North Dakota regulators decided Friday to reconsider Summit Carbon Solutions' proposal to build the $5.5 billion carbon capture pipeline through the state, instead of forcing the Ames company to reapply for a permit.
Iowa opponents have argued that Summit’s petition for a hazardous liquid pipeline in the state should be paused until it receives approval in North Dakota, which is where the Ames company plans to sequester 15 million tons of liquid carbon dioxide annually.
Summit proposes to capture carbon dioxide from about 30 ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, South Dakota and North Dakota, liquefy it under pressure and transport it via 2,000 miles of pipeline before sequestering it deep underground in North Dakota.
North Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner Sheri Haugen-Hoffart argued in favor of having Summit file a new application because of the "breadth of the changes" needed to be made in response to deficiencies the panel outlined last month in unanimously denying the company’s permit request.
Haugen-Hoffart said Summit executives had six months to address landowner and community concerns about the route location "and they didn't."
More: Summit Carbon Solutions reapplies for critical North Dakota pipeline permit
Now, Summit proposes 570 changes to the route, plus a large shift around Bismarck, the state's capital, she said. Summit "should pause and look at all the deficiencies that were in this initial application," Haugen-Hoffart said. "These issues are huge."
Commission Chairman Randy Christmann and Timothy Dawson, a substitute commissioner, voted to allow Summit to tackle problems with its application instead of restarting with a new application.
Christmann said the commission is charged with making a "just, speedy and inexpensive determination." And requiring both supporters and opponents to repeat earlier testimony violates that directive, Christmann said.
With a new permit application, "all that earlier testimony is wiped out, and that concerns me," he said, adding that some participants may not testify in a new hearing, believing the information wouldn't need to be restated.
"That person would think that we're smart enough to remember it, and we probably are, but we can't use it anymore," Christmann said.
The commission’s decision to reconsider Summit’s application doesn’t mean the panel will “grant the corridor certificate or the route permit,” Christmann said. “It only allows additional evidence for the company to try to persuade us that they are addressing the deficiencies.”