Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Overhaul Ohio's oil and gas laws: editorial

Good Afternoon:

The following represents our continued effort to bring information out to the community:

The Plain Dealer Editorial Board
 
oil.jpg
Oil workers on a drilling rig owned by Chesapeake Energy in Carroll County.
Gov. John Kasich is right to call for an increase in Ohio's severance tax on oil and gas and a new impact fee to help localities deal with the consequences -- in road wear, as just one example -- of expanded drilling and "fracking." But it's not enough.
If shale oils and gases are as bountiful under Ohio as the industry suspects, the state needs to tighten regulations more broadly to protect its groundwater and citizens and to expand the state's capacity to monitor the industry.
Kasich promised "tough environmental rules" in his State of the State speech (pdf) last week. They need to be state-of-the-art and include tougher liability and bonding requirements along with enough fracking-liquids disclosure to allow communities, if they so choose, to conduct baseline testing of groundwater before drilling begins.
Ohio also needs to revisit flawed laws that have removed virtually all drilling oversight from localities, given regulatory authority to a board dominated by oil and gas interests and forced some private landowners into drilling pools if within 20 acres of a neighbor who's cut such a deal. That's just wrong.
Increasing severance taxes is a good place to start. At current rates of taxation and production, they produce a pittance: $2.07 million statewide in natural-gas severance tax, and $487,165 for oil in fiscal 2010.
Ohio's severance tax rates are so far below the national norm that the Policy Matters Ohio think tank calculates (pdf) Ohio will forgo up to $538 million by 2015 if the rates aren't increased.
Additionally, highly profitable natural gas liquids are currently untaxed in Ohio; that needs to change.
Finally, Kasich and the General Assembly need to restore funding for the Ohio Geological Survey's seismic monitoring and bolster its resources for mapping and analyzing mineral resources. Those latter jobs are now largely financed by small slices of seven severance taxes, although a "regulatory cost recovery assessment" under a 2010 bill signed into law by former Gov. Ted Strickland goes to state coffers -- a mistake that needs to be rectified.
Producers undoubtedly will decry any significant rate increase or broadening of what the tax covers. But while fracking may offer Ohioans tremendous opportunities, it also brings serious risks and costs. A fair severance tax, fairly applied, and reasonable impact fees are in the public interest.

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Questions to ask industry reps:

Dear Ashtabula Neighbors:

These questions may be a good basis for issues we can raise in our townships, villages and cities as the drilling rigs start rolling down our roads.   Our neighbors in Geauga County provide the following questions for us to ask.

Gail Larson
Rock Creek

Please feel free to ask these questions of all industry reps and encourage
your elected officials to get all the answers to these questions.

To All Concerned Citizens,
Construction on the first Horizontal Hydro-Fracking site in Geauga County
has begun.

It is important for citizens to ask prior to EACH well site approval if
the following concerns have been addressed.

1) Basic protections offered by the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking
Water Act (and a number of other laws) do not apply to Oil and Gas
Drillers due to the “Halliburton Loophole” in the Energy Act of 2005. Do
we know our current state regulations offer adequate protections for our
health or for the protection of our natural resources? Where is the clear
concise list of regulations that the drillers must follow?
Who is making sure these drillers are doing what they are supposed to do?
Who has the manpower to actually do the monitoring?

2) The drill site will have about a 5 acre clear cut pad plus associated
roads. This is a huge area of impervious surface.
Who is checking for the impact on local surface water such as increases in
flooding and erosion? Does the local SWCD have the manpower to do this on
top of all they currently do?
What are the steps to remedy the problem if flooding and or erosion occur?

3) Each time a well is Fracked it requires massive amounts of water. On
the Newcolm Rd. site they estimate 6 million gallons per Frack, for 5
different bores. That is 30 MILLION GALLONS to Frack one site, once.
Where does all that water come from?
What are the remedies if lakes, streams or wells are depleted?

4) Added to all of that water are 4,000 to 7,000 gallons of chemicals. The
oil and gas industry does not have to tell us which chemicals they are
using. We have heard that at least 29 different chemicals used in the
process are toxic, many carcinogenic.
How can citizens be assured that carcinogens or other pollutants will not
show up in their well water – or local stream?
Who will pay for baseline tests to measure any changes in soils and water?
Who will pay for ON GOING tests to measure any changes in soils and water?

