Wyoming has narrowed its definitions for who can bid on state oil and gas lease parcels, disqualifying parties that intend to conserve the land rather than produce the mineral resources.

The change, made under emergency rulemaking in June, was mandated by House Bill 141 – State land oil and gas leases-operator requirement, which the Legislature passed during the budget session. Rep. Cyrus Western (R-Big Horn) brought the bill on behalf of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming. The association raised concerns over the state’s vetting process after the Lander-based conservation group Wyoming Outdoor Council last July placed bids on a state oil and gas lease parcel in Sublette County intending to spare it from development.

If a small Wyoming conservation group can bid to block energy development, a conservation- or anti-oil-and-gas-minded billionaire could do the same, the trade association argued.

“So rather than wait for that to happen, we thought, ‘Well, let’s step in now and let’s put in place a bill that acts as a deterrent to doing that,” Petroleum Association of Wyoming President Pete Obermueller told WyoFile.

Ultimately, the winning bidder in last year’s controversial auction was Casper-based Kirkwood Oil and Gas — the same company that had nominated the parcel — at $19 per acre for the 640-acre tract. When the company later learned that it had been competing against a conservation group, the owners cried foul and claimed they were duped into paying an artificially inflated price.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council defends its actions. 

Yes, council leaders say, the organization did bid on the controversial “Parcel 194.” But it didn’t skirt the rules or misrepresent its identity. The group expected that, if it was the winning bidder, it would pay about $12,000 for the lease (based on its $18 per acre bid) out of its own budget, according to Wyoming Outdoor Council Executive Director Carl Fisher. No well-heeled individual was on standby to finance the purchase, he told WyoFile.

The bidding controversy, he said, misses the larger issue: a lack of commitment by the state to implement its own policies that were crafted years ago to avert such conflicts in wildlife migration corridors.

Path of the Pronghorn

Kirkwood Oil and Gas had nominated a state lease parcel, 194, smack in the middle of the Path of the Pronghorn — a popular name for the long-distance migration of the Sublette Pronghorn Herd. It’s part of one of the most studied ungulate migration routes in North America, and the Path of the Pronghorn portion of the route is so named because it represents a “bottleneck” — an area squeezed due to rural development and landscape features.

And, critically, according to the council, Parcel 194 bisects the New Fork River where pronghorn cross. 

Given the years of high-profile studies and discussions regarding the Path of the Pronghorn and many other well-documented ungulate migration routes in Wyoming, the group didn’t expect the state would OK oil and gas lease parcel nominations in the area for its competitive lease auction.

“To our surprise, they were going to offer an oil and gas lease directly in one of the most important spots where, like, thousands of these members of the Sublette pronghorn herd are crossing the New Fork River,” said Alec Underwood, the council’s program director.

In the weeks before the auction, the council and other conservation groups implored state officials and the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to intervene and convince the Office of State Lands and Investments to remove Parcel 194 and others inside the Path of the Pronghorn from the auction, according to Fisher. But the parcels were not removed.

At that point, Fisher said, the council felt it had no other choice. 

“We had a conversation just to say, ‘Well, if we can’t get the parcel removed, and if we do qualify as a bidder in the process, we should engage in the process and put our money where our mouth is and bid to protect the parcel and the corridor,’” Fisher said.

Delayed protections 

The state had already anticipated such conflicts.

Gov. Mark Gordon signed an executive order in 2020 outlining general protections for designated wildlife migration corridors and directed the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to develop a set of specific migration corridor policies to avoid activities that might disturb the critical pathways. But the state, under pressure from industry, still has not bestowed official designations to several migration corridors, which leaves the Path of the Pronghorn open to development without the state’s stipulations — although the years-long designation process is formally underway.

In the immediate wake of the July 2023 bidding controversy, Wyoming Game and Fish Department officials collaborated with the Office of State Lands and Investments to propose adding stipulations to Parcel 194 preventing industrial activity during spring and fall migrations.

But the State Board of Land Commissioners, made of the state’s top five elected officials, declined the proposal.

For its part, Kirkwood Oil and Gas discounts the need to significantly restrict industrial activities in migration corridors — the industry has a stellar track record of producing oil and gas without detrimental impacts to wildlife, the company’s Land Manager Steve Degenfelder said. The industry continually refines best practices for habitat mitigation, he added.

