expansion, would be better directed toward renewable energy research and expansion given the well-documented contribution that fossil fuels make to accelerating climate change. Catherine F Buescher
  • March 4, 2020

    Oh no you won’t, DAPL. Over our dead bodies will citizens allow more of this environmental catastrophe. We will not allow these insane, irresponsible profiteers free reign to destroy as they see fit. Ji Choe
  • March 4, 2020

    No more pipelines, please and thank you! Alice
  • March 4, 2020

    These pipelines put profit over people, wildlife and nature. They always leak, and pushing more oil thru these pipes puts more at risk, in pursuit of profit for a very small group of people. We need to protect the land, not pollute it. Teri Gidwitz
  • March 4, 2020

    Dakota Access pipeline should never have been run through the state of IL in the first place. It should NOT now have double capacity. This pipeline, and others, is a disaster and has already leaked. The issues with the environment and eminent domain rights make this pipeline a MUST NOT. I am against it as well as any other fossil fuel developments in this state and country. Chris Christensen
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills here in Illinois. Also, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. J. Havansek
  • March 4, 2020

    It's ridiculous this project is even being considered. It's worse than that. It threatens collective extinction for the sake of short term profits. Even capitalists can't enjoy their windfall profits without a sustaining ecoshere. Do not allow this boondoggle to proceed. Tracy McLellan
  • March 4, 2020

    I agree that the expansion of the pipeline would have monetary advantages but from a more ecocentrist perspective, doubling the oil production would put organisms nearby at risk. The more oil being produced the more likely there is to be an oil spill. For fur-bearing animals, their insulation ability would be stripped from them if there was an oil spill, and to the land surrounding the earth and water would be contaminated. For animals in general, being exposed to an oil spill will decrease reproductive rates, cause organ damage, among other issues. Although this expansion would help economically, it would be potentially dangerous for the environment. Kiara Angelique
  • March 4, 2020

    I agree that the expansion of the pipeline would be a financial benefit, but it is highly potentially harmful. Doubling the oil production will make the chance of an oil spill more likely to happen. If it does happen it will harm the organisms and the land around. For fur-bearing animals, their insulation on their fur will be diminished and they will be prone to hypothermia with no outer protection. For marine animals, benthic organisms will be suffocated as the oil floats to the bottom, fish and plankton will be poisoned as it is just toxic to them. For all animals in general, after being exposed to oil they will have lower reproduction rates, organ damage, and death. The spill effects not only the animals, but also the land surrounding. The land and water will have lasting damaging effects which will be hard to fix. Yes, it seems like a good idea to help boost oil production, but it could hurt the environment in very bad ways. Kiara Robinson
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose approving this proposal.

    1. This increase in capacity would lock us into consuming more fossil fuels when we need to be eliminating them for the sake of the earth's climate.
    2. Energy Transfer cannot be trusted to monitor the pipeline. It has a poor safety record, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3. The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Barbara C Hill
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose granting approval for the installation of additional pumping stations and facilities on the certificated pipelines in the state of Illinois because we should be reducing our use of fossil fuels overall, not expanding their use, and protecting the wildlife habitat from which the fuel is extracted, not enabling their destruction by the extraction industry. Illinois must make a stand for sustainability and oppose the request. Jeffery J Biss
  • March 4, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Pipeline Access. It is the wrong move and will only further put the environment, health, and safety of people at risk. Instead, every effort must go into the transformation to renewable energy supplies, everywhere, now, and by everyone who has the power to make decisions on behalf of the present generation and the children of the future. Hille Haker
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the pipeline because further investment in fossil fuels is investment in grave digging. Gray Rothkopf
  • March 4, 2020

    I think often of my nieces, who are less than three years old, and how they're going to be disappointed to realize that the reason they live at the beginning of the biggest disaster in human history is that the judges, lawyers, and other self-proclaimed leaders of our society decided that they would not like to do the things that could have prevented that very disaster. We have known for decades that we must stop digging up and burning fossil fuels, but we are all together making the choice to not only continue doing it, but to increase the quantity, and rate, and means by which we do it. I was under the impression that our country was a place that valued the new, the innovative, the daring solutions to enormous problems, but here we all are sitting around a table earnestly debating whether to double the capacity of some retrograde nonsense that will endanger the lives of our own families. Jeff Headrick
  • March 4, 2020

    Approving the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion would be a reckless move which would not only lead to spills and the poisoning of the land, water, and people of our state, but contribute towards worsening global climate change with massive consequences for our whole planet and especially it’s most marginalized. The time to divest from fossil fuels was yesterday. The time to invest in a viable future of sustainable energy and green jobs is now. We shouldn't even have to ask you to vote against this, but if you take the wrong side of history and vote in favor, you will bring shame and condemnation upon yourselves. Samuel Peiffer
  • March 4, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because there is evidence DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil. Illinois will be taking all the risks of having this in our state and yet won't receive any benefits. In addition this additional oil will lead to increased negative climate change effects. Janice Sanes
  • March 4, 2020

    please stop this pipeline all living things are at risk...humans, animals are at risk. i want my great, great, great, grandchildrens live in a healthy atmosphere as i have...let's keep this planet livable! Betty TURNER
  • March 4, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of DAPL which exposes us to greater risk to our environment when we should be taking steps to increase sustainable clean energy.
    John Lawlor
    John Lawlor
  • March 4, 2020

    As a proud Chicago, Illinois resident (born and raised), I STRONGLY oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of undeniable evidence supporting the pipeline's destructive features, including but not limited to,

    - The increased risk for spills and contamination of precious drinking water in Midwest groundwater reservoirs
    - The violation of sovereign wishes of Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
    - Consumption of the additional volume of oil (double the current amount!) will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change, a huge risk for cities including Chicago.
    - The DA ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois citizens like myself get all of the risk, while oil companies reap all of the benefits and profit.

    Sincerely,
    Michelle Stearn
    60623
    Michelle Stearn
  • March 4, 2020

    I am against this pipeline that will contribute further to climate change. I vote NO to the pipeline. Meha Kamdar
  • March 4, 2020

    We are absolutely against any allowance of the Dakota Access Pipeline here in Illinois, on or near any protected or Native American lands, including the origin of this potential man-made pipeline disaster in North Dakota.

    We have reached a time of energy evolution, where we, as Americans and as humans, must make the shift to better and safer, whether in regards to ourselves or to our planet and natural resources. It is baffling to see utter disregard for the massive disruption of the earth's core, as if the earth is a room of non-living materials, filled with objects of no reaction, where one may rearrange the total order of things as if a closet makeover.

    But even for those who took or still take the optimistic view of mines, pipelines, fracking; The lessons have been blunt, loud, clear- and devastating. The pending accidental disasters. The irreversible depletion. The total destruction of life-sustaining resources. We wonder aghast, "Who dares to still plow forward as though oil pipelines are still a fine idea?[!]"
    Answer- Those who do not care.

    So we, Illinoisians, implore you to care. Care about the future of America's clean water supply. Care about the stability of the ground we live upon not to shift into man-made 6.7 magnitude earthquakes. Care about the safety and integrity of our land for our future and for future generations. Please help to recognize our earth as a living body working in symbioses with everything within it- including our state of Illinois.

    Iris L
    Iris L
  • March 4, 2020

    I am writing to oppose expansion of the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This pipeline will not benefit the people of the state of Illinois. The intention is to carry crude oil to the Gulf, where it can be shipped to other countries. Very little if any of the oil passing through Illinois will ever return. The people and wildlife of Illinois get the risks of the spills, which becomes more of an issue when a greater volume is pumped through the old, existing pipeline, while only the owners of Dakota Access and foreign nationals get whatever benefit there may be from this project. As this encourages extraction of carbon products from the soil, the people of the whole planet suffer the ravages of global climate change. Vincent J Hardt
  • March 5, 2020

    NO DAPL EXPANSION!!! Anna Rosa
  • March 5, 2020

    I, aswell as many other people from Illinois, disagree with this act to install additional pumping stations. In a time when climate change is reaching higher peaks, adding more pipelines would be adding to this, essentially moving backwards. WE all know the potential risks of any leaks or breaks in the pipeline and its effects on our water system and our environment. Moreover, if any leakage runs off to lake Michigan, it would be disastrous for millions of people and animals, from water to ecosystem damage. I strongly say no to putting up the pipelines. Mani T
  • March 5, 2020

    I strongly oppose the creation of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Upon reading an article on the subject, their are a lot of economic benefits to be able to transport more oil everyday. But the risk is not worth ruining the environment and increasing the spill risk that could result in spending more money in order to fix it anyways. The nearby tribe has raised concerns about what might happen if the oil were to leak into the Missouri river, where they get their water. This would not only affect the tribe, but also be a hazard to the health of many humans and cost tons of money to fix. This could take many years to correct and along with toxic water, erosion and strong winds would also be a problem because of the fluctuating water levels. In conclusion, this pipeline does not seem to be worth the risk of ruining the environment and will not help keep humans safe in the long run. Amy Batz
  • March 5, 2020

    I strongly oppose building the Dakota Access Pipeline. Illinois' aquifers and waters are far too valuable and irreplaceable to be placed at risk from an inevitable spill from this pipeline. The company transporting the fuels has ALREADY HAD A SPILL so please stop gutting our country and poisoning Americans for corporate profits. I agree that we shouldn't even have to ask you to vote against this; but if you vote in favor of this, you are one step closer to killing all of Americans including your own families while bringing shame and condemnation upon yourselves. Linda Wing
  • March 5, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because.of the potential negative impact on the environment. Increasing the flow will increase the likelihood of spills. Consuming the additional amount of oil will produce a large volume of emissions.
    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Patrick Sabol
  • March 5, 2020

    I’m opposed to the pipeline expansion. Illinois and our country have enough problems without the possibility of spilling Canada’s dirty crude throughout our land and waters. Michelle Campbell
  • March 5, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because the consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Illinois should be a leader in climate justice. Supporting the pipelines would be a huge step back and a public disappointment. Huan Song
  • March 5, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of several negative environmental and social impacts it would have on the surrounding area. Fossil fuels, like oil, are already bad for our environment because they can experience leaks and blowouts that can pollute the surrounding areas of land and water. Expanding this oil pipeline would also have negative social impact because the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has been trying to shut down the pipeline for years because they know it will negatively impact them. The tribe is especially worried about a possible oil spill, which makes sense because these can be extremely dangerous to surrounding wildlife and nature. This tribe draws their water from the Missouri River, and an oil spill into that river would obviously cause many problems for them. Overall I believe that the negative consequences outweigh any positives for expanding the oil pipeline in North Dakota. It is important that we take into consideration all possible aspects of this project, not just the economic part, but also the people that live in the area, the natural ecosystem of the area, and any wildlife living there too. caroline rukstales
  • March 5, 2020

    I am opposing doubling the capacity of DAPL. This pipeline is too controversial, within its two years service it has already leaked over 10 times. It puts our aquifer at too much risks. We have only one planet, it's time to move away from fossil fuel, not to double its transportation! G L
  • March 5, 2020

    Expanding the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline is utter madness! We should be getting OFF FOSSIL FUELS IMMEDIATELY INSTEAD! Climate Change is here now and we must ramp up all our efforts to transition quickly. It is utterly foolish to spend good money on the oil and gas industry. Illinois has not made enough investment in Wind and Solar to accommodate our electric energy needs. Start mandating these companies to invest in Wind and Solar instead. We already have enough oil and gas flowing to satisfy our current fuel needs. Clare Tobin
  • March 5, 2020

    The commerce commission should deny this petition. Increased pipeline capacity will increase the risk of mechanical failure and damaging oil spills along the pipeline route and into rivers and aquifers. It also worsens global warming, an unfolding catastrophe. Do not sell the future at this price. Ian Cornelius
  • March 5, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. First of all, it does not pose any significant benefits for the people of Illinois as the majority of the oil passing through Illinois will be brought to the Gulf and exported to other countries. On top of this, we risk being victims of the negative consequences of an oil leakage/ spill that can have a significant impact on our communities, environment, and economy. Oil spills to waterways are of more concern. Water movement can distribute oil over a wide range of areas, damaging plants and killing fish and wildlife. While the risk of a spill is considered ¨minimal¨, the costs clearly outweigh the limited benefits Illinois would gain as a state from this allowance. Additionally, oil is a nonrenewable fossil fuel and increased production of oil can lead to and intensify the problem of climate change. It is clear that we should not approve of this expansion as the consequences take precedence over the benefits we as a state and everyone else could potentially have. Hunter Subry
  • March 5, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of these pipelines in Illinois. Primarily because of the fact that an increase in the piping we use to transport oil would lead to a greater chance for accidents to occur. With a higher risk for oil leaking, we put so much wildlife in danger. The possibility of oil leaking into nearby water sources and contaminating nature for worse is a chance neither I nor should the state of Illinois be willing to take. Putting wild animals in danger of ingesting toxic oil and destroying our ecosystem is a risk not worth taking. Although many jobs would be created by this expansion, that kind of benefit is only a human construct. Without a healthy environment, our species would not be able to survive- let alone get jobs and make money. Let's give our environment the same opportunity to grow and flourish as it did for humanity. We can make better use of our resources by focusing on developing and implementing eco-friendly sources of energy while cutting down on the use of fossil fuels. How about we get people working on that instead? Aisha Asad
  • March 5, 2020

    I am personally opposed to the expansion towards this pipeline. Illinois should set it's goal in creating a more sustainable future, allowing for this expansion would go directly against that. Regardless of how big the risk, the room for error is always there for the pipe to fail. Considering how disastrous a failure would be on our local environment and how a lot of the reward from this risk goes to North Dakota over Illinois, I feel as a state it would go against our best interests to allow this to occur. Zach Hampton
  • March 5, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. I am greatly concerned about the possibility of ruptures due to increased volume, and the adverse—in many ways, unrecoverable—effects those spills would have on the land, wildlife and people of Illinois. Instead of expanding oil pipelines, I want our state to begin investment in green energy technology. Above all, the DAPL has illegally disregarded the lands of the Standing Rock Sioux and I absolutely reject the pipeline's actions against this tribe. Jill Mannor
  • March 5, 2020

    Any increase in production is a step backward for our environment and climate stability. Our children are going to be suffering from any short term action toward profits. The welfare of our children and the children of future generations are MUCH more important than profit now and in the future. I oppose the installation of more pumping stations. We didn't want the pipeline in Illinois in the first place. . Sterling Cone
  • March 5, 2020

    I am very opposed to increasing the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline for the following reasons

    1 This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater.
    2 The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3 The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Please stop this action.
    Charlynn Patelski
  • March 5, 2020

    If the water level there fluctuates, erosion and strong winds could further complicate the clean-up process of a potential oil spill. The oil spill would place animals and the surrounding community in danger. Increasing the oil from 570,000 barrels a day to as much as 1.1 million barrels puts immense amounts of pressure on the oil pipeline itself. Although the Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company is taking action to prevent any damage to the pipeline and the environment, I believe in a more ecocentrist ideology when I advocate for decreasing our levels of extraction in regards to fossil fuels and using them for fuel. There have been countless oil spills and pipeline leaks in the past that should've been a warning to the people of the future; if it happened in the past, you can only do so much to stop it from happening again when you possess limited resources and tools to do so. Mary Rene
  • March 5, 2020

