Act 13, also known as the Unconventional Gas Well Impact Fee Act, was signed into law in Pennsylvania in 2012. This controversial legislation aimed to regulate the hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, industry in the state and impose a fee on companies extracting natural gas from the Marcellus Shale formation.

The Marcellus Shale formation is one of the largest natural gas reserves in the United States, stretching from New York to West Virginia. The process of fracking involves injecting a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals into the ground at high pressure to extract natural gas from shale rock formations. While fracking has led to a boom in natural gas production and lowered energy prices, it has also raised concerns about its environmental impact, including water pollution, air pollution, and seismic activity.

Act 13 sought to address some of these concerns by imposing stricter regulations on fracking operations in Pennsylvania. The law required companies to disclose the chemicals they use in the fracking process, as well as to conduct pre-drilling water tests and post-drilling monitoring to ensure the safety of drinking water sources. It also established setback requirements for drilling near schools, hospitals, and other sensitive areas, and mandated the recycling of fracking wastewater to reduce the strain on local water supplies.

One of the most controversial aspects of Act 13 was the imposition of an impact fee on natural gas extraction. The fee was based on the number of wells a company operated and the price of natural gas, with the revenue going to local governments to mitigate the impacts of fracking on their communities. Critics of the law argued that it did not go far enough to protect the environment and public health, and that the impact fee was too low to adequately address the costs of regulating the fracking industry.

In 2013, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down key provisions of Act 13, including the zoning restrictions that limited local governments’ ability to regulate fracking within their borders. The court ruled that these provisions violated the state constitution’s guarantee of local self-government, and directed the legislature to revise the law to give more power to local communities.

Since then, Act 13 has undergone several revisions to address the court’s concerns and strengthen regulations on the fracking industry. These changes have included increased setbacks for drilling near water sources and other sensitive areas, as well as stricter reporting requirements for companies operating in the state. The impact fee has also been adjusted to provide more funding for local communities affected by fracking activities.

Despite these changes, Act 13 continues to be a contentious issue in Pennsylvania, with ongoing debates over the balance between economic development and environmental protection. Proponents of the law argue that it has helped to create jobs, boost the economy, and provide much-needed revenue for local governments. Critics, however, maintain that it does not go far enough to protect public health and the environment from the risks of fracking.

As the fracking industry continues to expand in Pennsylvania and across the country, the debate over Act 13 and its impact on communities and the environment is likely to persist. It remains to be seen whether the law will be able to strike a balance between promoting economic growth and safeguarding public health and natural resources in the face of a rapidly changing energy landscape.