 Since Enbridge started its proposal for a new Line 3 oil pipeline in 2015, multiple groups have filed motions about alleged misleading information. In the latest filings, some of the groups say that Enbridge may not have been honest about their plans for the decades-old pipeline. Mal Meyer has more from the Mississippi Headwaters. The different groups say they are concerned about the proposed Line 3 pipeline and the environmental impacts it would have on the area. If you look down, you can kind of see the mounds. That is where the pipelines are laid. The Sierra Club has been involved in a series of motions during the Minnesota Department of Commerce project process. One member says one of the proposed options to clear a new route would pose significant problems. When you look at this, there are how many more trees they'd have to cut down and make a bigger swath. The climate issues are enormous. The environmental impact is terrible. Cardi Cobanates also worries about potential oil spills from a new, much larger pipeline. If it hits our aquifers like it has in Cast Lake at their spill site, that then causes even more and more problems. Previous spills have sparked the latest motions. Citing vague language from a recent ruling after the Enbridge-Calm-Azoo River spill suggests the old line could remain open. To us, that's two different projects. You're either talking about replacing the line and building a new one, or you're talking about building a new one and continuing to use the old one. Both the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and friends of the headwaters say this should be taken into consideration. They want to have the public commenting period reopened, especially since other plans have also changed. Now that they've withdrawn sandpiper, we think that they need to reopen this, not forever, but just for a period of time to allow the public to comment on these new developments. The company denies misleading the public and says that it would decommission the decades old pipeline and follow the guidelines from the Calam-Azoo ruling. You know that the consent decree may have had some vague language in that area, but what's most important is the language that we put in our application to the Public Utility Commission that we will permanently deactivate the line and that's exactly what we intend to do. The Public Utilities Commission would decide if the period should be reopened. As a company, I think the best thing for the state, for our customers and for those that have the old line 300 property is to simply replace it with a new one. In Pinewood, I'm Mal Meyer, Lakeland News. And so far, a decision has not been made to reopen the commenting period. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.