Viewed narrowly, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's momentous
decision Thursday to strike down key provisions of the law that regulates
natural gas drilling doesn't change anything at all.
The court's 4-2 decision restores local zoning control of
drilling activity, which was in effect before the law known as Act 13 was
passed last year. Despite having to navigate an uneven landscape of local
zoning laws, Marcellus Shale gas producers flourished under the old rules.
But opponents of shale gas drilling say the court decision
carries substantial symbolic and political weight. They hope it signals a
reconsideration of state government's love affair with fossil fuels.
"With this huge win, we will move ahead to further undo
the industry's grip of our state government," said Maya van Rossum,
executive director of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, whose standing as a
plaintiff in the case was restored by the Supreme Court's decision.
More coverage
Pa. Supreme Court jolts shale industry
Pa. court sides with towns in gas drilling fight
First criminal case against a Shale firm opens
The ruling may also revitalize the state's Environmental
Rights Amendment, a 42-year-old law that guarantees Pennsylvanians' access to
clean air and water.
Gov. Corbett and Republican legislative leaders said last
week's ruling, written by Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille, also a Republican,
had ominous implications for business.
"Our fear now is that landowners and hardworking
individuals will suffer because of today's decision," state Senate
President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati and House Speaker Sam Smith, Jefferson
County Republicans, said in a joint statement.
The ruling struck down provisions in Act 13 that stripped
municipalities of the power to determine where natural gas drilling activity
could occur within their boundaries. While Act 13 was under legal challenge,
the old local zoning laws were still in force.
Corbett had pushed hard for the measure, saying the industry
needed standardized rules to prosper. The gas industry had complained about
dealing with potentially hundreds of different municipal zoning laws, including
some that increasingly appeared to be designed to stymie drilling altogether.
Local governments argued that drilling was an industrial
activity, just like a steel mill, that should be subject to zoning.
Establish limits
The court decision strikes down the law's provision allowing
wells and pipelines in every zoning district, including residential
neighborhoods, as long as certain conditions were met.
Castille and Justices Debra Todd and Seamus P. McCaffery
agreed the provisions "sanctioned a direct and harmful degradation of the
environmental quality of life in these communities and zoning districts."
The ruling restores the ability of municipalities to limit
drilling to certain zones and to manage it with reasonable noise requirements
and setback rules.
Towns are still not allowed to regulate technical aspects of
drilling, such as construction standards, which remain the sole responsibility
of the state Department of Environmental Protection.
"It's all about location," said John M. Smith, a
Canonsburg, Pa., lawyer for the plaintiffs. "You can't place industrial
activities in areas that will harm people."
Nor can municipalities ban drilling outright.
"We will still have to provide for drilling operations
in municipalities, albeit now not in residential areas, or near schools,
churches, playgrounds," said Smith, solicitor for several Southwestern
Pennsylvania towns that were plaintiffs in the case.
The lawsuit was initiated by rural Robinson Township, a
Washington County community west of Pittsburgh where five gas-drilling
companies have drilled about 20 horizontal wells so far. Each company has its
own pipeline system.
"We just enacted some commonsense rules," said
Brian Coppola, chairman of the township supervisors. "We certainly didn't
try to ban it."
The legal challenge in Pennsylvania is part of a broader
national resistance in states where the shale-drilling boom has led to a
domestic renaissance in oil and gas production.
Winners and losers
Though the energy bonanza has generated substantial benefits
- new wealth and jobs, lower energy costs, a reduced reliance on imported
energy - objections to drilling's impact on health and the environment is
mounting, even in states like Colorado and Pennsylvania, where laws
traditionally favor development of natural resources.
"Society at large is reaping the benefits of this
boom," said Andrew R. Kear, a geologist and political scientist at Ohio's
Bowling Green State University who is studying the cultural clash. "But
the costs and burden are being borne by people on the local level."
Act 13 imposed some stricter environmental rules on
drilling: new disclosure standards for the chemicals used in hydraulic
fracturing; lengthened setbacks to keep wells farther from homes and waterways;
and higher standards for emergency containment.
The act also created an impact fee, which imposes an annual
tariff on wells that generated $400 million in revenue for the first two years.
Though the court ruling did not address the constitutionality of the impact
fee, some legislators believe the decision also threatens its validity.
Major parts of Act 13 likely will need to be rewritten by
the General Assembly, which may prompt another round of litigation.
But some legal experts say the impact of the court ruling
may extend well beyond Act 13.
Castille and two other justices based their ruling on
Pennsylvania's Environmental Rights Amendment of 1971, which guarantees
Pennsylvanians "a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation
of the natural, scenic, historic, and aesthetic values of the
environment."
The environmental amendment "has been marginalized by
the courts from the outset," said John C. Dernbach, a Widener University
law professor who is codirector of the Environmental Law Center in Harrisburg.
Dernbach said the court ruling Thursday "breathed new
life" into the environmental law, the implication of which "will be
felt for years, perhaps decades."
Source: Philly.com
No comments:
Post a Comment