Summit attorney laments: ‘This is just going on so long’

Attorneys spar over testimony for Summit Carbon Solutions’ permit hearing

 

 

A pipeline attorney and the chairperson for Iowa Utilities Board at times complained on Wednesday about the sluggishness of the second day of testimony for Summit Carbon Solutions’ hazardous liquid pipeline permit request.

 

“Try to be more focused and appreciative of the time we’re taking,” chairperson Erik Helland said. “And when I say appreciative of time, I mean of the landowners, who aren’t being paid, are here on their own dime, their own accord, and their own inconvenience.”

 

Kossuth County landowner David Wildin was testifying at the time about why he objects to Summit’s request for eminent domain to construct and maintain a carbon dioxide pipeline on his property, but he didn’t object to answering more questions.

 

“The more the merrier as far as I’m concerned,” Wildin said.

 

Wildin’s two parcels of land are in the path of Summit’s proposed pipeline, which would span more than 680 miles in Iowa. In total, the company seeks eminent domain for about 950 parcels, or about 25% of its route in Iowa.

 

The speed of Summit’s hazardous pipeline permit process has prompted a tug of war between the company and those who oppose it. The company was successful in getting an earlier start to its evidentiary hearing with the hope of securing a permit by year’s end. Pipeline opponents have sought to delay the proceedings as much as possible with the hope that the company would eventually abandon its proposal.

 

The system would transport captured carbon dioxide from ethanol plants to North Dakota for underground sequestration.

 

The evidentiary hearing for the project was initially projected by IUB staff to last two months or more, but Summit attorney Bret Dublinske thinks it could be done in six weeks.

 

There is no overall schedule for the hearing. The IUB plans to post a weekly schedule with daily updates. For now the hearing will resume on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays.

 

A big factor in the length of the hearing is eminent domain. It took about four hours for three people to testify about eminent domain requests on Tuesday, the first day of the hearing. Eight people testified Wednesday over the course of about 10 hours.

 

Helland pledged early on Wednesday to finish testimony for all witnesses who were planned for the day. There were initially 10, but the board canceled one and another rescheduled.

 

“Mr. Wacker has opted out,” Helland said late in the day when one of the witnesses was dropped from the schedule. “Yet another example of perhaps why we should keep our questioning far tighter.”

 

But IUB staff told the Iowa Capital Dispatch that the witness had earlier in the day rescheduled for next week because he was unable to attend on Wednesday.

 

The other witness who was removed from the schedule was Rodney Mulvania, of Montgomery County, who had opted to have a family member speak for him. However, because that family member will likely testify later in the hearing, the arrangement was denied by the board. Helland said Mulvania has the option to testify in person later.

 

Seven witnesses are scheduled for Thursday.

 

The potential effects

Wildin told board members that his land near the Des Moines River is prime for residential development and that his lots might fetch more than $100,000 apiece. But he worries whether anyone would want to buy them if there’s a pipeline nearby.

 

“Who’s going to build a $670,000 home up here in this corner with that pipeline going across,” he asked as he pointed at a map.

 

Another of the witnesses was Timothy Fox, executive director of the Charles City Area Development Corporation, who argued against placing the pipeline on the south side of that town where his group is cultivating an industrial development site.

 

That site, the Avenue of the Saints Development Park, is promoted by the Iowa Economic Development Authority as “state certified and shovel ready,” and Fox said there were no other options for such a site near Charles City.

 

“This is really our only shot,” he said.

 

The rest of the land under consideration for eminent domain that was discussed on Wednesday was mostly cropland or is enrolled in a federal conservation program. Witnesses didn’t know whether they might have to repay federal money they have earned for setting aside farmland, and they worried about the long-term soil damage from construction and how a pipeline break might kill their livestock or people.

 

“There’s nothing in it for me — nothing but risk,” said Hollis Oelmann, who farms in Hardin County.

 

Attorney Brian Jorde, who represents more than 150 landowners or others who object to Summit’s project, asked one farmer whether he believes ethanol is a low-carbon fuel. The question prompted an objection from Dublinske, who sought to confine the questions to the land that is subject to eminent domain.

 

“This is just going on so long and so far that we need to clear up some procedure,” Dublinske said, and he added: “We have witnesses up here talking about highly technical subjects, scientific matters, from metallurgy, to soil sciences, to economics, to climate science, without any idea what their actual background or qualifications on those topics are.”

 

Helland sustained Dublinske’s objection and said the questions should be limited to the impacts of the pipeline on the properties, as the board had previously ordered.

 

Helland had a final admonishment to conclude the day’s proceedings on Wednesday: “I think it’s reasonable to expect all the attorneys and all the parties to be a little more respectful of the scope that the previous order set out.”