Face The State Staff Report
House Bill 1255, legislation intended to clarify regulations for oil and gas companies, was laid over until at least next week after nearly two days and close to ten hours of testimony from dozens of witnesses.
If the legislation passes, oil and gas companies could opt out of a process requiring review by the the state's Division of Wildlife for a drilling permit. The companies would still have to comply with existing rules and regulations, but would be able to internally evaluate potential impact to wildlife. The bill summary reads, "...an oil and gas operator is not required to consult with the division of wildlife in the department of natural resources to determine whether wildlife mitigation requirements are reasonably practicable, and requires the Colorado oil and gas conservation commission to make that determination."
The bill's sponsors, including Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, and Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Littleton, and co-sponsored by Rep. Wes McKinley, D-Walsh, say it is needed because the DOW has been inappropriately acting as a regulatory body, overstepping its statutorily-granted role as one of many voices in analyzing impact to wildlife.
After Democrat-led legislation passed in 2007, the Division of Wildlife was authorized to act in a consultative role as part of the permit process to ensure drilling would not offset the natural wildlife population. HB 1255's supporters claim today that DOW has acted as a regulatory body and is controlling and vetoing permits, which they are not authorized to do under current law.
Oil and gas companies maintain it is in best interest of property owners to protect wildlife on their property and that oil and gas companies are capable of determining the impact to wildlife.
"When [HB] 1341 was written in 2007 it was such that the DOW would be strictly a consulting part of the permit process," said Kathy Hall, Western Slope Director for the Colorado Oil and Gas Association. "Now they are regulatory. They do not have the staff or resources to do this. The landowners don't want [the DOW] on their properties. Ranchers can raise and protect their own wildlife."
Supporters also claim that the current permitting process lacks clarity and is costing Coloradans jobs associated with the energy economy.
"This recession is [the result of regulation]," Hall added. "We can't survive without the natural gas industry. The state needs jobs and the tax base provided by the oil and gas industry, and this governor is stopping it with his regulatory environment."
Agriculture Committee member Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, echoed Hall's statement.
"The Ritter administration has thrown farmers and ranchers in rural Colorado under the bus with these oil and gas rules," he said. "To bring balance and fairness we need to pass HB 1255 as quickly as possible, and hopefully in tact."
Environment Colorado opposes HB 1255, claiming the oil and gas industry is not the only economic factor legislators should be concerned with.
"We need to make sure that oil and gas drilling is not allowed to run over other parts of Colorado's economy," said Environment Colorado's field director Matt Garrington. "We have a ten billion dollar a year outdoor recreation economy. People live here because of the quality of life we offer and we need to make sure that we are protecting some of our greatest natural economic resources. That includes air, water, and outdoor recreation opportunities."
Late Wednesday night, the bill was laid over on a 7-6 vote that did not follow party lines. On the first day of testimony, Gardner emphasized that HB 1255 isn't a partisan bill, instead saying it is about property rights and saving jobs associated with the energy industry.
"This is not a partisan bill, this is about policy," said Gardner, a longtime property rights advocate. This bill ensures we won't turn [our backs] on rural Colorado. We can protect property rights and wildlife without destroying opportunity."
"I have no idea when this bill will be heard again," Gardner told Face the State late Wednesday. "The motion was unclear."