Industry greets new state rules with skepticism
Dave Nickum of Trout Unlimited said he is concerned oil and gas development may de-water sensitive streams on the Western Slope, and he wondered if the COGCC rulemaking process will tackle how energy companies’ water use will be regulated.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
DENVER — The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s proposal for how it will create new oil and gas permitting rules was met Tuesday with skeptical questions from the energy industry and concerns from conservationists.
During a series of meetings about the proposal Tuesday, attorney Ken Wonstolen, who represents the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, asked the COGCC’s acting director, David Neslin, if there is any indication the rules already in place aren’t adequate to assess environmental and public health impacts of energy development.
“The question is: Is that going to be a fiat rulemaking or based on administrative record?” he said.
“To the extent that there are disputes over draft rules, we will provide appropriate support as part of the rulemaking process,” Neslin responded, moving quickly to the next question.
Colorado Oil and Gas Association president Meg Collins said there were few surprises in the proposal, and she’s especially glad the COGCC is giving the industry two weeks to respond to it before it is widely released to the public.
But it’s too early to say what the meaning of the proposal is because the industry hasn’t had a chance to digest it, Colorado Petroleum Association President Stan Dempsey said. Most industry members had not seen the proposal before Tuesday morning.
Dempsey said he wants to be sure the commission isn’t duplicating other state regulations, such as those addressing odor control.
Parachute resident Sid Lindauer said he is concerned about how the proposal addresses noise and dust caused by oil and gas operators.
“From where I’m located, you can look often to the north and to the west 25 miles and see bunches of dust,” he said, adding he wonders how it might affect wildlife.
Neslin said no changes to the commission’s rules on dust are in the works. Division of Wildlife biologist John Broderick said the agency has no details on how dust affects wildlife, and the state has no recommendations for how the industry can minimize it.
Dave Nickum of Trout Unlimited said he is concerned oil and gas development may de-water sensitive streams on the Western Slope, and he wondered if the COGCC rulemaking process will tackle how energy companies’ water use will be regulated.
DOW Assistant Director John Bredehoft said that while the DOW has concerns about how the energy industry could deprive streams of their water, he said he couldn’t remember if the new rules will tackle that issue.
“We need to make note of that,” he said.
Kim Phillips of the Grand Valley Citizens Alliance in Garfield County told Neslin she is concerned the proposal may not require enough transparency about the chemicals that companies use in their drilling processes.
“We’re often introduced to the idea that we should just trust that those (chemicals) are safe,” she said, adding the public should have the right to know about the health effects of drilling.
“This is a potential win for industry,” she said. “We need to do testing on specific levels of specific ingredients that we know to be harmful to public health.”
Other concerned residents were less skeptical.
“I want to say this really is such an exciting thing for us,” Palisade-based home builder and Western Colorado Congress member Duke Cox said to Neslin, praising the proposal. “We’ve waited for this day for a very long time.”