WEBVTT
00:00:01.570 --> 00:00:02.403
Good morning, this meeting
00:00:02.403 --> 00:00:04.810
of the Railroad Commission of Texas will come to order
00:00:04.810 --> 00:00:07.040
to consider matters which have been duly posted
00:00:07.040 --> 00:00:11.783
with the Secretary of State for April 10th 2018.
00:00:11.783 --> 00:00:14.284
The Commission will consider the items on the agenda
00:00:14.284 --> 00:00:15.210
as posted on the agenda.
00:00:15.210 --> 00:00:17.830
Under our public participation policy,
00:00:17.830 --> 00:00:19.625
anyone desiring to offer public testimony
00:00:19.625 --> 00:00:23.390
on any items that are not noticed on today's agenda
00:00:23.390 --> 00:00:25.300
will need to fill out a testimony form
00:00:25.300 --> 00:00:26.360
found in the back of the room
00:00:26.360 --> 00:00:29.200
and submit it to Commission Secretary Kathy Way.
00:00:29.200 --> 00:00:31.810
Reminder to turn off your cell phones.
00:00:31.810 --> 00:00:32.813
And item number one.
00:00:38.575 --> 00:00:39.408
Morning, Clayton.
00:00:39.408 --> 00:00:40.580
Good morning, Chairman, Commissioners.
00:00:40.580 --> 00:00:41.960
Morning.
00:00:41.960 --> 00:00:43.910
Clayton Hoover, Administrative Law Judge.
00:00:43.910 --> 00:00:45.350
With me today is Robert Musick,
00:00:45.350 --> 00:00:46.703
I'll introduce him in just a minute.
00:00:48.310 --> 00:00:50.800
Item number one is an enforcement action
00:00:50.800 --> 00:00:54.100
against DCP Midstream LP
00:00:54.100 --> 00:00:55.663
for violations of statewide rules
00:00:55.663 --> 00:00:59.881
on the W125 4-inch Natural Gas Gathering Line,
00:00:59.881 --> 00:01:03.280
Buckeye Ranch, Fayette County, Texas.
00:01:03.280 --> 00:01:05.280
Because of the technical issues involved,
00:01:05.280 --> 00:01:06.870
I requested a technical examiner.
00:01:06.870 --> 00:01:11.030
Robert Musick has extensive experience on groundwater issues
00:01:11.030 --> 00:01:13.720
and participated in this case.
00:01:13.720 --> 00:01:15.930
This case involves alleged violations
00:01:15.930 --> 00:01:19.940
of Statewide Rule 8(b), and issues of compliance
00:01:19.940 --> 00:01:22.300
because of DCP's failure to perform
00:01:22.300 --> 00:01:24.730
additional groundwater testing
00:01:24.730 --> 00:01:27.340
through the installation of monitor wells
00:01:27.340 --> 00:01:31.023
to delineate confirmed groundwater contamination.
00:01:32.930 --> 00:01:36.590
This was in 2013, 2014, there was a condensate
00:01:36.590 --> 00:01:40.120
leak from a buried DCP gathering line.
00:01:40.120 --> 00:01:43.300
The leak exceeded 42 barrels.
00:01:43.300 --> 00:01:45.900
DCP failed to timely report the leak
00:01:45.900 --> 00:01:49.440
as required by Statewide Rule 20.
00:01:49.440 --> 00:01:51.710
A landowner told them of the smell
00:01:51.710 --> 00:01:54.380
in December of 2013.
00:01:54.380 --> 00:01:57.598
They took no action, they did not report the leak.
00:01:57.598 --> 00:02:00.550
The landowner told them about dying vegetation
00:02:00.550 --> 00:02:05.300
in April, they took no action, they did not report the leak.
00:02:05.300 --> 00:02:08.820
Finally, the Fayette County Emergency Coordinator
00:02:08.820 --> 00:02:11.990
reported the leak to the Commission in July.
00:02:11.990 --> 00:02:16.013
DCP never reported the leak as required.
00:02:17.060 --> 00:02:19.710
Enforcement contends this shows a lack of good faith.
00:02:21.420 --> 00:02:23.460
The leak was then repaired,
00:02:23.460 --> 00:02:27.010
the site excavated and evaluated.
00:02:27.010 --> 00:02:30.680
As part of that process, the only monitor well
00:02:30.680 --> 00:02:34.270
installed showed levels of benzine
00:02:34.270 --> 00:02:37.500
in the groundwater, that exceeded groundwater
00:02:37.500 --> 00:02:39.490
concentration limits.
00:02:39.490 --> 00:02:41.673
I'm using terminology from Mr. Musick.
00:02:43.404 --> 00:02:47.230
DCP received recommendations from its own consultant
00:02:47.230 --> 00:02:50.310
and then requests from staff to install
00:02:50.310 --> 00:02:53.410
additional monitor wells to evaluate
00:02:53.410 --> 00:02:55.803
the extent of contamination.
00:02:56.800 --> 00:02:59.210
DCP refused.
00:02:59.210 --> 00:03:01.860
Such refusal is additional evidence
00:03:01.860 --> 00:03:03.193
of lack of good faith.
00:03:04.260 --> 00:03:07.810
At the hearing, DCP presented evidence
00:03:07.810 --> 00:03:10.420
of nearby historical operations
00:03:10.420 --> 00:03:13.450
on two wells that might have caused
00:03:13.450 --> 00:03:14.963
groundwater contamination.
00:03:16.570 --> 00:03:19.250
However, the experts, even DCP's own experts,
00:03:19.250 --> 00:03:22.860
could not positively link the groundwater contamination
00:03:22.860 --> 00:03:25.640
to such historical operations.
00:03:25.640 --> 00:03:27.293
It's a mere possibility.
00:03:28.470 --> 00:03:32.530
Shallow excavations, such as the one carried out
00:03:32.530 --> 00:03:37.010
by DCP's consultant do not adequately reveal
00:03:37.010 --> 00:03:41.560
the extent of contamination for a spill like this.
00:03:41.560 --> 00:03:45.420
In fact, with light hydrocarbons like condensate,
00:03:45.420 --> 00:03:48.090
the shallow excavation, before the drilling
00:03:48.090 --> 00:03:51.360
and monitor wells, will often eliminate
00:03:51.360 --> 00:03:55.240
or obscure the extent of contamination
00:03:55.240 --> 00:03:58.720
because of evaporation and subsequent
00:03:58.720 --> 00:04:00.313
lack of adequate sampling.
00:04:02.760 --> 00:04:04.110
The preponderance of the evidence
00:04:04.110 --> 00:04:07.520
presented shows that there is groundwater pollution
00:04:07.520 --> 00:04:10.130
in the immediate area of the spill,
00:04:10.130 --> 00:04:14.090
that DCP has not brought the violation to compliance
00:04:14.090 --> 00:04:16.787
by the installation of additional monitoring wells,
00:04:16.787 --> 00:04:19.600
and that there is a lack of good faith.
00:04:19.600 --> 00:04:22.980
DCP's evidence on the other possible causes
00:04:22.980 --> 00:04:26.390
for the pollution did not refute any of this.
00:04:26.390 --> 00:04:29.420
It is recommended that all violations alleged
00:04:29.420 --> 00:04:33.130
be found to exist, that additional evaluation
00:04:33.130 --> 00:04:37.000
with monitor wells take place as requested,
00:04:37.000 --> 00:04:40.187
and that the administrative penalty of $10,000
00:04:40.187 --> 00:04:42.213
and other sanctions be assessed.
00:04:43.080 --> 00:04:46.170
Exceptions and replies were filed.
00:04:46.170 --> 00:04:49.210
I'm available for questions, as is Mr. Musick.
00:04:49.210 --> 00:04:50.513
Robert, anything to add?
00:04:51.670 --> 00:04:52.503
No sir.
00:04:53.350 --> 00:04:56.027
Thank you are there any questions?
00:04:58.920 --> 00:05:00.173
What are you reading?
00:05:01.370 --> 00:05:03.540
Maybe, go ahead, I might.
00:05:03.540 --> 00:05:04.601
I don't know that I have any,
00:05:04.601 --> 00:05:06.476
do you have any questions?
00:05:06.476 --> 00:05:08.853
No but I do have a motion on this one.
00:05:10.370 --> 00:05:13.830
And by the way the parties for the other,
00:05:13.830 --> 00:05:15.930
for DCP are here if anybody's got any questions
00:05:15.930 --> 00:05:16.780
for them as well.
00:05:21.890 --> 00:05:22.723
Going to wait?
00:05:22.723 --> 00:05:25.410
Yeah stay on the motion.
00:05:25.410 --> 00:05:27.930
Let me say I do respect the agency and your job
00:05:27.930 --> 00:05:30.400
that you've done and we were commended by the EPA
00:05:30.400 --> 00:05:31.556
a month or so ago.
00:05:31.556 --> 00:05:33.470
I thought it was a fabulous confirmation
00:05:33.470 --> 00:05:35.440
of the good work that y'all do.
00:05:35.440 --> 00:05:37.830
We appreciate that, indeed, it is one of our
00:05:37.830 --> 00:05:39.660
major duties to protect the public
00:05:39.660 --> 00:05:41.510
and our underground drinking water
00:05:41.510 --> 00:05:43.560
and it was great to hear that report from EPA,
00:05:43.560 --> 00:05:46.545
of all the people I never dreamed to hear a compliment
00:05:46.545 --> 00:05:48.403
from them, at least in the past.
00:05:49.850 --> 00:05:53.490
With due respect, after careful consideration
00:05:53.490 --> 00:05:55.830
of the evidence and the record, I find that DCP
00:05:55.830 --> 00:05:58.500
quickly discovered the leak, quickly cleaned it up,
00:05:58.500 --> 00:06:00.370
has accurately tested the soil surrounding
00:06:00.370 --> 00:06:02.920
the leak site, presented evidence that any pollution
00:06:02.920 --> 00:06:04.470
in the groundwater beneath the leak site
00:06:04.470 --> 00:06:07.790
was likely caused by nearby unplugged wells.
00:06:07.790 --> 00:06:10.900
Given this evidence, staff has not met, I believe,
00:06:10.900 --> 00:06:12.770
their burden of proof to show that DCP
00:06:12.770 --> 00:06:15.540
has or by preponderance of the evidence
00:06:15.540 --> 00:06:19.220
given the groundwater pollution at issue here.
00:06:19.220 --> 00:06:21.534
Therefore I move to dismiss the complaint
00:06:21.534 --> 00:06:23.567
without prejudice.
00:06:23.567 --> 00:06:25.360
And I will say I'm gonna second that,
00:06:25.360 --> 00:06:28.440
but my concern continues to be people
00:06:28.440 --> 00:06:30.970
timely reporting, so I do think we have
00:06:30.970 --> 00:06:33.080
a problem with that, that they did not
00:06:33.080 --> 00:06:35.880
timely report the incident.
00:06:35.880 --> 00:06:38.093
But with that, I'm gonna second the motion.
00:06:40.650 --> 00:06:42.043
Questions, concerns?
00:06:43.420 --> 00:06:46.463
Yeah so based on that motion,
00:06:53.060 --> 00:06:54.370
I guess maybe a question,
00:06:54.370 --> 00:06:57.300
Commissioner Christian, what do you envision
00:06:57.300 --> 00:06:59.430
we would do about the groundwater contamination
00:06:59.430 --> 00:07:00.703
if we dismiss this case?
