August 10, 2018

Complexities in determining title to oil and gas under Pennsylvania roadways

The PIOGA Press

(by Adam Speer)

The increased exploration of oil and gas throughout the Common wealth of Pennsylvania in recent years has highlighted the importance of determining the ownership of oil and gas underlying public roads and highways. More than 120,000 linear miles of state and local roadways traverse the Commonwealth. Public roadways―which include local roads, streets, alleys, expressways, interstates and turnpikes―may be created by conveyance, condemnation, dedication or prescription.

To determine proper ownership of the oil and gas under a roadway, a full title search of surrounding tracts must be completed. The time and method by which the roadway was created often influence the ownership of the oil and gas. This article, though not exhaustive, discusses the primary methods that roads may be created in Pennsylvania and provides a framework for determining oil and gas ownership under a public road.

Centerline presumption

Under Pennsylvania law, there is a general presumption that a conveyance of land bounded by a public roadway carries with it the fee to the center of the road as part and parcel of the grant, unless the road is owned in fee by the Commonwealth or municipality or an interest in the roadway has been expressly reserved. Where the side or edge of a street or highway is called for as a boundary in a deed, the grantee takes title in fee to the center line of such roadway. The grantee acquires a fee interest in the land to the centerline of the roadway, subject to the public’s right of passage and any reservations, and the grantor divests himself of his interest in the same. If a public roadway easement is later vacated, the property reverts “automatically and simultaneously” to abutting landowners. …

August 1, 2018

New PHMSA Rulemaking Proceeding Targets Changes to Class Location Requirements

Pipeline Safety Alert

(by James Curry, Keith Coyle, and Brianne Kurdock)

On July 31, 2018, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA or the Agency) published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register asking for public comment on whether the Agency should change its class location requirements for gas pipeline facilities.  Specifically, PHMSA is seeking comment on alternatives to pipe replacements driven by class location changes.  Adopted nearly five decades ago, PHMSA’s class location requirements use population density and surrounding land uses to categorize the potential risk that gas pipeline facilities pose to public safety.

The Agency is asking the public to comment on whether the class location requirements should be updated to account for recent developments in the pipeline industry, particularly the widespread use of integrity management (IM) principles and new technologies.  The current regulations require operators to reduce pressure, replace pipe, or conduct hydrostatic pressure testing in response to class location changes, and PHMSA is considering whether other alternatives should be available.  Comments must be submitted to the Agency on or before October 1, 2018.

The ANPRM is PHMSA’s first new pipeline safety rulemaking proceeding in the Trump era.  The Agency began examining the need to modernize the class location regulations several years ago in response to a mandate that Congress included in the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, and PHMSA is framing the ANPRM as an extension of that earlier effort.  The Agency’s decision to issue the ANPRM sends a strong signal about its commitment to President Donald Trump’s regulatory reform agenda and willingness to address an issue of longstanding concern to the pipeline industry. …

July 30, 2018

Federal pipeline safety agency weighs new approach to handling population shifts

S&P Global

(by Sarah Smith)

The federal pipeline safety regulator may change the way it handles requirements for gas pipelines in areas where population density is on the rise, potentially addressing operator concerns about the disruptions that current policy can lead to.

When more people move into the areas around gas transmission pipelines, federal rules require pipe operators to shift the way they use their infrastructure, but the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, or PHMSA, said July 30 that it is entertaining the idea of allowing companies to instead apply certain “integrity management” practices.

For the full article, click here. .

July 27, 2018

Zoning Hearing Board: Overlooked, Misunderstood or Misapplied Principles

The Legal Intelligencer 
(by Blaine A. Lucas and Alyssa E. Golfieri)
Pursuant to Section 901 of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, 53 P.S. Section 10101 et seq., (MPC), the state law establishing the framework for zoning and land use development regulations in Pennsylvania, every municipality in the commonwealth that enacts a zoning ordinance is required to create a zoning hearing board. A zoning hearing board is a quasi-judicial body that implements a system of checks and balances on a governing body’s legislative power to zone and regulate land development.
Zoning hearing boards have exclusive jurisdiction over eight discrete types of matters: substantive challenges to the validity of land use ordinances; appeals from the determination of a municipality’s zoning officer, including appeals from the granting or denying of a permit, the issuance of a notice of violation/cease and desist order, or the registration of nonconforming uses, structures, or lots; appeals from the administration of a floodplain provision or ordinance; applications for variances from the terms of a zoning or floodplain ordinance; applications for special exceptions under a zoning or floodplain ordinance; appeals from determinations related to the transfer of development rights or performance density provisions of a zoning ordinance; appeals from a zoning officer’s preliminary opinion on a proposed use or development; and appeals from a zoning officer’s or municipal engineer’s administration of any ordinances that regulates erosion and sedimentation control or stormwater management on projects unrelated to subdivisions, land developments, and planned residential developments.
Based on the exclusivity and scope of their jurisdiction, it is self-evident that zoning hearing boards have an integral role in assuring the fair and equal application of zoning and land use regulations across the commonwealth. Recognizing the important role zoning hearing boards play and the fact that such boards are in the best position to interpret and apply their municipality’s land use ordinances, appellate courts give a board’s findings and conclusions much deference.  …

