Archive for June, 2008

A Very Good Suggestion Received Regarding Our County Commissioners Meetings

Saturday, June 28th, 2008

Recently, Thompson suggested that it would be good if someone would post a copy of the minutes of the Commissioners’ Meetings. 

Two items about this great idea which need to be noted. 

The first is that the minutes are available for the previous meeting - after- they are approved.  The reason for that is simple.  If there is an error, they shouldn’t be made public until they have been corrected and approved by the Commissioners.  I have found this to be the way business is conducted in various local government meetings attended over the years.  If a copy is provided before the meeting, it is assumed to be a draft, rather than the approved version.  So, in the end, a copy of the official minutes posted on this blog would be roughly two weeks or so after the meeting.  If that is of interest to the readers, then the second item needs to be addressed.

The second item is the mechanics of how to get the approved minutes from the Commissioners’ meeting converted to electronic form and ultimately posted here.  First, someone would have to pick up a copy and then, for the somewhat technically minded, they would need to be scanned in and saved as a PDF and posted as a link here. 

Again, this writer would look forward to being able to post these minutes for the general public to read.  Even if they are a couple of weeks old they would offer insight as to how our Commissioners work and ultimately represent us.

Of course, if someone, or more than one, wanted to actually cover the meetings on a non-partisan basis….   In addition to having the minutes from the previous meeting, this would help make the Commissioners’ actions a little more transparent and make the information a lot more relevant.

All right.  Volunteers?

DEP Press Release 6-13-2008

Friday, June 20th, 2008

Here it is:

http://www.ahs.dep.state.pa.us/newsreleases/default.asp?ID=5107&varQueryType=Detail

 It has been reported that landmen for several companies have curtailed their activity in Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wyoming Counties.  Confirmation please.

Also, has there been any slowdown in Susquehanna County as a result of the above press release?

Gas Muse 6-19-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 10

Thursday, June 19th, 2008

It is becoming more and more evident that there are two groups of people who own land and who haven’t signed a mineral rights- those who want to sign and get a check as soon as possible and those who don’t. 

Those who remain on the fence about it are dwindling in number literally by the hour.   Over the past few months, the landmen running around have subjected the unsigned owners to sign using every tactic they could think of to get them - and for the worst terms possible to them. 

At the end of the day, those who do not sign a lease may be in a much better position than those who do.  Why?

Let’s be realistic folks, most people won’t have a production well on their property.  Those who do will probably do very well financially (at least by our local standards).  Those who are in a “production unit” (still undefined as I understand it), will make some money, depending on the size of the production unit.  According to various landmen, the production unit may consist of between 40 and 640 acres.  The shape will be determined by the gas company and does not have to include contiguous parcels.  Of course, few if any locally have seen any of this is writing, so it is entirely up to the discretion of the gas company to either include or not include you in a production unit.  If you are not included in a production unit, beware.

Those who have signed and will not have a production well on their property or be included in a production unit may have, according to the terms of their lease, given their permission to use their property for “storage”.  It is entirely possible, and maybe probable, that the properties not used for production may be hosting injection wells.  Or, maybe the “non domestic water” will be used to supply the enormous requirements for fracing fluid.  Many who have signed have given their permission, knowingly or not, to allow this to occur. 

If not injection wells, how about those retention ponds.  I bet they smell wonderful during the hot days of summer.  It may make your local veal farm smell good.  It certainly won’t help the property owner who is down wind to have “peaceful enjoyment” of their property.  You will almost certainly see one or the other.  Why not recycling? 

No one will be trucking this toxic mess to the Meadville area (the closest area currently permited to accept this waste) to be recycled.  Certainly not at $5 or so per gallon or more of diesel fuel.  If water weighs about 8 pounds to the gallon and you have to transport one million gallons, you may be able to get  about 8,000 gallons at most on a tank truck.  Sort of like those tankers who deliver gasoline to your favorite filling station.  Here is the math: 1,000,000 gallons divided by 8,000 gallons equals 125,000 tankers. This is just for fracing of one well, one time.  As I said, no one will be trucking this fluid for recycling.  By the time a plant could be built in this area, it would probably be too late.  Also, who would pay for it?  The drillers you say?  They should, but they probably would demand government funds.  Being optimistic, maybe a few people should look in to building such a facility privately.  Then the municipalities would have a better chance to pass legislation to force recycling.  Of course waiting for the necessary permits from DEP, EPA and God only knows who else, the issue could become moot.  Is it already too late? 

Maybe the waste could be transported by rail.  No wait, the current county commissioners haven’t supported the Railroad Authority any more than the last bunch.  Now it is reported that the land which was to be used as the basis for a transload facility will no longer be available as the Authority cannot get the support of State and Local officials.  Too bad, they had defeat snatched from the jaws of victory.  So, probably no rail solution here. 

