Transcript Highlights:

• Turning to the bill, House Bill 2542 prohibits animal testing facilities, contract testing facilities
• test method is available. ...from using an animal test method in a drug development process when an
• alternative test method is available, unless animal testing is requested by the federal regulatory agency
• I also Testing exists. Choosing not to use them only perpetuates that cycle.
• For example, we Are used to replace all forms of animal testing.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on several bills. House Bill 2542 would require drug developers to use validated non-animal testing methods when available, unless federal regulators request animal testing. The sponsor said the bill builds on prior Washington action on cosmetics testing and is intended to move toward more humane and modern science. Supporters, including students, animal welfare advocates, and biotech-related witnesses, argued that animal tests often fail to predict human outcomes and that alternatives are more accurate. A biotech industry representative said animal testing is still necessary for some research and warned the bill could deter local innovation, but said the industry was open to amendments. The sponsor said she was open to discussing changes to the enforcement mechanism. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. House Bill 2629 would address theft and vandalism of critical communications infrastructure, including copper and fiber lines. The bill would ban cash payments for nonferrous metal transactions, require electronic or stored-value payment methods, impose civil penalties for stolen copper used in telecommunications cable, and create a new Class C felony for destruction of critical communications infrastructure. The sponsor and industry witnesses described repeated outages affecting 911, hospitals, schools, and first responders, and said Washington has a high rate of these incidents. Recycling industry representatives supported the bill after negotiations, but a prosecutor and some others said the bill should focus more on law enforcement tools such as searchable transaction databases and holding periods rather than new penalties. No final action was taken in the hearing. House Bill 2394 would expand the Insurance Commissioner’s insurance fraud program and create a Class B felony for insurance fraud, including fraudulent billing, misrepresentation of repair costs, and misuse of coding systems. The bill also broadens who can be considered a victim for restitution and gives the commissioner additional investigative tools, while the substitute removed a reporting duty for certified public accountants. The sponsor and the Insurance Commissioner’s office said the measure responds to more sophisticated, technology-driven fraud schemes that harm both insurers and consumers. Insurance industry and fraud bureau witnesses supported the bill as a consumer protection measure. No vote was taken. House Bill 2361 would raise the maximum principal amount for small loans from $700 to $1,200, with annual inflation adjustments, while keeping the existing 30% of monthly income cap and other safeguards. The sponsor said the change would better reflect emergency costs and help borrowers avoid illegal lenders. DFI raised implementation questions about inflation adjustments and publication requirements, and opponents from AARP, SEIU 775, poverty advocates, and consumer attorneys argued the bill would increase debt traps and fees for low-income borrowers and older adults. MoneyTree supported the bill, saying the current cap is outdated and that the product remains a flat-fee, regulated credit option with existing consumer protections. The hearing also included testimony on House Bill 2294, which would prohibit negative use restrictions on real property that block grocery stores or pharmacies; staff described a proposed amendment adding notice and changing enforcement, and the committee then moved the bill out with a due pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And if they are, were they tested?
• and test and test her again.
• and test and test her again.
• The majority of the tests that are conducted...
• So dairy cattle are tested more frequently. ...and those tested cattle, those live tests in the right

Committee: House Agricultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING TESTED.
• THAT TESTING IS ALSO ONGOING.
• LAYERS TO TESTING SO IT'S A MASSIVE SYSTEM REPLACEMENT, RIGHT?
• WE STARTED TESTING WITH THE SYSTEMS READY TO START TESTING IN AUGUST OF THIS YEAR.
• TESTING SESSIONS, THAT'S NEW, WE STARTED BACK IN OCTOBER.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is this test? I'm so glad you asked.
• How can they judge whether the five-step test has been met?
• Like not even the five-step test.
• So I'm going to, you know, do the five-step test for my kids. Right?
• And so that's where the five-step test...

