After crafting and passing (through their legislative marionettes)
a piece of legislation so overwhelmingly favorable to the drilling industry at
the expense of community and environmental protection the drillers and frackers
are now claiming that the decision, which struck down many elements of this law,
is environmentally bad.
The most recent assertion is that because the state Supreme
Court struck section 3215(b) of the law, the provision that talked about
buffers, the decision weakened environmental protection for waterways.
What a farce!
First it is important to know that section 3215(b) included
among its provisions a mandatory waiver provision – a requirement that
DEP waive the minimal buffer requirements included in the law when asked by the
industry. And that if in its wisdom
(which right now is questionable at best) DEP told the driller/fracker that
they had to take extra measures to protect streams as a result of the buffer
waiver, the driller had the right take that request to court and it was
incumbent on the DEP to defend the need for additional measures rather than
being the responsibility of the driller to prove it was not needed. And if DEP requested no additional measures,
or ones that were clearly too weak, municipalities had no right similar to the
drillers/frackers to challenge the decision in court.
It is equally important to know that the buffer provisions
in section 3215 were woefully weak.
Shale gas development is a highly industrial process bringing with it
huge disturbance to the landscape, toxic chemicals and waste stored and used on
site (including in open pits), miles of drilling resulting in an abundance of
contaminated drilling muds, and a whole host of other industrial operations –
the buffer provisions of section 3215 were not crafted upon good science to
protect healthy streams, they were crafted so as to give the drillers the right
to drill too close to our precious waterways and to prevent either a future DEP
(one truly interested in environmental protection) or concerned communities
from mandating bigger buffer requirements.
The removal of section 3215(b) of the bad law simply
reinstated previous legal authorities already held by the DEP and municipalities
to protect streams, including with buffers.
ü
It restored the rights of communities to,
through zoning, instill greater buffer protections in order to protect
community waterways.
ü
It restored the 150 foot buffer requirement the
state already has in place for exceptional value and high quality streams (150
feet, while not an adequate buffer to protect our special protection streams
from drilling operations, is at least bigger than the 100 foot buffer in act
13).
ü
It restored the legal incentives for 100 foot
buffers from all development, including for the drillers.
ü
It restored the ability of the DEP to increase
buffer requirements for all streams through regulation under existing
legislation.
The Delaware Riverkeeper Network, myself in my role as the
Delaware Riverkeeper, the seven towns that joined us in litigation (Yardley
Borough, Nockamixon Township, Robinson Township, Peters Township, South Fayette
Township, Mt. Pleasant Township and Cecil Township), the town officials Brian
Coppola, David Ball, and Dr. M. Khan, have secured a decision that is
historically protective of the environment.
The decision we secured clearly establishes the obligation
of the Pennsylvania legislature, the Governor, all state agency heads, and all
local municipal officials to protect a healthy environment for present and
future generations.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s December 18, 2013 decision
vindicated the importance and power of Environmental Rights Amendment of the
Pennsylvania Constitution; it promised all generations of Pennsylvanians that
they will benefit from pure water, clean air and a healthy environment, giving
them the ability to defend that right in the courts if it is violated.
So let the industry and their political cronies twist in the
wind of hypocrisy – they know they passed legislation that would devastate Pennsylvania’s environment for generations to come in order to secure big profits and golden parachutes for their executives.
We know we secured a legal and moral victory
that will protect our environment for the benefit of all – those born and those
yet to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment