What is a pollutant?
Coalbed natural gas producer explains U.S. Supreme Court push

If you have a water well, and pump water to the surface - are you releasing a pollutant?

If you pump water out of the ground to irrigate your crops - are you releasing a pollutant?

Apparently, the answer is "yes" according to a decision by the Ninth Circuit Court on an issue related to coalbed natural gas development.

In both of these instances, unaltered ground water is being discharged to the surface. In Montana, these activities have been going on for decades without a single thought.

Then, along comes coalbed natural gas production. In order to reduce pressure in the embedded coal seams, producers pump water. In many cases, this is same water that ranchers have used as a source of drinking water for themselves and their livestock for many generations.

Yet, this recent court decision says that the water produced in association with coalbed natural gas production is different and that producers need to get permits, which - incidentally - we apply for anyway. But, because this same water is now pumped to the surface by an energy producer, all of a sudden this water is pollution subject to the stipulations of the Clean Water Act.

We do not agree with this exception because water produced from coalbed natural gas production is simply unaltered ground water moved from one spot to another. Industrial wastewater, on the other hand, has been altered and degraded by some sort of manufacturing process. Certainly, the Clean Water Act was intended to regulate discharge of this second type of water.

This is the reason our company asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review this case. We were simply seeking fair treatment which is a right afforded each and every American under the U.S. Constitution.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court denied our request to review the Ninth Circuit ruling. All of this has no impact on our future operations because getting permits to discharge water is a routine function in our business and we will, of course, continue that practice. We fought this decision on the basis of principle and fair treatment. We found it difficult to understand why our industry would be treated as an exception to what has been a lawful standard practice within Montana for generations.

Coalbed natural gas production has many supporters. For those owning mineral rights, income from royalty payments promises to keep the family farm "in the family." For others not directly involved in development, the positive impacts are evident. Look across Montana's southern border to Wyoming where the state recently reported a budget SURPLUS of $1.06 billion primarily from oil, natural gas and mineral income.

Certainly, care is required in developing coalbed natural gas. All industries have an impact on the land and producers and regulators need to monitor operations very closely. Coalbed natural gas development can co-exist with a healthy environment. Recently completed environmental studies in Montana - which consumed nearly seven years - clearly demonstrate the point. As you evaluate coalbed natural gas development, stick to science and facts. Please, don't jump to conclusions based on speculation, emotion and scientifically unsupportable statements.

Mike Caskey
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
Fidelity Exploration & Production Company