Corbett: It is not my intention to alter or affect the agreed-to terms of any existing lease

QFFECE THE Governor      
July 9, 2013



Today I signed Senate Bill 259, which amends Act 60 of 1979, commonly referred to as the Guaranteed 

Minimum Royalty Act. This legislation provides enhanced transparency to owners of oil and gas interests 

by requiring, at a minimum, that certain information which pertains to the payment for oil or gas production 

be disclosed on a royalty check stub or other means provided to the interest owner on a regular basis. 

These are important steps to better inform landowners and leaseholders regarding the production occurring 

from their property.  



I am aware of several questions and concerns which have been 'raised with regard to Section 4 of Senate 

Bill 259, which added a new Section 2.1 to the underlying statute. By signing this legislation, it is my 

intention, and I believe that of the General Assembly, to enhance the efficient development of oil and 

natural gas while safeguarding the rights and protections of landowners and leaseholders. 



It is not my intention to alter or affect the common-law Rule of Apportionment, or to alter or affect the 

agreed-to terms of any existing lease. I believe the constitutional protections which guard against legislative

impairment of contracts serves as an added backstop to these concerns.  



Moreover, I do not believe anything in Senate Bill 259 expands the ability of an oil or gas operator to define the size of a drilling unit, or to expand the ability of any operator to hold by production any parcels of leased land. Instead, the legal clarity provided by this legislation will further minimize environmental impacts and 

surface disturbance associated with oil or gas development; maximize the economic benefits of royalties 

realized by landowners and leaseholders; expand the number of royalty owners in the Commonwealth by 

encouraging the efficient development of oil and gas resources; and ensure that landowners and 

leaseholders are compensated fairly.  



I look forward to working with members of the General Assembly on additional, future steps to ensure that the interests of landowners are paramount.  



Sincerely, 

TOM CORBETT  

Governor

Views: 6698

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by JREwing on July 11, 2013 at 2:04am

Hi Scott and thank you for your kind and measured reply.  Fwiw, I could argue this subject matter from either side equally as fervently.  I just chose to play devil's advocate to show the other side.  Samuel Orr tried as well, and was also lambasted.  lol  Land owners on GMS get tunnel vision; blind to opposing points of view without using logical thought and reason.  Contrary to what Frank Walker thinks, I am not in any way shape or form related to an O&G company and I am not an attorney.  I am a PA landowner just like he is.  I did note in both of my posts that the passing of this bill was unfortunate for the affected landowners(believe me when I say I know firsthand).  If Frank thinks I'm a company man, he should ask me privately what I think of HK.  lol  I was just trying to make him think.  I do admire his unrelenting loyalty to PA land owners.

The affected landowners(my family included) signed leases with the intent of being drilled for shallow wells, and now additionally can be pooled into Marcellus and Utica units.  Nope, no bonus money or lease redo, but will they be better off or worse off(from their original leasing position)when the royalty checks start rolling in from their Marcellus or Utica wells?  I think better off.  I know we will be.

The fair/unfair issues, persecution complexes, envy and greed that I see on this site from land owners gets under my skin once in awhile.  lol

Again, thanks for the reply.

Permalink Reply by Rick Rodgers on July 12, 2013 at 5:44am

Scott, it sounds like you have read the bill and know what you're talking about.  Can you tell me, does this legislation also affect landowners who have an old well (from say 1920's or 30's) that has continued to keep the lease HBP by paying very small amounts?  The leases from this time of course did not have language about pooling.  Should this lease be assigned to a large Gas Company who wants to include the leased acreage in a unit, would they still have to negotiate for pooling rights, or does this legislation also affect these types of leases. 

Permalink Reply by Rick on July 12, 2013 at 7:56am

JR then why do the O&G companies want a redo? why couldnt they play by the rules in place at the time THEY signed? Like youi said sign or dont sign... they knew the industry... they had the best lawyers... they have done unitization for many years before that..they should have had the forsight to know they might need unitization at some point in the future.. BUT like you said THEY want a redo! you are being hypocritical in your stance... i cant believe you dont see your own hyprocracy?

You say landowners may see royalties they never imagined... but they may also see destruction and loss of use of their land that could never have imagined... you seem to be very closed minded, and fail to see both sides of the issue.

Permalink Reply by JREwing on July 12, 2013 at 1:49pm
I'm finished arguing this subject. I did my best to try and help people understand the big picture here, but to no avail. If you are angry, please contact your state representative or senator. I'm sure they can explain their position better than I can for them. For reference, the house vote was: yeas 167 to 33 nays. The senate vote was 48 yeas to 2 nays. The Governor signed the bill. Essentially, almost every member if our state government must have been bought lock-stock-and barrel by the O&G industry huh? And once again, while I empathize with the landowners affected by this bill's passage, I believe they are certainly no worse off today than they were when they signed their leases. I wish all of the affected land owners the very best of luck getting this bill repealed. Look yourselves in the mirror gentleman and convince yourselves it's about what's fair and NOT about money. Were you happy with that lease you signed years ago or were you under duress, maybe with a pistol to your temple huh?

I certainly realize I took an unpopular position on this issue, but you beef is NOT with me. Call your Congressmen and Senator.

Ciao
Permalink Reply by paleface on July 12, 2013 at 2:19pm

 Its gonna be hard for land owners that were getting $23.00 a month and now could see many thousands a month to be angry with the decision.

