Kansas Oil & Gas Information

The Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) regulates the oil and gas industry in the state, along with the other more traditional responsibilities like motor carriers, telecom issues and utility rates.  Many don't realize how much information is available on the web concerning oil and gas wells in the state.

For one, all the Intents to Drill oil and/or gas wells are posted and searchable here - Kansas Intents to Drill.  At least for the past year.  The Intent to Drill form has much information about the proposed well - including who are involved, what kind of a well it is, the intended pay zone information, whether it is a vertical or horizontal well, location, and much, much more.  These are pdf files.  The site also has monthly plugging reports on all plugged oil and gas wells and a lot of other information.

What does not seem to be available are the well completion reports showing how the well was completed - pipe used, cementing regimes, mudding data, etc., etc.  While the intents are useful in tracking new wells likely to be drilled, and the plugging reports are useful for finding out what wells were plugged, it is the completion reports that are so valuable for assessing if the wells are being completed correctly.  This is likely just an oversight by the KCC (cough, cough) that I'm sure will be remedied soon.

And the Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) also has oil and gas industry information, including maps of all the oil and gas producing zones in the state, annual production reports, and much much more.  Use this link for the KGS oil and gas pages.  If you can't find something after visiting these two pages, call the agency.

Water Rights Conservation Program - Kansas

Kansas had a water rights conservation program (WRCP) that ended December 31, 2009 due to budget cutbacks.  It was a jointly conceived and developed program that allowed valid water right holders to set their water right (use) aside for a number of years and not become subject to abandonment for non-use.  And the best part, it was a free program for the water right owners.

When the budget crisis hit in 2008, the state agencies began jettisoning all non-core programs (not required by statute) and the WRCP was one of these.  It was developed and operated out of the goodness of the state agency's heart.  This program's demise was lamented by many because it was fairly well used - with almost 1,000 water rights enrolled - some of those having been idle for as many as 15-20 years.

With a lot of work and convincing, we were able to get the 2011 Legislature to statutorily embody this program, and require a $300.00 filing fee to cover all the state's administrative program costs.   I'm happy to announce that the program starts back up again July 1, 2011, and I've already had my first applicant asking to file - even though the application forms aren't even available yet.

There were a few other changes as well, like limiting the enrollment time to 2, 10-year enrollments with a maximum of 2 years between each enrollment.  All in all, the new program is better for all concerned and should run smoothly - completely fee funded.  I'll try and keep tabs on enrollment and cover this program again later.  It's a good thing when water rights in overappropriated areas can be set aside for conservation rather than be used for fear of being abandoned and forfeited.

What's With Kansas & It's Fish?

In the Late Cretaceous Period - about 87-75 million years ago - Kansas was under water.  Yes covered by a shallow sea of saltwater.  It's only been in the last 65 million years or so that the Rocky Mountain uplift elevated us above sea level.  This event also elevated all the sea bottom sediments (shales and chalks) that contained a wealth of marine fossils.  One of these was the unique Fish-within-a-fish fossil discovered by paleontologist George Sternberg in Gove County, Kansas in 1952.

The fossil is a nearly 14-foot Xiphactinus audax specimen that just happens to have a 6-foot Gillicus arcuatus in its stomach - also very nicely preserved.  See more from the Sternberg Museum of Natural History.  The Smoky Hill Chalk is the upper member of the Niobrara Chalk Formation, and has yielded many significant fossils - like the largest yet discovered Xiphactinus audax measuring in at 17 feet long.  It was discovered in 1996 by Mike Everhart.  

So, while Kansas doesn't have the world's wealth of water today, there was a time.... 

Will It Be Water Or Economy in Kansas?

An interesting set of dynamics is underway in Kansas over a possible showdown between economic stimulation and water conservation.  When you think about it, it has always been a constant tug of war between these two philosophies.  How many government decisions are made to spur the economy which have had negative water conservation implications?  And how many water conservation decisions have had negative economic implications?  I have said many times, until we can design and implement government policy that addresses BOTH the reduction of water use AND the increase of economic productivity, we're not addressing the bigger issue.  I've blogged on this before, but I digress.

Now to the point at hand.  Kansas' former Agriculture Secretary, who in that position was intensly interested and invested in water, water rights and water use efficiency, is now our new Governor who has campaigned on the almost singular platform of economic stimulation - first and foremost.  Not a word in his campaign about water.  It makes many of us wonder where the state's water conservation ethic will go now. 

Maybe the first test will be the Governor's reaction to the state's most aggressive water conservation program yet - the Water Transition Assistance Program (WTAP) - a program that will sunset after this year - 2011.  Pilot WTAP has committed about $1.5 million per year for the past 5 years to retire water rights and transition irrigated acres to dry land production, and it must be re-enacted to continue.  Of course, everyone knows that ag production drops as this water is conserved by the retirement of the water rights.  Therein lies the dilemma.

