Author Archives: Thad Curtz

SB5641

SB5641 – Makes commercial greenhouses with plastic roofs as well as residential ones, and temporary growing structures with permanent walls as well as those with plastic sides, exempt from the building code.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Short (R; 7th District; Northeastern Washington)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Local Government February 18th, and passed out of committee the 22nd. Referred to Rules.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks January 18th; passed out of committee January 20th. Referred to Rules. Passed by the Senate January 28th.

Comments –
On average, transportation from the farm to the supermarket accounts for less than 4% of total food emissions. (Food that’s flown, like fresh fish and flowers, has relatively high transportation emissions; food that travels a long way by ship has suprisingly low ones.) Local food raised in a heated greenhouse may well not involve lower greenhouse gas emissions than food shipped a long way from a warmer location.

Summary –
The bill would expand the current exemption of “temporary growing structures” with plastic roofs from the requirements of the building code to include commercial greenhouses as well as residential ones, and to include buildings with permanent walls as well as those with sides made of plastic.

HB1753

HB1753 – Creates requirements for consultation with tribes on expenditures from the climate commitment act.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Lekanoff (D; 40th District; parts of Whatcom, Skagit and San Juan counties.) (Co-Sponsor Representative Fitzgibbon -D) (By request of the Governor.)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 16th, and passed out of committee the 22nd. Referred to Ways & Means; had a hearing there February 26th, passed out of committee and referred to Rules the 28th. Passed by the Senate March 4th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment & Energy January 13th; replaced by a substitute making a few small changes and passed out of committee January 27th. Referred to Appropriations; had a hearing there on February 4th; passed out of committee February 5th. Referred to Rules; amended on the floor by the prime sponsor, creating a capacity development grant program to support tribal participation and making other changes in the process which are summarized by staff at the end of the striker.  Passed by the House.

Summary –
The bill would require State agencies that allocate funding or administer grants using revenue from the Climate Commitment Act (aka the cap and invest bill) to consult in a new process with any affected tribe on all funding decisions and programs that might impact tribal resources, including cultural resources, fisheries, archaeological or sacred sites, and other rights and interests in lands reserved or protected by federal treaty, statute, or executive order. (It covers the use of revenue from the climate investment account, the climate commitment account, and the natural climate solutions account, and the requirements of the bill would also apply to local governments’ projects and programs receiving funding from those.)

Applicants for funding would be required to engage in a preapplication process with any tribes within a project area at the earliest possible date. That would include providing a notice to the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and any affected tribes including the detailed scope of the project and its location, preliminary application details available to Federal, State, or local governmental jurisdictions, and all publicly available materials, including public funding sources. An applicant would also be required to offer to discuss the project and its potential impacts with them. (The notification and offer to initiate discussion, or the reason why a discussion has not occurred, would have to be documented with a funding application when it was filed, and a copy of the application would have to be delivered to the Department and to the affected tribes.) If any funding decision, program, project, or activity that impacted lands or fisheries within which a tribe possesses reserved rights were funded from the accounts without such a consultation, an affected tribe could request that all further action on it cease until meaningful consultation had been completed.

Any affected tribe could request a formal review of a completed consultation by submitting a request to the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs and notifying the agencies involved and the Department. The agencies and each tribe would be required to meet separately to initiate a discussion within twenty days of the request, unless the affected tribes agreed to conduct a joint consultation with the state. After the formal review, an affected tribe or an state agency could request that the Governor and an elected tribal leader or leaders meet to formally consider recommendations from the parties. After that, the Governor or an elected tribal leader could call for the state and tribe or tribes to enter into formal mediation, conducted as a government-to-government proceeding, with each government retaining their right to a final decision that met their separate obligations and interests. Mediators would be jointly selected by the parties, and any agreement between the governor and a tribal leader or leaders resulting from the mediation would  be binding. Any party could still initiate further steps, including legal review, to resolve a continuing disagreement.  (During these steps, agencies would not be allowed to approve or release funding, or make other formal decisions to advance a project, including permitting, except when they were legally required to.)

The bill would require the Office of Indian Affairs to coordinate with the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and tribes in developing a periodically updated consultation process, including best practices for early, meaningful, and effective consultation, early notification and engagement by applicants and tribes as part of the preapplication process, and protocols for communication and collaboration with tribes. The Office would provide training and other technical assistance to agencies (and to local governments that requested it) as they implemented the required consultation.

SB5626

SB5626 – Adding a climate resilience element to water system plans.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Rolfes (D; 23rd District; Kitsap County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment and Energy February 22nd. Did not progress by cutoff; dead bill.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology January 12th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 20th. The substitute adds some specifications about the Department’s technical assistance, and would have the UW’s Climate Impacts Group assist in the development of tools for that if funding were appropriated. It would also eliminate the Public Water Board’s and Commerce’s participation in the administration of the Water System Acquisition and Rehabilitation Program. Had a hearing in Ways and Means February 3rd; passed out of committee on the 7th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate February 12th.

Summary –
The bill would require public water systems serving 1,000 or more connections to include a climate resilience element as part of their water system plans. They would have to determine which extreme weather events pose significant challenges to their system and build scenarios to identify potential impacts; assess critical assets and the actions necessary to protect the system from the effects of extreme weather events on operations; and generate reports describing the costs and benefits of the system’s risk reduction strategies for decision makers and stakeholders.

The Department of Health would be required to update its water system planning guidebook to assist systems in implementing the climate resilience element, including guidance on any available technical and financial resources. The bill would authorize the Department’s water system acquisition and rehabilitation program to make loans to systems to partially cover project costs as well as the current grants, and would make climate resilience planning and actions to protect system from extreme weather events, including infrastructure and design projects, eligible for financing from the program.

HB1731

HB1731– Enhancing the requirements for autonomous vehicle testing.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Kloba (D; 1st District; Kirkland) (Co-Sponsor Representative Boehnke-R)
Current status – Rescheduled for a hearing in Transportation Thursday February 1st at 3:30 PM.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –

The bill would require programs for testing fully autonomous vehicles with a backup human operator in the car on public roadways to certify that only someone with a valid US driver’s license and authorized by the developer of the system will operate or monitor the vehicle, that the vehicle will be continuously monitored by the operator, that he or she will be able to direct the vehicle’s movements if human assistance is required, and that the vehicles’ operation will comply with Washington State motor vehicle laws at all times.

It would require programs for testing fully autonomous vehicles without a backup human operator in the car on public roadways to certify that the vehicles will have an automated system that performs all aspects of the dynamic driving task within the environment in which it’s designed to function; that they’ll be capable of achieving a minimal risk condition to reduce the risk of a collision without human intervention when it’s necessary to maintain safe operations (such as stopping); and that they’ll comply with the motor vehicle laws. These programs would also have to certify that they have a comprehensive safety case framework with identifiable safety-related goals and mandatory feedback mechanisms in place; have conducted driving simulations and closed-course testing in preparation for testing on public roadways; have evaluated the safety record of the autonomous vehicle being tested to determine its readiness for testing on public roadways; and have put any additional safety measures appropriate to the less predictable driving environment of testing on public roadways in place, based on the evidence they’ve collected through these previous measures. Programs  would also have to certify that they’ve verified that the vehicle meets appropriate and applicable industry standards to help defend against, detect, and respond to cyberattacks, unauthorized intrusions, and false control commands.

The bill would shift the current requirements for reporting information about collisions or moving violations to the Department; it would require submitting the information that’s sent to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under the national autonomous vehicle incident reporting requirements, or the information the Department decided to require. It would add local fire service providers to the authorities that programs have to notify about periods in which they’ll be testing vehicles, and require providing a guide including instructions for interaction with autonomous vehicles without human operators as part of the notices when those are going to be tested. It would make the registered agent for a testing program responsible for tickets issued for violations of the traffic laws by fully autonomous vehicles without human operators in them, though those would not become part of the agent’s driving record. It would make any commercial or proprietary information submitted to the Department to which the NHTSA grants confidential status exempt from the public disclosure law.

SB5619

SB5619 – Develops a plan to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Lovelett (D; 40th District; Anacortes)
Current status – Senate concurred in the House amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1661 is a companion bill in the House.

Comments –
The findings say:
These marine forests and meadows play an important role in climate mitigation and adaptation by sequestering carbon and relieving ocean acidification. Marine vegetation can sequester up to times more carbon than terrestrial forests, and therefore represent a critical tool in the fight against climate change.
There’s research on using kelp growing on open ocean platforms, where the biomass falls into regions where there’s so little biological activity that it doesn’t break down and the carbon captured in its growth stays sequestered. I don’t know how much carbon from our local kelp forests stays sequestered for long. How well local eel grass meadows sequester carbon is unclear.


In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks January 20th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 27th. The substitute, which matches the one for HB1661, would focus the Conservation Plan on native species; have it address current conservation efforts; and identify research needed on native seaweed aquaculture. It specifies consultation and adds reporting requirements. Referred to Ways and Means. Had a hearing there February 5th. Amended and passed out of committee February 7th. (The amendment has DNR map both native and non-native eelgrass and kelp throughout the Sound and along the coast and allows it to use that mapping  in establishing the health and conservation plan.)  Referred to Rules; passed the Senate unanimously February 10th.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources February 18th; passed out of committee February 23rd. Referred to Appropriations. Amended to make it null and void if funding isn’t appropriated for it, and passed out of committee February 28th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House March 2nd.

Summary –
Original bill –
The bill would require the Department of Natural Resources to work with partners to establish a kelp forest and eelgrass meadow health and conservation plan that tries (subject to available funding) to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.

They would develop a framework to identify and prioritize kelp forest areas in greatest need of conservation or restoration, mapping areas throughout Puget Sound and along the coast where they were historically present, identifying priority locations for restoration that are at highest risk of permanent loss, or that contribute significant environmental, economic, and cultural benefits to tribal nations and local communities; locations where opportunities for partnership and collaboration exist, and locations where restoration would most benefit nearshore ecosystem function including salmon recovery, water quality, and other ecosystem benefits. They would identify potential stressors impacting the health and vitality of forests and meadows in prioritized areas in order to specifically address them in conservation and restoration efforts.

The department would collaborate with impacted tribal nations, and other local and regional partners, to address conservation and restoration needs in the priority areas and the appropriate tools and partnerships to address them. In developing coordinated actions and success measures, it would assess and inventory existing tools for conserving and restoring these ecosystems and reducing stressors related to their decline; identify new or amended tools that would support the goals of the plan; and identify success measures to track progress toward them.

The department would submit a report to the Office of Financial Management and the appropriate committees of the Legislature by December 1, 2022, including a map and justification of identified priority areas, an approach to monitoring the areas that are meeting the criteria for conservation or restoration established in the plan, and activities to be undertaken consistent with the plan. A final version of the plan would have to be submitted to OFM and these committees by December 1, 2023.

The department would continue to monitor kelp forests and eelgrass meadows to inform adaptive management of the plan and coordinated partner actions, and submit a report every two years including an updated map of distributions and trends; a summary of success measures and findings, including relevant information from the prioritization process; an updated list summarizing potential stressors, prioritized areas, and corresponding coordinated actions and success measures; an update on the number of acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows conserved by region, including restoration or loss in priority areas; an update on consultation with impacted tribal nations and local communities; any barriers to plan implementation; and legislative or administrative recommendations to address those barriers.

HB1723

HB1723 – Increasing the accessibility and affordability of telecommunications services, devices, and training through reduced rates, grants, and planning programs.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Gregerson (D; 33rd District; South King County) (Co-Sponsors Representative Taylor & Ryu – Ds)
Current status – House concurred in the Senate changes.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Community & Economic Development January 11th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 18th. The substitute no longer requires utilities to provide services to low-income persons at a reduced rate determined by the UTC; adds eight more types of anchor institutions, adds three sorts of people to the definition of underserved populations, and adds pre-kindergarten students to those that must be considered when awarding grants. Had a hearing in Appropriations January 27th. Replaced by a second substitute making the bill null and void if specific funding for weren’t appropriated and passed out of committee February 1st. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor and passed by the House February 12th. (The floor amendments allowed the program to assist low-income people with the cost of services through other means in addition to rate reductions; would have telecommunications providers determine rates for eligible services rather than the UTC; would no longer allow the UTC to exclude a provider from the program because of excessive charges or poor customer service; and would make the program subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for it.)

In the Senate – Passed
Scheduled but not heard in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 23rd. Replaced by a striker and passed out of committee February 24th. (The striker no longer requires telecommunications providers providing eligible voice and broadband, when enrolling new customers to inform new customers of these and other reduced rate options, and no longer requires them to submit specified information toverifying the eligibility of low-income customers. It no longer requires DSHS to verify low income eligibility or to reimburse providers for the difference between the reduced rates and regular prices, and it makes a couple of other small changes.) Referred to Ways and Means; had a hearing there February 26th. Replaced by a striker which eliminates the proposed Anchor Institution Digital Equity Program and the proposed Washington Broadband Assistance Program, requiring the Statewide Broadband Office to to develop and report on a state digital equity plan in consultation with the Digital Equity Forum, the UTC, and DSHS instead. Passed by the Senate March 4th.

Summary –
The bill would establish a Digital Equity Forum to develop recommendations to advance digital connectivity in the state and advise the State Broadband Office, and would create three new digital equity programs.

It would create a broadband assistance program, administered by the Department of Social and Health Services, to provide low-income persons with reduced rates for eligible voice and broadband services. The Utilities and Transportation Commission would determine eligible services and the amount of assistance, considering the number of customers expected to participate, the price of services, other available assistance programs, and other relevant facts. It would adopt guidelines to reduce barriers to enrollment in the program, which might include allowing providers with low-income internet offerings to automatically enroll customers who had already demonstrated eligibility through initial enrollment in another low-income internet offering without additional verification. Telecommunications providers would be required to provide those services to low-income persons at the reduced rate determined by the Commission, to inform customers that they may be eligible for reduced rates, and to provide information to the department for verifying the eligibility of those customers. The Department would reimburse companies for the discounts. (It would not be allowed to limit these customers to one line.) It would consult with the Office of Equity about methods for administering the program to reduce barriers to participation and a plan for outreach, eligibility determination assistance, and enrollment navigation assistance for populations that would be challenged to participate.

If funding were provided, the bill would establish a Digital Equity Forum to develop recommendations to advance digital connectivity in the state and advise the Broadband Office on the digital equity opportunity and digital equity planning grant programs. The directors of the Office and the Washington State Office of Equity would appoint members they agreed on to the Forum, prioritizing representatives from tribes; state agencies involved in digital equity; and underserved and unserved communities. Two State Representatives and two Senators, one from each party, would also be appointed as members by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate.

The Statewide Broadband Office would create and manage an anchor institution digital equity program providing rates discounted by at least 50% for broadband services and 25% for basic telecommunications services to public schools, housing authorities, libraries, medical and health care providers, community colleges and other higher education institutions, and other nonprofit or governmental community support organizations. It could provide partial or full grants for the costs for building, rehabilitating, or maintaining telecommunications infrastructure, prioritizing applications by the extent to which they help expand access to state-of-the-art technologies for rural, inner city, low-income, and disabled residents, and the extent to which any broadband service provided is consistent with the office’s current established goals. (The bill would also slightly expand the purposes of the Statewide Broadband Office to include increasing the adoption of broadband as well as its accessibility, to cover underserved as well as unserved communities, and to allow it to work with public housing agencies. It would allow it to assist applicants for the assistance programs it creates in seeking grants for broadband services, and would have it coordinate an outreach effort providing information about available broadband assistance programs to hard-to-reach and low-income communities, or to contract for that outreach.)

If funding were provided, the bill would have the Department of Commerce establish a digital equity planning grant program for local governments, institutions of higher education, workforce development councils, or other entities to development digital equity plans for discrete regions of the state. Priority would be given to applications accompanied by express support from community or neighborhood-based nonprofit organizations, public development authorities, federally recognized Indian tribes in the state, or other community partners and partners using community-based participatory action research methods as a part of the proposed plan. The Digital Equity Forum would review them and provide input to the department about prioritizing awards. The Department would be required to evaluate and rank applications using objective criteria such as the number of underserved populations served and subjective criteria such as the degree of support and engagement evidenced by the community who will be served; to consider the input provided by the forum; and to consider the extent to which the mix of grants awarded would increase the number of K-12 students gaining access to greater levels of digital inclusion.

The bill would focus the the Department of Commerce’s current community technology opportunity program on advancing broadband adoption, digital equity and inclusion. It would have the Digital Equity Forum review applications for the program’s grants and provide input on prioritizing awards, as well as requiring Commerce to consider that input and the extent to which the mix of awards would increase the number of K-12 students gaining access to greater levels of digital inclusion. It would remove the requirement for matching funds for program grants, and would have the Department provide additional support for evaluating the impact and efficacy of activities supported by the grants; and for developing, cataloging, disseminating, and promoting the exchange of best practices to achieve digital equity. It would explicitly have the Department collaborate with broadband stakeholders in implementing the program, including broadband action teams across the state.

HB1722

HB1722– Requires cities and towns to allow microtrenching for fiber optic cables.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Boehnke (D; 8th District; Tri-Cities) (Co-Sponsor Representative Paul-D)
Current status – Scheduled for a hearing in the Committee on Local Government Wednesday January 26th at 10:00 AM.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5775 is a companion bill in the Senate.

Summary –
The bill would require cities and towns to allow microtrenching for installing fiber optic cable, unless they makes a written finding that allowing it would inconvenience the public use of the right-of-way or adversely affect public health, safety, and welfare. (A microtrench for conduit is no more than four inches wide and between 12 inches and 26 inches deep; they could be shallower if the jurisdiction and the installer agreed to that.) Jurisdictions could charge fees to cover their costs for issuing permits and inspections.

SB5616

SB5616 – Allows using the energy efficiency account permanently for loans, loan guarantees, and grants that reduce greenhouse gas emissions for emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Rolfes (D; 23rd District; Kitsap County) (By request of the Office of Financial Management)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Appropriations February 22nd. Passed out of committee February 24th, and referred to Rules. Passed by the House March 3rd.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in Ways & Means January 17th. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 31st. Referred to Transportation and had a hearing there February 3rd. Replaced by a second substitute making a couple of housekeeping changes and passed out of committee February 7th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate unanimously February 11th.

Summary –

Substitute –
The substitute would make the change allowing the energy efficiency account to be used for projects reducing EITE emissions permanent.

Original bill –
During the next biennium, the bill would allow money in the energy efficiency account to be appropriated and spent on loans, loan guarantees, and grants for projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions for emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries. (It would also create a clean energy transition workforce account to support workers affected by the state’s transition away from fossil fuels to a clean energy economy, and a forest resiliency account dedicated to spending on forest health, carbon sequestration, and any other activities that help protect Washington forests.)

