geebee
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,512
good news. a win for PA imho
jdaddy
Active member
TU Amicus brief in Act 13 litigation: the results are in
Hello all –
In Sept. 2012, we submitted an amicus brief in the Act 13 litigation, in support of the municipalities’ rights and duties to enact local environmental ordinances to protect water resources that are stricter than those of the commonwealth. The PA Supreme Court just issued the attached opinion today, agreeing with us and the petitioners. The court declared the statewide zoning requirements of Act 13—those that would have restricted a town from adopting a local floodplain ordinance, for ex.—are illegal as a violation of the Art. I, Section 27 (Environmental Rights Amendment of the PA Constitution) and thus void.
This is definitely one for the win column.
Best,
Katy
Katy Dunlap, Esq. | Eastern Water Project Direct
607.703.0256 w | 607.742.3331 c | www.tu.org
Hello all –
In Sept. 2012, we submitted an amicus brief in the Act 13 litigation, in support of the municipalities’ rights and duties to enact local environmental ordinances to protect water resources that are stricter than those of the commonwealth. The PA Supreme Court just issued the attached opinion today, agreeing with us and the petitioners. The court declared the statewide zoning requirements of Act 13—those that would have restricted a town from adopting a local floodplain ordinance, for ex.—are illegal as a violation of the Art. I, Section 27 (Environmental Rights Amendment of the PA Constitution) and thus void.
This is definitely one for the win column.
Best,
Katy
Katy Dunlap, Esq. | Eastern Water Project Direct
607.703.0256 w | 607.742.3331 c | www.tu.org
jdaddy
Active member
I have the full Supreme Court Opinion on my Google shared drive below which is open to the public:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B_-e1Wze9NlYcGo2MTJ5WVJhQVk&usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B_-e1Wze9NlYcGo2MTJ5WVJhQVk&usp=sharing
Gudgeonville
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2011
- Messages
- 66
This is the loss of private property rights of landowners to ignorant local governments that are against drilling. Sad day when a person can't use there own property because of untrue safety and health concerns.
SBecker
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 5,660
Lmao coming from the gas guy.
When it affects the health of surrounding properties. I beg to differ.
Why don't you enlighten us on the 21,000 gallon spill out near Pittsburg that was covered up and affected the health of the neighboring property? It is finally coming out evwn though the DEP did their best to help hide it.
T
troutbert
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2006
- Messages
- 10,662
Could someone give us a summary of the topic?
MrMustard
Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 157
Becker: Are there actually any allegations that the DEP assisting in covering up that spill? From what I have read, the spill was never reported to the DEP.
SBecker
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 5,660
A Washington County judge will be asked next week to order a Texas-based water hauler to turn over photographs it may have of an alleged spill at an Amwell Township Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling site.
The motion will be presented by attorney John Smith, who is representing a group of neighbors suing Range Resources over claims they were sickened by the Yeager drilling operation, court records show.
As part of the discovery process in the lawsuit, Smith received documents from Red Oak Water Transfer indicating there was a leak of 500 barrels of flowback water at the site in 2010, and a subsequent cover-up of what took place. Other court documents in the case show a company executive denying the spill took place and alleging that the story had been fabricated by a disgruntled employee to get a coworker in trouble.
The information prompted state Rep. Jesse White Tuesday to ask state Attorney General Kathleen Kane to investigate the matter. Her spokesman, Joe Peters, said the law prevents her from investigating such cases unless they are referred to her by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
John Poister, spokesman for the DEP in Pittsburgh, said the department is conducting an internal investigation of its records to see if there was a spill reported at the drilling site off McAdams Road in Amwell.
The information the DEP has found thus far in its files does not correspond with the allegations that surfaced in the lawsuit, Poister said.
The plaintiffs in the long-running case are Stacey, Harley and Paige Haney; Beth, John and Ashley Voyles; and Loren and Grace Kiskadden.
Last month, President Judge Debbie O’Dell Seneca ordered 40 companies Range brought to the property to provide Smith with every chemical they used in the drilling process.
Red Oak, which now operates as Rockwater Energy Solutions, did not respond to a message seeking comment.
White also forwarded his complaint to Washington County District Attorney Gene Vittone. Assistant District Attorney Joe Zupancic said Vittone’s office would review the matter, but it would be more a matter for the state to investigate.
The DEP claiming the spill and cover-up in the documenta "does not correspond" with their files is a huge red flag. If the spill went unreported as the documents suggest, would DEP have any records of it at all? If they do have records of the spill, then that means it happened and the DEP didn't do anything about it. The DEP's "investigation" of something they apparently have no record of is just an excuse to bury the situation to protect Tom Corbett's friends in the natural gas industry.
The motion will be presented by attorney John Smith, who is representing a group of neighbors suing Range Resources over claims they were sickened by the Yeager drilling operation, court records show.