00:07:02.310 --> 00:07:04.770
Well I just don't believe they presented
00:07:04.770 --> 00:07:06.470
the preponderance of evidence does not show
00:07:06.470 --> 00:07:10.370
that DCP did not do in a timely fashion that.
00:07:10.370 --> 00:07:11.850
I'm also concerned about the amount
00:07:11.850 --> 00:07:14.230
of the penalty involved, also.
00:07:14.230 --> 00:07:16.150
So there's several factors here
00:07:16.150 --> 00:07:17.720
that just simply concern me.
00:07:17.720 --> 00:07:20.610
DCP caused a mess, they don't deny that,
00:07:20.610 --> 00:07:24.190
no one denies that, but the mess was small
00:07:24.190 --> 00:07:27.480
only 42 barrels of natural gas condensate.
00:07:27.480 --> 00:07:30.020
DCP discovered the mess and started cleaning it up.
00:07:30.020 --> 00:07:31.250
As part of the cleanup process,
00:07:31.250 --> 00:07:35.080
they over excavated the area where the spill occurred.
00:07:35.080 --> 00:07:37.560
Took 23 soil samples, confirmed the spill
00:07:37.560 --> 00:07:39.270
contaminated the soil depth at only
00:07:39.270 --> 00:07:41.810
14 feet below the surface, the groundwater's
00:07:41.810 --> 00:07:44.130
at 48 feet below the surface and so I don't think
00:07:44.130 --> 00:07:46.130
there was a risk to groundwater there.
00:07:46.130 --> 00:07:48.240
To explain there was some pollution in the groundwater,
00:07:48.240 --> 00:07:49.840
DCP offered evidence that it was caused
00:07:49.840 --> 00:07:52.240
by legacy oil and gas operations in the area,
00:07:52.240 --> 00:07:55.650
several old unplugged nearby wells as the source
00:07:55.650 --> 00:07:57.100
of that pollution.
00:07:57.100 --> 00:07:59.410
So given that, I think there's enough evidence
00:07:59.410 --> 00:08:04.410
that we just don't have enough certainty here to fine DCP.
00:08:06.890 --> 00:08:08.810
Clayton, am I correct, we're not,
00:08:08.810 --> 00:08:12.970
the fine here is not for contaminating
00:08:12.970 --> 00:08:15.740
the groundwater, per se, it's for not complying
00:08:15.740 --> 00:08:18.670
with our request for additional testing,
00:08:18.670 --> 00:08:19.870
am I saying that correctly?
00:08:19.870 --> 00:08:22.970
That's correct, the examiner's conclusion
00:08:22.970 --> 00:08:26.530
is that the incident could have caused
00:08:26.530 --> 00:08:30.300
pollution that is beyond the area
00:08:30.300 --> 00:08:33.440
excavated and that at the very least,
00:08:33.440 --> 00:08:36.360
additional monitor wells are required
00:08:36.360 --> 00:08:41.110
to evaluate the presence and extent
00:08:41.110 --> 00:08:44.883
of any pollution beyond the excavation that was conducted.
00:08:45.980 --> 00:08:48.470
So just so I understand the timeline here,
00:08:48.470 --> 00:08:50.910
it's Rule 20 requires immediate notification
00:08:50.910 --> 00:08:53.010
of this leak, they went three and a half months,
00:08:53.010 --> 00:08:54.523
didn't notify us.
00:08:57.994 --> 00:08:59.700
Then we, I don't remember the dates in here,
00:08:59.700 --> 00:09:03.970
but we sent two requests for additional testing
00:09:03.970 --> 00:09:06.470
that were not, testing was not performed.
00:09:06.470 --> 00:09:07.813
That's correct.
00:09:10.320 --> 00:09:12.930
And so, in your recommendations,
00:09:12.930 --> 00:09:14.490
your recommendations say to bring the line,
00:09:14.490 --> 00:09:15.797
one of my questions, depending on the motion
00:09:15.797 --> 00:09:18.800
was gonna be bring the line into compliance,
00:09:18.800 --> 00:09:20.360
I'm not sure exactly what that means, but you
00:09:20.360 --> 00:09:25.240
go on to say "and request for further investigation
00:09:25.240 --> 00:09:27.512
"remedial action within 30 days of this date
00:09:27.512 --> 00:09:30.410
"that this order becomes final," so it seemed to me
00:09:30.410 --> 00:09:33.260
that your main issue here, was hey we want them
00:09:33.260 --> 00:09:36.820
to go out and test and make sure that, or give us more
00:09:36.820 --> 00:09:39.050
credible evidence that they have adequately cleaned up
00:09:39.050 --> 00:09:40.270
or that their spill didn't cause
00:09:40.270 --> 00:09:41.460
this groundwater contamination.
00:09:41.460 --> 00:09:42.293
That's correct.
00:09:42.293 --> 00:09:45.050
The position of enforcement is even though
00:09:45.050 --> 00:09:47.790
the pipeline has been repaired,
00:09:47.790 --> 00:09:51.030
that they have not brought the site
00:09:51.030 --> 00:09:54.070
totally into compliance until they evaluate
00:09:54.070 --> 00:09:57.010
the extent of pollution in the area
00:09:57.010 --> 00:10:02.010
outside the excavation, and Mr. Musick asked questions
00:10:02.190 --> 00:10:05.850
about whether the contamination could have
00:10:05.850 --> 00:10:09.000
migrated down below the deepest surface
00:10:09.000 --> 00:10:11.010
of the contamination and it was clear
00:10:11.010 --> 00:10:14.510
that that was a possibility and that that needed
00:10:14.510 --> 00:10:18.000
to be evaluated, that was staff's position
00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:20.880
and that was the conclusion we reached.
00:10:20.880 --> 00:10:22.410
And I think the concern that we both have
00:10:22.410 --> 00:10:25.350
is that staff didn't really make their case.
00:10:25.350 --> 00:10:28.100
And so this seems to be an over-reach.
00:10:28.100 --> 00:10:30.450
Look I think there's clearly always a concern
00:10:30.450 --> 00:10:32.100
about groundwater contamination,
00:10:32.100 --> 00:10:34.820
I don't think anybody up here would disagree with that.
00:10:34.820 --> 00:10:37.040
But I don't think that staff ever made their case,
00:10:37.040 --> 00:10:41.193
in my opinion, that DCP had caused this.
00:10:42.080 --> 00:10:44.050
Maybe we don't know who caused it.
00:10:44.050 --> 00:10:47.510
Maybe that means we need to have further investigation
00:10:47.510 --> 00:10:49.690
from us as an agency to go out there
00:10:49.690 --> 00:10:51.820
because there seems to be there's two possibilities
00:10:51.820 --> 00:10:55.630
potentially, but we didn't prove our case up,
00:10:55.630 --> 00:10:58.310
is I think the concern that I have,
00:10:58.310 --> 00:11:01.340
and so there's a lot of possibles, but there's no
00:11:01.340 --> 00:11:04.000
preponderance of the evidence as you had stated
00:11:04.000 --> 00:11:05.950
in your PFD. I think that was an over-reach
00:11:05.950 --> 00:11:09.380
by a lot of supposition, and I think that's the concern.
00:11:09.380 --> 00:11:12.090
We're very fact-based, obviously, as this agency.
00:11:12.090 --> 00:11:15.740
Plus in my opinion, it is DCP's right
00:11:15.740 --> 00:11:18.560
to question whether they need to drill
00:11:18.560 --> 00:11:20.550
all those wells and continue to do that
00:11:20.550 --> 00:11:23.200
testing, and that, to me, is what this case is about.
00:11:24.140 --> 00:11:27.230
And so, they said they don't, we've got two people who
00:11:27.230 --> 00:11:30.210
don't think that they need to, and one that
00:11:30.210 --> 00:11:31.400
potentially, I don't know how you're,
00:11:31.400 --> 00:11:33.190
how he's gonna vote or not, but I think
00:11:33.190 --> 00:11:35.350
that that's where we disagree, I disagree
00:11:35.350 --> 00:11:37.500
with staff that I think this was an over-reach
00:11:37.500 --> 00:11:39.500
as far as what you're asking them to do.
00:11:40.790 --> 00:11:42.084
I disagree with that.
00:11:42.084 --> 00:11:43.720
It seems to me that what happened here
00:11:43.720 --> 00:11:45.780
is that we didn't know about the spill
00:11:45.780 --> 00:11:47.970
until three months after it occurred.
00:11:47.970 --> 00:11:49.840
As an agency, as a regulatory agency,
00:11:49.840 --> 00:11:51.490
the reason to bring us in immediately
00:11:51.490 --> 00:11:54.740
is so that we can partner with that operator
00:11:54.740 --> 00:11:58.210
and assess their findings as they find them.
00:11:58.210 --> 00:11:59.630
I saw in here, I think one of their soil samples
00:11:59.630 --> 00:12:02.950
was missing four feet of soil in it.
00:12:02.950 --> 00:12:04.600
There was disagreements, I think at one point
00:12:04.600 --> 00:12:06.220
their experts said that the groundwater
00:12:06.220 --> 00:12:09.130
could have been as close as 35 feet, not 48 feet,
00:12:09.130 --> 00:12:11.670
so there was a lot of, so you talk about
00:12:11.670 --> 00:12:13.090
getting the data, getting the facts,
00:12:13.090 --> 00:12:14.220
I agree with you but one of the reasons
00:12:14.220 --> 00:12:15.910
that we need to be notified right away
00:12:15.910 --> 00:12:17.950
is so that we can participate in that
00:12:17.950 --> 00:12:20.573
and see those findings and see that information.
00:12:22.320 --> 00:12:25.060
If our approach is, eh you didn't notify us,
00:12:25.060 --> 00:12:27.960
no big deal, and you know you didn't do the tests
00:12:27.960 --> 00:12:29.310
we asked you to do, no big deal,
00:12:29.310 --> 00:12:31.070
then how are we gonna get the data
00:12:31.070 --> 00:12:32.910
to make these decisions.
00:12:32.910 --> 00:12:35.677
The fact that I feel like your point here
00:12:35.677 --> 00:12:40.677
is to get them to go out and do
00:12:42.120 --> 00:12:43.480
additional tests seems like that
00:12:43.480 --> 00:12:44.850
ought to be exactly what we do.
00:12:44.850 --> 00:12:47.210
That's how we're gonna find out what did happen
00:12:47.210 --> 00:12:49.300
in this case, so I disagree with that
00:12:49.300 --> 00:12:50.270
assessment, this is over-reach
00:12:50.270 --> 00:12:52.450
to ask them to go get more data.
00:12:52.450 --> 00:12:54.130
Especially if they didn't notify us
00:12:54.130 --> 00:12:56.120
up front about the spill.
00:12:56.120 --> 00:12:58.860
I agree that the notification concerns me.
00:12:58.860 --> 00:13:00.800
I said that at the beginning.
00:13:00.800 --> 00:13:02.247
But I do think this is over-reach
00:13:02.247 --> 00:13:04.910
and that this spill, it seems to me,
00:13:04.910 --> 00:13:07.500
we didn't prove it impacted anything,
00:13:07.500 --> 00:13:10.060
and they proved to me that it didn't.
00:13:10.060 --> 00:13:11.650
So that's the way I looked at it
00:13:11.650 --> 00:13:12.920
and that we're asking,
00:13:12.920 --> 00:13:14.320
that's an over-reach to have
00:13:15.170 --> 00:13:18.600
additional wells drilled to monitor at this point.
