Forced pooling to be tested in PA. - GoMarcellusShale.com2024-03-28T16:58:43Zhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/forum/topics/forced-pooling-to-be-tested-in-pa?commentId=2274639%3AComment%3A507718&feed=yes&xn_auth=noInteresting to see Ms. Matteo…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5077432013-10-11T21:43:24.530ZTrapperhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/GlennArmstrong
<p>Interesting to see Ms. Matteo mentioned in the New Castle News today as being discredited for making false claims pertaining to drilling in Pulaski Twp.,Lawrence County,PA.............fractivist? One never can be too sure about some people's motives I guess..............</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Interesting to see Ms. Matteo mentioned in the New Castle News today as being discredited for making false claims pertaining to drilling in Pulaski Twp.,Lawrence County,PA.............fractivist? One never can be too sure about some people's motives I guess..............</p>
<p> </p> If the setback of 500 feet ap…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5077252013-10-11T14:44:38.028ZJamesGhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JamesGillett
<p>If the setback of 500 feet appilies to surface activities, then what you describe is petty much what we now have in PA. The PA Act 13 500 feet appiles to dwellings currently but not property lines. The activity in our area is limited from 7 AM to 7 PM 6 days a week and none on some holidays. No truck traffic within 15 minutes of any school bus travel. Any change in well quality and quantity within a year is assumed to be the fault of the operator and must be replaced at operator expense…</p>
<p>If the setback of 500 feet appilies to surface activities, then what you describe is petty much what we now have in PA. The PA Act 13 500 feet appiles to dwellings currently but not property lines. The activity in our area is limited from 7 AM to 7 PM 6 days a week and none on some holidays. No truck traffic within 15 minutes of any school bus travel. Any change in well quality and quantity within a year is assumed to be the fault of the operator and must be replaced at operator expense per Act 13. Sound levels at any property boundary must be less than 60 db. Sound studies are approved in advance before the start of pad construction.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This is what we now have. I think it is difficult to ask for much more from the operators. It is hard to think of other activities so controlled. </p>
<p>I think your proposed lease terms with no surface activity would be accepted by most operators for small parcels The trick may be obtaining details of the other leases that are not just rumors or bragging.</p>
<p>Again the issue of forced pooling is to some extent an issue to just stop drilling period and used to stir up landowners. It is like a magic act that diverts the attention from the real agenda of those that wish to dictate and control energy policy for their own varied purposes. Off topic but has some truth.</p> I don't agree with not using…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5077182013-10-11T13:22:38.721ZJim Litwinowiczhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JimLitwinowicz
<p>I don't agree with not using public roads but there are a few things that can be done to reduce impact. Limit hours of heavy truck traffic to 7 AM to 10 PM. 500' setback from any property that was force pooled. No surface activity on their property. (In return for a no surface lease, companies usually will pay a smaller bonus, often 50% of other leases. So people forced pooled should be paid 75% of the most recent bonus paid to others in unit) Multiple water tests after completion.....maybe…</p>
<p>I don't agree with not using public roads but there are a few things that can be done to reduce impact. Limit hours of heavy truck traffic to 7 AM to 10 PM. 500' setback from any property that was force pooled. No surface activity on their property. (In return for a no surface lease, companies usually will pay a smaller bonus, often 50% of other leases. So people forced pooled should be paid 75% of the most recent bonus paid to others in unit) Multiple water tests after completion.....maybe quarterly for two years once well is in production. More tests if well is reworked.</p> A fair balance of all interes…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5075442013-10-11T02:56:02.782ZVictoria Smithhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/VictoriaSmith
<p>A fair balance of all interests may be to respect the unsigned owners' positions, include them in the pool with a lease including restrictions including but not llimited to no pads, roads, lights, noise on or near the unsigned owners' property and also do not use the roads bordering the unsigned owners' properties for drilling related traffic. I know the roads are public but, in the interest of meeting an agreement with everyone, the drillers could agree to the traffic restriction. The…</p>
<p>A fair balance of all interests may be to respect the unsigned owners' positions, include them in the pool with a lease including restrictions including but not llimited to no pads, roads, lights, noise on or near the unsigned owners' property and also do not use the roads bordering the unsigned owners' properties for drilling related traffic. I know the roads are public but, in the interest of meeting an agreement with everyone, the drillers could agree to the traffic restriction. The unsigned owners are trying to be the best stewards of their land that they can be, but in response to the collective of landowners in their community, I think an agreement outside a court mandate would make for peace rather than a court forcing perhaps every party into a compromised position that is less than ideal for any of the parties. </p> Good points and you are corre…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5075432013-10-11T02:45:34.248ZJamesGhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JamesGillett
<p>Good points and you are correct. That is what happens. This is particularly true in PA where the land is quite hilly and does not follow anything close to rectangular shapes. </p>
<p>Good points and you are correct. That is what happens. This is particularly true in PA where the land is quite hilly and does not follow anything close to rectangular shapes. </p> FMV; actually forced pooling…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5074512013-10-11T02:06:11.005ZJim Litwinowiczhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JimLitwinowicz
<p>FMV; actually forced pooling has a large impact on surface disturbance.Couple years ago the Pittsburgh PG did an article on it and had two maps of Washington County, one with 20% of the land not leased and one that showed the potential if forced polling was allowed and all land in the county was produced. The one with forced pooling had approx half the number of pads, pipelines, and access roads.</p>
<p>When there are holdouts that don't lease, it forces odd shaped units of varying sizes.…</p>
