The U.S. State Department in May started weekly publications of the public comments submitted on its draft review of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The pipeline would move oil from Canada through the central United States to refineries along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Supporters of the pipeline say it would provide a source of economic stimulus and ensure North American energy independence.
John Quinn, executive director of the New England Petroleum Council, said in a Boston Globe letter to Secretary of State John Kerry, a former Massachusetts senator, there was no point in further delays of a project proposed more than four year ago.
"The only thing the United States would accomplish by refusing oil from our No. 1 trading partner, Canada, would be the transfer of economic benefits and enhanced energy security to other countries such as China," Quinn said in a letter published Friday.
Critics of the project say pipelines carrying so-called oil sands, the type designated for Keystone XL, are more prone to spills. Oil sands production is also considered more carbon-intensive than conventional crude oil.
Pipeline opponents Bold Nebraska, the Sierra Club and the Nebraska Farmers Union last week called for the construction of a wind turbine and a solar-powered farm in the pipeline's path in Nebraska.
A federal permit is required for the pipeline because it would cross international borders.