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee met and began without a quorum, first hearing AB 612 by Assembly Member Rogers and later AB 435 by Assembly Member Wilson. AB 612 would direct Caltrans to update the highway design manual so local jurisdictions consult with fire departments on major road improvements. Supporters, including the California Professional Firefighters and labor representatives, said the bill would improve emergency response and prevent road designs from hindering fire apparatus. County representatives said they were not opposed but wanted the bill narrowed to avoid mandatory consultation on minor maintenance projects or in areas without a local fire district. Several members praised the bill as common-sense safety legislation, and it was moved forward to Appropriations. The committee then adopted its rules and approved a seven-bill consent calendar. AB 435 would update California child passenger safety law to require children under 10 to be properly restrained in the back seat, require children ages 10 to 13 to remain in the back seat unless they pass the five-step seat belt fit test, and require the five-step test before a child may ride in the front seat. The author and supporters, including Safe Kids Greater Sacramento, Safety Belt Safe USA, AAA, the Automobile Club, and hospitals, argued the bill would align state law with national best practices and improve child safety. Committee members raised concerns about enforceability, implementation timing, pickup trucks, large families, and low-speed vehicles, and the author said he was open to amendments and additional data, including California-specific information. AB 435 was advanced to the Committee on Appropriations after discussion. AB 612 also received a due pass recommendation to Appropriations. The committee held rolls open to allow additional members to add on, then later confirmed the votes and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Earlier testing means fewer years of suffering.
• Earlier testing means fewer years of suffering.
• But no one ever tested me for celiac disease.
• It's a relatively inexpensive single blood test.
• Physicians don't usually test them.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Health

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health heard testimony on four bills: H. 5013 and S. 2928, which would establish a three-year celiac disease screening pilot program for children during routine cholesterol/lipid screening at ages 8 to 12; H. 5087, regulating medical spas; and H. 5115, establishing statewide food truck regulations, though the transcript focused almost entirely on the celiac and medical spa bills. For the celiac proposal, Rep. Badger and Sen. Lovely described long diagnostic delays, the lack of a cure, and the potential for a simple blood test to identify children earlier and reduce long-term harm. Multiple patients, clinicians, and researchers supported the pilot, saying celiac is frequently missed because symptoms vary widely or are absent, and that early detection could prevent malnutrition, growth problems, osteoporosis, and other complications. Testifiers also emphasized that the bill would study feasibility, accuracy, cost, and acceptability, and would include family education and support resources if diagnoses are made through the program. Several experts and advocates backed the celiac screening pilot, including a pediatric gastroenterologist from Italy who described successful national screening efforts there, a Celiac Disease Foundation representative, pediatric gastroenterologists from Massachusetts and Colorado, a pediatric dietitian, and a parent whose child was diagnosed after severe malnutrition. They argued that routine screening alongside existing pediatric bloodwork could identify many undiagnosed children and improve health equity, since celiac disease is often overlooked in people of color and lower-income patients. Committee members asked about how the screening would work, and witnesses explained it could begin with a blood test, followed by confirmatory endoscopy if needed. No vote was taken in the hearing. On H. 5087, witnesses from the medical aesthetics industry largely opposed the bill as written, saying it was outdated, redundant with existing Massachusetts licensing and board oversight, and too restrictive for nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and other licensed providers. Testifiers, including a retired lobbyist, a nurse practitioner, a PA, a plastic surgeon, and a clinic owner, said the bill could reduce access, raise costs, and push care into less regulated settings, while not addressing the real issues of training, compliance, and patient safety. Committee members pressed for more specific feedback on what provisions were unnecessary or duplicative, and witnesses said they had submitted position papers and written testimony identifying conflicts with current law. The hearing ended with the chair noting that all oral and written testimony would be reviewed before any decisions are made.

