Marcellus Shale Showdown Postponed

The showdown between Range Resources and South Fayette over its drilling ordinance was delayed because of questions raised over the impartiality of two members of the township’s zoning board.

The Marcellus Shale drilling company’s challenge against South Fayette's ordinance was postponed until November after township attorney Jonathan Kamin filed three motions at the Wednesday night hearing in front of the zoning board.

Kamin first asked for two of three zoning board members to recuse themselves from the hearing because the men are said to have leases with Range Resources. Kamin also asked for the alternate zoning board member to recuse himself because he is an employer of EQT gas company.

"We believe that three of four zoning board members have a conflict of interest in the hearing," Kamin said. "It's the only way to have a fair and impartial hearing on this matter."

Kenneth Komoroski, attorney for Range Resources, said, "We consider this board to be fair and impartial...You check your personal interests at the door as the board routinely has."

Kamin filed two more motions on behalf of the township requesting the board to quash the challenge. Kamin also said Range Resources has not filed the proper applications to proceed.

Following the motions, the zoning board took a 15-minute executive session to be counseled and decided to postpone the hearing until Nov. 9. They gave Range Resources 15 days to provide a written response to each of the motions. Range Resources and the township agreed to extend the time frame for the zoning board to make their decision.

Residents concerned about the Range Resources' challenge to the township's ordinance filled the South Fayette Middle School's auditorium on Wednesday night. The public will be given a chance to testify at the next hearing on Wed., Nov. 9.

The document contends that the company is “being deprived of its legal right to develop its oil and natural gas property interests.”

Earlier in the day, governing Marcellus Shale drilling. The company claimed Cecil had not properly advertised its meetings, among other concerns about the ordinance.

This story originally appeared on Upper St. Clair Patch

Amanda Gillooly of Canon-Mac Patch contributed to this story