1. SUSTAINABILITY FROM MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE SCOTT E. COBURN GENERAL COUNSEL, PENNSYLVANIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS September 27, 2013 – Widener University School of Law 1

2. Municipal Concerns 2  Addressing local impacts from Marcellus Shale operations  Managing impact fee funds for long-term benefits  Maintaining reasonable degree of control over Marcellus Shale operations

3. Local Impacts 3  Roads/Infrastructure  Significantly increased road use  Overweight/oversized vehicles Posting and bonding Excess maintenance agreements  Cost concerns Traffic/engineering studies Long-term maintenance

4. Local Impacts 4  Public services  EMS Need for Marcellus Shale-related training 911 and radio systems  Police New or expanded forces?  Increased operating costs CDL drivers Other skilled employees

5. Local Impacts 5  Environmental  Incidents  Noise/odors, etc. - 24/7 operations  Constitutional mandate to provide for public health, safety and welfare of citizens

6. Local Control 6  Short-/Long-Term Municipal Development  Rapid industry growth vs. Comprehensive plans  Zoning considerations Compatible uses Preservation of community character  Desire for local/regional economic growth

7. Local Control 7  Act 13 of 2012  Replaces “where vs. how” model previously used by Pennsylvania courts  Limits municipal control over the “where” of “oil and gas operations”

8. Act 13 8  Section 3304’s permitted uses (subject to requirements on setbacks, noise, etc.):  Wells – all zoning districts  Impoundments – all zoning districts  Compressor stations – industrial and agricultural districts; conditional use elsewhere  Processing plants – industrial; conditional in agricultural

9. Act 13 9  No limits on hours of operations for:  Compressor stations/Processing plants  Drilling of wells  Construction and disassembly of drilling rigs

10. Act 13 10  Uniform rules for:  Construction activities  Height, screens, fencing, lighting, noise for permanent structures  Overweight vehicles

11. Act 13 11  Robinson Township v. Commonwealth  Clash of competing interests Efficient development of oil and gas Promotion of land uses through zoning/environmental concerns  Whose authority trumps? Commonwealth? Municipalities?

12. Act 13 12  Commonwealth Court Ruling  Violates due process rights Landowners’ rights vs. public interest Zoning – view through community as a whole  Requires incompatible uses Majority view – “pig in the parlor” Dissent’s rebuttal

13. What’s Next? 13  Waiting on Supreme Court’s decision  If affirms – back to “where vs. how”  If overturns – Act 13 is the future?  Still issues to work out between industry and municipalities  Wells, impoundments, etc.  Support operations – storage yards, transfer stations  Environmental issues  Pipelines – colocation?  Seismic testing