Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Capture Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners continue county-wide carbon-capture ordinance 30 days after developer and public feedback
Summary
After staff read draft county-wide standards for carbon-capture operations, including setbacks, noise limits and monitoring requirements, the commission continued the public hearing 30 days to allow staff, commissioners and stakeholders (including the developer) time to review and provide recommendations.
The Cass County Planning Commission continued a public hearing on a draft county-wide carbon-capture sequestration (CCS) ordinance for 30 days after a technical presentation by planning staff and questions from residents and the developer.
Planner/staff (speaker 3) read proposed ordinance language that would permit injection and monitoring wells only on the parcel where carbon dioxide is captured, require state and federal permits and supporting studies to be provided to the county, and set operational limits including a 250-foot setback for injection sites from property lines and water sources and a height limit of 35 feet for site equipment. The draft also recommended third-party post-construction noise studies and ongoing monitoring, and indicated emergency-response and maintenance plans must be approved before implementation.
During public comment, a resident (speaker 7) who supplied a White County ordinance comparison urged additional protections: more conservative noise metrics, a ban on pipelines crossing multiple properties within the county and surety bonds or daily fines for violations. Planning staff said the draft was informed by other counties and that detailed requirements could be added to Economic Development Agreements (EDAs) and operational plans.
Greg Russell (speaker 8), who identified himself as representing DTE Energy and the Andersons (project developers), told the commission DTE has been working in the community about 2½ years, has drilled a test well and holds EPA-related permits in its application. Russell said the developer would welcome collaboration on ordinance language and asked for clear channels of communication; he described seismic testing and monitoring approaches and said 30 days is sufficient for initial review.
Planner and commissioners discussed monitoring-well placement (including above-zone and end-zone monitoring wells used to model plume movement), seismic testing and whether the ordinance should prohibit pipelines between county properties. The planner noted the draft already restricts piping and injection to the parcel of capture but said staff could clarify language if commissioners wished.
Commissioner motioned, seconded and the panel voted to continue the public hearing for 30 days so staff can accept written feedback and the public and developer can provide more specific recommendations. The commission also noted that the commissioners’ office and the county’s Economic Development Department would have roles in any EDA or operational agreement that supplements zoning requirements.
The hearing will resume in 30 days; staff and the public were asked to provide comments and proposed clarifications in the interim.