July 17, 2018

The EPA and Corps Request Additional Comments on the Proposed Repeal of the Clean Water Rule

Environmental Alert
(by Lisa M. Bruderly and Gary E. Steinbauer)
Nearly one year after officially proposing to repeal the Clean Water Rule (CWR), the landmark 2015 Obama Administration rule that redefined “waters of the United States” and arguably expanded the geographic scope of the Clean Water Act (Act), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (collectively, the “Agencies”) have clarified the legal basis for, and are soliciting additional comments related to, the proposed repeal. On July 12, 2018, the Agencies published a lengthy Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Supplemental Notice) in the Federal Register to clarify, supplement, and seek additional comment on their proposal to permanently repeal the CWR and recodify the regulatory definition of “waters of the United States” that existed before 2015. 83 Fed. Reg. 32227. Interested parties have until August 13, 2018 to submit comments in response to the Supplemental Notice.
As compared with the initial July 2017 proposal (82 Fed. Reg. 34899), the Supplemental Notice is rich in detail and includes significantly more legal analysis and citations, as well as references to and evaluations of documents included in the administrative record for the CWR. For almost every new or more detailed justification for the proposed repeal, the Agencies request comment. Some of the arguments and reoccurring themes for which the Agencies request comment include:

  • The CWR exceeds the Agencies’ authority under the Act by (1) failing to give sufficient effect to the statute’s use of the term “navigable” to define the Agencies’ jurisdiction and (2) focusing too much on the biological and environmental importance of wetlands.
  • The CWR is a misapplication of the “significant nexus” test for jurisdiction under the Act established by soon-to-be-retired U.S.

    • …

July 16, 2018

Energy Industry in WV and Ohio

Comcast Newsmakers

Tim Miller of Babst Calland talks to host Eric Minor about the Ohio Valley’s energy industry topics such as legal, regulatoryand NG drilling developments, infrastructure, legislative and construction and job growth outlook.

To watch the segment, click here.

July 13, 2018

Delaware Riverkeeper Network and May Van Rossum v. PADEP and Constitution Drive Partners, LP

Alert: PA Environmental Hearing Board Update
(by Jean M. Mosites and Kevin J. Garber)
On July 2, 2018, the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board issued an opinion and order related to a discovery dispute, concluding that no discovery was appropriate in a third-party appeal from an amended settlement agreement under the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (HSCA).
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection signed a prospective purchaser agreement in 2005 with a developer to clean up an abandoned tube manufacturing facility in Chester County, amended the agreement in 2007 and 2010, and published notice of the agreement in 2017 as a settlement under HSCA. Section 1113 of HSCA provides that an appeal of a HSCA settlement agreement must be decided on the administrative record, which is limited to: (1) PADEP’s notice of the proposed settlement, (2) written comments to the settlement, and (3) PADEP’s response to those comments. The Delaware Riverkeeper sought more.
The EHB determined that a party seeking discovery in an administrative record review appeal under Section 1113 of HSCA bears a heavy burden to show discovery is necessary. None of the Delaware Riverkeeper arguments—based on Article I, Section 27 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, as well as allegations of improper procedure and bad faith—met that burden. The full opinion can be found here.
Click here for PDF.

July 12, 2018

Babst Calland Adds 3 Attys To Emerging Tech Practice

Law 360

(by Mike Curley)

Babst Calland has added two shareholders and an associate to its practice, bolstering its roster in support of emerging technologies and new businesses.

The Pittsburgh-based firm announced Tuesday that Justine M. Kasznica and Carl A. Ronald joined as shareholders and Michael E. Fink joined as an associate in its Corporate and Commercial Group.

