Posts Tagged ‘Pennsylvania Supreme Court’

By Patrick Sweet (Staff Writer)
Published: June 15, 2010

NOXEN – Chief Oil and Gas may begin construction on a natural gas well just a few miles north of the border between Luzerne and Wyoming counties as soon as the second week of July.

Off Route 29 in Noxen, short stakes mark the future location of the drilling pad on Robert Longmore’s 97-acre farm. The state Department of Environmental Protection is currently reviewing the Texas-based gas company’s permit to place and operate a well it filed May 11.

The farm is near properties that are part of the Noxen Area Gas Group, a body of roughly 150 families with a combined 8,500 acres which is in the midst of negotiating a lease with Houston, Texas-based Carrizo Oil and Gas.

Just down the road from Longmore, Noxen group organizer Joel Field verified that the group is in the final stages of negotiation with Carrizo. Field and co-organizer Harry Traver declined further comment due to the sensitivity of the negotiations.

“Until things are settled down, they’d rather not give any statements,” Harry Traver’s wife, Dawn Traver, said Monday.

Longmore, 56, has owned the farm since 1998 and signed a lease with Chief roughly four and a half years ago. The landmen who approached Longmore about the deal, he said, made the three-page lease giving his family $25 per acre with the minimum 12.5 percent royalty sound like a good deal.

“We were kind of taken advantage of four and a half years ago,” Longmore said. “I know people getting $6,000 an acre.”

The lease had almost no provisions protecting Longmore’s farm. At the time, the landmen made it seem unlikely that drilling would ever commence during the terms of his lease, which ends May 15, 2011.

Chief Oil and Gas media contact Ben McCue attempted to reach operations employees for comment Monday afternoon but they were unavailable by press time.

Since Longmore signed, though, he said his experience with the company has been much more positive.

Earlier this year, the Longmores were given the opportunity to amend the lease.

“They proposed some amendments to the lease,” Longmore said, “so we countered with some amendments with some environmental stuff.”

Chief offered to reopen the terms of the lease in order to add protections for the company in anticipation of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision that could have invalidated thousands of gas leases where gas companies were deducting production costs from the state minimum royalty.

The opinion on the case was an interpretation of the Pennsylvania’s Minimum Royalty Act which establishes the 12.5 percent royalty requirement for all oil or natural gas recovered from a well but doesn’t stipulate when to calculate the royalty.

The court ultimately decided in favor of the gas companies roughly a week after the Longmores and Chief finalized the revised lease.

The Longmores added amendments that protected ground and surface water, along with the 0.25-mile stretch of Bowmans Creek that runs through the property.

Longmore’s son, Josh Longmore, manages the Luzerne County Conservation District and helped his father amend the lease.

“Unfortunately, they signed a very basic lease that didn’t have some of the protections that the newer leases have,” Josh Longmore said. “Our biggest goal, our biggest hope is that the property maintains its natural beauty, its agricultural purpose.”

The younger Longmore doesn’t have any stake in his parents’ farm, but felt that it was necessary to help. He and his father combed through leases that they found online and pulled out the clauses that fit their needs.

“There was like three or four different categories of amendments,” Longmore said.

Chief accepted 90 percent of their roughly 20 amendments, Longmore said.

The company did draw the line on an amendment that would have prohibited the company from disposing cuttings – the rock equivalent to sawdust – on the pad. The company argued it would be cost-prohibitive to haul it off-site, Longmore said.

“I really got the impression that they weren’t hiding anything from us,” Longmore said. “They were willing to answer every question we had.”

psweet@citizensvoice.com 570-821-2112

Copyright: The Citizens Voice

By Joe McDonald (Staff Writer)
Published: June 10, 2010

In a ruling with potentially far-reaching consequences in Pennsylvania’s lucrative and burgeoning natural gas industry, a federal judge in Scranton on Wednesday ruled a Susquehanna County landowner can sue Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. on the grounds it fraudulently misled him into a signing a lease at a lowball rate.

