Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Committee on Environmental Quality is now in order.
• SB 1375 keeps all other environmental laws, permits, and community commitments Keeps all other environmental
• That also poses a huge fire risk today, so we're reducing our fire risk when we do reconductoring.
• Grid reliability perspective, also fire risk.
• Alex Lumer, on behalf of the Environmental Defense Fund, the Pacific Forest Trust, the Environmental

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The committee heard several bills related to environmental quality, housing, transportation, and waste policy. SB 1375, by Senator Cortese, would create a narrow CEQA exemption category for certain transit and rail projects that have already undergone extensive environmental review. Supporters, including VTA, the City of San Jose, BART, Caltrain, MTC, and Climate Reality Silicon Valley, said it would reduce duplicative review and speed projects like the Diridon Station modernization. Committee members emphasized added amendments requiring displacement, construction-impact, and natural resources plans, and the bill passed 5-0 as amended to Transportation. The committee then took up SB 1031 on compostable plastics labeling. The author and supporters such as Californians Against Waste and the California Compost Coalition argued the bill would reduce consumer confusion, curb contamination in compost and recycling streams, and direct OEHHA to study health and environmental impacts. Opponents including manufacturers, BPI, retailers, and other industry groups said the bill would effectively ban compostable products in California, harm businesses, and fail to fix the underlying National Organics Program issue. After extensive discussion about labeling, composting capacity, and costs, the bill passed 2-2 on call to Appropriations. SB 958, relating to the Midway Rising redevelopment project in San Diego, was presented next; supporters said it would help move forward a large housing and mixed-use project on city-owned land after years of review and voter approval, and it passed 3-0 on call to Local Government. SB 1075, the Clean Air Promise, drew the most extensive debate. The bill would strengthen implementation and enforcement of AB 617 community emissions reduction plans and local plans in overburdened communities. Environmental justice advocates and youth supporters backed the measure, while local governments, business groups, air district representatives, and industry groups warned it would create uncertainty, add land-use constraints, and act as a housing and cost driver. The author accepted several committee amendments and said the bill was still being worked on, but the motion to pass it to Local Government resulted in a 2-2 tie and the bill remained on call. SB 1064, by Senator Dahle, would reduce clean truck check testing frequency for low-use heavy-duty vehicles and equipment from twice a year to once a year. Agricultural and trucking witnesses supported it as a practical, cost-saving change, while air quality advocates opposed weakening a program they said prevents excess emissions and protects public health. The bill passed 4-0 on call to Transportation. Finally, SB 1258 was presented as a revised measure on remediation of hazardous waste sites on the Cortese list. The author said the committee amendments replaced the bill’s original approach, but he continued to argue that remediation should be aligned with housing development so contaminated infill sites can be cleaned up and built on more efficiently. Developers and environmental consultants supported the concept, saying current timing rules create risk and leave sites idle, while the committee continued to hear testimony as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It has risks in that.
• from 60 days per winter over the period to just two, a 97% reduction in that risk.
• So a 97% reduction in that risk. That increased reliability matters for people, for pocketbooks.
• This bill requires development... ...other environmental and community partners to support it.
• Municipalities and state agencies are left to mitigate the environmental impacts.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a wide range of energy bills, with much of the discussion focused on offshore wind, battery storage, solar, nuclear study proposals, and a bill to redefine clean energy. Several Barnstable-area legislators and witnesses raised concerns about offshore wind transmission infrastructure near neighborhoods, beaches, and drinking water supplies, and supported bills to create a special commission and increase local input and oversight. In contrast, environmental, consumer, labor, and clean energy groups strongly backed offshore wind expansion bills, arguing that offshore wind lowers long-term costs, improves winter reliability, reduces fossil fuel dependence, supports jobs and local supply chains, and should include wildlife protections, labor standards, and community benefits. Some witnesses and committee members noted that parts of the offshore wind legislation overlap with the Governor’s energy affordability bill, and asked for clarification on which provisions were new versus duplicative. The committee also heard testimony on battery storage and solar legislation. Two student witnesses and several industry representatives supported a bill to study grid battery storage, saying storage can reduce outages, lower peak prices, and improve grid resilience during extreme weather. Witnesses from solar and storage companies supported a broader clean energy transition bill that would expand storage procurement, create a retail-style storage program for distributed batteries, set a 10-gigawatt solar target by 2035, and streamline siting and interconnection. Committee members pressed witnesses on whether these provisions were already included in the Governor’s affordability bill and asked for a section-by-section breakdown of what was new. One witness also urged allowing developers to bond interconnection payments to reduce financing costs. Another major topic was a bill defining clean energy, especially whether existing pumped-storage hydropower should qualify for subsidies or be excluded. Supporters of the bill argued that existing pumped storage should not receive additional ratepayer subsidies because it is already built, can have environmental impacts on rivers and ecosystems, and could cost ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Opponents said pumped storage is an important reliability resource and should remain eligible. The committee also heard testimony on nuclear-energy study bills: some witnesses supported creating a commission to examine nuclear power as a reliable, carbon-free option, while others opposed nuclear study bills and argued that nuclear is costly, unsafe, and inconsistent with the state’s clean energy goals. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• For this reason, operating engineers Local 3 respect operating in these high-risk environments.
• And it does not circumvent environmental review or local permitting requirements.
• Environmental Protection Agency's Risk Management Program or California's parallel system known as CalARP
• during chemical emergencies, and giving communities better access to information about risk.
• which were settled, and yet the facility still posed an extreme risk to nearby communities.

