Transcript Highlights:

• the management of household hazardous waste and small quantity generator waste.
• waste and household hazardous waste.
• Household hazardous waste is considered any waste that exhibits the properties of dangerous waste but
• Moderist waste is defined as a solid waste limited to conditionally exempt small quantity generator waste
• Household hazardous waste is considered any waste that exhibits the property of dangerous waste but is

Summary: The committee held an interim work session focused first on carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS), then on hazardous waste and extended producer responsibility (EPR). On the CCUS topic, industry and nonprofit presenters described point-source capture, direct air capture, mineralization, and geologic sequestration, emphasizing Washington’s basalt formations and state trust lands as strong candidates for storage. They argued that CCUS can help hard-to-abate industrial sectors, support jobs and investment, and provide a pathway for compliance, while also noting the need for clearer permitting, subsurface rights, pipeline authority, and storage infrastructure. Ecology and Commerce staff explained current state policy touchpoints, including Cap-and-Invest offsets and exemptions for permanently stored CO2, the public comment process underway to define “thousand-year” permanence, and how CCUS might fit within the Clean Energy Transformation Act without counting emitting generation as non-emitting. Some presenters supported more state action and primacy over federal permitting, while others warned about costs, energy use, uncertain capture performance, and the need to ensure real net greenhouse gas reductions and long-term liability protections. Members asked about public meetings, whether mineralized carbon would qualify as exempt under the Climate Commitment Act, the timeline for Ecology guidance, aquifer and water-quality concerns, energy intensity of capture systems, and liability if storage later proves problematic. Responses said Ecology’s guidance process is already underway, public meetings will be virtual, mineralized carbon would likely qualify if it meets the permanence standard, and EPA rules require storage in deep saline formations below drinking water aquifers. Industry speakers said capture energy use varies by source and concentration, and one presenter noted that some states use trust funds funded by injectors to address long-term liability. The second half of the session shifted to hazardous waste and EPR. Ecology staff reviewed existing product stewardship programs for electronics, paint, batteries, and mercury lights, and described moderate risk waste and household hazardous waste management in Washington. They highlighted that E-Cycle and PaintCare are producer-funded, that the battery stewardship program will begin in 2027, and that the mercury lamp program is in transition after its prior stewardship organization exited, prompting enforcement notices and a pending replacement plan. Ecology recommended best practices for future EPR programs, including clear producer and product definitions, full producer funding, convenience standards, annual reporting, and strong agency enforcement and plan approval authority. Local government speakers from King County and Douglas County described rising collection costs, equity and access barriers, rural travel distances, and the need for stable funding and flexible local implementation. King County said it collected over 3 million pounds of hazardous products in 2025 and supports EPR as a way to shift costs from ratepayers to producers, while Douglas County emphasized that rural residents will participate when services are accessible and that future systems should account for geography and local infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, the higher regulations for the emissions of the incineration of medical waste are at the EPA
• The emissions from plastics and sharps and the things that defy the fine regulated medical waste issues
• medical waste...
• It creates emissions: plastics, metal, sharps, infectious waste, that kind of thing.
• Because it goes into the air as emissions. So there are air quality emissions...

Committee: House A&B Natural Resources Subcommittee

Bills: HCR41 , HB11 , HB227 , HB243 , HB278 , HB335 , HB424 , HB454 , HB455 , HB492 , HB623 , HB641 , HB660 , HB708 , HB719 , HB940 , HB1029 , HB1053 , HB1069 , HB1077

Committee: House Judiciary

Keywords: coupons, rebates, alcohol regulation, malt beverages, Louisiana Department of Revenue, remembrance, Charlie Kirk, state recognition, October 14, memorial day, court filings, electronic filing, letter size paper, privacy, legal procedure, recusal, district attorney, substitute attorney, appointment process, legal proceedings

Transcript Highlights:

• some rules and regulations around how local communities can regionalize both their water and their waste
• ago, uh Medford is now ago, uh Medford is now sending<01:02:30.280><c> their</c><01:02:30.440><c> waste
• /c><01:02:30.720><c> water</c><01:02:31.280><c> to</c><01:02:31.520><c> Owatonna</c> sending their waste
• water to Owatonna sending their waste water to Owatonna and<01:02:32.320><c> they've</c><01:02:32.440
• </c> water and their waste water treatment. water and their waste water treatment.

