It was only a matter of time before a city banned hydraulic fracturing in California – a “home rule” state, where cities and localities are permitted by constitutional amendment to enact and enforce their own zoning laws as they see fit, so long as those laws stay within the bounds of state and federal constitutions.

The California Assemblymembers who sought a moratorium on all well stimulation activities early last year (vis-à-vis failed bills AB 1301, AB 1323, and AB 649) are seeking yet another moratorium, this time by amending SB 4, which went into effect on January 1, 2014 (and which we have extensively analyzed – see

On November 15, 2013, the California Department of Conservation (“DOC”) published the notice of proposed rulemaking action regarding draft regulations for well stimulation.  These proposed regulations will implement SB 4, which Governor Brown on September 20, 2013, and will become effective on January 1, 2014.  

The draft regulations supplement the Division of Oil, Gas and

California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 4 on Friday, September 20, 2013, establishing a permitting system for fracking of oil and gas wells. (See September 23, 2013 post.) The state, through the Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (“DOGGR”), will be developing regulations to implement SB 4’s requirements. Despite its recent

On Wednesday, the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources rejected one of the remaining two bills this session that would have regulated hydraulic fracturing activities. The rejected bill, AB 7, was amended on the floor at the end of May and sent back to the Natural Resources Committee. As amended, AB 7 would have required approval of proposed fracking activities, notice to property owners, regional water quality board approval of the proposed wastewater disposal, and disclosures relating to fracking fluids.
Continue Reading Only One Fracking Bill Survives in the California Legislature

On Monday, the Assembly Committee on Natural Resources passed three separate bills that separately would each place a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing. The next stop for these bills is the Assembly Committee on Appropriations, then the bills may advance to the floor.

Each of the three bills would restrict fracking activities pending a determination of whether and under what conditions fracking may be conducted without risk to human health or the environment. Two of the bills, AB 1301 and AB 1323, would prohibit fracking anywhere in the state. The third bill, AB 649, would only prohibit fracking, as well as the use of clean freshwater for fracking purposes, within a yet to be determined distance of an aquifer.
Continue Reading Assembly Committee Advances Bills to Impose Fracking Moratorium

Last week, the UC Berkeley Center for Law, Energy and the Environment released a report recommending increased regulation and further study of the impacts of hydraulic fracturing activities in California on public health and the environment. The report focuses on the potential impacts to groundwater and surface water resources relating to the management of wastewater associated with fracking, but also touches on other environmental and public health issues, such as air emissions and increased demand for water in well completions.
Continue Reading Report Recommends More Stringent Regulation of Fracking in California

UPDATE [4/5/2024]:  The Commission has determined to exercise its discretion to stay the Final Rules pending the completion of judicial review of the consolidated Eighth Circuit petitions.  Click here for more information.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission) finalized its climate change disclosure rule on March 6, 2024, reducing the final disclosure obligations from the initial proposal after thousands of comments from stakeholders. The final rule requires comprehensive and standardized climate-related disclosures, including disclosure on governance, business strategy, targets and goals, GHG emissions, risk management, and the effects of climate change on financial metrics. This additional disclosure is intended to help investors assess material risks in climate-related reporting and facilitate comparisons across firms and over time with respect to climate-related metrics. 

For issuers subject to the new disclosure requirements, compliance with the final rule will present practical challenges, such as coordination among internal and external subject matter experts in the legal, accounting, science, and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) fields; data tracking, collection, and verification; reconciliation of data reported to satisfy mandatory disclosure requirements and voluntary reporting commitments, like those covered by sustainability reports; and oversight to ensure disclosures satisfy both the new SEC rules and the increasing non-regulatory scrutiny from investors and watchdogs, like International Shareholder Services (ISS). These challenges will necessitate significant additional costs to prepare compliant disclosures.

Continue Reading The New SEC Climate Disclosure Rule Will Drive Risk Mitigation and Value Creation

California has enacted two new laws on corporate disclosure of direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related financial risks.  Senate Bill (SB) 253, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, expands state GHG emissions reporting requirements to large U.S. companies doing business in California.  SB 261 requires biennial disclosure of climate-related financial risks.

Continue Reading California’s New Climate-Related Disclosure Laws