CALGARY - TransCanada's Keystone XL oil pipeline will have "minimal" ecological effects in Nebraska, the state environmental regulator said in an evaluation of the line's revised route.

In its final evaluation report submitted to Gov. Dave Heineman late Thursday, the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality says spills would be localized and the new route avoids ecologically fragile areas.

"Construction and operation of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, with the mitigation and commitments Keystone has identified ... could have minimal environmental impacts in Nebraska," the report said.

Heineman has up to 30 days to review the more than 2,000 page report.

"I appreciate the feedback that we have received from citizens, and the hard work of the Department of Environmental Quality in addressing this issue in a thoughtful and deliberate manner," he said in a release.

"I will now carefully review this report over the next several weeks."

Heineman's decision will be shared with the U.S. State Department, which has federal jurisdiction because the pipeline begins in Canada. The State Department recommendation will go to President Barack Obama, who rejected an earlier iteration of the pipeline about a year ago.

The report says the rerouted pipeline avoids the Sand Hills region, an ecologically sensitive area made up of grass-covered sand dunes. However, it would cross the Ogallala aquifer, a crucial drinking water source for the American heartland.

"Impacts on aquifers from a release should be localized and Keystone would be responsible for any cleanup," the report said, adding the reroute avoids "many areas of fragile soils in Northern Nebraska" and a shallow groundwater area.

The DEQ report also said the pipeline would bring $418.1 million in economic benefits.

TransCanada spokesman Grady Semmens said the company has not yet reviewed the report, which it said included extensive public import.

"We have made significant strides to work with Nebraskans to identify the safest route possible for this pipeline project and we look forward to hearing from Governor Heineman regarding this report," he said.

"Safety remains our top priority. We will maintain a Nebraska-based emergency preparedness program with a response team in place, ready to react should an incident occur. The safety of the entire pipeline is our responsibility for as long as it operates. It’s a responsibility we take very seriously."

In a release, Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska, a group campaigning against the pipeline, noted that Heineman had previously asked Obama to deny the pipeline permit because it crossed the Ogallala aquifer.

"We continue to stand with Governor Heineman and his valid concerns on the risks of this pipeline route to farmers and ranchers' livelihoods and to our water," she said.

"We look forward to the governor denying the route since it still crosses the aquifer, and since the risks to our state's economy and identity remain at the forefront of this fight."

Nebraska landowner Bob Allpress called the report a "farce."

"There is no physical break in the Sand Hills. The route is still through the Sand Hills and is still a threat to the aquifer," he said in the release.

"Our farm, established in 1886, is not in the report. It omits five potable water wells and three houses on our farm that the proposed pipeline will pass right by. The proposed pipeline route also plows right over a Bald Eagle's nest that also isn't in the report."

Keystone XL was originally designed to carry oilsands crude from Alberta to Texas refineries, but Calgary-based TransCanada (TSX:TRP) has since broken the project into two parts.

The Obama administration rejected the proposal in its entirety about a year ago, but invited TransCanada to apply again.

The $5.3-billion segment the State Department is currently reviewing would carry oilsands crude from Alberta to Steele City, Neb.

Construction is underway on the more urgently needed $2.3-billion southern leg, beginning in Cushing, Okla., and ending at the U.S. Gulf Coast.

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • 'Ethical oil'

    The term "ethical oil" has become the centrepiece of a new application for a classic marketing strategy. After being added to the Conservative political lexicon, the slogan is slowly beginning to creep into the public discourse. And like other attempts by industry and advocacy groups to use value judgements to alter public opinion, it has the potential to change the way we think about Canadian oil.

  • Ethical Oil vs Conflict Oil

    Share this video with your friends and family.

  • Ethical Oil

    An ad from <a href="" target="_hplink"></a>, a new site trying to rebrand Alberta's oil sands.

  • Ethical Oil

    An ad from <a href="" target="_hplink"></a>, a new site trying to rebrand Alberta's oil sands.

  • 'Pork. The other white meat'

    In 1987, pork producers in the United States were steadily losing ground to chicken and turkey, which prompted the National Pork Producers Council to take a different tack. To counter the still-widespread belief that pork was a red meat, The New York Times reports that the council set out to appeal to health-conscious consumers by reminding them that pork was in fact <a href="" target="_hplink">considered a white meat</a>. The series of print and TV ads that followed featured pork prepared in ways that had been traditionally been reserved for poultry, such as cordon bleu and cacciatore a l'orange, as well as a new slogan: "Pork. The other white meat." (After nearly 25 years, the council recently changed its well-known catch phrase to "<a href="" target="_hplink">Pork: Be inspired</a>.") (AP File Photo)

  • Pork Commercial

    Pork, the other white meat.

  • 'Fair trade coffee'

    Though tracing the precise history of the fair trade movement is difficult, most observers agree that the concept was popularized by its application to the coffee industry. The <a href="'s" target="_hplink">first official fair trade label</a> was launched by a Dutch NGO, which imported the pioneering fair trade product -- coffee from Mexico -- to the Netherlands in 1988. Billed as an effort to secure better prices for producers, and guarantee certain environmental and labour standards, the demand for fair trade coffee quickly spread. But it's still a niche item that carries a premium: as The Toronto Star pointed out in 2007, only a small percentage of the java bought by coffee-giant Starbucks is <a href="" target="_hplink">fairly traded</a>. (Photo: Getty Images)

  • Starbucks is the largest purchaser of Fair Trade Coffee

    Full of rich bodied flavor and great respect for the farmers who grew it. Caf

  • 'Clean coal'

    The notion of coal as a clean source of energy was thrust into the spotlight in the United States in 2008, when a $40-million industry-sponsored campaign helped make it a talking point during the presidential race. An attempt to counter the public perception of coal as an acid rain-causing, environmental scourge, Businessweek observed that the <a href="" target="_hplink">"clean coal" campaign</a> tugged at the heartstrings with emotional TV ads featuring teachers and farmers -- and won the endorsement of both presidential candidates. (AP Photo)

  • Clean Coal Ad


  • 'Blood diamond'

    The recognition in the late 1990s that diamonds were being used to fuel bloody conflicts in African countries like Angola and Sierra Leone prompted the United Nations Security Council to find some way to track the movement of the precious stones. The resulting identification scheme, dubbed the <a href="" target="_hplink">Kimberley Process</a>, was put in place in 2003 to separate so-called blood or conflict diamonds from those used to fund legitimate governments. Though the process remains imperfect, the terminology was cemented in the minds of the general public, and soon found its way into popular culture: Edward Zwick's 2006 film Blood Diamond grossed more than US$171 million. (AP Photo)

  • Blood Diamond - Trailer

    Trailer for the movie 'Blood Diamond'

  • 'Dolphin-safe tuna'

    Dolphins tend to stick close to the surface, making them easy to spot, and easy prey for fisherman angling to catch tuna, which often swim alongside the large mammals. Despite several attempts by the United States government to limit the killing of dolphins by U.S. fishing boats, by 1990 the practice of purposefully ensnaring <a href="" target="_hplink">dolphins in tuna nets</a> became so widespread -- and so highly publicized -- that it had prompted a public boycott of canned tuna. In response, Congress instituted a consumer labelling program, and canneries that bought from fisherman that steered clear of dolphins started identifying their product as "Dolphin safe." Though the designation initially carried a premium, the program soon spread throughout the industry, making the additional cost worthwhile. (AP Photo)