Feb 24, 2015 3 min read

PITTSBURGH – A Range Resources attorney argued in Superior Court Tuesday the natural gas drilling company should not bear the burden of producing a full list of products and chemicals it used at a well site in Amwell Township.

A three-judge panel heard arguments stemming from Range’s appeal of a Washington County Court order from last June that held Range responsible for obtaining a list of all chemicals, including proprietary products, from its manufacturers. Range requested that the issue be argued separately from the main case, in which three Amwell families alleged that Range’s operations at the Yeager well site contaminated their water supplies and caused bodily harm.

Kendra Smith, who along with her husband, John, is representing the three families, said their request for the products is “so intertwined with the heart of the case” that it would be impossible to separate the two – and thus the issue is not appealable. The Smiths represent Stacey Haney and her two children; Beth and John Voyles and their daughter; and Loren and Grace Kiskadden.

Smith said the information they requested as part of the pretrial discovery period is needed in order to pursue the families’ claims that certain chemicals allegedly migrated from Range’s well pad or impoundment into the families’ drinking water.

Bruce Rende, attorney for Range, argued that the appellees do not have a “compelling need” for the product information. He said any hazardous or potentially carcinogenic substances were already released on a material safety data sheet. He said the products being requested are “industry secrets” that are protected unless a sufficient reason is given to release the information.

He called the Washington County Court order, which was signed by former Judge Debbie O’Dell Seneca, a “sweeping order” that requested information the company cannot access because many of the manufacturers are not parties in the case.

Judge Anne Lazarus said Range previously argued that it had already released the information and asked, “Isn’t this moot?”

Rende replied that Range had disclosed all products used in its fracking formula, but he said the court order requested additional information. In Range’s court brief, the company argued that the list could include products used for well pad construction, natural gas well drilling, hydraulic fracturing and general maintenance activities, including a “number of harmless products typically found on a work site” such as duct tape and hand soap.

President Judge Emeritus John Bender said he assumes that the trial court will act reasonably in its consideration of relevant information. He called the issue a “discovery problem” and asked if it could be resolved by the trial court.

Smith argued that Range has “exclusive access” to information on all the products it uses. She said Range should already know the properties of its products because those stipulations are outlined in sections of Act 13, the Oil and Gas Act and the Energy Policy Act.

The appeals court has not yet rendered an opinion on the matter.