National Association of Royalty Owners
The ONLY national organization representing, solely and without
compromise, oil & gas royalty interests.


Donation goal

NARO PA is focused on Guaranteed Minimum Royalty Act legislation, House Bill 557, which was also amended into House Bill 1401. Every day the legislature is in session, there are events which we must watch carefully to see what impact proposed changes have on you, our royalty owner membership. While all this action might have passed by without your notice, with the representation and guidance of our consultant, Versant Strategies, NARO PA is working hard to protect your interests. It is a tough battle against the most powerful industry lobby in the world. In Harrisburg, on our side NARO PA has one firm, Versant Strategies, with two people working part time for us, while the oil and gas industry lobby may have dozens and dozens of lobbyists on a given day. Our strength is you, our members. Now more than ever we need YOU to take action to protect your royalty interests. STAND UP for your rights!
Warning: browser cookies disabled. Please enable them to use this website.


* Mandatory fields
*First name
*Last name
Phone Number
*Amount ($USD)

Join us for
an informal discussion
of things that matter
to PA mineral owners.

· A discussion of multiunit wells and current legislative activity (HB557)

· Whatever is on YOUR mind!  Bring your questions & concerns

Open to the public.
Please Register.


Capitol Days

Call To Action!
You are needed Harrisburg!

  I am asking each NARO PA member to come to the capitol for at least one session day in December, I have asked you for months to be ready and the time has come to take action! 

    -- Jackie Root

 NARO PA President

Let us know you are coming by choosing your days.  

NARO PA Capitol Days

Let us know you are coming, by choosing your days. 

NARO PA Capitol Days


The Guaranteed Minimum Royalty Bill still exists as House Bill 557 but as you may recall GMRA language was also amended into House Bill 1401 which began as a severance tax bill. HB 1401 was voted out of the Appropriations committee on October 18th (First Consideration) and on November 20 called to the floor for second consideration. 392 amendments have been filed, debate began late on the 20th continuing through 10:45 PM. Both parties caucused the bill early on the 21st and then debate continued until 5:00 PM when the House adjourned. 26 amendments were brought up, 10 were withdrawn, 7 failed, 8 passed and the final amendment debate was left incomplete. Several amendments passed would ease regulations on the oil and gas industry suggesting a predicted movement toward a bill that would impose a severance tax, define the point of valuation for the GMRA and give industry regulatory relief.

                The House will reconvene Monday, December 4th at 1:00 PM where debate on HB 1401 is expected to continue. NARO PA will staff a table in the Rotunda all 9 session days in December, one or more board members will be present, all YOU need to do it show up. Once you sign up Versant Strategies will arrange visits with your legislators depending on availability. 

                No one can predict the outcome for House Bill 1401 but clearly the robust debate indicates a willingness of all parties to negotiate and we are in the game. Make no mistake, House Bill 557 is still in play and we continue to strategize for that option. 

Save the Date

2018 NARO PA 


March 21-23

in State College PA

Legislative Update

We can almost do a victory dance… almost. Section 1610 of HB 453/ printer # 2410, was amended out in the House Rules committee, the bill was then passed by the House and sent back to the Senate. The damaging language referred to as "Temporary Cessation of Production" would have provided an easy avenue for the lessee to bind the lessor to a lease that should have terminated for non production. It was buried in the Fiscal Code in HB 453 and had it not been for NARO PA's presence in the capitol via Versant Strategies this would have quietly passed and become law. We still need to be vigilant and watch that the Senate does not amend it back in hence the victory dance delay! Our work in Harrisburg is producing results.
     The budget battle rages on and it is the only topic considered relevant in the PA House at present. Hopefully we see resolution soon and we can then rally the troops to get HB 557  through the committees and on the floor. The NARO PA board is currently planning for our in person workshop meeting in Harrisburg next month, we will do long range planning for the 2017-18 year, discuss the 2018 convention March 21-23 and also plan for immediate action on HB 557.

     I tell you each month to stand ready to make the call and I ask that you continue to stand ready. Advocating for legislation is a process that we are unable to control, we must plan to act quickly, be ready to alter the game plan on a moment's notice while staying focused on our goal.  Our lobbyist is in touch with me almost daily, reporting on contacts, strategizing, clarifying and planning. Rest assured though it may seem quiet to you, the ground work for passing HB 557 is being laid.


 Jackie Root, 

Chapter President


We are constantly growing and changing! Check back soon for the full, updated Board District Map!

NARO is volunteer led. Many thanks to our dedicated chapter board for their leadership and oversight of Pennsylvania.  NARO is volunteer lead and cannot be effective in our mission work without the time and talent of our volunteers.  If you are interested in getting involved in mineral/royalty owner education and advocacy contact PA President Jackie Root.

To contact a PA Board Member click the link below.