The suit, filed by John Kropa, is one of several cases across the state filed by landowners who claim natural gas drilling companies fraudulently induced them to sign leases that locked them into $25-an-acre rates. In a modern-day version of the California gold rush, companies have been rushing to make deals with landowners across Pennsylvania so they can tap into natural gas from the Marcellus Shale, a geological formation that runs under most of the state.

U.S. District Court Judge James M. Munley, in an eight-page memorandum and order, noted Cabot’s agents told Mr. Kropa that the company “would never pay more than $25 per acre for the lease,” yet his “neighbors were apparently paid more than $25 an acre for leases on their property.”

“They relied on this statement and signed the lease, only to discover later that these statements were false and that others had signed far more lucrative deals” with Cabot, Judge Munley said.

Cabot’s representatives also warned that if Mr. Kropa did not sign a lease, then Cabot would take it anyway by negotiating leases with neighbors and “capture the gas,” leaving Mr. Kropa “without a lease or gas on their land,” the memorandum stated.

Mr. Kropa signed an oil and gas lease with the West Virginia company in 2006 and received a $1,275 payment for allowing the company to explore his 51-acre spread in Brooklyn Twp.

Mr. Kropa’s claims are not unique, especially for many of the leases signed before 2008, said attorney Stephen Saunders, a Scranton energy attorney.

“I think the fraud type claims will most likely be significant in cases where individual plaintiffs own larger tracts of land, say more than 100 acres, or situations where small contiguous landowners control significant areas in the aggregate hundreds of acres or more and are litigating as a group,” Mr. Saunders said.

If Mr. Kropa is successful in proving he was the victim of fraud, he could theoretically renegotiate a new lease, assuming the company still wants the gas under his land.

Judge Munley’s court order also dealt with another volatile issue in the gas drilling business: royalty payments. Mr. Kropa along with other landowers had claimed they were shortchanged by the drilling companies because they were deducing expenses from the royalties.

Judge Munley said that issue had been dealt with by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which ruled the royalty agreement was valid under Pennsylvania law.

Contact the writer: jmcdonald@timesshamrock.com

View this article here.

Copyright:  The Scranton Times-Tribune

DAN NEPHIN Associated Press Writer

PITTSBURGH — A lawyer for a suburban Pittsburgh municipality trying to keep gas wells out of a residential neighborhood told the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday that towns must be allowed to regulate the location of drills.

The high court’s ruling on whether Oakmont, home to the famous golf course of the same name, can restrict the location of wells will have big implications across Pennsylvania, a state where landowners big and small are trying to cash in on the vast stores of valuable natural gas below.

“This is way beyond Oakmont. This applies to every municipality in the state,” said borough attorney Clifford Levine. If a lower court ruling is allowed to stand, municipalities could become virtually powerless to control the growing number of gas and oil wells that are being drilled throughout the state.

Propelled by high natural gas prices, companies are scouring for drilling opportunities throughout the region.

Geologists and exploration companies, for example, recently developed a way to extract gas from one large reservoir located some 6,000 to 8,000 feet underground. Though drilling into that large pool has only just begun, prospectors are buying up drilling rights, leading to tensions among neighbors and questions about who can drill where.

In Oakmont, Huntley & Huntley Inc. wants to drill a gas well in a residential subdivision on two adjoining lots that total 10 acres. The families that own the lots would be allotted one-quarter of the gas at no charge and the rest would be sold. The families would share in the profit.

Opponents, mostly neighbors, objected on grounds that the well violated local zoning laws and that the drilling would create noise and jeopardize public safety. The borough council agreed and rejected the company’s proposal.

In July 2007, a state appeals court overturned the decision, saying state law pre-empted municipalities from regulating well locations.

The court relied on its interpretation of a 1992 amendment to the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Act, but that amendment was intended to address only operational issues, Levine argued.

Copyright: Times Leader