As stated in a previous post, the landowner who has leased and finds they have problems after the fact, especially those who signed early on, will have precious little recourse.  Some will get an acknowledgement of their complaint within 60 or so days, others (current leases being circulated) require the lessor (landowner) to submit to arbitration.  No wonder they want to have as many signed up as possible.  Especially if they are properties which will never be drilled on.  This will reduce the company’s potential for a payout in the event of a problem.  NEVER GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL.  If you sign a lease, you have certainly compromised yourself in that regard.  Ask a competent attorney.  Please note the word competent.  There is a difference between an attorney who can help you transfer your home and one who can properly represent you in negotiations such as these gas leases.

Here is something else to chew on.  Did the municipalities who signed a lease negotiate the use of natural gas for their respective commuties?  If not, why not.  Ask your elected official why their attorney (who is supposed to be advising them) didn’t negotiate that item and many others.  Part of the problem is that it is the opinion of this writer that there isn’t an attorney in the area who is competent to properly represent their client in these negotiations.  If they were, they wouldn’t have allowed their clients to sign these leases which are ridiculously slanted in favor of the lessee (gas company).

To those of you who haven’t signed a lease and share the concerns of this writer, good for you.  Whether it is out of not needing the money, concern for the environment, concern for reduced property values or some other valid reason, good for you. 

Maybe it is time for those who have no intentions of signing to organize to protect their properties.  Not just some little group in our fair county, as that will have little if any impact.  From reading publications from other areas, there are others in the Marcellus shale who don’t buy into the whole thing for whatever reason.  Maybe there should be a broad based effort to organize and force our elected officials to do something to protect those who don’t want to “play”. 

Maybe it’s time for Congressman Henry Waxman (D) California to reopen his House Oversight Committee Hearings on the subject. 

Your thoughts?

Gas Muse 6-14-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 9 ~ Back to the Basics

Saturday, June 14th, 2008

For the newer reader of this blog who may not realize the size of the Marcellus Shale in geographic, financial or other pertinent terms, the following is offered:

First, from Geology.com, a map and quick background of the Marcellus Shale

 http://geology.com/articles/marcellus-shale.shtml

Note that the area covered includes portions of Ohio, New York, Maryland, almost all West Virginia and about three quarters of Pennsylvania.  The site indicates that approximately 10% is recoverable at an estimated wellhead value of $1,000,000,000,000.  That’s one trillion dollars.  No wonder they want to lease your land - for as little as possible.

~~~~~~~~~~

Closer to home, “Railroad-RR” has created a Google Map which shows the present location of gas wells as well as the Tennessee  Pipeline in Susquehanna County.  This is updated regularly.  Initally, when you view the map, it appears small and cluttered, but you can zoom in and see the proximity to the various wells as well as dwellings, etc.  Can’t say enough good about Google mapping and the excellent work on this project.THE LINK IS NOW FIXED!! 

 http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&t=h&msa=0&msid=109081933932637779023.00044fb7409fbc47fd65d&ll=41.739297,-75.815449&spn=0.111183,0.243244&z=13

~~~~~~~~~~

Finally, a link to an article from the Towanda Daily and Sunday Review on the meeting the Susquehanna River Basin Commission held on June 12, 2008 approving the construction of gas wells in the twin tier counties (yes, that would include Susquehanna County).  You will note in the article that the amount of fracking fluid was stated to be between 2 million and 9 million gallons per well which is used over a 2 day period typically.  This is certainly an increase from the 800,000 gallons used in the Penn State video from February this year. 

http://www.thedailyreview.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=19770689&BRD=2276&PAG=461&dept_id=465049&rfi=6

Your thoughts?

So, What Have Our County Commissioners, State Senators and State Representatives Been Doing to Earn Their Paychecks?

Friday, June 13th, 2008

Has anyone else noticed that our fine County Commissioners have been conspicuous by their absence?  Oh sure, they show up for their meetings, but they appear to have pretty much disappeared into the woodwork.   Also, their meetings seem to be getting shorter and shorter…. 

Since the gas lease fever hit, you really don’t hear much from our State Senators or State Representatives either. 

This writer feels each of these elected officials needs to weigh in as to their position on the (a) way properties are being leased, (b) how they will address the damage to the infrastructure, (c) how they intend to address the environmental issues, (d) how they intend to address the obvious violations to the Clean and Green program and (e) are they participating in the gas lease “play”. 

These 5 issues are just the tip of the iceberg.  There will be many other questions.  The electorate deserve answers. 

If the readers would like to add to, or correct this by giving examples of how they are currently serving their constituency, please post it here.  Better yet, if we can get our elected officials to respond individually in this forum that could be construed as information directly from the horse’s mouth. 

Gas Muse 6-12-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 8

Thursday, June 12th, 2008

Quite a while ago in this blog, I voiced concern about those with mortgages who signed leases.  Yesterday, an article which appeared on August 25, 2007 in the Forth Worth Star-Telegram was provided to this writer.  The article refers to those who are due to get royalty checks, having problems, because the gas company (Chesapeake in this case) required the mortgageholder to sign a subordination agreement, which in the article, both Countywide and Washington Mutual are dragging their feet on.  For the sake of complete accuracy, you  will note there is a correction at the top of the article.  One bank in the area who had apparently refused to sign a subordination agreement later agreed to do so.

Anyway, here is the article:   Gas Deals Fine Print Can Be Costly.pdf

Wait until the owners of some of these smaller parcels who signed (and have a mortgage) need to refinance.  That will be interesting.

How many landowners had that little bit of critical information, noted above, disclosed to them by their favorite landman?  Precious few if any I will bet.  How about it ElmoT?  Did you disclose that to the landowners you dealt with?  You are worried about bashing landmen?  This isn’t bashing  Pal, it is fact, plain and simple.

~~~~~~~~~~ 

More recently, an op-ed piece in the Scranton Times-Tribune cautions not be allow the gas companies to do what the coal companies did years ago, “Strictly Monitor Shale Drillers”:  

http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=2185&dept_id=418218&newsid=19757397

~~~~~~~~~~ 

Finally, in today’s edition of the Scranton Times-Tribune, a guest editorial from Nathaniel Gillespie, a scientist with Trout Unlimited, Washington, DC, “Marcellus Shale No Gas”:

http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=2185&dept_id=613224&newsid=19767104

It’s good to see there is finally some press about the potential downside to this “play” for everyone, rather than the “How much did you get” discussions which have permeated our existence for the past months.  It isn’t all about the money folks.  The sooner we all realize this, the better chance we have of not completely ruining our environment.  Remember, at the end of the day, the greatest resource we have here isn’t Bluestone, Timber or Natural Gas, it’s our drinking water.

 By the way, the number one reason that this writer would advise everyone who hasn’t signed a lease NOT to, is the Arbitration Clause.  Never agree to arbitration.  It is the surest way to get the short end of the deal.  Ask anyone who has ever had to sue their insurance company due to an auto accident.  All policies force you to mandatory arbitration.  Never voluntarily give up your right to a trial with a jury of your peers. 

Even worse, some of the earlier leases only agreed to acknowledge your complaint within 60 days, nothing about attempting to correct the situation.  So, in theory, you could receive a letter that says something like “Thank you for your correspondence of ###.  Please consider this to be an acknowledgement of said correspondence.  Have a nice day”.

And this is just the beginning.  Stay tuned folks!

Gas Muse 6-6-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 7

Friday, June 6th, 2008

Here’s an interesting bit of information from the PA Supreme Court regarding the leases landmen are “negotiating” with landowners. 

“There is a wealth of authority for the proposition that the habitual drafting of legal instruments for hire constitutes the practice of law…

According to the generally understood of definition of the practice of law in this country, it embraces … conveyances, the preparation of legal instruments of all kind and ingeneral, all advice for clients, and all action taken for tem in connection with the law”  - PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT

 The above was found in a portion of a very recent article provided to this writer by a reader who is a Realtor.  It was written by James Goldsmith, Esq., general counsel to the Pennsylvania Association of Realtors.  It was shared with this writer that there there exists the possibility of filing an action based on the unlicensed practice of law.  Would that render existing leases invalid?  Almost certainly not by itself, however, with some of the other problems know n to exist in some of the earlier leases, it could add “weight” to the argument.

It will be interesting to see the results if the law community decides this is a matter to be persued.  Maybe leases will be negotiated (and more importantly modified) by attorneys, not landmen who have earned a reputation by many locally as being somewhere well below used car salesmen.  Actually, that may be an insult to the car salesmen. 

Your thoughts?

Gas Muse 6-5-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 6

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

One of the first reported significant environmental incidents occurred Wednesday on propety owned by Cleo and Gloria, Teel Wednesay.  

 According to a report published today in the Scranton Times-Tribune, several hundred gallons (actually they aren’t sure how much, earlier reports indicated 800 gallons) was spilled at a drilling site on the Teel property Wednesday.  The spill was contained before it got to Meshoppen Creek. 

The well is being drilled by Gassearch Services, who is a contractor for CABOT OIL & GAS CORPORATION.  The spill occured about 350 feet from a wetland area.  Apparently the fuel reached the wetland.  The article stated that a vacuum truck and sponges were used to clean up the spill, which gave the wetland a reddish hue.  The drilling company spokesperson said he could not give an estimate on when the cleanup would be completed.

