652 JOURNAL OF LAW AND POLICY
level.^166 The court discerned such an intention by looking to the
language and rules promulgated by the West Virginia DEP
which gave the state ultimate responsibility for protecting the
environment and indicated a “comprehensive framework.”^167
Additionally, the court held that West Virginia’s municipality’s
powers are “narrowly proscribed” and that if there is a question
as to whether a municipality has certain legislative power, the
court should find that the municipality does not possess such
power.^168 Morgantown did not appeal and other municipalities
have since repealed their hydrofracking bans.^169 Recently,
Morgantown considered limited zoning laws, controlling the
location of hydrofracking rather than an outright ban, although it
is unclear if even such a limited ban would be allowed.^170 Until
appellate courts in West Virginia address the level of power
local municipalities possess through their zoning power, it seems
unlikely that any type of hydrofracking ban will be allowed.
The states surrounding New York, where hydrofracking
already exists, have all taken different approaches to local
zoning power and hydrofracking bans. Generally the courts and
legislature have been more restrictive of local power with
greater control given to the state.^171 However, the law in both
West Virginia and Pennsylvania is still unsettled, with the
validity of Act 13 pending before the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court^172 and the West Virginia bans only being struck down at
the trial level.^173
(^166) Id.
(^167) Id.
(^168) Id.
(^169) Goho, supra note 14, at 6–7.
(^170) See Goho, supra note 14, at 6–7; Orford, supra note 162.
(^171) Goho, supra note 14, at 5–7.
(^172) Detrow, supra note 157.
(^173) Orford, supra note 162.