“The addition of these technology and startup-focused attorneys supports the firm’s strategy to expand its multidisciplinary team to serve the needs of clients developing new technologies, new companies and new ideas,” Managing Shareholder…

For the full article, click here.

July 10, 2018

Pennsylvania Supreme Court reverses approval of oil and gas well on narrow grounds

The PIOGA Press

(by Blaine A. Lucas and Robert Max Junker)

In Gorsline, court declines to rule on broader issue of compatibility with uses in residential and agricultural zoning districts, but suggests that municipalities may permit unconventional natural gas drilling in any and all zoning districts

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court published its long-awaited opinion in Gorsline v. Board of Supervisors of Fairfield Township on June 1. Although the majority reversed the Commonwealth Court’s decision affirming the granting of a conditional use for an unconventional natural gas well pad, it did so in a narrow holding, finding that Inflection Energy, LLC did not present enough evidence before the Fairfield Township Board of Supervisors establishing that its proposed unconventional gas well pad was similar to other uses allowed in the township’s Residential-Agricultural Zoning District. Unlike most zoning ordinances, the township’s zoning ordinance did not specifically authorize oil and gas wells. Instead, Inflection had relied upon a “savings clause,” which allowed uses “similar to” the other uses specifically allowed in the R-A District.

Despite headlines and press releases touting the Gorsline decision as a wholesale rejection of oil and gas development in residential and agricultural zoning districts, its ruling was much more limited. In fact, language in both the Gorsline majority and dissenting opinions largely rejects the post-Robinson Township assertion of many shale gas opponents that natural gas wells must be relegated to industrial zoning districts and are fundamentally incompatible with residential or agricultural zoning districts.

Background
In 2013, Inflection submitted a conditional use application to the board seeking to construct a natural gas well site in the township’s R-A District. …

July 10, 2018

Babst Calland Grows Emerging Technologies Practice, Adds Three Lateral Attorneys

Babst Calland today announced the addition of three lateral moves to support early stage businesses and companies with emerging technologies.

“The addition of these technology and startup-focused attorneys supports the Firm’s strategy to expand its multidisciplinary team to serve the needs of clients developing new technologies, new companies and new ideas,” said Babst Calland’s Managing Shareholder Donald C. Bluedorn II.

Justine M. Kasznica joined as shareholder in the Firm’s Mobility, Transport and Safety and Corporate and Commercial groups. Ms. Kasznica is a technology and commercial transactions attorney who represents technology companies, investor groups, universities and research institutions seeking to commercialize new technologies, as well as innovative products and services. Her clients are customers and vendors of software, SaaS, IoT, AI and robotics products and services in the retail, aerospace, autonomous vehicle, healthcare, education, emergency management and system safety/security industries, among others. In addition, she has experience in general corporate and commercial law matters, and supports clients with their entity formation, corporate governance, venture capital and private equity investments, and commercial contract needs.

A recreational drone pilot with a passion for robotics, space and aviation, she represents commercial space and drone (unmanned aircraft systems – UAS) companies in connection with their regulatory needs, and she also advises universities and large commercial institutions with respect to their UAS operations. In this role, she regularly participates in speaking engagements and leads workshops on legal and regulatory topics related to UAS and commercial space, and serves as an advisor to various UAS and space technology companies and projects.

Ms. Kasznica has been actively involved in Pittsburgh’s innovation economy since she moved to Pittsburgh in 2008. She served as Executive Director of the University of Pittsburgh School of Law Innovation Practice Institute and remains active on the boards of several entrepreneurship-focused organizations and programs, including Ascender, an accelerator and co-working hub. …

July 9, 2018

Babst Calland adds 3 to corporate practice, builds tech expertise

Pittsburgh Business Times

(by Patty Tascarella)

Continuing to add lawyers focused on technology and early-stage companies, Babst Calland on Monday confirmed three hires in Pittsburgh, including two from the local office of a Philadelphia firm.

Justine Kasznica and Carl Ronald both joined Babst Calland as shareholders. They previously had worked for Baer Crossey McDemus and Kasznica had led the Philadelphia-based firm’s Pittsburgh office for the past year.

For the full article, click here.