Bills: HF4680 , HF4047 , HF4590 , HF3757 , HF3569 , HF4507 , HF4426 , HF4927 , HF4788 , HF4757 , HF4747 , HF3561 , HF4014 , HF4013 , HF4689 , HF4766 , HF4589

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Keywords: wastewater treatment, improvements, capital investment, Greenfield, bonds, water treatment, infrastructure, municipal funding, state bonds, public utilities, HF4590, Tamarack, municipal infrastructure, bonding bill, general obligation bonds, Public Facilities Authority, sewer system, collection system, street reconstruction, local infrastructure

Bills: SB65 , SB444 , SB592 , SB640 , SB1242 , SB1257 , SB1304 , SB1501 , SB1642 , SB1946 , SB2178

Committee: House Alcohol, Tobacco and Controlled Substances

Keywords: SB65, naloxone, Narcan, opioid overdose, overdose reversal, opioid antagonist, emergency opioid antagonist, substance abuse services, harm reduction, public health, overdose prevention, good samaritan, civil immunity, criminal immunity, controlled substances, addiction treatment, fentanyl, opioid crisis, school overdose response, first aid

Bills: HB2975 , HB3405 , HB3406 , HB3728 , HB3902 , HB3977 , SB397 , HB1161 , HB2938 , HB2939 , HB3306 , HB3722 , HB4113 , HB4123 , HB2293 , HB3176 , HB3545 , HB3546

Keywords: poultry waste, nutrient management, environmental regulations, agriculture, water quality, pollution prevention, best management practices, noxious weeds, poison hemlock, kudzu, landowner responsibilities, environmental control, public nuisance, eradication, burn bans, fire danger, drought conditions, emergency declaration, scrap metal, regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• Importantly, the statute excluded areas used for waste, including those permitted under Chapter 27, which
• covers wells used to dispose of municipal waste. and industrial waste, oil and gas waste, and hazardous
• waste.
• was driven by concerns about potential contamination and the unknown interactions between injected waste

Bills: HB937 , HB2078 , HB2080 , HB3322 , HB3350 , HB4212 , HB4630 , HB4896 , HB4951 , HB5348 , HB5675 , SB565 , SB971 , SB1662 , SB2124

Committee: House Natural Resources

Keywords: special districts, notice requirements, Water Code, government transparency, public meetings, meeting notice, transparency, public engagement, notice, elections, groundwater management, water conservation, joint planning, environmental impact, desired future conditions, groundwater, conservation district, environmental quality, regulatory review, water utility

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, the higher regulations for the emissions of the incineration of medical waste are at the EPA
• The emissions from plastics and sharps and the things that defy the fine regulated medical waste issues
• medical waste...
• It creates emissions—plastics, metal, sharps, infectious waste, that kind of thing.
• Because it goes into the air as emissions. So there are air quality emissions... ...as emissions.