Transcript Highlights:

• timing taken, tests taken, that they wanted to take.
• timing taken, tests taken, that they wanted to take.
• timing taken, tests taken, that they wanted to take.
• After two fails, the third test, the customer has to pay $10 before they can take the test.
• </c> uh with the ballpark of 20% of tests uh with the ballpark of 20% of tests going<00:25:27.000><c>

Transcript Highlights:

• Fitness test.
• Not a fitness test. It had to be the presidential fitness test to get points on this.
• And if they did a point-of-care test, some sort of swab or blood test that they can do at the pharmacy
• Line 26 is talking about disposable diabetes blood sugar testing supplies—lancets, testing strips, all
• , such as maybe a strep test.

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2401, which would require physicians to complete continuing education on nutrition and metabolic health as part of the state’s rural health transformation effort. HHS supported the bill, saying it would help physicians better address chronic disease and preserve federal grant points tied to the state’s application. A member of the public also testified in favor, arguing that better nutrition education could improve diabetes outcomes and reduce costs. The committee then adopted an amendment to add the Board of Occupational Therapy Practice to the background-check statute so the occupational therapy compact could proceed, and it passed the bill as amended on a roll call vote. The committee next heard House Bill 1621, which would require the Presidential Fitness Physical Fitness Test in elementary, middle, and high school physical education courses. HHS said the bill was part of the rural health transformation application and could help preserve federal funding, but members raised many questions about the test’s criteria, adaptive options for students with disabilities, equipment needs, and whether the bill should apply to non-public schools. Senator Clemens offered an amendment to limit the requirement to public schools, but it failed. Senator Hogan then offered an amendment to clarify exemptions and allow DPI to align implementation with federal guidance; that amendment passed. A further amendment adding language allowing DPI to establish criteria for and exceptions to the test also passed. The committee then approved the bill as amended on a roll call vote. The committee also considered House Bill 1622, which joins North Dakota to the physician assistant licensure compact. HHS said the compact would improve access to care, especially in rural areas, support military families, and help preserve rural health transformation funding. Members noted the compact had been discussed in a prior session and that many earlier concerns had been resolved. After brief discussion about the compact process and its consistency with other interstate compacts, the committee voted to do pass the bill. Finally, the committee began Senate Bill 2402, which expands pharmacists’ prescriptive authority and therapeutic substitution powers. HHS and the Board of Pharmacy supported the bill as a way to improve access to care and maintain rural health transformation funding. Senator Roers introduced a detailed amendment negotiated with the Board of Medicine and Board of Pharmacy to narrow and clarify the bill, including notification requirements, limits on certain drug categories, and patient-protection language for therapeutic substitution. The Board of Pharmacy then testified in support of the broader bill and explained the CLIA-waived testing provisions and the repeal of the older, narrower pharmacist-testing language. The hearing and amendment discussion were still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> year of our testing, our NAEP testing. year of our testing, our NAEP testing.
• . test. test.
• </c> standardized tests. standardized tests.
• . testing. testing.
• It should be a voluntary test test them?

Committee: Joint Education

Transcript Highlights:

