The Commonwealth Court, one of Pennsylvania’s two intermediate appellate courts, invalidated provisions of the Oil and Gas Act Amendments of 2012 (“Act 13”) intended to limit local regulation of natural gas development, particularly development of the Marcellus Shale.  The court issued its opinion in Robinson Township v. Public Utility Comm’n, No. 284 M.D. 2012, on July 26.  The decision is on appeal in the Supreme Court at Nos. 63, 64, 72, and 73 MAP 2012.  My monthly column in the Pennsylvania Law Weekly considers some of the issues raised by this decision and the general confusion over which governments ought to regulate natural gas projects.  Read Natural Gas and Zoning:  The Commonwealth Court’s Act 13 Decision, 35 Pa. L. Weekly 696 (Aug. 28, 2012), by clicking here.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of David Mandelbaum David Mandelbaum

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and…

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and Oil and Gas Law in rotation at the Temple University Beasley School of Law as well as an environmental litigation course at Suffolk (Boston) Law School.

Since United States v. Atlas Minerals, the first multi-generator Superfund contribution case to go to trial in 1993, Mr. Mandelbaum has been engaged in matters involving allocation of costs among responsible parties, especially under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).  He has tried large cases and resolved others as lead counsel.  He has written, spoken, and taught extensively on the subject.  More recently he also has been engaged to assist lead counsel from this firm and others:

  • to develop cost allocation methodologies;
  • to craft expert testimony in support of a favored methodology (given a definition of “fairness,” why one methodology better tracks it than another);
  • to develop efficient case management approaches; and to assist private allocation as part of the neutral team.

Concentrations

  • Air, water and waste regulation
  • Superfund and contamination
  • Climate change
  • Oil and gas development
  • Water rights