HB1711

HB1711– Allows cities and counties to waive or defer ADU fees; defer taxes; and waive regulations for them, provided that they can’t be used as short-term rentals.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Pollet (D; 46th District; Northeast Seattle) (Co-Sponsor Representative Shewmake -D)
Current status – Passed out of committee and referred to Rules January 21st; still there at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House –
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Local Government January 12th.

Summary –
The bill would allow cities and counties to waive or defer fees for ADUs, including impact fees; defer the payment of taxes on them; or waive specific regulations for them. However, it would only allow these or other local incentives for the development or construction of ADUs if they were subject to binding commitments or covenants preventing their regular use as short-term rentals, and the jurisdiction had a program to audit compliance with those.

(It also removes the current definition of an ADU’s owner as someone with at at least a 50% interest in the property it’s on, and fixes the phrasing about route frequency in the definition of a major transit stop.)

SB5580

SB5580 – Authorizes loans and grants for emergency public works broadband projects, and no longer requires UTC assessments of applications’ technical feasibility.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Wellman (D; 41st District; Mercer Island) (Co-Sponsor Senator Mullet -D) (By request of the Public Works Board)
Current status – Referred to Rules. Still there at cutoff; sent to the “X” file February 17th.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1673 is a companion bill in the House.

In the Senate –
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology January 12th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 20th.

Summary –

Substitute –
When the Board was funding emergency public works projects, the substitute would require it to prioritize replacing an existing provider’s damaged infrastructure, and prohibit funding a new provider to overbuild the existing one.

Original bill –
The bill would authorize the board to make low-interest or interest-free loans or grants for emergency public works broadband projects, including the construction, repair, reconstruction, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement to critical broadband infrastructure damaged by unforeseen events.

It would no longer require the board to consult with the Utilities and Transportation Commission to assessments of the technical feasibility of applications and to consider those as part of its evaluations of them.

It would also make financial and commercial information and records supplied by businesses or individuals in applying for loans or program services exempt from disclosure under the public records act, and make very minor changes in the processes for applications and for objections by current providers.

HB1673

HB1673 –Authorizes loans and grants for emergency public works broadband projects, and no longer requires UTC assessments of applications’ technical feasibility.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Ryu (D; 32nd District; Shoreline) (Co-Sponsors Representatives Donaghy -D, Leavitt -D, and Boehnke -R) (By request of the Public Works Board)
Current status – Cancelled hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology on February 17th. Amended to prioritize funding projects that replace existing providers’ damaged infrastructure, specifying that the Board “shall not provide funds to a new provider to overbuild the existing provider,” and passed out of committee February 22nd. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate March 4th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5580 is a companion bill in the Senate.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Community and Economic Development January 11th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 14th. (There’s a staff summary of the substitute’s changes in a memo.) Had a hearing in the Committee on the Capital Budget February 1st, and passed out of committee February 4th. Referred to Rules February 7th. Amended on the floor to allow an existing provider to object to a project if the service they provide or commit to providing meets the State’s 2024 speed standards of 25Mb/sec download and 3Mb/sec upload, rather than the 2028 goals which increase to at least 150Mb/sec in both directions. Passed by the House unanimously February 10th.

Summary –
The bill would authorize the board to make low-interest or interest-free loans or grants for emergency public works broadband projects, including the construction, repair, reconstruction, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement to critical broadband infrastructure damaged by unforeseen events.

It would no longer require the board to consult with the Utilities and Transportation Commission to assessments of the technical feasibility of applications and to consider those as part of its evaluations of them.

It would also make financial and commercial information and records supplied by businesses or individuals in applying for loans or program services exempt from disclosure under the public records act, and make very minor changes in the processes for applications and for objections by current providers.

HB1702

HB1702 – Creates $100 B&O tax credit for each residential broadband installation and tax exemptions for developing and manufacturing broadband satellites.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Boehnke (R; 8th District; Tri-Cities)
Current status – Scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Committee on Labor, Commerce & Tribal Affairs on Monday February 21st at 9:30 AM
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
The bill specifies that most of these benefits only apply to broadband for residences or businesses; however, its final provision would seem to exempt any research and development activities in satellite manufacturing, launch, and communications, of whatever kind, from the B&O tax.

Summary –
The bill would provide a $100 credit against their business and occupation tax to broadband service providers for each new installation that supplies service meeting the State’s speed standards to a residential customer who didn’t already have that.
It would also exempt manufacturing low earth orbit satellites and components used to provide broadband service to a residence or business; antennae or other hardware for receiving signals at these locations; and “research and development activities in satellite manufacturing, launch, and communications” from the B&O tax.

(Each of these tax benefits would be available for six years, until the end of 2027.)