• No tests existed for graduating from a driver testing permit to a driverless testing deployment.
• Driver testing permit to driverless testing deployment.
• Today, 27 manufacturers hold driverless testing permits, six hold driverless testing permits, and three
• Today, 27 manufacturers hold driverless testing permits, six hold driverless testing permits, and three
• These were with AVs, and these would be testing with a driver, also testing without a driver.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard an informational hearing on California’s newly finalized autonomous vehicle regulations, with DMV and CHP officials describing the updated framework and committee members pressing them on safety, enforcement, and first-responder impacts. DMV said the rules, effective April 28, 2026, expand reporting, create a phased permitting system from testing to deployment, add requirements for safety cases, remote operations, and first-responder coordination, and open a path for heavy-duty AV testing and deployment while still prohibiting oversized loads and hazardous materials. CHP said it worked with DMV on enforcement tools, first-responder interaction plans, and training local agencies on the new notice of noncompliance process. Members asked about crash data, immobilizations, freeway and construction-zone safety, weigh-station enforcement, and whether foreign licenses can qualify for remote assistants or drivers; DMV and CHP said the rules are intended to keep AVs accountable and that heavy-duty AVs will be held to the same roadway standards as human-driven commercial vehicles. A second panel focused on data collection and enforcement. Consumer attorneys argued the prior rules were too limited because DMV stopped collecting meaningful data once AVs moved from testing to deployment, making it difficult for the public and litigants to understand incidents; they supported the new regulations but urged that the collected information be made public. The industry association said California now has the nation’s most robust AV oversight, with monthly or quarterly reporting of collisions, system failures, immobilizations, harsh braking, vehicle miles traveled, and notices of noncompliance, plus broad DMV authority to restrict or suspend operations. In response to questions, the industry said it generally supports the new framework, believes the regulations are clear, and does not favor full federal preemption of state AV rules, though it wants federal standards for design, construction, and performance. A third panel addressed first-responder interaction and remote operations. The San Francisco Fire Department described repeated AV interference with emergency scenes and said AVs have generated hundreds of “sleeper calls,” where passengers fall asleep and trigger 911 responses; the department said these incidents consume significant staff time and it wants better protocols to reduce unnecessary dispatches. Waymo said it has trained thousands of public-safety personnel, maintains a 24/7 emergency line, uses geofencing/avoid-the-area messages, and can allow first responders to manually override or move vehicles when needed. Committee members asked about sleeper-call prevention, remote assistant licensing and drug testing, communication redundancies during outages, and how manual overrides work for vehicles without traditional controls; Waymo said it is collaborating with responders and that its vehicles are designed to reach a safe stop if connectivity is lost. The final panel began with testimony on heavy-duty autonomous vehicles. A transportation researcher said freight is essential to California’s economy and that heavy-duty AVs pose distinct safety risks because of their weight, stopping distance, and the potentially severe consequences of crashes or immobilizations on highways. He said the new regulations are important because they create a regulated pathway for heavy-duty AV deployment, require a safety case, set mileage thresholds, and add reporting categories that can serve as leading safety indicators. The hearing was still in progress when the transcript ended, with additional testimony expected from labor and industry witnesses on heavy-duty AV deployment.

Transcript Highlights:

• She thinks the current testing window is problematic and hence this bill.
• End-of-year testing measures mastery of grade-level...
• It also ensures that students are tested on material that they've learned.
• These students may be at a disadvantage for computer-based testing, she notes that paper testing boosts
• Another one was a student with autism who did great on paper tests.