As part of the discovery process in the lawsuit, Smith received documents from Red Oak Water Transfer indicating there was a leak of 500 barrels of flowback water at the site in 2010, and a subsequent cover-up of what took place. Other court documents in the case show a company executive denying the spill took place and alleging that the story had been fabricated by a disgruntled employee to get a coworker in trouble.
The information prompted state Rep. Jesse White Tuesday to ask state Attorney General Kathleen Kane to investigate the matter. Her spokesman, Joe Peters, said the law prevents her from investigating such cases unless they are referred to her by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
John Poister, spokesman for the DEP in Pittsburgh, said the department is conducting an internal investigation of its records to see if there was a spill reported at the drilling site off McAdams Road in Amwell.
The information the DEP has found thus far in its files does not correspond with the allegations that surfaced in the lawsuit, Poister said.
The plaintiffs in the long-running case are Stacey, Harley and Paige Haney; Beth, John and Ashley Voyles; and Loren and Grace Kiskadden.
Last month, President Judge Debbie O’Dell Seneca ordered 40 companies Range brought to the property to provide Smith with every chemical they used in the drilling process.
Red Oak, which now operates as Rockwater Energy Solutions, did not respond to a message seeking comment.
White also forwarded his complaint to Washington County District Attorney Gene Vittone. Assistant District Attorney Joe Zupancic said Vittone’s office would review the matter, but it would be more a matter for the state to investigate.
The DEP claiming the spill and cover-up in the documenta "does not correspond" with their files is a huge red flag. If the spill went unreported as the documents suggest, would DEP have any records of it at all? If they do have records of the spill, then that means it happened and the DEP didn't do anything about it. The DEP's "investigation" of something they apparently have no record of is just an excuse to bury the situation to protect Tom Corbett's friends in the natural gas industry.
MrMustard
Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 157
Fair enough.
David
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2008
- Messages
- 1,835
Right... because there is no way that there could be an accident... hmm.. no.
Right... because there is no way that such a safe act conducted by such innocent companies would be unhealthy to anybody... OOOHHH, can't use that either.
Right, because there is no way that it affects all the surrounding people that are bystanders. Oh, wait... strike that, too.
Ohhh... you just have me convinced, gudeonville because you have no stake in the matter and are speaking in the best interest of flyfishing community... (have you ever actually posted about fly fishing?)
And your neighbor should be allowed to create their own home made atom smasher! Why regulate anything... let's live like China!
Berks
Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2009
- Messages
- 129
How dare they infringe upon the rights of an honest landowner to contaminate his and his neighbors’ properties. I always thought that was a Constructional right as long as enough $$ was generated in the process. Looks like the natural gas companies are going to have to up the ante and get some more television ads and maybe some more presentations at the local elementary schools to show the kids how safe everything is…
Either way, I’m sure the gas companies know exactly what’s happening in the sub-surface at all their drill sites and know the long term effect that exposure to the environment will have on their containment systems. Don’t worry, the well casing don’t corrode over the years, and we never have any seismic activity that may crack their magic cement, and none of the responsible gas companies will ever go out of business when the gas dries up and bilk the state (and taxpayers) with the abandonment and well closure costs.
I just can’t imagine an industry in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would ever remove buried minerals for the sake of making money at the expense of our environment. This would be truly unprecedented.
Either way, I’m sure the gas companies know exactly what’s happening in the sub-surface at all their drill sites and know the long term effect that exposure to the environment will have on their containment systems. Don’t worry, the well casing don’t corrode over the years, and we never have any seismic activity that may crack their magic cement, and none of the responsible gas companies will ever go out of business when the gas dries up and bilk the state (and taxpayers) with the abandonment and well closure costs.
I just can’t imagine an industry in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would ever remove buried minerals for the sake of making money at the expense of our environment. This would be truly unprecedented.
geebee
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,512
I'm liking rep. Jesse White more and more.
SBecker
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 5,660
pcray1231
Well-known member
Regarding the trial, if there was indeed a spill, it is a case for the courts. There is likely civil liability regarding the spill (for anyone who got sick or had property damage). And if there was a coverup, then add some criminal liability for those involved. I'm not close enough to the situation to know what went down, and I don't trust public statements from either side. I support 3rd party investigation.
As for the whole zoning thing, I'm torn. On one hand, I have no problem with municipalities using zoning, for instance, to prevent a well pad from being placed within a residential neighborhood. If they do it honestly. On the other hand, I fear that's not what will happen.
Entire townships with politically motivated leadership will just decide not to have any drilling within their borders by rezoning agricultural and rural land to exclude it. Other townships with different political motivations will open everything up to their buddies. Local leadership is very corruptible. That's not good.
Overall, I want gas drilling to take place in this state. It is providing a lot of jobs, as well as government revenue. It looks to keep gas prices low for a very long time. It's more environmental than coal, which is what it's replacing, and bringing those jobs from WV up here to PA (WV obviously hates it, but hey, we have a better mousetrap now, from an economic as well as environmental perspective).