00:13:18.600 --> 00:13:22.100
Okay well let me, I want to vehemently disagree with that.
00:13:22.100 --> 00:13:24.548
Because, what is the groundwater concentration limit
00:13:24.548 --> 00:13:25.381
for benzine?
00:13:26.295 --> 00:13:29.770
0.005 is the drinking water standard.
00:13:29.770 --> 00:13:32.400
Okay and we had five times that amount
00:13:32.400 --> 00:13:33.340
in this sample, right?
00:13:33.340 --> 00:13:34.360
Correct, correct.
00:13:34.360 --> 00:13:35.760
So someone's gonna have to go out and drill
00:13:35.760 --> 00:13:37.010
additional wells to figure out,
00:13:37.010 --> 00:13:39.440
I mean you got 28 micrograms per liter
00:13:39.440 --> 00:13:42.140
of benzine in this water, so if we're saying
00:13:42.140 --> 00:13:43.570
they don't have to do it, we need to do it,
00:13:43.570 --> 00:13:45.220
someone's gotta do it, so I disagree with your statement.
00:13:45.220 --> 00:13:46.690
I don't disagree that somebody's gotta do it.
00:13:46.690 --> 00:13:49.110
I'm not convinced that it's DCP.
00:13:49.110 --> 00:13:51.190
Maybe we do, or maybe we need to go
00:13:51.190 --> 00:13:53.530
figure out who these other wells are
00:13:53.530 --> 00:13:56.410
and make sure we go re-investigate this area.
00:13:56.410 --> 00:13:58.140
But I'm not convinced it's DCP
00:13:58.140 --> 00:14:00.850
and I don't think staff convinced me it's DCP.
00:14:00.850 --> 00:14:02.000
That's the problem I've got.
00:14:02.000 --> 00:14:04.220
I agree with you we've got a potential problem
00:14:04.220 --> 00:14:07.377
with the groundwater, but I'm not convinced
00:14:07.377 --> 00:14:08.620
DCP did it.
00:14:08.620 --> 00:14:10.970
I'm not convinced that they did it either,
00:14:10.970 --> 00:14:12.144
but I do, I'm convinced that additional--
00:14:12.144 --> 00:14:13.360
So why make them--
let me finish.
00:14:13.360 --> 00:14:15.190
I am convinced that they need to do testing
00:14:15.190 --> 00:14:16.960
if they didn't notify us of the spill.
00:14:16.960 --> 00:14:18.540
That's part of their obligation,
00:14:18.540 --> 00:14:22.050
so I'm gonna, I disagree with the motion.
00:14:22.050 --> 00:14:23.150
Okay, all right.
00:14:23.150 --> 00:14:24.090
Any other questions?
00:14:24.090 --> 00:14:27.390
Comments, all right we have a motion and a second,
00:14:27.390 --> 00:14:28.616
all in favor say aye.
00:14:28.616 --> 00:14:30.090
[Chairman And Commissioner Christian] Aye.
00:14:30.090 --> 00:14:30.923
Opposed?
00:14:30.923 --> 00:14:31.756
No.
00:14:31.756 --> 00:14:34.453
Motion passes, items approved, thank you.
00:14:36.411 --> 00:14:38.010
Thank you very much and your comments and questions
00:14:38.010 --> 00:14:40.852
are very much respected and appreciated.
00:14:40.852 --> 00:14:42.143
For clarification.
00:14:42.143 --> 00:14:43.827
You said the motion was--
00:14:44.752 --> 00:14:46.420
Mr. Christian's motion,
00:14:46.420 --> 00:14:47.890
I'm sorry, let me clarify that.
00:14:47.890 --> 00:14:50.990
Yes sir, we had a motion on the table, yes sir.
00:14:50.990 --> 00:14:53.110
Item number two is an enforcement action
00:14:53.110 --> 00:14:55.620
against Bryan Woodbine Gathering, Inc
00:14:55.620 --> 00:14:57.290
for violations of statewide rules on
00:14:57.290 --> 00:15:00.340
the Brazos County Facility Reclamation Plant.
00:15:00.340 --> 00:15:03.540
It's a Rule Nine facility in Brazos County, Texas.
00:15:03.540 --> 00:15:05.880
It's been operating a long time, it's been closed
00:15:05.880 --> 00:15:09.540
for quite some time and you'll,
00:15:09.540 --> 00:15:12.050
I'll refer to it later, there are two very large
00:15:12.050 --> 00:15:15.423
10,000 barrel tanks that are part of this facility.
00:15:16.520 --> 00:15:18.820
There was evidence of numerous spills caused
00:15:18.820 --> 00:15:21.280
by trespassers, which have been remediated.
00:15:21.280 --> 00:15:23.940
During this process, there was a settlement
00:15:23.940 --> 00:15:25.700
under which Bryan Woodbine tendered,
00:15:25.700 --> 00:15:30.700
and the Commission accepted, a payment of $3374.
00:15:30.720 --> 00:15:33.870
However, staff contend that full remediation
00:15:33.870 --> 00:15:36.530
was not achieved and the terms of the settlement
00:15:36.530 --> 00:15:39.050
were breached because Bryan Woodbine failed
00:15:39.050 --> 00:15:41.470
to remove and dispose of sludge
00:15:41.470 --> 00:15:43.890
in the bottom of the two inactive and abandoned
00:15:43.890 --> 00:15:45.840
10,000 barrel tanks.
00:15:45.840 --> 00:15:48.430
The Rule Nine permit issued to
00:15:48.430 --> 00:15:51.300
and currently held by Bryan Woodbine,
00:15:51.300 --> 00:15:52.930
and actually they bought it from somebody else,
00:15:52.930 --> 00:15:55.960
but the original Rule Nine permit
00:15:55.960 --> 00:15:57.440
has this provision in it,
00:15:57.440 --> 00:16:01.530
all wastes generated by reclaiming operations
00:16:01.530 --> 00:16:04.270
shall be disposed of in accordance with Statewide
00:16:04.270 --> 00:16:08.630
Rules 8, 9, and 46, relating to water protection,
00:16:08.630 --> 00:16:11.240
disposal wells, and fluid injection.
00:16:11.240 --> 00:16:13.090
The preponderance of the evidence in this case
00:16:13.090 --> 00:16:15.610
shows the past and continuing violations
00:16:15.610 --> 00:16:16.883
alleged by enforcement.
00:16:18.330 --> 00:16:20.920
While most violations have been remediated,
00:16:20.920 --> 00:16:23.040
the sludge remains on the facility
00:16:23.040 --> 00:16:25.950
as waste which requires removal.
00:16:25.950 --> 00:16:27.390
The fact that the pipe-line lease
00:16:27.390 --> 00:16:30.100
on the facility has ended, the surface lease
00:16:30.100 --> 00:16:32.580
has ended, is not relevant to Woodbine's
00:16:32.580 --> 00:16:34.800
remaining responsibilities and liabilities
00:16:34.800 --> 00:16:36.193
under statewide rules.
00:16:37.330 --> 00:16:39.320
It is recommended that the Commission assess
00:16:39.320 --> 00:16:41.110
Woodbine an administrative penalty
00:16:41.110 --> 00:16:45.450
in the amount of $6478 based on the area
00:16:45.450 --> 00:16:47.440
of the tanks, and order Woodbine
00:16:47.440 --> 00:16:50.870
to bring the facility into compliance with permit conditions
00:16:50.870 --> 00:16:53.260
in all Commission rules and regulations.
00:16:53.260 --> 00:16:55.680
Exceptions and replies were filed.
00:16:55.680 --> 00:16:57.083
I'm available for questions.
00:16:59.000 --> 00:17:02.300
I have a question, so you said in your presentation
00:17:02.300 --> 00:17:04.622
if I'm correct, that there was a settlement,
00:17:04.622 --> 00:17:09.031
some amount has been paid, $3,374, is that correct?
00:17:09.031 --> 00:17:09.864
Did I get my math right?
Yes that's
00:17:09.864 --> 00:17:11.306
correct.
00:17:11.306 --> 00:17:13.050
So he's already paid something,
00:17:13.050 --> 00:17:14.225
or this company's already paid something
00:17:14.225 --> 00:17:15.058
is that correct?
00:17:15.058 --> 00:17:16.430
Absolutely correct, Chairman, yes.
00:17:16.430 --> 00:17:18.320
And then staff exceptions,
00:17:18.320 --> 00:17:22.970
it said there was some room, staff believed
00:17:22.970 --> 00:17:24.970
potentially to adjust the penalties.
00:17:24.970 --> 00:17:26.030
Is that a fair assessment?
00:17:26.030 --> 00:17:26.863
Yes I understand that.
00:17:26.863 --> 00:17:29.820
Okay so I have a motion to adjust the penalty,
00:17:29.820 --> 00:17:32.410
but I do think that this, that staff's done
00:17:32.410 --> 00:17:33.890
a good job as far as where we need to go.
00:17:33.890 --> 00:17:35.470
Does anybody have any other questions?
00:17:35.470 --> 00:17:38.130
All right, I'm gonna move that we approve
00:17:38.130 --> 00:17:40.190
the examiner's recommendation, except for the
00:17:40.190 --> 00:17:43.647
proposed penalty amount, I would adjust it to
00:17:43.647 --> 00:17:47.710
$3104, to take into account the operators
00:17:47.710 --> 00:17:50.113
previously paid administrative penalties.
00:17:51.440 --> 00:17:53.350
And how, does anybody want my math?
00:17:53.350 --> 00:17:54.278
No.
00:17:54.278 --> 00:17:55.851
Yes, did I do it wrong?
00:17:55.851 --> 00:17:57.370
No we have a speaker from their law office.
00:17:57.370 --> 00:17:59.170
Oh I'm sorry, they didn't sign up.
00:18:01.360 --> 00:18:02.610
Nobody signed up, so...
00:18:02.610 --> 00:18:05.730
Okay, if somebody has a question of anybody who wants?
00:18:05.730 --> 00:18:08.600
Okay, is there a second?
00:18:08.600 --> 00:18:09.433
I'll second.
00:18:09.433 --> 00:18:11.250
Second, Commissioner Sitton, all those in favor,
00:18:11.250 --> 00:18:12.083
say aye.
00:18:12.083 --> 00:18:12.916
Aye.
00:18:12.916 --> 00:18:15.258
Motion passes, items approved, thank you.
00:18:15.258 --> 00:18:17.950
Chairman, you'll be encouraged to know our math agrees.
00:18:17.950 --> 00:18:19.720
Okay, I just wanted to make sure my math was right,
00:18:19.720 --> 00:18:20.553
so thank you.
00:18:20.553 --> 00:18:21.403
All right.
00:18:22.930 --> 00:18:23.910
Jennifer, good morning.
00:18:23.910 --> 00:18:26.050
Items three, four, and five.
00:18:26.050 --> 00:18:27.360
Good morning, Chairman and Commissioners,
00:18:27.360 --> 00:18:29.540
I'm Jennifer Cook with the Hearings Division.
00:18:29.540 --> 00:18:31.330
Items three through five concern a motion
00:18:31.330 --> 00:18:33.270
for rehearing of a Commission order
00:18:33.270 --> 00:18:35.710
denying three MIPA applications.
