By Mannix Porterfield
The Register-Herald
CHARLESTON
April 04, 2009 10:20 pm
—
Except for those born in a crisis, legislation normally takes three long, bumpy trips around the Capitol corridors to become a new or revised law.
This year was the second straight effort by the West Virginia Surface Owners Rights Organization seeking relief from zealous oil and gas drillers, the object of criticism by many landowners.
Even with the standard three-year time frame for new bills, organizer David McMahon felt he stood a good chance in getting a bill enacted.
In fact, head counts on committees where the legislation was routed appeared to put SORO in the driver’s seat.
As it turned out, the bill was just another long ride without hitting the checkered flag.
One problem after another posed obstacles, explained McMahon, a Charleston attorney who works with mostly low-income clients.
First, the Senate bill was triple-referenced, ending up in finance where McMahon said it really didn’t need to go.
“So then we went over to the House and ran into some procedural problems, a new early deadline for minor committees,” McMahon said.
Complicating matters even more was the slowness in getting a bill out of the drafting office.
“Certainly, another factor was all the bad things that happened to the oil and gas industry gave some legislators cold feet,” McMahon said.
First came the stunning decision by Chesapeake Energy to pull up stakes and take some 225 jobs out of West Virginia.
“That was a dampening factor,” McMahon said.
Adding to SORO’s dismay was the failure of the West Virginia Farm Bureau to take an active role in lobbying, even though the group endorsed the legislation on its Web site, McMahon said.
“We did some educating,” he said. “We knew it would be a tough struggle. The industry put up a tough fight.”
McMahon’s group wanted to extend the existing notification period from 15 days to two full months, which SORO sees as reasonable.
“After all,” he said, “that well is going to be up there for decades and decades.
“Surely they can start a little earlier in planning.”
Another aim was to require copies of statutes that control a drill site and a written agreement with surface owners.
If no such pact was hammered out, the driller would be obligated to post a token bond to guarantee compensation for the surface owners.
“They’re already entitled to compensation,” he said. “They’re already entitled to have the driller recognize their rights. It’s just getting it done, having that in force. We thought that (the bill) would be a little more leverage to get the surface owners’ existing rights enforced.”
Industry leaders also shied from a provision that would make sure surface owners were sold gas on location.
“I don’t understand why it’s a hassle,” McMahon said. “We don’t think it’s too much to ask for. But they did. We certainly didn’t think it (legislation) was unreasonable.”
In fact, some industry insiders privately told him the bill contained nothing they couldn’t abide by, McMahon said.
“But they hired the big lobbyists to not agree to anything,” he said.
McMahon emphasized that oil and gas drillers aren’t violating laws in the permitting end.
“But they’re doing more than common law would allow them if they ended up in court with the surface owner,” he said.
“They’re probably taking more advantages than they are supposed to.”
— E-mail: mannix@register-herald.com
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.