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Summary: The Committee on Education approved the minutes from February 18 and March 4, 2026, then took up several bills. HCR 2003, the “Protect Girls in Sports in Arizona Act,” drew extensive testimony. Supporters, including Superintendent Tom Horne, argued it would protect fairness, safety, and privacy in girls’ sports and locker rooms by requiring teams to be designated male, female, or co-ed and by limiting access to sex-designated private spaces. Opponents, including ACLU and transgender advocates, said the measure was discriminatory, would function as a bathroom ban, and could force schools to police students’ bodies and identities. The committee voted 4-3 to give HCR 2003 a due pass recommendation. The committee then advanced HB 2020, which lowers certain student threats or disruptions at educational institutions from a Class 6 felony to a Class 1 misdemeanor, and HB 2032, which changes the statewide testing window so assessments begin later in the spring and scores are returned later, with supporters saying it would better reflect a full year of instruction. HB 2033, allowing school districts or charter schools to choose paper-and-pencil administration of statewide assessments by governing board vote, also received support from educators who said it would reduce technology barriers for younger students. HB 2318, as amended, would impose term limits on school district governing board members after eight consecutive years; school board groups opposed it as harmful to rural districts, but the committee adopted an amendment and gave the bill a due pass recommendation. The committee also approved HB 2378, which changes eligibility rules for School Facilities Oversight Board members who are architects or engineers so their businesses may not include school construction. HB 2313, which prohibits teacher strikes or organized work stoppages and ties funding penalties to districts or charters that violate the ban, advanced despite testimony that it duplicates existing law and could chill educators’ speech and worsen staffing shortages. Finally, HB 2249, a major expansion of the Parents’ Bill of Rights, passed after heated testimony. Supporters said it would prevent schools from socially transitioning minors without written parental consent and stop staff from encouraging children to hide information from parents; opponents warned it was vague, punitive, and would expose teachers and schools to massive liability and litigation. The committee adopted amendments on HB 2318 and HB 2249 and reported all of the listed bills out with due pass recommendations, with recorded split votes on several measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that pond gets tested. We tested it every quarter for what could be in the water.
• capacity to test.
• capacity to test.
• How do we test the secondary effluent treatment? We've done testing for the primary.
• But because these tests are not cheap, we are only limited to do three rounds of testing.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Biotechnology and Medical Technology held an informational hearing on the role of biotechnology industries in wastewater treatment, hosted at Bakar Labs on the UC Berkeley campus. Opening remarks emphasized California’s water scarcity, the rising cost of wastewater infrastructure, and the need to reuse and clean contaminated water. Committee members framed the hearing as a look at both current treatment challenges and emerging technologies that could improve water quality, affordability, and resilience over time. The first panel focused on statewide wastewater challenges. BACWA Executive Director Laurie Fono described wastewater plants as part of a broader circular economy, noting their roles in recycled water, environmental enhancement, biosolids management, carbon sequestration, and renewable energy generation. She highlighted major challenges including aging 1970s-era infrastructure, nutrient reduction mandates, sea level rise, evolving regulations, and PFAS source control. She said Bay Area agencies face about $11 billion in nutrient reduction costs, with rate increases, state revolving funds, WIFIA loans, and bonds as the main financing tools. Members asked about regional differences, energy revenue opportunities, smaller decentralized plants, and agricultural collaboration. The second panel featured researchers and lab experts discussing biotechnology solutions. Lawrence Berkeley National Lab’s Dr. Romine Chakarvati described using microbial communities and machine learning to help break down PFAS and treat produced water. CEL Analytical’s Dr. Yigi Dearborn explained pathogen testing for direct potable reuse, wastewater monitoring, and the need for larger sample volumes and more funding to validate methods for viruses and protozoa. Stanford’s Dr. Chunhung-Shin presented an anaerobic membrane system that turns domestic wastewater into clean water and energy with less biosolids and lower operating costs. Committee members asked about AI, assay development, scaling technologies, and funding priorities. Public comment from the California Association of Sanitation Agencies stressed the need to balance scalability, reliability, and affordability, and the hearing adjourned without any formal vote or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Higher in PFOS than your influent testing, 551 times higher than your effluent testing, and 183 times
• We tested it, and it tested at 13,000 parts per trillion of PFOS, as our previous presenter explained
• We tested it and it tested it 13,000 parts per trillion of PFOS as our previous presenter, uh, uh, explained
• Duration were these samples taken and tested, and were they tested at one lab or more than one lab?
• So they don't test for every little thing.

Committee: House Agriculture

Summary: The committee hearing focused on biosolids, sewage sludge, and PFAS contamination, with the opening remarks and first three presenters arguing that land application of municipal sludge poses serious risks to soil, water, livestock, and human health. Representative Shaw cited EPA and state data on detected pollutants and PFAS in biosolids, while Denise Travick Poyer described her background in chemical engineering and PFAS work and said the EPA’s draft sewage sludge risk assessment shows unacceptable risk at very low PFOS/PFOA levels. She urged source reduction, more testing, and consideration of total organic fluorine, and noted examples from Michigan where industrial pretreatment and source reduction reduced PFAS in biosolids. Johnson County, Texas Commissioner Larry Woolley and Investigator Dana Ames presented a case study of alleged runoff from land-applied biosolids affecting a ranch, with high PFAS readings in soil, water, fish, cattle tissue, and a stillborn calf, and said the county and state had pursued investigations, lawsuits, and legislative responses. Sandra Trawick of Save Oklahoma Farms and Ranches argued that Oklahoma’s biosolids program relies heavily on Class B sludge, that current rules are outdated, and that land application exposes farms and rural communities to pathogens, chemicals, odors, flies, and runoff; she cited examples from Maine, Texas, Georgia, Michigan, and Oklahoma to support calls for stronger regulation or a ban. After the testimony, members asked about sampling methods, lab testing, EPA limits, and whether the cited PFAS blood levels were comparable to the soil and sludge measurements. Witnesses said the Johnson County samples were collected by a Texas A&M PhD contractor and tested at a single lab, and they explained that the EPA’s 4 parts per trillion figure applied to municipal drinking water standards. Questions also addressed whether sludge is incorporated into soil; Trawick said it had often been left on the surface, though she had seen better disking after public scrutiny. Members asked how biosolids compare with manure and feedlot waste, and witnesses responded that municipal sludge is more contaminated because it includes industrial, hospital, and household waste streams, unlike animal manure. The committee then moved to alternative solutions, hearing from Doug McKinney of Advanced Microbial Solutions, who promoted biological sludge removal using bacteria to reduce sludge volumes and avoid land application, citing cost savings for wastewater plants and correctional facilities. Jason Jepsen of Eden Energy followed with a pitch for an eight-stage waste-to-energy system that converts mixed waste into clean energy, biochar, and reusable products, framing waste as an asset and presenting his company’s technology as a no-land-application alternative.

Transcript Highlights:

• for and who should do that testing.
• for and who should do that testing.
• That can inform what should be tested, but the determination of what gets tested should be on a fire-by-fire
• There's testing that you want DTSC to do.
• This is about the standards for which contaminants you are tested and which levels after the testing

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• My I have a test happened in St. Cloud.
• Testing has been an issue.
• </c> instituted the instate testing instituted the instate testing requirements<01:30:08.080><c> were
• </c> testing facilities here in the state. testing facilities here in the state.
• Uh testing has been an issue. director. Uh testing has been an issue.

Bills: HF3642 , HF2700 , HF3615

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We provide the tracking for backflow testing, as well as carry out the backflow testing.
• There are separate testing and licensing requirements for that test.
• And the test that you went through was more difficult than the certification test that folks do?
• and double-payment for testing.
• or the testing requirement.

Bills: HB5208 , SB863 , SB1243 , SB1624 , SB1965 , SB2660 , SB2702 , SB2885

Committee: House Natural Resources

Keywords: water filtration, public drinking water, health and safety, well maintenance, water quality, Edwards Aquifer, water conservation, reclaimed water, aquifer storage, environmental protection, public utility agency, dissolution, local government, regulatory framework, municipal authority, Texas Water Bank, Texas Water Trust, water rights, water banking, instream flow

Transcript Highlights:

• FDLE TESTING AND UPGRADING THEIR EQUIPMENT.
• THIS AMENDMENT CLARIFIES THE TESTING IS TO BE DONE AT THE POINT OF FINAL BATCH TESTING WHICH WOULD BE
• HAD THEM TESTED BY A LAB HERE IN FLORIDA.
• WE TESTED THESE PRODUCTS USING THE SAME METHODOLOGY REGULATORY GUIDELINES AND TESTING PARAMETERS WE APPLY
• PRODUCED IN OTHER STATES AND IF THEY WERE TESTED THEY WERE TESTED BY LABS IN OTHER STATES.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a standardized test? What's the process? Some of them have a standardized test.
• There's other municipalities that give their own test. I know St. Joseph, we give our own test.
• And it's not an open book test.
• And it's not an open book test.
• I believe in one statewide standardized test, just like we heard that the electricians test statewide

Committees: House Local Government , House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Transcript Highlights:

• test methods, to determine if there is PFAS contamination at the site.
• We support the idea of having the military go back and actually test, using the current analytical test
• A while to do broad testing just to see the occurrence of PFAS.
• I do know that we want to verify that it's present, and we do test.
• Uh Waiawa present, and we do test.

Committee: Senate Public Safety and Military Affairs

Summary: The joint hearing of the Committees on Public Safety and Military Affairs and Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs considered two resolutions related to Red Hill and PFAS contamination. HCR 186 urged the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Health Agency to extend the renewal period for secretarial designee health care authorization for people affected by the Red Hill water contamination crisis and to improve access to care. Testimony from Moira Flanary and Board of Water Supply’s Ernie Lau supported the measure, emphasizing lasting health impacts, the need for continuity of care, and National Academies recommendations for continued eligibility and access to treatment. The second measure, HCR 200, urged the U.S. Department of Defense to reassess prior determinations and closure decisions under CERCLA in light of evolving scientific understanding of PFAS and recent federal hazardous substance designations. Mr. Lau testified in support, arguing that military investigations should not rely only on old records or AFFF documentation and should instead use current testing methods to identify contamination. He said PFAS is persistent, mobile in groundwater, and likely to require long-term remediation, and he also answered questions about cleanup challenges and the Board of Water Supply’s ongoing litigation against the Navy over Red Hill-related costs. At the end of the hearing, the committees voted to pass both HCR 186 and HCR 200 unamended. The Public Safety and Military Affairs Committee adopted the chair’s recommendations on both measures. The Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee did not have quorum, so its votes were deferred until April 21 at 2:00 p.m. in Conference Room 225.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that pond gets tested. We tested it every quarter for what could be in the water.
• But you have to keep in mind, we do test for other organisms. We do test for indicators.
• capacity to test.
• How do we test the secondary effluent treatment? We've done testing for the primary.
• But because these tests are not cheap, we are only limited to do three rounds of testing.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Biotechnology and Medical Technology held an informational hearing at Bakar Labs on the UC Berkeley campus titled “Biotechnology Industries’ Role in Wastewater Treatment.” Chair Assembly Member Ward and Assembly Member Papan opened by framing wastewater as a major California challenge tied to water scarcity, aging infrastructure, regulatory demands, affordability, and the need for innovation. Bakar Labs described its biotech incubator and public-private model, emphasizing the role of state support in helping early-stage companies commercialize technologies and create jobs. The first panel focused on the current wastewater treatment landscape. BACWA Executive Director Laurie Fono described wastewater plants as part of a circular economy that can produce recycled water, environmental benefits, renewable energy, and biosolids for land application, but said agencies face major challenges from aging 1970s-era infrastructure, nutrient reduction mandates, climate change, sea level rise, evolving regulations, and Prop. 218 limits on rate structures. She highlighted PFAS as a major source-control issue, saying most of it comes from households rather than local manufacturing, and argued that treatment plants are not designed to handle everything entering the sewer system. Members asked about regional differences, energy generation, financing, smaller decentralized plants, and agricultural collaboration. The second panel highlighted biotechnology research and testing tools. A Berkeley Lab scientist described using microbial communities and machine learning to improve PFAS and produced-water treatment, while a CEL Analytical laboratory director discussed pathogen testing for direct potable reuse, wastewater surveillance, and the need for larger sample volumes and better filtration methods to validate log reductions. A Stanford researcher presented an anaerobic membrane bioreactor system that converts domestic wastewater into clean water and biogas with lower energy use and less biosolids, reporting a demonstration project in Redwood City that is net energy positive and can reduce operating costs. Legislators asked about AI, scaling technologies, pathogen detection, and funding needs. Panelists and public commenters urged more pilot funding, stronger utility-state-industry partnerships, and better coordination among regulatory agencies. The hearing ended with public comment from the California Association of Sanitation Agencies and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 8 is a transformational bill that will replace the STAR test with three. ...test at the beginning
• The last test will be a. ...test over Texas TEKS with the norm-referenced output from the Texas TEKS.
• Well, if you don't want to use these tests, they can use MAP or other assessments, but the three-test
• So we're going to have a beginning-of-the-year test, a middle-of-the-year test, and then an end-of-year
• It's not just the STAR test.

Bills: HB8 , HB26 , HB192

Committee: Senate Finance