Filter By Service Area
Filter By Title
Filter By Office

Resources

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.

CCS In The 2024 Legislature

An inordinate number of bills related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) were introduced in the 2024 Regular Session of the Louisiana Legislature. Several were aimed at preventing CCS operations in Lake Maurepas and Lake Pontchartrain.  While these types of specific bills did not pass, several more general bills relating to CCS operations did pass and have been signed by the Governor or are awaiting signature. 

Generally, the Louisiana Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Act (the Act) governs the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide.  It contained provisions relating to the operator of a sequestration storage facility, carbon dioxide transmission pipelines, and the generator of the carbon dioxide (the CCS Operators). 

Liability

Act 461 (HB 937) provides a limitation of liability for landowners and is likely a welcome benefit for those seeking to lease property for CCS operations.  In general, a ‘landowner’ is the person who leases his or her property for storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  The term ‘landowner’ is formally defined as “any person who owns the surface and subsurface of land or water bottoms used for geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide who is not the owner or operator of the storage facility or carbon dioxide transmission pipeline, or the generator of the carbon dioxide being handled by either the facility or pipeline.”  The term does not include “the state.” 

A new provision, entitled “Landowner Liability Limitation,” is added to the Act.  La. R.S. 30:1109.1.  Under this new provision, a ‘landowner’ (as defined) does not assume or have any liability “at any time” based on the “mere fact” of being a landowner or entering a contract to allow his or her property to be used for the geologic storage, injection, or transportation of carbon dioxide.  A separate sub-section of new Section 30:1109.1 indicates that the liability limitation does not “alter” or “supersede” and contractual terms between the landowner and the CCS Operator. 

Under this new provision, simply allowing property to be used for CCS operations will not give rise to liability.  Presumably, however, liability could still attach to a landowner if he or she takes other actions related to CCS operations that cause harm or if the landowner is in breach of the contract with the CCS Operator. 

Act 415 (HB 169) is much more targeted.  Under previous law, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic losses were $250,000 per occurrence, except in certain situations, and, in those other situations, the maximum amount recoverable as compensatory damages for noneconomic loss were $500,000 per occurrence.  Act 415 revised those provisions from “per occurrence” to “per person.” 

Eminent Domain (Expropriation) 

Act 620 (HB 492) makes several significant changes to existing law.  First, the general provision relating to exploration, La. R.S. 19:2, is amended.  An entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline who has a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation is added to the list of entities having expropriation rights.  Additionally, while an entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide was previously included in that list of entities having expropriation rights, that entity must now have a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation to exercise those rights. 

Second, Section 30:1107 in the Act is amended to allow an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide by pipeline to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the Commissioner of Conservation.  The certificate may be issued after a public hearing and after the Commissioner determines that it is “in the present or future public interest.”  Additionally, Section 30:1104 previously required a special finding by the Commissioner, after a public hearing, “prior to the use of any reservoir for the storage of carbon dioxide and prior to the exercise of eminent domain.”  This section was amended seemingly to apply only to the entity engaged in the injection of carbon dioxide (as opposed to an entity engaged in transportation of carbon dioxide). 

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Act 620 specifically limits the rights of expropriation and “shall not allow for the expropriation of reservoir storage rights for geologic storage of carbon dioxide.”  This provision could limit the scope of the project to the area originally leased.  As injection continues over the years, the plume of carbon dioxide in the subsurface expands, potentially expanding beyond the boundary limits of the originally leased property.  Previously, an operator could then expropriate storage rights.  Now, however, the operator will have to negotiate with adjoining landowners and secure subsurface storage space by contract, which could prove expensive. 

General Provisions

HB 516 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It adds several administrative and operational provisions to the Act.  First, it requires a storage facility operator to have “an emergency and remedial response plan” prior to injection.  The plan must be shared with state and local officials and requires that “at least one tabletop exercise” must be conducted in coordination with emergencies preparedness and response agencies. 

Second, a notice of the injection permit must be recorded in any parish encompassing the area of review. Additionally, a map must be recorded showing several named features, including the location of the injection well, monitoring wells, abandoned wells, known faults, and aquifers. 

Third, no injection well may be sited within 500 feet of inhabited dwelling, schools, or health care facilities.  Finally, monitoring of groundwater above the confining zone must be conducted periodically and reported to the Commissioner on a semi-annual basis. 

Revenue Sharing 

HB 934 was sent to the Governor on June 3rd and is awaiting signature.  It generally provides that revenues collected by the Office of Mineral Resources from any contract regarding carbon dioxide storage must be forwarded to the state treasurer.  Thirty percent will be remitted to the parish or parishes within the area of interest.  The remaining monies are to be deposited into the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Conservation Fund.