00:18:35.710 --> 00:18:39.460
On January 23, 2018, the Commission issued an order
00:18:39.460 --> 00:18:41.660
denying Ammonite Oil and Gas Corporation's
00:18:41.660 --> 00:18:43.832
applications to have its leased acreage
00:18:43.832 --> 00:18:46.336
pulled into units for already drilled
00:18:46.336 --> 00:18:48.810
horizontal wells on Apache Corporation's
00:18:48.810 --> 00:18:50.640
Apache Blue Jay Unit.
00:18:50.640 --> 00:18:53.720
A timely motion for rehearing was filed by Ammonite.
00:18:53.720 --> 00:18:55.890
Apache filed a response in opposition
00:18:55.890 --> 00:18:57.570
to the motion for rehearing.
00:18:57.570 --> 00:18:59.620
None of the issues raised in the motion for hearing
00:18:59.620 --> 00:19:01.820
are new. All issues raised in the motion
00:19:01.820 --> 00:19:03.060
were already raised by Ammonite
00:19:03.060 --> 00:19:04.810
and considered by the Commission
00:19:04.810 --> 00:19:05.719
prior to the Commission issuing
00:19:05.719 --> 00:19:07.190
the order in this case.
00:19:07.190 --> 00:19:09.770
The examiner's recommend denying the motion.
00:19:09.770 --> 00:19:11.710
The motion will be overruled by operation of law
00:19:11.710 --> 00:19:14.850
on May 3, 2018, and I'm available for questions.
00:19:14.850 --> 00:19:16.430
Thank you, Jennifer, are there any questions?
00:19:16.430 --> 00:19:17.263
Nope.
00:19:17.263 --> 00:19:18.833
All right, I move we approve the examiner's recommendation
00:19:18.833 --> 00:19:22.040
for items three, four, and five, is there a second?
00:19:22.040 --> 00:19:23.000
Second.
00:19:23.000 --> 00:19:24.320
Second, Commissioner Christian.
00:19:24.320 --> 00:19:25.488
All in favor say aye.
00:19:25.488 --> 00:19:26.321
[All Commissioners] Aye.
00:19:26.321 --> 00:19:28.693
Motion passes, Ms. Cook, thank you.
00:19:29.780 --> 00:19:31.890
Okay and we're doing six, seven, eight, nine together,
00:19:31.890 --> 00:19:32.723
is that correct?
00:19:32.723 --> 00:19:33.880
Yes, Chairman.
00:19:33.880 --> 00:19:35.890
Items six through nine involve motions for a hearing
00:19:35.890 --> 00:19:37.800
of four enforcement default orders.
00:19:37.800 --> 00:19:39.531
If acceptable, I would like to do them
00:19:39.531 --> 00:19:44.531
as one presentation and then you can vote
00:19:45.586 --> 00:19:47.950
one time on all four items, if you'd like.
00:19:47.950 --> 00:19:51.000
They have very similar facts and issues involved.
00:19:51.000 --> 00:19:54.780
But I do have a separate order for each docket number
00:19:54.780 --> 00:19:56.900
to correspond with, that there's a separate
00:19:56.900 --> 00:19:58.313
final order for each docket.
00:19:59.270 --> 00:20:01.840
On February 13, 2018, default orders
00:20:01.840 --> 00:20:04.120
for these cases were approved by the Commission.
00:20:04.120 --> 00:20:07.310
On February 20, Steven Bailey filed a timely motion
00:20:07.310 --> 00:20:09.280
for rehearing for each of the four cases.
00:20:09.280 --> 00:20:11.590
Enforcement staff filed a reply
00:20:11.590 --> 00:20:13.630
in opposition to the motions.
00:20:13.630 --> 00:20:15.927
The orders find Mr. Bailey is a current officer
00:20:15.927 --> 00:20:17.595
and order him subject to the limitations
00:20:17.595 --> 00:20:22.595
in Texas Natural Resources Code Section 91.114,
00:20:22.850 --> 00:20:25.180
which prevents the Commission from approving
00:20:25.180 --> 00:20:27.592
an organization report containing him as a person
00:20:27.592 --> 00:20:29.770
in a position of ownership or control
00:20:29.770 --> 00:20:33.020
from engaging in activities under the jurisdictions,
00:20:33.020 --> 00:20:35.521
the Commission's jurisdiction for seven years.
00:20:35.521 --> 00:20:38.250
In the motions, Mr. Bailey asserts there's an error
00:20:38.250 --> 00:20:39.970
in the final orders because he is no longer
00:20:39.970 --> 00:20:42.600
an officer of Gulf and is no longer affiliated
00:20:42.600 --> 00:20:44.540
with Gulf and has not been since, before the
00:20:44.540 --> 00:20:46.960
complaints at issue were filed.
00:20:46.960 --> 00:20:48.970
In Staff's reply to the motion,
00:20:48.970 --> 00:20:51.430
staff argues that Mr. Bailey fails to satisfy
00:20:51.430 --> 00:20:54.900
the elements in Craddock versus Sunshine Bus Lines,
00:20:54.900 --> 00:20:57.430
in that case, which provides guiding principles
00:20:57.430 --> 00:20:59.710
for evaluating a motion for new trial
00:20:59.710 --> 00:21:01.420
after default judgment.
00:21:01.420 --> 00:21:03.160
This is traditionally the same analysis
00:21:03.160 --> 00:21:07.130
the Commission uses for rehearing motions after default.
00:21:07.130 --> 00:21:09.150
The first principle is whether the failure
00:21:09.150 --> 00:21:11.860
to file an answer is due to accidental mistake,
00:21:11.860 --> 00:21:14.870
instead of intentional or conscious indifference.
00:21:14.870 --> 00:21:17.430
Staff argues the complaint was properly served,
00:21:17.430 --> 00:21:19.280
and there is no information as to how it would be
00:21:19.280 --> 00:21:21.290
a mistake not to answer.
00:21:21.290 --> 00:21:24.140
To the ALJ, it appears more like an accidental mistake
00:21:24.140 --> 00:21:25.850
for the following reasons:
00:21:25.850 --> 00:21:28.160
Mr. Bailey is not a party to these cases,
00:21:28.160 --> 00:21:30.450
and no relief is requested against him
00:21:30.450 --> 00:21:32.470
in the complaints at issue;
00:21:32.470 --> 00:21:35.080
Mr. Bailey is Pro Se in response to receiving
00:21:35.080 --> 00:21:37.473
an earlier enforcement complaint against Gulf,
00:21:37.473 --> 00:21:40.139
not one of these four enforcement cases;
00:21:40.139 --> 00:21:42.490
he promptly replied with a letter stating
00:21:42.490 --> 00:21:44.140
he's not affiliated with Gulf
00:21:44.140 --> 00:21:46.768
and providing updated contact information;
00:21:46.768 --> 00:21:48.890
while he did not file an equivalent letter
00:21:48.890 --> 00:21:50.730
after receiving notice of the complaints
00:21:50.730 --> 00:21:53.730
for these cases, he's not a party in these cases;
00:21:53.730 --> 00:21:55.973
there was no request relief against him
00:21:55.973 --> 00:21:59.689
in the complaints; and the attorney,
00:21:59.689 --> 00:22:03.150
he sent the letter in the other case,
00:22:03.150 --> 00:22:05.330
not one of these four, was the same person
00:22:05.330 --> 00:22:08.580
he would be sending the letter to in these cases.
00:22:08.580 --> 00:22:10.640
The second principle is whether Mr. Bailey
00:22:10.640 --> 00:22:13.210
raises a meritorious defense.
00:22:13.210 --> 00:22:15.280
Staff asserts that the motions do not raise
00:22:15.280 --> 00:22:18.090
a meritorious defense because the motions
00:22:18.090 --> 00:22:20.190
do not address the violations.
00:22:20.190 --> 00:22:22.251
However, the motions do raise the meritorious defense
00:22:22.251 --> 00:22:24.410
as to the findings and ordering provisions
00:22:24.410 --> 00:22:27.568
against Mr. Bailey in the ALJ's opinion,
00:22:27.568 --> 00:22:29.370
which are the portions of the order
00:22:29.370 --> 00:22:31.510
Mr. Bailey complains of.
00:22:31.510 --> 00:22:34.090
The final orders find Mr. Bailey is the President
00:22:34.090 --> 00:22:37.140
and Secretary of Gulf and is subject to
00:22:37.140 --> 00:22:42.140
the Natural Resource Codes Section 91.114 limitations.
00:22:42.730 --> 00:22:45.260
Staff relies on Gulf's most recent organization
00:22:45.260 --> 00:22:48.100
report on file when the applicable complaints
00:22:48.100 --> 00:22:50.281
were issued to establish Mr. Bailey
00:22:50.281 --> 00:22:52.660
is a person in a position of ownership
00:22:52.660 --> 00:22:54.177
or control of Gulf.
00:22:54.177 --> 00:22:58.370
Mr. Bailey claims the organization report is incorrect.
00:22:58.370 --> 00:23:01.240
In determining whether a person is in a position of
00:23:01.240 --> 00:23:06.240
ownership or control under Section 91.114,
00:23:06.380 --> 00:23:09.740
Subsection C states that a determination is made
00:23:09.740 --> 00:23:12.090
quote, regardless of whether the person's name
00:23:12.090 --> 00:23:13.670
appears or is required to appear
00:23:13.670 --> 00:23:16.430
on the organization report, end-quote.
00:23:16.430 --> 00:23:18.870
In the motions, Mr. Bailey provided documentation
00:23:18.870 --> 00:23:20.884
from the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts
00:23:20.884 --> 00:23:24.350
showing other persons being the principals at Gulf.
00:23:24.350 --> 00:23:26.020
While Gulf may have had an obligation
00:23:26.020 --> 00:23:27.723
to update the organization report,
00:23:28.836 --> 00:23:30.530
the ALJ could find no basis provided
00:23:30.530 --> 00:23:33.180
to attribute Gulf's failure to Mr. Bailey
00:23:33.180 --> 00:23:37.589
and Subsection C of 91.114 suggests to ALJ
00:23:37.589 --> 00:23:39.700
that Gulf's failure is not attributable
00:23:39.700 --> 00:23:40.683
to Mr. Bailey.
00:23:42.080 --> 00:23:44.420
The third principle involves whether a rehearing
00:23:44.420 --> 00:23:45.870
will work injury to the Commission.
00:23:45.870 --> 00:23:47.921
Staff generally asserts granting the motions,
00:23:47.921 --> 00:23:51.360
will work injury by condoning respondent Gulf's inaction
00:23:51.360 --> 00:23:53.640
and will result in further delay.
00:23:53.640 --> 00:23:55.860
No specific injury was alleged.
00:23:55.860 --> 00:23:57.894
The ALJ recommends the Commission grant the motion
00:23:57.894 --> 00:24:00.390
for rehearing to address the provisions in the orders
00:24:00.390 --> 00:24:02.620
regarding Mr. Bailey.
00:24:02.620 --> 00:24:05.203
The motion will be overruled by operation of law
00:24:05.203 --> 00:24:09.120
on May 3, 2018, and I'm available for questions.
00:24:09.120 --> 00:24:10.860
Thank you are there any questions?
00:24:10.860 --> 00:24:11.960
I have one question.
00:24:13.150 --> 00:24:14.780
Jennifer, I want make sure I stay on timeline here.
00:24:14.780 --> 00:24:17.590
So, Mr. Bailey's contention is that
00:24:17.590 --> 00:24:21.570
he was not the President as of June 30th, 2016.
