Antelope County zoning commission approves conditional use permit for Summit Carbon Solutions

While neighboring state's officials wait to make decisions on permits for a proposed carbon-capture pipeline, Antelope County Planning and Zoning Commission members voted 6-1 to approve a conditional use permit for Summit Carbon Solutions.

Bob Krutz cast the lone vote to deny the permit when the commission reconvened, Oct. 12.

A public hearing for the CUP was originally held Sept. 14. During discussion after the hearing, commission members voted to continue the meeting to Oct. 5. At that meeting, commission members Ron Thiele and Dave Miller asked for additional time to review information.

When the commission reconvened Oct. 12, Antelope County Attorney Joe Smith said it's possible the company could argue that a CUP is not necessary.

"Right now, the position is a special use permit is being sought. There's a possibility another legal tactic might be taken," Smith said.

Chairman Greg Wortman asked if the county's CUP has merit.

Smith said if it's determined later that a CUP is unnecessary, the pipeline company could take legal action.

"I don't want to say things that five years ago, in a lawsuit, could be used," Smith said.

Wortman asked what the downside is to waiting to make a decision.

"I thought it was no downside to wait. If this is going to go, I want our conditions on it. But if the downside is, if we don't approve this, with the conditions we have now, we could potentially not have any sort of say," he said.

"They did, in good faith, come to us," Matt Klabenes said.

"I'd rather have something in place than nothing in place," Wortman added.

Antelope County Planning and Zoning Administrator Megan Wingate told the commission that she and Smith "had a discussion with Summit's lawyer."

"They want to work with us," she said.

"Don't worry about the legal end because it's out there. I think our policy should work." Smith said. "Look at the facts, what's the best use of land, what affects the county."

Neither Wingate nor Smith indicated when conversations with the Iowa-based company's legal team occurred.

Commission member Ron Rice asked if changes can be made to the CUP if construction does not begin within 18 months, per the CUP, and SCS asks for a time extension.

Smith said if construction doesn't begin within the specified time period included in the CUP, the permit will need to be amended or the company would be in violation of the CUP.

"Everybody says 'I want to see what Iowa does' or 'I want to see what South Dakota does.' That's what they're doing. They're not going to start putting their ducks in a row until all the ducks are there," Rice said. "I don't see building starting in 18 months."

According to SCS project manager Brent Niese, the pipeline will cross 66 tracts of land in Antelope County. Those tracts include 49 different landowners, seven who have not have not signed easements.

Construction was expected to begin in 2024; however, on Oct. 18, the company pushed back its timeline to 2026.

Bruce Rastetter, Summit Agriculture Group chief executive officer, the parent company of SCS, made the announcement in an interview with Bloomberg News.

The company cited regulatory issues, resulting in permit denials in some states, as well as opposition from environmental groups and organizations.

Another carbon-capture pipeline company, Navigator Heartland Greenway, canceled its midwest carbon pipeline project last week.

The company met resistance from landowners, local governments and community groups in South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska after it suggesting it would use eminent domain.

"Everyone said we have no chance against foreign-backed, multi-billion dollar hazardous pipelines but when hundreds of landowners band together with a unified legal strategy, we can win," said Brian Jorde, attorney for Easement Teams LLC and Domina Law Group, representing hundreds of affected landowners across the Midwest.