That said, I want to do it as cleanly as possible, and we can be smart about how, where, and when we do it. We have regulations regarding drilling and pollution. If the regulations are inadequate, then lets change them to make them adequate. And ENFORCE them, with punishments that actually have teeth. When crap like the above happens, make sure the full force of the law is enough to make drillers take every possible precaution, and then make examples of those who don't.
As for the whole zoning thing, I'm torn. On one hand, I have no problem with municipalities using zoning, for instance, to prevent a well pad from being placed within a residential neighborhood. If they do it honestly. On the other hand, I fear that's not what will happen.
Entire townships with politically motivated leadership will just decide not to have any drilling within their borders by rezoning agricultural and rural land to exclude it. Other townships with different political motivations will open everything up to their buddies. Local leadership is very corruptible. That's not good.
Overall, I want gas drilling to take place in this state. It is providing a lot of jobs, as well as government revenue. It looks to keep gas prices low for a very long time. It's more environmental than coal, which is what it's replacing, and bringing those jobs from WV up here to PA (WV obviously hates it, but hey, we have a better mousetrap now, from an economic as well as environmental perspective).
That said, I want to do it as cleanly as possible, and we can be smart about how, where, and when we do it. We have regulations regarding drilling and pollution. If the regulations are inadequate, then lets change them to make them adequate. And ENFORCE them, with punishments that actually have teeth. When crap like the above happens, make sure the full force of the law is enough to make drillers take every possible precaution, and then make examples of those who don't.
Chaz
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 8,451
Not quite, the jobs created are not Pennsylvanian's jobs for the more technical stuff. Not one coal fired generating plant has closed becuase of gas fired plants.
geebee
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Messages
- 2,512
And liquid gas prices are determined by worldwide supply and demand not local drilling - same as oil prices.
I agree with a lot of pcrays points though - local govt is easier to corrupt than the State or Feds.
The first question to any driller should be - what's your safety record, and two, how are you planning for contingencies ?
I agree with a lot of pcrays points though - local govt is easier to corrupt than the State or Feds.
The first question to any driller should be - what's your safety record, and two, how are you planning for contingencies ?
Gudgeonville
Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2011
- Messages
- 66
Unfortunately, it's already happening in rural townships in Western PA. Landowners that farm their own property are being zoned out of using their own mineral rights because of the newer suburban homes that were built in the last 10- 20 years. (Housing developments that were built on farms that the previous owners had to sell because they just couldn't make enough to not sell their farms) The townships want drilling only in industrial zoned areas of which there are few to none. Also, certain townships say they will approve a permit and then drag their feet always needing more information at the next meeting. They did this until the lease and or permit ran out essentially denying the rights to drill.
Also, as for the "alleged" spill, I understand how these operations work and I do not see any proof yet in all of the writings that there was indeed a 21000 gallon spill! Just because an anti drilling blogger, anti drilling state representative, and an ambulance chaser attorney (I won't say they are anti drilling per say because they have seen tons of work and $ handling anti drilling issues) suing the industry and DEP are trying to drum up sympathy in the public press does not make it true! If there was so much evidence of a spill, would not there be more concrete evidence?
my opinion only, of course.
Also, as for the "alleged" spill, I understand how these operations work and I do not see any proof yet in all of the writings that there was indeed a 21000 gallon spill! Just because an anti drilling blogger, anti drilling state representative, and an ambulance chaser attorney (I won't say they are anti drilling per say because they have seen tons of work and $ handling anti drilling issues) suing the industry and DEP are trying to drum up sympathy in the public press does not make it true! If there was so much evidence of a spill, would not there be more concrete evidence?
my opinion only, of course.
M
melvinp
Member
- Joined
- May 29, 2009
- Messages
- 549
Let me understand this if a land owner wanted a gas well on his property he can have one.If a person does not want a gas well on there property there will not be one.What would happenen if there was a large pocket of gas at a location that the owner did not want drilled.This is a funny question but what happens when the state wants that gas.and would this be an afferct of forced pooling.Dont no jack about the spill sorry. LAST MAN STANDING LEMON TWP PA
pcray1231
Well-known member
That's a lie. *Some* are not Pennsylvanian's jobs.
I almost spit up on that! Thanks for the laugh. They're closing down all over the place. Over 200 nationwide, and PA is one of the leaders in numbers of plants being shut down. The immediate cause of closure is actually increased federal regulations (EPA). Though the reason for the increased federal regulations is the increased supply of natural gas for power generation, i.e. they have an alternative and can get away with it. And the reason the coal plants won't spend the money to upgrade and meet the requirements of the regs is that it'd drive the price of coal above the price of gas.
i.e. gas is winning. Coal is losing.
