Transcript Highlights:

• fuel producers.
• fuel producers.
• fuel producers.
• We need fuel.
• We are layering regulation on top of regulation. We're driving up costs.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The committee first heard SB 872 by Senator McNerney, which would dedicate $150 million annually each for Central Valley subsidence repairs and Delta levee improvements. The author and supporters, including Restore the Delta and State Water Contractors, described the bill as an urgent, bipartisan effort to protect State Water Project conveyance serving 27 million people, prevent levee failure, and safeguard billions in state assets. Support came from a broad coalition of water agencies, labor, environmental groups, and local governments; there was no opposition testimony. Because the committee was operating without a quorum at the time, the bill was heard as a subcommittee item and no final vote was taken then. The committee then took up SB 981 by Senator Niello, which would require CARB to include cost-of-living impacts in its existing economic analysis for major regulations. The author argued the bill would improve transparency by showing effects on gasoline, electricity, food, housing, and business costs, while supporters from agriculture, manufacturing, business, propane, and restaurant interests said it would help lawmakers understand affordability impacts. Opponents, including the Coalition for Clean Air and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued it would add red tape, delay rulemaking, and require CARB to make speculative predictions. The chair and other members expressed concern that the bill was redundant, burdensome, and too narrow because it singled out CARB rather than addressing affordability across state government; no vote was taken in the excerpt. SB 887 by Senator Padilla would require large data center projects to undergo CEQA review, but offer streamlined treatment for projects meeting strong environmental, labor, and community-benefit standards. Supporters, including TURN, IBEW Local 569, and several environmental and local-government groups, said the bill would protect communities from high energy and water use, cost shifting, and pollution while still allowing responsible development. Opponents from the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Bay Area Council, and others argued the standards were overly prescriptive, potentially unattainable, and would drive investment out of California. After a quorum was established, the committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 887 as amended to the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee, with the bill kept on call. Finally, SB 1008 by Senator Ochoa Bog would renew the CEQA exemption for California Public Utilities Commission-ordered closure of at-grade rail crossings, which had expired at the start of 2025. Union Pacific and other supporters said the measure would restore a long-standing safety tool and help eliminate redundant crossings more quickly. With no opposition testimony, the committee approved the bill unanimously, 4-0, and kept it on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• This would establish a low-carbon fuel standard or a clean fuel standard.
• As you've heard, establish a low-carbon fuel standard or a clean fuel standard.
• aviation fuel.
• aviation fuel.
• on fuel prices.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy heard testimony on several transportation and clean-fuel bills. Supporters of H. 3535 argued for delaying or pausing enforcement of Massachusetts’ zero-emission vehicle sales mandate, saying the current ACC2 timeline is unrealistic given low ZEV sales, limited charging infrastructure, dealer inventory concerns, and potential economic impacts on dealerships, consumers, and tax revenue. Opponents of that approach, including automakers and clean transportation advocates, said the state should stay on course with electrification and that the mandate is necessary to meet climate goals. The committee also heard support for H. 3570/S. 2326 to update vehicle emission standards for municipal and utility fleets, with municipal utility representatives saying current electric truck technology, charging access, and costs make the rules impractical for critical public services. A major portion of the hearing focused on S. 2246, the Freedom to Move Act, which would require MassDOT and regional planning agencies to set vehicle miles traveled reduction goals and align transportation spending with climate targets. Supporters said the bill would better coordinate transportation planning, encourage transit, biking, and walking, and help Massachusetts meet emissions goals while saving money and improving public health. Some committee members raised concerns that the bill could duplicate existing transportation climate mandates and could disadvantage rural residents who must drive long distances; witnesses responded that the bill is meant to add coordination and flexibility, not impose a one-size-fits-all solution. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3448, which would set deadlines to electrify school buses and public fleets and create programs for private fleet electrification. Advocates said fleet electrification is a practical way to cut emissions, improve air quality, and save money over time, especially for schoolchildren exposed to diesel exhaust. Several witnesses also supported low-carbon fuel standard bills H. 3576 and S. 2251, arguing they would reduce fuel carbon intensity and generate revenue for charging and clean-fuel investments. Others, including a coalition opposed to private jet expansion, objected to the bills’ treatment of sustainable aviation fuel, saying it is not scalable, is expensive, and could create land-use and food-supply tradeoffs. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the hearing excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• utility that's regulated rate regulated utility that's regulated at<00:18:36.880><c> the</c><00:18:37.120
• in addition to delivered fuels like propane and fuel oil.
• It's a carbon fuel.
• , that's a still a dominant fuel fuel oil, that's a still a dominant fuel in<00:52:27.920><c> the</c>
• fuels.

Bills: HF3298

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: underground storage tanks, petroleum, reimbursement program, environmental regulation, pollution control, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes regulations and the impacts of those regulations aren't apparent until very later on in the
• standard, state fuel excise tax, and other regulatory programs that increase fuel cost.
• fuel producers.
• We need fuel.
• We are layering regulation on top of regulation. We're driving up costs.

Summary: The committee heard SB 872, which would direct $150 million annually each for Central Valley subsidence repairs and Delta levee work. Senator McNerney and supporters from Restore the Delta, the State Water Contractors, and many water agencies, labor groups, environmental organizations, and local governments argued the bill is urgent to protect water delivery for 27 million Californians, safeguard levees and state assets, and address climate-related flood risks. There was no opposition testimony, and members asked about the bill’s focus on state-owned conveyance; the author said the distinction reflects the separate state and federal water projects. The bill was held while the committee lacked a quorum, with no vote taken at that point. The committee then heard SB 981, which would require CARB to include cost-of-living impacts in its existing regulatory analysis for major rules. Senator Niello and supporters from agriculture, manufacturing, business, propane, restaurants, and commercial property groups said the bill would improve transparency about how regulations affect gasoline, electricity, food, housing, and business costs. Opponents, including Coalition for Clean Air and the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued it would add delay, cost, and redundant analysis to CARB rulemaking and could not reliably measure the effects the bill seeks to capture. Committee members raised concerns that CARB already estimates costs, that the bill is burdensome and narrow, and that it does not fully account for benefits or the role of other agencies. No vote was recorded in the transcript. SB 887, by Senator Padilla, would require data center projects to undergo CEQA review while creating a streamlined path for projects meeting strong environmental, labor, and community-benefit criteria, including zero-carbon electricity, on-site storage, recycled water or water-efficient cooling, and full cost responsibility for grid upgrades. Supporters said data centers are rapidly expanding, can strain energy and water resources, and should be held to clear standards while still allowing beneficial development; labor and environmental groups backed the measure. Opponents from the Data Center Coalition, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, and business groups said the bill is overly prescriptive, discriminatory toward one industry, and could drive investment and jobs out of state. After discussion, the committee established a quorum and voted 3-1 to pass SB 887 as amended to the Senate Energy, Utilities, and Communications Committee, with the bill kept on call. The committee also heard SB 1008, which would renew a CEQA exemption for the closure of at-grade rail crossings ordered by the California Public Utilities Commission. Senator Ochoa Bogh and Union Pacific testified that the measure would help the state act quickly on rail safety by removing redundant environmental review for crossing closures, while still requiring collaboration with local jurisdictions and the PUC. There was support from railroad and business representatives and no opposition. The committee voted 4-0 to pass SB 1008 to the Senate Energy, Utilities, and Communications Committee, and the bill was kept on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it fuels 150-plus thousand homes.
• fuel vulnerability, particularly in Maricopa County.
• and all the regulations for our state.
• fuel vulnerability and particularly in Maricopa County.
• But this is primarily due to our hot climate, as lower RVP produces fuel evaporation, reduces fuel evaporation

Committee: House House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee took up several energy, transportation, and land-use bills. HB 2428, dealing with county and ADEQ authority to issue voluntary permits certifying emission reduction credits for mobile and non-road sources, received neutral testimony from ADEQ and support from Maricopa County; the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and passed the bill 10-0 with a due pass recommendation. HB 2145, which expands who may request certain gasoline fuel reformulation actions and is contingent on EPA approval, also passed on a 5-4 vote after brief staff explanation and no amendment. The committee then considered HB 2331, a strike-everything amendment requiring electric utilities to ensure 85% of generating capacity serving retail load comes from “reliable resources” by 2030. Supporters, including the sponsor and Arizona Free Enterprise Club, argued it would protect affordability and grid reliability by favoring dispatchable power; opponents, including the Sierra Club and Rural Arizona Action, said it would effectively favor fossil fuels, raise costs, and limit cleaner resources. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill 6-4. HB 2795, which would bar counties from using zoning to block small modular reactors once federal permitting conditions are met, drew strong support from the sponsor and industry advocates who framed it as pro-property-rights and pro-nuclear, and opposition from county, city, and environmental groups who raised preemption, local control, safety, waste, and siting concerns; it passed 6-4. The committee also passed HB 2340, which allows the Power Plant and Transmission Line Siting Committee to evaluate proposed generating facilities along with transmission lines, on a 5-4 vote. HB 2400, an emergency measure to suspend the motor vehicle fuel tax in Areas A and C during part of the year and replace the lost revenue through state highway funding, drew opposition from cities and counties over transportation funding impacts but support from the sponsor and some members focused on gas affordability; the Griffin amendment was adopted and the bill passed 6-4. Finally, HB 2401 was introduced as a requirement for ADEQ to conduct a biennial review of available fuel formulations and their air-quality impacts in Areas A and C, but the transcript ends before testimony or action on that bill is completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is used nuclear fuel? What is used nuclear fuel? It's very much like new nuclear fuel.
• fuel type.
• or used fuel.
• both the oxide fuel that's in the U.S. to make the uranium-transuranic fuel. ...both the oxide fuel
• fuel.

