Gregg Hart — The Chair is addressed during the hearing’s opening as the presentation is introduced and the hearing goals are laid out, and is later referenced in connection with framing the issue and noting the complexity of the problem.
Gregg Hart — Assembly Member Gregg Hart opens the exchange by thanking the chair and raising questions about transparency and the legislature’s working relationships with industry. A respondent then addresses him directly in the same discussion, indicating a continuous back-and-forth on the same topic.
Gregg Hart — Gregg Hart emphasized that California would benefit from greater resiliency and buffer inventory in the fuel system if the costs are reasonable, framing prudence as the guiding principle. He then asked whether the CEC planned to use its authority to levy penalties or requirements, and summarized the discussion as indicating that action is needed to stabilize both the refining market and production side in California. He concluded by noting that recommendations will be sent to the governor on July 1 and expressed urgency about continuing the conversation on the fuel situation.
Gregg Hart — Likely referenced in the transcript as 'Chair Randolph'; thanked for work on refinery issues, though the name appears mistranscribed and is uncertain.
Joe Patterson — Vice Chair Gunda is referenced as starting the presentation; the transcript appears to misidentify the vice chair by name.
Joe Patterson — Referenced indirectly by title as Vice Chair in the prior slide context.
Joe Patterson — Addressed as Vice Chair Patterson.
Joe Patterson — Joe Patterson, as Vice Chair, pressed the director on why refiners would be closing if California companies were making more money, referencing permissive tools already authorized by legislation. He asked for the main conclusion first and then the background, and tied the discussion to prior committee testimony about company margins in 2020 and 2023.
Joe Patterson — Referred to as the Vice Chair in a private caucus discussion.
Joe Patterson — The Vice Chair is repeatedly referenced during the discussion: first as being addressed directly, then as having noted that 75% of crude oil processed into gasoline comes from imports. The discussion also refers to a slide the Vice Chair shared earlier and to the Vice Chair’s comments about how the CEC is trying to maintain an investment climate without causing price spikes. A later mention appears to be a transcription error referring to the same Vice Chair.
Joe Patterson — Vice Chair Patterson is addressed at the end of the section, indicating he is about to speak.
Joe Patterson — Joe Patterson, referenced as the Vice Chair, is mentioned in an ongoing discussion about refinery complexity and market conditions. The exchange notes that he had mentioned the chart, that the complexity of the issue was being addressed in relation to his concerns, and that he later addressed the cost difference between domestic and imported crude in his answer.
Joe Patterson — Rogers asks the Vice Chair to explain a complicated topic in simple, concise terms, essentially requesting an 'elevator answer.'
Joe Patterson — The speaker continues referencing Vice Chair Gunda’s earlier remarks, including the idea of taking a holistic approach and following up on the Transportation Fuels Assessment.
Joe Patterson — Mentioned as Vice Chair Gunda in the transcript; the speaker is responding to a question directed to him.
Joe Patterson — Said the CEC should use the tools only if benefits outweigh consumer costs and that the agency will return before enacting them.
Joe Patterson — Said the agency is resource constrained and hopes to begin the holistic conversation in the next couple of months.
Joe Patterson — Agreed with the Chair's concerns and emphasized maintaining stakeholder confidence and protecting communities and workers.
Joe Patterson — Emphasized the need to think through the next 10 to 15 years of transition and protect Californians.
Joe Patterson — Likely the Vice Chair being thanked, though the transcript says 'Vice Chair Gunda'.
Vice Chair Gunda — Begins the presentation and thanks the committee for the opportunity to testify.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Cottie Petrie-Norris is referenced as Chair Randolph during the ongoing committee discussion, with both mentions reflecting the same continuous exchange and role-based address.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Addressed as Chair Petrie-Norris.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — The witness, Cottie Petrie-Norris, is referenced while the speaker says they will be mindful of the Chair's question and continues responding to it as they frame the branded versus unbranded discussion.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — The speaker addresses Chair Cottie Petrie-Norris while explaining the difference between branded and unbranded gasoline retail prices.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — The speaker twice references Chair Cottie Petrie-Norris’s earlier framing, including her comments about needing an implementable transition plan, and uses her prior remarks as part of the ongoing discussion.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Cottie Petrie-Norris is addressed as Chair during a continuous exchange about vessel emissions, air quality regulation, and related pricing/company behavior concerns. The speaker asks the Chair if she wants to comment, references her earlier question about companies leaving despite profits, and then begins responding directly to the Chair’s prompt.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Referenced as having raised the climate agenda point earlier.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Addressed as Chair.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Addressed again as Chair in the follow-up question.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Referenced as having mentioned the possibility of $10-a-gallon gasoline.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — The speaker repeatedly addresses the Chair in a continuous discussion about emissions and imports, then presses for faster action on E15 and related policy options, and finally asks about the availability of technology for vessels.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Addressed as 'Chair' in the exchange.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — The Chair's earlier points are referenced as guiding the discussion about protecting Californians.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Closed the discussion, thanked participants, and opened public comment.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Praised for emphasizing affordability as a central concern.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Addressed as Madam Chair and credited with emphasizing affordability.
Cottie Petrie-Norris — Thanked directly for chairing the hearing.
Leanne Randolph — Leanne Randolph, Chair of the California Air Resources Board, introduced herself and began her testimony, thanking the committee for the opportunity to speak about California's transportation fuel market and CARB's mission.
AB32 — AB 32 is discussed as the foundational climate law for California, establishing the first economy-wide greenhouse gas reduction targets and the state’s initial 2020 climate goals, which were achieved early in 2014. The discussion also notes that AB 32 requires CARB to develop and periodically update a scoping plan for a cost-effective, technologically feasible emissions-reduction pathway, and that it served as the statutory basis for the low-carbon fuel standard as an early action measure.
SB32 — Identified as setting the state's 2030 climate target.
AB1279 — Cited as establishing carbon neutrality as a goal.
SB1020 — Cited as establishing interim clean energy targets.
SB905 — Cited as establishing a carbon capture, utilization, and storage program.
SB1137 — Cited as establishing health-protective zones around oil and gas infrastructure.
SB1075 — Cited as providing direction on incorporating clean hydrogen into carbon neutrality efforts.
AB1757 — Cited as providing direction on incorporating natural and working lands into carbon neutrality efforts.
Severin Borenstein — Severin Borenstein, a UC Berkeley professor, is cited as the person who identified the 'mystery gasoline surcharge,' and his calculation is later referenced as the benchmark for that analysis.
Director Ty Milder — Director Ty Milder presented a continuous data-driven explanation of California gasoline pricing. He said refiners generally benefit during price spikes, then moved to 2024 data showing different performance among refiners and distinguishing branded from unbranded suppliers. He walked through gross gasoline industry margin trends, noting the widening gap after 2015 and the 2022 spike, then shifted to market structure, explaining that the top four companies control most refining capacity and that concentration could increase further if closures continue. He described the importance of dealer tank wagon and other vertically integrated sales channels in California, compared them with the rest of the U.S., and argued that this structure gives some refiners more ability to raise prices. He then connected this market power to retail pricing, highlighting the mystery gasoline surcharge, spot market price movements, and how dealer tank wagon and branded rack prices have risen relative to spot. He concluded by contrasting unbranded gasoline as the value-oriented segment and referencing fuel specifications.
Director Malder — The chair thanks Director Malder, indicating the end of the witness's testimony.