EQB staff asks

board to suspend

Hutchinson pipeline permit

By KEVIN SWEENEY

Journal Editor

ST. PAUL -- The Hutchinson Public Utilities is facing the possible suspension of its permit to operate the natural gas pipeline it has built.

The staff of the Environmental Quality Board is asking the EQB to take the unusual step of suspending the permit until the Hutchinson Utilities Commission (HUC) provides documents the staff has been seeking, agrees to pay farmers along the pipeline for crop damage and losses done during the construction of the pipeline, and agrees to pay the EQB $25,000 to cover the costs it has incurred so far investigating complaints against the project.

New Ulm is participating in the natural gas pipeline project, tapping in to the pipeline HUC is constructing. It is paying a third of the $30 million project's cost and taking a third of the gas provided the pipeline will carry. The project is intended to give New Ulm a new source of natural gas and control the transportation fees the city and its customers now pay for natural gas.

The EQB staff is also asking for a resolution requiring HUC to seek the EQB's permission before constructing a tap to the Fairfax natural gas pipeline. That tap is part of New Ulm Public Utilities' plan to sell some of the natural gas it doesn't use to other communities.

Bruce Hanson, the attorney for HUC on the project, said Wednesday he will be representing HUC at the hearing today. He said the HUC has been collecting the information the HUC is seeking, that the HUC considers pertinent to the environmental questions on the pipeline. Some information, such as what Hutchinson is paying for the natural gas it pipes or whom it buys from, isn't germane to environmental questions, said Hanson.

An EQB staff memo presented for today's meeting said suspension of the pipeline permit is a major decision with significant impact on Hutchinson and the owners of the land on which the pipeline is built. The EQB has never suspended a pipeline permit before.

EQB staff said it is asking for the action for several reasons:

"First, there have been complaints registered about HUC's conduct from the time the first permit was issued in December 2002. Landowners who were not even on the route complained that they received letters threatening to condemn their property if they did not sign an easement," the memo said. Complaints have been received about the amount of topsoil stripped from the pipeline route, failure to notify landowners of pending construction, bad treatment from the land agents toward the landowners, damage to tile lines that were improperly repaired, and mixing subsoil and clay along with the topsoil placed back over the pipeline.

The EQB has also received a complaint from the Department of Natural Resources that the New Ulm connection to the pipeline goes through a wetland that was not on the route the city originally identified.

EQB staff said the HUC has been given opportunities to change its conduct, but the EQB continues to received complaints from landowners that HUC is not complying with mitigation plans it agreed to.

EQB staff said the complaints have been widespread along the line. While some landowners have said they are satisfied with HUC's conduct, others along the line have complained, and EQB staff said they have been able to confirm the complaints where they have looked.

EQB staff also feels HUC "has increasingly become more intransigent. ... Once the pipeline is complete and placed into operation, HUC is likely to become even more intransigent in its position."