    Here are my three reasons for opposing the proposal

    1 This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater
    2 The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil
    3 The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries
    Patti Hand
  • March 5, 2020

    I think that it is unfair to construct a dangerous pipeline over numerous states and just hope that the risk of a surge or a spill will magically pass over this issue. If there is a risk involved in this, I don't believe it is worth it. Sure it could be an economic gain and source for jobs, but it also crosses into Native territory that is supposed to be protected. Constructing this pipeline is essentially saying that you have no respect for the property of others, and you have no concern for the risk involved. Mackenzi Johnson
  • March 5, 2020

    Please extend your shortsightedness before deciding to put our environment at risk. I am against the Dakota Access Pipeline! Mike Glans
  • March 5, 2020

    We would like to have a planet for our grandchildren. Please do not build the DAPL any more than it already is Cante Albach
  • March 5, 2020

    The commission should deny this petition. Increased pipeline capacity will increase the risk of mechanical failure and damaging oil spills along the pipeline route, with contamination of rivers and aquifers. It will also worsen global heating, an unfolding catastrophe. We need a Green New Deal, not more oil. Do not sell the future at this price. Ian Cornelius
  • March 5, 2020

    In a recent 2020 study by Benjamin Hmiel, “Preindustrial 14-CH4 indicates greater anthropogenic fossil CH4 emissions,”published in Nature, “Fossil fuel extraction and use are among the largest anthropogenic sources of CH4 emissions…Carbon-14 in CH4 (14CH4) can be used to distinguish between fossil (14C-free) CH4 emissions and contemporaneous biogenic sources” The results of the research “indicates that anthropogenic fossil CH4 emissions are underestimated by about 38 to 58 teragrams CH4 per year, or about 25 to 40 per cent of recent estimates.”
    The good news is-- because the emissions are man made, we can also reduce the emissions IF we stop permitting the build out of infrastructure that lock us in to several more decades of burning fossil fuel and move swiftly towards renewable energy.
    If only these numbers meant anything to public officials
    IL Government can do the righteous thing and deny the permit on the basis that the company violated Indigenous sovereignty, an environmental impact statement of the project was never completed, not to mention the false pretense that this is a public utility and the company is selling the oil overseas, and lastly, IL Gov Pritzker agreed to honor the Paris climate accord- stand behind your words Governor and deny the doubling of DAPL.
    Tabitha Tripp
  • March 5, 2020

    Absolutely not. We can not add to the DAPL in anyway. We just declared a climate emergency we need to act on that declaration, not feed into fossil fuels and further ruin our planet and our ecosystems. Anastasia Rogers
  • March 5, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Please put people over profits. We cannot afford the impact of a possible leak. Nina P.
  • March 5, 2020

    Given the science, it is absolutely irresponsible to encourage and support the continued use of fossil fuels in the face of the climate crisis. It also seems unwise to double pressure and volume on a quickly engineered pipeline with a history of leaks and failures. The ecological, social, and sunk infrastructural costs associated with DAPL are not worth it. No on Double DAPL. Meg studer
  • March 5, 2020

    Strong no. Please let it be said for once that Illinois stood up to corruption and greed and put a hault on dirty energy for the people of the state, the people of this country, for the healthy existence of generations to come. Please invest the resources of Illinois in healing and clean alternatives. This is a fork in the road. Kristen
  • March 5, 2020

    I oppose the DAPL expansion. The time has come for us to do better. We need to invest in ways that are going to bring innovation to the energy industry. It's time. Jamie McDaniel Jamie McDaniel
  • March 5, 2020

    I oppose the extension of the Dakota oil pipe line in Illinois. Fossil fuels are the whale oil of the 21st century. We can no longer expand their use and must begin to stop their usage. Laurie Beasley
  • March 5, 2020

    I really don't see the benefits of having the oil pipe line ran through these cities. I feel that there are so many liabilities that would come with the construction of this pipeline. The idea of expansion is blasphemous. Absolutely atrocious at the fact that we are willing to risk our environment and alter ecosystems to export oil. We must put our nature at a top priority at this time. It says a lot about us as a country that we are willing to export oil at the expense of our environment. I am dumb founded that this was even brought up. smh Nelson Ross
  • March 6, 2020

    We have reached a moment in history when knowingly participating in the increase of carbon emissions is immoral, and an act of hostility toward young people and future generations. It is not yet illegal to do this kind of harm, but it rests on all our shoulders to prevent preventable harm. Doubling the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline should be viewed as unconscionable, harmful -- whether through the certain greenhouse gas pollution or the likely oil spill pollution-- and out of step with a habitable future for illinoisans. Josephine ferorelli
  • March 6, 2020

    Pipelines leak. It happens. It will happen again. What we don't know in advance is when, where and or how much.
    And that leak will affect the groundwater. Please help us to avoid this future potential disaster and do not issue the requested permit.
    Kevin Campbell
  • March 6, 2020

    Approving an expansion of the DAPL would be the height of irresponsibility. The risk of toxic oil spills will be enormously magnified. The climate crisis will be worsened by entrenching fossil fuel infrastructure at a time when our survival depends on fully transitioning to clean energy. And the DAPL has already desecrated and damaged Indigenous communities in the Dakotas -- atrocities which must not be ignored, let alone rewarded.

    There is no conceivable benefit to Illinois that can outweigh these costs, which will be borne painfully by millions of people for generations to come, all so wealthy corporations and executives can get a bit wealthier in the short-term.
    Andy Daglas
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. The extraction and use of fossil fuels are the irrefutable cause of climate change. Both pipelines and the climate crisis pose an immeasurable risk to public health and safety in Illinois. Patrick Williams
  • March 6, 2020

    NO to doubling the capacity of DAPL !!!! This is NOT a good example for our kids. Their future is at stake as our planet is
    in a CRISIS now facing massive species extinctions !!
    Rosa Gomez
  • March 6, 2020

    NO to more investment in fossil fuel !!!!!! Rosa Gomez
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the pipelines. Our eco- suicidal tendencies need to be addressed and stopped. Pipelines and fossil fuels are not worth pursuing. Let’s switch gears and nurture our wonderful life supporting planet. Enough! Carla WinterbottomWinterbottom
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the installation of additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in Illinois. I feel that doubling the velocity of pumping this crude oil increases the risks of a rupture and an oil spill. There have already been several oil spills on this pipeline already. Also, in a time when we are trying to move away from fossil fuels to more clean energy sources in order to save our planet, is seems counterproductive to be increasing removing fossil fuels from the ground. We should be decreasing our usage of these harmful fuels not increasing them. I have heard that consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to 20 million cars which will definitely exacerbate climate change. I urge you to please deny the permit. Renee Ewing
  • March 6, 2020

    We need to invest in clean, renewable energy, not pipelines that bring us closer to the climate crisis. Please do not allow these developments or any others similar to them! Eleanor Sharp
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the permit for the Dakota Access Pipeline. Put people over profit and say no to corporate greed. Ik they do be lining your pockets tho, but that money costs less than our earth. Hank Sanchez
  • March 6, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline in Illinois. Science and common sense oppose the pipeline expansion. It's not really a question of whether or not the pipeline expansion should be allowed. It's a question of whether or not the state of Illinois, in the form of the Illinois Commerce Commission, has the will to stand up to big money and do what is right for the citizens of Illinois. Natalie
  • March 6, 2020

    One of the things we DON"T need more of is fossil fuels. We need to put our resources toward replacing fossil fuels with 21st century solutions, not bankrolling more pipeline activity. Please consider the future for all of us. Laurie H Poelking
  • March 6, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. At this critical time of climate change, all resources should go toward safe renewable energy development. Fossil fuels must stay in the ground. We can and must preserve our planet. Cynthia Stahler
  • March 6, 2020

    To Whom It May Concern,

    I do hope someone reads this. I attended this morning's hearing at the Illinois Commerce Commission. I am a lifelong Midwesterner, and sympathetic to the need for jobs and strong unions. However, it is evident that Dakota Access interests are using shopworn tools of argument to convince us that (1) if the scientist or environmental economist uses the word 'uncertainty', and/or (2) represents the rate of incidents per kilometer with a number that sounds low to lay ears, and/or (3) is not him or herself an expert in 'pump technology,' 'pipeline construction,' 'mechanical engineering' or 'metalurgy,' (these were asked about this morning), then clearly, their research must in some way be suspect. But this is all sophistry, meaning, desperate attempts to mislead without lying under oath. The scientists, environmental economists, and concerned citizens were clear; the pumping stations and associated pipelines will leak (and must, at least for 'controlled' leaks, or 'checks'), and oil use and transport has a nearing expiration date in terms of long-term economic value. Allowing Dakota Access to carry out their project in Illinois will a backwards decision, one that will render Illinois dirtier, and eventually poorer, an undesirable site for living, investment, agriculture or recreation. I would also note that the Dakota Access legal counsel described rural Illinois as 'underutilized.' It has been utilized as a home, an ecosystem, a territory, a site of play, worship, and sustenance, for thousands of years. The insertion of a pumping station is not what gives it value, nor can it even be neutral. Don't devalue Illinois. Deny Dakota Access their permit. Thank you.

    MKS
    Molly Sturdevant O'Donnell
  • March 6, 2020

    #NoDAPL
    1. This increase would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater.
    2. The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil.
    3. The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries.
    Claire Poelking
  • March 6, 2020

    Pipelines and pumping stations break, leak, spill, burst, and explode into streams, rivers, lakes, farmlands, wildlife preserves and natural areas. Oil and gas pollutes and contaminates our air, ruins drinking water, kill animals, destroys ecosystems, and makes people sick. Illinois does not need this pipeline expansion. Dakota Access/Energy Transfer Crude Oil has proven in the past to be untrustworthy to regulate itself and the people of Illinois, our health, our lands will pay the steep price of more oil and gas pushed through this pipeline. Larger capacity means more production at the time that we must cut drilling, fracking and production of fossil fuels if we have any chance of slowing down climate change. We know all these things are true. Who will profit from this expansion? No one and nothing but DA/ETCO.
    We finally must put planet and people first.
    This expansion must be denied.
    Lois Kain
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota pipeline in Illinois. This is just too big of an environmental risk for Illinois. We must protect Illinois and protect the future for our children. Jean Forness
  • March 6, 2020

    Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. 
    By pumping increased  volume of oil through the DA pipeline to Patoka, Illinois,  residents of Illinois will  have increased risk of spills and leaks of oil into our rivers and aquifers in Illinois.
    We  need to continue to increase production of renewable energy and decrease our use of fossil fuel, because increasing use of fossil fuels will negatively impact climate change. Please deny this permit, to take steps away from creating more climate change, especially when the oil is being exported to make profits for people outside of Illinois.
    Please deny this expansion permit.
    Marji Gibbs
  • March 6, 2020

    The ICC should not approve this expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. The company owning this pipeline says in it's numerous tv commercials that expanding the pipeline here in Illinois will greatly benefit the people and economy of Illinois by way of more jobs and added, needed energy capacity. And it says that the alternative to the pipeline would be greatly expanding oil truck and oil train traffic through the region. And that latter point may have some truth to it. But the company does not mention at all any of the downsides to the pipeline to be built here, and that is not fair or being honest. Pipelines leak and they burst. This happens frequently in the US. The ecological viability of our farmlands and our water sources is too critical and important to leave them open to the considerable risk that this Dakota pipeline will burst its seams and spill its oil into our water Wells and rivers and farmlands. Plus, it is likely the case that much of this oil to come through the pipeline will be heading further southward destined for ports on the Gulf of Mexico and uotiny for export abroad, so that the company will reap the profits from the piped oil while the people and the land of Illinois will hear all the risks associated with the pipeline. There has to be a better way. Please consider the points made here in making your decision. Thank you. Rudolph Gartner
  • March 6, 2020

    Water is a huge part of life. Stop tying to worry about your oil pipelines and consider the environment. Didn't you guys already have a spill for one of the oil pipelines into the water. We already got 5G coming and all the 5G towers to come with it. Jacob Franklin
  • March 6, 2020

    We should be figuring out how to remove the current pipeline - not increase the imprint of this looming menace. The DAPL group has already committed untold and lasting harm to Indigenous people and their lands through their illegal actions. Now they wish to pursue that ruin to whatever ugly end. At a time when a growing number of individuals have the sense (financial, moral, and otherwise) to look to explore other energy options, this group will place Illinois and its residents at risk for the eventual financial collapse of that market and potential environmental collapse crisis in the high likelihood of a leak. We have one of the most precious resources in all the world right at our doorstep (Lake Michigan and its waterways), and these folks would gladly endanger that for short-term profits that are only running one way - up. Even without the leak, Illinois will be asked to bear the secondary environmental impacts of higher emissions and still have toxic particulates leaching into water sources. It's wrong to entertain the continued, illegal actions of DAPL. Matthew Tapey
  • March 6, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline for multiple reasons. One being that there is no demand in Illinois for the type of oil that it will be carrying. Our refineries can't even handle it, meaning that all the oil will be exported anyways. The pipeline would also be transporting more oil than it is designed to handle. That means that there is a large chance of a rupture in the pipe, especially near the pumping stations due to the extra pressure. An oil spill would in turn hurt Illinois land by ruining habits for wildlife and hurting crops. Noel A.
  • March 6, 2020

    I OPPOSE the permit for expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because literally doubling the flow of crude oil will significantly increase the risk of severe spills. Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company plan to transfer this crude for export. Moreover the applicant has a bad safety record and is under criminal investigation in Pennsylvania for a pipeline construction project that racked up 40 times more violations than normal. So, Illinois must endure the very substantial risk of harm to our land and water for no long-term benefit to the Illinois economy.

    This pipeline also, of course, has an evil history of adversely affecting the rights of the Sioux first nation in the Dakotas.

    Finally, humanity is experiencing the effects of Global Warming worldwide. Australia had a terrible brush fire season a month ago and western U.S. states also had an order-of-magnitude worse fire season a year ago. Here in Illinois, climate change is raising the level of Lake Michigan and causing substantial damage, And the Great Lakes have been ice-free this non-winter. The State of Illinois has been making good progress on renewable and clean energy. The LAST THING we need is to facilitate more fossil fuel transportation that increases greenhouse gas emissions and exacerbates global warming!

    Please deny the application to increase the capacity of the DA/ETCO pipeline.
    Paul J. Culhane
  • March 6, 2020

    Strong no. Please let it be said for once that Illinois stood up to corruption and greed and put a hault on dirty energy for the people of the state, the people of this country, for the healthy existence of generations to come. Please invest the resources of Illinois in healing and clean alternatives. This is a fork in the road.

    We have to be ushering in the solar era. Anything we do going forward must pass the test of being sustainable and non-toxic to the planet and its life. I am a passive house architect and all my new homes are net zero and with no gas lines, all electric. The future is this and it is here now. I am voting and acting to stop all polluting sources of energy. I’m done with fossil fuels.
    Mark Miller
  • March 6, 2020

    I very strongly oppose increasing the DAPL capacity. This would be a bad move for the environment and endanger those who live nearby. Ruptures to pipelines are already a problem and this would only increase the risks. ZOE SPIRRA
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because
    --doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.
    --consumption of this additional oil will produce emissions equal to 20 million cars which will exacerbate climate change
    --the plan is to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while oil companies get all of the benefit.
    Kevin Drever
  • March 6, 2020

    Just this morning in the Tribune, it was noted there are real concerns about the volume/pressure being proposed for this pipeline. While I appreciate the need for jobs, it seems that if the same amount of effort was put into cleaner forms of energy we could achieve those same job goals and they would be sustaining as cleaner energy is the future; not riding carbon producing energy to its, and our, grave.