NARO PA BOD 9.2017 WEB2.xlsx

Other Pennsylvania Energy News Updates

February 4, 2016, 

Attorney General vs. Chesapeake Energy.

Two objections were filed in the Attorney General's PA Lawsuit against Chesapeake Energy Corp.  The full documents are available here.

Williams Objection.pdf

CHK Objection.pdf

December 9, 2015

Office of Attorney General lawsuit seeks millions in restitution from energy producer accused of deceptive practices in fracking industry 

HARRISBURG — Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane's office today announced it has filed a lawsuit against Chesapeake Energy Corp., the country's second-largest producer of natural gas, and its affiliates amid allegations the companies underpaid landowners' royalties associated with fracking.

The lawsuit alleges that Chesapeake and other defendants engaged in deceptive conduct in securing fracking leases from Pennsylvania landowners. These alleged deceptive business practices occurred as part of a rush to lock up acreage in the Marcellus Shale region, the country's largest natural gas field that runs through much of the Commonwealth.

"This alleged conduct amounts to a 'bait-and-switch,'" Attorney General Kane said. "Pennsylvania landowners were deceived in thousands of transactions by a company accused of similar conduct in several other states. This lawsuit should serve as notice that we will not allow our residents to be exploited."

The lawsuit, which was filed in the Bradford County Court of Common Pleas, seeks restitution for thousands of consumers, civil penalties and legal costs. It was the result of an extensive investigation by the Office of Attorney General's Antitrust Section and Bureau of Consumer Protection. The investigation focused on counties in northern Pennsylvania. 

According to the lawsuit, the defendants obtained leases and promised lessors certain amounts of royalties, but then delivered something different in royalty payments after gas wells started producing and the defendants began making royalty payments to landowners. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that landowners were told certain lease provisions prevented them from incurring charges for the extracting and marketing of natural gas. They said they were later told the leases permitted such charges.

As a result of the misrepresentations, Chesapeake and other defendants allegedly took deductions and, in some cases, made retroactive deductions of post-production expenses from royalty checks. These practices occurred despite landowners' claims that their leases contained the necessary language to prohibit such deductions.

General Norman W. Marden, all of the office's Antitrust Section. The Antitrust Section is tasked with protecting the free enterprise system by detecting anti-competitive practices and taking legal action to stop them. Senior Deputy Attorney General John Abel, of the office's Bureau of Consumer Protection, also worked on the investigation.  

The Office of Attorney General is also filing an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania advising the court of this lawsuit. The brief urges the court to reject the proposed settlement of the Demchak class action in its current form.


The office requests that the court modify the Demchak Settlement Agreement and Release to clarify that the class does not have standing to bring the claims asserted by the Office of Attorney General and therefore cannot release the office's claims through the settlement.

The Office of Attorney General's investigation of this matter required a significant examination of the fracking industry to identify the unfair methods of competition and alleged deceptive acts or practices in violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

Hundreds of landowners also played an integral role in the investigation by sharing information with the Office of Attorney General.

"This investigation would not have been possible without the cooperation of landowners who spoke with our staff," Attorney General Kane said.  

The lawsuit requests the court to order the defendants to:

·         Pay restitution to all persons who have suffered losses as a result of the defendants' conduct.

·         Pay civil penalties of $1,000 for each violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, and $3,000 for each violation involving a person 60 years old or older.

·         Permanently refrain from any practice that violates the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law.

In addition to Chesapeake Energy Corp., the other affiliates named as defendants in the lawsuit are Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC; Chesapeake Operating, Inc. and Chesapeake Energy Marketing, Inc. Williams Partners, LP, which owns and operates infrastructure used in the fracking industry, is also named as a defendant.

Pennsylvanians who feel they were victimized by these or other companies should file a complaint with the Office of Attorney General's Antitrust Section by calling 717-787-4530 or by submitting a complaint at www.attorneygeneral.gov.

The lawsuit was filed by Chief Deputy Attorney General Tracy Wertz, Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph S. Betsko and Senior Deputy Attorney General Norman W. Marden, all of the office's Antitrust Section. The Antitrust Section is tasked with protecting the free enterprise system by detecting anti-competitive practices and taking legal action to stop them. Senior Deputy Attorney General John Abel, of the office's Bureau of Consumer Protection, also worked on the investigation. 

The Office of Attorney General is also filing an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania advising the court of this lawsuit. The brief urges the court to reject the proposed settlement of the Demchak class action in its current form.

The office requests that the court modify the Demchak Settlement Agreement and Release to clarify that the class does not have standing to bring the claims asserted by the Office of Attorney General and therefore cannot release the office's claims through the settlement.

November 2015
Demchak Settlement and Opt-Out Instructions

DEMCHAK --- Message from Jackie Root, NARO PA President

          Several public meetings were held in Northeast PA regarding the Demchak Proposed Settlement with Chesapeake. One thing that I heard loud and clear is that potential class members do not understand how they can be a part of the settlement when they did not choose to participate in this action. Like it or not, this is how Class Action Law works! The notice you did or did not receive failed to include the entire complaint, key definitions defining potential financial recovery are only included in the 89 page complaint. We have included all the documents from the case here for you to review.

