Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 21 acknowledged the health dangers of fossil fuel development in California as state regulators took a first step towards preventing the development of new oil and gas wells near schools, hospitals, and homes. 

The proposal, released by the Department of Conservation’s Geologic Energy Management Division, is still a draft — and may yet change as it winds its way through a regulatory process that includes extensive public comment. 

“This is about morality. The issue that really unites us here today is around the issue of justice, environmental justice, economic justice — they go hand in hand,” Newsom said in Wilmington, a community surrounded by oil refineries. “It’s about public health. It’s about safety. It’s about dignity. It’s about the ability to live your life out loud.”

The governor, who in April ordered the phase-out of new oil fracking, has been criticized by environmental advocates for not doing more to reduce fossil fuel pollution and production that disproportionately burdens low-income communities and communities of color. Newsom announced Oct. 25 that he, 15 California lawmakers and top state officials will attend a crucial international conference on climate change early next month. 

Newsom directed California’s oil and gas regulators to ramp up public protections near oil and gas facilities in 2019. The controversial proposal has already received more than 40,000 individual public comments, state officials say. And it comes after a lengthy review by a panel of public health experts.

Still, it’s likely to see significant opposition from the politically powerful oil and gas industry and state building trades lobby, which have successfully blocked legislative attempts to establish health and safety buffer zones around oil and gas facilities. 

Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president and CEO of the Western States Petroleum Association, called it “an activist assault on California’s way of life, economy and people” and said it “could lead to increased costs and reduce the reliability of our energy supply. His decision was not based on what is best for Californians or science.”

Environmental justice advocates, however, said it was “a strong step in the right direction” that nevertheless does not go far enough to rein in an industry that has historically seen limited enforcement. 

The draft rule proposes a 3,200-foot public health setback around new oil and gas development, separating new wells from sensitive sites such as homes, hospitals, schools and nursing homes. Nearly 2 million Californians live within 3,200 feet of an existing oil and gas facility, according to Jared Blumenfeld, California’s Environmental Protection Secretary. 

Operators of existing oil and gas wells would be required to install emissions detection and vapor capture systems at the wellheads and establish nearby monitoring for pollutants. The rule would bar diesel engines on site, and require reducing other nuisances such as dust and nighttime lighting. 

Six years ago, California scientists released a comprehensive review of fracking and other practices in California, warning “many of the constituents used in and emitted by oil and gas development can damage health, and place disproportionate risks on sensitive populations, including children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with pre-existing respiratory and cardiovascular conditions.”

California, which cultivates an image of aggressive action to limit climate change, is the seventh largest producer of crude oil in the country. 

But while new development has flatlined, companies continue to rework existing wells. Southern California has some of the most extensive urban oil fields in the nation, dating back to the 19th century in some cases.

The scientists evaluated a number of potential control strategies, and determined that eliminating or reducing new wells and properly shutting down existing ones would eliminate “the source of nearly all environmental stressors … protects local and regional populations.” 

The research team was more skeptical of the pollution controls for existing wells, which they said “tend to be disproportionately focused on air pollutant emissions” and “(lack) the important factor of safety provided by a setback when engineering controls fail.” 

CalMatters reporter Julie Cart contributed to this story.