Summary: The committee opened with prayer and then took up a series of House bills, most of them on natural resources, agriculture, energy, and economic development topics. House Bill 2988, dealing with efforts to address woody invasive species through a state income tax credit subject to appropriation, was explained as a response to underfunding concerns and was reported do pass unanimously. House Bill 4344 would exempt sales tax on frackwater sales; the author said it was a constituent request tied to oil and gas activity in western Oklahoma, staff indicated a minimal fiscal impact, and the bill passed 9-2. The committee then approved House Bill 3280, which raises the Homemade Food Freedom Act revenue cap from $75,000 to $300,000 to let home-based food businesses grow before facing more burdensome licensing and inspection requirements. Members asked about the fiscal impact and food-safety distinctions between perishable and nonperishable foods; the author said there would be no state fiscal impact and that existing safety limits would remain unchanged. House Bill 3917, imposing a surcharge on large-load data centers during peak demand periods and directing the revenue to a grid modernization fund, was presented as a way to protect ratepayers and passed unanimously. House Bill 4413, as amended by PCS, would require any Oklahoma facility incinerating regulated medical waste to follow EPA guidelines; the author said the measure was prompted by a Tulsa facility seeking a permit variance and argued the bill was needed to protect public health and safety. After extensive questioning about DEQ authority, EPA standards, and health risks from incineration emissions, the PCS passed 8-1. House Bill 3402 created a revolving fund for DEQ biosolids land-application research and passed 7-2, and House Bill 4476 created a community music infrastructure and events development revolving fund to support rural music festivals and local matching participation, passing 5-4. Finally, House Bill 4155, as amended by PCS, established a new economic development structure for events in Oklahoma and passed 6-3. The committee repeatedly reminded authors to provide detailed forms and Senate authors before full A&B consideration, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• County Solid Waste Management Agency, Western Placer Waste Management Authority, County Solid Waste
• , as universal waste.
• , as universal waste.
• As e-waste, as universal waste, those opportunities don't exist for nicotine vapes.
• The emissions crisis.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Transcript Highlights:

• County Solid Waste Management Agency, Western Placer Waste Management Authority, Western Placer Waste
• , as universal waste.
• , as universal waste.
• As e-waste, as universal waste, those opportunities don't exist for nicotine vapes.
• the release of hazardous waste.

Summary: The committee heard AB 839, which would allow up to three sustainable aviation fuel projects to qualify for expedited CEQA judicial review. The author and airline and airport supporters argued SAF is a key emissions-reduction strategy for aviation and that California needs to signal investment certainty after prior project litigation. Environmental Justice and Earthjustice opposed, saying the bill weakens the public’s ability to challenge polluting projects and that SAF facilities can harm already overburdened communities. The committee later took a roll call on the bill and it was held on call after a 3-0 vote, with the motion being due pass to Judiciary. Members then took up AB 762, which would ban the sale of disposable nicotine vapes in California. The author and a broad coalition of waste, public health, local government, and environmental groups said the devices create fire hazards, add lithium batteries to the waste stream, and burden local recycling and hazardous waste systems. Opponents, including retailers and business groups, argued the bill would mainly affect a small legal market while the illicit market would continue to supply most disposable vapes, and warned of unintended consequences. After discussion about illicit sales, EPR ideas, and reuse alternatives, the committee voted 2-2 on the motion to pass as amended to Revenue and Taxation, so the bill was kept on call. The committee also heard AB 907, which would compensate the six local air district representatives who serve on the California Air Resources Board the same as other board members. The author and supporters said the change would improve equity and help ensure local representation on CARB, and no opposition was presented. The chair expressed support, noting similar legislation had passed the committee previously, and the bill was held for a later vote once quorum issues were resolved.

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead, it exempts the emissions from waste-energy facilities used by county and city solid waste management
• further facility, but also emissions are counted that are associated with solid waste diverted to a
• So emissions are counted that are associated with solid waste diverted to municipal solid waste landfill
• rather than its direct greenhouse gas emissions.
• rather than direct gas emissions.