Summary: The Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee met to hear a series of presentations on the economics, financing, workforce, and community impacts of advanced nuclear deployment in North Dakota. William Bridge of Nucleon Energy presented the committee’s economic impacts and private-sector financing report, estimating construction and operating job impacts, local spending, and state/local tax effects for hypothetical SMR projects. He said the report assumes first-of-a-kind costs are still high, used a $6 million per megawatt nth-of-a-kind proxy, and estimated peak construction workforces of about 500 for a 200-MW plant and 1,000 for a larger facility, with roughly 100 operating jobs for a 200-MW plant. Committee members questioned security costs, capital cost assumptions, water and transmission siting constraints, and whether the model included fuel and waste; Bridge said the report included initial fuel in capital cost and that waste disposal is funded through existing federal mechanisms. Lori Brady of the Nuclear Energy Institute then outlined national nuclear workforce needs and NEI’s strategic workforce planning efforts. She described declining labor-force participation, retirements, and the need for a much larger future workforce, and said NEI has organized recommendations around career awareness, pipelines, training and qualification, policy support, retention, and nontraditional recruitment. She highlighted tools such as the Nuclear Works career website, the Nuclear Energy Academic Roadmap, the new federal Energy and Natural Resources career cluster, and the Nuclear Uniform Curriculum Program for community colleges. Members asked about AI, timing for training relative to plant development, and whether advanced manufacturing would reduce staffing needs; Brady said AI is not expected to replace workers and that training timelines depend on the specific project and staffing plan. The committee also heard from Gary Yaco, mayor of Red Wing, Minnesota, who described Prairie Island’s role in his community. He said the plant provides a large share of local property tax revenue, supports well-paid jobs, contributes to emergency preparedness funding and training, and is broadly supported by the city despite periodic protests and public concerns. He emphasized the plant’s security, regular drills with local and federal responders, and the absence of problems with dry cask storage. Later, Benton Arnett of NEI discussed the current financing landscape for advanced nuclear, explaining how tax credits, federal loan support, off-take agreements, and new business models are helping projects move forward. He said early projects face high upfront costs and long lead-time procurement, but that investor confidence is improving as federal policy and regulatory streamlining continue. The committee asked about waste funding, comparisons with natural gas, the effect of political shifts on investor confidence, and whether the market will narrow to a few winning technologies; Arnett said the industry is still sorting that out, but expects clearer winners in the late 2020s and early 2030s. The meeting concluded with an introductory presentation from Julie Kazeraki of DOE’s Office of Energy Dominance Financing, who said the office is focused on accelerating nuclear deployment through financing support.

Transcript Highlights:

• restricting new fossil fuel infrastructure.
• restricting new fossil fuel infrastructure.
• Later that year, the Baker administration issued their draft regulations, and I think the regulations
• that's fossil fuel-ridden.
• or fossil fuels.”

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on several climate and utility-related bills, especially H. 3449/S. 2292 to expand the municipal fossil fuel-free building demonstration program from 10 to 20 communities and related home rule petitions for Somerville and other municipalities. Witnesses from Somerville, Salem, Worcester, Cambridge, Newton, Arlington, Wellesley, Watertown, and the Massachusetts Municipal Association argued that local governments should be allowed to opt into fossil fuel-free or net-zero building standards, citing climate goals, environmental justice concerns, housing production, and data showing all-electric construction can cost about the same as or less than mixed-fuel construction. Committee members repeatedly pressed witnesses for cost data and asked for written follow-up, while also discussing whether strong environmental standards affect housing supply; witnesses responded that the main housing constraints are financing and that they would provide more data from local projects and state studies. A second major topic was H. 3564, which would require gas companies to provide municipalities with detailed multi-year pipe replacement plans, allow local review and objections, and limit reimbursement for projects not previously disclosed except in emergencies. Municipal leaders and advocates said the bill would improve coordination of street work, reduce disruption and costs, and help cities plan for electrification, network geothermal, and non-pipeline alternatives. Testimony from Wellesley, Cambridge, Arlington, Newton, and others emphasized repeated problems with last-minute gas main work, the need for advance notice, and the value of municipal participation in planning gas system retirement and alternatives. The committee also heard testimony on the “tactical transition” bills, S. 2249/H. 3539, aimed at managing the gas-to-clean-energy transition. Supporters from Gas Transition Allies, Rewiring America, and 350 Mass said the bills would require joint gas-electric planning, create an advisory council, eliminate subsidies for new gas hookups, shift investment toward repairs and clean alternatives, protect workers through retraining, and make utility plans more transparent. They argued these changes would reduce ratepayer costs, avoid stranded gas assets, and support orderly decarbonization. In addition, HEET testified on H. 3541, which would update greenhouse gas accounting to better reflect methane’s short-term climate impact, and H. 3543, which would establish a framework for managing shared thermal resources and thermal energy networks; committee members asked several questions about the meaning, ownership, and consumer-cost implications of the proposed “thermal commons.” No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is used nuclear fuel? It's very much like new nuclear fuel.
• fuel type.
• or used fuel.
• water reactor fuel.
• fuel.