00:24:21.570 --> 00:24:25.930
The violations in question did occur before that;
00:24:25.930 --> 00:24:30.930
however, our cases happened after that.
00:24:33.140 --> 00:24:34.840
In a default, I look at the complaint.
00:24:34.840 --> 00:24:37.150
The complaint alleges the wells were inactive,
00:24:37.150 --> 00:24:40.210
and I believe, all four cases, they were inactive
00:24:40.210 --> 00:24:41.233
before 2016.
00:24:42.846 --> 00:24:47.846
And the complaint alleges that Mr. Bailey
00:24:49.310 --> 00:24:51.825
is responsible because he is the current President
00:24:51.825 --> 00:24:54.090
and Secretary and that's the information I have
00:24:54.090 --> 00:24:55.460
in the complaint.
00:24:55.460 --> 00:24:58.806
I will also refer you to portion in Natural Resources Code
00:24:58.806 --> 00:25:03.806
91.114, which is the section that provides the limitations
00:25:03.940 --> 00:25:07.083
on officers or persons in control.
00:25:09.140 --> 00:25:12.943
If you look at 91.114 A2,
00:25:14.010 --> 00:25:17.120
it talks about that the limitation
00:25:17.120 --> 00:25:20.340
that a person who holds a position, ownership or control
00:25:23.430 --> 00:25:26.080
in the organization has within the seven years
00:25:26.080 --> 00:25:28.500
preceding the date on which the report application,
00:25:28.500 --> 00:25:29.580
or certificate was applied.
00:25:29.580 --> 00:25:33.950
So this would be a future certificate that Mr. Bailey
00:25:33.950 --> 00:25:35.380
was involved with.
00:25:35.380 --> 00:25:37.080
Held a position of ownership or control
00:25:37.080 --> 00:25:38.130
in another organization.
00:25:38.130 --> 00:25:39.766
During that period of ownership or control,
00:25:39.766 --> 00:25:42.803
the other organization violated a statute.
00:25:44.420 --> 00:25:48.250
But if you look at, so it's was he in a position of control
00:25:48.250 --> 00:25:50.310
when the organization violated the statute?
00:25:50.310 --> 00:25:51.177
I think it's where you're headed.
00:25:51.177 --> 00:25:52.140
[Commissioner Sitton] Yes.
00:25:52.140 --> 00:25:53.830
If you look at Subsection B,
00:25:53.830 --> 00:25:56.496
and first off, I wanna say I'm not overruling
00:25:56.496 --> 00:25:59.293
that there may be another theory as to why Mr. Bailey
00:25:59.293 --> 00:26:02.383
should be responsible under 91.114,
00:26:02.383 --> 00:26:04.940
but that wasn't litigated and I just looked at the
00:26:04.940 --> 00:26:07.820
complaint and I'm not sure what enforcement's position
00:26:07.820 --> 00:26:10.406
would be as to whether there are other reasons
00:26:10.406 --> 00:26:14.480
and how they would want to pursue a prior officer.
00:26:14.480 --> 00:26:16.133
But looking at Subsection B,
00:26:17.030 --> 00:26:20.020
when it's referring to an organization-violated statute,
00:26:20.020 --> 00:26:24.010
an organization has committed a violation if one,
00:26:24.010 --> 00:26:26.298
a final judgment or final administrative order
00:26:26.298 --> 00:26:28.940
finding the violation has been entered against the
00:26:28.940 --> 00:26:31.702
organization and all appeals have been exhausted;
00:26:31.702 --> 00:26:35.170
or two, the Commission and the organization have entered
00:26:35.170 --> 00:26:38.180
into an agreed order related to the alleged violation.
00:26:38.180 --> 00:26:42.120
As of this date, there is neither one of those has occurred.
00:26:42.120 --> 00:26:45.820
In fact, the complaints allege there are no prior violations
00:26:45.820 --> 00:26:48.180
or history of violations against Gulf.
00:26:48.180 --> 00:26:51.714
I also just wanted to bring up how enforcement
00:26:51.714 --> 00:26:56.714
would proceed and argue these two together, I don't know.
00:26:57.770 --> 00:26:59.810
That just wasn't part of the proceeding.
00:26:59.810 --> 00:27:02.010
I was given the information about who the current
00:27:02.010 --> 00:27:04.110
officer was and that's why he was responsible.
00:27:04.110 --> 00:27:05.750
Let me make sure I understand what you're saying
00:27:05.750 --> 00:27:10.140
that it's not, in any case, not only this,
00:27:10.140 --> 00:27:15.120
it's not when a company doesn't follow our rules.
00:27:15.120 --> 00:27:18.125
It's when the Commission actually makes a determination
00:27:18.125 --> 00:27:19.970
that there is an agreement or a settlement,
00:27:19.970 --> 00:27:22.310
that date is what determines the date of the violation,
00:27:22.310 --> 00:27:24.770
the date that we finish the process.
00:27:24.770 --> 00:27:25.680
Not when the rules are,
00:27:25.680 --> 00:27:28.883
is that what you're trying to say that B1 and 2 say?
00:27:31.620 --> 00:27:35.460
I did not have to determine that issue,
00:27:35.460 --> 00:27:39.590
but looking at it, there was some intent in B2,
00:27:40.760 --> 00:27:44.330
and it says that, I think you can read B,
00:27:44.330 --> 00:27:48.140
they commit a violation if there is an order in place.
00:27:48.140 --> 00:27:49.610
And we don't have an order in place.
00:27:49.610 --> 00:27:51.340
So that's kind of as far as I got.
00:27:51.340 --> 00:27:53.180
Now once you have an order in that place,
00:27:53.180 --> 00:27:55.450
perhaps the order could say the violation occurred
00:27:55.450 --> 00:27:56.833
back in 2013.
00:27:58.090 --> 00:28:00.420
I'm open to that distinction.
00:28:00.420 --> 00:28:01.253
I understood.
00:28:01.253 --> 00:28:04.520
But no one's made any of those kind of arguments
00:28:04.520 --> 00:28:05.670
in this case.
00:28:05.670 --> 00:28:09.900
And I'm not sure how staff would interpret these
00:28:09.900 --> 00:28:12.200
two together, or how they want to or if they would
00:28:12.200 --> 00:28:14.370
want to proceed against a prior officer.
00:28:14.370 --> 00:28:17.303
I'm unfamiliar with that happening.
00:28:18.570 --> 00:28:21.800
So I guess my position on this is gonna be
00:28:21.800 --> 00:28:25.160
that the statute is pretty clear, as you just pointed out,
00:28:25.160 --> 00:28:26.730
during that period of ownership or control,
00:28:26.730 --> 00:28:29.500
the other organization violated a statute or Commission
00:28:29.500 --> 00:28:30.693
rule ordered by the law.
00:28:32.480 --> 00:28:36.510
To me, it's when that violation is when a rule is broken,
00:28:36.510 --> 00:28:41.510
which as a matter of principle says, hey, I need to be,
00:28:41.800 --> 00:28:44.240
I, as an officer or leader, I want to always have to take ownership
00:28:44.240 --> 00:28:45.770
of what I'm doing because if I leave,
00:28:45.770 --> 00:28:48.603
the things that happened on my watch could follow me.
00:28:50.130 --> 00:28:51.780
But that said, what I hear you saying is
00:28:51.780 --> 00:28:53.820
if we grant this motion for rehearing,
00:28:53.820 --> 00:28:56.560
they're gonna look at this and they may still say,
00:28:56.560 --> 00:28:58.440
hey, Mr. Bailey is gonna be on these,
00:28:58.440 --> 00:29:00.363
because he was there at the time of the violation.
00:29:00.363 --> 00:29:01.810
But today we don't have an order.
00:29:01.810 --> 00:29:03.270
We don't actually have a violation date,
00:29:03.270 --> 00:29:06.050
so we couldn't make that determination in the timeline.
00:29:06.050 --> 00:29:08.640
I think if the motion is granted, then Enforcement
00:29:08.640 --> 00:29:11.684
can proceed and develop theories with the facts
00:29:11.684 --> 00:29:14.136
and evidence, the facts that it accumulates,
00:29:14.136 --> 00:29:19.136
and perhaps have the same theory that you're discussing.
00:29:21.200 --> 00:29:23.940
It would seem to me that if we were going to
00:29:23.940 --> 00:29:26.210
grant the motion for rehearing, if we are going to evaluate
00:29:26.210 --> 00:29:28.670
whether a certain individual was an officer,
00:29:28.670 --> 00:29:30.680
had control ownership of a company
00:29:30.680 --> 00:29:34.510
at that point, 'cause I think, in some of our other cases,
00:29:34.510 --> 00:29:36.190
I used the word general language that anybody
00:29:36.190 --> 00:29:38.199
who was an officer or had control,
00:29:38.199 --> 00:29:40.956
it seems like we would evaluate, okay, if this person
00:29:40.956 --> 00:29:42.450
is coming off,
00:29:42.450 --> 00:29:43.790
who is supposed to go on,
00:29:43.790 --> 00:29:45.695
who is the person who is responsible?
00:29:45.695 --> 00:29:47.284
So it would seem to me that those ought to go together.
00:29:47.284 --> 00:29:50.460
I know that wasn't mentioned specifically in the proposal.
00:29:50.460 --> 00:29:53.350
To me, I think it's even clearer to me,
00:29:53.350 --> 00:29:55.980
and what we've historically done, and I take my lead
00:29:55.980 --> 00:29:58.480
actually from David Porter who used to harp on this,
00:29:58.480 --> 00:30:02.030
whatever your P5 says, that's sitting here, that's who it is,
00:30:02.030 --> 00:30:05.330
and to me Mr. Bailey wasn't off the P5.
00:30:05.330 --> 00:30:08.210
Nothing had been filed differently when this case
00:30:08.210 --> 00:30:11.920
went to hearing which means, from Commission rules,
00:30:11.920 --> 00:30:14.500
he is still liable at this point.
00:30:14.500 --> 00:30:17.853
I mean under this, because they didn't change the P5.
00:30:18.690 --> 00:30:22.880
Whatever the P5 says is historically what we've always done,
00:30:22.880 --> 00:30:25.666
and I think that's where I came down.
00:30:25.666 --> 00:30:28.560
I'm disagreeing with Jennifer's,
00:30:29.630 --> 00:30:31.970
and I'm gonna move the other way
00:30:31.970 --> 00:30:34.910
because I think whatever the P5 says is what we look at.
00:30:34.910 --> 00:30:37.070
We don't know when somebody goes on or off,
00:30:37.070 --> 00:30:40.517
it's not our job to know, it is the P5 for us to understand.
00:30:40.517 --> 00:30:42.950
For us to know, that's what we look at in our records
00:30:42.950 --> 00:30:43.783
and our rules.
00:30:43.783 --> 00:30:45.650
That's what the rules says for us.
00:30:45.650 --> 00:30:48.720
Obviously, in the past too, just that even owners,
00:30:48.720 --> 00:30:51.280
private owners buy property are liable for
00:30:51.280 --> 00:30:53.650
what is discovered later.
00:30:53.650 --> 00:30:55.970
I could've been a previous owner, and I've seen
00:30:55.970 --> 00:30:59.220
it's very unfair sometime to individual land owners.
00:30:59.220 --> 00:31:00.560
Now seeing that really harmful,
00:31:00.560 --> 00:31:03.260
but that is the precedent for a while.
