Assembly questions CBM ordinance

MAT-SU -- A full audience turned out to speak in favor of the Mat-Su Borough's proposed coal-bed methane ordinance at the first public hearing on the matter Tuesday, but some assembly members were less enthusiastic about the proposed ordinance.

The ordinance, according to Mat-Su Borough staff, would create a two-tier conditional-use permit regulating exploration and development within the borough. The ordinance was developed as a spinoff of the state Department of Natural Resources' process initiated in 2003 to address concerns raised by property owners after a broad area of the Mat-Su was leased by coal-bed methane developer Evergreen Resources Alaska.

"It was made clear by the state throughout [the public hearing process] that the borough would be responsible for developing local ordinances," said Murph O'Brien, the borough's chief of planning.

The borough began developing an ordinance that would address land-use regulations, such as well spacing, setbacks, public notice requirements and similar issues.

O'Brien and borough planner Mark Jaqua said planning staff used comments from the state meetings, as well as sample ordinances and regulations from areas in the Lower 48 where coal-bed methane was being developed, to draft the proposed borough ordinance. Once drafted and complete, the ordinance was sent out for public comment, and community councils and residents were given an opportunity to send in written comments.

O'Brien said 38 written comments were received, 29 of which were in favor of the ordinance. When the planning commission held a public hearing Aug. 23, 17 people spoke, all in favor of the ordinance.

At the Tuesday assembly meeting, 21 people spoke about the ordinance, 20 of whom were in favor of it. Some wanted tighter restrictions on setbacks, greater well-spacing requirements and noise-level restrictions, while others encouraged the borough to pass the ordinance -- quickly.

"The borough must assert its authority; if you don't assert it in land use, the state may not assert its authority, and may assert its authority in ways you do not like," Lazy Mountain resident and U.S. Senate Green Party candidate Jim Sykes told the assembly.

Sykes also asked his assembly representative, Bruce Bush, to withdraw from voting on the ordinance, stating he had witnessed "noticeable siding with Evergreen" when Bush spoke at community council meetings about coal-bed methane development.

"I think I've been very open-minded on this whole process from the very beginning," Bush retorted. A follow-up question to Sykes from Assembly Member Jim Colver, asking what conflict Sykes had perceived, was ruled out of order by Tim Anderson, the borough mayor.

One audience member, Butte resident Lucille Frey, cautioned the assembly not to move on the ordinance before the state's development standards were released.

"You all are beating a dead horse with this ordinance," Frey said. "You should wait 'til the state has its legislation passed because it might take care of this ordinance -- you're just pushing it here."

Frey cited steady property values, lower taxes, increased jobs and a surging economy in areas of Colorado where coal-bed methane is being developed, and told assembly members to consider carefully what they appeared to be ready to throw away.

While assembly members didn't debate the matter Tuesday, they were able to ask questions of both borough staff and audience members, and several used the opportunity to point out what they saw as potential flaws in the proposed ordinance.

Bush questioned why borough staff held only one public hearing on the ordinance before it reached the assembly -- and why that public hearing was held Aug. 23.

"Due to the fact that this is a very touchy subject, and because a lot of people are interested … do you think that was adequate time to push that through?" Bush asked. "You scheduled this right in the busiest time of the year."

O'Brien said the public hearing was not the only opportunity the public has had to weigh in on the ordinance. A public notice process prior to that hearing had extended for nearly 80 days, he said.

Assembly Member Talis Colberg asked if there were any scientific reasons behind the two-wells-per-640-acre spacing requirement included in the document. Jaqua said the numbers were reached after borough staff looked at a range of spacing requirements used in the Lower 48, and were meant to address what may be appropriate in a residential area, not necessarily the best method for extracting coal-bed methane from underground coal seams.

"It seems to me that the numbers you picked, if these numbers are accurate, it makes it pretty impossible to develop," Colberg said, and asked if there was any place currently being developed by coal-bed methane producers where the wells were spaced 360 acres apart.

Jaqua said there was not, but said well density varies greatly, and the ordinance was aimed at allowing developers, when appropriate, to apply for a variance to increase well density or address other issues.

"You're compelling all developers to immediately go through the variance procedure, right from the get-go," Colberg said. "Is the ordinance being designed to make this actually happen anywhere and try and set it back from where people live, or is it simply saying 'We're going to make this impossible to develop anywhere, even in the unpopulated areas?'"

Jaqua said without knowing what type of well spacing would be appropriate for the Mat-Su, staff had to pick a number to start out with. Modification, he said, can take place later.

Assembly Member Bill Allen later asked whether planning staff had specifically asked Evergreen representatives to comment on well density. O'Brien said the borough had received several pages of comments from them, but none of the comments specifically addressed density, and borough staff never asked their opinion about density.

Colberg asked if scientific reasoning was used when the regulation stipulating a quarter-mile setback from a well or compressor station was written. Jaqua said that regulation stemmed more from public concern than from scientific data. He added that the setback requirement could be waived by a property owner, if he or she wereamenable to having a well or compressor station closer. Otherwise, he said, changes can be made through a variance procedure.

Colberg said he was concerned that wells could be the same distance from a home as a compressor station, a larger facility some say would generate much more noise than a well-drilling site.

"Why wasn't the distinction made that setbacks for wells are one thing, and setbacks for a compressor station are another?" Colberg asked.

"We were not attempting to be proscriptive," Jaqua said. "We were not trying to address every type of development."

Other assembly members expressed concerns about the borough's ability to enforce the ordinance, to which O'Brien responded that borough staff may be growing if coal-bed methane production becomes a reality in the borough -- an in-field compliance officer would be hired, along with someone at the borough offices who could process permits and paperwork. The two positions, along with one added vehicle, would cost about $250,000 per year, O'Brien said.

Assembly members tackled the issue again at Thursday's special meeting about the ordinance. Read Sunday's edition to find out how the borough assembly plans to address the ordinance. The ordinance may be reviewed online at the borough's Web site, www.co.mat-su.ak.us, by clicking on the "CBM resources" link.

Contact Rindi White at rindi.white@frontiersman.com.