Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Pennsylvania
Related: About this forumPA DEP Under Reporting NG Wells - violates Act 13
PA Department of Environmental Protection FAIL
http://blog.shaleshockmedia.org/2013/01/10/pa-department-of-environmental-protection-fail/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1315 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
PA DEP Under Reporting NG Wells - violates Act 13 (Original Post)
Frack Glop
Jan 2013
OP
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)1. Sounds like this is about par for the course.
Let's add a little teaser from the article.
A recently released analysis, An Analysis of Unconventional Gas Well Reporting under Pennsylvanias Act 13 of 2012 states the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection did not report all of the states natural gas wells and this could result in the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars.
- Finally, fees depend on spudding, or the actual start of drilling of an unconventional gas well (58 Pa.C.S. §2301). In the oil and gas industry, spudding is distinct from activities such as completion and production, which can occur only after spudding, if at all. By anchoring the assessment of fees on spudding, Act 13 requires the identification of unconventional gas wells without reference to completion or production. But, in that case, how does one differentiate unconventional and conventional wells, as both are essentially identical at the start of drilling? And how can the DEP retroactively determine whether an unconventional well has been spud if the necessary records were not kept?
- Phase 1: The DEP Omitted 1,500 Recent Unconventional Spuds: The first phase of our analysis started with the DEPs Act 13 report and focused on determining the extent to which the DEP accurately reported on recent unconventional well spudsthose between 2002 and 2011, as this was the time period explicitly covered by its report. In particular, we compared the DEPs Act 13 report with its previously published reports covering the same period. Essentially, we used the DEPs existing reports to assess the accuracy and completeness of its Act 13 report. This entailed downloading five additional DEP reportspermits, spuds, production, wastes, and complianceall of which were publicly available on the DEPs Office of Oil and Gas Management website.
- Phase 1: The DEP Omitted 1,500 Recent Unconventional Spuds: The first phase of our analysis started with the DEPs Act 13 report and focused on determining the extent to which the DEP accurately reported on recent unconventional well spudsthose between 2002 and 2011, as this was the time period explicitly covered by its report. In particular, we compared the DEPs Act 13 report with its previously published reports covering the same period. Essentially, we used the DEPs existing reports to assess the accuracy and completeness of its Act 13 report. This entailed downloading five additional DEP reportspermits, spuds, production, wastes, and complianceall of which were publicly available on the DEPs Office of Oil and Gas Management website.
I have to wonder if this is intentional because of the DEP relationship with the drillers, or if it is just incompetence. One if just as likely as the other.
JPZenger
(6,819 posts)2. Article: Did PA. DEP Miss Out on $300 Million of Well Impact Fees????
http://articles.mcall.com/2013-01-10/news/mc-pa-gas-well-impact-fees-20130110_1_deep-wells-impact-fee-marcellus-shale
The questions revolve around which wells were required to pay the fees, and which ones were not. At least one expert argues that hundreds of additional wells should have been charged the fees.
The questions revolve around which wells were required to pay the fees, and which ones were not. At least one expert argues that hundreds of additional wells should have been charged the fees.