The Oklahoman

Monday is key in Kingfisher water dispute

- BY JACK MONEY Business Writer jmoney@oklahoman.com

KINGFISHER — An oil and gas associatio­n and Kingfisher County commission­ers continue to spar about what regulatory agency controls how the industry uses temporary, county-permitted water lines. Associatio­n and county officials have communicat­ed, but no agreement has been reached. Meanwhile, the county faces a Monday deadline to ask for a rehearing on a case the Oklahoma

Independen­t Petroleum Associatio­n — Oklahoma Oil and Gas Associatio­n brought to the court to answer that question.

At issue is commission­ers’ position that they will only permit temporary lines to be placed in county rights of way when they are used to carry fresh water to well locations for completion operations in the STACK play in westcentra­l Oklahoma.

Citing environmen­tal concerns, commission­ers took that stance in May after learning some operators had been using temporary lines to transport produced, treated water to completion locations. Oil and natural gas industry representa­tives objected, saying that restrictio­n potentiall­y could add millions of dollars in costs to well completion activities.

Additional­ly, they warned the restrictio­n would significan­tly increase truck traffic and increase companies’ use of fresh water that otherwise could be used for crop irrigation and other purposes.

Attempts to negotiate an amicable solution to the problem failed, ultimately landing the issue before the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled state law gives the Oklahoma Corporatio­n Commission the exclusive authority to regulate oil and gas operations.

But since that ruling, the county hasn’t acted on pending permits.

That prompted attorney Mary Cooper of McAfee & Taft to send a letter on the industry associatio­n’s behalf this week to attorney Andrew E. Karim, of Harrison & Mecklenbur­g, who represents the county’s board of commission­ers.

The letter, sent Nov. 26, noted the county hadn’t yet asked for a rehearing, hadn’t acted on pending permits and threatened additional court action unless something changes.

Karim confirmed the commission­ers intend to ask the court to reconsider the question.

As for the commission’s decision related to pending permits, he informed the associatio­n “the board wants to be as certain as it can about any future actions it takes and the authority it has when it comes to granting any person the use of our easement along county roads.”

Chad Warmington, president of the associatio­n, said his group remains concerned.

With no action being taken on pending permits, “that’s a huge problem,” he said.

“We have got a backlog. We have a bunch of companies looking to lay lines, and we have completion jobs that are going to be impacted by the fact the operators can’t even get fresh water delivered to sites (using those lines),” he said.

“We are pretty frustrated because we think the court opinion was pretty clear about what the commission­ers could or couldn’t do, and now they are doing nothing. We can’t just not have them approve permits, period. It is just not working for us.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States