California Assemblymember Das Williams (D-Carpinteria) has introduced an oil and gas bill to ensure that the state comes into compliance with the Class II underground injection (“UIC”) requirements under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”).  According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”), California is currently out of compliance with certain requirements for some Class II injection wells (oil and gas wastewater disposal wells) because fluid from these wells is being injected into non-exempt aquifers, which is prohibited.  Assembly Bill 356 (“AB 356”) was introduced on February 17, 2015 following publication of a letter from the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (“DOGGR”) to the USEPA addressing California’s Class II UIC program.

The bill authorizes the DOGGR Supervisor to require operators to implement a groundwater monitoring program for underground oil production tanks, facilities, and disposal and injection wells.  In addition, AB 356 would require operators to submit this monitoring plan, with a schedule for monitoring and reporting groundwater quality data, to the local regional water quality control board.  Data would then be submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board for inclusion in the geotracker database.  The purpose of the bill is to protect underground drinking water sources from potential  contamination arising from oil and gas operations.Continue Reading Proposed Assembly Bill 356 Would Require Additional Groundwater Monitoring by Oil & Gas Operators

On Thursday, Feb. 19, the Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”) filed suit against the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”), the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”), and the Department of the Interior (“DOI”) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. (CBD v. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-01189.) The complaint alleges that the federal agencies issued permits for drilling off the coast of California without adequate environmental review. Specifically, CBD claims that the federal government violated the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act “without analyzing fracking pollution’s threats to ocean ecosystems, coastal communities and marine wildlife, including sea otters, fish, sea turtles and whales.” (CBD Press Release, Feb. 19, 2015.)
Continue Reading Center for Biological Diversity Files Complaint Against Federal Agencies to Halt Offshore Fracking in California

On Wednesday, December 17, I gave a presentation to the Groundwater Resources Association (“GRA”).  I reviewed the past year’s developments in California’s regulation of hydraulic fracturing and previewed my future predictions for the industry.  Below is a summary of my talk and the power point presentation is attached here.
Continue Reading Here Today & Fracked Tomorrow: A Review of SB 4 in 2014

On Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 4, three counties in California presented voters with measures to ban hydraulic fracturing and other forms of intensive oil and gas operations.  Voters in Santa Barbara County rejected the measure there, while voters in San Benito and Mendocino Counties approved their respective ballot measures.

Santa Barbara’s Measure P would have banned the use of “high-intensity” oil extraction methods, including fracking, by future oil and gas projects on unincorporated county land.  Measure J, the San Benito County Fracking Ban Initiative, also bans “high-intensity petroleum operations,” which includes fracking, acid well stimulation, and cyclic steam injection.  Additionally, it bans any new gas or oil drilling activity in residential and rural areas in the County.  Measure J passed 57% to 43%.  The Mendocino County Community Bill of Rights Fracking and Water Use Initiative, Measure S, bans “unconventional extraction of hydrocarbons,” including fracking.  The ordinance creates a strict liability scheme for damages to any person or property inside Mendocino County caused by unconventional extraction.  Measure S passed 67% to 33%.Continue Reading Two County Fracking Prohibitions Succeed While One Fails: What the Voting Results in Santa Barbara, San Benito, and Mendocino Counties Mean for the Oil & Gas Industry in California

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 U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) released a report yesterday, July 28, 2014, that presents a need for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) to update the Underground Injection Control class II program (“UIC Program”).  Under the UIC Program, the USEPA oversees and regulates groundwater affected by wells associated with oil and gas production.

The City of Compton is being sued for its ordinance banning hydraulic fracturing, effective on April 22, 2014.  (Western States Petroleum Association v. City of Compton, et al., Case No.BC552272.)   Although Compton is not the first city in the state to enact such a ban, Compton is the first city to be sued over it.  The Western States Petroleum Association (“WSPA”) filed a law suit on Monday, July 21 in Los Angeles County Superior Court.  The complaint states that such fracking bans are preempted by state regulation of well stimulation, Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”) and the Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources’ (“DOGGR”) regulations.

WSPA alleges several other legal grounds for the ordinance’s invalidity.  The industry group claims that the city failed to give adequate notice of the ordinance, violating state and federal Constitutional due process guarantees.  Additionally, the lack of public debate when passing the ordinance violated the City’s policy powers.  Mineral rights holders were not given a forum for public input.Continue Reading Industry Group Sues Compton for Moratorium on Hydraulic Fracturing

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