Drill site inspection option rarely invoked in Garfield County
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, Colo. A relatively new state policy aimed at resolving conflicts related to natural gas drilling sites has been used little in Garfield County.The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s on-site inspection policy was instituted in February 2005, largely to address concerns in places such as Garfield County about conflicts between landowners and energy companies wanting to drill on their land. Yet requests for inspections in the county have been made only four times.Statewide, the COGCC has received 91 requests. Forty-eight were for locations in Weld County, and another 16 for Las Animas County sites.COGCC director Brian Macke thinks the low number of requests in Garfield County reflects efforts by energy companies to reach surface use agreements with landowners in the county.”They see that it’s in their best interests to do so,” he said.The inspection policy resulted from situations involving split estates, in which landowners don’t own underlying minerals. Under state law, energy companies can post a bond and proceed with drilling if they’re unable to reach a surface use agreement with a landowner.Under the policy, a landowner who isn’t happy with an energy developer’s plans for a drilling site can request an on-site inspection by COGCC staff. The COGCC then can ask for more mitigation of visual, noise and other impacts, if warranted.The COGCC has conducted 20 on-site inspections out of the 91 requests. Forty-seven requests were withdrawn and 24 inspections are pending.Macke said that the last he checked for Garfield County this year, 505 of 1,670 drilling permit applications involved cases of split estates. Energy companies reached surface use agreements with landowners in 479 of those cases.”I really do believe that it reflects their desire to go that extra step and make sure that they arrive at a mutually agreeable surface use agreement,” Macke said.Duke Cox, chairman of the energy committee of the Western Colorado Congress citizens group, said the low number of requests for inspections in the county could reflect any number of things. He said there was a long history of the COGCC ignoring Garfield County residents’ concerns, and they came to rely on other sources of help. One option has been to contact the local Grand Valley Citizens Alliance group, which then would contact the COGCC.Garfield residents also have become more familiar with drilling issues through forums and educational materials, he said.”Them calling the COGCC to come out and settle their differences, we’re maybe past that point,” Cox said.Only about 12 percent of drilling applications approved in Colorado last year were permitted under a surface use bond. Macke said that’s down from as high as 21 percent in past years, before the new policy was in place. But the percentage has risen again so far this year, to about 17 percent.Macke said one reason is that some companies prefer to proceed with drilling under a bond and reach a surface use agreement later, once the impacts associated with a well pad are better known. The COGCC doesn’t receive information on how many agreements are reached after a drilling permit is issued.Macke believes the inspection policy has proven to be workable, and has helped push companies to reach agreements with landowners.”We’ve seen that it’s provided a very important mechanism for having the oil and gas commission staff available to surface owners who feel like they may not be consulted with as they would like to be,” Macke said.The inspection program was implemented on a trial basis as only a policy, meaning it’s not formally enforceable. But compliance by companies has been high, Macke said, and he would like to see the policy become an enforceable rule.Meanwhile, the state legislature this year passed, and Gov. Bill Ritter signed, a law requiring energy developers to minimize their damage to surface land, and let surface owners seek compensatory damages when that hasn’t occurred.Contact: Dennis Webb: email@example.comPost Independent, Glenwood Springs Colorado CO
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
Under a tight deadline, the LoVa trail group needs $300,000 to continue a project that begins building the trail toward South Canyon.