Industry Motion Re Final Rule Comment Deadline FNL

Finem

Informations

• Publié par: Ofte
• Nombre de lectures: 41
• Langue: English

Extrait

BEFORE THE OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

IN THE MATTER OF CHANGES TO THE

)

CAUSE NO

.

1R

RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE OIL

)

AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION

)

DOCKET NO

.

0803-RM-02

OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

)

C

OLORADO

O

IL

&

G

AS

A

SSOCIATION

C

OLORADO

P

ETROLEUM

A

SSOCIATION

M

OTION TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE PARTY COMMENTS

COME NOW, the Industry Associations and enter their motion for the Commission to

provide for additional time for the Parties to submit comments on the final proposed OGCC rules

to be considered during the hearings scheduled for December 9-11, 2008.

The Industry

Associations state as grounds for this motion:

1.

The Commission Order dated November 6, 2008 sets forth a clear and

unambiguous timeline for distribution of the final proposed rules and deadlines for party groups

to provide comment.

The schedule set forth for submittal of Party Group comments is

aggressive and requires the Party Groups to review and compile comments from numerous

individual Parties within 10 days of receipt of the final proposed OGCC rules.

This deadline was

set on a date certain, November 17, 2008, on the assumption that all of the proposed wording

would be issued by Staff on November 7, 2008.

2.

A key component of the final proposed rules is the accompanying Statement of

Basis and Purpose (SBP). During the course of the rulemaking proceedings, the Commission

Staff has regularly deferred questions about and explanation of the drafters’ intent to the SBP.

Commission staff has advised various industry parties that many of the concerns about the draft

rules expressed in the filings of the industry parties on October 22 and November 4 would be

addressed in the SBP. However, as of this writing, Commission staff has not released a proposed

draft of the SBP, and thus industry parties have not had any opportunity to review the proposed

final version of the SPB language as was contemplated by the Commission Order. Without

reviewing that language, the industry parties do not have the information necessary to complete

their review of the proposed rules and therefore will not be able to submit informed comments on

the proposed rules.

3.

Given the wide-ranging, complex and technical nature of this rulemaking, the

SBP is an integral supporting document. A thorough and complete review of the rule requires

consideration of the SBP.

Industry Parties must have adequate time to review the entire final

proposed rule and supporting documents to ensure the rules and the SBP do not create

conflicting directives, ambiguity, or errors.

Colorado statutes direct that the SBP shall be a

“written concise general statement of their basis, specific authority, and purpose.” 24-4-103(4)(c)

C.R.S.

The SBP is a foundational document.

It is not intended to resolve difficult or complex

technical and policy questions.

It must not be used to create a “shadow” rule creating

inconsistencies with final rule text.

4.

Despite the schedule set forth in the Commission’s order, the final proposed SBP

was not circulated to Party Groups on November 7, 2008.

As of this filing, it has not been

circulated to Party Groups for review and analysis.

This delay has compromised the ability of

the Industry Associations and other Parties to review and analyze the final proposed rule to

identify potential inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

Furthermore, the delay associated with the

failure to distribute the SBP has further compressed the already short timeframe set forth in the

Order for comment and prejudiced the Parties’ ability to fully and meaningfully participate in the

comment process for the final proposed rule.

Accordingly, the Industry Associations request that this Commission:

A.

Provide all Party Groups 10 days from the date of receipt of the final proposed

SBP within which to submit their comments on the final versions of the SBP and the draft rules

and that Staff be afforded a corresponding extension of its filing deadline (currently November

24, 2008), that is, until and through seven days after the revised deadline for the Party Groups’

filing date; and

B.

Convene an expedited telephonic meeting in order to address this Motion on an

expedited basis given the time constraints present.

R

ESPECTFULLY

S

UBMITTED THIS

12

TH

D

AY OF

N

OVEMBER

,

2008:

/

S

/

KENNETH A

.

WONSTOLEN

________________________

Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.

C

OUNSEL FOR THE

C

OLORADO

O

IL

&

G

AS

A

SSOCIATION

/

S

/

JOHN PAUL SEMAN

,

JR

.

______________________

C

OUNSEL FOR THE

C

OLORADO

P

ETROLEUM

A

SSOCIATION

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, hereby certify that on this 12th day of November, 2008, I served an electronic version

of the foregoing

M

OTION TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE PARTY COMMENTS

, and have

arranged to have an original and 14 copies hand delivered, addressed to the following:

Patricia Beaver, Hearing Manager

[e-mail]

Docket No. 0803-RM-02

Oil and Gas Conservation Commission

1120 Lincoln Street, Suite 801

Denver, CO

80203

- and-

I hereby certify that I caused two (2) copies of the above-referenced Motion to be hand-

delivered, addressed to the following:

K

e

l

l

y

R

e

e

s

[e-mail]

Colorado Department of Law

1525 Sherman Street, 5

th

Floor

Denver, CO

80203

- and-

I hereby certify that I caused one (1) copy of the above-reference Motion to be hand-

delivered, addressed to the following:

Joshua B. Epel

Hearing Officer

c/o DCP Midstream

370 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2500

Denver, CO

80202

- and -

I electronically served the above-referenced motion on the following:

[e-mail]

and all of the Parties listed on the Party List found at the OGCC website.

_/S/ Linda Etz____________________

Linda Etz