00:31:03.260 --> 00:31:04.910
Sure, I understand.
00:31:04.910 --> 00:31:07.710
I'm sure that is Mr. Bailey's, I think Bailey's situation,
00:31:07.710 --> 00:31:10.070
but at the end of the day, I agree that the statute is
00:31:10.070 --> 00:31:13.250
really clear here, to me, if the violations, even though
00:31:13.250 --> 00:31:15.710
it may not have an order and we may not have an official
00:31:15.710 --> 00:31:19.640
finding yet, violations occurred when anybody was
00:31:19.640 --> 00:31:24.373
an owner or had control, then they are still tied to this.
00:31:26.404 --> 00:31:27.360
I have asked my questions.
00:31:27.360 --> 00:31:28.300
Any other questions?
00:31:28.300 --> 00:31:31.650
I move that we deny the motions for rehearing for
00:31:31.650 --> 00:31:34.640
items six, seven, eight, and nine.
00:31:34.640 --> 00:31:35.473
Is there a second?
00:31:35.473 --> 00:31:36.306
Second.
00:31:36.306 --> 00:31:38.060
Second, Commissioner Sitton, all in favor say aye.
00:31:38.060 --> 00:31:39.460
Aye.
00:31:39.460 --> 00:31:41.470
Motion passes, those items are approved.
00:31:41.470 --> 00:31:43.000
Thank you, Jennifer.
00:31:43.000 --> 00:31:44.403
Item number 10.
00:31:50.306 --> 00:31:51.670
Good morning, Chair, Commissioners.
00:31:51.670 --> 00:31:52.760
My name is Linda Tom,
00:31:52.760 --> 00:31:54.770
Administrative Law Judge with the Hearings Division.
00:31:54.770 --> 00:31:58.000
I'll be presenting items 10 and 11,
00:31:58.000 --> 00:32:01.430
both of which are P5 motions for rehearing.
00:32:01.430 --> 00:32:04.010
Item number 10 is a motion for rehearing filed by
00:32:04.010 --> 00:32:08.223
Oil Gas Etc, and Oil and Gas Docket Number 200309024.
00:32:10.810 --> 00:32:14.510
On February, 13th, 2018, Oil and Gas failed to appear at
00:32:14.510 --> 00:32:16.690
hearing, and the Commission entered into a default order
00:32:16.690 --> 00:32:20.090
denying the motion for renewal of Oil Gas Etc's P5
00:32:20.090 --> 00:32:23.150
organization report, because the operator had 31 wells
00:32:23.150 --> 00:32:25.323
not in compliance with Statewide Rule 15.
00:32:26.240 --> 00:32:28.949
In this motion for rehearing, Oil Gas Etc. does not contend
00:32:28.949 --> 00:32:31.885
the Commissioner's determination that 31 wells are not
00:32:31.885 --> 00:32:36.650
compliant, but it states four H5 tests failed.
00:32:36.650 --> 00:32:38.980
Corrections have been made and a retest has been scheduled
00:32:38.980 --> 00:32:40.950
for the earliest possible date.
00:32:40.950 --> 00:32:43.410
A consultant has been hired to complete and file forms
00:32:43.410 --> 00:32:46.120
and production reports, and they had hoped to come into
00:32:46.120 --> 00:32:48.510
compliance before today's conference.
00:32:48.510 --> 00:32:51.713
However, at this time, 31 wells are still not in compliance.
00:32:51.713 --> 00:32:54.080
It's recommended that the motion be denied.
00:32:54.080 --> 00:32:56.240
The motion is overruled by operation of law on
00:32:56.240 --> 00:32:58.460
May 24th, 2018.
00:32:58.460 --> 00:33:00.170
I'm available for any questions.
00:33:00.170 --> 00:33:01.702
Thank you are there any questions?
00:33:01.702 --> 00:33:02.535
No.
00:33:02.535 --> 00:33:04.240
I move we approve the examiner's recommendation.
00:33:04.240 --> 00:33:05.073
Is there a second?
00:33:05.073 --> 00:33:05.906
Second.
00:33:05.906 --> 00:33:07.060
Second, Commissioner Christian.
00:33:07.060 --> 00:33:08.208
All in favor say aye.
00:33:08.208 --> 00:33:09.140
Aye.
00:33:09.140 --> 00:33:11.683
Motion passes, item is approved, number 11.
00:33:11.683 --> 00:33:14.110
Item number 11 is a motion for rehearing filed
00:33:14.110 --> 00:33:15.760
by Bustamante Oil Company
00:33:15.760 --> 00:33:17.753
in Oil and Gas Docket 200309013.
00:33:20.510 --> 00:33:23.930
On February 13th, 2018, Bustamante failed to appear
00:33:23.930 --> 00:33:25.970
at hearing, and the Commission entered into a
00:33:25.970 --> 00:33:28.990
default order denying renewal of Bustamante's
00:33:28.990 --> 00:33:31.900
P5 organizational report, because the operator
00:33:31.900 --> 00:33:35.730
had 25 wells not in compliance with Statewide Rule 15.
00:33:35.730 --> 00:33:37.685
Bustamante states, in this motion for rehearing,
00:33:37.685 --> 00:33:40.440
they've not been able to renew their P5 because
00:33:40.440 --> 00:33:43.530
they have a pending extension to a determination
00:33:43.530 --> 00:33:46.460
on a good faith claim on three wells that are in the process
00:33:46.460 --> 00:33:47.485
of being plugged.
00:33:47.485 --> 00:33:49.394
In the examination for the motion of rehearing,
00:33:49.394 --> 00:33:52.150
staff found that Commission records show Bustamante
00:33:52.150 --> 00:33:55.660
failed to file any extensions on the non-compliant wells.
00:33:55.660 --> 00:33:58.780
Secondly, Bustamante mistakenly references a docket
00:33:58.780 --> 00:34:00.670
which was not a docket for a good faith claim
00:34:00.670 --> 00:34:02.620
but in fact an enforcement action
00:34:02.620 --> 00:34:04.550
brought by the Commission against Bustamante to pay
00:34:04.550 --> 00:34:06.593
penalties for violations of Commission rules.
00:34:06.593 --> 00:34:09.640
And thirdly the good faith claim referred to in the motion
00:34:09.640 --> 00:34:11.500
for rehearing was a different docket,
00:34:11.500 --> 00:34:14.053
determined on September 27th, 2016,
00:34:14.053 --> 00:34:16.490
and ordered wells plugged.
00:34:16.490 --> 00:34:19.920
At this time, there are three wells not in compliance.
00:34:19.920 --> 00:34:21.850
The motion for rehearing will be overturned by
00:34:21.850 --> 00:34:24.860
operational law on May 24th, 2018.
00:34:24.860 --> 00:34:27.440
It's recommended that the motion be denied.
00:34:27.440 --> 00:34:29.240
I'm available for any questions.
00:34:29.240 --> 00:34:31.130
Thank you are there any questions?
00:34:31.130 --> 00:34:33.170
I move we approve the examiner for recommendation.
00:34:33.170 --> 00:34:34.003
Is there a second?
00:34:34.003 --> 00:34:34.836
Second.
00:34:34.836 --> 00:34:36.020
Second, Commissioner Sitton.
00:34:36.020 --> 00:34:36.926
All in favor say aye.
00:34:36.926 --> 00:34:37.759
Aye.
00:34:37.759 --> 00:34:39.410
Motion passes, item is approved.
00:34:39.410 --> 00:34:40.243
Thank you.
00:34:41.500 --> 00:34:43.890
Number 12, good morning.
00:34:43.890 --> 00:34:45.140
Good morning.
00:34:46.420 --> 00:34:50.100
For the record, Christa Reeve, with the Hearings Division.
00:34:50.100 --> 00:34:52.553
Item number 12, I had hoped would be good news.
00:34:52.553 --> 00:34:56.680
On July 23rd, 2018, the Commission entered a default order
00:34:56.680 --> 00:34:59.810
denying renewal of Cascade Operating Company's form P5
00:34:59.810 --> 00:35:01.600
organization report.
00:35:01.600 --> 00:35:04.130
Cascade's filed a timely motion for rehearing.
00:35:04.130 --> 00:35:06.510
This item was passed at the last conference.
00:35:06.510 --> 00:35:09.810
Since the last conference, Commission records show that
00:35:09.810 --> 00:35:12.640
plugging reports forms W3 have been approved for
00:35:12.640 --> 00:35:13.880
three wells.
00:35:13.880 --> 00:35:17.560
One well remains non-compliant with Statewide Rule 15.
00:35:17.560 --> 00:35:20.565
Staff opposes Cascade's motion for rehearing
00:35:20.565 --> 00:35:23.970
as Cascade is non-compliant with Statewide Rule 15.
00:35:23.970 --> 00:35:26.145
It is recommended that the motion be denied.
00:35:26.145 --> 00:35:28.510
The motion will be overruled by operation of law
00:35:28.510 --> 00:35:30.190
on May 3rd, 2018.
00:35:30.190 --> 00:35:32.530
I'm available for questions.
00:35:32.530 --> 00:35:33.920
Okay what's left?
00:35:33.920 --> 00:35:35.230
There is one well left.
00:35:35.230 --> 00:35:36.656
Apparently, it's plugged,
00:35:36.656 --> 00:35:39.200
and somebody is driving in a report.
00:35:39.200 --> 00:35:42.080
But until they actually show up and the Commission
00:35:42.080 --> 00:35:46.200
has it in hand and can approve it, I don't know,
00:35:46.200 --> 00:35:49.225
because we thought last conference that
00:35:49.225 --> 00:35:50.250
plugin reports were imminent,
00:35:50.250 --> 00:35:52.360
and they didn't get filed till yesterday.
00:35:52.360 --> 00:35:54.220
So we will see.
00:35:54.220 --> 00:35:56.240
So we have 'til May 3rd, which means we have one
00:35:56.240 --> 00:35:57.100
more conference.
Yes ma'am
00:35:57.100 --> 00:35:59.210
and I can certainly put this on the,
00:35:59.210 --> 00:36:00.043
if you'd like.
00:36:00.043 --> 00:36:02.530
Let's give him one more week.
00:36:02.530 --> 00:36:03.880
Okay alright.
00:36:03.880 --> 00:36:05.610
So let's pass it, thank you.
00:36:05.610 --> 00:36:06.710
Thank you very much.
00:36:07.580 --> 00:36:12.580
Okay items 13 through 30, Consent Agenda.
00:36:12.740 --> 00:36:15.000
There are 18 items on the Consent Agenda.
00:36:15.000 --> 00:36:17.470
I'm gonna move we approve items 13 through 30.
00:36:17.470 --> 00:36:18.303
Is there a second?
00:36:18.303 --> 00:36:19.136
Second.
00:36:19.136 --> 00:36:20.130
Second, Commissioner Christian.
00:36:20.130 --> 00:36:21.610
All in favor say aye.
00:36:21.610 --> 00:36:22.443
Aye.
00:36:22.443 --> 00:36:25.260
Motion passes, those items are approved.
00:36:25.260 --> 00:36:28.280
Rule 15, Inactive Well Items.
00:36:28.280 --> 00:36:30.680
Items 31 through 55.
00:36:30.680 --> 00:36:32.930
I understand that 34 is in compliance.
00:36:32.930 --> 00:36:34.550
Is that correct?
