Members of the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee debated a bill Wednesday that would increase the rights of surface owners in cases of split estate.

Split estate occurs when the surface of the land and the minerals underneath are owned by different parties.

The discussion of House Bill 219 drew a standing-room only crowd — but members of the committee were called to the floor of the House before the bill could be put to a vote. It will be considered again Friday.

It's one of the most contentious issues in the extraction of oil and gas — one that flared recently in Santa Fe County before an energy company backed off plans to drill in the Galisteo Basin.

Information about the ownership of mineral rights can be hard to find. Surface rights owners often don't learn until just before production starts that someone else has the right to drill on their property.

The legislation would require oil-and-gas producers to notify surface owners 30 days before signing a lease with mineral-rights owners. It would also require that surface owners be told the identity of the mineral owner and be given time to try to negotiate their own lease or purchase of the rights under their property.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, said he introduced the bill in response to the oil-and-gas industry's recent interest in Santa Fe County and other parts of Northern New Mexico.

"I saw the issues arising especially in Mora and Rio Arriba counties, where people were caught completely unaware," Egolf said.

Opponents of the bill argued that information about mineral ownership is readily available to those who take the time to look. But, they said, because producers often pay landmen thousands of dollars to do the research, they shouldn't be forced to give that information away free of charge.

"I have a problem with that," said Rep. Donald E. Bratton R-Hobbs. "We are taking information that is proprietary and paid for and we are giving it to surface owners for free."

Rep. Benjamin H. Rodefer, D-Corrales, questioned how such information could be both easy to come by and expensive to obtain.

"If you are making the argument that this information is readily available, then why is it a problem to release it?" Rodefer asked. "You can't have it both ways."

More than a dozen people testified on each side of the issue.

Supporters included representatives from the Sierra Club, the Oil and Gas Accountability Project, Santa Fe County, The Environmental Law Center and several private citizens including surface owners and ranchers.

Opponents included representatives from Conoco Philips, Chevron, the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association and the State Land Office. Several people who make their living researching mineral-rights ownership also spoke in opposition to the bill.

Independent Petroleum Association President Karin Foster said over-regulation is driving the lucrative oil-and-gas industry out of New Mexico.

Tecton Energy sparked local resistance to oil-and-gas activity in 2007 when it announced plans to drill for oil in the Galisteo Basin. Tecton's plans were thwarted by moratoriums on drilling at both the state and county levels.

In October, just before the county passed a regulatory ordinance that proponents hailed as the toughest in the nation, the company listed its Santa Fe County leases for sale.

Tecton spokesman John Cordova confirmed Wednesday that the company "will not be going forward" with its plan to drill in the Galisteo Basin.

Discussion of the HB219 in the Capitol's Room 315 is set to resume at 8:30 a.m. Friday.

Contact Phaedra Haywood at 986-3068 or phaywood@sfnewmexican.com.