  5) After the chemical laden water is pumped at high pressure into the
well – a large percentage comes back out to be trucked away.
  What happens to the fluid that remains in the ground?
  Where does it go?
  How do we KNOW it won’t cause trouble in 5, 20 or 50 years?
  Do they have means to track it?

6) The Fracking Fluid that comes back out is full of the original
chemicals PLUS other substances found in shale – some of them toxic, some
radioactive such as Radon.
How and where are they disposing of this hazardous material?
Are they monitoring the levels of contaminates?
How are they assuring that the holding tanks or open holding ponds do not
leak?
How do they assure that the holding ponds do not overflow in a heavy rain?
Do they need to placard the trucks to show that they are hauling toxic/
radioactive material?
Who makes that decision?
How is it monitored?

7) Toxic gasses and other pollutants are often known to be released as
water evaporates in holding ponds and holding tanks.  How is evaporation
from the Frack water ponds monitored?

 8) How do they know that in the within the horizontal foot print of a
possible 2 MILE radius that there are no faults, seams or old wells that
could cause methane or other substances to migrate?

 9) Over the life of this site – there will be many thousands of truck
trips. How will the noise and pollution from the trucks be monitored?
How will Truck traffic affect the surrounding neighborhood?
How will normal traffic be maintained in times of peak truck traffic?
How will safety be maintained on the roads?
Who pays for increased manpower if it is needed to handle issues caused by
excess traffic?
What happens if the cost of road repair work exceeds the amount held in
escrow?

10) When the well is in production, other excess gasses often get released
to atmosphere or burned off – what are the monitoring measures?
What are the requirements of the driller to notify the public about
noxious fumes?

11)  Will Pipelines and/or Transmission stations be used to move the final
product? If so, where will pipelines and transmission stations be located?
Will the public know this before construction starts?
What kind of clear cut is required along a pipe line?
How much noise is produced by a transmission station?
What gasses can be released at this point?
How are the gasses monitored along the pipeline? At the transmission
stations?
If the gasses cause foul odors, headaches, nausea etc… what recourse does
a home owner have? Is there a way to the track incidents of these
symptoms?

12) If the “highly unlikely” happens and gasses migrate into wells and
houses blow up, (which has happened right here in Geauga County) or people
get sick from toxins released into the air or water, or an earthquake
occurs because of subterranean disruptions, or a truck accident spills
gallons of toxic sludge into the river ….
How is the public notified?
Who pays ALL of the costs of the clean up?
Who pays medical bills of people harmed?
How do you assess damages to livestock?
How do you asses the damage to wildlife?
If Brine blowback or a spill pollutes a farm field – how are damages
assessed?
What happens if neighbors loose their wells and then can’t afford to move
because the properties can’t be sold?

13) We have heard from the Oil and Gas Industries that Fracking is NOT a
new process and that they have been Fracking vertical wells for many years
– implying that the technology is the same.  THEN they say that there have
been no examples of problems with Horizontally Fracked wells and use ONLY
the numbers based on the new Horizontal technology – leaving out all
history of problems with vertical wells.
So, which is it?
 Is it new technology with an unknown history?
Or is it a new application of an existing technology that has had some
history of failure in the past?
How can the industry reps keep claiming that they have a spotless safety
record when news reports from all over the US have described Blow backs,
wellhead failures, fires, and leaks – why don’t these incidents count?

14) What is the big hurry? The Shale is not going anywhere.
The Gas within the Shale evidently takes a lot of work to release - so it
is not going anywhere.

Natural Gas prices are low right now... so this is not market driven.
It looks as though the big boom is driven by the industry's fear that
regulation will increase.
ASK the companies -If your processes are safe - why do you fear regulation?
Is it that the industry knows that when the public sees the effect of this
drilling, home owners will no longer be willing to lease their land?
 Unfortunately, then it could be too late.
It is only responsible for ALL of us to ask these questions prior to
drilling.

