Minnesota regulators review 28-mile Summit carbon pipeline near Fergus Falls

A government contractor has modeled a possible rupture and determined that, in a worst-case scenario, it could be life-threatening to people within a maximum of 189 meters, a distance of about two football fields. There are eight homes and a business within that likely path.

Summit will not build its pipeline in Minnesota until the company receives approvals elsewhere, particularly for the end of the system in North Dakota.

That is not certain, however. In August, North Dakota denied Summit a site permit but agreed to reconsider the move; a decision is expected soon. In South Dakota, authorities rejected an application for the project last year, but Summit plans to reapply soon. In June, Summit scored a victory when Iowa regulators approved the pipeline system there.

Summit’s potential use of the right of expropriation is one reason for fierce opposition from some landowners and conservative politicians elsewhere. It’s not an issue in Minnesota because Summit cannot assert the right of expropriation under state law and the company has voluntary easements on 89 percent of its 28-mile stretch, Blank said.

At the hearing, Peg Furshong, a director of CURE, said said the PUC should have considered both sections of the pipeline in Minnesota, even though Summit has not yet applied for permits for the southern section. The project there would pass at the end of their driveway in rural Redwood County, and many of those listening had driven three hours north from the Lamberton area, Furshong said.