SB 3928, the “Standardized Calculation of Operational Polluting Emissions Act of 2026” or “SCOPE Act of 2026,” would direct the Environmental Protection Agency to study and issue guidance on how direct emitters should calculate and report scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. Scope 3 emissions are indirect emissions tied to upstream and downstream value-chain activities, and the bill authorizes EPA to define the relevant thresholds and methodologies for reporting. The bill is framed as a guidance-and-study measure rather than a direct regulatory mandate, and it focuses on creating standardized approaches for emissions accounting.
The bill requires EPA, within one year of enactment, to publish guidance covering recommended reporting thresholds, calculation methods by source category, monitoring frequency, quality assurance and control, methods for estimating missing data, and recordkeeping/reporting practices. It defines “direct emitter” by reference to facilities already subject to EPA greenhouse gas reporting requirements under the Clean Air Act regulations, while also allowing EPA to include other facilities it deems appropriate. The bill includes a savings clause stating that it does not affect existing authority of the President, federal agencies, or states under current law.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would not itself impose a new nationwide emissions cap or reporting program, but it would require EPA to develop a framework that could influence how regulated facilities measure and disclose indirect emissions. Its practical effect would be to shape federal greenhouse gas reporting standards for direct emitters and potentially expand the scope of emissions data collected or recommended for reporting. Because the bill expressly preserves existing federal and state authority, it would supplement rather than displace current environmental laws and regulations, especially those under the Clean Air Act and EPA’s greenhouse gas reporting rules.
Sentiment
Based on the available record, the bill appears to have been introduced and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works without recorded votes or committee debate in the provided materials. As a result, there is no documented floor or committee sentiment to gauge support or opposition. The bill’s structure suggests a technocratic, administrative approach to emissions accounting, which may appeal to proponents of standardized climate disclosure while remaining limited enough to avoid immediate regulatory burdens.
Contention
The main likely point of contention is whether EPA should be involved in setting guidance for scope 3 emissions, since those emissions are indirect and can be difficult to measure consistently across supply chains. Supporters may view the bill as a necessary step toward standardized, comparable greenhouse gas reporting, while critics may argue that scope 3 accounting is uncertain, burdensome, and potentially overextends federal climate reporting into value-chain activities beyond a facility’s direct control. Another possible issue is the bill’s open-ended language allowing EPA to determine appropriate thresholds and include additional facilities, which could raise concerns about future regulatory expansion even though the bill does not itself mandate new limits.
Establishes the climate corporate data accountability act requiring certain business entities within the state to annually disclose scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 emissions; establishes the climate accountability and emissions disclosure fund.
Establishes the climate corporate data accountability act requiring certain business entities within the state to annually disclose scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 emissions; establishes the climate accountability and emissions disclosure fund.