Committee: Joint Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee

Summary: The committee met to hear a series of presentations on advanced nuclear economics, workforce, community impacts, and financing. Nucleon Energy’s William Bridge presented a report estimating the economic impacts of hypothetical 200-megawatt and 600-megawatt SMRs, including construction and operating jobs, local spending, tax revenue, and the private-sector conditions needed to attract investment. He said the report used nth-of-a-kind cost assumptions, discussed security and water siting considerations, and argued that early community engagement and permitting work should be timed to when projects are closer to being economic. Committee members questioned cost assumptions, security staffing, transmission and water siting, and whether large reactors or SMRs are more likely to be financed in the near term. Lori Brady of the Nuclear Energy Institute then outlined national nuclear workforce needs and NEI’s strategic workforce planning. She described declining labor-force demographics, the need for hundreds of thousands of new energy workers by 2050, and six workforce priorities: career awareness, pipelines, training and qualification, policy support, retention, and non-traditional pipelines. She highlighted the Nuclear Works career website, the Nuclear Energy Academic Roadmap, the new federal Energy and Natural Resources career cluster, and the Nuclear Uniform Curriculum Program for community colleges. Members asked about AI, robotics, and when training should begin relative to future plant construction; Brady said AI is not expected to replace workers broadly and that training timelines depend on the specific project and staffing plan. Red Wing, Minnesota Mayor Gary Yako described hosting the Prairie Island nuclear generating facility. He said the plant provides a large share of the city’s property tax base, supports well-paid jobs, contributes to local emergency preparedness, and is a strong community partner through donations and employee involvement. He said the city supports relicensing, has regular emergency drills, and has had no issues with dry cask storage. The committee also heard from NEI’s Benton Arnett, who reviewed the current financing landscape, including federal tax credits, DOE loan authority, offtake agreements, and the shift toward project developers and special-purpose vehicles. He said early projects face high first-of-a-kind costs, but federal support and long-term power purchase agreements are helping make projects financeable. Finally, DOE’s Julie Kazeraki described the Office of Energy Dominance Financing and its role in supporting new nuclear, restarts, uprates, and supply chain investments, emphasizing that federal loan and tax-credit tools are intended to reduce upfront risk and improve project affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is used nuclear fuel? Used nuclear fuel is very much like new nuclear fuel.
• fuel type.
• Spent fuel.
• or used fuel from the reactors, and high-level waste that ...fuel or used fuel from the reactors and
• fuel.

Committee: Joint Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• specification regulations.
• So once you have mixed fuel and don't know where that mixed fuel came from, or the fuel is mixed and
• As time has gone on, the difference between carbob fuel fuel fuel and non-carbub fuel from an air pollution
• And the fuel island problem that is caused by Carbob fuel is a bigger problem.
• The fuel island problem that is caused by CARBOB fuel is a bigger problem.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard several bills, with most of the discussion focused on AB 2672 (Hart), which would require the California Energy Commission to set parameters for using an existing waiver process to allow non-CARBOB gasoline during fuel supply shocks, with fees used to offset emissions and help fund cleaner vehicles. Supporters said the bill would reduce gas price spikes and provide needed flexibility in emergencies; opponents, including the Western States Petroleum Association and union refinery representatives, argued it would function as a tax, create market uncertainty, and could undermine in-state refining and fuel-system compliance. Members raised concerns about affordability, refinery impacts, and delegation of authority to CARB/CEC, while the author said the bill was intended to be cost-neutral and protect consumers. The committee initially held the bill open and later advanced it on a divided vote. AB 2761 (Petrie-Norris) was heard next and would modernize California crash data reporting by creating a single statewide electronic system for fatal and injury crash reports. The author and AAA supported the measure, saying current paper-based reporting is slow, fragmented, and outdated, delaying safety improvements and federal funding opportunities. There was no registered opposition, and the bill moved forward unanimously to Appropriations. AB 1874 (Wilson) would prevent people convicted of certain serious driving offenses from serving a license suspension while incarcerated, so the suspension would begin when they are actually back on the road. Supporters, including law enforcement and roadway safety groups, said current practice makes suspensions meaningless and weakens accountability for dangerous drivers. Some members questioned whether the bill creates a double penalty, but the author argued the measure is limited to the most serious offenses and ensures the suspension has real public safety effect. The committee approved the bill on a strong vote. The committee also passed its consent calendar bills, and several measures were held open for later vote tallying before the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• fuel sector emissions.
• We do have some concerns about language changing the point of regulation to include fuel purchasers in
• It was very intentional when the legislature passed the CCA to only regulate large fuel suppliers and
• So the problem with renewables versus fossil fuels: fossil fuel, the upfront cost is small.
• So in fossil fuel, the costs are in the fuel. It's all about the fuel.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills. House Bill 2272 would update state park inspection language for ski lifts and related equipment to better match current equipment and federal standards; the sponsor and State Parks said it was a simple modernization bill, and there was no opposition. House Bill 2245 would expand Clean Energy Transformation Act coverage to port districts that distribute electricity, utilities with a single customer, and certain affected market customers such as data centers; supporters said it closes loopholes and applies clean-energy rules more fairly, while ports, business groups, and some utilities warned of unintended consequences, added reporting burdens, and impacts on cogeneration and rural economic development. Ecology and Commerce supported the goal but raised concerns about allowance allocation, fiscal impacts, and possible double counting, and WAPUDA asked that existing single-customer PUDs be grandfathered. House Bill 2215 would lower Climate Commitment Act thresholds for gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, and propane suppliers and extend coverage to some purchasers; supporters said it would prevent entities from gaming the system and cover significant emissions now below the threshold, while Ecology, fuel distributors, propane suppliers, grocers, and business groups warned of compliance costs, supply-chain impacts, possible linkage issues, and the need to preserve existing reporting authority for natural gas. Ecology estimated about 50 additional covered entities could be brought in, and several opponents argued the bill would sweep in small family-owned businesses not intended to be regulated. House Bill 2090 would direct Commerce to develop a nuclear strategic framework for inclusion in the state energy strategy, contingent on outside funding. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill is only a planning measure to ensure Washington considers advanced nuclear as a firm, low-carbon, small-footprint resource amid rising demand, grid constraints, and land-use concerns; supporters included Energy Northwest, local governments, labor/environmental Democrats, and pro-nuclear groups. Opponents, including the Sierra Club, Columbia Riverkeeper, tribal representatives from the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and several environmental advocates, said the bill gives nuclear special treatment, relies on private funding that could bias the study, and risks advancing projects at Hanford without early, meaningful tribal consultation. Tribes requested explicit consultation, independent and publicly funded analysis, and attention to treaty rights and historic nuclear impacts. Testimony also sharply divided over cost, waste, and land use, with supporters emphasizing reliability and footprint and opponents citing high costs, unresolved waste disposal, and the immaturity of small modular reactors. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• jet fuels.
• Their fuel is clean.
• Through 2037, we would use a utility-specific fuel mix for alternative jet fuel.
• It's what fuels our economy.
• cost of fuel, and this just adds more cost to your fuel.

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2436, a technical fix to Washington’s oil tanker escort tug requirements in Puget Sound waters. The bill would require escort tugs to have either horsepower equal to 5% of the tanker’s deadweight tonnage or 3,000 horsepower, whichever is greater. Rep. Lekanoff and the Washington State Board of Pilotage Commissioners said the change aligns statute with existing rules and industry practice and supports protection of the Salish Sea and southern resident killer whales. No opposition was raised, and the hearing was closed without action at that point. The committee then heard House Bill 2322, which changes Clean Fuels Program rules and tax incentives for alternative jet fuel. Supporters, including Rep. Dent, Sky Energy, 12, and the City of Moses Lake, said the bill would provide certainty for large-scale sustainable aviation fuel investment by changing the trigger for tax incentives and clarifying that certain renewable electricity, including hydro, can count as zero carbon. Ecology opposed the bill’s treatment of electricity accounting, saying it would weaken incentives for new renewable generation and could reduce the clean fuels program’s emissions benefits. U.S. Oil asked for additional clarification or changes to allow Pierce County participation or define “blender.” No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. In executive session, the committee passed several bills. Substitute House Bill 2343, dealing with discharge permits for publicly owned animal facilities, passed 21-0. Proposed second substitute House Bill 1420, creating a textile and apparel coordinating organization for a needs assessment, passed 12-9. House Bill 2426, allowing Pollution Control Hearings Board appeals to be heard by a single member or alternative panel by agreement, passed 19-2. Substitute House Bill 2271, expanding post-consumer recycled content requirements for certain plastic products, passed 12-9. Substitute House Bill 2215, adjusting Climate Commitment Act fuel supplier thresholds, passed 12-9. Substitute House Bill 2421, restricting 6PPD and certain substitutes in tires, passed 11-9 with one excused after an amendment to exempt rural eastern Washington was rejected. Action on House Bill 2301 and House Bill 2296 was deferred to a later meeting due to time constraints.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today you're going to be discussing the FAA's aviation fuel tax regulation.
• So the last bullet point here, I wanted to point out that the same FAA regulation applies to local fuel
• tax regulations.
• So when we talk about the fuel tax that is subject to this FAA regulation, it is actually a number of
• It is the aircraft fuel tax.

Summary: The committee began with a work session on aircraft fuel taxes, hearing from WSDOT Aviation about the FAA’s aviation fuel tax rules, Washington’s compliance history, and the potential consequences of noncompliance. WSDOT said the state has collected roughly $210 million in aviation fuel taxes since the federal compliance period began, and that FAA has questioned some of the state’s claimed offsets. Members asked about the federal authority behind the rules, who pays the taxes, and whether Boeing is affected. The committee then moved to public hearing on several bills tied to aviation fuel tax revenue. SB 5989 would redirect a small share of state sales and use tax on aircraft fuel to the aeronautics account and require reporting on airport project funding. Supporters, including port, airport, and pilot groups, said it was a measured step toward FAA compliance and airport investment; the bill’s staff summary said it would reduce general fund revenue and increase DOR costs. SB 5898 would redirect hazardous substance, petroleum products, and oil spill-related taxes on aircraft fuel to the aeronautics account. Supporters said it would bring Washington into compliance and help airports, while Ecology, counties, and ports warned it would significantly reduce MTCA and related environmental funding. SB 6240 would create a new noise and air quality mitigation account funded by a portion of hazardous substance tax revenue; airport and aviation groups opposed it as duplicative or noncompliant with FAA rules, while community and environmental advocates from Sea-Tac area cities supported it as a needed mitigation source. The committee also heard SB 6244, which would extend a hazardous substance tax exemption for certain pesticides used in Washington agriculture through 2038. Agricultural and logistics witnesses supported it as important for food security, storage, and competitiveness, and staff said it would have a small revenue loss and administrative cost. SB 6231, a governor-request bill, would repeal the sales tax exemption for data center refurbishments while keeping the exemption for original server equipment; OFM and local government groups supported it as a revenue-raising budget measure, while data center, labor, and business representatives opposed it, warning of lost investment, jobs, and competitiveness. SB 6228 would repeal the preferential B&O rate for prescription drug resellers; OFM supported it as an outdated preference, but pharmacies, wholesalers, and business groups argued the cost would be passed through to pharmacies, hospitals, insurers, and patients and could worsen pharmacy closures. The committee then heard SB 6220, which would narrow and clarify a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income homeownership property by allowing temporary community use and preserving the exemption when property is transferred to another exempt nonprofit. The sponsor said the bill was intended to let a community land trust host local performances without jeopardizing affordable housing plans. Finally, the committee heard SB 5880, which would allow blood and breath toxicology results to be admissible if tested by ISO/IEC 17025-certified labs, in addition to the state toxicologist process. Seattle’s city attorney supported it as a way to reduce a long toxicology backlog and speed DUI cases, while counties raised concerns about shifting costs to local governments and creating unequal access based on local resources. No votes were taken in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, a little background on alternative jet fuels participation in the Clean Fuels Program.
• Alternative jet fuel is an opt-in fuel in the Clean Fuels Program, eligible to earn credits in the program
• Recent Clean Fuels Program updates modify the carbon intensity pathway for alternative jet fuel when
• SB 5932 directs Ecology to amend its Clean Fuel Standard rule to allow alternative jet fuel producers
• And as we were talking about the total cost of fuel, there's always this specter that it's regulation

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee heard three bills. SB 6246 would direct Ecology to develop recommendations for how no-cost allowances for emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities (EITEs) should work from 2035 to 2050, and would require EITEs to submit facility-specific emissions data and periodic decarbonization plans as a condition of receiving allowances. Supporters said the bill preserves the Climate Commitment Act’s goals while giving the Legislature and Ecology better information to prevent emissions and job leakage and to plan for industrial decarbonization. Opponents argued the bill adds costly reporting and planning burdens, could threaten competitiveness, and in some cases could lead to allowance withholding; Ecology said it generally supports the approach but wants some streamlining and noted implementation costs are not in the governor’s budget. SB 5932 would provide certainty for sustainable aviation fuel development by changing how Ecology applies electricity carbon intensity in the Clean Fuels Program and by setting an earlier trigger for aviation fuel tax incentives. The sponsor and 12, a Moses Lake SAF developer, said the bill would give investors and producers needed certainty for expansion and help Washington remain competitive. Ecology and Climate Solutions opposed parts of the bill, saying it would weaken incentives for new renewable electricity generation, limit Ecology’s technical discretion, and reduce the Clean Fuels Program’s effectiveness, though Ecology said it supports decarbonizing aviation and is willing to work on the issue through rulemaking. Some testimony also supported the tax certainty portion while objecting to the Clean Fuels Program changes, and one witness asked for clarification on local participation in the incentive. SB 6172 would end remaining state tax and regulatory exemptions for the coal-fired TransAlta plant after its scheduled closure date. The sponsor said Washington should remove special treatment now that the state has phased out coal, while supporters said the bill reinforces the state’s clean energy transition and protects public health and climate goals. A few witnesses raised concerns about possible costs to utilities and ratepayers if the plant were ever required to run in an emergency, and asked for language to protect against that. The hearing concluded with the committee closing public testimony on all three bills; no votes were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• turn it into a fuel.
• Who needs fuel? So, you know, I'm going back here. Who needs fuel right now to this... Fuel?
• You're going to have used fuel in a spent fuel pool.
• and use fuel topics.
• Fuels and fuel cycle facilities, which contribute to...

Summary: The meeting opened with remarks about the value of public engagement and the availability of presentation materials, then moved into a series of technical briefings from Idaho National Laboratory staff. Joe Renovitz described recent federal and DOE efforts to streamline nuclear regulation for advanced reactors, including NRC Part 53 and upcoming Part 57 rulemaking, DOE authorization updates, crosswalks between DOE and NRC requirements, and use of AI to speed licensing communications and document review. He emphasized that the goal is to align safety standards for advanced technologies, reduce rework for developers, and support deployment for commercial, defense, and research uses. In response to questions, he said there is no current plan to merge agencies, but there is more information-sharing and embedded NRC staff at DOE facilities; he also noted public outreach is supported through groups like GAIN and NEI. David Tolman then discussed the nuclear fuel cycle, covering uranium mining, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, spent fuel storage, transportation, disposal, and recycling. He explained high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), DOE’s HALEU Availability Program, and the need to expand domestic enrichment, deconversion, and transportation capacity to support advanced reactors and the 2050 nuclear growth goal. He also reviewed used fuel management, including on-site storage at operating and shutdown reactors, the Center for Used Fuel Research at INL, a high-burnup research cask project, and the long-term repository question, which he said is ultimately political as well as technical. He outlined reprocessing approaches—aqueous/Purex, pyrochemical, and fluoride volatility—describing INL’s work on electrochemical processing of EBR-II fuel and noting industry interest from several companies in recycling technologies. Ashley Shields presented on AI for nuclear applications, describing INL’s use of generative AI, high-performance computing, and digital-twin tools to accelerate reactor design, licensing, operations, and materials development. She highlighted the Prometheus effort to pursue highly automated reactor design and operation, the large documentation burden for reactor licensing, and ongoing work on autonomous control, remote operation, and AI-assisted materials qualification through the Vulcan challenge and related data platforms. In questions, she said AI tools are used under data-governance and security controls, with different models chosen for different tasks, and argued that software engineers and human oversight remain necessary. The session ended with a brief recess announcement and a transition to a later presentation on critical minerals and materials.

Transcript Highlights:

• of ZEV charging and fueling infrastructure.
• But regulations are only part of the story.
• Utility Directed Clean Fuel Rewards Program.
• , as opposed to just hard regulations.
• So California has a unique gasoline fuel blend.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions. The chair opened by emphasizing California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing challenges with affordability, access, interoperability, heavy-duty electrification, and federal headwinds. She highlighted interest in technologies such as inductive charging and thanked host organizations and staff before moving to the first panel. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described current programs and priorities. Go-Biz outlined its role in coordinating agencies, supporting permitting, and advancing the state’s ZEV market development strategy and equity action plan. CARB discussed federal attacks on its clean vehicle regulations, litigation to defend waiver authority, and the importance of incentives and regulatory programs such as Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Clean Truck Check, HVIP, and Clean Cars for All. The CEC detailed its funding and regulatory work on charging and fueling infrastructure, charger reliability, payment methods, roaming, and statewide planning, while stressing the need for more charging in multifamily housing and more public DC fast charging. All three agencies said federal rollbacks and permitting delays are major obstacles, but that California remains committed to expanding ZEV adoption. The second panel featured advocates, local government, utility, and research perspectives. CalETC urged continuous state funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and emphasized the low-carbon fuel standard, multifamily charging, and managed charging. An EV advocacy group proposed a conquest-style state incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily housing is a major untapped market, while also favoring Level 2 charging over Level 1 for most home and apartment settings. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale local deployment of chargers, fleet electrification, workforce training, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and streamlined permitting and grid interconnection. UCS recommended prioritizing replacement of older high-emitting vehicles, using fuel policy revenues to support cleaner cars, and expanding bidirectional charging. The chair closed by asking for more discussion on Level 1 versus Level 2 charging and noted the importance of education, affordability, and practical deployment strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• and cleaner fuels transitions.
• petroleum-based fuels in the future.
• But more recently, renewable fuel is trading at a discount to fossil fuel.
• a one-fuel system.
• So, you know, the EPA regulations and the California regulations aren't that different.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• diesel fuel, and that the regulated tank universe includes gas station underground storage tanks.
• diesel fuel, and that the regulated tank universe includes gas station underground storage tanks.
• diesel fuel, and that the regulated tank universe includes gas station underground storage tanks.
• diesel fuel, and that the regulated tank universe includes gas station underground storage tanks.
• diesel fuel, and that the regulated tank universe includes gas station underground storage tanks.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing on HB 660, which would require historic horse racing facilities to pay 10% of HHR winnings to host communities as mitigation. Representative Om said the amendment was intended to leave charities and the state whole while funding local costs tied to large gaming facilities. Supporters argued the measure would address future municipal expenses, while opponents said host towns have not reported current problems and that the bill would single out one industry. Members questioned the 10% rate, whether the proposal was retroactive, and whether it would apply to existing facilities; the sponsor said it would apply to facilities already in place or later added. The hearing was then closed without any vote recorded in the transcript. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 658-FN, which raises reimbursement caps and adjusts fees for the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleanup Fund and the Oil Pollution Control Fund. Representative Malloy introduced the bill, and Representative Aly explained the funds as a state-backed insurance mechanism for oil spill cleanup and prevention, including replacement of leaking home heating oil tanks for low-income homeowners. Bob Scully of the Energy Marketers Association supported the bill, saying the fee structure helps fund remediation and tank replacement, though costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. Department of Environmental Services officials Robert Bishop and Jennifer Marts described the bill as extending the fee collection for 10 years, changing reporting dates, increasing the cap for low-income tank replacement, and rebalancing fees based on an actuarial review. DES testified that the actuarial study found the fund needed to remain solvent and that home heating oil releases are the largest category of new releases, with the fuel oil fee otherwise needing to rise by more than 200% to cover projected costs. The board instead proposed a smaller increase and adjusted other fees accordingly, while maintaining a reserve to cover the first days of a major coastal spill before federal funds become available. Members asked about the basis for the fee changes, the role of the actuarial review, and the statutory language governing who pays the fees. The transcript ends during this hearing, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the regulations that would be immediately impacted is a transport refrigeration unit regulation
• The other regulation that we have where we have some fees is the commercial harborcraft regulation.
• SB 905 calls for us to develop regulations.
• fleets regulations.
• pathways in our low carbon fuel standard program.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• "They are founded on different regulations, yes." "Thank you.

