Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Restoration Work Along NEXUS Pipeline Put on Hold Until the Spring

From the Akron Beacon Journal:
Nexus Gas Transmission will wait until next year to fully restore all of the land along its pipeline route. 
Heavy rain this fall has left the ground in some areas too wet to properly restore this year, a project spokesperson wrote in an email last week. 
Nexus had aimed to complete restoration around the end of last month, according to filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which has already approved the pipeline for use. 
Nexus will stabilize unrestored areas with FERC-approved, industry-standard practices for the winter and finish restoration in the spring, spokesman Adam Parker wrote in an email. 
“Where appropriate, erosion control devices will remain in place, the right-of-way will be seeded with a winter grass and stabilized with straw mulch,” Parker wrote, adding that workers won’t put mulch or seed in areas with standing water.
Click here to continue reading.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Clinton Sandstone Being Targeted by Drillers

From Kallanish Energy:
Calgary-based Marksmen Energy reports it's making progress in drilling a Clinton Sandstone well in southeast Ohio, Kallanish Energy reports. 
The company has a 60% interest in the Leaman #1 horizontal well in Hocking County. The well is operated by Hocking Hills Energy and Well Services LLC of Ohio. 
Completion of milling and drilling the 1,500-foot lateral is expected to begin this week. The lateral drilling is expected to take 10 to 15 days. The sandstone was previously stimulated with a 12-stage hydraulic fracturing or fracking process. 
Marksmen said it has interests in 5,500 acres of additional land with several potential Clinton Sandstone wells locations that could be developed under its agreement with its operator. 
The company has said it's planning “an aggressive drilling program in 2019 to fully develop the acreage,” subject to financing.
Read more by clicking here.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Encino Planning to Grow Utica Shale Operations

From S&P Global Platts:
Encino Energy, a company that became an Appalachian Basin exploration and production industry powerhouse with the acquisition of Chesapeake Energy's Utica Shale assets in July, is looking to grow its operations in the Utica and invest in other basins, the company's CEO said in an interview with S&P Global Platts. 
"We expect to be active acquirers; there are specific targets in the Utica that we're already evaluating that we hope to buy and there are probably more in the Utica that we hope to acquire over time," Encino President and CEO Hardy Murchison said Monday. 
Murchison said the company is also looking to expand beyond its Utica footprint into other US onshore resource plays. 
"We clearly expect to grow in the Utica and we'll probably expect to grow outside the Utica as well," he said.

Almost overnight, Encino became a major player in the Ohio Utica Shale play with the acquisition of Chesapeake's Utica assets, including more than 900,000 net acres of leasehold, spanning the condensate, liquids-rich and dry gas windows of the play. The assets include about 900 gas wells that produce more than 600 MMcf/d of gas equivalent.
Read the whole article by clicking here.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Monday, November 26, 2018

PA Supreme Court to Review Important "Rule of Capture" Case

From the PA Environment Digest Blog:
On November 20, the PA Supreme Court agreed to review the PA Superior Court ruling in April saying Southwestern Energy drilling company trespassed on the property of Susquehanna County landowners by taking natural gas from an adjacent property without permission through its unconventional drilling operations. 
The PA Supreme Court specifically rephrased the issue it was reviewing this way--”Does the rule of capture apply to oil and gas produced from wells that were completed using hydraulic fracturing and preclude trespass liability for allegedly draining oil or gas from under nearby property, where the well is drilled solely on and beneath the driller’s own property and the hydraulic fracturing fluids are injected solely on or beneath the driller’s own property?” 
The PA Superior Court ruling overturned the rule of capture practice that has been in place for as long as companies have been drilling for oil and gas and developing natural resources.
Click here to read more.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Summit County to Set Up "Pipeline Emergency Response Fund"

From the Akron Beacon Journal:
The Summit County Council on Monday formally approved the “Pipeline Emergency Response Fund” intended to pay for services in the event of a natural gas pipeline emergency in the county. 
Starting in 2021, the fund — proposed in response to the now-functioning $2.1 billion Nexus natural gas pipeline that runs through part of the county — will collect about $100,000 annually in property taxes from pipeline operators. The money will be used to pay for training, planning and equipment for local emergency responders. 
The council also on Monday received a 2019 preliminary operating budget. 
According to the county executive’s web site, the county is looking at a 2019 operating budget of $546.7 million, which is 1.7 percent higher than the 2018 adjusted budget of $537.7 million. The 2018 operating budget as originally passed in late 2017 totaled nearly $529.2 million. The county’s latest budget document says it projects revenue collection will be flat next year.
Click here to read more.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Belmont County EMA Acquires New Emergency Response Vehicle Thanks to $50,000 from Drillers

From The Times Leader:
Two local counties are now better equipped to respond to emergencies, thanks to a partnership with the natural gas and oil industry.

The Belmont County Emergency Management Agency held a ribbon-cutting ceremony Tuesday to dedicate its new emergency response vehicle — a travel trailer that has been converted and equipped to serve as a mobile incident command center. The new vehicle was acquired at no cost to taxpayers, since the Ohio Oil and Gas Association was able to coordinate an effort by EQT Corp., Ascent Resources and Antero Resources to each pay a share of the $50,000 price tag. Mike Chadsey, marketing director for the OOGA, said the three companies are the primary gas and oil producers operating in Belmont County today and they were happy to help prepare the EMA to respond to any type of emergency. 
Dave Ivan, EMA director, said the vehicle replaces an previous unit that had been created from an old school bus. At Ivan’s recommendation, the Belmont County Board of Commissioners voted to donate the bus-based unit valued at up to $10,000 to Monroe County, which previously had no mobile incident command center at all. Ivan also noted that more surrounding counties could benefit as well if the Belmont County EMA is called to assist another county with an emergency. 
“I can’t thank you all enough,” Ivan said to the representatives of Ascent, EQT and Antero who were on hand Tuesday morning.
Read the whole article by clicking here.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Public Meeting Tomorrow on Permit for Belmont County Cracker Plant

From the Ohio EPA:
Ohio EPA will hold a public meeting to present information and accept comments on a draft air permit-to-install related to the proposed PTTGCA Petrochemical Complex that would be located at Old Route 7 and Ferry Landing Road (Hwy. 2), Shadyside. 
The public information session will begin at 6 p.m. on Nov. 27, 2018, and will be held at Shadyside High School, 3890 Lincoln Ave. The public hearing will immediately follow, during which the public can submit comments on the record concerning the draft permit. 
If approved, the permit would allow construction of a 1.5 million tons-per-year ethane cracker plant. The plant would use six ethane cracking furnaces and manufacture ethylene, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE). Carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter and greenhouse gas pollutants are expected to be emitted along with minor quantities of other pollutants. Computer modeling was conducted to ensure local air quality will be protected. 
If the permit is approved, the total maximum air emissions would be limited to protect public health and the environment. Ohio EPA does not have regulatory authority over issues such as siting; eminent domain; setbacks from homes, schools or businesses; noise levels; traffic; zoning; or impacts to property values.

The permit application may be viewed online at http://epawwwextp01.epa.ohio.gov:8080/ords/epaxp/f?p=999:10 by entering permit number P0124972 or at the Ohio EPA Southeast District Office, 2195 Front St., Logan. Call for an appointment: (740) 380-5245. 
Ohio EPA values public input. Comments will be accepted both verbally and in writing at the hearing and may be submitted through Dec. 11, 2018. Written comments may be sent by mail to Kimbra Reinbold, Ohio EPA, DAPC Southeast District Office, 2195 East Front Street, Logan, Ohio, 43138 or emailed to kimbra.reinbold@epa.ohio.gov.
Click here to see view this release on the Ohio EPA website.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

EnCap Trying to Sell Royalty Stake in Utica Shale

From Oil and Gas Investor:
EnCap Investments LP has retained Detring Energy Advisors to market for sale certain of its oil and gas mineral and royalty interests located in Jefferson, Belmont, and Harrison counties, Ohio, within the core of the dry gas Utica Shale play. 
The assets offer an attractive opportunity to acquire a concentrated, core position underneath premier Utica-focused operators generating world-class well results and superior economics, according to Detring. 
Asset Highlights:
  • About 6,325 Net Royalty Acres (at 1/8) | 93% HBP
  • Overriding Royalty Interests (ORRI) located throughout the core of the prolific Utica Shale play
  • Substantial OGIP across contiguous acreage position and under top operators including Ascent, Gulfport, Hess and XTO
  • Significant near-term development potential with about 3,340 net royalty acres (more than 50%) contained within existing horizontal drilling units
  • ORRI retained for any leases re-leased within 12 months of expiration
Read on by clicking here. 

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Oil and Gas Set to Benefit From Mid-Term Elections?

From Forbes:
As a general rule, a divided federal government is the best kind of federal government where the oil and gas industry is concerned. This is an industry that places a high degree of importance on regulatory and statutory certainty, and a divided government tends to result in a slower pace of change in these areas. 
The unified, Republican-controlled government of the past two years produced a rapid pace of change, though much of it has actually been favorable for the industry, as the Trump Administration has gone about revising and repealing a raft of Obama-era actions. But that work is now mostly done, although the ultimate resolution for the EPA's Waters of the United States rule and various methane-related measures at EPA and the Department of the Interior remain somewhat up in the air for now. 
Congress was able to agree to include energy-related provisions in its omnibus spending bill last December, but has done little related to energy since. The lame duck session of the current 115th congress that will convene for four weeks between now and December 31 will have to try to deal with a broad range of potential legislation, as the GOP majorities will likely try to cram in as much as they can before they give way to the 116th congress in January.

Most crucial for oil and gas is the FY 2019 appropriations bill for the Departments of Interior and Energy, which was extended through December 7 as part of the "mini-bus" appropriations bill passed at the end of September. DOI and DOE, together with the EPA, do the most to regulate oil and gas activities at the federal level, and the appropriations bill always impacts how their actions will be carried out in the coming year. The lame duck session will also most likely pass the annual "tax extenders" legislation that includes a few oil and gas-related provisions. This bill also includes provisions related to biofuels and other renewable energy sources and typically attracts broad, bi-partisan support.
Continue reading by clicking here.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Rig Count Bounces Back in Utica Shale

New permits issued last week: 7 (Previous week: 4)  +3
Total horizontal permits issued: 2924 (Previous week: 2917)  +7
Total horizontal wells drilled: 2457 (Previous week: 2448)  +9
Total horizontal wells producing: 2081 (Previous week: 2075)  +6
Utica rig count: 18 (Previous week: 15)  +3

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Friday, November 16, 2018

XTO Energy Brings ‘Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day’ STEM Program to Belmont

by Jackie Stewart, Energy in Depth

XTO Energy brought its Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day” program to Belmont County Schools on Tuesday, as part of the company’s ongoing effort to encourage young women to pursue education and career opportunities in science, technology, engineering and math – or STEM – fields.
Middle school girls from Shadyside, Bellaire and Powhatan heard from a number of XTO Energy’s female employees from the area – including several engineers.
The program provided the 50 students with the opportunity to take part in interactive experiments conducted by members of the XTO staff and the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP). Through the hands-on problem-solving activities, students were shown how creativity and ingenuity can be used in the classroom, and how knowledge of STEM subjects can lead to rewarding engineering careers.
ExxonMobil and XTO Energy have made it a priority to engage young women and promote STEM education. Since the inception of their “Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day” in 2003, more than 14,000 students have participated in the program. As XTO Energy’s Karen Matusic told EID, this week’s event in Belmont gave the company the opportunity to expand the tradition, and leave an impression on the young students in the process:
“It was a pleasure working with such bright and enthusiastic students and teachers from the area schools. For XTO and ExxonMobil, it is important to give back to the community and it is our mission to encourage young ladies to consider a career in the STEM field. I think they were impressed to learn that XTO’s president is a woman and to talk to two of our female engineers who grew up in Ohio.”
According to the National Science Foundation, while women represent almost 50 percent of the workforce, they hold less than 20 percent of engineering jobs – 15 percent as of 2015.
The increasing expansion of oil and natural gas development across the Appalachian Basin will continue to afford opportunities in a myriad of STEM-related fields in the energy industry. Additionally, the prolific production coming from the region is drawing new industries to the region, including petrochemical projectsand plastics and chemical manufacturing. These industries, too, will require a vast number of STEM educated specialists. As OGEEP Executive Director Rhonda Reda told EID:
“The Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (OOGEEP) is dedicated to educating students about science, technology, engineering and math in hopes that one day they will become leaders in our great industry.  Today, women fill 47 percent of all jobs in America, yet hold only 24 percent of STEM jobs.  XTO Energy’s event yesterday helped engage another 50 bright young females in the Ohio Valley about future careers as engineers, geologists and other technical fields.  OOGEEP was honored to be a part of this program, and looks forward to participating in many more educational opportunities like this one in the future.”
Ohio Oil and Gas Association Communications Manager Lyndsey Kleven added:
“Seeing the girls get excited, involved and working together on the science experiments was a truly rewarding experience. They cheered each other on while being friendly competitors to see which team would build the winner project. The Ohio Oil and Gas Association is proud to have members like XTO Energy that organizes community events like this that make an impact while encourage students they can be anything they want to be.”
“Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day” is another part of an ongoing effort to aid, engage and excite students about the fields that will be driving the workforce of tomorrow. With opportunities expanding in the region in the years to come, the hope is local students like the young women in Belmont are well-positioned to become future leaders in these vital fields.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Utica Rig Count Drops For Second Straight Week

New permits issued last week: 4 (Previous week: 8)  -4
Total horizontal permits issued: 2917 (Previous week: 2913)  +4
Total horizontal wells drilled: 2448 (Previous week: 2446)  +2
Total horizontal wells producing: 2075 (Previous week: 2072)  +3
Utica rig count: 15 (Previous week: 17)  -2

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

West Virginia’s Natural Gas Industry Keeps Pushing to Whittle Away Payments to Residents

For decades, Arnold and Mary Richards collected monthly royalty checks — most recently from $1,000 to $1,500 — for the natural gas sucked up from beneath their West Virginia farm by small, old wells.

So in 2016, when EQT Corp. drilled six new gas wells, the Ritchie County couple expected to see their royalty payments skyrocket. The much-larger wells would collect far more natural gas from the Marcellus Shale formation, which is fueling the boom in the state’s gas industry.

The Richards’ checks did grow considerably. But the couple also saw something they didn’t expect: EQT was cutting the size of those new checks.

EQT began deducting for what it said was the cost of transporting the gas, for processing the gas and even for state taxes. All told, since November 2016, the Richardses calculated they were missing about $235,000 in royalties.

The Richardses had looked closely at their lease agreements. The agreements stated that EQT would give them 12.5 percent of the revenue generated from the wells. They didn’t say anything about allowing deductions. So the Richardses went to court, filing a federal suit against the company in February 2017.

“I only want the royalty that is due us, according to our lease,” Mary Richards told a jury in Clarksburg this September.

Arnold and Mary Richards are the latest among thousands of West Virginians who have watched the state’s natural gas producers whittle away at royalties promised to them, according to a review of court records by the Charleston Gazette-Mail and ProPublica.

Sometimes, the companies deduct a variety of “post-production” costs from gas proceeds, as appears to have happened in the Richards’ case. Other times, they’ve avoided paying full royalties by creating shell companies that, at least on paper, buy the gas at reduced prices. These practices have gone on for decades.

While the state Legislature and courts have both tried to ensure that residents are getting their fair share, gas companies have simply shifted their tactics.

In 1982, the Legislature banned leases that limited payments to just a few hundred dollars a year. The bill declared an end to the “continued exploitation of the natural resources of this state in exchange for such wholly inadequate compensation.”

Twenty years later, residents filed a series of suits alleging they were still being shortchanged. The lawsuits prompted a series of settlements and a $400 million verdict in 2007.

Yet residents say these practices haven’t ended. A class-action lawsuit, filed in 2013 on behalf of more than 10,000 individuals and companies that own gas, is set to go to trial in two weeks. It alleges that EQT — the state’s second-largest producer — continues to take improper deductions from royalties.

“It’s still going on, and they’re finding ways to disguise it,” said Scott Windom, a Harrisville lawyer who represented the Richardses and who often represents gas owners in fights with producers.

EQT, as well as other gas companies and industry trade groups, maintain that they’ve done nothing wrong, and that royalty payments are fair and based on lease language or state law.

Deduction of post-production costs from gas royalty payments is a method that has “long been used in West Virginia and other states,” lawyers for EQT argue in the ongoing class-action case. They made similar arguments in the Richards’ case.

West Virginia’s natural gas industry has flourished, with production roughly tripling in the past five years. State leaders portray the industry as the heart of a strong future economy, perhaps to replace the declining coal business.

But there are growing indications that natural gas is taking West Virginia down the same path as coal, including a long and continuing battle over how the profits are divvied up among residents and out-of-state companies that are extracting natural resources from the land. And EQT is now suing to gut the 1982 royalty law that was meant to give gas owners a larger piece of the industry pie.

Joshua Fershee, a West Virginia University energy law professor, said the number of royalty disputes has increased as the industry has grown, and they are likely to continue as gas production keeps expanding.

“These issues will keep playing out,” Fershee said.

For Arnold Richards, the reason to fight is clear: “It’s not because I don’t have enough money to live on. I do,” he testified. “I really worked hard all these years to get it, not pass it on to a corporation.”

After deliberating for just a few hours, the jury ordered EQT to repay the Richardses the $192,000 in post-production costs that had been deducted from their royalty payments. U.S. District Judge Irene Keeley had already ordered the company to pay them nearly $43,000 in taxes that had been deducted, for a total of $235,000.

An EQT spokeswoman declined to comment on the verdict in the Richards’ case, on whether the company plans to appeal or on the class-action case that’s headed for trial.

Back in the Day

Sixty-seven years ago, Arnold and Mary Richards got married. They were both about 18 years old. A few years later, in 1954, they bought their farm, on Rock Camp Run outside Harrisville.

As part of the deal, the Richardses acquired the rights to about half of the natural gas under the farm. In those days, gas wasn’t in high demand. There were wells on the Richards’ land, but they were small and only drilled vertically.

The ownership of land and mineral rights in West Virginia is complex and confusing, even for many who live in the state.

Someone may own the surface land, while someone else owns the coal, oil or gas underneath. Sometimes, as in the Richards’ situation, people own both the surface and the gas below. Much of the natural gas in West Virginia is produced under lease agreements, in which an owner or owners of the gas lease it to a production company. Many leases are decades, or sometimes more than a century, old. In the early 1900s, natural gas leases that paid $100 to $300 a year were considered reasonable, maybe even generous. Back then, most drillers were after oil, and natural gas was mostly an undesirable byproduct.

As the market for gas increased, in manufacturing, home heating and electricity, the industry has grown. Newer leases pay a share of the revenue generated, so gas owners make more money as production increases. Leasing practices also have changed so that many leases have set terms, often five years, rather than being open-ended.

With the industry growing, West Virginians who owned their natural gas pushed successfully in 1982 to ensure they would get a bigger cut of the profits. Lawmakers passed a bill outlawing those flat-fee leases that paid just a few hundred dollars a year. The bill declared that such arrangements had been “unfair, oppressive” and “an unjust hardship on the owners of the oil and gas.”

The new law only applied to situations in which both the gas lease was an old flat-fee arrangement and the well was new, drilled after the 1982 law took effect. In order to get a state permit for such wells, gas companies would have to pay the gas owners at least 12.5 percent of the revenue collected from the gas. (Since the Richardses already received that, the new law did nothing for them.)

For more than 40 years, Arnold Richards drove an hour each way daily from Ritchie County to DuPont’s plant near Parkersburg, where he worked as a millwright. The couple also worked their farm, and when they had the chance and had some money saved up, they bought more of the gas reserves under the farm.

Then, in 2014, the Richardses seemed to get good news. EQT bought the gas leases to their land. By then, companies were using advanced hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to capture larger and larger amounts of gas. EQT wanted to do that at the Richards’ farm.

To do so, the company wanted to change the lease, to allow it to “pool” the gas reserves, drilling into the Richards’ gas from an adjacent piece of property. The couple went along with it, agreeing to a new “pooling clause” in their lease, but not to any other changes. The new wells were drilled in 2016.

But when the first check arrived, Arnold Richards noticed that EQT had taken out production costs. He called the company to ask what was going on.

The company has paid the Richardses $935,000 in royalty payments, but it would have been more than a million dollars without the deductions. The company “didn’t give us any satisfaction,” Mary Richards said later in court.

So the couple went to see Rod and Scott Windom, a father-son legal team in nearby Harrisville, the county seat. The Windoms filed a lawsuit for the couple in February 2017.

“An Awful Lot of Charges That We Didn’t Know About”

The Richards’ lawsuit wasn’t the first against EQT or other producers over royalties, and it wouldn’t be the last.

Perhaps the most significant challenge to West Virginia natural gas leasing practices came about a decade ago when a teacher couldn’t decipher the accounting statements on the stubs the gas company sent him.

Garrison Tawney grew up in Roane County and went to Marshall University, in Huntington. Around 1940, he came back home to teach school and tend the family farm near Looneyville. He retired from the school system in 1976, but kept working his hay and cattle.

Tawney’s wife, Freda Vineyard Tawney, owned natural gas reserves she had inherited from her family. In 1989, the Tawneys leased those gas reserves to Columbia Natural Resources. Their new leases paid them 12.5 percent of the sales.

But to Garrison Tawney, the numbers never seemed to add up. Eventually, he turned to a local lawyer. Tawney and his lawyer started investigating and eventually sued when they discovered Columbia was taking various deductions from the gas revenue before it calculated royalties.

Company lawyers tried to explain away the move. They pointed to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission orders aimed at deregulating the pipeline industry. Previously, gas had been sold by the producer at the physical “wellhead” to the pipeline company. Under the new FERC-ordered system, it was routinely sold at a remote point of sale following processing and transportation.

“The only logical way to calculate royalties,” lawyers for the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association argued in a brief supporting Columbia Gas in the Tawney case, “is to permit gas lessees to deduct the lessor’s proportionate share of post-production expenses from the total price received at the point of sale.”

Companies like Columbia Gas started deducting the costs of processing and shipping gas to pipelines before they calculated the royalties for people like the Tawneys. They just didn’t tell them they were doing it. Accounting statements to gas owners continued to list “Your Share Prod. Charges” as “0.00.”

Tawney died at age 90, about two years before the three-week trial in Roane County Circuit Court in January 2007, but he had told his story under oath in a deposition, part of which was read to the jury.
“Well, the only thing I know, that I was thinking that we was getting one-eighth of the production [12.5 percent] without any modification or deductions,” Tawney testified. “But I didn’t know that they was going to do what they did, which was take out an awful lot of charges that we didn’t know about.”

By then, the lawsuit was a class-action on behalf of 10,000 gas owners, and jurors came back with a $400 million verdict for Tawney and the other gas owners. Most of the money — about $271 million — was to punish the companies involved. Sharing the liability were NiSource, which had, at one point, owned Columbia Gas, and Chesapeake Energy, which later bought Columbia.

The verdict set off a firestorm of protest from the gas industry.

In a Charleston Gazette story, Chesapeake Energy spokesman Scott Rotruck compared it to “getting clobbered with a big, roundhouse punch in the first round.” Rotruck told the Charleston Daily Mail that the punitive damage award was “almost like capital punishment for a parking violation.”

Chesapeake and NiSource tried to appeal the verdict, especially the punitive damages portion. The state Supreme Court turned them down in May 2008.

Chesapeake’s colorful CEO, Aubrey McClendon — known for collecting wine, antique maps and vintage motor boats — wasn’t happy, and he let West Virginia officials know it. Within a week of the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear its appeal, Chesapeake dropped plans to build a new regional corporate headquarters in Charleston, expected to cost $30 million to $40 million. The company had already purchased land and broken ground for the office building. (McClendon died in May 2016, in a one-car crash, a day after being indicted on federal charges that he rigged bids for oil and gas leases.)

In October 2008, Chesapeake and NiSource dropped an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and settled the case for $380 million.

In the three years after the Tawney verdict, at least three other class-action cases against gas producers in West Virginia were settled for a total of more than $80 million on behalf of some 35,000 gas owners.

That included about a $30 million settlement by Equitable — as EQT was then known — with about 10,000 class members who had gas leases with the company.

Despite the predicted doom from industry leaders, natural gas activity in West Virginia skyrocketed in the decade after the Tawney case. Today, Southwestern Energy, which, in 2014, bought Chesapeake’s West Virginia operations, is the third-largest producer in the state.

“They Have Arrogantly Disrespected the Law in West Virginia”

After years of litigation, some residents — and even landowners and their lawyers with years of experience in gas issues — contend they still aren’t sure what’s being deducted from their royalty checks.

In January 2014, U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin told EQT that its leases with W.W. McDonald Land Co. did not allow it to deduct expenses like “meals and entertainment,” “uniforms,” “meter operation and repair” and “personal property taxes” from the payments it made to the company, which had sued EQT.

The judge noted that the leases in question allowed deductions only for “compressing, desulphurization and/or transporting gas” from the well to the point of sale. Generally, the judge observed, deductions are allowed only if they are spelled out in the lease and are “actually incurred” and “reasonable.”

“I find that meals and entertainment, uniforms, meter operations and repair, and personal property taxes are not costs of compression, desulphurization, or transportation,” the judge wrote.

The McDonald Land case was notable in another way. It alleged that, after legal challenges to the practice of deducting post-production costs from royalty payments, EQT reorganized its operations in an effort to keep pocketing those deductions for itself.

Between 2000 and 2005, EQT produced gas owned by W.W. McDonald and transported it to an interstate pipeline, where it was marketed to third parties. EQT paid the costs of transporting and marketing the gas, and passed on some of those costs to W.W. McDonald.

Then, in January 2005, EQT reorganized. It formed separate entities, including EQT Gathering Inc. and EQT Energy. A different EQT arm, EQT Production, was the one that had the McDonald leases and was producing its gas.

In 2005, EQT Production starting selling the gas to its own sister company, EQT Energy. EQT Energy, after contracting with yet another spinoff to collect and transport the gas, would then sell it to a third party at a higher price than the company originally paid.

EQT Production argued in court that once it started that arrangement, it was no longer improperly deducting transportation costs when it paid McDonald Land’s royalties.

Lawyers for McDonald Land, though, responded that the result of the complex setup was “exactly the same”: EQT could keep paying less in royalties.

Goodwin concluded that EQT’s new system — the company calls it a “work-back methodology” — wasn’t allowed in West Virginia.

“The defendants cannot calculate royalties based on a sale between subsidiaries at the wellhead when the defendants later sell the gas in an open market at a higher price,” Goodwin wrote in a 36-page ruling in November 2013. “Otherwise, gas producers could always reduce royalties by spinning off portions of their business and making nominal sales at the wellhead.”

EQT and McDonald Land reached a confidential settlement in August 2015, but, by then, a new class-action lawsuit had been filed against EQT, alleging the company hadn’t ended the practice. That case, in U.S. District Court in Wheeling, involves roughly 8,000 leases and 10,000 class members, court records show.

“They have arrogantly disrespected the law in West Virginia,” wrote lawyers for the gas owners currently suing EQT. “They are intelligent, smart and knowledgeable in this industry. … Instead of preparing to comply with the law, they set about and prepared to dodge it and find and invent arguments to disobey the law.”

EQT lawyers argue the company’s royalty payment methods “are not a sham,” and they urged that the class-action case be thrown out.

While a final decision has not been issued in the case, U.S. District Judge John Preston Bailey has already ruled that, as a matter of law, various EQT subsidiaries are the parent company’s “alter ego” and can’t be used to help reduce royalty payments to gas owners. The lead named plaintiff is the Kay Co., a small landowning firm named for its founder, James Kay, a well-known coal executive who was president of Royal Coal and Coke Co. The trial is slated to start on Nov. 27.

Other royalty suits against EQT, and against other gas producers like Antero, are pending in West Virginia courts. (The lead lawyer for gas owners in the class-action case, and in several other such cases, is Charleston attorney Marvin Masters, who is among a group of local investors who bought the Charleston Gazette-Mail this year.)

“Outdated Statutory Language”

Despite the flurry of settlements it triggered, the Tawney case didn’t end the practice of companies taking post-production deductions from royalty checks. EQT continued taking such deductions from some of its leases, arguing that the 1982 law meant to benefit landowners actually allowed the company to pay them less.

