Oil & Gas

Subscribe to Oil & Gas via RSS

As many of you know, permitting delays are not only frustrating but can have real consequences for project applicants with contractual deadlines. In the case of a federal oil and gas lease, operators should be mindful of the primary term in their lease as recently highlighted by the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) in…

In a closely watched, 4-3 decision issued yesterday, February 17, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the ‘Home Rule Amendment’ to the Ohio Constitution does not grant the city of Munroe Falls the power to enforce its own oil and gas permitting scheme simultaneously with a state-wide permitting regime. (State ex rel. Morrison v.

On Wednesday, January 28, the Senate voted against Amendment 48 which would allow the federal Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to regulate hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) on state and private lands.  The measure was presented by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) as a negotiated amendment to the Keystone XL Pipeline Act.  The amendment would have repealed sections of…

On January 20, 2015 a U.S. District Judge overturned New Mexico’s ban on hydrocarbon extraction, which included a prohibition on hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) in the state.  (SWEPI, LP v. Mora County et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-00035-JB-SCY, filed Jan. 19, 2015.) Mora County, a political subdivision of the State of New Mexico, enacted the ban through a local ordinance in April 2013.  It was the first such prohibition in the country.

Federal District Court Judge James O. Browning based his decision on federal preemption:  “Historically, a county cannot enact or supersede federal law. The Ordinance thus goes beyond Mora County’s historical lawmaking just to deprive corporations of their rights.”  (Id. at p. 157.)  The Mora County ban clashed with both state and federal law regulating the drilling of oil and gas.  Under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, any local or state law that conflicts with federal law is invalid.Continue Reading Federal Judge Rules that State and Federal Law Preempts New Mexico’s Fracking Ban

Today, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced a new goal to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas industry.  (See White House Fact Sheet.)  The EPA’s goal is to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40-45% from 2012 levels by 2025.  The proposed regulations will set standards to reduce methane and volatile organic compounds (“VOC”) emissions from “new and modified oil and gas production sources, and natural gas processing and transmission sources.”  The EPA will issue a proposed rule in summer 2015, and will issue a final rule as early as next year, in 2016.

Today’s announcement furthers the “Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions” issued in March 2014, which is an initiative under the Obama Administration’s Climate Act Plan.  Further, the EPA previously published standards for VOC emissions from the oil and gas industry in 2012 which aim to protect public health and the environment while permitting expansion of oil and gas production.Continue Reading EPA Announces Plan for Rulemaking to Reduce Methane Emissions from the Oil and Gas Industry

As we reported earlier, consideration of proposed federal rulemaking concerning crude oil-by-rail transportation recommended by the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration and Federal Railroad Administration is underway, and, after receiving more than 3,000 submissions, the comment period closed on September 30.  Nevertheless, and despite the possibility of preemption challenges in litigation, state…

Railroad transportation of raw petroleum, often referred to as “crude-by-rail,” has received increasing media attention in recent months, due to health and environmental concerns.  California took a stab at legislating rail transport through Senate Bill 861 (“SB 861”), which the State Legislature passed in June 2014 and the Governor subsequently signed into law.  On Tuesday, October 7, 2014, a group of railroad companies, led by Union Pacific Railroad Company, filed a complaint the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, alleging that SB 861 is preempted by federal law.

SB 861 imposes requirements on railroads operating within California that are duplicative of federal regulations.  For example, the law mandates oil spill prevention measures including reporting the quantity and substance of transported materials, and a map of track routes and facilities, both which are already required under federal law.  (See Gov. Code § 8670.29.)  Additionally, railroad operators must submit and gain approval of an oil spill contingency plan before they can legally operate throughout California.Continue Reading Railroad Companies Allege Federal Law Governing Petroleum Transport Preempts SB 861

On September 30, 2014, a block of twelve Democratic U.S. Senators presented a letter to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), urging stricter fracking regulations.  The Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”), an agency within the Department of the Interior, is authoring the federal regulations for fracking on public and Indian lands.  The…

About the Mineral Law Blog

Learn More

Here Stoel Rives shares insight and analysis about key mineral law developments. Drawing on a very active natural resources practice, we aim to keep readers informed about the legal aspects of news that impacts exploration and development of all things mineral.