It was mainly to ensure that the project implementation would be in the best interest of the nation.
In 2012, the Department of State denied TransCanada a permit to begin the project. It stated that a span of sixty days was not sufficient to collect the information on the benefits of the project to the nation. Subsequently, the company collaborated with Nebraska department of environment quality and conducted an impact assessment. It was done to determine the best location the pipeline would pass with minimal environmental impacts.
In May 2012, TransCanada made an application for the presidential permit. The US department of state was obligated to either accept or deny the company the permit taking into consideration whether the project is beneficial to the people. Many factors were being considered such as security, culture, foreign policy and environmental impacts (Yuan, 2011). In 2014, the Department of State invited members of the public to comment on the factors that would be considered of national interest. Moreover, it is also consulting with different agencies such as department of Justice, Defense, Commerce and Energy to ensure that the correct decision is made on the permit application.
TransCanada is facing much opposition from community-based groups and the environmental organizations. It is mainly because of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the usage of oil sands crude. Furthermore, this will lead to the prolonged dependence on fossil fuel by the United States. Emissions of greenhouse gases accelerate the effects of global warming as it results to the destruction of the ozone layer. Community groups are strongly opposing the project because it is being constructed on their lands thus affecting their ability to produce food through farming. Furthermore, there will be no land to graze their cattle.
Keystone XL pipeline project poses a high risk to the neighboring community because the potential of spillage is huge. Eighty-eight