Kirkwood didn’t nominate Parcel 194 because it is in the Path of the Pronghorn, he told WyoFile. It nominated the parcel, and others in the area, because the company is trying to piece together a block of lease tracts on the western flank of the prolific Pinedale Anticline natural gas field.

“I hunt and fish,” Degenfelder said. “I value the attributes of Wyoming, both monetary and wildlife, and our standard of living with great respect. I think that we can accomplish both of them at the same time.”

Research, however, shows that pronghorn have avoided and abandoned the Anticline gas field. 

The state’s new definitions for qualified bidders went into effect just before an oil and gas lease auction that began July 8. The online auction, which is managed by Texas-based EnergyNet, was extended to Wednesday due to disruptions caused by Hurricane Beryl.

Wyoming bans conservation bidders from oil and gas lease sales is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

To make south Louisiana’s oil and gas infrastructure more resilient to extreme weather, Entergy Louisiana wants to build a $441 million floating natural gas power plant as the land around it continues to vanish from a combination of sinking and sea-level rise.  

A top Louisiana utility consumer advocate noted the “loop of irony” of adding even more greenhouse gasses to a region already suffering massive land loss because of climate change. 

Entergy says the plant is necessary because in 2020, Hurricane Zeta took out a major transmission line serving the area, according to its filing with the Louisiana Public Service Commission. The company says the plant would be cheaper than building a new transmission line through wetlands and marshes, and it would not be “prudent or economic” to buy power on the open market. The company did not provide the cost to replace its downed transmission line.

Entergy Louisiana says its proposed 112-megawatt Bayou Power Station could disconnect from the grid and use the plant’s power to provide electricity to 7,000 residential, industrial and commercial including Port Fourchon, the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port and residents in Golden Meadow, Leeville and Grand Isle. The power station would have black-start capability — or the ability to rapidly start up and ramp down without being connected to other parts of the energy grid. 

“This Project will directly address critical oil and gas customers in the system at Port Fourchon,” Entergy’s filing to the PSC. “The interconnection of the Project will add a resilient power source to the (Entergy Louisiana) grid and enable storm restoration options, following a significant weather event.” 

The promises being made mirror those its sister company, Entergy New Orleans, used to convince the New Orleans City Council to approve a 128-MW natural gas plant in eastern New Orleans that came online in 2020. Entergy New Orleans said the $210 million plant would come online quickly after a storm to provide the city with power.

But that didn’t happen. After Hurricane Ida struck in August 2021, the entire city went dark, and it took almost three days for the New Orleans gas plant to become operational. The utility said using the plant’s quick-start capability wasn’t the safest way to restore power to the city.

 “And so the question now is why should the Louisiana Public Service Commission approve (Bayou Power Station) seeing what happened only a handful of years ago,” asked Logan Atkinson Burke, executive director of the Alliance for Affordable Energy.

Burke noted the Bayou Power Station would cost twice as much as the New Orleans plant and produce less electricity. 

The power generation portion of the project is estimated at $374.3 million, or roughly $3,318 per kilowatt, an amount twice as much as most other power generation costs, according to the federal Energy Information Administration. If the Public Service Commission approves the plant, the costs would trickle down to all of Entergy Louisiana’s 1.1 million customers through increased rates and charges. 

In addition to approval of the plant within 120 days, Entergy has asked the PSC for permission to bypass the competitive bid process and hand the contract to its preselected contractor, Grand Isle Shipyards.

“An RFP (request for proposals) wouldn’t have produced a more qualified vendor at a better cost,” said David Freese, a spokesman for Entergy Louisiana. The plant would be built at the company’s shipyard and moved to Leeville for installation.

Before it narrowed its options, Entergy also considered combined-cycle gas turbines, solar and simple-cycle combustion turbines, Freese said. Offshore wind was not considered because of the costs of building a transmission line to the offshore turbines, the intermittent nature of wind and the potential impact of hurricanes on those turbines, he said.

Coastal researcher Alex Kolker, an associate professor at the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium who specializes in oceanography, geology and climate science, said the region is prone to storms and extreme weather that is being made more intense by climate change. 

Utility consumer advocate Burke said it appears the company is doubling down on its reliance on fossil fuels, ignoring the inherent climate risks. 