That position got them sued again, by Patrick and Katherine Leggett, owners of natural gas reserves in Doddridge County.

In that case, the state Supreme Court ruled in November 2016 that the company couldn’t take such deductions. But then, a new justice, Beth Walker, took office and voted to rehear the case. In a decision made controversial by investments Walker’s husband had had in the natural gas industry, the court, in May 2017, reversed itself and decided in EQT’s favor. What that meant was that, for flat-fee leases and wells drilled after 1982, post-production expenses could be deducted from the royalty payments.

But the Supreme Court also urged lawmakers to consider the impacts of the ruling, with one justice urging the Legislature to rewrite “outdated statutory language” to address “significant changes” in the gas industry.

When lawmakers came to Charleston for their annual legislative session in January 2018, they heeded the court’s call, taking up a bill to overturn the second ruling in the Leggetts’ case and banning post-production deductions for gas owners with leases since 1982.

“If this decision is allowed to stand, it will shift millions if not billions of dollars out of West Virginians’ pockets — West Virginia farmers’ and mineral owners’ pockets — into the hands of out-of-state corporations,” Farm Bureau lobbyist Dwayne O’Dell told one committee. “We want those folks to be able to stay in business and develop the oil and gas here, but at the same time, we want our people well cared for.”

No one from the gas industry spoke up publicly during two committee hearings, so the measure moved quickly, passing the Senate unanimously and the House by a vote of 96-2.

Gov. Jim Justice signed the bill and it took effect on May 31. EQT is now suing the state in federal court, challenging this year’s legislation and the entire 1982 royalties law.

The Richards Trial

The bill didn’t stop gas companies from taking deductions from the royalty payments made to people like Arnold and Mary Richards, whose leases already required a 12.5 percent payment.

That brought them four months later to the federal building in Clarksburg in mid-September for a trial — the first time either of them had been in federal court, except for once years ago when Mary was a juror in a federal case.

During the trial, EQT lawyer David Hendrickson explained that EQT Production sold the Richards’ gas to a sister company. The sister company paid them the price of the gas, minus transportation costs, and that final price was what ETQ Production based the couple’s royalties on. Hendrickson said that’s not the same as EQT Production taking deductions.

“We’re paying the fair market value of what we received for the gas,” Hendrickson said.

Both Arnold and Mary Richards testified, briefly, telling jurors the story of their farm, their gas leases and how they were shocked to suddenly have EQT taking deductions from their royalty checks.

The Richardses are in their 80s now. They have adult children, grandchildren and some great-grandchildren. By the time the case reached trial, it was purely a contracts case. They weren’t seeking some huge, multimillion-dollar punitive damage award. They just wanted the royalties they thought were coming to them.

“We want our children to have the fruit from our labor, rather than give it to someone that doesn’t, I don’t want to say doesn’t deserve it, because they did a fine job getting it produced, but I have nothing against them, other than the fact that I just want what’s due our family,” Arnold Richards told the jury. “That’s about all the reason I’m here.”

Before the verdict in the Richards’ favor, Scott Windom told jurors in his closing argument that Hendrickson was asking them to take his word that the payments are fair, and not to look too closely at EQT’s new system.

“EQT reminds me a little bit of the great magnificent Oz in the movie, ‘The Wizard of Oz,’” Windom said. “He’s pulling the levers and making the smoke and the noise and the lights behind the curtain and Dorothy and Toto look behind there and he says, ‘Oh, don’t pay attention to what you see, only pay attention to what I’m telling you.’”

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for their newsletter.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Century-Old West Virginia Leases Yield Paltry Gas Royalties. A Suit Could Cut Others’ Payouts to a Trickle, Too.

Linda Stimmell gets upset every time EQT Corp.’s checks arrive in the mail. The energy giant extracts natural gas from beneath the Stimmell family’s old farm in Doddridge County, West Virginia, under the terms of a lease signed when Teddy Roosevelt was president.

The royalty checks Stimmell receives from two “Bates Wells,” named for her great-great-grandfather, Andrew Jackson Bates, amount to just $9 and $3 each quarter.

The lease Bates signed more than a century ago with Carnegie Natural Gas Co. of Pittsburgh allowed legendary industrialist Andrew Carnegie’s company to drill for, produce and sell as much natural gas as Carnegie wanted. In exchange, Bates got a flat fee of $300 a year per well.

Because of that deal, Stimmell and the many other Bates descendants who have since inherited the gas — and that 112-year-old lease — have received tens of thousands of dollars less than they would have if the contract were negotiated today.

“They’ve paid pennies, compared to what they are making,” Stimmell said. “It’s ridiculous.”

It’s not clear how many West Virginians are stuck with old leases that pay residents a fraction of what they might otherwise get. Observers guess it’s in the thousands. But what is clear is that thousands more could find themselves getting far less in royalties, if at least one major gas company gets its way.

That’s because of a recent lawsuit filed by EQT — the state’s second-largest gas producer — that threatens to put far more people in Linda Stimmell’s situation, stuck with tiny monthly payments at a time when the natural gas industry is booming.

The lawsuit, filed in April, challenges a 1982 law that aimed to give gas owners a bigger share of the profits. That law applied to situations where the gas lease was an old flat-fee arrangement and the well was drilled after the law took effect. In order to get a state permit for such wells, gas companies would have to pay the gas owners at least 12.5 percent of the revenue from the gas.

EQT lawyers argue that the company invested time and money on leases, betting financially that, eventually, more modern drilling techniques would fuel skyrocketing production in West Virginia’s Marcellus Shale gas fields.

“It was entirely foreseeable that, over time and with investment, mineral extraction technology and related infrastructure would continue to improve, new technologies would develop, and the market for natural gas would grow,” the company maintained in its lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Clarksburg.

