Energy

Subscribe to Energy via RSS

On April 29, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (“Water Board”) issued a Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment and Notice of Public Workshop regarding the proposed Draft Model Criteria for Groundwater Monitoring (“Model Criteria”) for areas of oil and gas well stimulation. Senate Bill 4 requires groundwater monitoring for all oil and gas wells that receive stimulation treatments.

The Model Criteria will be used by (1) the Water Board to implement a regional groundwater monitoring program, and (2) oil and gas operators and Water Board staff in the development of groundwater monitoring near well stimulation activities. These Model Criteria outline the methods to be used for sampling, testing, and reporting the water quality associated with oil and gas well stimulation activities.

The groundwater monitoring data will be used to initially establish baseline condition prior to well stimulation. Thereafter, Water Board staff will evaluate data and test results to determine changes in water quality and whether additional monitoring requirements or corrective actions are necessary.Continue Reading Water Board Issues Proposed Draft Model Criteria for Groundwater Monitoring

The California State Bar, Environmental Law Section hosts an annual conference which welcomes attorneys and students from across the state to learn and discuss cutting edge environmental law issues.  This year’s Environmental Law Conference at Yosemite featured an insightful panel on hydraulic fracturing regulation.  The panel, held on Sunday, October 19, was titled “Recent Developments in the Regulation of Fracking at the Federal, State, and Local Level.”  The four panelists each shared their experience and differing viewpoints in relation to their law practice.

Kassie Siegel, Senior Counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity, focused on hydraulic fracturing regulation at the federal level.  She noted the lack of meaningful federal regulations and pointed out that fracking is exempt from several federal laws including the Clean Water Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.  Thus, fracking is not highly regulated by federal agencies and currently depends more on state and local oversight.Continue Reading State Bar, Environmental Law Section Presents Update on Fracking Regulations

The world continues to shift for the energy sector in California. On Monday, U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announced the highly anticipated proposed CO2 standards for existing power plants in the U.S.  The proposed rules would affect existing power plants undertaking changes, as well as those not contemplating any modifications.  What’s more, states can meet the proposed standards through implementation of…

Governor Brown released a summary of his proposed 2014-2015 budget this week, including details on proposed environmental protection and natural resources spending.  The Governor’s budget provides $3.6 billion in funding for the California Environmental Protection Agency, including $3.1 billion in State funds and $54 million from the General Fund.  Proposed funding of CalEPA programs include:

  •  $850 million

…

This week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey, ruling on the constitutionality of California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS).  The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s holdings in large part, in particular finding that the LCFS does not on its face violate the…

In Poet, LLC et al. v. California Air Resources Board et al., the Fifth Appellate District held the Air Resources Board (“ARB”) violated CEQA and the APA with its approval of the Low Carbon Fuel Standards (“LCFS”) regulations, and ordered the lower court to issue a peremptory writ of mandate, requiring ARB to take certain CEQA-related actions in any re-approval of the regulations. In doing so, however, the Court concluded that the LCFS regulations could remain in effect while ARB took the actions necessary to comply with CEQA and the APA. The Court also ordered that if those corrective actions were not taken, ARB would be ordered to set aside and suspend operation and enforcement of the LCFS regulations.

The LCFS regulations were adopted by ARB to reduce emissions from transportation and implement measures to achieve the goals of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 ( “AB 32”). In enacting the regulations, ARB was required to comply with AB 32, California’s Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), and the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).Continue Reading California Appeals Court: Air Resources Board Low Carbon Fuel Standards Regulations Violate CEQA

Putting uncertainty to rest for a variety of different stakeholders in California, Southern California Edison (SCE) announced today that the utility will permanently retire the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS).  In addition to SCE’s press release, Governor Jerry Brown, California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Peevey, and California Energy Commission Chairman Robert Weisenmiller have issued statements this…

Communities for a Better Environment (CBE) and Center for Biological Diversity (Center) filed suit on May 29, 2013 to challenge the constitutionality of a provision of California law that requires appeal directly to the California Supreme Court of any decision on a thermal power plant license by the California Energy Commission.  The Supreme Court has discretion whether to take such appeals.  The lawsuit, filed May 29, 2013 in Alameda Superior Court, alleges that California Public Resources Code section 25531(a) violates article VI, section 10 of the California Constitution, by restricting the judicial forums available to citizens to challenge Energy Commission decisions.  The complaint also alleges that section 25531(b) restricts a court’s ability to review the facts of such challenges, in violation of the separation of powers. 

Section 25531 is part of the Warren-Alquist Act, which governs the Energy Commission and grants the Commission exclusive jurisdiction over the permitting of all thermal power plants in California that are 50 MW or larger.  For other electrical generating facilities, such as wind and solar farms and thermal power plants of less than 50 MW, legal challenges to agency decisions are filed in state superior court and go through the normal appeals process.

Plaintiffs have named the State Controller’s Office, as well as the Energy Commission, as defendants.  The complaint requests declaratory relief, that Section 25531(a) violates article VI, section 10 and Section 25531(b) violates the separation of powers doctrine.  Plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief, to enjoin the state from expenditure of funds to implement these provisions of the Warren-Alquist Act.Continue Reading New Lawsuit Challenges the California Supreme Court’s Original Jurisdiction over Power Plant Siting Cases

About Stoel Rives Environmental Law

Learn More

Few firms view their Environment, Land Use, and Natural Resources practices as core legal services. Stoel Rives is one of them. The firm ranks #8 in the United States according to Law360’s list of the largest practices of its kind. Our sophisticated compliance counseling, permitting, regulatory development, and litigation practices continue a long tradition of specialization and deep experience. Our environment, land use, and natural resource attorneys incorporate prior agency experience, technical acumen, and industry knowledge into their legal advice. They also build strong relationships with agency officials and industry associations. Our litigation successes include landmark decisions. More than 60 attorneys, paralegals, and compliance analysts comprise Stoel Rives’ nationwide Environment, Land Use & Natural Resources practice.