American Oil and Gas Reporter - September 2015 - 16

IndustryDigest
California Judge Denies
CBD's Request To Bar
Wastewater Injections

ALAMEDA, CA.-A California
judge has denied a request by an antidevelopment group for a preliminary
injunction to stop wastewater injection
in 2,500 wells across the state.
Ruling in Center for Biological
Diversity v. California Department of
Conservation in California Superior
Court in Alameda County, Superior
Court Judge George Hernandez says the
wells have not demonstrated any threat
to public health by contaminating
aquifers, but economic harm would
occur if the wells were shut in.
According to the California
Independent Petroleum Association,
CDB filed the lawsuit against the
Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal
Resources, claiming injections into
permitted underground injection wells
were unlawful and dangerous. The
association successfully filed to
intervene in the case.
The judge stated he found no
evidence of risk of imminent harm to
protected nonexempt aquifers, saying
the plaintiff's evidence-generalized
admissions by DOGGR that it had not
effectively enforced laws and

statements concerning actual harm
which he said were, at best, ambiguous-
was unpersuasive, CIPA quotes.
CIPA says the ruling allows
DOGGR to begin working with the U.S
Environmental Protection Agency to
resolve issues surrounding aquifer
classifications. Under the Safe Drinking
Water Act, an aquifer may be exempted
from the UIC program if it is not being
used as a drinking water source and will
not be used, or if it has a high total
dissolved solids content, the association
says.
DOGGR plans to conduct a
preliminary assessment of whether
disputed aquifers that it historically has
treated as exempt meet the federal
criteria for SDWA exemption, CIPA
reports. The agency's preliminary
assessment is that some of those
aquifers may not meet the exemption
criteria, but there are residual water
quality questions to be resolved that
may support exemptions, CIPA says.
In his testimony for several oil and
gas companies that intervened in the
case, attorney Jeffrey Dintzer pointed
out that imposing an injunction on
injection wells would immediately stop
17 percent of the state's oil production,
and force the state's refineries to secure
crude from out-of-state sources.

Charles Moncla Jr. Selected As 2015 LAGCOE Looey

LEON CHARLES
MONCLA JR.

LAFAYETTE, LA.-The Louisiana
Gulf Coast Oil Exposition has selected
Leon Charles Moncla Jr. as its 2015
LAGCOE Looey in recognition of his
45-plus years of industry service, announces 2015 LAGCOE Chairman Steve
Maley.
Moncla is chairman and chief executive officer of Platinum Energy Solutions Inc. He founded Moncla Well
Service Inc. in 1984 and served as its
president until the company was sold
to Key Energy Services in 2007. Moncla
16 THE AMERICAN OIL & GAS REPORTER

also served as president of Moncla
Companies LLC, and founded Moncla
Marine, Brothers Oilfield Service, and
Tri Energy Services.
Maley, operations manager at Badger
Oil Corp., says LAGCOE Looey recipients have shaped the oil and gas industry
through years of devoted hard work
while continuously giving back to their
communities. This year's recipient is
no different.
"LAGCOE Looey 2015 epitomizes
the qualities of a true Southwest
Louisiana oilman: entrepreneurial risk
taking, perseverance during tough times,
and enjoying life to the fullest," Maley
comments. "In the end, you pay it forward by giving back to the community
and bringing the next generation along.
These are the values of LAGCOE, and
these are marks of the character of
Charlie Moncla."
❒

The end result would be an increase
in gasoline prices for California drivers,
Dintzer predicted, adding a second
direct result of an injunction would be
the loss of thousands of oil and gas jobs
in California. r

Colorado Fracture Bans
Sent To Supreme Court

DENVER-Declaring the issue to be
of "significant public interest," the
Colorado Court of Appeals in August
referred two cases seeking to overturn
local hydraulic fracturing bans to the
state Supreme Court.
Citing bans on fracturing in other
Colorado towns, the Appeals Court
stated that lawsuits against Longmont
and Fort Collins were "test cases for
determining whether county and local
government may regulate or prohibit
fracturing and related activities," and as
a result the issue is, "appropriate for the
Supreme Court to decide," according to
the Appeals Court motion filed Aug. 17.
Shortly after voters in Longmont
approved a ban on fracturing in 2013,
the city was sued by the Colorado Oil &
Gas Association. The state Oil & Gas
Conservation Commission and TOP
Operating Company later joined the suit
as plaintiffs. The Longmont ban was
overturned by a district court judge who
cited the "operational conflict" doctrine
under which state law pre-empts a local
jurisdiction (AOGR, Sept. 2014, pg.
183).
The second case referred by the
Appeals Court involves COGA's
lawsuit against a voter-approved, fiveyear moratorium in Fort Collins. A
district court overturned the moratorium
under the same pre-emption doctrine
applied in the Longmont case.
In both cases, there is strong
disagreement over the pre-emption
issue, with Longmont arguing that the
case is "as much about the principles of
pre-emption as about minerals or public
health," the Appeals Court motion
notes. Longmont also argued that
industry practices have changed so
dramatically since a 1992 Supreme
Court ruling upheld state pre-emption
that the basis for the court's decision
was no longer valid.
A portion of Fort Collins' appeal
questions whether the pre-emption
doctrine applies to a moratorium rather

American Oil and Gas Reporter - September 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - September 2015