Governmental Regulation of Oil Production
- Northcutt Ely (Member of Stabilization Committee, Petroleum Division, A.I.M.E)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- Transactions of the AIME
- Publication Date
- December 1937
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 155 - 162
- 1937. Original copyright American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. Copyright has expired.
- 5.3.4 Integration of geomechanics in models, 1.6 Drilling Operations
- 1 in the last 30 days
- 183 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
The subject of this paper implies three questions: whether regulation isnecessary; if so, what sort of regulation is wise; and, finally, by whatgovernment the power to regulate is to be exercised.
In the year 1937 emphasis falls on the third of those questions.
This contrasts with the situation prevailing a dozen years ago, when thequestion was whether regulation was necessary at all; and with the situation afew months ago, when the third question seemed answered by the Supreme Courtdecisions on the National Recovery Act, Agricultural Adjustment Act and GuffeyCoal Control Act, and by the ratification of the Interstate Oil Compact. Itthen appeared settled that the State ,and not the Federal Government possessedthe regulatory powers and, granting that conservation measures are a recognizednecessity, the problem seemed to be to develop the wisest kind of regulationthat the Constitution would permit .. Today, by virtue of developments duringthe first months of 1937, the oil industry is faced again by the question ofwhether the Federal Government is to have power to control its operations,along with those of the other basic industries.
Developments in Governmental Control
There have been three recent developments. The dominating one is thePresident's? proposal that he be authorized to increase the size of the SupremeCourt to 15 members. The implications of that plan ought to be perfectly plainto the oil industry. This suggestion is made in lieu of offering an amendmentto the Constitution, to reverse the Supreme Court decisions mentioned. In thosedecisions the Court held that production does not constitute commerce, andhence that the Federal power to regulate interstate commerce does not extend tothe regulation of production.' These holdings were contrary to the Government'scontention that the stream of commerce begins in the factory and ends with theconsumer and may be regulated at any point from beginning to end.
|File Size||724 KB||Number of Pages||8|