EQT wants a federal judge to throw out the entire 1982 statute. The company declined to comment on the lawsuit beyond its court filings.

A victory for the company could shift millions of dollars in gas royalties from West Virginia residents and businesses to out-of-state gas producers like EQT, a politically connected company with a board member, Bray Cary, who is a top adviser to Gov. Jim Justice.

So far, the Justice administration is fighting the EQT lawsuit. Lawyers for the state have asked for it to be dismissed, citing the state’s interest in preventing the gas industry from “continuing to capitalize on older, flat-rate leases that provided unforeseen windfall profits in the modern natural gas marketplace.”

Tom Huber, president of the West Virginia Royalty Owners Association, said the company’s lawsuit shows that “EQT’s greed knows no limits.”

“They are determined to suck every bit of gas they can out of our state and pay us next to nothing for it,” Huber said. “EQT wants us to starve so they can please their Wall Street investors.”

Linda Stimmell’s natural gas story starts on Sept. 17, 1906, when her grandfather’s grandfather signed a lease that gave the rights to oil and gas under a 150-acre tract of land in Doddridge County to Carnegie Natural Gas.

The company drilled two wells there shortly afterward. A century later, both are still producing, even if just a trickle of gas in today’s market. Equitable Resources, EQT’s former name, took the wells over in 1999, when it acquired Carnegie Natural Gas. The lease lasts forever, or at least as long as the wells are active.

Stimmell inherited part of the gas rights from Bates, her great-great-grandfather on her father’s side, but she’s not sure exactly what her share is, or how many of her distant relatives, all descendants of Bates, are co-owners.

Situations like Stimmell’s aren’t that unusual in West Virginia.

Land ownership is often complex and confusing. Someone might own the surface land, while someone else owns the the coal, oil or gas underneath. Tracts such as natural gas reserves become divided among multiple owners, as land and mineral rights are passed down across generations.

In Stimmell’s case, Bates split his gas and other holdings among his five children. They split what they inherited among their children, and so on. After a couple of generations, what began as a one-half ownership turns into a one-twentieth share.

Stimmell didn’t pay attention to any of this until 1996, when her father died and she inherited part of the Bates mineral holdings. Her dad, George B. Swiger, worked more than 40 years for Hope Gas, as a maintenance man who helped residential customers with gas connections for their stoves, furnaces and hot-water tanks.

“My father retired from Hope Gas, and he always told me, don’t trust the gas companies,” Stimmell said. “I thought nothing about any of this stuff until he passed away.”

Stimmell soon learned. Her checks certainly weren’t making her rich, but her life seemed to become consumed by skirmishes with various gas companies.

Some West Virginians have gotten wealthy from the natural gas boom, the mineral rights under an old family farm turning them into “Marcellus millionaires.”

But Stimmell’s experience is just as common, and it reflects what some state residents who own land or minerals in the state’s gas-producing region go through: One company quibbled with her about the specific location for a gas line she requested to a cabin she kept on the old family property when she moved to Morgantown. Another wanted to wrestle with her over a right-of-way to build its new gas transmission pipeline.

There were periodic requests to amend her family’s leases to allow the gas company to reach more reserves. The industry says these are efforts to “modernize” leases. But those kinds of requests seldom include an offer to increase royalty payments to a more modern rate. Stimmell’s mail became an endless string of paperwork, much of it almost impossible to really understand.

And one thing is certain: As long as EQT holds her lease, and keeps producing even a little gas from it, she can’t work out a deal for some other company to drill a different well into a different gas formation — perhaps the Marcellus — and pay her larger royalties. It’s a common problem for some West Virginians in gas counties. Wells are “held by production,” allowing companies to avoid having to pay the costs to shut down and plug an old well, or just to stave off competition from some other company.

There once was hope for Stimmell, during a mid-2000s lawsuit over natural gas royalties.

Flat-rate leases are “void and unenforceable,” Roane County Circuit Judge Thomas C. Evans III had ruled, citing the legislative findings from the 1982 law.

“To enforce such a contract term under these circumstances would require this court to perpetuate oppression and injustice, in violation of the clear public policy of this state,” Evans ruled in August 2006.

But Evans didn’t offer gas owners like Stimmell any relief — no court order or statewide injunction. West Virginia lawmakers hadn’t provided any remedy, either.

Lawmakers in 1982 applied the law only to future gas wells, those that needed new permits from the state. They were trying to stay within the Contracts Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits public officials from interfering with private contracts unless there is a compelling public interest.

Lawyers representing gas owners in royalty cases have never tried to get a court to order higher royalties for pre-1982 wells. They, too, worry that the Contracts Clause would stand in their way.

Meanwhile, the 12.5 percent required by that 1982 law itself is growing outdated. As demand for natural gas increases, gas producers routinely pay as much as 16, 18 or even 20 percent royalties when they negotiate new leases for the right to drill.

Years ago, Stimmell was surfing the internet, trying to educate herself about gas leases, and she came across David McMahon, a lawyer and founder of the West Virginia Surface Owners Rights Organization.

McMahon, in a recent legal brief, cited Stimmell as an example of what might become more commonplace if EQT wins its lawsuit to throw out the 1982 law that requires royalties of 12.5 percent for newly drilled wells.

That law doesn’t help Stimmell, because her wells were drilled before 1982. But McMahon used the numbers from her well to show how paying a 12.5 percent royalty — rather than a flat fee — helps other gas owners with new wells.

If EQT had paid Stimmell and other Bates heirs 12.5 percent — one-eighth is the way the law expresses it — since 1982, McMahon wrote, they would have received $71,000 over that time. Instead, they received $22,000 from their flat-rate lease.

The difference would be far greater in situations in which EQT and other companies have drilled horizontal wells that can access far more gas. A modern well can produce about $7.1 million worth of gas a year and, with a 12.5-percent royalty rate, generate royalties worth more than $887,000 annually, McMahon wrote, citing one example.

