The Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Commission asked the state’s supreme court to address the question of standing and review decisions by several district courts and the Colorado Appeals Court. Colorado Rising, a consumer advocacy group, immediately said COGCC’s Aug. 8 petition for certiorari in “Weld Air & Water et al vs. COGCC” would deny Coloradans protection from hazards associated with oil and gas operations.
“In order to have the best possible understanding of who has the ability to challenge a commission decision in court, the commission chose to request guidance from the Colorado Supreme Court,” said COGCC Director Jeff Robbins.
This comes as the commission tries to implement Colorado Senate Bill 181’s mandate to regulate oil and gas development so that public health, safety, welfare, and the environment and wildlife resources are protected, Robbins said.
“Additionally, the commission and I are both committed to ensuring that the public has a voice. The COGCC staff and I have been instructed to explore broader standing rules before the commission as part of our upcoming rulemakings and to reflect the spirit of SB 181,” Robbins said.
The appeals court ruled on June 6 that the commission did not act arbitrarily or capriciously when it granted permits for oil and gas activity that opponents had challenged because it considered relevant public comments.
COGCC also complied with setback regulations establishing the necessary distance of such activity from schools and residences because Rule 604.c.(2)(E)(i) does not require the commission to conduct an alternative site analysis before granting a Form 2A permit, the appeals court said.
‘Saddened, disappointed’
Colorado Rising argued that the appeals court’s ruling found citizens’ groups have the right to challenge oil and gas operations’ proximity to school playgrounds and similar activities. “The appeals court’s decision on standing was clear and well supported. This is supposed to be a new commission after SB 181, but they’re acting exactly as they always have. I’m extremely saddened and disappointed by this action,” attorney Kate Merlin said.
Characterizing the COGCC as “an unelected consisting of part-time members appointed by the governor,” Colorado Rising Communications Director Anne Lee Foster said the commission is trying to limit citizens’ legal access by creating its own rules on standing, “limiting what qualifies as an ‘injury’ to dramatically narrow the categories of people who qualify to sue it.”
COGCC, meanwhile, announced on Aug. 15 that while the formal stakeholder process for SB 181 will begin later, it would receive comments early on the rulemakings at various locations around the state. It said it will accept observations on mission change, cumulative impacts, alternative flow analysis, and flowline proposals at an Aug. 21 hearing in Glenwood Springs.