Committee: House Emergency Management

Transcript Highlights:

• We are working through the environmental process.
• We identified many risk factors, and each of those risk line items does include and addresses questions
• So it does try to consider those risks in market conditions and other risks that may be out there.
• Also, the risk discussion: we have 400 risks identified for the program, and those have all been modeled
• That has created cost and risk reductions.

Committee: Joint Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee

Summary: The Joint Committee on Interstate 5 Bridge met remotely with Washington legislative members to receive updates on the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program, including environmental review, cost and funding, tolling, and procurement for construction. Program staff said the final supplemental environmental impact statement was published in April 2026, with a federal record of decision expected in early summer. They described the recommended design as a single-level fixed-span bridge, centered I-5 alignment, C Street ramps, one auxiliary lane in each direction, and dispersed park-and-ride parking. Members raised concerns about transparency, the closed chat function, and the decision not to include two auxiliary lanes; staff said the one-lane option was recommended through consultation with partner agencies and analysis, but the final decision would come with the record of decision. Staff also said the diversion analysis projected less than 3% traffic diversion to I-205 in 2045, though members from Oregon and Washington expressed concern about impacts to their communities and asked for more detail on mitigation and decision-making. The committee also reviewed a major cost update. Staff said the full five-mile program is now estimated at $13.5 billion to $15.2 billion, with a likely cost of $14.4 billion, up from a 2022 estimate of $5 billion to $7.5 billion, citing inflation, schedule delays, scope changes, and more detailed risk modeling. They said the first funded phase has been reduced to a $5.68 billion package focused on the Columbia River bridge replacement, connections to I-5, Hayden Island and SR-14, bridge demolition, tolling infrastructure, and advancing light rail design. Funding for that phase was described as $5.69 billion, including $2.1 billion federal funds, $1 billion from each state, and $1.5 billion in projected toll revenue. Members asked what would happen if costs rise further; staff said the estimate includes substantial contingency, the project will use progressive design-build to manage risk, and the team will continue updating the finance plan annually. A separate tolling and traffic-revenue presentation explained that four toll scenarios were analyzed using regional travel demand modeling, a toll diversion model, and a post-processing review. All scenarios assume pre-completion tolling beginning July 1, 2028, a 50% low-income discount for eligible users, and exemptions for tribal preemptions, emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, and organized militia. Staff said the low-income discount would affect about 4% to 6% of annual transactions and reduce annual revenues by roughly 2% to 3%. They said Scenario 2 was used for the financial analysis and is sufficient to support the $1.5 billion toll contribution in the funded phase. Members asked about toll collection costs, revenue impacts of the discount, and how the scenarios differed; staff said collection costs are expected to be in line with other WSDOT toll facilities, but exact costs are not yet set because toll rates are not final. Finally, WSDOT staff outlined procurement and delivery steps for construction. They said WSDOT will be the lead contracting agency, using progressive design-build, with a request for qualifications targeted for early July 2026, a request for proposals in October, contractor selection in April 2027, construction starting in 2028, and tolling beginning in 2028. Staff said the approach is intended to consolidate scope, reduce interface risk, and allow transparent negotiation with an independent cost estimator, while preserving an off-ramp if a fair price cannot be reached. Members asked for more detail on timing, cost allocation, and the share of the first phase funded by tolls; staff estimated tolls account for about 26% of the first phase cost.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the environmental groups are, by and large, opposed.
• I see a lot of environmental support.
• Grishina Mojee, Mojee, Environmental Voters, in support.
• while reducing environmental impacts.
• And there is serious risk to my members' cancer risks from soil and air contaminants.

