States Take the Lead in Carbon Sequestration Permitting: A shift Towards Faster CCS Project Approvals
The landscape of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) in the United States is evolving, with a growing trend of states assuming primary responsibility for regulating geologic sequestration wells. This delegation of authority, known as Class VI Underground injection Control (UIC) primacy, is poised to accelerate the deployment of CCS technologies – a critical component of many climate change mitigation strategies. As of mid-2025, several states are either gaining or defending their authority to oversee thes projects, signaling a meaningful shift in the regulatory framework.
The Expanding Circle of Primacy: Arizona, Texas, and Beyond
The EPA is actively working to transfer authority for Class VI wells to states capable of demonstrating robust regulatory programs. Arizona and Texas are the latest to move towards achieving this primacy, joining North Dakota (2018), Wyoming (2020), Louisiana (2023), and West Virginia (anticipated 2025).This expansion is particularly noteworthy given the increasing number of CCS projects vying for permits. Currently, the EPA is managing applications for 62 CCS projects, many involving multiple injection wells, creating a considerable workload. Industry stakeholders believe state-level oversight will streamline the permitting process, reducing bottlenecks and fostering quicker project development.
For context, the global CCS capacity reached approximately 83 million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) in 2023, with projections indicating a need to scale up to over 1.5 billion tonnes per annum by 2030 to meet climate goals, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Faster permitting is therefore crucial to achieving these targets.
Legal Challenges and the Defense of State Primacy
The transition to state-led regulation hasn’t been without hurdles. Several states’ primacy grants have faced legal challenges from environmental organizations concerned about potential environmental impacts and procedural compliance.
Louisiana’s Victory in Court:
Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the EPA’s decision to grant Class VI primacy to Louisiana. The case, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice v. EPA, saw environmental groups argue that the EPA’s approval process was flawed and that transferring liability to the state could jeopardize environmental protection. However, the court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked the necessary standing to bring the challenge, a decision that could set a precedent for future legal battles. This outcome suggests that successfully challenging EPA’s primacy grants will be a difficult task for opponents.
West Virginia’s Primacy Under Scrutiny:
Currently, the EPA’s grant of Class VI primacy to West Virginia is being contested in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (West Virginia Surface Owners’ Rights Organization v. Zeldin). The core concern revolves around whether West Virginia possesses adequate resources and technical expertise to effectively regulate these complex projects. Briefing in the case is underway, with a decision expected in the coming months.
A Cooperative Federalism Approach and the Future of CCS
Despite these legal challenges,the EPA appears committed to a “cooperative federalism” approach,actively supporting states in assuming Class VI primacy. The agency anticipates that empowering states will lead to more efficient and tailored regulation of CCS projects.
The expectation is that as more states gain primacy, the overall permitting timeline for CCS projects will shorten, attracting further investment and accelerating the deployment of this vital technology. This shift in regulatory control is a key indicator of the growing momentum behind CCS as a critical tool in the fight against climate change,and a move towards a more decentralized and responsive regulatory system.