Penn State Law Professor Discussed Legal Aspects of Municipal Bans on Hydraulic Fracturing

Ross Pifer, Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center at Penn State, discussed the legal implications of municipal bans on hydraulic fracturing on 90.5 WESA, Pittsburgh's NPR News Station.  The discussion centered around news that Youngstown, Ohio was considering a ban on hydraulic fracturing similar to Pittsburgh's current ban.  Professor Pifer discussed the interplay of the different levels of government - federal, state, and local, and how Pennsylvania's Act 13 provides municipalities the ability to regulate aspects of natural gas production, if the municipality clears certain hurdles.  Professor Pifer further stated that one of the Act 13 hurdles that required municipalities to allow for the reasonable development of natural gas is currently in front of Pennsylvania's Supreme Court.  Professor Pifer said that the Court will provide more clarity for what municipalities may regulate when it decides the Act 13 case.  However, Professor Pifer noted that no matter what the Supreme Court determines, there are other hurdles that could make any municipality's ban unlawful. 

An audio clip of the discussion may be found at: http://wesa.fm/post/discussing-municipal-bans-fracking

Written by: Tom Panighetti

September 25, 2013

PUC and DEP petition Supreme Court for rehearing

On July 30, 2013, the newest member of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Correale Stevens, was sworn onto the bench. In light of the new addition to the Court, attorneys for the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission and Department of Environmental Protection submitted petitions for oral arguments in the case challenging Act 13 of 2012 to be reheard. The Commonwealth Court determined some of Act 13 to be unconstitutional in 2012. Robinson Twp. v. Com., 2012 WL 3030277 (Pa. Commw. Ct. July 26, 2012). In particular, the statutory requirement that municipal zoning ordinances be amended to include oil and gas operations in all zoning districts was in violation of substantive due process, and the statutory  well location restrictions were unconstitutional because the restrictions failed to provide sufficient guidance to the DEP as to when to grant a waiver from setback requirements.

Oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court were delivered by both Robinson Township and the Commonwealth in October. The Court has not decided what action it will take in the case.

For more information on the Act 13 proceedings, visit the Marcellus Shale Resource Area of the Agricultural Law Center.

Written by: Garrett Lent, Research Assistant

Agricultural Law Resource and Reference Center

August 2013