Iowa utilities Board asks about ability to change Dakota Access pipeline route

Iowa Utilities Board Chairwoman Geri Huser expressed her concerns Tuesday about the route Dakota Access for a crude oil pipeline.
“If the route is an issue, is this the best time for the utilities board to be looking at the route, after the hearing,” Huser said, referring to the pipeline which will cross Iowa from northwest to southeast, over about 330 miles.
Huser asked the IUB’s legal counsel whether the board should consider the cost of changes, and whether the board could go as far as asking Dakota Access to completely refigure the route, for example along a route that goes first south along the state’s western end, then directly east through southern Iowa. 
Later, when discussing a property outside of Ames, which the owners felt was close enough to Ames that it may be viable to be considered for development, Huser raised that issue again.
“I’m again asking staff to assist us with what options are available … when we see there is another way to go,” Huser said. “It may not be less costly, but it does save the land for future use.”
Board member Nick Wagner said he could offer a few route tweaks, particularly for properties the pipeline barely came through, or just clipped through a corner. He also asked what criteria the board should consider when deciding whether to change the route at.
Wagner also wondered about what landowners could do if, after a pipeline is built, something wasn’t fixed to their satisfaction.
“Are there any stipulations the board can place on a permit to say, if after it’s installed, the landowner is not happy, there’s any remediation we can require,” Wagner asked.
The board’s legal counsel said the board could impose conditions on the permit that were property specific, as well as over the entire project.
An attorney for the IUB mentioned that another part of Iowa Code, which provides the regulations for utility transmission lines, requires the proposing company or utility to file alternative routes. The code for underground pipelines does not require that.
“My understanding of the company's case here, they're saying they looked at the whole state and considered all of the avoidance criteria or preference criteria and came up with what they believe to be the best (route),” attorney David Lynch added.
A wholesale route change would possible impact farmers to a lesser extent, he said, by moving the pipeline away from tile lines. But it would impact more landowners, because the proposed route is the shortest way to get across the state, he said. 
Check back with The Graphic-Advocate all week for continued coverage of the IUB hearing, which is being livestreamed online through Thursday afternoon.