The Nickel Report

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has finalized and released a new version of ISO 27914 (ISO 27914:2026), the standard for underground storage of carbon dioxide in geological formations that do not produce hydrocarbons. 

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.

The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (“OBBBA”) signed on July 4, 2025, enacts the widely-publicized “No Tax on Tips” and “No Tax on Overtime” changes to the tax code. These provisions will decrease tax burdens for many employees, but also present new compliance obligations for employers. These changes are retroactive to January 1, 2025, so employers should be focused on these issues now.

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.