Colo. Rev. Stat. » Title 34
Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-60-101 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Oil and Gas Conservation Act".

Source: L. 51: p. 662, § 16. CSA: C. 118, § 68(15). CRS 53: § 100-6-19. C.R.S. 1963: § 100-6-19.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Bowen/Edwards Assocs., Inc., 830 P.2d 1045 (Colo. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Bowen/Edwards Assocs., Inc., 830 P.2d 1045 (Colo. 1992). · cites it 2× “entity engaged in oil and gas development and operations in La Plata County, has standing to challenge the validity of the county’s land-use regulations pertaining to oil and gas activities within the county without first filing a permit-application with the county and obtaining…”
Voss v. Lundvall Bros., Inc., 830 P.2d 1061 (Colo. 1992). · cites it 3× “The questions in this case are whether the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, §§ 34-60-101 to -126, 14 C.R.S. (1984 & 1991 Supp.”
Garman v. Conoco, Inc., 886 P.2d 652 (Colo. 1994). · cites it 2× “See § 34-60-101 to -126, 14 C.R.S. (1984 & 1994 Supp.”
Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners v. Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Comm'n, 81 P.3d 1119 (Colo. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs brought this action challenging the validity of an amendment to COGCC Rule 303(a), promulgated under COGCC's rulemaking authority pursuant to the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, § 34-60-101, et seq., C.R.S.2002 (OGCA). The amended rule, dealing with permits to drill for…”
Gerrity Oil & Gas Corp. v. Magness, 946 P.2d 913 (Colo. 1997). “The court of appeals also held that the trial court erred in construing Magness’s trespass claim as requiring a showing that Gerrity acted unreasonably in conducting its operations.”
Grant Bros. Ranch, LLC v. Antero Resources Piceance Corp, 2016 COA 178 (Colo. Ct. App. 2016). “Concluding that Grant Brothers was required and failed to exhaust its administrative remedies available under the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, §§ 34-60-101 to -130, C.R.S. 2016 (the Act), the district court held-that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action and…”
Oborne v. Cnty. Com'rs of Douglas Cty., 764 P.2d 397 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “This appeal by the Board of County Commissioners of Douglas County (Board) from the judgment of the district court reversing the Board’s denial of plaintiffs’ application for a permit to drill an exploratory oil well requires us to consider the extent to which the Oil and Gas…”
Town of Frederick v. North Am. Resources Co., 60 P.3d 758 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002). “The state’s interest in oil and gas development and operations is expressed in the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, § 34-60-101, et seq., C.R.S.2001, whose declared purposes include promoting the development, production, and utilization of oil and gas resources in the state.”
Williams Nat. Gas Co. v. Mesa Operating Ltd. P'ship, 778 P.2d 309 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989). “Mesa Operating Limited Partnership (Mesa) and the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (commission) appeal the trial court judgment reversing the commission’s order which denied Williams Natural Gas Company (Williams) the opportunity to participate in a gas well spacing hearing…”
Superior Oil Co. v. W. Slope Gas Co., 549 F. Supp. 463 (D. Colo. 1982). “1973 § 34-60-101 et seq. In our view, it is more within the province of that Commission to speak to Colorado’s natural gas policy in the absence of legislation.”
Amoco Prod. Co. v. Thunderhead Investments, Inc., 235 F. Supp. 2d 1163 (D. Colo. 2002). “Findings of Fact Colorado Revised Statute § 34-60-101, et seq. (2001), the “Oil and Gas Conservation Act,” established the COGCC.”
Colorado Mining Ass'n v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 170 P.3d 749 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007). “The implied preemption jurisprudence arising from the Oil and Gas Conservation Act, § 34-60-101, et seq., provides guidance to the present situation.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.