Question about Hilcorp's Central Facility/Compressor Station

There has been an ongoing dispute in Pulaski Twp., PA regarding what Hilcorp terms their "central facility" versus what some think is actually a compressor station being disguised using different terms. Hilcorp has described the central facility as the place where a dehydrator removes water from the natural gas then compressors and fans cool the fans. Is that different than the function of and equipment used in a compressor station? There are some (mostly anti-fracking activists) who believe that Hilcorp is lying to the community by using the term central facility. Can someone help me understand the difference between the two?

Views: 2783

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on September 29, 2015 at 7:28pm
I sincerely hope you will be so enthusiastic when it directly impacts you.
Permalink Reply by Michelle Hoffman on September 30, 2015 at 2:27pm

What makes you think it doesn't directly impact me?

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on September 29, 2015 at 8:14pm
If the ordinance does not apply to any legal business than why did it need to be abolished?
Permalink Reply by Michelle Hoffman on September 30, 2015 at 2:28pm

Why not ask the supervisors instead of assuming some sort of nefarious intent? 

Permalink Reply by John Smith on September 30, 2015 at 2:32pm

I tried but they would not take questions.. You know hearing only heard one resident...    http://www.ncnewsonline.com/news/hearing-hears-only-one-resident/ar...

Nefarious indeed.

Permalink Reply by Michelle Hoffman on September 30, 2015 at 2:41pm

The noise ordinance was abolished just a few months ago and first brought up just a month or two before that. The hearing you are referring to took place a year ago. How is it possible that you tried to ask why they were going to abolish the ordinance a year before they indicated they were going to do it?

Permalink Reply by John Smith on September 30, 2015 at 7:13pm

The hearing that only one resident was allowed to speak was an example. I have gone to meetings where if they don't like what you are saying they just cut you off. This was an example of that in the news..  I'm not saying that day is the day I spoke. The day I tried to speak is the day when they announced the resending. I spoke  and was told to shut up because I didn't have documents to PROVE what I was talking about. I can't speak about something that was in the future...Really???  You need to learn to read..Or you are playing games.. Just like Pulaski is......

Permalink Reply by Michelle Hoffman on September 30, 2015 at 7:41pm

I don't know who you are but I'm convinced you are trying to goad me into sinking to your level of nastiness.  Not gonna happen. Toodles :)

Permalink Reply by John Smith on September 30, 2015 at 7:48pm

Really don't want to be nasty.. I just flat out say you are a public official and you  Obviously shown your bias and should step down along with the ZHB and the Township supervisors. Let someone that WILL do what is right do the job instead of your self serving agenda. The ol mighty dollar. 

Permalink Reply by John Smith on September 30, 2015 at 1:16pm

 Michelle Hoffman

The problem is that the whole Pulaski ordnance was written before the unconventional well drilling revolution. It is a 2002 document that needed updated and I’m sure that in the spirit of the  Noise ordnance was not meant to be a catch all for drilling and noise 24-7 .7 days a week. Somebody found a loophole so they could continue on. Just because a law was wrote does not mean that it is a good law. What good law lets just legal businesses make noise. That is discrimination against people because it put business needs before people's needs( Rights) I’m not anti fracking but I’m pro common sense. You have ALL 3 supervisors having conflicts and direct financial gain out of this. Then you have the ZHB who ALL had leases. A judge just ruled that just having a lease is a conflict of interest in the commonwealth.

So what do you think the judge is going to do when ALL 3 supervisors have leases, 1 works for Hilcorp and will get a $100,000.00 bonus if they met a production mark.??

The other 2 supervisors one has a well pad going on his real property  that is a $25,000.00 for signing and royalties of 18% after that. The other supervisor gains financial from the other supervisors well pad in royalties. The you have the ZHB  who all have leases. What do you think a judge is going to say about all that??

There was no way anyone can tell me that any of those hearings were fair and impartial. And I’m sure a judge will agree especially after this ruling just came out on conflicts.

Pulaski has sold it’s soul and is getting called out for it. We all hate dirty politicians.

So it seems to me that they are just playing games with their ordinances to suit themselves.

That is self dealing and government at it’s worst. This could have been a good thing for ALL of us but greed wins evrytime.

Permalink Reply by Michelle Hoffman on September 30, 2015 at 2:30pm

First, you seem to be confusing the Zoning Ordinance with the Noise Ordinance. They are two different ordinances. Secondly, who in this township would then be eligible to be a supervisor if anyone with a lease is not qualified in your opinion? 

Permalink Reply by John Smith on September 30, 2015 at 2:38pm

I'm not confusing anything.. The noise ord is part of zoning. It tell you what levels in what zones. Thus zoning.   That is what this judge said is law. Maybe people can give up their oil money to serve... I'm sure there are people who are qualified to serve and not beholden to any business interest.  

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service