On November 12, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) granted the Texas Railroad Commission (RRC) primacy over the Class VI Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, authorizing Texas to assume primary permitting and enforcement authority for carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. With this decision, Texas joins Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming as one of the few states administering its own UIC Class VI permitting program.
Understanding Class VI Wells
Class VI wells, which are used for long-term geological sequestration of CO2, are among the most highly regulated injection well categories. Federal UIC regulations require detailed geologic characterization, plume-migration modeling, rigorous construction and monitoring standards, and long-term post-injection site management. Until now, EPA has served as the exclusive permitting authority for CCS projects in Texas, a process often criticized for lengthy review times and administrative uncertainty.
With primacy, day-to-day permitting authority shifts to the RRC, while EPA maintains supervisory authority over the state’s implementation of the program. For CCS developers, the transition is expected to provide greater predictability and regulatory efficiency, particularly given the RRC’s longstanding experience regulating Class I and Class II injection wells and its familiarity with Texas’ geologic conditions. Combined with the state’s abundant saline formations and proximity to major CO2 sources, RRC primacy further positions Texas as a leading jurisdiction for CCS development and investment.
Clarifying Pore Space Ownership
Permitting, however, is only one component of the legal framework surrounding CCS projects. Recent judicial decisions and legislative developments have helped clarify that subsurface “pore space”—the voids within underground formations used for CO2 storage—is generally owned by the surface estate unless expressly conveyed. Mineral ownership alone does not include the right to store CO₂ or other injected substances, and pore-space rights may be leased or conveyed separately from mineral interests.
While this clarity provides a more predictable foundation for project development, it also underscores the need for careful title review. Developers must determine whether pore-space rights have been severed from the surface estate, whether earlier conveyances restrict the use of formations for storage, and whether existing mineral leases contain provisions that may conflict with sequestration activities. For surface owners, clarified pore-space ownership may create opportunities to participate in CCS projects through easements or leases, though such agreements involve long-term operational considerations, potential interactions with mineral development, and careful allocation of post-closure responsibilities.
Conclusion
Texas’ assumption of Class VI primacy offers increased regulatory certainty and alignment with an agency already deeply experienced in injection-well oversight, while legal clarity around pore-space ownership provides a more stable foundation for negotiating and securing storage rights. Together, these developments create a clearer pathway for CCS project development, but they also highlight the importance of a disciplined permitting strategy, robust title analysis, and carefully structured agreements. As Texas begins implementing its Class VI program—and as early RRC guidance and permitting decisions appear—both developers and landowners will benefit from proactive legal planning and attention to developing regulatory requirements.