California Environmental Law Blog - Insight and information for the environmental and natural resource industry

Senate Bill 34 (Carbon Capture and Storage Act of 2013), which would close certain key legal gaps that hinder carbon capture and storage in California, lost its sponsor late last week when Senator Rubio (D – East Bakersfield) suddenly resigned.  Earlier this week the Senate Environmental Quality Committee decided to postpone its hearing on SB 34.  SB 34 is virtually identical to SB 1139 (Carbon Capture and Storage Act of 2012), which stalled in the Assembly last year.  (See prior blog post concerning SB 1139.)

SB 34 addresses a number of issues identified in the white papers—Approaches to Pore Space Rights, Carbon Dioxide Pipelines, and Enhanced Oil Recovery as Carbon Dioxide Sequestration—that Stoel Rives prepared for the California Carbon Capture and Storage Review Panel in 2010.  For more information on SB 34, please contact Mike Mills, Jerry Fish, or Eric Martin.

Co-Authored by Mike Mills, Jerry Fish and Eric Martin

California’s Cap and Trade Program is now a reality. Businesses needs answers to questions arising from this complex program. Now that the State of California has held its first auction of carbon allowances under the Program and the initial compliance period of 2013-2014 is now underway, Stoel attorneys Michael Mills, Tom Henry and Allison Smith have prepared a primer on the basics of this complicated regulatory scheme. This helpful guide explains the differences between allowances and offsets, which industries are subject to regulation in different compliance periods, the basics of the trading program, and the penalties for non-compliance.

To read the full article, click here.

On Thursday, the Senate Appropriations Committee shelved two bills relating to fracking, AB 972 and AB 591.  AB 972 would have placed a moratorium on fracking in California pending issuance of state regulations governing the practice (See August 14 post).  AB 591 would have required operators to disclose fracking activities and chemicals (See May 8 post).

Thursday was the last day for legislative finance committees to address bills pending in the current session, ending August 31.

Co-authored by Michael N. Mills and Robin B. Seifried.

The Senate Committee on Environmental Quality on July 3rd advanced a bill (AB 972) that would prohibit the State Oil and Gas Supervisor from approving the drilling of a fracking well until the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) adopts fracking regulations.  Existing law requires a well operator to obtain approval before commencing drilling.  The bill would require the operator to indicate in a request for approval whether fracking “will be used or is planned to be used in completing the well.”  If the operator so indicates, the bill would prevent the approval of drilling until DOGGR fracking regulations are adopted and in effect.  The bill would also define “hydraulic fracturing,” “hydraulic fracturing fluid” and “proppants.” 

After the summer recess, the bill is schedule to be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on August 6.

Co-Authored by Michael N. Mills and Robin B. Seifried.

In Los Angeles this Wednesday, three City Council members introduced a resolution urging the Governor and California regulators to impose a moratorium on fracking until the state determines that the practice does not endanger public health, the water supply or the environment.  The concern arises in part because California, unlike some other oil-producing states, does not require fracking operators to disclose the locations of their fracking operations or the chemicals they use.  In the absence of statewide regulations, local communities are considering whether they should regulate fracking.

On a regional scale, South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) officials are considering new rules that target emissions from fracking operations.  South Coast officials discussed the AQMD’s authority to pursue the new rules at its June 1 meeting.  Sources say South Coast is the first AQMD to consider fracking rules, which could come before state and federal regulations and may cover a wider scope of operations than EPA’s currently proposed rule (such as high-pressure gas wells).  The South Coast rules would require fracking operators to disclose the types and amounts of chemicals used.  Before deciding whether to pursue the new rules, District officials indicate that they want to study the issue in more detail and meet to discuss the issue with stakeholders.  In response, the Western States Petroleum Association indicated that the types of air quality issues addressed by the proposed EPA rule are not generally associated with fracking for crude oil production, which accounts for most of the fracking operations in California.

Co-Authored by Michael N. Mills and Robin B. Seifried.