Bills: HR257 , HR258 , HR259 , HR260 , HR261 , HR262 , HR263 , HCR105 , HCR106 , HR252 , HR253 , HR254 , HR255 , HR256 , HCR103 , HCR104 , SB83 , SB143 , SB155 , SB228 , SB283 , SB295 , SB338 , SB388 , SB408 , SB431 , HR84 , HR188 , HR205 , HB302 , HB597 , HB819 , HB1257 , HB1258 , SCR24 , SB45 , SB58 , SB71 , SB81 , SB92 , SB100 , SB109 , SB141 , SB156 , SB181 , SB203 , SB204 , SB205 , SB207 , SB213 , SB214 , SB216 , SB229 , SB257 , SB274 , SB290 , SB304 , SB374 , SB379 , SB396 , SB410 , SB425 , SB427 , SB429 , SB479 , SB522 , SB357 , SB406 , HR171 , HCR49 , HCR65 , HCR72 , HR37 , HCR64 , HR170 , HR191 , HR206 , HR207 , HR208 , HR217 , HCR11 , HCR53 , HCR60 , HCR66 , HCR68 , HR9 , HCR27 , HCR28 , HCR50 , HCR62 , HCR67 , HCR71 , HCR78 , HCR81 , SCR19 , SCR3 , SCR6 , SCR18 , SCR11 , SCR22 , SCR2 , SCR20 , HCR6 , HB64 , HB68 , HB92 , HB130 , HB258 , HB633 , HB801 , HB61 , HB98 , HB102 , HB139 , HB142 , HB170 , HB185 , HB194 , HB199 , HB231 , HB247 , HB294 , HB336 , HB474 , HB661 , HB842 , HB852 , HB301 , HB359 , HB657 , HB675 , HB680 , HB727 , HB79 , HB251 , HB625 , HB769 , HB775 , HB783 , HB895 , HB1011 , HB1057 , HB1155 , HB1186 , HB1224 , HB1245 , HB1247 , HB1253 , HB1254 , HB1255 , HB1256 , SB41 , SB44 , SB64 , SB84 , SB87 , SB93 , SB98 , SB107 , SB118 , SB142 , SB192 , SB195 , SB199 , SB219 , SB222 , SB234 , SB241 , SB255 , SB275 , SB277 , SB292 , SB294 , SB306 , SB314 , SB482 , SB8 , SB10 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB14 , SB16 , SB17 , SB18 , SB20 , SB21 , SB22 , SB40 , SB48 , SB55 , SB69 , SB75 , SB77 , SB78 , SB85 , SB102 , SB115 , SB133 , SB140 , SB148 , SB151 , SB165 , SB169 , SB170 , SB185 , SB197 , SB200 , SB217 , SB235 , SB278 , SB280 , SB291 , SB300 , SB303 , SB315 , SB324 , SB330 , SB411 , SB416 , SB420 , SB436 , SB438 , SB449 , SB455 , SB456 , SB477 , SB489 , SB521 , HB646 , HB824 , HB341 , HB682 , HB766 , HB926 , HB998 , HB1051 , HB1080 , HB1201 , HB1223 , HB603 , HB940 , HB1191 , SB47 , HB901 , HR20 , HR74 , HB284 , HB306 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB577 , HB582 , HB605 , HB614 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB798 , HB911 , HB955 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1069 , HB1113 , HB1140 , HB1180 , HB1240 , SB82 , SB89 , SB149 , SB382

Keywords: condolences, memorial resolution, House Resolution, Shreveport, children, tragedy, sympathy, bereavement, tribute, mourning, schoolchildren, public charter school, elementary school, Head Start, family loss, Louisiana House of Representatives, condolence resolution, House resolution, victims, family support

Summary: The House convened with 93 members present, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and then spent much of the morning recognizing guests and former members, including student groups, arts educators, rodeo queens, and Congressman Troy Carter, who urged members not to let partisan divisions harm Louisiana. Representative Newell also delivered a lengthy floor statement tying current voting-rights debates to civil rights concerns and warning against weakening protections for Black communities. The chamber then received Senate messages and committee reports, and several resolutions and bills were advanced or referred in routine order. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to House resolutions, many of them memorials or study requests. The House adopted resolutions supporting a physical therapy degree designation for federal loan purposes, honoring veterans who served in Honduras, extending a behavioral health courts study, seeking bridge-removal funding for U.S. 90 in St. Tammany Parish, urging DOTD studies on local traffic projects, requesting a study of rural economic development, supporting Camp Beauregard and the National Guard Youth Challenge Program, creating a permit-study committee, and asking for studies on autism services, school nurse orientation, opioid treatment in correctional settings, floodplain map updates, and care gaps for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. One resolution on rent stabilization failed, and another on pregnancy-related emergency medication was returned to the calendar after questions about its implications. The chamber also concurred in or rejected several Senate amendments to House bills. Concurrences included bills on arrest warrant recall procedures, disturbing the peace near places of worship, rape and sex offense provisions, bridge naming, holiday rules, victim confidentiality, and the classic black license plate. The House rejected Senate amendments to HB 258 on dual office holding and dual employment. The most contentious item was HB 102, which would create second-degree cruelty to the elderly and persons with infirmities but was amended in the Senate to add broader first-degree murder provisions tied to firearms and public shootings; members raised concerns about self-defense, overcharging, capital punishment exposure, and fiscal impact on the public defender system. Despite those objections, supporters argued the changes would deter violent crime and protect the public, and the bill was ultimately supported in floor debate as amended.