    Please consider our children and future generations and put the resources need for this proposed pipeline into more earth/human friendly energy pursuits.

    Thank you.
    John Poelking
  • March 6, 2020

    The pipelines are already risky and the fracking procedures by which the oil traveling through them is procured, are devastating. Expansion is a terrible and dangerous idea. Do not do it. Vicki Walden
  • March 6, 2020

    I very strongly oppose increasing the DAPL capacity. Bakken Crude oil is highly corrosive and explosive; it's a danger to the environment as well as to residents who live nearby. Ruptures to pipelines are already a problem, and expansion would significantly exasperate the risks. We can't depend on our government to regulate the industry or on the industry to regulate itself and keep people safe.

    I want my public tax dollars to fund a long-term phase out of fossil fuels along with a budgeted phase-in of alternative, green energy sources. I care about what this generation leaves behind for our children and grandchildren. It's time this government puts people before profits! We have a duty to leave this world better than we found it - morality is an obligation.
    Gerri Songer
  • March 6, 2020

    Hello,

    I am writing to express opposition to the petition to install additional pumping stations onto the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    According to climate scientist Dr. James Hansen, “as part of my testimony last week to the Illinois Commerce Commission, in opposition to the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline, I did a calculation of the amount of CO2 that will be released by the additional crude oil, if the pipeline capacity is increased from 570,000 bpd (barrels per day) to 1,100,000 bpd. The additional CO2 emitted is equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants.”

    Furthermore, no clear need for this oil expansion has been named in the petition except the convenience of Dakota Access customers.

    For the above reasons, I ask that you deny the petition of Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC.
    Parth Patel
  • March 6, 2020

    Hello,

    I am writing to express opposition to the petition to add additional pumping stations to the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    According to climate scientist Dr. James Hansen, “as part of my testimony last week to the Illinois Commerce Commission, in opposition to the proposed expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline, I did a calculation of the amount of CO2 that will be released by the additional crude oil, if the pipeline capacity is increased from 570,000 bpd (barrels per day) to 1,100,000 bpd. The additional CO2 emitted is equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants.”

    Furthermore, no clear need for this oil expansion has been named in the petition except the convenience of Dakota Access customers.

    For the above reasons, I ask the Illinois Commerce Commission to deny the petition.
    Parth Patel
  • March 6, 2020

    Just no. Expansion begets unnecessary threats to endangered species, freshwater, farmland, PLUS emission of enormous amounts of greenhouse gasses and other co-pollutants. Sue Haas
  • March 6, 2020

    I am opposed to the Dakota Access pipeline for several serious reasons. It increases the release of carbon dioxide and other climate changing gases into the atmosphere with the increasing of global climate change. It violates treaty rights and is opposed by American Indian tribes whose lands it crosses and is proposed to cross. It has the potential as well as a history of seriously and permanently contaminating the land, water and air. This is unacceptable. It puts the profits and interests of fossil fuel industries above the welfare, health and lives of everyone. Margaret Aguilar
  • March 6, 2020

    The negative environmental impacts highly outweigh the economic growth that this (could) bring to the state of Illinois. There is absolutely no need for this expansion of pipeline when it is just asking for increased leaks and spillage. The state needs to be more focused on how we can be more concerned with protecting the environment and the current jobs that could be taken away by the negative effects of the expansion of the pipelines. Anonymous
  • March 6, 2020

    The negative environmental impacts highly outweigh the economic growth that this (could) bring to the state of Illinois. There is absolutely no need for this expansion of pipeline when it is just asking for increased leaks and spillage. The state needs to be more focused on how we can be more concerned with protecting the environment and the current jobs that could be taken away by the negative effects of the expansion of the pipelines. Anonymous
  • March 6, 2020

    Please do not approve the pipeline expansion permit. Illinois does not need to be left holding the bag if there is an oil spill. It appears that the oil companies will get all the rewards and Illinois will be left with all the risk if there are spills and leakages. It appears that increasing flow will increase the very real possibility of leakage. Please consider carefully what the adverse effects are to Illinois before you approve any expansion. Mary Bostwick
  • March 6, 2020

    I oppose expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the dangers of a spill and because as a country we should be moving away from fossil fuels, towards a sustainable clean energy economy. mark snawadzki
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. It violates treaty rights and is opposed by the Native American tribes whose lands will be crossed by it. The extreme velocities permitted by the pipeline will increase the risk of rupture and contaminate the land, water and air. We need to halt investment in fossil fuel infrastructure immediately and focus instead on alternative forms of energy. Sloan Williams
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose DAPL as it is a huge risk of failure and pollution to our State Samantha Seidenberg
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipe was never intended to withstand the new volume and pressure. DAPL has sprung leaks and Energy Transfor Partners gas one of the worst records of safety. Joye Braun
  • March 9, 2020

    Greetings,

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because increasing capacity for crude transfer will not have a significant economic impact to Illinois, and the pipeline expansion increases risks of failure and spillage of oil. Additionally most of the crude oil will be exported to outside the United States. I am concerned about the impact of increasing fossil fuel capacity will have on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions.
    Dan Fraczkowski
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipeline because of contamination and illness. All people should have the right to clean water. Our forefathers have taken so much from the native americans, isn't it time we give them the right to unspoiled drinking water and soil contamination? I do not support this proposal and hope that you will not as well. April Rock
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose the installation of additional pumping stations and pumping facilities in the State of Illinois. Karie Brown-Tess
  • March 9, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will make climate change worse! Ashley Geohas
  • March 9, 2020

    Please deny the Dakota Access Pipeline permit allowing it to double capacity. Our environment has and continues to be assaulted by accidents, spills and pollution from these industry companies focused on only profit and greed. I thought Illinois was to move to clean energy? Much of this product goes to export. Please do the Right thing for the People and Environment of Illinois. Anonymous
  • March 9, 2020

    Please don not approve the DAPL pipeline extension. Illinois should be moving forward with more investment in sustainable and renewable energy. Approving this pipeline extension would counter act that. Illinois should be a leader in renewable energy and rejecting the pipeline extension is necessary. Make the right choice for Illinois' future. Katie Binhack
  • March 9, 2020

    I strongly oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. Its environmental risk, evidenced by the spills it has already had, greatly outweighs its economic benefit. Furthermore, we must move away from oil and gas energy to slow the catastrophic effects of climate change. That means we must be far sighted and foregoing promised short term economic benefits. The current and future effects of climate change will cost us far more than more pipelines gain. Rick Schoenfield
  • March 10, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. Illinois and the rest of the world should be looking for ways to promote clean energy and make that economically feasible and attractive instead of bowing to the pressures of Big Business. Contributing to global emissions and devastating spills that will and already have occurred with the pipeline is a sure road to diminishing the quality of life on the planet that can never be recouped. Terri Murphy
  • March 10, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.
    Lydia Pudzianowski
  • March 10, 2020

    Illinois should be prioritizing renewable energy development, not fossil fuels and the environmental risks that accompany them. Thaddeus Rada-Bayne
  • March 10, 2020

    Enough with oil dependency. Too many risks with pipelines, they outweigh the rewards. Robert Horwitz
  • March 10, 2020

    I oppose in the strongest possible terms the entirety of the DAPL project. I stood physically in the way throughout Iowa, SD and Standing Rock taking multiple arrests for civil disobedience during the construction of this controversial fossil fuels project. I absolutely reject and condone anyone backing an expansion of capacity on this project. Rather, I implore all states affected to take steps to rescind any permits and ultimately see the pipeline removed during my lifetime. We owe it to the future generations to get this right, to curb our contribution to climate change essentially short changing their futures and the existence of all of humanity. Paramount in my concerns since this project was wrought upon the people, the water and the land were concerns for Indigenous Solidarity. Being an Indigenous Crimean Tatar, I stood with my Indigenous Lakota relatives in defense of their homelands from the harms associated with this black snake. I continue my stand with my relatives as we fortify our resistance to yet another antiquated fossil fuels project - TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL - and we remain resolute in our opposition and shout out resoundingly - Mní Wicóni!

    #PeopleAndPlanetFirst
    #IndigenousSolidarity
    #DefendTheSacred
    #ActionOverHope
    #FreeRedFawn
    #StillNoDAPL
    #SuHayattir
    #NotMeUs
    #NoKXL
    ???????????????
    Mahmud Fitil
  • March 11, 2020

    At a time when renewable and green energy should be a priority,it makes no sense economically or environmentally to expand a dying energy souce.It also puts us all at risk of a major risk from leaking.Shut it down,don't expand it! Lisa Judy
  • March 11, 2020

    Please limit this pipeline. Josephine Fenton
  • March 11, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it would double the flow rate and increase the probability and severity of spills. The consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Please deny the pipeline permits and protect my health and my environment from corporate greed.
    Thank you, Nadine Marquardt
    nadine marquardt
  • March 13, 2020

    I oppose the increased capacity for this pipeline. The potential for enviromental damage outweighs the benefit. Oil demand is weak. This Heavy, toxic oil is not needed. Thomas J Hurrle
  • March 13, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline, because it will only exacerbate climate change. In a time where we should be reeling in our dependence on fossil fuels, further developing the pipeline is entirely counter-intuitive—for both the future of our planet and the human race. We need to start prioritizing the natural world and native populations over economic development. Erika Kelly
  • March 13, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it would double the flow rate and increase the probability and severity of spills. The consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Please deny the pipeline permits and protect my health and my environment from corporate greed. It is irresponsible for our state to help companies take any more oil out of the ground. Rupert Deese
  • March 13, 2020

    At a time when renewable and green energy should be a priority,it makes no sense economically or environmentally to expand a dying energy souce.It also puts us all at risk of a major risk from leaking.Shut it down,don't expand it! Gail Potocki
  • March 13, 2020

    Stand up to the greed of the fossil fuel industry that has been destroying our planet and health. At a time when investment in renewable and green energy is an existential imperative, it makes no sense economically or environmentally to expand a dying energy source. Shut it down,don't expand it! niloofar shambayati
  • March 17, 2020

    I oppose expanding the capacity of the timeline for a many reasons. Three of them
    1) It would lock us into more fossil fuel consumption when the existential threat of climate change is growing ever greater
    2) The company charged with monitoring the pipeline has a lousy track record for safety, and the Bakken pipeline system has already leaked 5,000 gallons of oil
    3) The risk/benefit ratio doesn’t work for Illinois residents, since it’s our land and water at stake, but most of the oil is slated for export to other countries
    Chris Smith
  • March 17, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access pipeline. Illinois and the rest of the world should be looking for ways to promote clean energy and make that economically feasible and attractive instead of bowing to the pressures of Big Business. Contributing to global emissions and devastating spills that will and already have occurred with the pipeline is a sure road to diminishing the quality of life on the planet that can never be recouped. martin mccarthy
  • March 17, 2020

    Please stop the fossil fuel pipelining companies. They are ruining our Earth and fueling Climate Change! Maria Gilfillan
  • March 18, 2020

    This pipeline will allow irreparable damage to occur to our environment, our homes and our bodies. I support revoking permits for additional pump stations and facilities in the State of Illinois. Our future and our lives depend on us being good stewards of the planet. Joseph Naidnur
  • March 18, 2020

    I do not support expanding pump facilities and stations into Illinois as part of the pipeline plans. Both science and very recent examples of oil spills, water pollution, and the devestation brought on to communities prove that this is not a decision that has the public's health and safety in mind. We must make smart moves to preserve our collective future and livelihoods and not give into pressure to support this project. Joseph Naidnur
  • March 18, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will have a negative impact on our environmental landscape. The work needed to install expansions will disrupt ecosystems and displace our state's natural landmarks, preventing natural animal inhabitants from living here safely in the future. The pipeline also has potential to break, and it has before. Should oil be leaked into Illinois' natural landscape, our biodiversity will be diminished as plants die and animals are forced to find new homes in environments where they may or may not survive. Both of these vents will mean that we will not be able to remove greenhouse gasses from our environment as efficiently as we currently can, speeding the effects of climate change and giving us less time to react to it. John McDermott
  • March 25, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will negatively impact the environment, and makes no sense for the long term goals of the county's energy needs. It would be a waste of money; the use of fossil fuels will drop dramatically within the decade. Renewable energy is the future, and has the greatest potential for profit, and promising positive results for the environment. Renewable energy jobs already outnumber those in the coal industry, and its reasonable to see this trend continue to other fossil fuel sector jobs. Join the future, and prosper. Furthermore, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change. Evidence also indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit. Thank you for your time. Regards. Joe Gomez
  • March 25, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because it will negatively impact the environment. We need to focus on renewable energy sources that will create jobs and self-reliance for this country. Renewable energy has the greatest potential for profit and positive results for nature and society. Renewable energy jobs already outnumber those in the coal industry. That being said, if the use of fossil fuels drop within the next decade, this project will be futile. Also, doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills and consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions that will simply exacerbate climate change. Company profit over people and the planet is just bad business. Thank you for your time. Kayla Newsome
  • April 13, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because of the reasons below.

    Doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills.

    Consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risk while these oil companies gets all of the benefit.

    Thank you.
    David R Wilcox
  • April 16, 2020

    I am opposed to the expansion of capacity of the DAP/ETCO pipelines for the following reasons -

    An expansion of system and pipeline capacity can only have the effect of further endangering the soil and water. It increases the likelihood of a spill or break as a result of the required pressure profile of the modifications. Such spills and breaks will have much greater impact si8mply as a result of the increase volume of flow.

    As a farmer, I was raised with an attachment to the land and the soil. You respect and honor the land and never take from the soil what you cannot put back. The extractive industries are based upon taking and not giving back. It is a business model of exploitation and greed. The pipelines, as part of the petroleum network, follow the same business model - to pursue profit while putting at risk the land and soil of farmers through which the pipelines run and the waters that belong to all of us.

    The proponents and their expert economists point out that pipelines are statistically the safest means of transporting petroleum and that increased production of oil keeps fuel prices low. None of these statistics mean anything when that oil is bubbling up through the soil or our precious water resources.

    Through exploitation of the Earth's resources, we have brought ourselves to a tipping point of destroying our environment and life as we know it. It is no longer the responsible thing for the people and governmental agencies to facilitate continued extraction of hydrocarbons from the Earth and subsequent emission of carbon dioxide into the air. It must be limited some time and somewhere. Now and here is the time!
    William Klingele
  • May 26, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Also, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Additionally, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefits I do not support expanding pump facilities and stations into Illinois as part of the pipeline plans. Both science and very recent examples of oil spills, water pollution, and the devastation brought on to communities prove that this is not a decision that has the public's health and safety in mind. We must make smart moves to preserve our collective future and livelihoods and not give in to pressure to support this project.

    Illinois and the rest of the world should be looking for ways to promote clean energy and make that economically feasible and attractive instead of bowing to the pressures of Big Business. Contributing to global emissions and devastating spills that will and already have occurred with the pipeline is a sure road to diminishing the quality of life on the planet that can never be recouped.
    Susan Osada
  • June 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the 19-0673 - Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC by installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities on existing certificated pipelines in the states of Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.