00:36:34.550 --> 00:36:37.560
I'm gonna move that we approve items 31 through 55,
00:36:37.560 --> 00:36:39.730
with the exception of items 34.
00:36:39.730 --> 00:36:40.563
Is there a second?
00:36:40.563 --> 00:36:41.396
Second.
00:36:41.396 --> 00:36:42.490
Second, Commissioner Sitton.
00:36:42.490 --> 00:36:44.090
All in favor say aye.
00:36:44.090 --> 00:36:44.923
Aye.
00:36:44.923 --> 00:36:46.993
Motion passes, those items are approved.
00:36:46.993 --> 00:36:48.620
Master Default Items.
00:36:48.620 --> 00:36:50.470
Items 56 through 87.
00:36:50.470 --> 00:36:53.060
There are 32 Master Default Orders on move.
00:36:53.060 --> 00:36:56.500
We approve items 56 through 87 and is there a second?
00:36:56.500 --> 00:36:57.620
Second.
00:36:57.620 --> 00:36:59.220
Second by Commissioner Christian.
00:36:59.220 --> 00:37:00.221
All in favor say aye.
00:37:00.221 --> 00:37:01.060
Aye.
00:37:01.060 --> 00:37:03.563
Motion passes, those items are approved.
00:37:04.483 --> 00:37:05.748
We've got one more.
00:37:05.748 --> 00:37:08.530
Agreed Enforcement Orders.
00:37:08.530 --> 00:37:10.785
Items 88 through 235.
00:37:10.785 --> 00:37:13.476
There is a 148 items on this.
00:37:13.476 --> 00:37:16.760
Move we approve items 88 through 235.
00:37:16.760 --> 00:37:17.593
Is there a second?
00:37:17.593 --> 00:37:18.426
Second.
00:37:18.426 --> 00:37:19.490
- Second, Commissioner Sitton.
00:37:19.490 --> 00:37:20.363
All in favor say aye.
00:37:20.363 --> 00:37:21.260
Aye.
00:37:21.260 --> 00:37:23.010
Motion passes, those items are approved.
00:37:23.010 --> 00:37:24.633
That concludes the Hearing section.
00:37:27.680 --> 00:37:28.633
Good morning.
00:37:28.633 --> 00:37:29.568
Good morning.
00:37:29.568 --> 00:37:30.483
236-37.
00:37:32.490 --> 00:37:34.010
Wei Weing, for the record.
00:37:34.010 --> 00:37:34.963
Interim Director.
00:37:36.020 --> 00:37:38.820
In the month of March, we have received in total
00:37:38.820 --> 00:37:42.400
1614 drilling permit applications,
00:37:42.400 --> 00:37:44.620
which is a record setting norm for us,
00:37:44.620 --> 00:37:46.660
going back almost three years.
00:37:46.660 --> 00:37:51.070
So needless to say, the activities are increasing.
00:37:51.070 --> 00:37:55.090
And I'm happy to report that our Drilling Permit
00:37:55.090 --> 00:37:58.070
department staff did a good job keeping our average
00:37:58.070 --> 00:38:00.669
below the three business days requirements.
00:38:00.669 --> 00:38:05.060
We are at 2.4, 46 days on average,
00:38:05.060 --> 00:38:06.810
in processing that.
00:38:06.810 --> 00:38:11.680
And part of the reason is we continue to hire technical
00:38:11.680 --> 00:38:16.530
staff and we are projecting a total FDE of 735 employees
00:38:18.199 --> 00:38:20.410
by the end of this month.
00:38:20.410 --> 00:38:22.270
So that concludes my report today.
00:38:22.270 --> 00:38:23.860
I'm available for questions.
00:38:23.860 --> 00:38:24.693
Thank you Wei.
00:38:24.693 --> 00:38:26.060
Any questions?
00:38:26.060 --> 00:38:26.893
No.
00:38:26.893 --> 00:38:28.957
Alright, good, thank you.
00:38:28.957 --> 00:38:30.853
Alright item 238.
00:38:31.700 --> 00:38:32.851
Pau,l good morning.
00:38:32.851 --> 00:38:33.803
How are you?
00:38:35.171 --> 00:38:37.516
Doing good, Chairman, thank you very much.
00:38:37.516 --> 00:38:38.540
Good morning, Chairman. Good morning. Commissioners.
00:38:38.540 --> 00:38:40.010
For the record, my name is Paul Delaney.
00:38:40.010 --> 00:38:43.030
I'm the Internal Auditor for the Railroad Commission.
00:38:43.030 --> 00:38:44.946
The Internal Audit Charter is the formal document
00:38:44.946 --> 00:38:47.946
that defines the Internal Audit Activity's purpose,
00:38:47.946 --> 00:38:50.566
authority and responsibility.
00:38:50.566 --> 00:38:52.700
Internal auditing standards require that
00:38:52.700 --> 00:38:54.406
the charter be periodically updated
00:38:54.406 --> 00:38:56.510
and presented to executive management
00:38:56.510 --> 00:38:58.042
for their approval.
00:38:58.042 --> 00:39:00.530
One of the recommendations from our most recent
00:39:00.530 --> 00:39:03.500
external peer review was that we update our charter,
00:39:03.500 --> 00:39:06.423
which was last updated in June 2013.
00:39:07.290 --> 00:39:09.390
The updated charter will ensure our continued
00:39:09.390 --> 00:39:11.458
compliance with the applicable auditing standards
00:39:11.458 --> 00:39:13.550
and with the recommendations contained
00:39:13.550 --> 00:39:15.280
in the external peer review.
00:39:15.280 --> 00:39:17.660
I'm requesting that you approve the updated charter.
00:39:17.660 --> 00:39:19.060
I'm available for questions.
00:39:20.080 --> 00:39:21.820
Thank you are there any questions?
00:39:21.820 --> 00:39:22.900
No.
00:39:22.900 --> 00:39:25.560
Alright, I move we approve staff's recommendation.
00:39:25.560 --> 00:39:26.512
Is there a second?
00:39:26.512 --> 00:39:27.345
Second.
00:39:27.345 --> 00:39:28.380
Second Commissioner, Christian.
00:39:28.380 --> 00:39:29.723
All those in favor say aye.
00:39:29.723 --> 00:39:30.970
Aye.
00:39:30.970 --> 00:39:31.803
Motion is approved.
00:39:31.803 --> 00:39:33.960
Thank you Paul for your work.
00:39:33.960 --> 00:39:36.380
Item 239, good morning.
00:39:38.353 --> 00:39:39.353
I'll be quick.
00:39:40.200 --> 00:39:42.990
Vanessa Burgess, Assistant General Council, for the record.
00:39:42.990 --> 00:39:45.660
Item 239, we have nothing to report.
00:39:45.660 --> 00:39:47.568
Thank you, you have any questions?
00:39:47.568 --> 00:39:49.163
[Commissioner Sitton] So long winded.
00:39:49.163 --> 00:39:50.140
(all laughing)
00:39:50.140 --> 00:39:52.160
Alright, item 240.
00:39:52.160 --> 00:39:53.440
Public Participation.
00:39:53.440 --> 00:39:55.510
We have one person who is turned in a card
00:39:55.510 --> 00:39:58.785
to testify. Cyrus Reed, good morning.
00:39:58.785 --> 00:40:00.035
Good morning.
00:40:03.630 --> 00:40:04.800
I'll be very brief.
00:40:04.800 --> 00:40:06.840
Cyrus Reed, for the record.
00:40:06.840 --> 00:40:08.560
I'm with Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club.
00:40:08.560 --> 00:40:11.680
Nice to see you, Chairman and Commissioners.
00:40:11.680 --> 00:40:14.513
I'm here to praise and criticize as I often am,
00:40:15.846 --> 00:40:19.660
to talk about your enforcement plan that you've put out
00:40:19.660 --> 00:40:21.950
for public comment, so my first prize is thank you
00:40:21.950 --> 00:40:22.783
for doing that.
00:40:22.783 --> 00:40:23.616
Thank you.
00:40:23.616 --> 00:40:26.270
I know this is because of the Sunset legislation,
00:40:26.270 --> 00:40:29.350
but I believe it's been a long time coming to actually have
00:40:29.350 --> 00:40:32.650
a document that lays out your major strategies
00:40:32.650 --> 00:40:34.353
and goals for enforcement.
00:40:34.353 --> 00:40:37.253
And I'll start with the praise and say,
00:40:38.200 --> 00:40:39.940
and we'll put in public comments,
00:40:39.940 --> 00:40:44.770
but that the two major goals I think are good ones.
00:40:44.770 --> 00:40:47.900
First one, to be more accurate and actually get
00:40:47.900 --> 00:40:49.450
your enforcement data out there
00:40:50.350 --> 00:40:51.370
and be able to track it.
00:40:51.370 --> 00:40:53.590
That's an important goal through the agency.
00:40:53.590 --> 00:40:58.410
And two would be as a member of both the girl scouts
00:40:58.410 --> 00:41:01.600
and boy scouts, they use resources wisely.
00:41:01.600 --> 00:41:04.260
So effectively use the resources you've given by
00:41:05.430 --> 00:41:06.620
whereby everyone is paying the fees,
00:41:06.620 --> 00:41:10.300
but by the legislature to actually enforce the law,
00:41:10.300 --> 00:41:11.670
protect public health and environment.
00:41:11.670 --> 00:41:14.293
So those are good goals and we support them.
00:41:15.580 --> 00:41:17.600
And we also support,
00:41:17.600 --> 00:41:21.290
you've put in some more details about what constitutes
00:41:21.290 --> 00:41:22.410
the major violation.
00:41:22.410 --> 00:41:24.640
I think that's been missing for number of years.
00:41:24.640 --> 00:41:28.410
So kind of spelling that out to help your staff know
00:41:28.410 --> 00:41:31.080
when a violation is major is important.
00:41:31.080 --> 00:41:33.440
And also the fact that you've given the public
00:41:33.440 --> 00:41:34.440
the opportunity to comment.
00:41:34.440 --> 00:41:35.930
I think it's important.
00:41:35.930 --> 00:41:38.943
Now let me get to a little of the criticism.
00:41:40.450 --> 00:41:41.690
More detail.
00:41:41.690 --> 00:41:44.450
So you've got a report that says we think we are gonna
00:41:44.450 --> 00:41:47.320
do about a 130,000 inspections.
00:41:47.320 --> 00:41:50.376
I think putting some more detail on geographically
00:41:50.376 --> 00:41:54.060
where you might do those inspections,
00:41:54.060 --> 00:41:56.070
to what degree the response is to complaints,
00:41:56.070 --> 00:41:59.230
versus the normal kind of routine inspections
00:41:59.230 --> 00:42:01.753
you give, might be useful to this report.
00:42:03.100 --> 00:42:05.710
You've also put in as part of your goals,
00:42:06.640 --> 00:42:09.490
and we support this, the fact that you're going to try to
00:42:09.490 --> 00:42:13.220
get your information to be more accessible to public.
00:42:13.220 --> 00:42:15.750
Again, I'd like to see more details on where we are
00:42:15.750 --> 00:42:16.583
in that process.