SB5590

SB5590 – Eliminates the expiration date for the Marine Advisory Council, which works on addressing the impacts of ocean acidification.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Wagoner (R; 39th District; parts of Skagit, Snohomish and King Counties)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment and Energy February 24th, and passed out of committee. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House March 4th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in Environment, Energy & Technology January 19th; amended to keep an expiration date, but extend it to 2032, and passed out of committee January 27th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate February 14th.

Comments –
The original section of the law establishing the Council says that it’s to deliver recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature, but it doesn’t actually ever specify what those are supposed to be about…

Summary –
Original bill –
The bill would eliminate the expiration date for the Marine Advisory Council, which works on addressing the impacts of ocean acidification. It’s currently June 30th, 2022.

The Council’s composed of 23 voting members representing State and tribal government, State agencies, and a range of stakeholders, with invited participation as non-voting members by representatives of NOAA and academic institutions conducting scientific research on ocean acidification. It’s to focus in a sustained and coordinated way on increasing the state’s ability to address impacts of ocean acidification; to advise and work with the University of Washington and others to conduct ongoing technical analysis on accidification’s effects and sources; and to deliver recommendations to the Governor and appropriate committees in the Legislature [presumably about ways to address those impacts], identifying actions necessary to implement them, and   taking the differences between in-state and out-of-state impacts and sources into consideration.

The Council’s also to seek public and private funding for resources needed for ongoing technical analysis to support its recommendations; and to help conduct public education about ocean acidification’s impacts,  contributions to those, and implementation strategies “to support the actions adopted by the Legislature”.

It’s to meet at least twice a year, and accept public comment on agenda items and other matters relating to the protection and conservation of the state’s ocean resources.

HB1682

HB1682 – Provides additional free allowances, reduced over time, for emissions-intensive trade-exposed facilities, and allows using cap and invest revenue for reducing their emissions.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Fitzgibbon (D; 34th District; Vashon Island & West Seattle) (Requested by the Department of Ecology)
Current status – Had a hearing in  Environment & Energy Tuesday January 18th. Replaced by a substitute from the prime sponsor and passed out of committee February 1st. Referred to Appropriations, and had a hearing there February 5th. Replaced by a second substitute from the prime sponsor advancing the date for completion of Ecology’s report on alternative methods for managing the distribution of credits to EITEs from 2026 to 2024, providing a detailed statement of legislative intent about criteria for the policies which Ecology is to consider in preparing the report, and making some other changes that are summarized by staff at the beginning of it. Passed out of committee February 28th; referred to Rules.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
Section 26(5) of the Climate Commitment Act (aka the cap and invest bill) prohibited expenditures of the revenues after April 1st, 2023 unless the Legislature had considered and enacted legislation brought forth by Ecology, and developed in consultation with stakeholders, outlining a compliance pathway specific to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed businesses for achieving their proportionate share of the state’s emissions reduction limits through 2050.

Summary –
Substitute –
The substitute would make awards of no cost allowances to facilities using best available technology starting at the fourth compliance period rather than the third, and would replace the general criteria for those with detailed specifications about qualifying and the process; it also makes some minor changes. There’s a staff summary at the beginning of the substitute.

Original bill –
The bill would extend the period during which emissions-intensive trade-exposed businesses receive free allowances to help meet their obligations under the Climate Commitment Act (aka the cap and invest program). The Act stepped down the number of free allowances each facility received during two four year periods, ending January 1st, 2035. (It also prohibited the expenditure of any revenue from the program after April 1st, 2023 unless the Department of Ecology had proposed and the Legislature had enacted a pathway for these facilities to achieve their proportionate share of the state’s emissions reduction limits through 2050.)

In the last of the original Act’s compliance periods, from 2031 through 2034, it required facilities using mass-based estimates of their emissions to get free allowances to cover 94% of their original baseline emissions. (It lowered the free allowances for facilities reporting the carbon intensity of their operations with a 3% reduction from the previous level for each compliance period.) This bill would now grant both kinds of facilities additional free allowances to cover 88% of their emissions during 2035, and then set their free allowances at 6% below the previous year’s level each year until 2050.

The bill shifts from saying Ecology may adjust a facility’s benchmark for a compliance period upward if it demonstrates additional reductions in carbon intensity or mass emissions are not technically or economically feasible to saying that Ecology would be required to adopt rules to provide a process for these adjustments in the third and subsequent periods. (Raising the benchmark reduces the number of allowances a facility needs.) Ecology would be authorized to grant an adjustment based on that determination and other factors including a finding it’s necessary to accommodate for changes in the manufacturing process that have a material impact on emissions; changes to a facility’s external competitive environment that result in a significant increase in leakage risk; or abnormal operating periods when a facility’s carbon intensity has been materially affected. Any adjustments may not increase the total annual allowance budget for the program for any calendar year in the compliance period for which the adjustment was granted or any future calendar year; reduce the progressively equivalent reductions year over year in the annual allowance budgets; or prevent the achievement of this sector’s share of the emissions-intensive and trade-exposed businesses’ proportionate share of the State’s targets. The Department would also be able to adjust the numbers of all these additional free allowances if that was necessary to ensure achievement of this sector’s share of the State’s targets, or to provide for alignment with other jurisdictions to which the state had linked the cap and invest program.