Summary: The Environment and Energy committee met for executive session on four bills. Staff briefed House Bill 2416, which would replace Climate Commitment Act no-cost allowances for the Spokane waste-to-energy facility with a separate regulatory scheme requiring emissions reductions, reporting to Ecology and Commerce, and enforcement provisions; members discussed whether emissions accounting included biogenic emissions and confirmed the reduction measures would need to occur on-site. House Bill 2537 would direct Ecology to recommend a future allowance schedule for emissions-intensive, trade-exposed facilities and require biennial reporting and periodic plans, while House Bill 2575 would reduce several Energy Independence Act and state energy strategy reporting requirements for utilities and Commerce. House Bill 2322, as amended in a proposed substitute, would delay alternative jet fuel tax incentives until July 1, 2031, remove capacity thresholds, tie eligibility to life-cycle rather than direct emissions, and drop a Clean Fuels Program carbon-intensity change. During executive action, the committee debated the policy impacts of the waste-to-energy bill, with supporters saying the Spokane facility is unique and needs a separate framework, and opponents arguing it would create costly disincentives and raise ratepayer costs. The EITE bill drew support from members who said it would help identify facility-specific decarbonization options, while opponents warned about competitiveness, job losses, and industry leaving the state. The reporting-reduction bill was described as a streamlining measure that would save utilities money and remove duplicative or outdated reports. The alternative jet fuel substitute was presented as a clarification and simplification of the incentive structure, and members praised the changes. All four measures were reported out of committee with due pass recommendations. House Bill 2416 and House Bill 2537 each passed on 12-9 votes, House Bill 2575 passed unanimously by voice vote, and the proposed substitute for House Bill 2322 also passed unanimously by voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• 50 percent of the waste generated.
• For example, according to the latest annual emissions inventory, the total San Pedro Bay complex emissions
• According to the latest annual emissions inventory, the total San Pedro Bay complex emissions of diesel
• by 2030 and zero emission by 2035.
• So we look at the GHG emissions as a function of NOx emissions as well.

Committee: House Natural Resources

Summary: The committee first heard SB 14, which would direct state agencies to reduce single-use plastics and improve recycling and composting practices in state facilities. The author described the bill as a way for California to lead on waste reduction, with goals such as more reusable foodware, less paper purchasing, better employee education on sorting waste, and stronger recycled-content requirements for state purchases of plastic bottles. Support came from composting and waste-management representatives, while manufacturers and bottled-water interests removed their opposition after amendments narrowed the bill; the measure received a due pass recommendation to Governmental Organization on a unanimous roll call of members voting. The committee then took up SB 326, a wildfire-risk bill that would create a framework for Cal Fire to evaluate wildfire mitigation investments and accelerate implementation of Zone Zero building standards in very high fire hazard areas. The author and a Stanford wildfire policy expert argued the bill would help prioritize the most effective fuels-management and defensible-space actions, while local government and insurance representatives voiced support. With no opposition, the bill was passed as amended to Appropriations on a unanimous vote. Next, the committee considered SB 34, dealing with the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The author said the bill was narrowed by amendments to preserve port competitiveness while requiring the district to account for factors outside the ports’ control, avoid cargo-throughput caps, and focus on stakeholder collaboration and electrification planning. Supporters included labor, business, and port-related groups, while environmental organizations, community advocates, and the AQMD opposed it, arguing it would weaken local air-quality efforts and set a bad precedent. After extensive debate over precedent, automation, cargo limits, and federal preemption, the bill passed as amended to Transportation on a roll call with some members voting no and others not voting. The committee also heard SB 279, which would expand composting flexibility for agricultural operations and small community composters. The author and supporters said the bill would help farmers manage orchard and vineyard removals after the agricultural burning ban, increase local composting capacity, and keep more organic material out of landfills. Commercial composting interests opposed the measure, warning it could create permitting inequities, undercut existing facilities, and allow too much food waste at small sites. Despite those concerns, the bill passed to Appropriations on a roll call vote. The transcript ended as the committee began discussion of SB 613 on upstream methane emissions and data collection for imported oil and gas, with the author noting there was no opposition to that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to carbon emissions, Spokane is uniquely positioned to have this waste-to-energy plant,
• In addition to providing waste 1990s.
• So, as you heard, the waste-to-energy facility in Spokane provides disposal for a lot of waste as part
• The Spokane waste-to-energy facility is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution
• The county's regional solid waste system is a significant user of the city's waste-to-energy plant.

Summary: The Environment and Energy Committee heard testimony on three bills. HB 2426 would allow the Pollution Control Hearings Board, with unanimous agreement of the parties, to use alternative board compositions for appeals, including a single member or other qualified environmental adjudicators, so long as one member is a Washington-licensed attorney and the panel has environmental law expertise. The bill sponsor and supporters from business and conservation groups said it was a narrow, consensus-based change intended to improve efficiency and predictability. ELUHO’s director supported the concept but flagged technical issues in the bill language about attorney and Growth Management Hearings Board member qualifications. HB 2416 would provide no-cost allowances under the Climate Commitment Act to Spokane’s waste-to-energy facility, which is not currently covered until the second compliance period. Supporters, including Spokane officials, labor, and local partners, said the facility protects a sole-source aquifer, provides waste disposal and electricity for about 13,000 homes, and faces large compliance costs that could raise rates and threaten jobs. Opponents from environmental groups and Ecology argued the bill would give the facility preferential treatment, subsidize most of its emissions through 2050, and fail to ensure real emissions reductions; AWB raised concern about market impacts if new allowances are added. No vote was taken. HB 2373 would require electric utilities to offer monthly bill discount programs with tiered income levels, expanded outreach and enrollment, and updated reporting on low-income energy assistance. The sponsor said the bill is meant to make assistance more consistent and accessible statewide, while utilities and rural co-ops warned it could create unfunded mandates and significant rate increases for non-low-income customers, especially in smaller systems. Supporters from community action agencies, Commerce, and some utilities said monthly assistance is needed because energy burdens are rising and current programs are patchwork, though several urged pairing the bill with state funding or amendments. The committee heard extensive testimony but took no final action on any of the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, according to the latest annual emissions inventory, the total San Pedro Bay complex emissions
• According to the latest annual emissions inventory, the total San Pedro Bay complex emissions of diesel
• by 2030 and zero emissions by 2035.
• So we look at the GHG emissions as a function of NOx emissions as well.
• You want to be able to stop NOx emissions.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 14, which would direct state agencies to reduce single-use plastics and improve waste diversion at state facilities by updating integrated waste management plans, increasing reusable foodware use, reducing paper purchasing, and requiring better employee education and recycling/composting practices. Supporters from the California Compost Coalition, Republic Services, Waste Management, and others said the bill would help build composting and recycling markets and let the state lead by example. Several groups that had opposed earlier versions said they were now neutral after amendments, including the removal of a 90% requirement. The bill was moved out on a due pass as amended recommendation. The committee then took up SB 326 on wildfire mitigation. The bill would create a framework for Cal Fire to evaluate the risk-reduction benefits of fuels management and landscape resilience investments, and it would accelerate implementation of Zone Zero defensible-space standards, including grants for local enforcement and broader application to rental and sale properties and post-fire reconstruction. Support came from Stanford climate researcher Michael Mastrandrea and several local government, insurance, and climate groups. With no opposition, the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. Next, SB 34 on port emissions and the South Coast Air Quality Management District drew extensive testimony. The author said the bill was narrowed by committee amendments to preserve the ports’ ability to reduce emissions while preventing cargo throughput caps and addressing concerns about automation, local control, and the timeline for port clean-air planning. Supporters included ILWU, business groups, and port-related stakeholders, while the South Coast AQMD and many environmental and community organizations opposed it, arguing it would weaken public-health protections and set a bad precedent. After lengthy debate, the committee approved the bill on a due pass as amended vote to Transportation, with some members voting no and others abstaining. The committee also heard SB 279, which would expand composting options for farmers and small community composters by allowing limited on-farm composting after large biomass events and increasing the amount small operations may process and sell. Supporters said the bill would help address agricultural waste, expand composting capacity, and reduce landfill disposal. Commercial composting representatives opposed it, warning that the bill could create regulatory inequities, strand recent investments in permitted facilities, and allow too much unregulated food waste. Despite those concerns, the bill passed to Appropriations on a due pass vote. The transcript also briefly referenced SB 613 on upstream methane emissions data, described as having no opposition and intended to improve tracking of imported oil and gas emissions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because emissions isn't what drives me. Emissions doesn't drive me.
• Emissions doesn't drive me to my house every day. Emissions doesn't power my television.
• But if the goal is zero emissions, then a gas-powered plant that does zero emissions would be acceptable
• And that is intended to be an offset, a carbon emission offset equivalent to the carbon emissions being
• So that's not causing more emissions anywhere else. That is subtracting emissions everywhere.

Bills: SB78 , SB235 , SB22 , SB310

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 78, which would classify nuclear energy as renewable energy. Senator Thornton and supporters argued that New Mexico needs dispatchable, baseload power and that nuclear should be added to the state’s renewable portfolio standard because wind and solar are intermittent and require extensive land, mining, and battery storage. Supporters also emphasized nuclear’s zero-carbon profile, the safety record of U.S. Navy reactors, the possibility of small modular reactors, and the fact that New Mexico already uses nuclear-generated electricity from out of state. Opponents, including Senator O’Malley and Senator Charlie, argued nuclear is not renewable because it relies on finite uranium and creates long-lived radioactive waste, and they raised concerns about uranium mining impacts, waste storage, and the bill’s lack of a limiting principle. The committee voted 5-4 to do not pass the bill, with Senators Cervantes, Hamblen, O’Malley, Lopez, and Charlie voting yes on the do-not-pass motion and Senators Ezell, Scott, and Thornton voting no; the chair then explained that the vote reflected disagreement over whether nuclear should be labeled renewable, not opposition to nuclear power itself. The committee then heard Senate Bill 235, the Microgrid Oversight Act, with a committee substitute. Sponsor Senator Steinborn said the substitute would restore existing renewable benchmarks for microgrids, require large microgrids to meet zero-carbon targets by 2045, add reporting and PRC oversight, and close a loophole that could let utilities buy microgrid power and shift costs to ratepayers. Supporters, including environmental groups and community advocates, said the bill was needed to regulate large data-center microgrids such as Project Jupiter in Doña Ana County, which they said could drive major emissions, ozone, and nitrogen oxide pollution, strain water supplies, and undermine state climate goals. They also argued the bill would protect ratepayers and ensure transparency and community benefits. Opponents, including Americans for Prosperity, the Chamber of Commerce, oil and gas associations, Xcel Energy, PNM, Consumer Energy Alliance, and economic development groups, argued the bill would impose unnecessary regulation on private microgrids, slow investment, raise costs, and reduce flexibility for reliability projects and industrial development. They said microgrids are already regulated for safety and interconnection, and that the bill could discourage projects in New Mexico. In response, Steinborn said the bill was necessary because current law leaves a loophole for large polluting microgrids and because several major projects are already planned or underway. The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides, but the transcript ends before a final vote on SB 235 is taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• times over, especially methane emissions of landfills over waste energy.
• They are not controlled in the same manner that emissions are controlled from waste energy facilities
• Uh I also want to acknowledge that air emissions from a waste-to-energy facility, they may meet state
• <02:15:00.480><c> from</c><02:15:00.640><c> a</c><02:15:00.720><c> waste-to-energy</c> emissions from
• a waste-to-energy emissions from a waste-to-energy facility, facility, facility, they<02:15:02.840><

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• , industrial waste, and construction and demolition waste as feedstocks for making this type of fuel.
• construction</c> Waste Industrial Waste and construction Waste Industrial Waste and construction and
• </c> arsenic chromium and lead in this waste arsenic chromium and lead in this waste much<00:17:54.799
• wood waste components along with green waste that contains invasive species plants and pests and to
• wood waste components along with green waste that contains invasive species plants and pests and to

Committee: House Economic Development & Technology

Summary: The Committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on HB 976, a measure related to incentives for renewable fuels, including renewable diesel and sustainable aviation fuel. Supporters said the bill would help close the cost gap between renewable and conventional fuels, strengthen Hawaii’s energy security, support climate goals, and encourage local economic development. Testifiers from Pono Pacific, PAR Hawaii, Hawaiian Electric, Hawaiian Airlines/Alaska Airlines, the Hawaii Department of Transportation, Pacific Biodiesel, Aloha Carbon, and others described ongoing or planned projects, local feedstock development, and potential benefits for agriculture, waste diversion, and emissions reductions. Several testifiers also discussed proposed amendments. The Hawaii Renewable Fuels Coalition said it wanted to remove the import tax credit, eliminate the aggregate cap increase to avoid additional state funding, and revise local-production language to rely on a carbon-intensity threshold rather than location-based preferences. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii raised technical concerns about the bill’s administration, including prorating credits if the cap is exceeded and the feasibility of a 30-day filing window. Some supporters urged keeping solid waste, including construction and demolition debris, as eligible feedstock, while Energy Justice Network opposed that approach and also urged removing GMO-related language and waste-based feedstocks because of environmental and toxic emissions concerns. Opposition testimony focused on the bill’s cost and feasibility. Energy Justice Network and Ted Metros argued the measure could become a large subsidy for a refinery and questioned whether Hawaii has enough land and water to produce meaningful quantities of biofuel locally. Metros also criticized the refundable credit structure and said the state should not bear the cost for what he described as a benefit largely tied to tourism and imported fuel. No vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided; the chair later noted the committee had received 13 testimonies in support, 18 in opposition, and seven comments, and then invited further discussion on cost allocation and lowering caps to broaden participation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we did look at publicly available data on waste feedstock availability.
• And we did look at publicly available data on waste feedstock availability.
• Yeah, if you're using the waste feedstock.
• It won't reduce net emissions for the reasons that Dr. Smith explained.
• So that's almost one in three cars coming off the lot zero-emission.

Summary: The subcommittee heard testimony on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, which would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold for use in California from 2026 to 2036. The Department of Finance and CARB argued the credit would help decarbonize aviation, support refinery transitions, and keep fuel production and jobs in California. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, saying it is a relatively expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases, could have uncertain or limited climate benefits, and would reduce diesel excise tax revenue that supports highways, local streets and roads, and other transportation programs. A major point of debate was whether the credit would simply shift limited feedstocks from renewable diesel to SAF rather than create new low-carbon fuel supply. Professor Aaron Smith and the LAO said that because feedstocks such as used cooking oil, tallow, and vegetable oils are limited and already used in other fuel markets, the policy could increase SAF at the expense of renewable diesel, with possible increases in fuel prices and little net emissions benefit. Administration and CARB staff disputed that outcome, saying additional waste-based feedstocks are available and that the policy would not meaningfully raise gasoline or diesel prices. Senators focused on feedstock availability, impacts on road funding, fairness to consumers, and whether the proposal was really aimed at preserving specific refineries such as Phillips 66. Public comment was sharply divided. Labor representatives, refinery workers, airlines, Boeing, airports, and some local residents supported the proposal, emphasizing jobs, refinery investment, and aviation’s need for a liquid-fuel decarbonization pathway. Environmental and transportation groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, World Resources Institute, Earthjustice, California Environmental Voters, counties, cities, and trucking and asphalt associations, opposed it, citing weak net climate benefits, possible fuel-price impacts, and losses to transportation funding. No vote was taken; the chair announced all items would be held open for a future hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Choosing expensive policies to reduce emissions means that we are choosing to reduce emissions less than
• You got to buy the waste oils and fats to put in there.
• a 175-ton-per-day increase in NOx emissions by 2037.
• Kayla Robinson with Californians Against Waste.
• Funds to support zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles.

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• We did look at publicly available data on waste feedstock availability.
• So greenhouse emission difference between the...
• Yeah, if you're using the waste feedstock.
• So that's almost one in three cars coming off the lot, zero-emission.
• The $200 million for the light-duty zero-emission vehicle rebate.