Summary: The committee heard several energy, water, and utility bills, with extensive testimony on cost, ratepayer impacts, and climate or reliability goals. SB 919 by Senator Grayson would extend the biomethane monetary incentive program through 2030 and support renewable natural gas development by reducing interconnection cost barriers. Supporters said RNG helps methane reduction and organic waste diversion, while opponents, including TURN and environmental groups, argued the bill could shift costs to ratepayers and subsidize combustion-based fuels, especially dairy digesters. The author said committee amendments removed the rate-basing provisions and instead urged the CPUC to act quickly on its pending decision; the bill was left for a later vote. SB 931 by Senator Laird would reauthorize the Diablo Canyon Community Impact Mitigation Program through 2030. Supporters said San Luis Obispo County and local schools rely on the funding for emergency preparedness and public safety, while TURN argued the extension would add about $47 million in statewide ratepayer costs and should instead be paid from existing PG&E deal revenues. Members discussed the bill as a continuation of the 2022 Diablo Canyon agreement, and the author said the measure simply restores the five years omitted from that deal. The committee also heard SB 1215 by Senator Cortese, which would direct the CPUC to set deployment targets for EV charging in multifamily housing. Supporters said renters and apartment residents are largely shut out of home charging, and that prior utility programs showed the model can be cost-effective and beneficial to ratepayers. The bill was amended to address affordability, ratepayer benefits, and limits on major system upgrades. SB 1295 by Senator Stern would create a framework for using distributed batteries and other local resources to solve grid constraints more cheaply than traditional infrastructure. Supporters said it could improve reliability and reduce costs by targeting batteries where they provide the most grid value, while utilities said they were open to continued discussion. SB 1359, also by Senator Stern, would require the CPUC to more carefully evaluate major gas infrastructure investments and alternatives such as electrification before approving new spending. Environmental groups supported the bill as a guardrail against stranded assets, while gas utilities opposed it, warning it could undermine the obligation to serve, create safety and reliability risks, and retroactively change the rules for approved investments. On water policy, SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar would create a statewide low-income water rate assistance program upon appropriation. Supporters said about 1.6 million households have water debt and that affordability is a statewide issue, not just a problem for disadvantaged communities. Some members raised concerns that the bill lacked a funding source and that state mandates, such as chromium-6 treatment requirements, already strain local water agencies; the author and supporters responded that the bill includes administrative caps and transparency measures and is intended to work alongside future funding. The committee then heard SB 1098 by Senator Pérez, which would restrict the use of utility memorandum and balancing accounts by requiring exceptional circumstances, adding sunset dates, and creating cost-sharing or lower-return rules for certain spending. TURN and other supporters said the accounts allow utilities to recover costs after the fact with too little discipline, while Edison and PG&E opposed the bill, arguing that some costs are unpredictable and that the CPUC already has a formal review process. SB 1125 was moved to Appropriations with a roll call, and the roll was left open for additional votes; the other measures were discussed with no final committee actions announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> three environmental impact statements. three environmental impact statements.
• Second is risk.
• Second<00:11:59.040><c> is</c><00:11:59.160><c> risk.</c> Second is risk. Second is risk.
• <00:14:43.120><c> with</c> environmental risk than a barn with environmental risk than a barn with 9,990
• </c> additional environmental protection. additional environmental protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are convening as the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee. Welcome.
• Beyond their health risks, nitro musks are also a major environmental concern.
• Ryan Spencer, perhaps with the Environmental Working Group.
• I'm Santiago with California Environmental Voters in support.
• I have a master's in environmental health from UC Berkeley.

Summary: The Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee met to adopt its rules, establish quorum, and approve a consent calendar of five bills, all sent to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee then heard three measures: AB 638 by Assembly Member Rodriguez on stormwater capture for irrigation of urban public lands; AB 60 by Assembly Member Papin on banning synthetic nitro musks in cosmetics and personal care products; and AB 916 by Assembly Member Lee on restricting certain antibacterial soap ingredients in consumer hand soaps and body washes. AB 638 was presented as a climate and water-supply measure directing the State Water Resources Control Board to develop guidelines for capturing and safely reusing stormwater for irrigation. Supporters, including NRDC and several environmental groups, argued it would reduce potable water use and help move stalled projects forward. The bill drew no opposition and received strong support from committee members, including requests to coauthor. It passed the committee on a due pass motion to Appropriations. AB 60 would ban synthetic nitro musks in cosmetics and personal care products due to health and environmental concerns. Supporters cited endocrine disruption, reproductive harms, persistence in waterways, and international restrictions. The bill passed on a due pass motion to the floor, with one member not voting. AB 916 generated the most debate: supporters said the three targeted antimicrobials offer no added benefit over plain soap, may contribute to health harms and antibiotic resistance, and should be banned in consumer products while exempting health care settings. Opponents argued the ingredients are already under FDA and DTSC review, raised preemption concerns, and warned of costs and impacts on food handling and other uses. After extensive discussion, the committee approved AB 916 on a due pass motion to the Committee on Health, with several no votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'm also a Rotarian and in an environmental group.
• And I'm also a Rotarian and in an environmental group.
• And I'm also a Rotarian and in an environmental group.
• And I'm also a Rotarian and in an environmental group.
• Totally agree with the fire safety concerns and risks.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources

Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a heavily attended hybrid hearing focused primarily on plastics reduction bills, along with a few local and related waste-management measures. Chair Rauch and Chair Barber outlined strict testimony rules because of the large number of speakers. Before the plastics docket, the committee heard support for a local Sharon sewer-extension bill for a Sunrise Senior Living project, and the bill’s proponents said the project would help address senior housing needs and would still require MWRA and local approvals. The chairs also noted a separate local matter involving Sharon and the MWRA. A major portion of the hearing centered on the Plastics Reduction Act and related bills addressing single-use plastics, including plastic bags, polystyrene, black plastic, plastic beverage bottles, non-flushable wipes, skip-the-stuff provisions, and truth-in-labeling. Sponsors and supporters said the bills would reduce litter, microplastics, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal waste costs, while creating statewide consistency and supporting environmental justice communities. Several speakers cited local bans already adopted by many Massachusetts cities and towns, and many urged the committee to advance comprehensive statewide action. The committee also heard testimony on a boat wrap recycling bill, a mattress recycling bill, and a bill to prohibit hotels from providing small plastic toiletries. Municipal officials and waste professionals supported extended producer responsibility for paint and labeling for non-flushable wipes, saying these measures would shift costs away from cities and towns and reduce strain on wastewater systems. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, Mayor Ruth Ann Fuller of Newton, and a Franklin County waste official all backed paint EPR and wipes labeling. Fire Chief Brian Nardelli testified for the Fire Chiefs Association in support of lithium-ion battery legislation, citing fire safety and disposal concerns. Other speakers, including environmental groups, local activists, and business representatives, supported bag and polystyrene bans, though the Retailers Association of Massachusetts urged any bag policy to be truly statewide and said any bag fee should be retained by retailers. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• This legislation would shift the risk of non-performance from developers who can manage that risk to
• Those developers are willing to take that risk, and ratepayers are shielded from the risk.
• , and ratepayers are shielded from the risk.
• the risk simply makes sense.
• The Environmental Council has investigated the environmental impact of nuclear power quite thoroughly

Bills: SB5821 , SB6004 , SB6010 , SB5941

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Keywords: nuclear energy, energy strategy, advanced technology, sustainability, state policy, renewable energy, public entities, electric generation, contracting, SB 6010, Washington energy siting, EFSEC, Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, tribal consultation, government-to-government consultation, federally recognized tribes, energy facility siting, RCW, clean energy, alternative energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Our coalition of environmental and environmental justice organizations oppose this bill because it undermines
• Our coalition of environmental and environmental justice organization, respectful opposition to AB-839
• Our coalition of environmental and environmental justice organizations oppose this bill because it undermines
• Fires are a huge risk.
• So we support the environmental goal.

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:

• The Senate Committee on Environmental Quality is now in order.
• SB 1375 keeps all other environmental laws, permits, and community commitments Keeps all other environmental
• That also poses a huge fire risk today, so we’re reducing our fire risk when we do reconductoring.
• Grid reliability perspective, also fire risk.
• Alex Lumer, on behalf of the Environmental Defense Fund, the Pacific Forest Trust, the Environmental

Summary: The committee heard SB 1375 by Senator Cortese, which would streamline environmental review for certain transit and rail projects that have already undergone extensive prior review. Supporters, including VTA, San Jose transportation staff, BART, Caltrain, MTC, and Climate Reality Silicon Valley, said the bill would reduce duplicative analysis, save time and money, and help advance projects like the Diridon Station modernization in San Jose. Committee members emphasized the bill’s narrow scope and the added amendments requiring displacement planning, legal services for displaced residents, construction-impact mitigation, and natural resources planning. The bill was approved on a 5-0 vote and sent to Transportation as amended. The committee also took up SB 1031 on compostable plastics labeling and waste-stream impacts. The author and supporters such as Californians Against Waste argued the bill would reduce greenwashing, clarify labeling, cut contamination in compost and recycling streams, and direct OEHHA to study health and environmental effects. Opposition from manufacturers, BPI, retailers, and others focused on concerns that the bill would effectively ban compostable products in California, create costs, and fail to fix a separate federal/NOP labeling problem. After extensive discussion about composting capacity, labeling clarity, and costs, the bill passed 3-2 to Appropriations. SB 958 by Senator Weber Pierson addressed the Midway Rising redevelopment project in San Diego. The bill, as amended, would no longer create a full CEQA exemption but instead clarify CEQA treatment of building-height impacts in the project’s future EIR. Supporters said the project would deliver thousands of housing units, including affordable housing, along with parks, a new arena, and economic benefits on underused city land. The committee voiced support for the project’s housing and revitalization goals, and the bill passed 3-0 to Local Government as amended. The committee also heard SB 1075 on strengthening AB 617 community air protection plans, with environmental justice supporters backing stronger enforcement and local implementation while local governments, business groups, and air district representatives warned it could create uncertainty, raise costs, and function as a land-use mandate; the bill was held on a 2-2 vote after the author accepted several amendments and continued negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Refiners, and also in terms of pegging them at high risk for leakage.
• It feels like the leakage risk is getting worse.
• It's important because it affects environmental ambition.
• an effective way to mitigate leakage risk.
• I'm the California Senior Director for Environmental Defense Fund.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies

Summary: The committee heard an overview and discussion of CARB’s proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, implemented under AB 1207 and SB 840. Chairs and members emphasized the program’s role in meeting climate targets while balancing affordability, and CARB described the proposal as intended to preserve market certainty, strengthen cost containment, address utility affordability, and support the state’s 2045 carbon-neutrality goal. CARB also noted the public comment period, the planned board hearing, and the goal of an effective date of September 1, 2026. Members questioned CARB on several implementation issues, including whether the rulemaking would be completed on time, the treatment of carbon capture and sequestration, the timing of the transfer of allowances from natural gas utilities to electric utilities, and the impact on ratepayers. CARB said it was on track to meet the May deadline, that CCUS/CDR could be further refined in the proposal and would also be addressed in a separate SB 905 rulemaking later in the year, and that it was seeking to protect ratepayers while inviting more utility data during the comment period. The committee also discussed refining-sector leakage risk, gasoline imports, and how imported fuel is accounted for under cap-and-invest versus the low-carbon fuel standard. A second panel of outside experts and stakeholders then testified. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and IEMAC representatives explained the major statutory changes, including putting offsets under the cap, shifting allowances from natural gas to electric utilities over time, and changing how allowance value is divided among utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. They stressed that CARB has significant discretion in setting the allowance “pie,” and that more free allocations to utilities or industry reduce GGRF revenues. EDF’s representative argued the proposal should be adopted this spring, said the utility transition should happen faster, and urged a tighter near-term emissions cap. SCAPA, representing publicly owned utilities, opposed the proposed utility allocation changes, saying they would reduce expected allowances, undermine long-term planning, and could force higher rates or reduced decarbonization investments.

Transcript Highlights:

• calls for forest thinning and management on 2.3 million acres of forest a year to reduce wildfire risks
• Projects would still have to go through the normal environmental and other permitting processes to apply
• more biomass opportunities, not only for energy generation, but for waste management for wildfire risk
• We need to focus on community wildfire risk reduction.
• We need to focus on community wildfire risk reduction.

Committee: Senate Natural Resources and Water

Transcript Highlights:

• Residents live with a constant risk of toxic emissions, heavy metal pollution.
• Our neighborhoods become environmental dumping grounds.
• Chair and members, Chris Bauer on behalf of Clean Harbors Environmental Services.
• Marquis Mason, California Environmental Voters in support, also on behalf of Environmental Defense Fund
• Joseph of Orange, Central California Environmental Justice Network, and Environmental Defense Fund, in

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• We are convening as the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee.
• I'm Santiago Rodriguez with California Environmental Voters in support. Hi, good afternoon.
• Beyond their health risks, nitro musks are also a major environmental concern.
• Ryan Spencer on behalf of the Environmental Working Group.
• I'm Santiago with California Environmental Voters in support.

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• I see a lot of environmental support.
• Investors respond by pricing in greater risk.
• while reducing environmental impacts.
• And there is serious risk to my members' cancer risks from soil and air contaminants.
• Chloe Shay, on behalf of California Environmental Voters, we echo the concerns of our environmental colleagues

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications

Transcript Highlights:

• We know that there are systems that are at risk.
• We're not at risk at this point. All right.
• And help me understand in terms of the risk for future outages or the lack of risk and what we've done
• Marie Lou, on behalf of the California Environmental Justice Alliance and the Central California Environmental
• Lee Lou, on behalf of the California Environmental Justice Alliance and the Central California Environmental

