May 15, 2021

Volume XI, Number 135

Advertisement

May 14, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 13, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

California Legislature Mulls Imposing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosure Requirements

Today, the California Senate Environmental Quality Committee is scheduled to hear SB 260, aka the Climate Corporate Accountability Act.  This bill would require the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations develop and adopt regulations requiring business entities with total annual revenues in excess of $1 billion and that do business in California publicly to  disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.  The bill requires of disclosure of three types of emissions:

  • “Scope 1 emissions” -  all direct greenhouse gas emissions that stem from sources that the reporting entity owns or directly controls, regardless of location,  including, but not limited to, fuel combustion activities.

  • Scope 2 emissions” -  indirect greenhouse gas emissions from electricity purchased and used by the reporting entity, regardless of location.

  • “Scope 3 emissions” - indirect greenhouse gas emissions, other than scope 2 emissions, from activities of the reporting entity that stem from sources that the reporting entity does not own or directly control and may include, but are not limited to, emissions associated with the reporting entity’s supply chain, business travel, employee commutes, procurement, waste, and water usage, regardless of location.

The reporting entity would also be required to disclose a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target that is "in line with the scale of reductions required to keep global warming at or below 1.5°C above preindustrial levels, and includes scope 1 emissions, scope 2 emissions, and scope 3 emissions".   These disclosures must be independently verified by a third-party auditor, approved by the state board, with expertise in greenhouse gas emissions accounting. 

If enacted, one wonders whether these requirements will be challenged on First Amendment or Dormant Commerce Clause grounds. 

Advertisement
© 2010-2021 Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 102
Advertisement
Advertisement

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS

Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Keith Paul Bishop, Corporate Transactions Lawyer, finance securities attorney, Allen Matkins Law Firm
Partner

Keith Bishop works with privately held and publicly traded companies on federal and state corporate and securities transactions, compliance, and governance matters. He is highly-regarded for his in-depth knowledge of the distinctive corporate and regulatory requirements faced by corporations in the state of California.

While many law firms have a great deal of expertise in federal or Delaware corporate law, Keith’s specific focus on California corporate and securities law is uncommon. A former California state regulator of securities and financial institutions, Keith has decades of...

949-851-5428
Advertisement
Advertisement