    Due to the chaotic changes that are happening to our climate we need to immediately make the transition from oil and gas to renewable energies.

    We must not continue to take more fossil fuels from underground. Digging up more fossil fuels will release more greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. This will result in hotter temperatures, more overlap of the weather’s seasons, and more extreme weather events such as floods and tornados.

    Pumping more fossil fuels though existing or new pipelines are likely to lead to more problems such as leaks and pollution of our soil and water which also causes health problems. Illinois should not have to put up with these risks while a private corporation receives all the benefits.

    Complete docket number P2010673
    Meryl Greer Domina
  • June 3, 2020

    Dear ICC commissioners,

    On May 18 our Organization, Chicago Area Peace Action, filed a complaint with the Illinois Office of the Executive Inspector General asking for Michael Carrigan to recuse himself from Docket 19-0673 because of his strong and recent affiliation with parties to this case. We sent a priority letter on May 21 to the Chairman of the ICC, Carrie Zalewski, containing a copy of our complaint and notifying her that we had filed the complaint with the OEIG. Have you received our letter? What is going on?

    Thank you,

    Catherine Buntin and Jack Kelly of CAPA.
    Jack Kelly
  • June 16, 2020

    I strongly oppose the doubling of the DAPL pipeline capacity.

    Doubling the capacity increases risk of leaks. Considering the pipeline has already leaked several times at the current capacity, a doubling would put the health and wellbeing of our communities, as well as the cleanliness of our water sources, at great risk. Anything that would increase the health risks of our communities during COVID-19 is extremely dangerous. Allowing this pipeline to double during a pandemic would only add to the public health crisis Illinois is facing.

    In addition, a federal judge recently knocked down the original permits for this pipeline and ordered a full environmental impact statement (EIS) to be completed by the Army Corps of Engineers. This means that the environmental impacts of the pipeline are unknown as is, much less with an increased capacity. Doubling the capacity before a full review can be done is extremely irresponsible and puts Illinois communities at great risk of harm.

    There are several more reasons to avoid doubling DAPL, including respect for Indigenous Peoples rights and the need to fight climate change. No matter what way you look at it, doubling DAPL is a reckless and irresponsible venture. I urge you to stop it from happening.

    Thanks,
    Amanda Hermans
    Amanda Hermans
  • June 17, 2020

    Ms. Rusmi is urginng the ICC to vote no on the Dakota Access application ofr a pipeline expansion. Erin Rusmi
  • June 17, 2020

    I want the ICC commissioner to vote NO for the Dakota pipeline Andrew Hellinger
  • June 17, 2020

    I am calling to protest any move forward for the Dakota Access Pipeline. Please vote no Zhenya Polozova
  • June 17, 2020

    I vote no on the Dakota Pipeline expansion. Steven Hall
  • June 17, 2020

    Please tell ICC to vote no on Dakota Pipeline David O'Donnell
  • June 17, 2020

    I would like to vote no for the Dakota Access Pipeline. I feel that it is too bold and and I believe we should transition away from fossil fuel as it is not good for the enviorment. Samuel Peiffer
  • June 17, 2020

    Cust urges the ICC to vote no the the Dakota Access pipeline expansion. Maddie Low
  • June 17, 2020

    M. Rabelais objects to the Dakota pipe line. Urges the ICC to vote "No." M. Rabelais
  • June 17, 2020

    I would like to vote against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Leroy Fach
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose the double capacity of the Dakota Pipeline Anna Kaufman
  • June 17, 2020

    I am against the DAPL. I feel that it is not good for the enviroment or for the future enviroment of my grandchildren. Retha Daugherty
  • June 17, 2020

    I am oppose to the Dekota Pipeline expansion in Illinois. I am addressing my concerns not just for us citizens but for our future children. Please ICC do not approve this. Will Bloom
  • June 17, 2020

    I want the ICC to vote no on the DAPL. I feel it is not in the best interest for our future or the future of our kids. Karra Kallen
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose doubling of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Jessica Mermel
  • June 17, 2020

    My name is Dani Castanzo from Rising Tide Chicago, I urge the ICC to vote no on the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the oil will make leaks more likely. Rising Tide Chicago hopes to continue the conversation with the ICC regarding this. Please deel free to contact me or anyone at Rising Tide Chicago. We hope ICC will vote no on the Dakota Access Pipleline. Thank you. Dani Castonzo
  • June 17, 2020

    Mrs. Logman states, she is opposed to the expansion of the Dakota pipe line. Marjorie Logman
  • June 17, 2020

    Please do not approve the doubling of the Dakota Access Pipeline! We only have 10 years to avoid 1.5 deg of global warming. We are on thin ice and we need to move way from fossil fuels as quickly as possible. Now is NOT the time to be doubling down on fossil fuels. I want a habitable future! We know what burning fossils fuels does to our world, it is negligent not to transition to renewable energy. Please do not approve doubling DAPL!!

    The 1,172-mile Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which extends from North Dakota to southern Illinois, was built over the opposition of tens of thousands of Indigenous Water Protectors. A federal judge ruled its construction was illegal. It leaked five times during its first six months in operation.

    Now, communities along the pipeline route are under threat once again as Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind DAPL, seeks to double the amount of oil running through the pipeline from its current operating capacity of 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day (one of the biggest pipeline capacities in the whole country!)

    Thank you,
    Melissa Brice
    Melissa Brice
  • June 17, 2020

    Do not double the Dakota Access Pipeline!! For the sake of our planet!

    Doubling the Dakota Access Pipeline puts the health and wellbeing of people along this pipeline route at risk from oil spills, especially the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota whose drinking water source is threatened.

    The Dakota Access Pipeline violates the Fort Laramie treaties of 1851 and 1868 and threatens the water sources and livelihood of Indigenous Peoples way of life.

    The Dakota Access Pipeline has spilled at least a dozen times in the past three years of operation.

    This decision is very important, and ICC commissioners are moving ahead with this process and project when most of the general public is focused on the COVID-19 public health crisis and may not be able to also focus on this important issue that will also affect health and wellbeing. Expanding oil infrastructure is not essential work in a global pandemic and should not be prioritized.

    The price of oil and demand for oil is low, and climate scientists and the United Nations tell us that we must completely transition from fossil fuels within the next ten years in order to avoid catastrophic climate impacts globally; therefore it’s not possible to make any argument that the pipeline is necessary for the public good.

    On Wednesday, March 25, a federal judge recently knocked down the original permits for this pipeline and said there now needs to be a full environmental impact statement (EIS) completed by the Army Corps of Engineers which could take several years, so it has not yet been determined what the environmental impacts of this pipeline are -- let alone an expansion of oil flow in the same pipeline.

    Climate scientist James Hansen from Columbia University testified for the ICC that the doubling of oil flow through the DAPL Pipeline is the greenhouse gas equivalent of 15 1,000 MW coal plants or 20 million cars.
    Paula Brice
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the doubling of the DAPL pipeline capacity.

    Doubling the capacity increases risk of leaks. Considering the pipeline has already leaked several times at the current capacity, a doubling would put the health and wellbeing of our communities, as well as the cleanliness of our water sources, at great risk. Anything that would increase the health risks of our communities during COVID-19 is extremely dangerous. Allowing this pipeline to double during a pandemic would only add to the public health crisis Illinois is facing.

    In addition, a federal judge recently knocked down the original permits for this pipeline and ordered a full environmental impact statement (EIS) to be completed by the Army Corps of Engineers. This means that the environmental impacts of the pipeline are unknown as is, much less with an increased capacity. Doubling the capacity before a full review can be done is extremely irresponsible and puts Illinois communities at great risk of harm.

    There are several more reasons to avoid doubling DAPL, including respect for Indigenous Peoples rights and the need to fight climate change. No matter what way you look at it, doubling DAPL is a reckless and irresponsible venture. I urge you to stop it from happening.
    Jeffry C Green
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the doubling of the DAPL pipeline capacity.

    All pipes leak; anyone who tries to "guarantee" no leaks is lying. Doubling the capacity increases risk of leaks. Considering the pipeline has already leaked several times at the current capacity, a doubling would put the health and wellbeing of our communities, as well as the cleanliness of our water sources, at great risk. Anything that would increase the health risks of our communities during COVID-19 is extremely dangerous. Allowing this pipeline to double during a pandemic would only add to the public health crisis Illinois is facing. Are the builders of the DAPL offering to cover the medical costs of Illinois residents poisoned by leaks, poisoned by dirty air - when will regulators understand that cost MUST include those unseen, such as health adversely affected by pollution and poisoning as a result of fossil fuels.

    In addition, a federal judge recently knocked down the original permits for this pipeline and ordered a full environmental impact statement (EIS) to be completed by the Army Corps of Engineers. This means that the environmental impacts of the pipeline are unknown as is, much less with an increased capacity. Doubling the capacity before a full review can be done is extremely irresponsible and puts Illinois communities at great risk of harm.

    There are several more reasons to avoid doubling DAPL, including respect for Indigenous Peoples rights and the need to fight climate change. No matter what way you look at it, doubling DAPL is a reckless and irresponsible venture. I urge you to stop it from happening.
    Steve Schueth
  • June 17, 2020

    Enough is enough. Our communities get none of the benefit and all the risk with these pipeline projects. Oil demand is low, and renewable energy is clearly our best path forward. Stop supporting the oil lobby with a project that sets Illinois back.

    Daniel Suarez
    Daniel Suarez
  • June 17, 2020

    No on DAPL expansion. I oppose this on the strongest terms possible. No to ETP AND NO TO ANY BANK THAT FUNDS IT Levy John
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Doubling the Dakota Access Pipeline puts the health and wellbeing of people along this pipeline route at risk from oil spills, especially the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota whose drinking water source is already threatened. In addition, expanding oil infrastructure is not essential work right now (during a global pandemic and a worsening climate crisis) and should not be prioritized. We must be transitioning from fossil fuels at a rapid pace not doubling down on oil production. Installing additional pumping stations and pumping facilities is detrimental to the health of people, now and in the future, and it's imperative we do everything we can to make sure we have a habitable planet for future generations. Thank you for your time. Sally Weigel
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the 1,172-mile Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), which extends from North Dakota to southern Illinois. A federal judge ruled its construction was illegal. It leaked five times during its first six months in operation.

    Now, communities along the pipeline route are under threat once again as Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind DAPL, seeks to double the amount of oil running through the pipeline from its current operating capacity of 570,000 barrels per day to 1.1 million barrels per day.

    So far, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Iowa officials have given the doubling proposal their thumbs-up, leaving only one state, Illinois, to prevent an expansion of a project that has put the environment at such great risk. I urge you to oppose the DAPL expansion.

    Sincerely,

    Adria
    Adria Wilson
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the DAPL extention. We must have forethought concerning the long term affects of our plans for transitioning to zero emissions economy. This is a backward and harmful step. Karen O Fort
  • June 17, 2020

    I am opposed to doubling the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
    There is a risk of it leaking.
    We need to leave fossil fuel in the ground if we are going to reverse global warming.
    Heather Ways
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) or any other pumping facilities in the State of Illinois. Moving forward on these fossil fuel projects during the midst of a pandemic is irresponsible. The State of Illinois must join forces with other energy-forward states and be a leader in the Midwest by rejecting future fossil fuel projects and instead invest in AND incentivize renewable energy projects. Furthermore, DAPL already cuts through Indigenous lands and risks water contamination for many. We must stop being a culture of degradation to the environment and minority cultures and instead embrace a clean, just energy system moving forward. Please vote NO on the expansion of DAPL. Evan Callan
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the DAPL pipeline. Regardless of whether you are pro environment or not, it does not make any economic sense to invest in a project that is based upon fossil fuels when it is clear that the future is in renewable energy. Don't waste hard earned tax payer dollars. Susan Zimny
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because doubling the flow rate will increase the probability and severity of spills. Also, consumption of the additional volume of oil will produce emissions equivalent to fifteen 1,000-megawatt coal plants or 20 million cars, which will exacerbate climate change.

    Additionally, evidence indicates that DA/ETCO plans to export this crude oil, so Illinois gets all of the risks while these oil companies get all of the benefits I do not support expanding pump facilities and stations into Illinois as part of the pipeline plans. Both science and very recent examples of oil spills, water pollution, and the devastation brought on to communities prove that this is not a decision that has the public's health and safety in mind. We must make smart moves to preserve our collective future and livelihoods and not give in to pressure to support this project.

    Illinois and the rest of the world should be looking for ways to promote clean energy and make that economically feasible and attractive instead of bowing to the pressures of Big Business. Contributing to global emissions and devastating spills that will and already have occurred with the pipeline is a sure road to diminishing the quality of life on the planet that can never be recouped.
    Andrew Hellinger
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the doubling of the DAPL pipeline capacity.

    Past experience has shown that significantly increasing the capacity of these pipelines increases
    the chance of harmful oil spills. This risk is unacceptable. The oil to be pumped through Dakota
    will not benefit Illinois. We are to assume the risk of the pipeline while gaining very little benefit.

    We should also be moving away from using fossil fuels. Increasing the capacity of Dakota Access
    only insures that we will be using more dangerous fossil fuels in the future. This would be an unwise policy.

    Please do not allow additional pumping stations and pumping facilities in Illinois now or in the future.

    Sincerely,
    Mark Kraemer
    Mark Kraemer
  • June 17, 2020

    I urge the Illinois Commerce Commission to deny Dakota Access and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company's petition. This pipeline, which from its construction endangered indigenous communities throughout the Midwest, has no business looking for an expansion in our state. As if that weren't enough, the expansion of fossil fuel supply that the pipeline endangers the health and well-being of our state and the future of our children.

    The Illinois Commerce Commission has a responsibility to the people of Illinois to make decisions about energy supply that are in the best interest of the people of this state. Expansions to the pipeline will put Illinois further in danger of oil leakage (the pipeline leaked five times in its first six months of operation) and is a short- and long-term danger to our energy supply, water, soil, and land.
    David Clauson
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose this pipeline. We need to end our reliance on fossil fuels - they are killing our planet. Now, when demand is so low, is a perfect time to permanently put this pipeline to rest. Judy Pollock
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose this expansion. The environmental impact and safety risk of those in the region of this expansion are not acceptable risk. Our farm land is known throughout the country as some of the most fertile and healthy soil content and it behooves our farmers and this state to keep it healthy for future generations. Erika Reidy
  • June 17, 2020

    I am writing to strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. In standing with the indigenous water protectors of Illinois, I oppose the harm this will do to communities and the environment. It is an unnecessary extension, and our resources would be better spent on a litany of other concerns or avenues of energy.

    Thank you for your time.
    Matthew Wrobel
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The builders of this pipeline have shown tremendous disrespect and disregard for indigenous peoples, water rights, human life, and the health of our environment. Pipelines mean spills, continued reliance on fossil fuels, and further destruction of our already fragile ecological health. Kathleen McNutt
  • June 17, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to the expansion of the Dakota Access pipeline.

    We are in a climate crisis that threatens all of us and all other life forms. Allowing this expansion will massively increase climate pollution and have hugely detrimental effects on Illinois’ air, water and land.

    It’s time to invest in green energy and a green future for those living now and for future generations.
    Annie Pike
  • June 17, 2020

    I oppose the DAPL expansion. In a time of worsening climate change effects and increased investments in clean energy, it's an environmental and financial mistake to invest in more fossil fuel infrastructure. Mary Hannah Langhoff
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose the the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) capacity-doubling expansion project. Linda Groetzinger
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly disprove of the DAPL, which was built over the opposition of tens of thousands of Indigenous Water Protector, and was ruled illegal by a federal judge. The DAPL poses a threat to communities along the pipeline, as well as our climate overall.

    We must transition to renewable resources to protect our communities, our climate, our air, and water. Stop the DAPL!

    Lara Levitan
    Lara Levitan
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose doubling DAPL. WE HAVE A SOLAR ROOF AND A HEV CAR.
    We need to stop using fossil fuels soon! We are reaching tipping points sooner than expected. Very dangerous, cannot be undone!
    Sandra Kaptain
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose expanding the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    This project puts water security at risk for far too many people.
    Brenna Lemieux
  • June 17, 2020

    Hello,

    I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed doubling of the oil capacity for the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has stated that we have approximately 10 years to avoid the worst consequences of the climate crisis on people, planet, and our societies. It is unacceptable that oil pipeline expansions are being considered in this context.

    The Illinois Commerce Commission must reject the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
    Parth Patel
  • June 17, 2020

    Requesting that you vote negative on the DAPL pipeline project. Thank You! jon frank rice
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion or extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline because this wastes more money on fossil fuel production when the planet and our survival depend on our enhanced expertise in using renewable and non-polluting fuel sources.

    Illinois has some of the richest farmland in the world. It is irresponsible to risk the polluting oil spills that will wreck havoc on our most precious and irreplaceable sources of food and wealth in our state. This fossil fuel business model of exploitation and greed is inexcusable, and it is unconscionable that our representatives should endanger our state's irreplaceable land and water that they have sworn to protect.

    Please instead fund research and projects that can make our whole state a leader in renewable, clean energy. Fossil fuels are finite; renewable, clean energy is not. We need to start now to conserve our precious soil water for ourselves and for future generations.

    Barbara S. Njus
    Barbara Njus
  • June 17, 2020

    I request the ICC NOT to allow for the doubling of capacity for DAPL. Given the inherent safety and sustainability issues, this should in no way be allowed to happen. Brock Auerbach-Lynn
  • June 17, 2020

    I write again to strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Having attended the IIC's public hearing in March I heard the most short-sighted and unconvincing evidence for moving forward with this--short term job creation and corporate profit.
    Doubling this pipeline does not create the long term jobs Illinois needs and puts farmers’ existing jobs at risk. Any jobs created by this pipeline are temporary, dangerous and unhealthy. High pressure pumping stations increase the risk of oil spills and injuries, and this pipeline has already spilled. Each spill contaminates ecosystems, water, land, food systems and health.

    It is clear that the fossil fuel industry is not a "good investment,” now more than ever, this is a dying industry. It is responsible for the climate crisis that is jeopardizing our planet's survival. The oil industry has also chosen an unethical path, continuing to build pipelines across land sacred and belonging to Indigenous groups. It perpetuates harm and disrespect.

    Illinois must refuse to participate in the sabotage of a healthy future. Let's lead and invest in sustainable and just energy systems instead.

    Thank you,
    Hillary Geller
    Hillary Geller
  • June 17, 2020

    Request a NO vote on the DAPL expansion. It is an irresponsible and unnecessary plan not to mention potentially dangerous to our environment, and communities. Margaret Denny
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion or extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline because this wastes more money on fossil fuel production when the planet and our survival depend on our enhanced expertise in using renewable and non-polluting fuel sources. Taylor
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion or extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline because this wastes more money on fossil fuel production when the planet and our survival depend on our enhanced expertise in using renewable and non-polluting fuel sources. Matt
  • June 17, 2020

    I strongly oppose any expansion or extension of the Dakota Access Pipeline because this wastes more money on fossil fuel production when the planet and our survival depend on our enhanced expertise in using renewable and non-polluting fuel sources. Robyn
  • June 17, 2020

    Illinois has a 19 billion dollar agriculture business that is at risk with the impacts of climate change. This pipeline will further risk the established agricultural business in Illinois.
    In addition, past experience has shown that significantly increasing the capacity of these pipelines increases
    the chance of harmful oil spills. This risk is unacceptable. The oil to be pumped through Dakota
    will not benefit Illinois. We are to assume the risk of the pipeline while gaining very little benefit. This is not a sustainable policy that risks Illinois financial interests.
    William Wilms
  • June 17, 2020

    Expanding DAPL is a disaster for our climate, a threat to our drinking water, and an insult to indigenous communities who came together in 2016 in an attempt to stop this weapon of colonialism. As a state, we should strive to protect people and the planet, not toxic polluters. Caroline Wooten
  • June 17, 2020

    This will be a disaster for the environment. We need to move away from fossil fuels and towards renewables. This is a step in the wrong direction. Andrew Sloan
  • June 17, 2020

    I would hope that you have read the United Nations reports such as this one.

    WMO State of the Global Climate
    The tell-tale physical signs of climate change, such as increasing land and ocean heat, accelerating sea level rise and melting ice, contributed to making 2019 the second warmest year on record according to a new report compiled by a network led by the World Meteorological Organization. The report documents the increasing impacts of weather and climate events on socio-economic development, human health, migration and displacement, food security and land and marine ecosystems.
    https//www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/climate-change/

    I would hope you are aware that The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change composed of noted scientists from around the world have told us that we have about 11 years to make SIGNIFICANT change in our putting more green house gases into the atmosphere! We must move away from fossil fuels ASAP and not be pumping more of them out of the ground and piping them across IL.

    PLEASE consider future generations and make your decisions on their behalf not the on the profits of fossil fuel companies.

    Dr. Ron Cox
    Ron Cox
  • June 18, 2020

    I strongly oppose the doubling of the pipeline. Need to think about the future climate for our children Evan Hoffman
  • June 18, 2020

    I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed doubling of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

    Doubling the capacity of the DAPL is dangerous. The pipeline leaked 5 times during its first 6 months in operation, and spilled more than 12 times in its first 3 years. Doubling DAPL means higher pressure pumping stations, which can cause more spills.

    The expansion of the pipeline would not bring economic benefits to Illinois. The oil industry is dying, and doubling DAPL would not help Illinois farmers or workers. The expansion is all risk for Illinois with no reward—oil will flow through the state and be exported elsewhere.

    Climate science tells us that we must rapidly transition away from fossil fuels. Doubling DAPL is the equivalent of 15 1K MW coal plants, a major step in the wrong direction.

    Please oppose the expansion of DAPL!

    Alex McLeese
    Alex McLeese
  • June 18, 2020

    Pipelines are a pr3ecepie fro disaster - to the environment now and especially in the future. What we do now to stop fossil fuel use will affect the whether or not irreversible feeback loops will begin in 10 years. If they do this planet will not reset itself as a livable climate for 250,000 years. We need to move away from fossil fuels and towards renewables. Diane Thodos
  • June 18, 2020

    Members of the Illinois Commerce Commission,

    Please deny the DAPL petition to expand the pipeline capacity. This expansion is against the public interest and will enrich the fossil fuel industry at a time when we should be making every effort to move to renewable energy. The public is watching your decision. .
    Please choose wisely.

    Thanks
    R Slone, Chicago
    Ricca Slone
  • June 18, 2020

    Hello,

    I am writing to express my opposition to the doubling of oil capacity for the Dakota Access Pipeline. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has stated that we have approximately 10 years to avoid the most catastrophic consequences of the climate crisis.

    The Illinois Commerce Commission must vote no.
    Parth Patel
  • June 19, 2020

    I would like to vote no for the DAPL. Angie
  • June 19, 2020

    hello, please consider that this pipeline is a subsidy for the fossil fuel industry. This will bring more pollution and environmental destruction to my home state. I urge you to reject this immediately. No more pipelines. Mark Brouwer
  • June 19, 2020

    Members of the Illinois Commerce Commission,

    Please deny the DAPL petition to expand the pipeline capacity. This expansion is against the public interest and will enrich the fossil fuel industry at a time when we should be making every effort to move to renewable energy. The public is watching your decision. We need you to choose wisely.
    Brette Fiedelman
  • June 19, 2020

    I’m strongly against the the expansion of the Dakota Pipeline. It’s disgusting and is unnecessary for our time. Illinois could construct renewable energy sources instead and still bring jobs to the state. Ralf
  • June 19, 2020

    This pipeline is an undeniable step in the wrong direction. Pollution is wreaking havoc on the environment, wildlife, and our own communities. This is unacceptable. The climate crisis is right at our doorstep. We’re running out of time. Xueyi Lu
  • June 19, 2020

    To the members of the Illinois Commerce Commission

    We're at a unique moment in world history where every choice we make in regards to the planet will have huge repercussions for future generations. Now more than ever we need to be shifting away from fossil fuels and investing in renewable energy. I urge you to deny the expansion of DAPL through Illinois.
    Lorraine Boissoneault
  • June 19, 2020

    We need to thwart all expansions of efforts to exploit fossil fuels until we have a mechanism in place to charge CO2 polluters for the true costs of their activity to all of us. Ron J. Low
  • June 19, 2020

    Do not allow the DAPL to cross through Illinois. We're in the middle of a global climate criss caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The ICC will be complicit in this crisis if it approves the DAPL. This particular pipeline violates the sovereignty of the Standing Rock Sioux (which the ICC will also be complicit in), poisons water sources, and normalizes the burning of fossil fuels. Illinois also recently passed legislation to criminalize protesting energy infrastructure projects (not a coincidence), so this project would cause further state violence to be inflicted upon people protecting the land and water. You need to hold fossil fuel companies to a much higher standard for approval of their projects, and make it extremely difficult to justify their activities in the context of the climate crisis. We need to invest in renewable energy infrastructure instead. Business as usual is killing us. Maddy Low
  • June 19, 2020

    The expansion of the DAPL is a dangerous and extremely unnecessary move. The risks to the environment, air and water are scientifically proven and the health endangerment to thousands will be a cost that far outweighs any benefit that is envisioned by this construction. Illinois citizens cannot be compromised to ensure some short term gains for the fossil fuel industry. As the Covid 19 time period has emphasized, the need for more oil is certainly in question. And the time to be concerned about climate change is at hand. This pipeline expansion is a dinosaur that we must rein in while turning our sights towards renewable energy.
    Please vote to halt the DAPL expansion and be a voice for all people in Illinois now and for future generations.
    Andrea Amend
  • June 19, 2020

    Hello,

    I'm writing to request that the ICC not approve the petition for additional pumping stations and increased capacity on the Dakota Access pipeline. The capacity increase will not benefit Illinois in any relevant capacity and exposes the state to a much greater risk of oil leaks and environmental accidents. There is no compelling reason to approve this petition.

    Thank you for your understanding,
    Vivek
    Vivek Doshi
  • June 19, 2020

    To the members of the ICC,

    I am writing to strongly encourage you to vote "No" on the petition to increase capacity on the Dakota Access pipeline and install additional pumping stations. It will do little, if anything, to benefit Illinois while exposing the state to much greater risk of environmental calamity. I urge you to make the choice that is right for Illinois and the world at large.
    Vivek Doshi
  • June 22, 2020

    It is critical that the request to double the size of the Dakota Access Pipeline be denied.

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has clearly laid out the tremendous financial and human costs of failing to dramatically and immediately cut our carbon emissions. Expanding the pipeline puts our children, grandchildren and even the current generation in harm's way with increasing risks of food shortages, wildfires, flooding and other extreme weather events, and puts the longer term survival of our entire civilization and species at risk.

    The price of oil and demand for oil is currently very low - now is the time to ramp up renewable energy generation and ramp down fossil fuel usage. Expanding oil infrastructure is not essential and is not what should be prioritized during a pandemic.

    The original permits for the pipeline are no longer valid, due to a court finding that there needs to be a full Environmental Impact Statement for the pipeline - without even knowing the environmental impacts, it would be reckless to move forward with approval.

    There have been at least 12 spills in the past 3 years of DAPL Pipeline operation. The pipeline threatens the drinking water source of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota, and also poses a threat to the health and wellbeing of many other people along the pipeline route. The pipeline also violates the 1851 and 1868 Fort Laramie treaties with indigenous peoples.

    Please do not consider this ill-advised plan, which endangers our citizens, provides very little if any benefit to Illinois, and will contribute to the climate change that poses an existential crisis to our entire species.
    Shira Hammann
  • June 22, 2020

    I urge you to reject the proposal to double the amount of oil pumping through the Dakota Access Pipeline. ETP, not Illinois, would be the beneficiary of this increased capacity. But, Illinois would bear its adverse consequences. Pumping more oil through the pipeline will elevate the local risks of an oil spill contaminating Illinois land and water. Moreover, as we face a climate crisis with its enormous costs to our state and planet, it is essential that we enact policies which encourage the transition to green energy, not the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure. Thank you for consideration of my voice on this important decision. Laura Winston
  • June 22, 2020

    To the members of the ICC,

    I am writing to strongly encourage you to vote "No" on the petition to increase capacity on the Dakota Access pipeline and install additional pumping stations
    Claudia
  • June 22, 2020

    To the members of the ICC,

    I am writing to demand that you to vote "No" on the petition to increase capacity on the Dakota Access pipeline and install additional pumping stations. It will do little, if anything, to benefit Illinois while exposing the state to much greater risk of environmental calamity. I urge you to make the choice that is right for Illinois and the world at large.

    Thank you.
    Kyla Jarka
  • June 23, 2020

    Dear ICC Members,

    I am writing as a Climate activist for Illinois as well as our Nation! I continue to be gravely concerned for increased air, ground and water pollution and the steady destruction of our natural resources throughout our states. Expanding DAPL is a disaster for our climate, a threat to our drinking water, and an insult to indigenous and underpriveledged people, as well as agricultural and farming communities! Please vote "NO" on any expansion of the Dakota Access Pipe Line!

    Thank you for your consideration!
    Alex Hallett
  • June 30, 2020

    I am an activist with 350 Chicago, a local grassroots environmental organization. Our organization filed a complaint with the Office of the Executive Inspector General on June 9. In the complaint, we asked that Commissioner Michael Carrigan recuse himself from Docket 19-0673 because of his labor union leadership roles and recent affiliation with parties to the case in accordance with Section 2-108 of the Public Utilities Act.  

    On June 10, we emailed a copy of our complaint to ICC Chairman Carrie Zalewski. We have not received a response. We would like to know whether you received our complaint, and to know whether this issue is being investigated.

    Alex McLeese and 350 Chicago
    Alex McLeese
  • July 22, 2020

    Dear ICC Commissioners,

    I am writing on behalf of 350 Chicago, a local grassroots environmental organization. We are posting this comment to state that we oppose the proposed doubling of the Dakota Access Pipeline. One reason for our opposition is that there is no longer the demand for increased capacity on the pipeline.

    As Reuters reported on July 2 in an article entitled “Energy Transfer digs in on North Dakota pipeline expansion despite oil slump, sources say” -

    “Energy Transfer wants to nearly double the size of the line, and some companies that signed up say it is no longer necessary due to the sharp fall in U.S. oil production after the coronavirus pandemic….