<p>FMV; actually forced pooling has a large impact on surface disturbance.Couple years ago the Pittsburgh PG did an article on it and had two maps of Washington County, one with 20% of the land not leased and one that showed the potential if forced polling was allowed and all land in the county was produced. The one with forced pooling had approx half the number of pads, pipelines, and access roads.</p>
<p>When there are holdouts that don't lease, it forces odd shaped units of varying sizes. These haphazard shapes leave a lot of leased land inaccessible, makes pipelines snake around parcels, and does not allow for a repeatable pattern of development. Mkaes a mess and drives up cost.</p> The lateral spacing will depe…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-11:2274639:Comment:5074012013-10-11T01:20:01.400ZJamesGhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JamesGillett
<p>The lateral spacing will depend on the shale properties. This varies considerably. This is known to be dofferent between the shale plays in Texas and Pennsylvania. Even within the Marcellus shale the extent of the frack varies considerably between well locations SW PA and NE PA. The seismic signals show the fracks vary considerably within the same well along the lateral. There is no value that can be universally applied. Perhaps a "courtesy" value of 100 to 150 feet could be applied…</p>
<p>The lateral spacing will depend on the shale properties. This varies considerably. This is known to be dofferent between the shale plays in Texas and Pennsylvania. Even within the Marcellus shale the extent of the frack varies considerably between well locations SW PA and NE PA. The seismic signals show the fracks vary considerably within the same well along the lateral. There is no value that can be universally applied. Perhaps a "courtesy" value of 100 to 150 feet could be applied for the setback of the well bore for the property line. The question is in the end what does this accomplish for the small property owner? Really not much just a feel good number. I have observed well bore offsets of 150 feet in lateral plats in anticipation potential trespass issues although not required by law. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Interesting discussion but I still think worrying about small properties a mile underground is a minor issue compared to other property rights including the surface infringed by zoning which can change by the whims of a few. After all zoning is just eminent domain without the money. Look at the number of landowners that would like to lease their property but the larger agendas of others are denying them hundreds of thousands of dollars. Look at the landowners in NY next to PA as an example. Getting off topic a little. Just do not have a knee jerk reaction to "forced pooling" and the "rule of capture". Know where the alternative may take you and be used by others with less noble agendas.. </p>
<p> </p> James,
A general practical s…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-10:2274639:Comment:5072782013-10-10T23:30:20.310ZFairMktValuehttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/GBrooks
<p>James,</p>
<p><em> A general practical setback would be difficult to determine</em></p>
<p>I disagree. A practical setback is already essentially in use by the industry right now in the form of lateral spacing of the bores. They are experimenting with tightening up this spacing but, just for the sake of argument lets say it settles out at 400 to 500 ft.</p>
<p>So set at 400 ft. Yes the natural cracks will still feed the man made ones, no problem. I just would not want the man made ones…</p>
<p>James,</p>
<p><em> A general practical setback would be difficult to determine</em></p>
<p>I disagree. A practical setback is already essentially in use by the industry right now in the form of lateral spacing of the bores. They are experimenting with tightening up this spacing but, just for the sake of argument lets say it settles out at 400 to 500 ft.</p>
<p>So set at 400 ft. Yes the natural cracks will still feed the man made ones, no problem. I just would not want the man made ones trespassing on my un leased property.</p>
<p> <em>The idea of pooling is to minimize surface damage which is a good idea</em></p>
<p>Don't think that really applies to the horizontal drilling now being done. One well pad can now cover quite a bit more ground than the conventional vertical wells.</p>
<p>Pooling itself is still not a bad thing - I just do not want to be forced into something that benefits a small number of people that have made a decision to lease their property . If my property stands in the way of their profit, they may have just made a bad decision. </p>
<p>Forcing takes away what little leverage the landowner has.</p>
<p></p> I know it sounds unfair but o…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-10:2274639:Comment:5074412013-10-10T22:34:07.633ZJamesGhttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JamesGillett
<p>I know it sounds unfair but oil seeps from sands and forms pools. I have had an oil well for the last 10 years 150 feet from my property line taking oil in a pool that is surely in part located underneath my property. I cannot do a thing but drill another well and draw from the same pool. Your point of naturally migrate sounds good but what is natural. The best Marcellus wells in PA have natural existing fractures that feed the man made fracture network near the well bore. Without these…</p>
<p>I know it sounds unfair but oil seeps from sands and forms pools. I have had an oil well for the last 10 years 150 feet from my property line taking oil in a pool that is surely in part located underneath my property. I cannot do a thing but drill another well and draw from the same pool. Your point of naturally migrate sounds good but what is natural. The best Marcellus wells in PA have natural existing fractures that feed the man made fracture network near the well bore. Without these pre existing fractures the wells are not very good. They are referred to as joints and are largely responsible for determining the orientation of the well bores in PA. A general practical setback would be difficult to determine. Lots of money to be made arguing in front of judges with limited backgrounds. The simplicity of the rule of capture has significant practical utility. Defining an alternative would be difficult. </p>
<p>The idea of pooling is to minimize surface damage which is a good idea. Look at oil field pictures from 100 years ago and the surface impact. </p>
<p>The alternative to solve sub surface disputes is to have the government own the mineral rights and then nobody owns anything. This eliminates the trepass issue. The government will do with the property what and when it wants. This could be accomplished by heavily taxing sub surface property and make it so no private person can afford the luxury of owning property a mile below the surface. Be careful what you wish for in the form of regulation and ownership. I vote for the status quo.</p> I would hope at this point ru…tag:gomarcellusshale.com,2013-10-10:2274639:Comment:5072592013-10-10T20:10:29.479ZRagnars Repohttps://gomarcellusshale.com/profile/JohnOhorodnyk
I would hope at this point rule of capture has been explained to him and others.
I would hope at this point rule of capture has been explained to him and others.