Showing posts with label Road Construction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Road Construction. Show all posts

Monday, June 17, 2013

USGS Report Released on Landscape Disturbance Due to Gas Exploration- Fayette and Lycoming Counties


On June 3, 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey released a report on the potential consequences of constructing well pads, new roads, and pipelines for natural gas and coalbed methane exploration on surrounding ecosystems and wildlife. Disturbances such as forest loss were recorded. In Fayette County, the study showed disturbances on the west side of the county. More than 4,362 acres were disturbed due to 1,297 natural gas extractions sites. In Lycoming County, more than 1,040 acres were disturbed mostly in the eastern and western edges of the county. The data collected during the study will be used to assess the effects of these disturbances and land-cover changes.

Written By Sarah Doyle – Research Assistant

The Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

June 17, 2013

Thursday, June 6, 2013

Valley Rod & Gun Club v. Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC., No. 3:CV-13-0725, 2013 WL 2393003 (M.D. Pa. June 3, 2013).

On June 3, 2013, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania ruled on a gas well operator’s motion to dismiss a landowner’s claims of trespass and conversion/misappropriation by the company. Defendant operator Chesapeake and Plaintiff landowner Valley Rod & Gun Club executed a lease that contained provisions allowing Defendant access to the Plaintiff’s property, granting a right of entry, permission to construct a well pad, the privilege to install and use roads, and utilize oil, gas and non-domestic water for the storage of gas. Defendant and Plaintiff, disagreed on the location of the well, and Defendant chose a location against the owner’s requests that damaged the Plaintiff’s surface property. Defendant, via its sub-contractor, utilized stone, fill, rock, trees and mulch on the Club’s property to construct the access roads to the pad, without permission of the owner. The court dismissed the trespass claim because the lease granted Defendant a right of entry to the Plaintiff’s land, an absolute defense to trespass. The court explained that the lease provisions privileged the Defendant to install and use roads on the surface estate, and lacked provisions that restricted access where the Defendant’s otherwise had a right to be. The court, however, denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss the conversion and misappropriation claim. The court explained the Plaintiff plead facts sufficient to demonstrate that the stone, fill, rock, trees and mulch were not utilized by Defendant in sitework incidental to the extraction of oil and gas, but rather in the construction of access roads.

Written by: Garrett Lent, Research Assistant
Penn State Law, Agricultural Law Center
June 2013