Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Pipeline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Summit Carbon Solutions updates Wright County supervisors on new management, landowner payments and permit filing
Summary
Summit Carbon Solutions representatives told the Wright County Board of Supervisors on Sept. 29 that the company has a new management team and has submitted an amended permit to the IUC. Summit outlined proposed landowner payments and a range of county payment options for roughly 46 miles of pipeline in the county.
Kylie Lane, project manager for Summit Carbon Solutions, and Mike Higgins, executive vice president of pipeline and operations, briefed the Wright County Board of Supervisors on Sept. 29 about company leadership changes and proposed payment terms related to a CO2 pipeline project traversing the county.
Lane said a new management team took over the project this summer and Joe Griffin has become the new CEO. Summit described an updated landowner and community partnership program that would provide ‘‘annual payments of 25¢ per foot up to 50¢ per foot for landowners with the pipeline going through their property,’’ and said the company was evaluating a county payment option ‘‘starting at 0.125¢ per foot and increasing up to 25¢ per foot’’ tied to roughly 46 miles of pipe projected in Wright County.
Summit also told the board it had submitted an amended permit to the IUC. Supervisors and public attendees asked follow-up questions during the presentation about payouts and permit amendments, including whether proposed route changes or upsizing of pipe segments would affect landowner agreements. Members discussed that the amendment process could include rerouting or a change in pipe size in some areas; the presenters said in some neighboring segments there were proposals to increase pipe diameter and that related permitting could proceed through state and federal review.
Why it matters: The company's payment proposals and any permit amendment could affect property owners along the planned route and could change the scale of county involvement. Board members asked for additional detail on payment administration and on the status of the amended filing with the IUC.
What the board asked for and what comes next: Supervisors pressed Summit for more specifics on payout timing and who in county government would approve county payments. Summit committed to continue answering questions; no final county commitments were made during the Sept. 29 meeting.
