North Dakota’s state utility regulator has granted reconsideration of a carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline project by Summit Carbon Solutions previously rejected due to concerns, including safety.
The North Dakota Public Service Commission (NDPSC) had rejected the permit application for the Midwest Carbon Express project because of “broad concerns” relayed to the regulator during public consultations, the agency said in a published decision on the 4th of August. The concerns span “eminent domain.” , safety, the policy of permanent CO2 sequestration and storage, setback distances, irreparable damage to underground drainage systems, impacts on property values and the ability to obtain liability insurance due to the project,” said the regulator’s rejection announcement.
Summit had proposed the pipeline would run through Burleigh, Cass, Dickey, Emmons, Logan, McIntosh, Morton, Oliver, Richland and Sargent counties, according to the commission’s Aug. 4 statement. As part of its reconsideration request, Summit now said it would implement a reroute through the state capital, Bismarck.
Summit had said the project would serve 12 ethanol plants in the company’s home state of Iowa. Although the $4.5 billion project would be based in Iowa, it aims for permanent underground CO2 storage in North Dakota, according to a March 11, 2022 Summit press release.” In total, Summit plans to have 681 miles of pipeline routed across Iowa, operating through 30 Iowa counties,” while the entire length “measures just under 2,000 miles,” that announcement said.
In announcing the denial of the permit application in August, the North Dakota regulator said: “The property owners and the comptroller stated that the project would cause adverse effects on their property values and the projects of residential development … Owners repeatedly stated that they have contacted Summit with requests to rezone their properties or other mitigation steps, but the company has received nothing.”
The regulator also pointed to issues related to eminent domain and safety, but said it had no jurisdiction over those aspects, which are overseen by the Transportation Department’s Hazardous Materials and Conduct Safety Administration.
Summit also did not address the concerns of the North Dakota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), whose “concurrence is usually required by the Commission for the issuance of a siting permit ” added the NDPSC.
Additionally, “The US Geological Survey observed 14 areas of potential geologic instability within the project corridor,” he continued. “Summit has not submitted information to the Commission demonstrating how it has addressed these concerns.”
In a press release announcing the reconsideration grant, Summit said, “We subsequently rerouted through Bismarck, made adjustments to drill or avoid game management and geographic hazard areas, and collaborated with the State Historic Preservation Office to record survey findings.”
“Summit Carbon Solutions remains deeply committed to supporting North Dakota’s energy industry and working with farmers, ranchers and the community at large,” the company added. “To date, Summit Carbon Solutions has partnered with more than 76 percent of the landowners along the North Dakota route and has acquired nearly 90 percent of the pore space for sequestration.”
In its own announcement of the reconsideration grant, the NDPSC said: “In its petition, Summit has requested an opportunity to present relevant evidence at a hearing or hearings to demonstrate in the case that it has addressed , or will address, the deficiencies noted in the PSC’s August 4, 2023 order denying the permit.”
“Today’s decision has taken this into account, as a decision to deny reconsideration would have required the company to reapply and start the authorization process, including deleting all information on currently on the register,” the regulator added. “This record includes information gathered at five separate public hearings held throughout the state, which included lengthy and valuable testimony from the company, auditors and the public.
“The Commission will determine at a future date any details about a hearing or hearings and what issues will be considered during that process.”
To contact the author, please email jov.onsat@rigzone.com