July 6, 2018

The 2018 Babst Calland Report Focuses on the Appalachian Basin Oil & Gas Industry Forging Ahead Despite Obstacles

PGHTECH FUSE
Marcellus, Utica Shale Plays Account for 41 Percent of U.S. Natural Gas Output
The law firm of Babst Calland today released its annual energy industry report: The 2018 Babst Calland Report – Appalachian Basin Oil & Gas Industry: Forging Ahead Despite Obstacles; Legal and Regulatory Perspective for Producers and Midstream Operators. This annual review of shale gas development activity in the Appalachian Basin acknowledges an ongoing rebound despite obstacles presented by regulatory agencies, the courts, activists, and the market. To request a copy of the Report, contact info@babstcalland.com.
In this Report, Babst Calland attorneys provide perspective on issues, challenges, opportunities and recent developments in the Appalachian Basin and beyond relevant to producers and operators.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s May 2018 report, the Appalachian Marcellus and Utica shale plays account for more than 40 percent of U.S. natural gas output, compared to only three percent a decade ago. Since then, the Appalachian Basin has become recognized in the U.S. and around the world as a major source of natural gas and natural gas liquids.
The industry has been forging ahead amidst relatively low natural gas prices, infrastructure building, acreage rationalization and drilling plans that align with business expectations. The policy landscape continues to evolve with ever-changing federal and state environmental and safety regulations and tax structures along with a patchwork of local government requirements across the multi-state region.
Joseph K. Reinhart, shareholder and co-chair of Babst Calland’s Energy and Natural Resources Group, said, “This Report provides perspective on the challenges and opportunities of a shale gas industry in the Appalachian Basin that continues to enjoy a modest rebound. While more business-friendly policies and procedures are emanating from Washington, D.C., threats of trade wars are raising concerns about the U.S. …

July 6, 2018

Three Pittsburgh attorneys selected to national list of influencers

Pittsburgh Business Times

(by Mark Mensheha)

Manoj Jegasothy of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, Peter Kalis of K&L Gates and Justine Kasznica of Babst Calland have been selected to a national list of notable attorneys.

The Business Journals’ Influencers: Law spotlights 100 executives who are having an impact on business and legal matters in communities across the nation.

These 100 executives represent both large, nationally recognized firms and smaller, locally focused businesses. Some are long-tenured executives, while others have found success relatively early in their careers. And while some might be familiar industry names and others less so, as a group nationally, these individuals are having an impact on matters of business and law in myriad areas.

For the full article, click here.

July 6, 2018

Babst Calland Expands Mobility, Transport and Safety Practice

PGHTECH FUSE
Babst Calland announced the addition of William L. Godfrey as Director, Mobility, Automation and Safety. The Firm is expanding its capabilities to support the developing needs of companies with emerging technologies.  It provides strategic leadership with business and legal advice for manufacturers, suppliers, start-ups, technology companies and government entities in the full-spectrum of transportation regulatory, safety, product quality, and automation matters, including those related to automated/autonomous driving systems.
“Will Godfrey’s expertise and creativity deepens our unique vision to deliver full-stack solutions to clients’ problems that integrate technical and engineering know-how with legal insight to expand business opportunities,” said Tim Goodman, Chair of Babst Calland’s Mobility, Transport and Safety Group, and former National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Assistant Chief Counsel for Enforcement and Federal Senior Executive.
A former General Motors vehicle engineer, production manager and senior U.S. federal regulatory chief at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)/U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Will Godfrey will assist clients in achieving their business goals and navigating obstacles by applying a current and detailed understanding of the federal government’s approach to transportation safety regulation (particularly motor vehicles), including its programs, processes, and personnel.
Godfrey spent nearly a decade at NHTSA/DOT, where he served in various leadership capacities.  Among other things, as NHTSA’s Trends and Analysis Division Chief, he led the oversight, analysis, and investigation of more than 1,100 vehicle, equipment, tire, motorcycle, and child car seat manufacturers globally, including TREAD Act/Early Warning Reporting Program and the integration of new, data-driven techniques.  As a senior policy advisor to the NHTSA Administrator, he led the agency’s comprehensive reorganization of the NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation (ODI).
“Will Godfrey is well-regarded and uniquely qualified to serve clients with emerging technologies as a senior technical and strategic advisor, integrated with our best in class legal and technical team,” said Donald C. …

July 6, 2018

Kasznica joins Babst Calland

Pittsburgh Business Times 

(by Patty Tascarella)

One of Pittsburgh’s largest law firms has boosted its technology expertise with a big catch.

Babst Calland confirmed on Friday that Justine Kasznica has come aboard as a shareholder in its Mobility, Transport and Safety and Corporate and Commercial groups. Monday is her first day at the downtown headquarters of the region’s seventh-largest law firm.

For the full article, click here.

Top