Oil and gas operations might be pushed further away from homes, schools and other residential buildings under a rule change being considered by Wyoming regulators. 

But is unclear when and how that rule would be implemented. 

Mark Watson, the state's interim Oil and Gas supervisor, said Tuesday in a public meeting in Casper that his agency will prioritize an examination of the minimum distance required between energy development and residences. The current distance is 350 feet.

The gathering came amid increasing oil development in eastern Wyoming and pressure from landowners worried about the proximity of energy operations to their communities. Tuesday's meeting was initially billed as a chance to gather public input on proposed rule changes on setback requirements, flaring and the bonds operators pay on wells.

But it was short on specifics. Watson, who assumed his current role as interim supervisor two weeks ago when his predecessor Grant Black abruptly resigned, did not give a timeline for when any changes would be adopted. He did allude to the state's lengthy rule-making procedure, noting any changes would have to follow that procedure.

Flaring, the practice of burning off excess natural gas at oil wells, and bond requirements will still be studied, but only after a review of setback distances is complete, Watson told a crowd of around 50 people.

The change was made at the request of Gov. Matt Mead, who chairs the oil and gas commission, Watson said. He recalled a conversation he had with Mead and other members of the commission earlier in the week during an interview after the meeting.    

"I said, 'Where do you want me to go in the future, what do you want do you want me to look at?"' Watson said.  "The governor said, and the commission too they agreed, that 'We want you to look at setbacks first.' They thought it might be a little simpler, it's not going to be, and work their way up to flaring. Speculation on my part, but they thought take something that is not as hard to do."

Tuesday's meeting saw several landowners, as well as environmentalists, push for raising setbacks requirements. Energy operations near communities are devaluing property values and diminishing quality of life, they said in comments to the commission. Only one representative from the energy industry spoke and in that case the comment concerned drilling applications.

Maria Katherman, a Converse County resident, alluded to the abandoned coal-bed methane wells in the Powder River Basin, which were left-behind after the bust of the industry. The state is now tasked with plugging those wells. If the state had developed a strategy at the beginning of that boom it wouldn't be faced with the situation now, she said. 

Katherman encouraged the commission to develop rules that would prevent the current oil play from concluding in a similar fashion. 

"Citizens' perception of this commission is that you guys listen to oil and gas, which you should do. But you should also listen to the citizens because we are the ones that are gonna live here," Katherman said. "We're not making a dime by coming here tonight. We're not getting paid $80 an hour to attend this meeting. We're here because we hope there are some changes made in the way the commission operates." 

Watson rejected the notion the commission does not listen to citizens. He said regulators are duty bound to follow state law. And he pleaded with landowners to be patient, noting the commission is currently understaffed. A rule review will likely take time, he said.

In an interview, he declined to say whether the minimum distance between homes and energy operations should be raised, saying he needed to study the issue. But he did note that one proposal to set the minimum distance at one mile was too far.  

"I'd have to look at it closer, but to go from 350 feet to 5,280 feet, you know, that's quite a big jump," he said.

Reach energy reporter Benjamin Storrow at 307-335-5344 or benjamin.storrow@trib.com. Follow him on Twitter @bstorrow

(9) comments

thehousemouse
thehousemouse

Well lets see collectors cars have to be setback 1/4 mile. so I would assume over 1/4 mile should make landowners somewhat happy.

LVHS77
LVHS77

Until these NIMBYs are willing to pay their fair share in taxes to make up for what oil and Natural gas pays they need to just shut up and deal with it. I am tired of these Country Club ranchettes and horse properties whining about everything yet demanding Taj Mahal services

Wyoming Girl88
Wyoming Girl88

LVHS77, you are sorely misinformed. These people are hardly hailing from "country club ranchettes." They are average people who work hard for a living and simply want their health and property values protected. It's interesting that you say big money should stop whining to get what it wants because that actually does fit this situation quite well. These companies are the ones making huge profits from developing near homes, just because they have money doesn't mean they should be able to develop wherever they like and ignore consequences to folks nearby. Oil money has sure done it's job at putting rose colored glasses on your face, that's for sure.

LVHS77
LVHS77

Girl88 I want the Stable Wyoming tax base protected. You and your NIMBY friends hate oil and gas development. I don't. We need the oil, gas, and minerals tax money. Farming and ranching dries up during a drought, tourism dries up during uncertain economic times. Are you willing to have your taxes go up 300%+ to have everything that evil industry pays for? As well as the VERY HIGH paying jobs it provides

Wyoming Girl88
Wyoming Girl88

Who said anything about hating oil and gas development? Or that increasing setback distance requirements would somehow make it disappear?

Wyoming Girl88
Wyoming Girl88

By the way, natural resource development is a boom and bust industry. If you know Wyoming, you should at least know that much. I'd hardly call the financial benefits of a boom a "stable" tax base.

LVHS77
LVHS77

the obama regimes EPA is what causes busts in energy extraction. Stop him and the EPA you stop the bust cycle

Wyoming Girl88
Wyoming Girl88

LVHS77 - Oh really? Wow! I had no idea! Since you're so smart, can you remind me of when Obama was elected again? 2008? And since when have booms and busts happened in energy extraction in Wyoming? Since there was ever such a thing as supply and demand and market saturation? So yeah...definitely the fault of Obama's less than 6 year old administration and the EPA, which by the way, came along a mere 44 years ago in 1970.

whatever
whatever

LVHS/Allen - your usual moronic rant. there have always been and always will be boom and bust cycles in the energy industry. energy is a global commodity and will always be subject to these cycles. you know nothing about economics, or much of anything else.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.