TransCanada Corp. has already filed lawsuits against property owners who refuse to allow the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to traverse their land, even though the project has not yet received federal approval.

The Canadian company informed Nebraska cattle buyer Randy Thompson that if he did not allow pipeline access on 80 of his 400 inherited acres, "Keystone [would] use eminent domain to acquire the easement."

Other property owners from South Dakota to the Gulf of Mexico have received similar threats. By its own count, TransCanada already has 34 eminent domain actions in Texas and another 22 in South Dakota.

"Their land agent told us the very first day she met with us, you either take the money or they're going to condemn the land," said Sue Kelso, who owns pasture land in Oklahoma with her siblings.

The company's pressure tactics have raised questions as to whether a foreign company can take such a stance against U.S. landowners before the State Department even determines whether the project is in the national interest.

"It is presumptuous for the company to take on eminent domain cases before there is any decision made," said a U.S. government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Thompson, the cattle buyer, wrote in his testimony for a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing in May that the questions surrounding the Keystone pipeline are reason enough to put its approval on hold. He said he would continue to fight against the pipeline on his land.

TransCanada spokesman Shawn Howard said the company does not have to wait until it has its permit to start obtaining land. He said the company has worked to secure voluntary agreements and will use force where property owners are unwilling to cooperate.

But a senior State Department official said the Canadian company has not sought federal approval to invoke eminent domain. He said his department is not in charge of the issue and that it would be up to the states to determine whether the company's actions are appropriate.

Affected landowners have argued TransCanada has not met the requirements to invoke eminent domain, but a South Dakota judge ruled in a previous pipeline case that the company could use eminent domain to obtain land (Kaufman/Frosch, New York Times, Oct. 17). -- PK