Originally published by Charles Sartain.
Posted by Charles Sartain
House Bill 40, similar to House Bills 539 and 540, steamrolled through the House of Representatives last week by a vote of 122 to 18. Reminds us of A L pitchers not rookies and the Rangers’s betting order.
The bill would preempt local control of oil and gas operations. If the bill becomes law political subdivisions could not enact or enforce ordinances that ban, limit or otherwise regulate an oil and gas operation within its boundaries.
Exceptions would be:
- Above ground activity that governs fire and emergency response traffic, lights, or noise, or “reasonable” setback requirements;
- That is commercially reasonable;
- Does not effectively prohibit an oil and gas operation conducted by a reasonably prudent operator (hello Dallas and Denton); and
- Is not otherwise preempted by state or federal law.
A regulation is prima facie commercially reasonable if it has been in place for at least five years and has allowed oil and gas operations to continue during that period.
See the House Research Organization’s analysis of who’s for and who’s against. You won’t be surprised at the lineups.
What Supporters Say:
- To satisfy concerns that Railroad Commission surface regulations are insufficient and not enforced, the Legislature should fully fund the Railroad Commission and focus on improving state policies and regulations instead of off-loading that task to municipalities (good luck on the “fully fund” part);
- The law would affirm the preemptive nature of state oil and gas regulations and reduce litigation (a cause dear to the heart of our legislature, regardless of the side effects);
- Municipal regulations that effectively ban attempts to exploit natural resources deprive mineral rights owners of their property.
- The law would affirm the dominance of the mineral estate (as has been the law of Texas since minerals were discovered).
- The impact of operations are only temporary and can be mitigated by above-ground regulations such as setbacks, fencing, etc.
- Establishes regulatory certainty.
What Opponents Say:
- Even basic ordinances intended to insure public health and safety would be prohibited;
- Effects of operations are felt most acutely at the local level, and municipalities are better equipped than state agencies to understand the effects of operations in their communities.
- State agencies may not have the political will to enforce regulations to protect public health and the environment.
- Gaps in state subsurface rules and regulations are filled by local ordinances, which would be preempted.
- State regulations on oil and gas operations are notoriously weak.
- Municipalities might have statutory obligations that cannot be performed without limiting subsurface activity.
- Current law is sufficient to protect property rights. Regulatory takings are not inherently bad; property owners are compensated for a regulatory taking facilitated by municipal regulation.
- Erosion of property rights is worthwhile if local regulations are necessary to protect neighborhoods from environmental degradation and public health consequences.
- Oil and gas operations infringe on property rights of surface owners.
What Sam Phillips Did For You Yesterday
After watching Rhodes Baseball take three out of three from Millsaps, we had a holy experience Sunday in Memphis. The 8:00 a.m. Rite I service at Calvary Episcopal Church downtown was one, but I’m really talking about Sun Studio – “The birthplace of Rock and Roll”. Today’s musical interludes are the first studio recordings ever by these artists. What’s so new and different? Nothing, until you consider the best-selling tune of 1952 for perspective. Imagine the world before Rock and Roll and then listen:
Howling Wolf 1952 (not R&R of course, but it set the stage).
I Elvis 1953
The Killer 1956
Three more next time, including two gents in the picture.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/1bvdDS5
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment