Colorado’s Energy and Carbon Management Commission (ECMC) recently passed rules to address cumulative impacts from oil and gas development in Colorado. These rules stem from several recent bills passed by the state legislature, directing the state to limit the cumulative impacts from oil and gas development and protect disproportionately impacted communities. Our Alliance was involved as a party throughout the hearing. Despite significant community input, the new requirements are largely procedural and miss substantive hooks to limit future impacts to communities.

This process seems to be yet another example of state decision-makers giving in to pressure from fossil fuel lobbyists. In June, ECMC released a proposed set of rules that included many key protections for communities disproportionately impacted by oil and gas production. Unfortunately, a few months later, a revised set of rules were released that watered down substantive requirements and removed key protections that community groups had fought hard for.

Key protections, including meaningful thresholds for the state to deny future permits, were removed from the final version of the rule. Without specific denial criteria as well as clear and accurate baseline data to work from, there is no real protection against cumulative impacts from ongoing and future development. Some positive aspects of the new rules include a slightly expanded area in which oil and gas operators are required to notify the public, with additional time and notice requirements for people living in disproportionately impacted communities.

Alliance members Barbara Vasquez and Rich Alward, with attorney Matt Sura, represented Our Alliance during the hearing. We appreciate all of the individual efforts and comments that were submitted during the process to advocate for additional protections for Colorado communities. This engagement was effective and necessary to ensure the final rule did not fall further astray from community interests. To adequately protect Colorado communities, additional pressure should be placed on the legislature to make progress towards future rulemakings focused on reclamation as well as water quantity and quality issues from oil and gas development.

As concisely said by Barbara Vasquez, “Colorado has once again missed a key opportunity to establish long overdue protections for our most vulnerable communities to counter the harmful cumulative impacts of oil and gas development. While we are glad to see some additional procedural requirements for these communities put in place as a result of this process, we are disappointed in the state’s failure to listen to and respond to community feedback. The protections from cumulative impacts to air and water quality, water quantity, and wildlife are quite weak and lack definition of any thresholds for denying a permit. When it comes to new oil and gas development in the state, it appears decision-makers wish to continue to provide a pathway to saying yes to developers, with community and environmental protections as an afterthought.”