I tried three times during the campaign (through his Twitter account) to ask him about the "water plank" of his platform, but never got any response.  I guess I'll never know if he ignored me or if there was a disconnect between him and whomever he had running his Twitter account.  Anyway, I guess we'll see soon enough, because water is getting no less important in Kansas, and the Governor will have to weigh in soon.  If I chose to lay a bet, I'd be betting on economic development over water conservation, but....

Kansas State Water Plan Fund

The Kansas state water plan fund is an annual pot of money used exclusively for water projects in the state endorsed by the state water plan.  It is roughly $20 million per year derived from 10 sources: 1) a state general fund transfer; 2) an economic development fund transfer; 3) municipal water fees; 4) industrial water fees; 5) stockwater fees; 6) pesticide registration fees; 7) fertilizer registration fees; 8) pollution fines and penaties; 9) clean drinking water fee fund transfer; and 10) sand royaly receipts. It has been this way virtually since its inception in 1989 with only a few, minor tweaks.

The optimist says that $20 million a year for water projects is pretty good.  The pessimist says that $20 million of 1989 dollars is only $10 million of 2010 dollars, so water resource funding in Kansas is losing ground. I guess I'm neither an optimist nor pessimist (or perhaps more accurately - both) because $20 million 1989 dollars was not enough and it's getting less and less each year.  Kansas has this year a $13.7 billion budget.  ALL natural resources spending combined is but .5% of that budget. I'm sorry, but it's almost embarassing in light of the almost bombastic rhetoric water gets each and every year in this drier than average state. When the funding starts to flow from the verbiage, I'll become an optimist.

OK, let's put up the soapbox and start thinking about other interesting, but more positive, topics.

New Conservation Use Type

Last Legislative session the idea of a new type of Kansas water use - “conservation” – was floated as an alternative to the elimination of the Water Rights Conservation Program (WRCP). It stalled in a Senate committee when the chair did not see enough consensus. Kansas Ag Secretary Svaty has since indicated his continued interest in the idea, and there are indications it may be considered for interim Legislative study.

The essence of the program is that anyone wanting to conserve their water right by not using it would change the right from its current use type (irrigation, M&I etc.) to the new “conservation” beneficial use type created by the Legislature. The change would be permanent until an application is filed again to change it to another use type. As left last year, any water right in the state would be eligible and there would be no time limit a water right could exist as a conservation use water right.

While seemingly simple, this idea has some challenges. Some wanted only areas closed to new appropriations to have this option – believing that participation in non-closed areas could prevent new water right applications from being approved - thus underutilizing the state's water resources. Others felt the future change process from conservation could subject the water right to new (as-of-yet-developed) criteria - in other words, less assurance of what the water right will become when changed to some other use type in the future. Still others objected to the permanent nature of the change and felt there should be a time limit set. 

The Ag department had last session addressed the first of these issues with the promise of a regulation that would basically allow its division of water resources to let term permits for new uses that did not exceed the extent of water existing as conservation rights - and only for as long as the conservation rights existed.  This construct basically crafted a state brokerage in this regard.  While a creative fix, and close to being workable, it was offered very late in the process and never got enough time to gel. 

      

It is my opinion that the largest issue is that of the fundamental change in the water right when initially changed to a conservation use type. I can't help but think there will be hoops to jump through in changing it back to some other use type, and those hoops will benefit the state more so than the water right holder.  If we discuss this issue again in Kansas, my focus will be on this issue - not so much to be an opponent, but to insure that the process is clearly stated so that the water right owner understands what will have to be done, and what he or she will end up having, when the time comes.

Kansas' Largest Earthquake

Just read that central Oklahoma (where I lived before moving to Kansas) had another small earthquake this morning - 3.7 in the Jones, OK area.  In reviewing the technical info on this quake from a USGS site, I traveled over to the Kansas site out of curiosity (Kansas Earthquake Info) and looked at the largest quake (of record) to hit Kansas - a 5.1 quake that struck the Riley County Area (Manhattan, KS) on April 24, 1867.  This quake is noted here because its USGS record has 3 references to water as follows:

This earthquake inflicted several minor injuries, cracked walls, and loosened stones from buildings. At Manhattan, a 0.6-meter wave was observed moving south to north on the Kansas River. Chimneys were downed in Louisville (Pottawatomie County) and Leavenworth. One side of a large building that houses a newspaper office was knocked down at Paola, south of Kansas City, in Miami County. East of Manhattan, the earth opened and ejected much water on a farm about 5 kilometers south of Wamego.  Additional minor damage occurred in Iowa at Dubuque (plaster fell); in Kansas at Junction City (a well being dug was destroyed),..

 

It's comforting to know that there has been little earthquake activity in Kansas since 1990 - I count only 13 or so.  (Map from the same USGS site linked above).  Now tornadoes - quite a different matter!