Permalink Reply by Trapper on July 13, 2013 at 2:06am

I tend to agree with you paleface. Too bad folks can't seem to see past the bonus. The production from even a poor horizontal well will blow the shallow vertical out of the water. It's strictly business and what do we really want ? Myself , I just want to see some royalties and , hopefully , get to retire a few years early! The only way that is going to happen is if I get drilled.

Permalink Reply by Rick on July 13, 2013 at 3:21am

Your best wasnt good enough JR! Ha! You still seem to be unable to understand the issue. Let alone simple logic.

Permalink Reply by paleface on July 13, 2013 at 4:14am

 Be careful JR,they'll shoot you again.

Permalink Reply by Frank Nesmith on July 10, 2013 at 12:24pm

Let's hope the lawsuits start quickly :(

Permalink Reply by paleface on July 10, 2013 at 12:37pm

 If you had a shallow well lease and now you are being pooled into a Marcellus would that pooling be sub surface for your Marcellus or utica ? not a surface lease if so that sounds like a good deal to me.

Permalink Reply by Mark McGrail on July 10, 2013 at 2:26pm

Frank,

Once a company attempts to take advantage of the ambiguity in the wording of this legislation it will affect numerous land owners, At that point a class action suit could be filed ( I am not an attorney this is my opinion). Hopefully, an enterprising/philanthropic law firm will take the case. Thus the expense will be mitigated.

There is the other option which I stated earlier. We can petition the legislature and DEP to put in place rules/guidelines  as to how this "pooling" may be applied.

2z248p19vqnh9Permalink Reply by 2z248p19vqnh9 on July 10, 2013 at 4:06pm

Mark McGrail, maybe it should be thought of in this manner...CorBETt stated that this was not intended to 'allow advantage' to G/O Co.'s...and IF (when) they OVERSTEP any potential bounds - PA should be held responsible, as well as the G/O Co.'s. Do you beLIEve it? Time always does tell (unfortunately). Heads or Tails? - your call?

IF the intentions were to be to the LANDOWNER's advantage - let's see if they STAND BEHIND THEIR WORDS & IF they are 'worth their salt' - NOT a 'mask'. (MASK of SHAME? - time...). *Uncle Billy's SALT...?

---------------------------

*Many a thing is said in jest?...maybe they are just joking? (here, I AM just joking...) - the old, 'I never thought that would happen...let's see where this goes'. Not at all saying that I agree - I agree to disagree...and guess that we'll JUST HAVE TO WAIT & SEE! Right is Right & Wrong is Wrong - right? RIGHT! 'A is A' & 'B is B'. NO 'apples to oranges'...pull the wool over the landowner's eyes. Big bad WOLF?...

I think what people have somehow 'lost' their overall comprehension of WHAT 'government' IS/ *SHOULD BE* today. Government is overall pretty simple - facts are this...that 'THEY' (government employees) receive a paycheck (YES - a PAYCHECK!) to REPRESENT YOU. YOU being the taxpayer/landowner.

Came up with an interesting concept years ago that I know won't fly, but sure makes sense...

...IF you PAY your taxes - THEN you have a right to say where YOUR $$$ goes. (IF you DON'T 'pay'...being 'one's share of taxes' - you can't 'play'...). I know that'll never fly, so I don't say it much (BUT - THAT would be a 'right way of doing things', wouldn't it?). *You get what you PAY for?

Here was another idea - to 'keep things fair' - IF you PAY (taxes) you get a number of votes - based on ratio of tax$/vote (ratio)...the 'everyone/everyone elses' still get their vote - but only 1 - or even JUST A 'HALF-VOTE'. CRAZY, I know, but it makes pretty good sense to me. Like I said, I know it'll never fly (maybe if pigs had wings?...). Just a thought - everyone still has 'rights to thoughts' here in America, right?). God only knows - leave it to Him.... Blowin' in the wind, I am. Ha-Ha!

Boy, give an inch, take a mile...stranger things have happened. Don't Give Up the Ship! If THEY could do it 200 years ago...WE can still 'do it' today. Here's the thing - HOW DO YOU KNOW (or not)...that 'they' didn't receive phonecalls saying NO to this G/O259?

DO YOU?...anything can be 'claimed/said'...how do you KNOW that they didn't receive calls from people saying NO to this O/G259? *Follow the money. *He who has the gold makes the rules. *Takes one to know one(?).... You never know....

As one light lights another, nor grows less - so nobleness enkindles nobleness. All is fair in 'pooling' & war? Things keep building a stronger & stronger case to the G/O Co.'s really knowing what a 'golden nugget' they have here in PA+...the fact that they have to 'dot the I's, cross the T's...'HOG-TYING landowners' - hobbling them...there are stranger things afoot that what is being said...TIME will tell. I just have this 'gut' feeling on this - strange...and I am NOT 'touchy-feely' of mind. I am of like mind with you all - WHAT is going on with all of this?

Mercer Co., Pa. - strange. Rumors of various layers that weren't before understood...talk of all the wells not being 'worth their salt' - yet they are still pursuing drilling...refineries being built...pipelines being put into place ('horizon' / infrastructure?)...on & on & on... Ever get the feeling that the 'writing's ON THE WALL', but it's in 'invisible ink'? Who knows? The shadow knows! Interesting propaganda plays...strange days.

-----------------------------

Mark - you said an interesting thought...OK, O/G259 passed - when it needs tweeked - let's TWEEK IT! (but then you've got to believe that you'll be heard...). Tough Nut.

Landowners are just squirrels - trying to keep their trees & nuts! (and minds!) - WHEW!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service