Summary: The Senate Committee on Rules first handled several routine actions, including approving three governor’s appointments not required to appear: Anthony Surich as Executive Director of the California Housing Finance Agency, Craig Snelling J.D. to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, and Nicholas Mueller to the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission. The committee also approved referral of bills to committees, all by 4-0 votes. It then took up appointments requiring testimony, beginning with Jereen DiAdamo to the State Water Resources Control Board. DiAdamo focused her remarks on safe drinking water, groundwater sustainability, conservation, and Bay-Delta restoration. She said the number of Californians without safe drinking water has fallen from 1.6 million to 800,000 since 2019, credited the SAFER program, technical assistance, and mandatory consolidation authority, and described ongoing work on failing and at-risk systems, domestic well mitigation, SGMA implementation, and the Bay-Delta Plan. Senators pressed her on audit follow-up, measurable goals for reducing the remaining unsafe systems, funding uncertainty, and concerns from environmental and tribal groups that the board has favored water users over ecosystem protections. Supporters from water, agriculture, business, and local agencies praised her collaborative style and consensus-building, while opponents argued she had not done enough to protect the Delta and called for new leadership. The committee ultimately voted 4-0 to advance her appointment to the full Senate. The committee then heard from Sivagunda Gunda for reappointment to the California Energy Commission. He highlighted progress on grid reliability, zero-carbon generation, and planning for California’s energy transition, including transportation fuels, building electrification, and the eventual retirement of Diablo Canyon. Senators questioned him about the future of Kern Energy and small refineries, the state’s transportation fuels plan, fuel imports and costs, and whether California can retire Diablo Canyon by 2030 without harming reliability. Gunda said the state is planning as if Diablo Canyon retires in 2030, that current resource additions make reliability manageable, and that affordability and market coordination remain key issues. The committee then voted 4-0 to advance his appointment to the full Senate, and the hearing recessed afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• And finally, deal with this environmental legacy once and for all.
• Again, at risk of oversimplification.
• And so the environmental risk factor with it not being a non-mine resource is less when it's under the
• Well, again, at risk of oversimplification. So in the grants, Again, at risk of oversimplification.
• And so the environmental risk factor with it not being a tap, non-mine resources, is, So the environmental

Bills: SB66 , SB79 , SB108

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

Transcript Highlights:

• And it does not circumvent environmental review or local permitting requirements.
• And it does not circumvent environmental review or local permitting requirements.
• Environmental Protection Agency's Risk Management Program or California's parallel system known as CalARP
• which were settled, and yet the facility still posed an extreme risk to nearby communities.
• The motion is due pass to the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials.

Summary: The Assembly Emergency Management Committee met late in the evening and first approved a consent calendar containing SB 837, SB 894, SB 973, and SB 1079, sending those bills to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 904, which would codify coordinated state response and permitting review efforts for wildfire recovery, and SB 1263, which would limit post-disaster debris removal work to properly licensed contractors with required hazardous-materials training. Both bills drew support from the authors and industry/public-safety witnesses, with SB 1263 also drawing an opposed-unless-amended position from contractors who said they were working toward agreement on final language. Both measures passed to Appropriations on unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The committee next heard SB 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, which would designate the State Fire Marshal as the safety regulator for interstate hydrogen pipelines and require hydrogen-specific safety standards. The author and supporters from building trades and pipe trades argued the bill would provide clear safety rules before hydrogen infrastructure expands, while one industry witness said the correct agency had been identified but that some concerns remained. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations, with Assemblymember DeMaio voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 883, which would impose additional oversight on facilities storing methyl methacrylate and other reactive chemicals after a recent Orange County evacuation tied to a potential explosion risk. Supporters, including community, environmental, and public-health groups, said the bill would improve transparency, emergency planning, and safety protections near homes and schools. Chemical and manufacturing groups opposed the bill in its current form, citing undefined terms, concerns about mandated cooling systems, and possible conflicts with existing regulatory frameworks, but said they were willing to continue working on the measure. The bill passed to the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials on a 4-2 vote, with Assemblymembers Hadwick and DeMaio voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• As AB 2051 puts California law on all of our environmental regulations.
• There's current flood risk today.
• Without it, we increase the risk of catastrophic wildfire.
• the environmental community to slow things— ...be weaponized by the environmental community to slow
• I am proud to have the support of the environmental and environmental justice communities, clean tech

Committee: House Natural Resources