You must have opted out by December 17, 2015 if you did not want to be a part of the settlement, according to the instructions included in the notice. 

All forms are from the www.chesapeakepagasroyaltysettlement.com




This, above, is the Amended Settlement proposed in 2015


This, above, is the preliminary approval order
signed by the judge 10-2-15.

Demchak v CHK Notice.pdf

This, above, is the notice of Proposed Settlement

sent in early November 2015 to potential class members.

You may have received this if "records show that you (or someone in your family) have received, or potentially will receive royalty payments from Chesapeake form current or future wells in Pennsylvania." It has been noted that a recent discovery of additional potential class members will result in 216 new notices going out with an extended deadline. It is also conceivable that you may be a potential class member and failed to receive a notice due to mail issues, address changes, ownership changes, etc. If you leased with Chesapeake or Chesapeake now owns a lease you signed with another company, you may want to regard the notice as pertaining to you and your oil and gas rights.

Demchak in the News
Reprints of Articles

Chesapeake Lawsuit Involves 4,000 PA Landowners;

Other Operators Could Face Charges

Jamison Cocklin

December 10, 2015

The Pennsylvania Attorney General's (AG) office said Thursday that its lawsuit against Chesapeake Energy Corp. and its affiliates, including Williams Partners LP, could involve at least 4,000 landowners, a number that could grow exponentially as the case unfolds and if the state takes action against other operators.

The lawsuit, which came after what the office called an "extensive investigation" that took more than a year to complete, might not be the only result of those efforts. On Thursday, a day after it filed the complaint against Chesapeake in the Bradford County Court of Common Pleas, the AG's office did not rule out the possibility of legal action against other operators in the state.

"We really can't get into what may be coming in the future in regard to other companies," said spokesman Jeffrey Johnson. "At the moment, this lawsuit is what we're prepared to discuss." He added that the AG made a "very extensive review" of the oil and gas industry "as a whole" and said the office was already receiving phone calls from landowners it had not spoken to.

Just days before the office filed the lawsuit, a source with knowledge of the investigation, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to share information publicly, said the investigation would likely uncover "excessive" and "improper" royalty deductions made by Chesapeake and some other operators. The source said the AG's investigation became "much more complicated than the office ever expected it was going to be," adding that it was forced to conduct in-depth auditing of royalty payments and other records.

The complaint accuses Chesapeake of unfairly deducting post-production costs from royalty checks to cover marketing costs, including compression, dehydration and transmission (see Shale DailyDec. 9). It is seeking restitution for thousands of landowners, as well as civil penalties and legal costs, adding to Chesapeake's legal problems in the state and elsewhere where it has been accused in various courts of underpaying royalties. In addition to Williams, which moves and processes gas for the company, the state's lawsuit names as defendants Chesapeake Appalachia LLC, Chesapeake Operating Inc. and Chesapeake Energy Marketing Inc.

The AG is seeking restitution for all persons affected, civil penalties of $1,000 each and $3,000 for each violation involving people 60 years of age and older. Taken together, Johnson said, the office has conservatively estimated that Chesapeake could be forced to pay "tens of millions" of dollars in damages if the lawsuit is successful. It also comes ahead of a Feb. 2, 2016 hearing in federal court at which a judge is expected to approve a class action lawsuit against Chesapeake (see Shale DailyDec. 8). Known as the Demchak settlement, involving more than 15,000 landowners, that case has taken years to resolve.

When Chesapeake first agreed to settle in 2013, they offered.....

To read the rest of this article, CLICK HERE.

Pennsylvania Royalties Settlement Swells to $17M-Plus And Growing For Chesapeake

Jamison Cocklin

December 8, 2015

A long-delayed class action settlement between Pennsylvania landowners and Chesapeake Energy Corp. to resolve claims that the company improperly deducted post-production fees from royalties has received preliminary approval from a federal judge, ballooning to more than $17 million and now involving thousands of property owners.

Originally reached in August 2013, the $7.5 million settlement between Chesapeake and a little more than a dozen landowners now includes in excess of 15,000 people, who are expected to receive portions of an estimated $17 million. Attorney Michelle O'Brien of the O'Brien Law Group, who represents the lead plaintiff, Demchak Partners LLP, and who has been negotiating the settlement for years now, said the estimate could grow. It's unclear, she said, how many landowners could ultimately be included in the class.

"The settlement is based on the actual deduction taken out of each individual class member's royalty check," she said. "Every single day that amount increases and now it will increase further until Feb. 2 if the settlement is approved. We don't know the final number yet, so that was a rough estimate from several months ago."

Click here to read the full article.

Page title