Posts Tagged ‘Fayette’
Court ruling affirms communities’ ability to limit natural gas drilling
By Elizabeth Skrapits (Staff Writer)
Published: August 23, 2010
DALLAS TWP. – Would local officials be powerless to stop a natural gas company from drilling a natural gas well in the middle of a housing development?
Not according to a new state court ruling, which affirms the right of municipal and county officials to limit natural gas drilling to certain districts, such as agricultural, mining or manufacturing, and out of residential neighborhoods.
“Gas drilling is here to stay, and it affects the Back Mountain region very extensively.” Attorney Jeffrey Malak told members of the Back Mountain Community Partnership as he outlined the new court decision.
Thousands of acres in the Back Mountain have been leased by natural gas companies, and Encana Oil & Gas USA Inc. is drilling the second of two exploratory natural gas wells in Lake Township.
Traditionally, local officials have limited say when it comes to natural gas drilling. Technical aspects, such as what kind of materials to use and how the well is drilled, are governed by the state Oil and Gas Act. But local officials are gaining more and more say in where wells can be drilled.
Two previous cases, Huntley & Huntley v. Oakmont Borough and Range Resources v. Salem Township (Westmoreland County) set precedents allowing local officials some leeway in regulating where natural gas companies can drill.
A third, Penneco Oil Co. Inc. v. the County of Fayette, decided in Commonwealth Court on July 22, determined the state Oil & Gas Act does not trump local zoning ordinances, and that local officials can take steps to protect the residential character of neighborhoods.
In the case, Penneco, Range Resources Appalachia LLC and the Independent Oil and Gas Association of Pennsylvania took Fayette County Office of Planning, Zoning and Community Development to court, saying they did not have to follow the county’s zoning ordinance because the state Oil and Gas Act made it invalid. The court ruled in favor of the county.
“This opens up the floodgates and says municipal zoning is not pre-empted,” Malak said.
The Penneco case allows that gas wells cannot be located within the flight path of an airport runway; that they must be at least 200 feet from a residential dwelling; and that officials can require fencing and shrubs around the well site. It also allows zoning hearing boards to impose any other provisions to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents.
Whether the Penneco case will be appealed is anybody’s guess, but it’s the law unless the state Supreme Court changes it, Malak said.
Dallas Borough already has some of the provisions in its zoning ordinance, Malak said. In Jackson Township, where he also serves as solicitor, the supervisors will put similar provisions in the zoning ordinance when it is drafted over the next couple of months, Malak said.
Dallas Township Supervisor Chairman Phil Walter asked Malak if there was a way to protect a municipality against fly-by-night operators who will leave when something goes wrong.
The case does allow for bonds, even large ones, to be put in place to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents, Malak said.
Kingston Township Supervisor Jeffrey Box asked if local officials can require a land development plan from natural gas companies. Malak said they could, and they can require special exceptions, meaning there has to be a hearing in front of the zoning hearing board to grant permission and to impose any standard planning and zoning fees.
But, he said, there are still aspects of natural gas drilling that will have to be decided in court, such as whether there can be restrictions on hours drillers can operate and whether they can be barred from using roads at certain times.
eskrapits@citizensvoice.com , 570-821-2072
View article here.
Copyright: The Citizens Voice
Pa. considers adding natural gas to the tax rolls
By MARC LEVY Associated Press Writer
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) _ The land agents, geologists and drilling crews rushing after the Marcellus Shale are raising something besides the natural gas they’re seeking: Talk of a natural gas tax.
Thanks to a state Supreme Court decision six years ago, Pennsylvania is now one of the biggest natural-gas producing states — if not the biggest — that does not tax the methane sucked from beneath its ground.
But momentum is gathering to impose such a tax. The Marcellus Shale — a layer of black rock that holds a vast reservoir of gas — is luring some of the country’s largest gas producers to Pennsylvania, and state government revenues are being waylaid by a worldwide economic malaise.
A spokesman for Gov. Ed Rendell says the administration is looking at the idea of a tax on natural gas, but a decision has not been made. Typically, Rendell does not reveal any tax or revenue proposals until his official budget plan is introduced each February.
Senate Republicans are planning a November hearing at Misericordia University in northeastern Pennsylvania to look at what effect can be expected on local governments if Marcellus Shale production lives up to its potential.
Local officials worry about damage to local roads ill-suited for heavy truck traffic and equipment. School districts could be strained by families of gas company employees moving into town. And some residents are concerned about gas wells disrupting or polluting the water tables from which they draw drinking water.
Legislators must find the fairest way for companies to share those costs, whether by levying a tax or through some other means, said Sen. Jake Corman, R-Centre, the GOP’s policy chairman.
“I do think there is an understanding that some sort of compensation for municipalities is warranted,” Corman said. “We just have to figure out the best way to do that.”
So far, drilling activity is under way on the Marcellus Shale in at least 18 counties, primarily in the northern tier and southwest where the shale is thickest, according to the state Department of Environmental Protection.
Land agents are trooping in and out of county courthouses to research the below-ground mineral rights. At least several million acres above the Marcellus Shale have been leased by companies in West Virginia, New York and Pennsylvania.
Just this week, Range Resources Corp. and a Denver-based gas processor said they have started up Pennsylvania’s first large-scale gas processing plant, about 20 miles south of Pittsburgh.
And CNX Gas Corp. announced that a $6 million horizontal well it drilled in southwest Pennsylvania is producing a respectable 1.2 million cubic feet a day — a rate it expects to improve in coming weeks.
In the opposite corner of Pennsylvania, drilling pads are now visible on Susquehanna County’s farmland, and hotel rooms are booked with land agents and drilling crews.
“It is the talk at the coffee shops, at the local grocery store, the gas station — everybody,” said state Sen. Lisa Baker, R-Luzerne.
Activity is still in the early stages, as exploration companies work to confirm their basic assumptions about the potential of the Marcellus Shale reservoir, and probe for the spots with the greatest promise, analysts say.
Industry representatives say they oppose a tax, and Stephen W. Rhoads, the president of the Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association, questioned the wisdom of imposing a tax on gas production that is still speculative.
In some natural-gas states, a tax is collected based on a company’s gas production by volume.
But in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that state law did not allow counties, schools and municipalities to impose a real estate tax based on the value of the subsurface oil and gas rights held by exploration companies.
An appraiser’s study presented last year during a House Finance Committee hearing estimated that the court’s decision had cost Greene, Fayette and Washington counties up to $30 million in county, school and municipal tax revenue.
The state’s county commissioners and school boards support the resumption of some type of taxing authority — although that could mean landowners would get smaller royalty checks.
Regardless, Doug Hill, the executive director of the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania, said the matter is one of basic fairness since coal, gravel and limestone are assessed.
“The bottom line is it isn’t a windfall issue,” Hill said. “It’s a tax equity issue.”
___
Marc Levy covers state government for The Associated Press in Harrisburg. He can be reached at mlevy(at)ap.org.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.