The entire community will pay the extended costs of this risky endeavor.
Kathy Flora

Article "New York Court Affirms Towns’ Powers to Ban Fracking"

Dear Trumbull Township neighbors,
Here is an interesting article on local communities trying to gain control of their own futures.

Gail Larson
.

by Lena Groeger
ProPublica, Feb. 22, 2012, 5:51 p.m.
Opponents and supporters of fracking walk into the last of four public hearings on proposed gas drilling regulations in New York state on Nov. 30, 2011. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
In a decision that could set a national precedent for how local governments can regulate gas drilling, a New York state court yesterday ruled for the first time that towns have the right to ban drilling despite a state regulation asserting they cannot.
At issue was a zoning law in Dryden, a township adjacent to Ithaca and the Cornell University campus, where drilling companies have leased some 22,000 acres for drilling. In August, Dryden's town board passed a zoning law that prohibits gas drilling within town limits. The next month, Denver-based Anschutz Exploration Corp. sued the town, saying the ban was illegal because state law trumped the municipal rules.

As Anschutz noted, New York law promotes the development of oil and gas resources in the state [1]. State Supreme Court Justice Phillip Rumsey addressed this point in his decision, writing [2]: "Nowhere in legislative history provided to the court is there any suggestion that the Legislature intended — as argued by Anschutz — to encourage the maximum ultimate recovery of oil and gas regardless of other considerations, or to preempt local zoning authority."
The Dryden case is merely the latest in a string of similar conflicts arising from Colorado to Pennsylvania that pit local communities against state oil and gas laws. It is common for local governments to zone industrial or commercial land, or to institute ordinances for noise or traffic. When it comes to the development of natural resources like oil and gas, the industry contends that local government shouldn't make those decisions.
In New York, the controversy over state regulation of fracking has been brewing for years. In 2008, New York effectively put drilling on hold [3] while it launched an environmental analysis of fracking, a process that uses a mix of highly pressurized water, sand and other chemicals to crack the earth deep underground. This is the first ruling on an industry effort to use the mineral extraction law to get around local bans.
In addition to the environmental and health concerns over fracking, which we've covered in depth [4], a fundamental issue has been the rights of localities against state or federal laws. According to Eric Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York, the right of local governments to determine their own land use has been guaranteed by the Constitution for over a century.
"The argument is simple," said Goldstein. "New York state laws shouldn't override the authority of local governments to protect their constituents."
In New York, two very similarly worded laws govern the regulation of mining and oil and gas drilling [1]. The oil and gas provision gives the state the power to "regulate the development, production and utilization of natural resources of oil and gas [5]." The town of Dryden argued that it was not trying to regulate fracking but merely trying to protect its citizens and property. It pointed out that courts have allowed towns to ban mining, and said Dryden should be allowed to do the same for fracking. The justice seemed to agree, concluding that the state's oil and gas laws don't prohibit localities from barring drilling.
Anschutz's lawyer, Thomas West, said he was not sure whether the company would appeal the decision. Even if it does so, said Joseph Heath, an environmental attorney in New York, Tuesday's win could help set a precedent for other communities. Despite the threat of similar lawsuits from a major corporation, local fracking bans and moratoriums have continued to grow [6] in the last few years.
"People are now concentrating on local governments because that's the best form of protection against fracking," said Heath.
Such protection is unlikely to come from the states, as New York's Department of Environmental Conservation has already deferred to the courts. When ProPublica interviewed the commissioner last year [7], we asked him specifically about the potential for conflict between local municipalities and states. He said it was likely "that the courts will need to decide these issues in a lawsuit between the town and the drilling company, not the state." Now, it looks as if at least one court has decided.
"[The Dryden case] is an important indicator of how those battles are likely to play out," said the NRDC's Goldstein, "although it's not the final word."

Cancel Chardon Rally

Hello All,

Due to the tragic shooting yesterday at Chardon High, Kathy and I have decided to postpone the Stop Fracking Geauga Rally that was planned for this Saturday. We will announce the new date as soon as we figure out when we can get another permit to use the square. Please help us spread the word.

Thanks,
Jess Schaner

Shale study predicts 65K jobs, $5B GDP growth from drilling by 2014

Please note that the study can be downloaded from this posting.  Let us review both sides of the issue and find a balance that serves our community with overall good.