“It’s very clear that we are in a in a loop of irony at this point where the hotter it gets, the more water there is, and the less land there is as a result of oil and gas extraction, all while Louisiana is so interconnected to those international oil and gas systems,” Burke said. “So we ‘need’ to build something that is incredibly vulnerable in a place that is vulnerable because of oil and gas.”

Floodlight is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powerful interests stalling climate action.

Louisiana energy company plans to float above climate damage — literally is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

During a summer’s afternoon in 2022, a 450-foot fireball exploded at a liquefied natural gas terminal south of Houston, rocking sunbathers on Quintana Beach, adjacent to the Freeport LNG terminal, and rattling homes for miles around.  

Eighteen months later, residents around the plant have yet to receive any information directly from Freeport LNG about what caused the explosion, or what to do if it were to happen again, said Melanie Oldham, one of the founders of Better Brazoria, an environmental and public health advocacy group who felt the blast in her living room, 3 miles from the terminal. 

John Allaire frequently hears the internal alarms go off at Venture Global’s Calcasieu Pass LNG terminal, just a mile from his home on the Gulf Coast in southwest Louisiana, but he never knows what’s causing them. He said when he asked about the alarms, a Venture Global executive told Allaire to call 911 if he was concerned. 

The Biden administration recently paused permitting for new LNG terminals to consider the macro implications such as climate change and national security of the U.S. becoming the world’s largest exporter of the super chilled, super condensed methane gas. But those living near the eight terminals already operating in the U.S. and the seven that are under construction have more immediate concerns — their safety. 

Unlike other industrial facilities, such as chemical plants and oil refineries, LNG operators don’t have to share with the general public information such as what chemicals are being used onsite and how an accident could impact the people who live around the facility. 

“If people knew the risks around LNG, there would be so much public outcry that this buildout wouldn’t happen,” said Naomi Yoder, who researched the safety of LNG facilities as a staff scientist at the environmental watchdog Healthy Gulf.

The LNG industry says its operations are safe. On the website for the Center for LNG, a  lobbying group, three paragraphs explain the safety of the emerging export industry. It points out that the U.S. Energy Department itself says “The physical and chemical properties of LNG render it safer than other commonly used hydrocarbons.” The Center for LNG did not respond to multiple requests for more information on LNG safety.

But the information needed for the public to verify that claim is often confidential because LNG terminals are considered critical infrastructure and could be terrorist targets. Companies also can shield information they consider to be trade secrets.

Even some of the computer models used to determine the risks of potential accidents at LNG terminals are proprietary. So scientists such as Jerry Havens — a professor emeritus of chemical engineering at the University of Arkansas who worked on the original safety standards for LNG import terminals — can’t verify their findings. And Havens is skeptical.

“What it means is that these places are being built shiny and new and approved with 1,100 and 1,200-page reports. But they are neglecting a major hazard. These calculations need to be checked.”

The risks around the terminals are made even more opaque by the fact the LNG industry is regulated by three federal agencies: the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the U.S. Coast Guard.  

One of those agencies, PHMSA, is using regulations from the 1980s — before the United States started exporting LNG and when the fuel was mainly used as a backup for gas-fired power plants. 

“There’s not sufficient information to know what the full risks are, and the repercussions of no one understanding are huge,” said Elizabeth Calderon, an attorney for Earthjustice, a nonprofit public interest environmental law organization.

Law allows plans to stay mostly secret 

The secrecy around the safety information for LNG terminals is a contrast from refineries or petrochemical plants that are regulated under the federal Emergency Planning Community Right to Know Act. Under that law, facilities that handle chemicals are required to prepare risk management plans for the Environmental Protection Agency. Portions of those plans, including off-site scenarios, are made available for the public to view at federal courthouses. 

But in 1998, the EPA exempted facilities “used to liquefy natural or synthetic gas or used to transfer, store, or vaporize LNG in conjunction with pipeline transportation” because the facilities are not considered “stationary.” PHMSA confirmed it does not enforce the Right to Know Act. 

PHMSA and FERC do require developers and owners of LNG facilities to create and regularly update their emergency response plans, but the public availability of those plans on FERC’s website is uneven. Some, like for Freeport LNG, are available and updated regularly. But others, such as for the operating Corpus Christi LNG, could not be found by Floodlight. 