Well, it had to happen sometime - probably the first REPORTED significant environmental issue.  The article goes on to say the diesel fuel was on the property to power the drilling rig and there was a loose fitting or lock on the tank.  While the company responded promptly, the thought here is that this is the first of many environmental issues.  Lets hope they are all relatively small and are rare occurances.  Somehow I doubt it.     Wait until we see one of these retention ponds leak fracking fluid.  Now, that should be interesting.

 Something else that will be interesting - will the DEP fine the driller and all associated for the “damage to the wetlands area” as well as having a spill of that size in general.  If you or I spilled that much in a wetlands, we probably would be facing bankruptcy.  Oh maybe the DEP will just turn their heads from this matter.  We will see.   -  Or maybe not…

I wonder how the people who live by and make their living in the Chesapeake Bay appreciate the drilling and almost certan pollution of water their bivalves are struggling to survive in feel about this.  I wonder if they even (on a widespread basis) know about this potential.

Too many questions now. Too few answers.  Many more questions to come, probably even less answers in the future - until after it is too late to react.  We certainly have not been proactive have we? 

Gas Muse 6-2-2008 ~ What Have We Learned So Far About Gas Leases, Gas Wells, etc. PART 5

Tuesday, June 3rd, 2008

So we now know that gas companies will be a part of our lives for a very long time.  They came, threw a few (and I do mean a few) bucks around and got themselves ingrained into our lives through leases which few read and even fewer understood before signing.  What should we expect from here forward?

 Here are some more links to what has happened in other areas. 

From MSNBC,  

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11641198/from/ET/   some of the social implications.

From the Fort Worth Weekly, 

http://www.fwweekly.com/content.asp?article=2988

From the Colorado Gazette, 

 http://www.gazette.com/articles/tax_28315___article.html/gas_colorado.html  They are actually generating tax revenue from the wells there.  Are we? 

It is time to really push our state legislators (especially including the ones who have signed up their properties) to PROPERLY regulate the Oil and Gas Industry in Pennsylvania.  Since it is well known, or should be, that rural areas such as Susquehanna County will not in the forseeable future see natural gas being made available here for domestic or commercial use from the current “play” under current plans, the question should be asked, “Aside from a few jobs being created, exactly what benefit will the typical landowner (leased or not leased) see from this exercise? 

What about the damage to the already fragile infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc)?  Who is going to fund the increase in police departments to will have to deal with the (well documented in other areas) increase in crime, drug use, domestic violence, etc.  Who is going to pay for that?  It most certainly shouldn’t be the owner of a home in a small village here who has no interest in or possibility of making money from a gas lease and who is already is funding the property owners who are benefiting from the Clean and Green program.  Oh yes, and while we are at it, let’s not forget the water and air quality issues. We have always been noted for our clean water and air. Let’s see if that remains the case in a few years.

This writer would suggest that the time to ORGANIZE property owners who (a) have sufficient acreage to lease but choose not to become a part of the gas leasing scheme for a variety of reasons, or (b) cannot lease their property due to location (in town for example), address the issues noted above, especially the Clean and Green issue, NOW before it is really too late. 

Mt. View High School Vandalism?? or Prank??

Monday, June 2nd, 2008

Time for something completely different

Driving past Mt. View School today, this writer was shocked to see the amount of garbage on the High School lawn.  Not food mind you, but it looked like the township truck which picks up the yearly junk exploded.  Everything was there from a couch to a kitchen stove, down to a rug.  I am not talking about a few things - probably a couple of hundred items give or take. As of late this evening, most of it remains.

 So, it’s time to round up the usual suspects.  Time to check out the surveilance video as they did last year. Last year, class of 2007 wrapped the message board in clear plastic and a message “Mountain Poo”, or something similar was spray painted on the plastic. Obviously the intent was to have some fun and minimize the damage.

There is a pretty good chance this was the “Senior Prank” for the class of 2008.  If this turns out to be the case, certainly very poor judgment was excercised by the perpetators. 

It will take time and money to clean up this junk, never mind the message it sends to the taxpaying public.  If in fact this was the Senior Prank, doesn’t this tell the public that these students care so little for their school they “trash it”?  Some school spirit.

What a lousy thing to do to the rest of the students who presumably have school spirit.

Of course a much more disturbing scenario would be if the people who did this were adults. Let’s hope not…

One question for the staff at Mt. View, why isn’t the junk picked up? No matter who did it, it looks really bad and needs to be cleaned up ASAP.

Shame on whoever did this in the first place.