    Users say an expansion to 1.1 million bpd is unlikely to be filled because the state’s [North Dakota’s] production is not expected to rebound soon. ‘Honestly, DAPL is not needed,’ said one customer who committed to space on the expanded line, speaking on condition of anonymity. ‘They’re trying to build a house that all these people signed up for. Even if there’s no longer a need for the house, you can’t really walk away from it. Would I like to get out? Yes, for sure.’…

    ‘At the moment I don’t think the demand is there from shippers for more DAPL, given the decline in Bakken output,’ said Sandy Fielden, director of oil and products research at Morningstar in Austin, Texas.”

    This article makes clear that demand for the expanded capacity on the pipeline does not exist. The quantities of oil for which companies signed up originally was lower than the 530,000 increase in capacity that DAPL/ETCO has petitioned for. And now the companies are saying that they have no need for the additional capacity. Even Energy Transfer, the parent of DAPL/ETCO, has admitted this by telling their shareholders that they do not see a need for more than a 31 percent increase rather than the 92 percent increase they have petitioned for. We don’t think even this smaller increase is necessary.

    On July 6, a district court judge ordered that the Dakota Access Pipeline be shut down and emptied while the United States Army Corps of Engineers conducts an extensive environmental impact review. That decision is being appealed. The process of conducting the environmental impact review would take 13 months or so, and would be followed by public hearings that would last months more and possible further legal actions. It does not make sense to make a decision approving the doubling of the capacity of DAPL when the whole pipeline may be shut down for a long period of time or indefinitely. At the end of this process, the oil industry in the Dakotas may be encountering significant economic problems, and the demand for the DAPL expansion may not exist. The doubling of the pipeline should not be approved.

    Alex McLeese and 350 Chicago
    Alex McLeese
  • July 27, 2020

    I am opposed to the proposed increase to flow volume in the DAPL/ETCO pipelines specifically because of the increased hazards caused by the increased flow and generally because of the great harm being done to the earth and the environment by the petroleum industries. From exploration, through production, transportation, storage, refining, and distribution, at every step, the environment is damaged and life is endangered, frequently concentrating this endangerment on the most vulnerable among us.

    At the well site and from related extraction methods like fracking, there is localized damage, along with surface and subsurface contamination and release of gaseous hydrocarbons damaging to the world environment and climate stability. In transportation, by whatever means, there is endangerment of the environment from spills, leaks, breaks and fires. In the case of transportation by pipeline, rights-of-way are most frequently taken by eminent domain based upon faulty rationale of general benefit with limited recognition of the transfer of risk to the landowners and nearby residents, and no acknowledgement of the ultimate environmental damage done by the industries facilitated by the pipeline.

    At the termination of the transportation of petroleum products is the refining industry. Here again are the risks of spillage, leakage, breaks, fires, and unprogrammed releases. The release of by-products is governed by laws fashioned by the industry and these emissions typically have their greatest impact on the health of persons in vulnerable low income and minority communities. Downstream of the refining is the transportation, storage, and consumption of the end products. The resultant emissions and their effects on the environment are well documented.

    The time has arrived for a halt to the removal of hydrocarbons from the earth and their dispersal along with their by-products, into the environment. When the holistic view of the process cycle is taken, the harm no longer justifies the economics of petroleum extraction and processing. Their economic model is one of greed and letting others assume the risks of damage. This has been facilitated by industry-influenced laws to their own advantage. To say that this huge industry would be decimated by weaning from petroleum is short-sighted. The infrastructure, jobs, and industrial impact can be rapidly replaced by other energy sources with resultant benefit to us all. We must remember that one of the results of the rise of petroleum was an end to the use of whale oil. We no longer kill whales for their oil. Time and technology march on. The era of petroleum must come to an end.

    We can never remediate the damage we have done to the environment, but we can give nature the opportunity to repair itself, if we do it before it is too late.
    Judith Vesely
  • July 29, 2020

    As a mother who is concerned for the well being of future generations, I'm against the installation of additional pumping stations and pumping facilities to double the oil flowing through Illinois. A sustainable future requires that we move away from fossils. Do not authorize Section - 8- 503 of the public utilities act. Gloria Fallon
  • August 4, 2020

    Dear ICC Commissioners,

    Last week, I sent this message on behalf of 350 Chicago to the Office of the Executive Inspector General - "Last month, we at 350 Chicago sent a complaint to your office asking you to investigate whether ICC Commissioner Michael Carrigan should have recused himself from the DAPL doubling case 19-0673. Carrigan has stated that he will not do so because it has not been shown that he is personally biased. We do not believe his response is adequate. While we are not lawyers, it is our understanding that regulations including Section 2-108 of the Public Utilities Act and 83 Ill. Adm. Code 100 say that commissioners who have recently been associated with parties in cases must recuse themselves. This means that Carrigan should not participate in case 19-0673. Are you satisfied with Carrigan’s decision not to recuse himself? We ask that your office further investigate this matter."

    Alex McLeese and 350 Chicago
    Alex McLeese
  • August 17, 2020

    Vote a strong NO to the dapl expansion. We need forward thinking leaders to move us away from fossil fuels. Shannon Donley
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this Expansion because-
    • The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent—but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.
    • Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.
    • On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    •ETIT has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Peter Anderson
  • October 13, 2020

    I strenuously oppose granting Dakota Access and Energy Transfer a permit to build two new pumping stations and to upgrade a third pumping station in Illinois. The Dakota Access pipeline should never have been constructed the way it was in the first place, without a full Environmental Impact Study. U/S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled against DAPL in July and has ordered that the Army Corp of Engineers must conduct such a study, which could take 13 months.

    It makes no sense, while this EIS is being conducted, to grant a permit to DAPL and ETCO to expand their operation since the future of the entire pipeline is in doubt. The Standing Rock Sioux have been vindicated. Their rights to a safe supply of drinking water is more important that the needs of oil producers to more profit.

    Meanwhile, we have overwhelming evidence in the wildfire season and the hurricane season of 2020 that the climate crisis is upon us. The commission must not rule that the people of Illinois need even more fossil fuel flowing through our state, when it is obvious that we need to slash our consumption of fossil fuel radically and begin the difficult but necessary transition to an economy fueled by wind, solar, geothermal, and other forms of renewable energy. Building new fossil fuel infrastructure at this time tends to "lock in" the commitment to continuing business as usual. But "business as usual," the continuing extraction, transportation, refinement, sale, and consumption of fossil fuels is leading us towards catastrophe. I beg the members of the Illinois commerce Commission to take leadership in the face of the climate crisis and to say NO to the DAPL- ETCO permit requested in Docket 19-0673.

    I
    Mary Shesgreen
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose adding pumping stations and facilities expanding pipelines in Illinois. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent —but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC. Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC. Most importantly, on September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. Macaire Grambauer
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because of the following reasons.

    The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 pct—but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.

    Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.

    On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.

    ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.

    Thank you,
    Meredith West
    Concerned Citizen of Illinois
    Meredith West
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because

    The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.

    ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport, evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Carol Frischman
  • October 13, 2020

    To Whom It May Concern,

    I am writing to ask you to not approve expansion of the Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC in Illinois. I oppose this expansion because on September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. In addition to that, ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil. It is immoral that Illinois would get all of the risk while ETP would get all of the benefit, especially in the middle of a climate crisis.

    Sincerely,

    Noel Jones
    Chicago, IL
    Noel M Jones
  • October 13, 2020

    AGREE COMPLETELY WITH THIS COMPLAINANT QUOTED BELOW

    "Last week, I sent this message on behalf of 350 Chicago to the Office of the Executive Inspector General "Last month, we at 350 Chicago sent a complaint to your office asking you to investigate whether ICC Commissioner Michael Carrigan should have recused himself from the DAPL doubling case 19-0673. Carrigan has stated that he will not do so because it has not been shown that he is personally biased. We do not believe his response is adequate. While we are not lawyers, it is our understanding that regulations including Section 2-108 of the Public Utilities Act and 83 Ill. Adm. Code 100 say that commissioners who have recently been associated with parties in cases must recuse themselves. This means that Carrigan should not participate in case 19-0673. Are you satisfied with Carrigan’s decision not to recuse himself? We ask that your office further investigate this matter."

    FURTHERMORE, flowing more OIL into Illinois directly THREATENS ILLINOIS' ecosystems- and especially Lake Michigan, the clean drinking water source for MILLIONS!! Not too long ago, BP oil refineries in Whiting Indiana had a significant oil spill. UNACCEPTABLE.

    WE NEED TO REEL IN OUR FOSSIL FUEL USAGE- NOT AMP IT UP! THE SCIENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING IS UNEQUIVOCAL AND CANNOT BE DEBATED, AND OUR ACTIONS HENCEFORTH NEED TO REFLECT A DECIDED MOVEMENT TOWARD RENEWABLES.
    Nicole Beck
  • October 13, 2020

    It is unbelievable that we must beg the ICC to vote no on 8-503. Any fair minded citizen knows that we must stop the fossil fuel industry from any new oil development if we have any concern for the storms of the future and the ability to sustain life on this planet. The public agrees that we must take action to stop the Green House Gases, think carbon, distruction that we are seeing; fires, floods, hurricains, droughts... migrations where land is no longer viable after generations of stable weather patterns. So, Illinois has an opportunity to take responsibility by stopping further expansion (use) of the pipelines in Illinois. Will the commissioner appointees of the ICC vote for the safety of our planet or will they vote for big industry? M. Catherine Buntin
  • October 13, 2020

    Today is Indigenous People's Day. As an American, it breaks my heart how we have treated our Native people. DAPL has walked all over Native People's rights and they continue to do so against the views of Illinoisans. There is no need for an expansion of oil production. We are living in a pandemic where people who can are working from home. We certainly aren't calling for increased oil. In fact, they are practically giving gas away for free. Stop the production. Shut down DAPL for the good of our environment and with respect for the people who live along it's pathway.

    Water is LIFE!
    Carol Fendt
  • October 13, 2020

    To the Illinois Commerce Commission, I write urging you not to approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. I oppose this expansion for several reasons, first and foremost because the climate emergency requires swift and strong action to decrease, not increase fossil fuel production. But also because the fossil fuel industry is slowly but surely shutting down and you as well as the rest of our state leadership must acknowledge that fossil fuels are on their way out as a leading industry. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production - drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent. On September 23, Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. You must take up your responsibility to the residents of Illinois and to the state's environmental health and shut down, rather than expand, the pipeline. Cheryl Brumbaugh-Cayford
  • October 13, 2020

    NO NO NO patricia fraser
  • October 13, 2020

    Dear Commissioners and Commission staff,

    As a citizen of Illinois and the world I urge you to oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. And I, and many others, have said as much before. Have you heard of the term regulatory capture? Let me define it for you, the industry that is being regulated captures the regulators regulating it. Was your proposed order written by Energy Transfer Partners? It reads like their testimony exactly and completely ignores the testimony of those rightly opposing the expansion.

    QUESTION, Are you public servants or corporate servants? More importantly, are you parents? Do you want your children to have the same opportunities you've had? Consider what your work to increase fossil fuel production will do to the planet your children live on. We are already experiencing massive economic and social disruption from simultaneous hurricanes, wildfires and drought made significantly more intense by fossil fuel generated climate change. With this proposed order you are part of a massive, collective business as usual juggernaut which is grinding the futures of your own children into ash and dust. For their sakes oppose this expansion.

    QUESTION, is the ICC about regulating the Illinois economy so that it can be competitive now and into the future? Do you read the reports of the international energy agency? Do you read the annual letters of financiers of people like Larry Fink at Blackrock? You should, it's your job to know about the industries you regulate. Fossil fuels are the past. They're finished. The Dakota Access Pipeline is on its way to being a stranded asset, an irrelevance. Energy Transfer Partners reads those reports. They know this to be true. Your order is simply allowing them to squeeze the last cash they can out of their irrelevant 20th century business before they move into the future of clean, sustainable, renewable energy. They don't care about Illinois, they care only about their shareholders short term interests. Don't participate in this schill.

    Also, the Bakken oil field is shutting down, drying up, and its producers are declaring bankruptcy. ETP is cutting rates to attract shippers. Why do they need to increase capacity? DAPL does not comply with NEPA. And most of the oil, if not all, will be exported providing no benefit to anyone but ETP.

    Vote logically. Vote with your conscience. Vote for your children. Listen to us, the people of Illinois. It's your job.

    Respectfully,

    David O'Donnell
    David ODonnell
  • October 13, 2020

    I strongly urge you to reject this expansion request. It poses great risk to the environment of our state for no good reason. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; rather, it is obvious that ETP plans to export this oil. Even if an out-of-state market is identified, Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. The ICC should protect the interests of the citizens of Illinois, not the oil business! Kathleen Hamill
  • October 13, 2020

    Let's not do this. We need to be taking this pipe out of the ground, not filling it with even more oil. Vote no. A leak would be devastating at this capacity. And the time to make long-term investments in carbon-based infrastructure is long over. Whatever they were going to invest in this project should be put towards building a modern energy system. John Kokoris
  • October 13, 2020

    Increasing the capabilities of this pipeline will allow even greater and even irreparable damage to our environment, our homes and our bodies. I support revoking permits for additional pump stations and facilities in the State of Illinois. The fate of our State and of our very lives depends on us being good stewards of the planet. The ICC must act responsibly in this matter and vote No to the industry's request. Timothea Papas
  • October 13, 2020

    I'm against the installation of additional pumping stations and pumping facilities to double the oil flowing through Illinois. Please vote against this proposed action. KAREN A NELSON
  • October 13, 2020

    The expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline is completely unnecessary now because there is so much less demand for oil due to the pandemic. Producers who would have used the pipeline are declaring bankruptcy and going out of business. In September, Illinois was one of fifteen states asking the DC Court of Appeals to temporarily shut down the line to allow the Army Corps of Engineers to comply with NEPA and to consider climate change. There is evidence that the oil which would flow through this expanded pipeline is destined for export. How and where does our state stand to benefit? All of the risk of the inevitable spills for what? Please do not allow this to happen. Mary Griswold
  • October 13, 2020

    Hello,

    I am writing to express strong opposition to the the request to nearly double the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Energy Transfer Crude Oil pipeline. This request is unacceptable for the following reasons
    1) On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    2) Energy Transfer Partners (ETP) has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil. This situation means that Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.

    I am calling on the Illinois Commerce Commission to vote no.
    Parth Patel
  • October 13, 2020

    I vehemently oppose the expansion. It's become obvious that ETP plans to export the additional oil, so Illinois isn't even benefitting from all the risk it would shoulder from transporting 1.1 million barrels of oil a day. Shut it down. Taylor M
  • October 13, 2020

    I'm vehemently opposed to further development of the DAPL/ETCO pipelines. Any good reason you may have heard for the completion of these projects is likely farcical. Pipelines typically leak and tax payers cover the bill for clean up. Employment opportunities from the construction project are minimal. Construction will be disruptive to the surrounding ecosystems, watersheds, farms and properties. We know full well that the DAPL/ETCO pipelines are not reflective of an intelligent or ethical energy policy. LeRoy F. Bach
  • October 13, 2020

    I am an Illinois resident and voting American citizen. I have long been concerned about environmental pollution, its effect on the health of myself, my family and fellow Americans. This crisis of contamination now threatens the whole planet, our culture and economy. Major weather pattern changes are creating regular climate disasters that are elevating previous concerns to panic. Public opinion polls reflect this, with a large majority of our country's populace agreeing. Yet American businesses and often OUR own government entities, such as the ICC, appear to refuse to acknowledge this pending catastrophe and operate business as usual.This is shocking.