The bill would add programs, activities, or projects that reduce the emissions of emissions-intensive, trade- exposed facilities to the list of those eligible for funding from the revenue generated by the cap and invest program.

It would also eliminate the requirement for a report to the Legislature by December 1, 2026, after consultation with manufacturers, about alternative methods for determining the allowances to be provided to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed facilities from 2035 through 2050, best practices for ensuring against emissions leakage and economic harm to businesses in carbon pricing programs, and alternative methods of emissions benchmarking and mass-based allocation of allowances. It would remove the original Act’s provision for continuing to award free allowances at their level in 2034 if the Legislature doesn’t adopt a program for continuing them by December 1, 2027.

HB1672

HB1672 – Exempts local property tax increases for conservation futures from RCW 84.55.010’s limits on local levies.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Wylie (D; 49th District; Vancouver)
Current status – Had a hearing in Finance January 18th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would exempt local property tax increases for conservation futures from RCW 84.55.010’s limits on local levies.  (That limits a local levy to the amount of the largest property tax in a district during the most recent three years, adjusted for various factors like increased assessed values, times one of several limit factors which depend on the district but are often 1%.)

HB1661

HB1661 – Develop a plan to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources January 18th; replaced by a substitute January 25th. Referred to Appropriations, and had a hearing there February 3rd. Still in committee by cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5619 is a companion bill in the Senate.

Comments –
The findings say:
These marine forests and meadows play an important role in climate mitigation and adaptation by sequestering carbon and relieving ocean acidification. Marine vegetation can sequester up to times more carbon than terrestrial forests, and therefore represent a critical tool in the fight against climate change.
There’s research on using kelp growing on open ocean platforms, where the biomass falls into regions where there’s so little biological activity that it doesn’t break down and the carbon captured in its growth stays sequestered. I don’t know how much carbon from our local kelp forests stays sequestered for long. How well local eel grass meadows sequester carbon is unclear.

Summary –
Substitute –
The substitute would focus the Conservation Plan on native species; have it address current conservation efforts; and identify research needed on native seaweed aquaculture. It specifies consultation and adds reporting requirements.

Original bill –
The bill would require the Department of Natural Resources to work with partners to establish a kelp forest and eelgrass meadow health and conservation plan that tries (subject to available funding) to conserve and restore at least 10,000 acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows by 2040.

They would develop a framework to identify and prioritize kelp forest areas in greatest need of conservation or restoration, mapping areas throughout Puget Sound and along the coast where they were historically present, identifying priority locations for restoration that are at highest risk of permanent loss, or that contribute significant environmental, economic, and cultural benefits to tribal nations and local communities; locations where opportunities for partnership and collaboration exist, and locations where restoration would most benefit nearshore ecosystem function including salmon recovery, water quality, and other ecosystem benefits. They would identify potential stressors impacting the health and vitality of forests and meadows in prioritized areas in order to specifically address them in conservation and restoration efforts.

The department would collaborate with impacted tribal nations, and other local and regional partners, to address conservation and restoration needs in the priority areas and the appropriate tools and partnerships to address them. In developing coordinated actions and success measures, it would assess and inventory existing tools for conserving and restoring these ecosystems and reducing stressors related to their decline; identify new or amended tools that would support the goals of the plan; and identify success measures to track progress toward them.

The department would submit a report to the Office of Financial Management and the appropriate committees of the Legislature by December 1, 2022, including a map and justification of identified priority areas, an approach to monitoring the areas that are meeting the criteria for conservation or restoration established in the plan, and activities to be undertaken consistent with the plan. A final version of the plan would have to be submitted to OFM and these committees by December 1, 2023.

The department would continue to monitor kelp forests and eelgrass meadows to inform adaptive management of the plan and coordinated partner actions, and submit a report every two years including an updated map of distributions and trends; a summary of success measures and findings, including relevant information from the prioritization process; an updated list summarizing potential stressors, prioritized areas, and corresponding coordinated actions and success measures; an update on the number of acres of kelp forests and eelgrass meadows conserved by region, including restoration or loss in priority areas; an update on consultation with impacted tribal nations and local communities; any barriers to plan implementation; and legislative or administrative recommendations to address those barriers.

