Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Sequestration Primacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill to let DNR seek EPA primacy for carbon sequestration permitting and modernize billing
Summary
House Bill 1368 directs the Department of Natural Resources to standardize utility billing for DNR properties and establishes language enabling Indiana to seek EPA class‑6 primacy to administer geologic carbon sequestration permitting; the committee passed the amended bill 10–2 after technical tweaks requested by EPA were added.
House Bill 1368 has two distinct components: administrative billing changes for Department of Natural Resources properties and a statutory framework to seek EPA 'class 6' primacy over geologic carbon dioxide storage permitting in Indiana.
Stephanie Flitner, general counsel for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, told the committee the bill standardizes utility payment options (allowing ACH and wire transfers and a single consolidated invoice per DNR property) to reduce lost or unpaid invoices and taxpayer costs. The bill’s larger and more contested portion establishes a framework modeled on EPA‑approved state structures so Indiana can apply for class‑6 primacy to administer permitting for geologic carbon storage.
DNR said it drafted the language after consultation with EPA and that EPA had suggested technical clarifications included as an amendment; the committee accepted those technical changes by consent. DNR staff emphasized primacy would permit Indiana to make permitting decisions closer to local geology and stakeholders and provide a predictable, state‑level permitting path for capital investments.
Several industry witnesses supported primacy and streamlined permitting. Tim Phelps (Indiana Ethanol Producers Association) and Hamilton Smith (POET) framed primacy as important to carbon capture projects being pursued by ethanol and industrial firms in the state. Supporters said fees would be charged to applicants to fund program administration.
Opponents and several public commenters raised concerns about monitoring, safety, the existing Wabash Valley project’s special status and whether fee revenues would land in a dedicated DNR account or the general fund. Representative Matt Pierce asked for clarification about staffing and funding. DNR said permitting fees exist and would cover administration; sponsors agreed broader fiscal mechanics around fund flows are a separate appropriation issue and not resolved in this bill.
After debate and witness testimony, the committee accepted the EPA‑requested technical amendment and passed HB1368 as amended, recorded 10–2. Members asked for continued engagement on implementation details — especially funding, monitoring and the administrative structure that would follow primacy if EPA approves delegation.
