From Washington to Bradford and congressmen to oil drillers, a
recent settlement agreement between the U.S. Forest Service and a
coalition of environmental groups has many people talking, but it
appears that a federal judge will have the final say.

U.S. Rep Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., met with U.S. Forest Service
Chief Gail Kimbell on Thursday to get to the bottom of the
settlement just a day after parties in the lawsuit filed new
documents with the federal court in Pittsburgh.

The settlement, which imposes new restrictions on oil and gas
development on the Allegheny National Forest, has producers enraged
and environmentalists cheering.

The settlement, if signed by District Judge Sean McLaughlin,
would require analysis of all future oil and gas developments using
the National Environmental Policy Act, which hasn’t been previously
used for private mineral right estates on the forest.

NEPA analysis requires developers to hold off on drilling while
the Forest Service conducts environmental analysis of proposals,
gathers public comments and develops possible alternatives to the
proposals – a process that producers say could last months or even
years before the Forest Service makes its final decision on whether
to approve the plans or not.

“With this settlement the Forest Service is making a commitment
to disclose to people living near the Allegheny National Forest
what impact oil and gas drilling will have on water quality,
recreational opportunities, and the other benefits they expect from
the national forest in their backyard,” said Andy Stahl, executive
director of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics, one
of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the Forest Service.

However, the settlement, filed with the court April 9, is still
not finalized.

The Pennsylvania Oil and Gas Association, which was named an
intervenor defendant alongside the Forest Service just two days
before the settlement was reached, asked the court to halt the
agreement on April 13. POGAM argues that since it was a party in
the lawsuit it should have been at the table during the settlement
talks. The industry group also says that the settlement should be
moot because the Forest Service has no authority to prevent
producers from accessing the minerals.

“The National Environmental Policy Act … is beyond the authority
of the Forest Service to apply, regarding the exercise of private
severed oil, gas and mineral estates in the Allegheny National
Forest,” according to a document filed in the court by POGAM on
April 17.

The Forest Service chief disagrees with POGAM’s stance, telling
Thompson that NEPA will also help prevent the significant damage
that oil and gas development causes to the forest.

Thompson said his office is submitting requests to Kimbell to
find out what that damage has been.

“The administrative and legislative branch … have spent ,2
trillion in the last three months working hard to stimulate and
create jobs, and here’s the Forest Service making a policy decision
that is shutting down the (regional) economy,” Thompson said. “What
they are doing right now is wrong.”

Attorneys for the coalition of environmental groups say the
terms of the settlement are absolutely appropriate because, they
argue, the Forest Service has a responsibility to regulate the
surface lands owned publicly.

“The Service has considerable power to ‘regulate Forest System
lands,’ and, even in the face of private mineral rights, has the
limited but substantial authority to itself ‘determine the
reasonable use of federal surface,'” according to a document filed
with the court Wednesday.

April 29 marks the last day either party can file documents with
the court.