Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › Business › Energy

Some in oil, gas industry don't condemn draft rules

Larger operators are taking more cautious approach

Todd Hartman and Gargi Chakrabarty

Published April 2, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  
Members of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association demonstrate their disapproval March 20 of the state's overhaul of drilling rules on the west steps of the capitol.

Photo by George Kochaniec Jr. / The Rocky

Members of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association demonstrate their disapproval March 20 of the state's overhaul of drilling rules on the west steps of the capitol.

Related Links

More Energy

More stories »

An oil and gas trade association's condemnation of new state oversight for the industry isn't shared by all energy companies in Colorado and may be a shrewd negotiating tactic, political analysts suggested Tuesday.

State officials released much- anticipated draft environmental rules for the industry Monday, which some companies and industry allies said had been revised to address key concerns raised by the industry since last year's initial proposals.

Nevertheless, the Colorado Oil & Gas Association criticized the revised rules as a repackaging of initial proposals.

"These rules will negatively impact Colorado's number one economic contributor, at a time when Colorado's entire economy is being buoyed by these important investments," said COGA President Meg Collins, in a prepared statement Monday.

Such rhetoric is arguably a smart move, said pollster Floyd Ciruli, noting that COGA's criticism of the state rule-making in recent months resulted in big changes to the earlier proposals by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.

"The forces arrayed on the side of defending the industry, and that includes legislators who favor them . . . recognize that the rules are better than they were initially proposed, and than they were expected to be," Ciruli said.

"COGA in particular is simply taking the most conservative negotiating position . . . they are going to be the anchor in this, the place that shows no compromise. I think they could argue it's worked so far, because these rules are much improved."

It's not surprising that COGA is taking a hard line, added Steve Welchert, a Democratic political consultant. He said COGA represents the state's smaller operators and is typically a "saber-rattler" on state matters such as regulations.

The bigger companies, in contrast, are more cautious, exhibiting a more deft political touch, he said. That assertion could be seen in the comments from Stan Dempsey, who represents the Colorado Petroleum Association, an association of larger energy companies.

Dempsey's comments were far more restrained when the draft rules appeared, and he said they appeared to reflect a "bit more understanding" of industry from regulators. Dempsey also declined to attack the rules, saying it was still early in the process.

BP, the state's largest natural gas producer, was also far more careful in its comments about the rules. Jack Rigg, a spokesman, said the company has worked with the state and will continue to.

BP has "gone through the stakeholder process and given suggestions on how to improve the original draft rules," he said.

COGA runs the risk of losing credibility with voters, Welchert said, if it continues to oppose issues at every turn and avoid acknowledging any concessions in the rule-making debate.

"It's a really fine line for them," he said of criticizing the rules when others have acknowledged improvement. "They begin to look like single-issue, self-serving folks, which they are, but you never want to appear that way."

But Katy Atkinson, a Republican consultant who has advised COGA members, said she believes the state contributed to an adversarial process by creating the perception it wasn't interested in industry concerns last fall - an assertion regulators have contested.

"The original mistakes, or what I think are mistakes . . . and the sense from industry that nobody was listening to them, may have gotten industry to the point where they were so darn angry, they don't care about what kind of minor concessions they get" in the rule-making, Atkinson said.

COGA's opposition, however, was curious to Elise Jones, of the Colorado Environmental Coalition. She said Collins, of COGA, told her Monday morning "she was pleased the administration had been so responsive to industry concerns."

"Eight hours later, (Collins) is spewing hysterical rhetoric."

Collins declined an interview Tuesday, but responded this way to Jones, in a statement:

"Based on (oil and gas conservation commission acting director Dave) Neslin's public statements, yes, our initial take after the (morning legislative) briefing was that the draft rules appeared to address some of our concerns.

"We believed acting Director Neslin and took his word for it. However, upon further investigation into the draft rules, we've found that not only are our initial concerns still included, they're more serious."

hartmant@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5048

Comments

  • April 2, 2008

    1:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    justright writes:

    What kind of smoke screen article is this?

    The Colorado Oil and Gas association has been completely overhauled with anti oil and gas people. Ritter and fellow libs completely changed the make-up of this association. The objective of the new people is to slow down the oil and gas industry. That is exactly what more rules do. You know things like, you can't drill in March or April because of some bird, or in June and July because of some rodent or August and September becuase there is too much sunshine.

    Eventually COGA's goal is to stop oil and gas production. First slow it down and then stick a fork in it.

    Imagine if the "K-12 Education Association, CEA" had to put oil and gas experts or home school experts or religion experts or pipe fitter experts on their association board. The home schooling experts and pastors I am sure would be welcomed by the CEA especially since they no longer are the voting majority.

    People, an association is suppose to work for the industry they represent. They are not there to work against those interest. I am sure the CEA doesn't want home schoolers spending their money and dictating how to do their job any more then Oil and Gas industry wants environmentalist telling them how or where to find oil and gas.

  • April 4, 2008

    10:19 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    CarefulReader writes:

    justright is just wrong. COGA, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association is a trade group made up entirely of oil and gas companies. "Ritter and his fellow libs" have no say in who is on the COGA board, unless some of the "fellow libs" are in the oil & gas business.

    justright is probably confusing COGA with COGCC, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which is the state agency that oversees oil and gas drilling and production in the state. Sure Ritter added some non-industry people to the COGCC. It's a bad idea of have an oversight commission made up entirely of the people it's supposed to be overseeing. Thanks governor for letting the rest of us have some say in what the oil and gas industry does to our state.

  • April 6, 2008

    8:45 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    justright writes:

    Good catch Carefulreader,

    I certainly meant COGCC and NOT COGA. I apologize to COGA people for they are a great organization. COGA does a great job of avocating for oil and gas interest in Colorado. My momma told me not to post on an empty stomach.

    The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is the group trying to stick a fork in oil and gas development in Colorado. Which now seems to be at odds with the TAX money the Guv plans on collecting from an aggressive expansion of mineral extraction.