Robin L Brower
Date: Tuesday, February 28, 2012, 10:42am EST

Jeff Bell
Staff reporter - Business First
Email
Development of Utica shale gas resources in Ohio has the potential to create or support more than 65,680 jobs by 2014 at an average wage of $50,225 a year, according to findings in a study released Tuesday.
The study, commissioned by the Ohio Shale Gas Coalition, also said Utica shale activity could significantly boost Ohio’s gross domestic product and state and local tax revenues.
The coalition, led by the Ohio Chamber of Commerce , hired a team of researchers from Cleveland State University, Ohio State University and Marietta College to conduct the study (download it here). The oil and gas industry, plus politicians such as Gov. John Kasich, have said drilling for natural gas and wet gases such as ethane, butane and propane in the Utica shale formation could become an economic game changer for Ohio.
The research team reached its conclusions after looking at mineral leasing activity, road and bridge construction related to development, drilling and completing wells and building of post-production natural gas infrastructure such as pipelines, processing plants and storage facilities.
The study team said Ohio’s gross domestic product can be expected to increase by $4.9 billion in 2014 due to development of the Utica shale play. That would equal a 1 percent increase in Ohio’s gross domestic product, which would be greater than the average annual statewide growth rate of 0.6 percent for the past 13 years.
In addition, the study found Utica shale activity would boost state and local tax revenues by $433.6 million in 2014, an exponential increase over the $16.5 million generated by such activity last year.
But the study also said the oil and gas industry is facing a number of challenges as it develops the Utica shale play. They involve a combination of low prices and sizable development costs, including the expense of complying with government regulations meant to contain environmental risks from drilling operations.

Please feel free to post your comments here.  The community needs a forum in which it can voice all sides of an opinion in a free speach but responsible way so that a best case matrix can be understood and acted upon.

New group of landowners files suit against Chesapeake

Bringing you good information that is un-biased from valued news organizations:

New Round of Landowners File Suit Against Chesapeake


YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio – Thirty-three landowners in Columbiana County filed a lawsuit late Monday against Chesapeake Exploration LLC, asking a common pleas court there to the declare null and void the oil and gas leases they now hold with the company.
"We're rather ticked off, to put it mildly," says Cynthia Koonce, a plaintiff in the case. "It's like these guys have divided the world amongst themselves."
Koonce, who lives on Guilford Lake in Lisbon and owns 230 acres, signed an oil and gas lease with Denver-based Anschutz Exploration Corp. in 2008. She and the others say the company misrepresented material facts about the energy industry's interest in the area and concealed information regarding the Utica and Marcellus shale, a vast repository of dry and wet gas trapped in shale rock deep beneath eastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania.
According to the complaint, Anschutz scooped up thousands of acres in the region between 2008 and 2010 at a time when few residents of Columbiana County understood the significance of the Utica shale. As such, Anschutz was able to secure these leases at prices well below today's market value, court documents say. Once Anschutz acquired the leases, the company sold them to Chesapeake, court papers say.
"Chesapeake and their assignors knowingly and/or recklessly engaged in a course of conduct in which substantial oil and gas acreage was acquired via land agents who concealed, failed to disclose and/or actively misrepresented material facts in order to persuade landowners to execute leases for as little money as possible," the complaint alleges.
That left landowners with leases in which they received less than 1% of the fair market value for up-front signing bonuses that are now being paid in Columbiana County, court documents say.
"Landowners would not have entered into the Anschutz leases had they received truthful and accurate information as to these material facts," the complaint reads.
Today, leases average between $5,500 and $6,000 per acre in up-front bonus payments, while landowners have negotiated 20% royalties in gross well production.
Also, these landowners argue that the agreements contain a provision that allowed them to seek third party offers or renegotiate before any drilling began, documents say. However, the complaint alleges that Chesapeake has refused to honor that provision, and the plaintiff's attorneys argue that this presents sufficient cause to terminate the lease agreements.
According to court documents, the landowners have received a third party offer to lease their land.
Lee Plakas, an attorney with the Canton firm Tzangas Plakas Mannos & Raies Ltd., and who represents the landowners, says the lease provision protects the landowners' right to receive fair value for their land in the event that the oil company attempted to hold the land without drilling.
Plakas said in a statement that "landowners have a right to receive fair value for their land and to have it put to productive use within a reasonable period of time."
And, the lawsuit claims that the leases were improperly notarized and recorded, and therefore should be negated, court papers say. Moreover, the complaint contends that landowners were not given proper 30-day notification in the case their lease was assigned to another party, thus rendering the agreement null and void.
Gary Corroto, attorney for the landholders, added that under Ohio law, oil and gas leases must be signed and notarized in the presence of a notary public.
"It was common practice of the land agents to have landowners execute their leases in their homes, only to then take the executed lease to a notary, who did not witness the landowners' signature," the complaint says.
Such practice smacks of a similar procedure dubbed "robo signings," in which lenders improperly signed or notarized mortgages or mortgage assignments during the financial crisis, Corroto says.
Plus, he emphasized that landowners must be notified in writing of an attempted assignment of an oil and gas lease within 30 days of the assignment. "Landowners have a right to know who is claiming an interest in their land, and that this statutory notification requirement is an important protection for landowners."
Landowners are seeking termination of the lease, an amount in excess of $25,000 in unjust enrichment, another $25,000 or more in damages because of breach of contract, and at least another $25,000 in damages because of trespassing onto private property.
The latest filing comes as Chesapeake moves forward with its own lawsuit in federal court against 95 landholders in Columbiana and Carroll Counties who are also seeking to terminate leases they initially signed with Anschutz, but are now held by Chesapeake. The group wants to renegotiate the lease terms with another company that has come forth with a more lucrative offer.
Two other lawsuits filed by landowners in Columbiana and Carroll counties were filed against another company, Patriot Energy LLC of Lisbon. Those complaints allege that Patriot acquired leases at rates as low as $5 an acre between 2008 and 2010, and then flipped them the Chesapeake at a rate more than $1,000 an acre.
They also argue, as in the latest filing, that the leases were improperly notarized and should therefore be terminated.
Copyright 2012 The Business Journal, Youngstown, Ohio.

Robin L Brower
Trumbull Township, OH

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Good Morning neighbors!

One of our valued Trumbull Township residents has given me a link that she and her family look to for important information.  We always appreciate good insight and ask that any one who posts to our Blog be kind and respectful.

RoseMarie Cowham

Ashtabula-county-dorset-Twp-Richmond-Twp

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Dear neighbors:

The Chardon City Council is discussing the possibility of a moratorium on Fracking for their properties.  Deb Reiter, Chardon City Council, proposed the moratorium and it was then passed to their Legislative committee.  There are folks in Geauga County as concerned as we are.

I have attached a Letter to the Editor that was printed in the Geauga press last week that is a sample we might use for writing to the Star Beacon and the Gazette.  If we can keep this topic on the front burner for our neighbors, perhaps we will get the attention of the people with the power to help us in the State House.

I would also encourage you to email or call Representative Kozlowski and Senator Cafaro to let them know your hopes and concerns for the future of our county.

Gail Larson

Geauga Times Letter to the Editor on Fracking, Feb. 2012

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Petition on Ohio Legislative Hearings for Fracking

Community Members:

Welcome to the Oil and Gas Watch, Ashtabula County Ohio Blog.  There are many concerned neighbors in our area watching and acting on behalf of our environment.  Help us by commenting, providing information and sharing resources to protect our Communities.  You can begin below:


This is a petition being circulated by Rep. Bob Hagan:

Legislative hearings on Fracking

To be delivered to: The Ohio State House, The Ohio State Senate, and
Governor John Kasich

Demand that the Ohio Legislature have immediate hearing relative to
Fracking in Ohio.

5 bills have been proposed relative to moratorium and regulations of the
growing drilling industry in Ohio, yet we cannot get hearing on any of the
bills.

Bills proposed need to be heard now. We need to let the Speaker of the
Ohio House the Pres. of Ohio Senate know we want hearings.

Please click below to sign on:
http://signon.org/sign/legislative-hearings?source=s.fwd&r_by=2665369

Thank you.