Lawyers Warn Pipeline Case May Turn Midstreamers “On Their Heads”
A couple of legal beagles from the Fox Rothschild law firm (in NJ) are sounding the alarm that two bankruptcy court decisions in New York State are threatening to up-end the midstream industry across the country. We tend to agree with them. Earlier this year, MDN brought you the news that a NY bankrutpcy court judge had allowed Sabine Oil & Gas, going through bankruptcy, to cancel a pipeline gathering contract with Cheniere’s Nordheim Eagle Ford Gathering in Texas (see Midstream Nightmare Comes True: Judge Lets Driller Cancel Contracts). Nordheim spent $84 million building a pipeline system to Sabine’s wells. In return for laying out that kind of money, Sabine, as is always the case, signed a multi-year contract with Nordheim (10 years in this case), ensuring Nordheim would make a profit on its up-front investment. The judge allowed Sabine to carte blanche cancel the deal several years into the contract. We asked at the time: If a driller signs a contract and that signature is no longer any good, will anyone build pipeline systems anymore? A pair of lawyers delve into the case and point out: “If other judges follow the analysis and conclusions reached in the Sabine Oil case, the expectations of midstream service providers in the oil and gas extraction process might be turned on their heads.” Indeed…
Read More “Lawyers Warn Pipeline Case May Turn Midstreamers “On Their Heads””
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, like many liberal Democrats, loves to pick winners and losers. Recently Cuomo launched an “ambitious” new Clean Energy Standard in which he puts his bets on nuclear energy. That is, he’s willing to transfer billions of New Yorker’s hard-earned taxpayer dollars out of their pockets and into the pockets of nuclear power companies. Why? In order to prop them up, make them “competitive” with much cheaper natural gas-powered electric plants. That is, Cuomo cheats. He wants to stack the deck. And New York’s natgas power generators are not having it. They’ve sued the state, challenging the Clean Energy Standard that steals money out of our pockets in order to prop up nuclear companies, all using the excuse of “global warming”…
In June MDN brought you a report about a family (John and Ashley Voyle) living near a former Range Resources wastewater impoundment in Washington County, PA who had sued not only Range, but a water testing company (TestAmerica Laboratories) in a lawsuit alleging their water well had been contaminated by Range’s impoundment. The water testing company was made part of the lawsuit because, said the Voyles, the company allowed their test results to be doctored by Range before the results were reported to the PA Dept. of Environmental Protection. That aspect of this long, drawn-out lawsuit has been decided. The judge in the case said TestAmerica is not at fault and has been removed from the lawsuit…
The table has been turned on Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and her corrupt co-conspirator, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. A U.S. District Court Judge in Texas has granted Exxon the right to examine “internal phone records, other communications and depositions” related to Healey’s involvement in attempting to persecute Exxon Mobil for daring to say man-made global warming may not be all it’s cracked up to be. Perhaps the judge will also extend his order to NY AG Eric Schnedierman too? That would be terrific. At a minimum, when Exxon goes fishing, no doubt communications (i.e. corrupt collusion) between Healey and Schneiderman will be found and exposed to the light of day for all to see. In our wildest dreams both AGs will be forced to resign–an appropriate action considering their rabidly radical views against, and attempts to criminalize, fossil fuels. Here’s the low down on what the judge said and did…
In September the Ohio Supreme Court finally ruled on a series of cases involving the state’s Dormant Mineral Act, or DMA (see 
We remember watching Marlin Perkins on “Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom” growing up. For the younger generations, it was a TV program roughly the equivalent of watching today’s Discovery channel. In particular we remember watching a wildebeest being taken down by a pack of jackals. The jackals would watch for an advantage–a wildebeest that was old and slow, or wounded, or maybe too young to keep up with the herd. They would single it out and one after another jump on it to bring it down. That’s the image that floated through our heads as we noticed a sudden surge of law firms filing class action lawsuits against Chesapeake Energy. No, these lawsuits have nothing to do with Chesapeake shorting landowners in their royalty checks–there’s already a bunch of those lawsuits. These lawsuits are new and stem from the recent announcement that the U.S. Department of Justice, Securities and Exchange Commission and even the U.S. Postal Service have launched investigations into Chesapeake (see 
Since April of 2014, MDN has written about and monitored a new project to build a $615 million electrical generating plant in Marshall County, WV that will burn Marcellus Shale gas (see 
As a general rule and principle, local control over decisions that affect an entire community is a good thing. Our great country as founded gives precedence to individual freedom. However, what do you do when two neighbors disagree on an important, community-changing issue? Our founding fathers wrestled with this concept and crafted an ingenious solution. If everyone in a community voted on every issue, the founding fathers recognized such a system descends into mob rule. However, in order to preserve democracy and cherished individual freedom, people should have the right to vote. Instead of voting on every issue, the founders created a system where citizens vote for small groups of representatives who act as a buffer between the “mob” and common sense/fairness for everyone–people who dedicate their time to understanding issues, how their constituents feel about those issues, and then voting in accordance with their own conscience and findings. Such a representative democracy is called a republic, which is the political system we have in the United States (NOT a straight up democracy). Even among the layers of elected representatives (local, state, federal) there is a pecking order. The founders recognized there are certain rights and issues best decided and enforced on either the federal or state level, rather than the local level. Each local community (lets call it a township) does NOT have the right to craft its own constitution and confer rights on individuals, corporations, eco-systems or any other entity. Conferring of such rights is the purview of either the federal or state government–NOT a local government. For example, in every state in the union oil and gas development is regulated by the state–not by local entities. In some states, Pennsylvania among them, zoning can affect and influence oil and gas development–where it happens, when it happens–but not control how it happens. So what if a community decides to ban oil and gas development (or pipelines, or injection wells)–in other words, “whether” such an activity happens? Such a ban is illegal. Introducing zoning regulations that result in a de facto ban is also illegal–but it’s happening in pockets across the Keystone State. Perhaps it’s time to criminally charge local representatives who pass these illegal laws (laws that trample individual property rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution) under a PA law called “official oppression.” That’s what the Pennsylvania Independent Oil & Gas Association (PIOGA) is considering right now…
Last Friday the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association (PIOGA) filed a letter with the PA Joint House Senate Committee on Documents asking them to NOT publish the Dept. of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) final Chapter 78a Marcellus Drilling regulations, citing last week’s PA Supreme Court ruling on Act 13 as the basis. As MDN previously reported, the DEP plans to publish the final regulations in this week’s Oct. 8 Pennsylvania Bulletin (see 
Yesterday MDN reported that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has essentially gutted the rest of the Act 13 drilling law passed in 2012 (see 
Following up on yesterday’s Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision to eviscerate the rest of the 2012 Act 13 drilling law (see