And while 11 pages of its 170-page plan for under-construction Venture Global Plaquemines is publicly available, not even a redacted version could be found for Venture Global’s Calcasieu Pass terminal, which is already operating.  The information that is available in those plans, and in material distributed by companies such as Freeport LNG emphasize the low risk of an accident. 

Yoder said ideally, the plans would contain a “worst case scenario” for the LNG storage tanks and tankers that describes a potential blast radius and risks to people within each radius.

“All the important stuff is redacted,” said James Hiatt, a fisherman and environmental activist who lives in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana. “They tell us that all of it is proprietary information and it’s national security. They won’t tell us what the risk is. People deserve to know if they are safe in their homes.”

As industry grows, so do accidents

Dick Gremillion, director of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness for Calcasieu Parish, says he isn’t overly concerned with the risks of LNG compared with the multiple other refineries and petrochemical facilities in the Lake Charles area. The region is home to several oil refineries, including one lightning struck in 2023, and chemical plants, where explosions are common.

Chuck Watson, founder of Enki, a company that models the risks of natural and manmade hazards, agrees the likelihood of an LNG accident is quite low. But, he added, “The problem is if you have an accident, the consequences are quite high.” 

A 2009 report from the Congressional Research Service suggests the safety record of the industry is mixed. It cites 13 serious accidents in the world involving LNG, including a 2004 fire at a terminal in Algeria that killed 27 workers. The report concludes that import terminals pose safety challenges because “LNG is inherently hazardous and its infrastructure is potentially attractive to terrorists.”

Regional concerns about LNG have been heightened by a string of incidents at facilities since the U.S. began exporting the fuel in 2016. The 2022 accident south of Houston, in which a segment of pipe exploded, occurred because Freeport failed to identify hazards or to implement changes from a 2021 hazard analysis. Worker fatigue from overtime was listed as a contributing cause. 

In 2018, PHMSA ordered Cheniere Energy to shut down two LNG tanks at its Sabine Pass, Texas, plant and fined it for failing to deal with known leaks in its double-hulled tanks. And in 2022, Calcasieu Pass was cited by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality for exceeding permitted release levels 139 times. 

“Operational problems, procedures, lack of controls, proper controls, lack of adequate training. These types of things keep happening at LNG facilities,” Allaire said. “The potential is there. There is human error and these kinds of things keep happening. Something is going to happen here in the U.S.”

Potentially deadly problems

Havens, the retired chemical engineering professor, has been sounding the alarm for years on one specific accident that could happen at a liquified natural gas LNG terminal — a vapor cloud explosion in zero wind conditions. These can occur when a large amount of flammable refrigerants, which are used to superchill the gas, leak and create a cloud of vapor. 

Without wind to disperse the gas, the clouds can become larger and more dangerous. If ignited, these vapor clouds can explode at a much higher pressure than a typical chemical explosion

The industry acknowledges the potential for vapor cloud explosions in permit applications and environmental impact statements. In almost every case, the risk of vapor cloud explosions is limited, according to those analyses, because it would stay within the perimeter of the terminals.

But Havens argues those calculations don’t, among other things, account for zero or low wind conditions. 

“The risk has been calculated away,” Havens said. “They are actually ignoring a catastrophic risk.”

A British industrial safety agency says the risks of such explosions can be reduced by installing a small number of sensors. 

PHMSA has commissioned research into the issue and says the concerns about vapor cloud explosions in zero-wind conditions might be addressed as part of its long-promised update to LNG safety regulations. The agency says its notice of proposed rulemaking for those updates will be issued in May, but it has promised the updated rules for at least two years. 

Tankers carry risks

When LNG import facilities were being proposed in the early 2000s, there was a public outcry over the potential that terrorists could target the ships as they traveled through populated areas. The Coast Guard and state and local police responded by escorting the tankers in and out of Boston Harbor with machine guns.

Along the Gulf Coast, however, the presence of Coast Guard escorts is not evident, said  Allaire, who can watch the tankers pass by his property two or three times a week. 

The Coast Guard requires each LNG owner to develop safety plans, including having an incident commander aboard each vessel in the event of an accident. The agency, however, did not directly answer whether it still escorts LNG tankers, saying it screens every vessel for safety or security risk and conducts operations to address identified risks.