    Due to this concern the Dakota Access Pipeline should never have been built. In acknowledgment of that, a Federal judge ruled this year that the Army Corps of Engineers permits were not issued in compliance with NEPA. The judge was so aggrieved by the provided evidence that the pipeline was ordered shutdown. The latter part of the ruling was overruled, but sixteen states, including Illinois, have filed suit in D.C. Circuit of Appeals. Filed in September of this year, the suit demands at least temporary shutdown of the pipeline while the Corps correct their previous lapses with NEPA. This is no time to be considering doubling the capacity of a dirty fossil fuel pipeline whose actual approval and existence is questioned.

    The dirty oil being transported is harmful to our environment and will only force further global climate change. This oil represents the old direction of the economy that brought us to this point. For at least the last decade a gradual change to clean and sustainable energy has been underway. This needs to be encouraged more with a serious move away from the dirty fossil fuels that represent the unhealthy and dangerous past. We must learn from the mistakes.

    This economic movement, along with this years COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of oil prices and Bakken oil production. Drill rigs are shutting down. Producers are declaring bankruptcy. Affiliated sub-contractors are closing down business in the area and moving or laying off employees. This included my son-in-law who only kept his job by transferring from ND to OH. Williston ND has gone from a boom town to one starting to take on appearance of a ghost town. Shuttered homes and businesses. The oil output from this area has declined by 40 percent. Has ETP acknowledged these facts at the ICC?

    Other economic data support this. Oil shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL and ETP has cut rates to keep shippers on its pipeline. Has ETP shared that with the ICC? Has ETP identified a single U.S. refinery that has accepted the additional oil that an expansion of the pipeline would transport? These economic conditions indicate that ETP must plan to export this oil. Illinois farmers and residents must accept the environmental risks while ETP gets all of the benefit. This is unacceptable.

    ETP can clearly see the writing on the wall. They want to extract as much of an American resource that should stay in the ground. Then ship it overseas before they see a more permanent collapse in the fossil fuel market. But the planet, climate change and our own personal environments cannot stand more of this stress just for the sake of a quick profit now. We must must look to the future and the health of our population and environment.
    Lawrence Frey
  • October 13, 2020

    No, no, no to the addition of pumps for the DAPL to pump more oil to contaminate the water, air and soil. Charles Ryan, Chicago Charles Ryan
  • October 13, 2020

    I’m concerned about water quality and our children’s future. Please do NOT approve this permit Wynne Coplea
  • October 13, 2020

    Please stop this atrocity from coming to fruition!! Maria Gilfillan
  • October 13, 2020

    I am submitting this comment to register my opposition to the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. In addition to being disrespectful towards indigenous communities, specifically the Sioux nation, this pipeline also contributes to climate change. On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. It is baffling that instead of shutting it down, the pipeline might receive a permit for expansion. I hope the Illinois Commerce Commission will do the right thing and not approve this permit. Supriya K
  • October 13, 2020

    Relative to Dakota Access, LLC and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC

    Keep fossil fuels in the ground. I do not want a pipeline bursting in my yard. I do not want the Earth devastated.

    You cannot give 100 percent insurance that a pipeline will not burst. Please, no increase of any pipeline.

    Thank you for preserving our one green Earth.
    Janice Gintzler
  • October 13, 2020

    Please do NOT expand DAPL access. Illinois needs to use and transport less fossil fuel and use more renewable energy. Jen Packheiser
  • October 13, 2020

    Please vote "No" on the Dakota Access pipeline. It has been proven that there is little if any use for the oil there...............no one wants it. That alone would be a good reason to deny further use of this pipeline. Thank you for your attention to this issue. Charlotte Jones
  • October 13, 2020

    COVID-19 has highlighted the decline of the fossil fuel industry and the harms that this work has. I oppose this expansion and urge the ICC to fight against climate change. Ella Wischnewsky
  • October 13, 2020

    I am totally opposed to any more destruction of our planet and danger to the people of Illinois health and for the future 7 generations by doubling the capacity of the oil of this unethical company that has numerous spills and major damage to the environment. Everyone is switching to renewables and all these companies have had at least 30 years to make the transition. All the reputable scientists and people who would be directly impacted have said no, no, no. repeatedly and there also appears to be some conflict of interest with the people involved.

    We do not want any more of these irresponsible companies doing business in Illinois.
    Savannah Hawkins
  • October 13, 2020

    DAPL is an obomination. Do NOT allow something so harmful and pointless to move forward! Todd Everett
  • October 13, 2020

    I would ask the Commission to reject Dakota Access, LLC request for additional pumping stations. Scott Allen
  • October 13, 2020

    Please do not expand the DAPL. Poisoning our land and water for centuries in exchange for short-term corporate profits is not a good return on investment for anyone. Thank you! Charles Johnson
  • October 13, 2020

    I am writing to express my opposition to permitting the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline through Illinois. Expansion is not warranted—ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport. The evidence points to ETP planning to export this oil, which means that Illinois takes on all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. As a citizen, as a mother concerned with our state’s health and safety, I urge you to deny this request. Jacquelyn Pope
  • October 13, 2020

    Please not approve the Dakota pipeline project. We need renewable energy now not fossil fuels. The time is running out on climate change. Any expansion will end up as stranded assets. Illinois cannot afford the pipeline expansion money wise and from an emissions standpoint. Thomas Coleman
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because-
    • The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.
    • Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.
    • On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. 
    • ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Emily Murphy
  • October 13, 2020

    Do NOT grant the permit to expand access. This is a further imposition on the health of the general populace for the sake of profit.

    This is not sustainable. Why hasn't ETP acknowledged that COVID has stifled production and shut down rigs at the ICC?

    This is not necessary.
    Luis Vargas
  • October 13, 2020

    Please vote NO on the expansion of the DAPL extension. Thank you. Marjorie Woolard
  • October 13, 2020

    Please, please, please vote no on this expansion. We must turn away from dirty, hazardous fossil fuels and turn toward renewable energy. If this expansion passes, it will directly contribute to the worsening of our already terrifying climate crisis. If those in power don't start acting in a climate conscious manner by voting no on expansions like these and saying no to the fossil fuel industry, then you are facilitating the demise of ecosystems and humans. Olivia Boyle
  • October 13, 2020

    Hello,

    I am opposed to this expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) in our state.

    I do not want dirty oil flowing through our state; I want us to be a leader in clean energy.

    This proposed expansion would increase risks of leaks and increase the magnitude of these leaks.

    On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil.

    Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. This is not right.

    I urge you to deny the request for expansion.
    Thank you.

    Sincerely,
    Nikoletta Antonakos
    Nikoletta Antonakos
  • October 13, 2020

    There are so many reasons to oppose DAPL expansion. From the climate crisis, to indigenous sovereignty, to clean water. Please, please, please, do not say yes to these pumping stations. Caroline Wooten
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. Oil is not the way to go. We need renewable energy. Not more fossil fuels that are damaging to the environment and the community. Caitlin Guerra
  • October 13, 2020

    I strongly oppose this expansion because
    1. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production, drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent, but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.
    2. Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL, ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines, but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.
    3. On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    4. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport. Evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil, Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.

    Cheers,
    Nancy Holda
    Nancy Holda
  • October 13, 2020

    VOTE NO! Illinois needs to moving forward with clean energy. We should not be doubling the capacity of DAPL. With drill rigs shutting down and producers declaring bankruptcy, we need to put our support around clean nergy that are more stable for our economic and environmental future. Katie Binhack
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion for the following reasons.

    The ETP will not acknowledge that the expansion is not needed based on oil industry issues stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic and the public's demand for a transition to renewable energy. Drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent.
    I agree with those that want to see an immediate transition to renewable energy. Expanding oil and gas infrastructure at this time makes no sense and keeps us further from solving the climate crisis. On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL. ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.
    ETP has not identified any U.S. refineries that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil. This is an unfair risk exchange - Illinois takes on all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Yvonne Besyk
  • October 13, 2020

    The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent—but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC. Carter Cleland
  • October 13, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline with new pumping stations and pipeline in Illinois.
    At a time when all climate indicators call for a reduction of fossil fuels, Energy Transfer wants you to believe this project is beneficial, rather than another profit-driven, growth oriented, dangerous venture. I urge you to listen to the studies and testimonies of concerned experts.

    Annette Rozier
    Annette Braden-Rozier
  • October 13, 2020

    Please don’t let more Dakota Access pumping stations and facilities be installed. We need to be walking away from fossil fuels towards clean, renewable energy. Kathleen Y Drury
  • October 13, 2020

    On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with the environmental impact review. Hence what is the point of doubling the capacity of a pipeline that is shut down, and may very well be dissassembled once the Environmental impact assessment reveals that ETP did not fullfill the requirements set forth by the EPA when crossing water bodies?
    Futhermore demand for Bakken oil is dropping and DAPL is actually underutilized. Both from a business standpoint and from an environmental standpoint this pipeline has not reason to exist. What is the point of doubling its capacity? So that it turns a very short term profit for a single CEO? At the expense of the health of millions of Illinoisans?
    Gwenn-Ael Lynn
  • October 13, 2020

    Leading figures in the USA Scientific Community like Esteemed Dr.Jane Goodall, Professor Katherine Hayhoe Texas Tech, one author Chicago Climate Action Plan. Environmentalist Bill McKibben, climatologist Dr.James Hansem and NewYorker science Journalist ElizabethKolbert have spoken ou tabout connectivity between viral pandemics, climate change, environmental degradation, and our societal addiction to fossil fuels.Those realit yfactors make proposed expansionof the Dakota Access Pipeline at this time obscene and a threat to public health. Keep also in mind IL growing commitmen to Green Jobs and further deployment of renewable energy like wind, solar, and hydrogen.Kee pIL along this "Green" highwa yand reject this discredited proposal toexpand the Dakota Access Pipeline. Dr .R. A. . Rosenstein
  • October 13, 2020

    Please don't approve this. Do what clearly demonstrates that Illinois puts the safety of its people and property above all! Robin Migalla
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because

    The COVID19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production. Drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent, but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.

    Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL. ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines, but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.

    On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.

    ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil. Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Margaret Denny
  • October 13, 2020

    Please do not expand the Dakota Access Pipeline. Alexandra Sipiora
  • October 13, 2020

    Please do not allow this expansion because ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    Thank you,
    Linda K
    Linda Kurtz
  • October 13, 2020

    We oppose the doubling of the Dakota Access pumping facilities! Sandra Kaptain
  • October 13, 2020

    As a Mother, Grandmother, and environmental activist I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline because clean air and clean water are important to me. I live in a very ecologically sensitive region at the confluence of the Mississippi, Illinois and Missouri River that are threatened everyday with a pipeline breach as crude oil travels alongside and in some instances under these rivers. It is not a question of if, but when, a leak will occur.
    Energy Transfer Partners have not been forthcoming with the Illinois Commerce Commission about the underutilization of the existing DAPL pipeline and ETP has not identified where the additional oil will be transferred, and since the pandemic has practically put a halt on Bakken Oil production there is no need for added pipeline capacity. Since the existing DAPL is not being used at capacity ETP is slashing rates to keep business going.
    Illinois is involved with other states in a lawsuit calling for a shutdown until the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA, so we know the pipeline is already problematic.
    For these reasons I ask the Illinois Commerce Commission not to approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion Permit.
    Thank you,
    Virginia Woulfe-Beile
    Virginia J Woulfe-Beile
  • October 13, 2020

    I am opposed to the proposed increase to flow volume in the DAPL/ETCO pipelines because of the increased hazards caused by the increased flow and generally because of the great harm being done to the earth and the environment by the petroleum industries. At every step, the environment is damaged and life is endangered, from exploration, production, transportation, storage, refining, and distribution. This could have a long lasting environmental impact. We need to protect what little is left. Victoria Fuller
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because on September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. Tonyisha Harris
  • October 13, 2020

    Bakken's oil production has collapsed amid the pandemic. Drilling has shut down, producers are going bankrupt and output has declined by 40 percent. Yet ETP denies these facts.

    Shippers are underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP won't share that with the ICC.

    Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport, indicating that ETP plans to export this oil.

    The State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change on September 23, 2020, calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    Michael Weimann
  • October 13, 2020

    Please vote a strong no for the Dakota Access Pipeline. The future is in green energy and there's not time to waste. Lynn Pollack
  • October 13, 2020

    I am against the pipeline. We need to move away from fossil fuels. Andrew Sloan
  • October 13, 2020

    There is no reason to expand the capacity of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The fossil fuel industry is in decline. Demand is down and will continue to drop as renewables continue to become cheaper, providing increasing percentages of energy demand, and slowing the disastrous emissions of carbon dioxide. I've seen reports that shippers are under utilizing the DAPL, so why expand capacity? Double DAPL is unwise both economically and environmentally. James Gibbs
  • October 13, 2020

    Writing to express a strong NO to the DAPL expansion. We need forward thinking leaders to move us away from fossil fuels. Renee Patten
  • October 13, 2020

    I oppose the proposed DAPL expansion because it is linked to destructive climate change and would be too risky to Illinois. It would not be a smart or worthwhile project. Mary Barbezat
  • October 14, 2020

    I am writing to you today to ask you not to approve the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The devastating impacts of climate change the scientists have been warning us about for some time is already here. We see it in the climate change related wildfires destroying millions of acres of land, trees, homes and human lives in 12 western states. The same is true in the Gulf Coast from hurricanes that are much more frequent and destructive causing massive flooding and destruction in another ten southern states.
    We know all of this destruction is caused by fossil fuel carbon pollution. We also know this destruction will continue to increase unless we all work together to reduce the carbon pollution in the atmosphere.
    You have an opportunity now to take a positive step in that direction and that is not to further expand the production and transfer of fossil fuels. Do the right thing and reject the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
    Sincerely Jack Kelly
    Jack Kelly
  • October 14, 2020

    I don't care, and the ICC shouldn't either, how many other organizations and state authorities have already approved portions of the Dakota Access Pipeline to be built and expanded. It is NOT RIGHT for us or anyone to be continuing with fossil fuel infrastructure build out. We need to build out a sustainable future for ourselves NOW. We need to be making the right decisions NOW to prepare for our future and this is not it. Fossil fuel use must be ended. True leaders are needed to stand up and say NO to this and related projects and to instead redirect energy and resources towards appropriate infrastructure in green, renewable, sustainable technologies. Please be those leaders, leaders of which we can be proud for setting an example and putting us on a sustainable, livable future. Jennifer Linton
  • October 14, 2020

    I adamantly oppose this proposed expansion of The Dakota Access Pipeline. Any further investment in this dying industry is reckless in that it demonstrates the state prioritizing short-term profit over the long-term health and wellbeing of its people. To protect our environment and ensure hopeful economic outlooks for generations to come, we must oppose this expansion. Timothy Arnold
  • October 14, 2020

    We need to continue moving away from fossil fuels and invest in clean energy sources. DAPL does not belong in Illinois. Alex Parker
  • October 14, 2020

    Please don't allow any expansion of existing pipelines. This is short-term thinking - any financial gains made with the pipeline will be erased very soon by climate change damage. Illinoisans don't want the DAPL at all - o we certainly don't want it expanded. This is way too risky a move for Illinois. Every time we allow or even incentivize fossil fuel expansion, we're creating even more painful work to undo the damage in the near future. NO on expansion. KELLY STOCK
  • October 14, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. Please vote NO on this expansion and be on the right side of history. You should be supporting projects that enable Illinois to transition to a clean economy - not those that will contribute to the climate crisis that is already taking a toll here on agriculture in IL and threatens future generations.
    Sincerely,
    Laura Winston
    Laura Winston
  • October 14, 2020

    Please do not expand the DAPL pipeline. We need to instead expand and invest in solar, wind, and other renewable energies for our children's future, and not in fossil fuels which exacerbate climate change and the resulting environmental (and therefore human) devastation. Please be forward thinking leaders and say no. Andrea Troolin
  • October 14, 2020

    I am strongly against the oil pipelines in Illinois. They can be toxic. They are unnecessary with the world moving away from fossil fuels. They do not benefit us Illinoisans in any way. Joseph J Zefran
  • October 14, 2020

    I am strongly opposed to the expansion of the Dakota access pipeline. Overall, this is a collapsing business as the world is moving away from oil. The issues regarding climate change are severe and there is no reason to expand on a dying business and contributing to the destruction of our planet. Laura Davis
  • October 14, 2020

    Don’t approve the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion permit! Sarah Cnota
  • October 14, 2020

    Dear Officials, Our world needs to come together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for our health, safety and economies. I oppose the expansion of the DAPL because in reality we need to radically reduce the use of fossil fuels. Illinois needs to do our part. Sarah Sanford
  • October 14, 2020

    Approving the Dakota Access Pipeline harms Illinois and benefits only the oil company who will ship the oil overseas. There is no benefit to Illinois residents or the state and there are many risks. Oil is bad business and not the right business for Illinois. Deny the Dakota Access Pipeline expansion. Put our people and our land over Texas oil company profits. Jill Franklin
  • October 14, 2020

    I oppose the Dakota pipe line. We have 10 years to half our carbon dioxide emissions. We have the technology to do that. The government should be leading the way in reducing our fossil fuel dependency. Hear the people! DORELLE ACKERMANN
  • October 14, 2020

    I am deeply opposed to any expansion of the DAPL given its direct contribution to the climate crisis, which is already devastating the Midwest, killing vulnerable people worldwide, and wrecking ecosystems. Gavin Taves
  • October 14, 2020

    Illinois would be better served focusing on renewables. This pipeline exposes our rivers and agricultural land to unnecessary risk where better alternatives exist. I oppose this installation. Noah
  • October 14, 2020

    I STRONGLY oppose the doubling of DAPL's capacity. Science tells us unequivocally that the expansion of fossil fuel extraction is suicidal. This is being done for private profit only, to ship oil to Gulf Coast export markets. In the relatively near future, on a ruined planet, we will bitterly regret the rise of the export oil industry in the US, against the wishes of a majority of citizens.

    HOWEVER, Illinois can still make a better choice. Let us refuse the increase in DAPL's capacity, and begin the transition to renewable energy, a powerful new industry that offers massive employment and clear public benefit, unlike oil pipelines that serve almost no one in our state.
    Brian K Holmes
  • October 14, 2020

    I strongly oppose the expansion of DAPL. Illinois gets very little benefit from this. It just basically is letting a dirty highway go right down the middle of our state and only a very small 'toll' is gained. Steven Hall
  • October 14, 2020

    I am deeply opposed to any expansion of the DAPL given its direct contribution to the climate crisis.
    Climate change is a critical and emergent thread which is already devastating the Midwest, killing vulnerable people worldwide, and wrecking ecosystems. We should be investing in renewable energy and reducing current contributors to pollution and carbon emissions, not adding to it.
    Lauren Wyeth
  • October 14, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of DAPL. With the changing nature of work and reduced cost for renewable energy, this is an unnecessary risk for the citizens of Illinois and the surrounding environment. Shelby Best
  • October 14, 2020

    I am 100 percent opposed to DAPL and ETP doubling their capacity. There is no reason, except short-term greed, for everything that this industry is currently doing. It was infuriating enough watching them bulldoze this entire project through native sacred land that is supposed to be protected by long-standing treaties and then to watch and know that this pipeline goes under the Mississippi near where my family lives AND that this pipeline has already leaked many times. I hardly know where to start and stop with how outrageous I think these companies are behaving. They do not deserve any kind of privilege such as being allowed to double their business during times when oil prices are plummeting due to covid-19 and the fact that people and travel industries are Not moving at the same pace as before. Please do NOT allow then to pump more. It is no longer necessary. Jane Albright
  • October 15, 2020

    I am a professional environmental planner and I oppose any expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure in Illinois, including this. Illinois and the Chamber of Commerce must commit to a net-zero carbon emissions and zero-fossil fuel based economy by 2035. Gas prices have plummeted as demand has gone into a freefall, and an investment at this time in expanding fuel infrastructure makes no economic sense. This project will only serve to endanger Illinois residents while providing no economic benefit. Pipeline expansion is economically unsustainable, as well as environmentally unsustainable. Taxpayers will have to foot the bill for the environmental damage caused by this pipeline capacity upgrade, especially if Dakota Access LLC goes bankrupt due to the financial turmoil they are facing. Illinois has a massive infrastructure investment backlog, and fossil fuel capacity is nowhere on the list of priorities. Wholeheartedly oppose this proposal. Dominic Marlow
  • October 15, 2020

    I am deeply opposed to any expansion of the DAPL given its direct contribution to the climate crisis. Jennifer Chou
  • October 15, 2020

    I am opposed to approving the Dakota Access Pipeline to be extended through Illinois. Climate Change is an ever present threat that we are seeing the effects of more intensely every year. We as a Country should not be putting more money and resources into energy sources that contribute to climate change.
    The other concern is the risk associated with oil and gas pipelines effects on the environment could have extremely negative consequences. The highly protested portion of the DAPL had multiple leaks shortly after its construction. Why should we bring a pipeline into our state that has a track record of pollution and negative consequences.
    Daniel Salgado
  • October 15, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of DAPL in Illinois because it risks the health of our rivers and land. Illinoisans reap next to nothing for a present risk and an inevitably leaky line that will cause damage just as our water resources become more valuable and our agricultural sector more necessary. There is no reason for us to pave the way and bear the risk for Energy Transfer's expanded profits. With the price of oil so low, the alleged benefits do not outweigh the risks. Rachel Havrelock
  • October 15, 2020

    I expose the expansion of any pipeline that would serve as infrastructure for the fossil fuel energy sector, which is the number one contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and the ensuing disasters that will threaten the existence of human life on this planet. Please turn down this request for any additional work to support the DAPL. The future is renewable energy, now cheaper than any other source of energy, especially when you consider that wind and sun are completely free forever, while we likely have not seen the end of the declining cost to build out this sector. For the sake of our planet, human health and the health of our ecosystems, just say no! Jane Goldenberg
  • October 20, 2020

    As we watch the world suffer the effects of climate change and more states and locales file lawsuits against the fossil fuel industry's corrupt practices, which have endangered the human race as a whole, one would think we might slow down a bit with all the extraction that is bringing devastation to local communities... and perhaps even the end of the human species.

    If the ICC can consider the reality of our current global situation, something I'm finding government agencies are struggling to do in recent years, perhaps they can consider the already horrible situations humans are facing as a result of our changing climate. These changes are largely driven by the consumption of fossil fuels and the waste products of that industry, like methane.

    Maybe the ICC can consider the deceit of the industry - for decades now, as they pretended their products were safe for use, while they knew the dangers. And perhaps the ICC can consider the illegalities of the current DAPL situation, as they operate without a viable EIS for their project. Or maybe the ICC can determine that, as more and more pipeline projects are being cancelled, terminated, or pulled back because of environmental and treaty law concerns, that this too is another fossil fuel industry consideration that must be denied.

    I appreciate your consideration.
    Jami Gaither
    Jami Gaither
  • October 26, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) because

    The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent—but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC.
    Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC.
    On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA.
    ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit.
    I am concerned Pipelines can cause additional unintended environmental damage,
    Yours in action,
    Karen
    Karen Daiter
  • November 2, 2020

    I oppose this expansion because the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a collapse of Bakken oil production—drill rigs are shutting down, producers are declaring bankruptcy, and output has declined by 40 percent—but ETP refuses to acknowledge these facts at the ICC. Shippers appear to be underutilizing DAPL—ETP is cutting rates to keep shippers on its pipelines—but ETP doesn’t want to share that with the ICC. On September 23, 2020, the State of Illinois joined 15 other states in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals linking DAPL to climate change and calling for it to be at least temporarily shut down while the Army Corps of Engineers complies with NEPA. ETP has not identified a single U.S. refinery that will take the additional oil it wants to transport; evidence indicates that ETP plans to export this oil—Illinois gets all of the risk while ETP gets all of the benefit. Sue Patel
  • November 2, 2020

    I oppose the expansion of any pipeline that would serve as infrastructure for the fossil fuel energy sector, which is the number one contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and the ensuing disasters that will threaten the existence of human life on this planet. Please turn down this request for any additional work to support the DAPL. The future is renewable energy, now cheaper than any other source of energy, especially when you consider that wind and sun are completely free forever, while we likely have not seen the end of the declining cost to build out this sector. For the sake of our planet, human health and the health of our ecosystems, just say no! Linc Cohen
  • November 9, 2020

    Do not approve this pipeline! Protect the land. People over profits! Morgan Paulus
  • November 23, 2020

    The oil spills that always have and always will occur on pipelines and oil equipment is too much risk for all our people.
    The money should be spent on renewable energy, which actually has a viable future.
    Todd Everett
  • December 2, 2020

    Dear Members of the Illinois Commerce Commission,

    I write to express my deep concerns about the Order entered regarding Docket 19-0673 on October 14th. I request that you vote for a rehearing on this matter.

    The Order doesn't explain why Energy Transfer should get the right to double the capacity of their pipelines. The Order appears to just rely on Energy Transfer's argument that in 2018 six shippers expressed a preference to use the two pipelines rather than existing alternatives to transport crude oil. This is not a public need. It's a commercial preference.

    Over 12 million people live in Illinois. I think the "public need" should address the needs of that large population, not just the needs of one segment of industry. Almost all of the oil that is transported through the DAPL, ETCO pipeline is exported to other countries. That oil does not end up in our gas tanks or heat out houses. The definition of "public need" used by the ICC is bizarrely narrow.

    During the evidentiary hearings, SOIL and Sierra Club lawyers provided evidence about the lack of public need for the capacity expansion and the harmful impacts of the project, but the Order just ignores that evidence in its conclusions. Specifically, the order ignores these points:

    1) DA-ETCO relied on a very short-term pre-pandemic Bakken production forecast.
    2) Domestic refineries don't need more Bakken oil.
    3) Other transportation alternatives already exist.
    4) The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis, both globally and in Illinois. SOIL and Sierra Club brought in the renowned climate scientist James Hansen who testified that the result of doubling these pipelines would significantly contribute to making the climate crisis worse.
    5) The pandemic has drastically and perhaps permanently reduced the demand for oil.
    6) A federal court has stated that Dakota Access has an inadequate ability to detect leaks and that DA's operator has one of the worst safety records in the industry.
    7) Governor Pritzker has stated that climate change must be addressed by public officials
    8) The office of the Illinois Attorney General, speaking for the State of Illinois, has filed a brief in a federal court in September linking DAPL with climate change and urging the court to shut down DAPL. So Illinois tells the federal court to shut down DAPL, but the ICC says to double it.

    I am particularly concerned about the climate crisis. The IPCC warned us in 2018, that we had about 12 years to drastically slash our consumption of fossil fuels or else the climate crisis will become a climate catastrophe, causing massive human suffering, financial loss, increased migration, political instability, crop shortages, hunger, and millions of human deaths. We now have only 10 years. But instead of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, we, the human race, especially the US, are increasing them. Every expansion of fossil fuels is a step in the wrong direction. Every government agency should look for ways to cut fossil fuels, The pandemic has demonstrated the folly and disaster that results when we ignore the science.

    It is my understanding that an ICC Order should explain the reasons for its decisions. The order submitted on October 14th did not explain why they dismissed all the above points.

    Please vote for a rehearing.
    Mary Shesgreen
  • December 3, 2020

    Dear Members of the Illinois Commerce Commission,

    I write to express my deep concerns about the Order entered regarding Docket 19-0673 on October 14th. I request that you vote for a rehearing on this matter.

    The Order doesn't explain why Energy Transfer should get the right to double the capacity of their pipelines. The Order appears to just rely on Energy Transfer's argument that in 2018 six shippers expressed a preference to use the two pipelines rather than existing alternatives to transport crude oil. This is not a public need. It's a commercial preference.

    Over 12 million people live in Illinois. I think the "public need" should address the needs of that large population, not just the needs of one segment of industry. Almost all of the oil that is transported through the DAPL, ETCO pipeline is exported to other countries. That oil does not end up in our gas tanks or heat out houses. The definition of "public need" used by the ICC is bizarrely narrow.

    During the evidentiary hearings, SOIL and Sierra Club lawyers provided evidence about the lack of public need for the capacity expansion and the harmful impacts of the project, but the Order just ignores that evidence in its conclusions. Specifically, the order ignores these points:

    1) DA-ETCO relied on a very short-term pre-pandemic Bakken production forecast.
    2) Domestic refineries don't need more Bakken oil.
    3) Other transportation alternatives already exist.
    4) The expansion will exacerbate the climate crisis, both globally and in Illinois. SOIL and Sierra Club brought in the renowned climate scientist James Hansen who testified that the result of doubling these pipelines would significantly contribute to making the climate crisis worse.
    5) The pandemic has drastically and perhaps permanently reduced the demand for oil.
    6) A federal court has stated that Dakota Access has an inadequate ability to detect leaks and that DA's operator has one of the worst safety records in the industry.
    7) Governor Pritzker has stated that climate change must be addressed by public officials
    8) The office of the Illinois Attorney General, speaking for the State of Illinois, has filed a brief in a federal court in September linking DAPL with climate change and urging the court to shut down DAPL. So Illinois tells the federal court to shut down DAPL, but the ICC says to double it.

    I am particularly concerned about the climate crisis. The IPCC warned us in 2018, that we had about 12 years to drastically slash our consumption of fossil fuels or else the climate crisis will become a climate catastrophe, causing massive human suffering, financial loss, increased migration, political instability, crop shortages, hunger, and millions of human deaths. We now have only 10 years. But instead of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, we, the human race, especially the US, are increasing them. Every expansion of fossil fuels is a step in the wrong direction. Every government agency should look for ways to cut fossil fuels, The pandemic has demonstrated the folly and disaster that results when we ignore the science.

    It is my understanding that an ICC Order should explain the reasons for its decisions. The order submitted on October 14th did not explain why they dismissed all the above points.

    Please vote for a rehearing.

    Mary Shesgreen
    Elgin, Illinois
    Mary Shesgreen

Full docket number: P2019-0673