00:42:16.583 --> 00:42:19.770
You know for long time the Sierra Club has argued that,
00:42:19.770 --> 00:42:22.000
eventually, we want to get a place similar to what
00:42:22.000 --> 00:42:25.249
you can do at TCEQ, where you can go online,
00:42:25.249 --> 00:42:29.130
look up companies, not necessarily compliance history,
00:42:29.130 --> 00:42:31.790
but just get an accurate report of have they violated
00:42:31.790 --> 00:42:35.140
the laws, how often, what kind of violations or
00:42:36.000 --> 00:42:39.610
as is often the case, if you guys initially find
00:42:39.610 --> 00:42:42.290
a violation that turned out not to be a problem.
00:42:42.290 --> 00:42:45.560
So having a way that you can do that online and search
00:42:45.560 --> 00:42:47.370
for that is gonna be important.
00:42:47.370 --> 00:42:50.850
So I urge you to think about that and put this in this
00:42:50.850 --> 00:42:53.570
report, or if it's not possible to this year at least,
00:42:53.570 --> 00:42:55.663
set kind of your long-term goal for that.
00:42:56.760 --> 00:43:00.045
And then, you know, I've said this in the past,
00:43:00.045 --> 00:43:05.045
that I believe the fines and some of this you can't control.
00:43:05.980 --> 00:43:07.220
It's right as in statute.
00:43:07.220 --> 00:43:09.760
The maximum fines, you guys can't do anything about that.
00:43:09.760 --> 00:43:10.730
The 10,000 limit.
00:43:10.730 --> 00:43:11.563
That's in statute.
00:43:11.563 --> 00:43:14.190
That's a legislature's job to see if they want to raise it.
00:43:14.190 --> 00:43:17.280
However, what you can do and it doesn't necessarily
00:43:17.280 --> 00:43:18.430
have to be part of this plan,
00:43:18.430 --> 00:43:21.530
but you can think about looking at your penalty matrix,
00:43:21.530 --> 00:43:25.280
which is in rules and concerning updating them.
00:43:25.280 --> 00:43:28.430
I would argue there are a number of fines that you have
00:43:28.430 --> 00:43:31.397
that are outdated and are not sufficient to deter
00:43:31.397 --> 00:43:33.020
future violations.
00:43:33.020 --> 00:43:35.880
So I would encourage you to look at your rules
00:43:35.880 --> 00:43:39.260
and your penalty matrix, especially for repeat violations,
00:43:39.260 --> 00:43:41.020
and see if some of those need to be updated
00:43:41.020 --> 00:43:43.890
to provide of a deterrence, and with that all,
00:43:43.890 --> 00:43:44.907
we'll definitely do our incumbency,
00:43:44.907 --> 00:43:48.340
but I do appreciate this first attempt.
00:43:48.340 --> 00:43:50.150
Thank you for being here.
00:43:50.150 --> 00:43:51.220
We look forward to your comments.
00:43:51.220 --> 00:43:52.663
Thank you.
Thanks.
00:43:54.070 --> 00:43:59.070
Okay items 241 and 242, our Executive Session.
00:44:01.559 --> 00:44:02.840
You know, Chairman, can I make a comment
00:44:02.840 --> 00:44:04.710
to what Mr. Reed said, because something he left
00:44:04.710 --> 00:44:05.640
hanging out there, I just--
00:44:05.640 --> 00:44:06.473
Oh I'm sorry I didn't...
00:44:06.473 --> 00:44:08.340
It's alright, I was slow to respond.
00:44:09.791 --> 00:44:11.417
One of the statements you made at the end
00:44:11.417 --> 00:44:12.763
and you don't need to respond to this.
00:44:12.763 --> 00:44:15.200
So I'll just make it, is that
00:44:15.200 --> 00:44:19.045
our fines are insufficient to avoid repeat violations.
00:44:19.045 --> 00:44:24.045
And there's always the sort of underlying message that
00:44:26.560 --> 00:44:28.530
operators out there are a bunch of cowboys
00:44:28.530 --> 00:44:29.609
and that they have to be controlled
00:44:29.609 --> 00:44:33.450
and that they're not trying to avoid violations.
00:44:33.450 --> 00:44:34.840
They're not trying to do the right thing on their own.
00:44:34.840 --> 00:44:37.050
Sure, there are some bad actors out there
00:44:37.050 --> 00:44:39.662
that we have to go after, but by and large,
00:44:39.662 --> 00:44:42.685
our fines are not the things that make these companies
00:44:42.685 --> 00:44:44.090
want to be good operators.
00:44:44.090 --> 00:44:46.140
They do that because they are good public citizens,
00:44:46.140 --> 00:44:48.220
and they want to be respected in their communities.
00:44:48.220 --> 00:44:49.990
They want to protect their communities in which they work
00:44:49.990 --> 00:44:53.010
and they live and that's the lion's share
00:44:53.010 --> 00:44:53.843
of what we see.
00:44:54.950 --> 00:44:56.210
I don't like it hanging out there
00:44:56.210 --> 00:44:59.670
that, oh, we need bigger fines to keep people in line.
00:44:59.670 --> 00:45:01.530
I don't think that's, majority of the time
00:45:01.530 --> 00:45:03.370
that's not what keeps people doing the right thing.
00:45:03.370 --> 00:45:05.870
They do that because they're good stewards of
00:45:05.870 --> 00:45:07.994
the communities in which they work.
00:45:07.994 --> 00:45:10.500
I find that 99.9% of the time.
00:45:10.500 --> 00:45:11.966
I just wanted to make that statement.
00:45:11.966 --> 00:45:12.860
They get support.
00:45:12.860 --> 00:45:15.647
Madam Chairman, I appreciate Mr. Commissioner Sitton
00:45:15.647 --> 00:45:18.105
saying the same and I agree with him totally.
00:45:18.105 --> 00:45:21.418
Second part of that I'd also mention is
00:45:21.418 --> 00:45:25.400
there is some part of a danger in fining too much.
00:45:25.400 --> 00:45:28.910
Some operators, in fact, did make safety worse
00:45:28.910 --> 00:45:32.040
whenever you extend some fines that shut down
00:45:32.040 --> 00:45:34.789
some super small operations that are taking care
00:45:34.789 --> 00:45:36.419
of the things now.
00:45:36.419 --> 00:45:40.270
If you start fining them too much, they like,
00:45:40.270 --> 00:45:43.832
many of our wells and many of our sites,
00:45:43.832 --> 00:45:46.004
they walk off in bankruptcy,
00:45:46.004 --> 00:45:47.950
and all of a sudden you have danger
00:45:47.950 --> 00:45:50.620
and there is nobody there containing the danger.
00:45:50.620 --> 00:45:52.150
Sometimes for us fining too much
00:45:52.150 --> 00:45:53.694
or being too quick to pull the gun.
00:45:53.694 --> 00:45:56.538
So there are always two sides of the issue.
00:45:56.538 --> 00:45:59.190
Plus my concern is little operators versus
00:45:59.190 --> 00:46:01.991
the big operators and the consistency of the penalties
00:46:01.991 --> 00:46:05.180
is hard in a state size of Texas.
00:46:05.180 --> 00:46:06.693
I agree with your comments.
00:46:07.970 --> 00:46:11.260
Thank you. I really look forward to getting more comments.
00:46:11.260 --> 00:46:13.243
Part of the reason why we put it out.
00:46:14.270 --> 00:46:16.220
We appreciate the feedback.
00:46:16.220 --> 00:46:18.430
Thanks, Cyrus, for coming today.
00:46:18.430 --> 00:46:21.800
Okay so we are at item 241-42.
00:46:21.800 --> 00:46:26.060
Executive Session. Having convened in a duly-noticed
00:46:26.060 --> 00:46:30.540
open meeting, the Railroad Commission now will, at 11:16,
00:46:31.870 --> 00:46:36.410
on Tuesday, April 10th, hold a closed meeting in the
00:46:36.410 --> 00:46:38.180
Willa May Conference Room on the 12th Floor
00:46:38.180 --> 00:46:39.930
of the William B. Travis State Office Building,
00:46:39.930 --> 00:46:43.620
pursuant to the Texas Government Code, Chapter 551.
00:46:43.620 --> 00:46:46.080
The Commission will discuss personal matters
00:46:46.080 --> 00:46:48.922
related to the position of the executive director,
00:46:48.922 --> 00:46:52.128
pursuant to section 551.074 of
00:46:52.128 --> 00:46:55.390
the code, and the Commission will reconvene
00:46:55.390 --> 00:46:58.846
in this room after we finish Executive Session.
00:46:58.846 --> 00:47:00.370
Madam Chairman, you said what time
00:47:00.370 --> 00:47:02.170
we'll convene the Executive Session?
00:47:03.190 --> 00:47:06.100
No, we are leaving here.
00:47:06.100 --> 00:47:08.577
We are going to reconvene--
11:16 though?
00:47:08.577 --> 00:47:11.244
No, guys I think I said 10:16.
00:47:12.270 --> 00:47:14.315
Maybe you're right, you may have caught me this morning.
00:47:14.315 --> 00:47:17.130
We are recessing at 10:16.
00:47:17.130 --> 00:47:20.560
We will reconvene back in this room after Executive Session.
00:47:20.560 --> 00:47:21.393
Thank you.
00:47:21.393 --> 00:47:23.977
I mean, I didn't want to wait an hour.
00:47:34.380 --> 00:47:36.506
The closed meeting of The Railroad Commission of Texas
00:47:36.506 --> 00:47:41.506
was hereby concluded at a 11:30 AM on April 10th, 2018.
00:47:41.597 --> 00:47:44.303
And the Commission will now resume its open meeting.
00:47:45.252 --> 00:47:48.420
[Commissioner Christian] Madam Chairman, I have a motion.
00:47:48.420 --> 00:47:49.800
State your motion.
00:47:49.800 --> 00:47:53.510
Madam Chairman, I move that we hire Wei Weing
00:47:53.510 --> 00:47:56.360
as Executive Director of the Texas Railroad Commission.
00:47:56.360 --> 00:47:58.903
I'm gonna add with the salary to be negotiated
00:47:58.903 --> 00:48:02.300
with our Human Resources department in line with the
00:48:02.300 --> 00:48:03.800
ranges set out in the posting.
00:48:05.030 --> 00:48:06.077
Second.
00:48:06.077 --> 00:48:07.740
The motion and a second.
00:48:07.740 --> 00:48:08.640
All in favor say aye.
00:48:08.640 --> 00:48:09.810
Aye.
00:48:09.810 --> 00:48:12.810
Motion passes, welcome to the Commission, officially.
00:48:12.810 --> 00:48:13.643
as the new executive director.
00:48:13.643 --> 00:48:16.145
[Commissioner Sitton] Man, get the guns.
00:48:16.145 --> 00:48:18.520
(all applauding)
00:48:18.520 --> 00:48:20.013
You can say something.
00:48:23.289 --> 00:48:27.577
We are excited to have him.
00:48:27.577 --> 00:48:30.350
I'm happy to continue to serve in the capacity
00:48:30.350 --> 00:48:34.280
and I'm humbled at the opportunity and I'll do my best.
00:48:34.280 --> 00:48:36.820
Thank you for your support and help.
00:48:36.820 --> 00:48:37.829
Thank you, Wei.
I look forward to
00:48:37.829 --> 00:48:38.662
working with you.
00:48:38.662 --> 00:48:39.520
Way to go.
00:48:39.520 --> 00:48:40.530
Thank you, Wei.
00:48:40.530 --> 00:48:41.530
We are now adjourned.
00:48:41.530 --> 00:48:42.410
Thank you all.
00:48:42.410 --> 00:48:45.243
(all applauding)