Carbon pipeline CUP decision extended to Oct. 12 meeting

Whether or not Antelope County Planning and Zoning Commission approves a conditional use permit for a proposed carbon-capture pipeline will wait until Thursday, at the earliest.

The group is set to reconvene, Oct. 12, at 3 p.m., in the commissioners' meeting room, to discuss approval or to deny the permit. Public comment will not be heard since that portion of the process closed when the commission met Sept. 14.

Chairman Greg Wortman said he had been contacted by a member of the public who spoke at the public hearing and wanted to share additional information via email. Wortman said he shared that information with Megan Wingate, county zoning administrator.

"She (the caller) also wanted clarification on the reason why we ... I feel there's a lot of misunderstanding and what happened there. She's the only other person I spoke to," Wingate said.

Two other commission members reported they had been approached by members of the public.

Bob Krutz said he'd been called by the same individual. Matt Klabenes said he'd also been approached by a member of the public

"I was informed by Megan, through our county attorney, that we weren't to be talking or discussing things. This may be a conflict," Klabenes said.

"It's not against the law," Megan said.

County attorney Joe Smith interjected. "You had the public hearing, where you heard both sides of the presentation. You're past that stage. You can still ask questions."

Wortman recapped what happened at the Sept. 14 hearing and subsequent meeting, which included a failed motion, made by Krutz, to table a decision. At that time, following approximately 20 minutes of discussion, commission members agreed to continue the meeting to Oct. 5.

On Thursday, Wingate said no new testimony would be accepted, but commission members could ask questions of Summit Carbon Solutions representatives.

Commission member Ron Rice asked about the closest location of a habitable structure.

According to Brent Niese, project manager for SCS, the nearest house is 383.8 feet away. The closest water well is 175 feet.

"We ran a report for registered wells," Niese said. "We did a flyover so we can see water wells. In most situations, we're going to keep that out of the right of way."

Environmental impacts, including wetlands and endangered species, have been taken into consideration. Niese said those processes are ongoing.

Krutz questioned why railroad crossings aren't included on detailed maps.

Railroad crossings will be separate easements, similar to road and highway crossing agreements, according to Niese.

"Depending on the railroad, you have a certain depth of covering requirement. You have a casing requirement. We are working through those agreements," Niese said.

Using Holt County's zoning regulations on carbon-capture pipelines as a reference, commission members continued to ask Niese questions.

Krutz questioned what safety equipment would be necessary. Wingate said she asked regional emergency manager, Bobbi Risor, who is unsure what would be required and had Wingate change proposed language.

"What may be necessary now may not be necessary a year from now," Wingate said.

Niese said air monitors and all agreed-upon equipment will be supplied by the company. SCS will give a lump-sum grant, in addition to a per-mile payment to counties along the route.

"This is a new development. We think it will be $50,000 and $1,000 per mile will be given to the emergency managers to distribute as they see fit. That's basically upon getting permits. That's from feedback we've received from first responders," Niese said.

SCS will roll out the program across all five states included in the route. The amount will be "on top of equipment we're promising," Niese noted.

Setbacks distances were discussed. Board member Matt Klabenes said those distances "are just a number."

"One house at 380 feet. But the town of Orchard at 200 (feet). It's a mathematical deal," Klabenes said.

Niese said the Emergency Responder Guide, published by PHMSA and used by first responders lists, 330 feet as a safe setback distance.

Wortman allowed comments from Shelly Meyer, who said water usage, water waste and air quality permits, submitted by SCS, have raised concerns in Iowa.

"Summit has paused those permits in Iowa. The air quality is due to a chemical, triolein glycol, which they need to dehydrate the substance coming out of the pipe. That chemical will go into the air. It's very, very dangerous," Meyer said.

She said SCS will also need water usage and waste management permits, since the water will need to be disposed of.

"Again, every time I open up the computer and peel back the onion, there's something more. I'm requesting you table this until you have more information," she said, offering to share more information with commission members. "I don't think everybody got the real picture."

Wortman responded about any misunderstanding resulting from the Sept. 14 meeting.

"I'm not, as a board member, willing to take any responsibility. It was very clear what we did and why we did it. Am I the only one who feels this way?" He asked.

Wingate said the public was given an opportunity to talk at that meeting. Public notices were printed in county newspapers.

Krutz asked Niese where water will be dumped.

"Those will be conversations you have with the counties. Potentially, you can test smaller segments depending on how much water you get for that segment. You're not adding anything to that water. It's just water to fill the pipeline that's brand new carbon steel pipe. You're just pressurizing that. I don't know the discharge because that has to be discharged," Niese said.

Krutz asked Art Tanderup, an NRD board member, the same question.

Ron Rice interjected. "NRD has nothing to do with this."

Tanderup said he will need to check on what is required.

Commission member Ron Thiele said he has a lot of unanswered questions about the project, including the number of landowners who have signed easements with SCS.

In Antelope County, 66 tracts of land, with 49 separate landowners, are along the route. Of the seven landowners who have not signed an easement, four tracts are owned by the same family, according to Niese.

Thiele questioned the amount of payment per landowner.

Niese said the price varies.

"Our average is starting at $680 per rod. A rod is 16.5 feet, so each one is going to be a little different," he said.

"We're supposed to do what's best for the county, the health," Klabenes said.

"There's the first one I'm not sure we know, the health," Thiele said.

Klabenes reiterated that the commission's job is to do what's best for the people in Antelope County. He said he'd thought about the Sept. 14 discussion regarding eminent domain.

"In reality, think back to things in the past that were done by eminent domain. It's mindblowing how many things in this country, we would not have the interstate and we wouldn't have Highway 275. There were 20 parcels (in Antelope County) that were under eminent domain. In a sense, it's the law that's laid out. I'm not sure it is a bad thing. They have to prove eminent domain to the courts that eminent domain is good for the public. If they can do that, good luck. I think it's an uphill battle," he said.

County attorney Joe Smith explained the eminent domain process, as relating to the court system.

For the next hour, discussion topics ranged from casings, depth of cover, thickness of pipe, corrosion issues and abandonment concerns.

Ron Thiele said he would like to gather more information before voting on a recommendation.

"I'm not ready to say yes, but I don't feel like I have a clear conscience to say it right now. There were things said that made me think. I'd like to say yes for the county, but I'm not ready now," he said.

Wortman said he was unsure what information is still needed for the group to make a recommendation.

Board member Dave Miller asked where the process is at in neighboring states.

Rice said some of those places have different procedures than Antelope County.

Thiele made a motion to extend the meeting one week. Miller asked for additional time.

Wortman expressed displeasure with the commission.

"I'm done. This is so past me, what I'm capable of doing. We did the best we could with the information we had to try to make the best decision. I don't know that we made the best decision, but a week later, we're going to be in the same damn place," he said. "Two weeks later, five weeks later, it's going to be the same damn thing. It's so much bigger than anything we've had to do before."

Klabenes said, "That can't be the reason. Please tell me there's some other reason than it's too big for us. It's not too big."

Thiele stressed again that he wanted time to review information and find answers to his questions.

Klabenes seconded Thiele's motion to reconvene in a one week.