Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pipeline Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PUC suspends Black Hills tariff filing and approves settlement after pipeline-permit dispute
Summary
The PUC voted to suspend Black Hills Power’s tariff imposition for 180 days, authorize consultant contracts and assess filing fees, and approved a separate settlement resolving staff’s pipeline permitting complaint that includes a $40,000 penalty (not charged to ratepayers) and a required declaratory ruling on a long line’s permitting status.
The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission on March 10 took procedural action on Black Hills Power’s rate filing and approved a settlement resolving a staff complaint over pipeline permitting and inspections.
On Docket EL26-003, PUC staff (Amanda Reese) asked the commission to suspend imposition of Black Hills’ proposed tariff for 180 days beyond Feb. 19, 2026, to assess a filing fee for actual expenses not to exceed $500,000, and to authorize the executive director to enter into necessary consulting contracts. Black Hills attorney Jason Kyle told the commission the company had no objection to those housekeeping requests. The commission approved the motion; Commissioners Fegan and Nelson voted yes.
The commission then addressed PS25-003, a staff complaint against Black Hills Power concerning pipeline permitting and what staff described as inaccurate statements to regulators during inspection follow-up. Staff said the issue centers on whether a long transmission line — referred to in the record as the “Lang One” line, built circa 2002 — required a permit under SD statute 4941B when it was installed and whether it must be permitted now.
Douglas Law, counsel for Black Hills, acknowledged there had been miscommunications with staff and gaps in historical records for the older line. He said the company views the settlement as an opportunity to strengthen compliance and communications with pipeline safety staff. Staff and the company agreed not to litigate all facts and instead to resolve contested issues through a settlement and a new declaratory-ruling docket to determine whether a permit is required under statute 4941B.
As part of the settlement, the commission recorded a civil penalty of $40,000 related to the matters raised in the complaint; the commission and company confirmed those penalties will not be billed to ratepayers. The settlement requires Black Hills to file a petition for a declaratory ruling regarding the Lang One line and to enter into regular meetings with pipeline safety staff to improve communications and compliance practices.
Chairman Nelson praised the PUC pipeline safety staff’s national reputation, and commissioners emphasized that the settlement preserves pipeline safety oversight while avoiding formal litigation in this instance. On a motion to approve the settlement stipulation and ordering the declaratory-ruling process, Commissioners Fegan and Nelson voted yes and the motion carried.
Next steps: Black Hills is to file the petition for a declaratory ruling on the Lang One line’s permitting status; the PUC will monitor regular meetings between Black Hills and pipeline safety staff and track compliance and implementation of settlement terms.
