Landowners with gas leases find they are being charged for "post production costs" of fracking

[JPZenger]

Last edited Mon Jul 1, 2013, 04:26 PM - Edit history (1)

http://pennsylvaniafrack.com/category/forced-pooling/

"Not only are the royalty checks tiny, in some instances leasers are being charged retroactively for post production costs which has resulted in receiving a BILL in the thousands of dollars instead of a check.

'Testifying at a Senate Environmental Resources and Energy committee hearing on June 27, 2013, Bradford County Commissioners Chairman Doug McLinko said, “Our constituents have shown us evidence of extraordinary post-production cost in Bradford County, with deductions of 40 and 50% all the way up to as much as 90%.” “…we have seen checks come with zero payment. We have seen retroactive charges being billed to land owners for tens of thousands of dollars where the property owners actually have a bill sent to them and they go without any royalty payments until it is paid in full.” Similar concerns were raised by the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau at the same hearing.'

Chesapeake Energy seems to be the big gas corporation taking the biggest chunk our of royalty checks. However, April 2013, Chesapeake Energy sold much of its natural gas holdings in Pennsylvania to Southwestern Energy for a mere $93 million."

Here's audio of the hearing:

http://senaterepublicannews.com/committees/environmental/2013/062713/agenda.htm
---
The legislature couldn't pass the transportation bill, but they did pass a law this week that makes it easier for the gas companies to combine multiple ancient mineral leases for large-scale fracking operations, without having to re-negotiate with the property owners.

[femmocrat]

1. No way!

That is really cruel.

That is a great link, BTW. "Just sue them!" hahahaha How realistic!

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. Gee, who would have thought oil & gas companies would lie?

eom

[life long demo]

3. Just another reason to love PA

What could possibly go wrong, those property owners probably were telling themselves. Thanks JP for another eye opening article on the state of the commonwealth of PA. As I sit here just shaking my head wondering what else can the PA legislature do to its citizens. Sometimes it's like the twilight zone gone horribly wrong. I truly can not understand how anyone would vote for the republicans.

[BlueToTheBone]

4. Surprise! They were so greedy

that they didn't read the fine print. I don't feel sorry for them at all. To allow the earth to be destroyed for a few bucks...they deserve whatever comes their way.

[malthaussen]

5. Tragic, just tragic.

Sold their birthrights for a mess of pottage, and didn't even get the pottage.

-- Mal

[limpyhobbler]

6. what a shame. nt

[Historic NY]

7. Well, well who would have thought....

any way they can to weasel out on paying they will use. I just can't really believe it...nope.

[blue neen]

8. JP, do you have any more info on the law about ancient mineral leases?

Is that SB-259?

[JPZenger]

10. There has been almost no news coverage of that new law.

There was an article in Sunday's Tribune-Review, linked below.

I did a google search and it came up almost empty. It passed the Senate by a large margin, and passed the House earlier this week. It is called "pooling," but does not involve the "forced pooling" that the industry tried to get passed a few years ago.

Excerpt from Tribune-Review article

"The legislation could impact shale drilling operations in Western Pennsylvania, where many people signed oil and gas contracts years before shale drilling became a major industry.

But the bill will affect people who have not necessarily agreed to lease their land for modern shale drilling. Experts have said it's likely to affect old contracts that don't mention whether drillers can combine their leases into the large pools that cover several parcels of land, common in today's drilling.

If it passes, it will give the drilling companies the right to pool leases as long as their contracts don't specifically prohibit it, which older contracts typically don't, experts have said. "

http://triblive.com/news/adminpage/4285763-74/drilling-bill-contracts#ixzz2XoaCfvge

[blue neen]

11. So, does this mean that the drillers could frack underneath your property,

even if you didn't sign a lease, on the basis of mineral rights signed away 100 years ago? For the purpose of "pooling", that is.

[frylock]

9. i am shocked. shocked and appalled.

:|