News
California lawmakers challenge federal bid to expand oil drilling and hydraulic fracturing statewide
Los Angeles Times – September 9
California lawmakers this Monday approved legislation seeking to block the federal government from allowing new oil and gas wells in national parks and wilderness areas in the state. AB 342 would make it illegal for pipelines and other essential infrastructure associated with any new oil or gas projects approved in federally protected areas to cross state lands. The bill now heads to Governor Gavin Newsom for his consideration. California lawmakers this week are also considering legislation that would allow state agencies to lock in protections under the federal Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, and other environmental and labor laws that were in place before President Trump took office in January 2017.
Chevron faces new demands from regulators as Kern County oil releases continue
KQED – September 10
After months of discussions with Chevron over a series of uncontrolled crude petroleum releases in a Kern County oil field, state regulators are demanding new information about Chevron's operations in the spill area. California's Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) issued a formal directive to the San Ramon-based company on Tuesday, requiring Chevron to provide technical data on its petroleum extraction practices in the Cymric oil field. The spills are also expected to be the subject of a joint oversight hearing in the coming weeks by the State Senate and Assembly committees on natural resources.
Shasta Dam case appealed to California Supreme Court
Record Searchlight – September 8
Fresno-based Westlands Water District has filed an appeal with the California Supreme Court in an attempt to overturn a lower court ruling and allow it to continue assessing the effects of raising the height of Shasta Dam by 18½ feet. In their lawsuit filed against the water district earlier this year, the California Attorney General's Office and several environmental groups alleged that raising the height of the dam as proposed would increase the level of Lake Shasta and further inundate the McCloud River, which flows into the lake and is protected under state law. A Shasta County Superior Court judge in July held that the water district could not legally conduct an environmental impact report on the effects of raising the height of the dam. The water district argues that it is unprecedented for a court to order an agency to stop environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act before an agency has been able to complete that review and make its decision.
|