Watson, the risk modeler, is concerned about yet another danger: leaking LNG onto the water. When the gas, which is supercooled to -260 F, hits the warm water, the gas could warm and rapidly expand, creating a shock wave that could travel miles. If that gas ignited, it would cause vast destruction, Watson warns.

Watson conducted risk modeling for the Elba LNG terminal downriver from Savannah, Georgia. He found if there were a major rupture of a tanker ship or storage tank, heat from the resulting rapid phase transition could cause second degree burns up to 1.5 miles away. 

Who’s in charge? 

Confusion around which federal agency regulates which aspect of the LNG industry makes it hard for the public to get information, said Yoder, who is now GIS data manager at the Bullard Center for Environmental and Climate Justice at Texas Southern University. 

“Honestly, when we asked PHMSA about the emergency response plans and about the risk assessments, they’re like, ‘OK, talk to FERC,’ ” Yoder said. “And then when we asked FERC, they say ‘You need to talk to PHMSA,’ and then we go back to PHMSA. They say, ‘Oh, well actually you should talk to OSHA.’ I mean it’s just absurd.”

Although “the law is not very clear on who has what authorities,” former FERC chair Richard Glick insists the overlap does not create blindspots in regulation.

But Glick said he wasn’t aware until shortly before he left FERC in 2022 how little residents around the terminals know about emergency planning. 

“The developer and the government are naturally concerned about making sure that certain information is unavailable to terrorists,” he said. 

“On the other hand, people who live in these communities have very legitimate reasons to be concerned about these facilities — whether it be evacuation plans, whether it be just plans about what’s going to be put in there, what the dangers of explosions, and all sorts of other potential issues are,” Glick added. “In my opinion, they weren’t necessarily receiving the information they should receive.”

Floodlight is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powerful interests stalling climate action.

Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story misstated James Hiatt’s parish of residence.

Secrecy around gas export terminals leaves public in the dark on dangers is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

An Ohio judge has dismissed environmental groups’ appeal from commission decisions to lease parts of a state park and two wildlife areas for oil and gas drilling.

Judge Jaiza Page’s Feb. 23 order effectively denies the emergency stay the environmental groups had sought to stop the Ohio Oil and Gas Land Management Commission from acting on Monday to accept bids from companies to drill and frack under Salt Fork State Park, Zepernick Wildlife Area and Valley Run Wildlife Area.

Starting in January, the Ohio Oil and Gas Land Management Commission solicited bids from companies to drill and frack under the state park and wildlife areas. The commission is expected to act on bids at its Feb. 26 meeting.

Judge Page’s eight-page decision agreed with the commission that the court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. She also agreed with the commission’s argument that the groups have no standing to contest its rulings.

“We are disappointed with the Court’s order. We are considering next steps with our clients,” said attorney Megan Hunter of Earthjustice, which has acted as counsel for Save Ohio Parks, the Ohio Environmental Council, the Buckeye Environmental Network and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

Energy News Network reached out to spokespeople for the Ohio Attorney General and the Ohio Oil & Gas Land Management Commission, but they have not yet provided comments.

Judge Page’s order noted the word “shall” in one part of ORC Ch. 155, suggesting the commission has a mandatory duty to lease state park lands. Yet she did not mention at all the requirement in another part of the law that says the commission “shall” consider nine factors in deciding whether to allow drilling on state-owned lands.

A key part of the environmental groups’ challenge was that the commission failed to consider all nine factors the law required it to consider. Those include environmental impacts, effects on visitors or users of state-owned lands, public comments or objections, economic benefits and other considerations.

The commission’s proceedings also have been clouded by the submission of hundreds of allegedly falsified pro-fracking comments. The commission announced in September that it would not consider those comments. But results of an investigation by the Ohio Attorney General’s office have not yet been announced.

It’s also unclear whether the commission considered and properly weighed concerns voiced by opponents of the leasing, whose comments raised worries about possible contamination from accidents, anticipated interference with their ability to enjoy state parks and wildlife areas, and more.

A separate case challenges the constitutionality of House Bill 507, the law passed by Ohio’s General Assembly late last year to kickstart the commission’s leasing process. The law also declared that natural gas is “green energy.” That case is before Judge Kimberly Cocroft.

In the HB 507 case, the state argued the constitutional challenge case is moot because the commission’s adoption of leasing terms meant there was no longer any mandatory duty to allow drilling on state-owned lands.

