Business Immigration Insights

On September 10, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authorized the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to regulate all underground injection of carbon dioxide for long-term geological sequestration within Arizona’s jurisdiction. The final rule followed a comprehensive technical and legal review to ensure the state’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program met all requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) section 1422. As discussed in an earlier post, Arizona previously did not have primacy over any UIC well classes, unlike other states that have sought Class VI primacy thus far.

Last month saw several developments in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ongoing efforts to authorize states to implement Class VI of the federal Underground Injection Control (UIC) program under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for geologic sequestration of carbon. This push toward state primacy is an important development for the rapidly growing carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) industry, for which Class VI permits are the critical construction and operating permit. Currently, there are 62 CCS projects - including many with multiple wells - with permit applications pending with EPA. Project proponents anticipate that permitting will be faster if administered by the state instead of EPA. The latest developments last month include: (1) EPA’s proposal to grant primacy to Arizona; (2) EPA’s proposal to grant primacy to Texas; (3) a federal court decision rejecting a challenge to EPA’s earlier grant of primacy to Louisiana; and (4) an ongoing challenge to West Virginia’s recently granted primacy.

In the fall of 2018 we posted a state-by-state summary of smart contract legislation which included an overview of legislation passed in Arizona, Tennessee and Vermont, as well as an update on legislation pending in other states at the time. Over the past few years, a multitude of states have tackled smart contract legislation with varying degrees of detail and success. Most state smart contract legislation has fallen into three broad categories: formation of exploratory committees, recognition of basic smart contract concepts and comprehensive treatment of smart contracts and related technologies.

In a favorable decision for retailers, a California federal court judge scaled back a proposed class action seeking to bring nationwide class claims. Plaintiff Todd Carpenter alleged that he bought a rodent habitat at a California PetSmart and that the habitat was defective in such a way that his rodents were able to chew through and escape. He filed a class action in the US District Court for the Southern District of California for violations of California consumer protection laws, violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and common law fraud. The plaintiff sought to represent a nationwide class consisting of all purchasers of the rodent habitat along with a California subclass. PetSmart moved to strike the nationwide class on the grounds that the court lacked personal jurisdiction over PetSmart with respect to the nationwide class.