Freeport Area School Board considers drilling proposal
The Freeport Area School District is set to allow drilling for natural gas on vacant land that it owns.
The school board on Wednesday night heard a proposal by Renee Anderson of the Tucker Arensberg law firm dealing with an undeveloped, 30-acre plot of land adjacent to the South Buffalo Elementary School that “has the potential of being leased.”
MDS Energy would drill the wells and the school district would be in line for royalty payments of 15.5 percent should natural gas be found.
No drilling would be done on the elementary school property.
But if a Marcellus shale well is drilled, horizontal fracking as far as a mile below the surface could go under the elementary school. The company also may decide to drill a conventional gas well instead.
Anderson cautioned that gas wells drilled in that area have come up empty.
“It's a fairly good royalty since it's a dry well area,” Anderson said.
School district Business Manager Ryan Manzer said the school board plans to vote in June.
Such moves to extract natural gas from beneath public land have been controversial. Many protested Allegheny County's decision this month to allow gas to be extracted from beneath Deer Lakes Park in Frazer and West Deer.
• The school board thanked student representative Hayley Davis for her two years of service as a liaison between the school board and the student body.
George Guido is a freelance writer for Trib Total Media.
More Valley News Dispatch
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.