It’s unclear whether appellees will appeal Judge Page’s order or if another motion for stay will be filed. It’s also unclear when Judge Cocroft will rule.

Companies submitting any winning bids accepted by the commission will need to file a permit application with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. The agency reviews those permits fairly quickly, so drilling could start this spring.

Court dismisses appeal to block drilling and fracking under Ohio park and wildlife areas is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

An Ohio commission is arguing its decisions last fall to allow oil and gas drilling under a state park and two wildlife areas are final and cannot be appealed.

Environmental groups challenging the Ohio Oil & Gas Land Management Commission say it failed to follow state law when it approved land parcels for leasing of drilling rights at Salt Fork State Park, Zepernick Wildlife Area and Valley Run Wildlife Area. Among other things, state law says the commission must consider nine factors in reaching its decisions, including environmental impacts, consequences for visitors or users of state lands, public comments or objections, economic issues, and others.

State lawyers have filed a motion to dismiss, claiming the court can’t review the decisions because the statute doesn’t expressly provide for judicial review.

The plaintiffs seeking to overturn the decisions, though, say the commission’s actions affect their rights and amounted to licensing, which can be appealed under the Ohio Revised Code.

“Our courts play a critical role in overseeing agency decisions to make sure agencies do not abuse the discretion and power the law gives them. Our lawsuit asks that the court provide that critical oversight here,” said Megan Hunter, an attorney with Earthjustice, on behalf of the plaintiffs. Those environmental groups are Save Ohio Parks, the Ohio Environmental Council, the Buckeye Environmental Network and Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

“Ohio statute has set up a system where an oil and gas company can hand-select those public lands it wants to lease and ask the commission for permission to move forward with the process for it to do so,” Hunter added. “The law places the commission in a gatekeeping role, making them the ones to determine whether an oil and gas company should be able to lease a particular state park or wildlife area.” 

And while a winning bidder has to apply for permits to drill, Ohioans generally have no right to appeal permitting decisions, she said. “Therefore, the appeal from the nominations is when there is an opportunity for judicial review of the decision to drill under these state lands.”

Commission chair Ryan Richardson admitted that the commission would need to consider the nine statutory criteria in a Nov. 2 affidavit filed in a related case. Yet the commissioners did not discuss all nine factors at the public meeting where they voted to grant the proposals. Nor did they provide any written opinion explaining how they weighed the nine criteria.

“This is not the way justice is supposed to happen in Ohio or anywhere else in a democracy,” said Melinda Zemper, a member of Save Ohio Parks.

A troubled record

The case is further complicated by the commission’s insistence on moving ahead before the Ohio Attorney General’s office resolves an investigation into claims about allegedly falsified comments that favored fracking under state parks and wildlife areas.

“The [commission’s] decision to approve fracking in Ohio parks undermines core principles of good governance, for it occurred despite an ongoing investigation and enormous public pushback,” said Chris Tavenor, associate general counsel and managing director of democracy policy for the Ohio Environmental Council. The decisions also mean Ohio will be a less healthy place to live and have more greenhouse gas emissions, he said. As of 2021, the Energy Information Administration ranked Ohio fifth among states for total carbon dioxide emissions, he noted.

The commission’s failure to let citizens testify at its meetings also undermined the trust of Ohio citizens and denied them their rights to participate in the process, said Loraine McCosker, a co-founder and member of Save Ohio Parks. A separate lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of House Bill 507, which jump-started the challenged decisions, but where citizen groups had no chance to testify against its natural gas provisions after they were added through last-minute amendments in late 2022.

The appeal doesn’t automatically stay the public bidding period for the drilling rights, which began Jan. 3 and runs through Feb. 4. Spokesperson Andy Chow said the commission does not comment on pending litigation. However, he noted, the commission is currently working to schedule its next meeting to decide on the winning bids.

Once companies have secured drilling rights, they would be free to apply for permits to drill wells. Ohio law generally provides up to 21 days for review of those applications, except for urban areas, where a 30-day review period applies. The average review time generally has been running 15 to 18 days, Chow said. So, barring any stay from a court, well construction could start as early as this spring.

Briefing on the question wrapped up last week in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, and the state’s motion to dismiss is now ready for review by Judge Jaiza Page.

Commission claims court can’t review decisions on drilling under Ohio park and wildlife areas is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.