If the companies were able to revert to leases paying $300 a year, they would collect “a windfall,” McMahon wrote, “depriving landowners in this state of income vital to their fortunes and families and the state’s economy — a windfall that the state has a legitimate interest in preventing.”

Even paying 12.5 percent is a good deal, he said. “They get to keep the other seven eighths.”

EQT argues in its lawsuit that those old leases “apportioned the risk according to each party’s preference at the time.” Gas owners would receive a reliable payment for gas development, regardless of how much gas was eventually produced. Producing companies would have “the incentive to invest in improving natural gas extraction, production and marketing.”

“Making such investments is exactly what EQT has done,” the EQT lawsuit says. “Over the better part of a century, EQT has invested millions of dollars to improve techniques for extracting natural gas and for infrastructure to develop an integrated market for natural gas.”

EQT says it should be able to “enjoy the returns of such investments,” without state lawmakers interfering with its leases.

During previous major cases over gas royalties, the two trade associations that represent the gas industry filed friend of the court briefs on the company’s side. This time, however, industry groups have stayed out of the case. EQT has said in court documents that flat-rate leases represent “a relatively small percentage of all leases in West Virginia,” but that it believes it holds the greatest number of them.

Some of EQT’s competitors say that getting rid of the flat-rate statute isn’t a priority for them.
“It just didn’t feel like the spirit of what we were trying to do with these legacy leases in West Virginia,” said Al Schopp, a regional senior vice president and spokesman for Antero Resources, the state’s largest gas producer.

Stimmell said she worries about the day when EQT might show up and want to drill a Marcellus well on the Bates lease. If EQT wins its current lawsuit, her six grandchildren would be stuck sharing a $300 per year flat payment — not a percentage cut of the millions of dollars a modern well could generate.

“I’ve always said I’m not against drilling,” Stimmell said. “But I am for the people — the mineral owners and the surface owners — to be paid a fair price.”

Get in Touch

The Charleston Gazette-Mail and ProPublica want to tell the story of the changing landscape in West Virginia, and how coal and natural gas are impacting it. West Virginians: Tell us how your community is changing. Call or text us at 347-244-2134, or email us: changingwv@wvgazettemail.com.

Here’s what we’d like to see:

Photos or videos (including then-and-now visuals) showing changes in your life because of natural gas or those of family or friends working in the industry.

Any correspondence you’ve had with state or local government officials about natural gas development. Have you asked for help, and if so, what has been the response?

Experiences regarding royalty payments. Do you lease mineral rights to a drilling company or producer? If so, tell us what that’s been like.

Filed under:
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for their newsletter.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Thursday, November 8, 2018

Eighth Consecutive Loss for CELDF in Youngstown

by Dan Alfaro, Energy in Depth

For the eighth consecutive time, the citizens of Youngstown have voted overwhelmingly against a Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) initiative aimed at banning fracking and all fossil fuel-related activity within the city limits.
Unofficial results show nearly 57 percent of the city’s voters rejected the proposal – nearly identical to the margin on the seventh failed attempt.
City voters rejected similar ballot measures six times between 2013 and 2016: twice in both 2013 and 2014, and once each in 2015 and 2016. The group – under the guise of the all-too-familiar “Community Bill of Rights” – again attempted to repackage and re-purpose what ultimately amounts to a symbolic ban on fracking.
As in years past, the Youngstown Vindicator editorial board joined a chorus in urging voters to stop the “job-killing” madness. Again:
“What part of ‘no’ – multiplied tens of thousands of times over in votes over five years – do the self-appointed do-gooder backers of the Youngstown Drinking Water Protection Bill of Rights don’t understand?
“Apparently not much, given their foolish and unrelenting pursuit of their misguided and foolhardy proposal.
“After all, responsible and civic-minded Youngstown residents have convincingly and resoundingly said no to the jobs-killing initiative seven times over now – from 2013 to the 2018 primary election.”
The effort was again opposed by a broad, diverse coalition of Youngstown city officials, community and business leaders, and labor groups, many of whom joined in the Mahoning Valley Jobs and Growth Coalition. Following the vote, the coalition reiterated the clearly stated (eight times) fact residents of Youngstown are not inclined to support the out-of-state driven effort:
“We urge the backers of the Youngstown Drinking Water Protection Bill of Rights to stop abusing our electoral system by repeatedly placing this amendment on the ballot. In rejecting this amendment eight times, Youngstown voters have made it crystal clear they don’t want this proposed charter amendment. Continuing to place it on the ballot in the future will only serve to waste our tax dollars on election administration costs – tax dollars that could otherwise be spent bettering our community.”
The repeated attempts, and subsequent rejections of the initiative has been a costly endeavor for the city, with a burden more than $180,000 placed on the backs of taxpayers.
Despite repeated failures, unfortunately this is unlikely to be the last time voters have to face (and fund) the issue on the ballot. Susie Beiersdorfer, a member of the Committee for the Youngstown Water Protection Bill of Rights, stated as much to the Vindicator following the seventh defeat:  “It’s not like we’re going to stop. Our motto is we don’t lose until we quit.”
Thankfully the resolve of an informed electorate has stayed steadfast in opposition, a trend that will continue should the group continue to ignore the will of the voters, and attempt to foil the city of Youngstown with yet another fruitless fracking ban.

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

Rig Count Dips in Utica Shale

New permits issued last week: 8 (Previous week: 0)  +8
Total horizontal permits issued: 2913 (Previous week: 2905)  +8
Total horizontal wells drilled: 2446 (Previous week: 2439)  +7
Total horizontal wells producing: 2072 (Previous week: 2057)  +15
Utica rig count: 17 (Previous week: 20)  -3

Connect with us on Facebook and Twitter!