HonorableOlin Culberson,ChaiI?iWn RailroadCowission of Thxas Austin,Texas
Dear Sirs OpinionMO..O-7096 Ret Whether dasingheadgas, v&%oh has not been processed~or+t thfough a gasolineplant for thb removal off bdrooarbons,mn be legallyutilized for the manufactureof cationblack where the recoveryis less than 5 pounds of carbonblack to each 1,000 cubic feet of cashingheadgase
Your letterof Februaryll,,1946, reads as follows:
"The RailroadCommissionof Texas has had a requiestto grant authorityto utilizecasingheadgas, which has not been processedor put througha gaso- line plant for the removalof hydrocarbons,in a channel-blackplantmaking carbonblack.
"This oasinghsadgas i8 in the categoryof sweet gas. The ohannelaslrbon black plant will not reoovarfive pounds per thousandcubic feet.
"QUESTIOHI If casingheadgas,which is classifiedas sweat gas, does not gg,$hrougha.gasolineplant for the extraotionof hydrooarbxxs,can the RailroadConnnissionauthorizeit to be burned for aarbon-blackwhere the recoveryis leas than the five pounts par ouMo feet of gas.*
Your questionis no doubt propoundedin the light of Se&ion 3 of Article 6006,Vernon'sAnnotatedCivil Statutes,particularlysubsection(i) thereofwhioh provide8:
Vhs produotion,transportation, or use of naturalgas in suchmanner, in auoh amount,or under such oonditionsik to constitutemste is hereby de- olaredto be unlawfuland is prohiMted, The tern "waste"among other things shall specificallyinclude: _ . " . . .
"'(I) The UQO of naturalgas for the manufactureof carbonblack without first.havingextractedthe naturalgasolinecontentfrom such gas, sxospt where it is utilizedin a plant produoingan averagerecoveryof 'notless than five (5) poundsof carbonblack 'coeach one thousand(1,000)cubic -. .-. - -,_
Hon. Olin Culbsrson,Page 2 (o-7095)
feet of gas it shall not ,benecessaryto first extractthe naturalgasoline contentfrom such gas. ". . .*
Prior to its amendmentby the 47th Legislature(Acts 1941, pags 117, chapter91) Subsection(i) read as follows:
"(i) The uss of naturalgas for the manufactureof oarbonbla& without first havingextxaotedthsnatural gasolineoontentfrom such gas."
In opinionNo. O-2199,dated April 25, 1940,addressedto I&. John E. Taylor,Chief Supervisor,Oil and Gas Division,RailroadCamnissionof Texas, this Dspartmsntheld, among other things,that casingheadgrsmay be used in the manufaotursof oarbonblack "withoutthe impositionof the linit- ationsin subsection(i) of 8sOtiOn3 of.Artiole~6008."This opinionwas writtenin the light of Subseotion(i) as it read prior to the 1941 wend- ment, but the conolusionappliesto presentSubseotion(i) with equal rele- vancy. In additionto and apart from thereasons advanoedin OpinionNo. O-2199,ws are of the opinionthat its oonolusionis oompslladbythe follow- ing additionalstatutes.
Article 6008, Section3, Subsection(g) provides:
*(g) The escapeinto the open air, from a well producingboth oil and gas, of natural gas in exosss of the snaount vhioh is necessaryin the efficient drillingor operationof the well." (One of snrnneratedspecificdefinitions of Yvaste.")
&ticle 6014, Section (a) providsss
"The production,storageor transportationofcrude petrolem oil or of nat- ural gas in such manner, in such amount,or under such conditionsas to constitutewaste is hereby dealaredto be unlawfuland is prohibited. The term "noste"smong otherthings shall speoifioallyincludes
"(a) The operationof any oil well or walls with an ineffioientgas-oil ,ration, and the Commissionis hereby given authorityto fix and dstermineby order such ratio)providedthatthe utilizationfor manufactureof natural gasolineof gas producedfrom an oilwsll wit&n the permittedgas-oil ration shall not be includedwithinthe definitionof waste."
The foregoingstatutesspecificallyregulatethe productionof cashinghead gas and are controllingupon matters of statutorywaste. "Casingheadgas is nothingother than gas from an oilwell)" Mussellarm v. KagnoliaPetroleumCo., 107 Okla. 183, 231 Pac. 526* "There