Last week a proposal to raise the minimum bond-on amount for split-estate oil and gas wells from $2,000 per well to $10,000 died in a senate committee.

Sen. John Schiffer, R-Kaycee, introduced Senate File 87, “Oil and gas operations-surety bond,” spurred by the Powder River Basin Resource Council’s December report, “The State of the Split Estate. A Landowner Perspective: Five Years After Passage of the Wyoming Split Estate Statute.”

Schiffer, along with landowners and other proponents, testified that the $2,000 minimum bond level was too low to inspire the true intention of the requirement; to negotiate in good-faith with landowners to reach a surface use agreement. Much of Wyoming is under split-estate, which means the person who owns the surface doesn’t own the minerals below the surface. That ownership resides with, or is owned by or leased to oil and gas developers.

Usually, the oil and gas developer strikes a “surface use agreement” with the surface owner, which involves paying a fee to the surface owner for damages and loss of permanent or temporary use of the surface.

But Schiffer and others argued that some developers have figured out it’s easier, and cheaper, to not actually negotiate in good-faith and simply post the $2,000 bond. The surety (not the full dollar-amount) resides with the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which can cash it in to pay for the cost of clean-up in the event the developer doesn’t meet reclamation requirements.

In this scenario, the surface owner still receives no “surface damage” payment. Schiffer and advocates of the bill said that by raising the minimum bond-on requirement to $10,000, more developers would be enticed to actually strike a surface use agreement resulting in some payment to the surface owner.

“We know that the chance of something happening is minimal, and if it is indeed minimal, then why the concern (about raising the bond),” said Patricia Hawk, a surface owner from Laramie County.

Arguing against the measure was the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, and Sen. Kit Jennings, R-Casper.

“A landowner has the option to go to (the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission) to ask that the bond be raised,” said Bruce Hinchey, president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming.

Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission supervisor Tom Doll agreed with landowners that there’s been a recent surge in posting bonds on split-estates, and that seems to be coming from companies performing seismic surveys in southeast Wyoming. Doll said that some of the seismic survey companies are not actually working for specific clients, but are gathering seismic data hoping to sell it to potential oil and gas developers.

Schiffer chastised industry representatives for not pressuring companies to adhere to the spirit of the good-faith negotiation implied by the minimum bond-on requirement.

“An industry that chooses to stick their heads in the sand — I’m shocked by that. Absolutely floored. But now you see what the problem is,” said Schiffer.

Dustin Bleizeffer can be reached at 307-577-6069 or dustin@wyofile.com.

Dustin Bleizeffer covers energy and climate at WyoFile. He has worked as a coal miner, an oilfield mechanic, and for more than 25 years as a statewide reporter and editor primarily covering the energy...

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *