Louisiana House Bill HR289

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

Caption

ENERGY: Urges and requests the Department of Conservation and Energy to review policies and practices related to the redaction of proposed well site locations

Summary

House Resolution 289 urges and requests the Louisiana Department of Conservation and Energy to review the laws, regulations, policies, and practices governing the redaction of proposed well site locations in permit applications. The resolution focuses especially on Class VI wells, which are associated with geologic carbon dioxide storage, and notes that applicants have increasingly sought to keep proposed well locations confidential even though the department has indicated those locations should be publicly available before the notice-and-comment stage of permitting. The resolution does not change substantive law directly. Instead, it asks the department to study whether current confidentiality claims under prior law, trade secret provisions, and agency practices are limiting public access to information needed for meaningful participation in the permitting process. It also requests a written report to the House Committee on Natural Resources and Environment by March 1, 2027, including any recommendations for legislative action if changes are needed.

Impact

HR289 has no immediate statutory effect and does not amend the Louisiana Revised Statutes. Its practical impact is to direct agency review of how well permit information, especially proposed well locations, is treated as confidential during the permitting process for wells regulated under R.S. 30:1 et seq. The resolution specifically references the repeal of a prior confidentiality provision in the Louisiana Geologic Storage of Carbon Dioxide Act and the possible use of trade secret law under R.S. 44:3.2, signaling that future legislative or regulatory changes may be considered to ensure public notice and participation in well permitting.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution is supportive of transparency and public participation in energy and environmental permitting. The bill’s findings suggest concern that redaction practices may be undermining the public notice and comment process, and the resolution frames the issue as one that should be reviewed so the department can carry out its duties effectively. No votes or committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded opposition or debate in the available materials.

Contention

The main point of contention is the balance between confidentiality for applicants and transparency for the public. Applicants appear to be seeking redaction of proposed well site locations, citing proprietary, trade secret, or confidentiality grounds, while the resolution argues that withholding site locations prevents affected landowners, nearby residents, and other interested parties from meaningfully participating in the permitting process. A secondary issue is whether existing law after repeal of the prior confidentiality provision still allows or should allow redaction of this information.