HB1660

HB1660 – Modifying the State’s limits on local jurisdictions’ ADU requirements.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Housing & Local Government Wednesday February 23rd. Amended to specify that jurisdictions issuing ADU permits aren’t liable if that violates various ownership associations’ existing restrictions on them. Passed out of committee February 23rd; referred to Rules.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5648 is a companion bill in the Senate.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Local Government January 12th; replaced by a substitute January 21st. (The substitute would prohibit local jurisdictions from limiting ADUs in various additional ways; there’s a staff summary of the details at the beginning of the substitute.) Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to prohibit condominium associations or associations of apartment owners from blocking the construction or use of an ADU and passed by the House February 14th.

Original bill –
The bill would extend the date by which cities and counties would have to adopt subsection (2) of RCW 36.70A.698 from July 1, 2021 to July 1, 2024. That subsection allows them to require off-street parking for an ADU within a quarter mile of a major transit stop if they determine that the ADU is in an area that lacks access to street parking capacity, has physical space impediments, or there are other reasons supported by evidence that would make on-street parking infeasible there. (If they changed their rules about ADUs after July 1, 2021, they would have until their next comprehensive plan update to make this additional change. The bill would make the subsection take effect after July 1, 2024 in any jurisdiction that hadn’t adopted the change by then, though.)

The bill would also prohibit cities and counties from requiring owner occupancy of the principal housing or dwelling unit on a lot with an ADU unless it were being offered or used for short-term rental.

HB1663

HB1663 – Reducing methane emissions from landfills.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Duerr (D; 1st District; Bothell) (Co-sponsor Representative Fitzgibbon -D)
Current status – House concurred in the Senate amendments March 9th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
I’ve done my best to summarize this bill, but I wouldn’t swear I’ve got it right…

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 16th, replaced by a striker making minor changes that are summarized at the end of it and passed out of committee February 23rd. Referred to Ways and Means, and had a hearing there February 26th. Amended to make a couple of minor changes and passed out of committee February 28th. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to allow local governments to receive funding from the Climate Commitment Act for installing gas collection devices and gas control systems; to remove the requirement for methane hot spot monitoring and reporting; and to include installation of an energy recovery device as qualifying for the up to two year extension on the deadline for compliance. Passed by the Senate March 4th.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in Environment & Energy; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 20th. (The substitute exempts limited purpose landfills; there’s a staff summary of the other minor changes in it.) Referred to Appropriations, and had a hearing there February 4th. Replaced by a 2nd substitute adding a 3% limit on methane leak rates for gas collection and control system routing gas to energy recovery or treatment systems, and changing the frequency of source testing for gas control devices. Passed out of committee February 5th, and referred to Rules. Amended on the floor, to change the frequency of required source testing in municipal landfills from three years to five years, unless they’re non-compliant, in which case they must be tested annually until they comply two years in a row. Passed by the House February 11th.

Summary –
The bill applies to municipal solid waste landfills and to limited purpose landfills that received waste after January 1st 1997, and receive or have received nothing but solid waste that isn’t inert or hazardous. If one contains less than 450,000 tons of waste, its owner or operator has to do an annual waste in place report. Landfills with more waste have to include a calculation of their gas heat input capacity in their report. (That’s the gross heating value of the methane emissions, which can be calculated in various ways.) If that’s more than 300,000 btus/hour recovered and there’s any measured concentration of methane over 200 parts/million by volume from the surface of one of these larger active, inactive, or closed landfills over four consecutive quarterly readings, they have to install a gas collection and control system, conduct instantaneous and integrated surface monitoring of the landfill surface, monitor the gas control system, and monitor each individual wellhead to determine the gauge pressure.

Collection and control systems have to handle the expected gas flow rate from the entire area of the landfill, be designed and operated so that there is no gas leak that exceeds 500 parts/million by volume at any component under pressure, and collect gas at a rate that keeps the instantaneous monitoring of surface methane (other than nonrepeatable, momentary readings) below 500 parts/million by volume ; or maintains an average methane concentration determined by integrated surface emissions monitoring below 25 parts/million by volume. (The requirements don’t apply to the working face of the landfill or areas where the cover’s been removed to work on systems or for law enforcement excavations.

Ecology or the local authority would have to allow the capping or removal of the gas collection and control system at a closed municipal solid waste landfill or limited purpose landfill, if the system had been in operation for at least 15 years, or the owner or operator demonstrated  that system would be unable to operate for that long due to declining methane rates; the surface methane concentration measurements were below the act’s limits; and they submitted an equipment removal report.

The bill would exempt these landfill emissions from the cap and invest program, but it would expand the law that allows Ecology to impose civil penalties of up to $10,000 a day for violations of the Clean Air Act to include violations of these landfill emissions regulations, of  the Clean Fuels Act, and of the rules governing burning permits (RCW 76.04.205). (I  don’t know why it includes this last item, since that RCW already authorizes these penalties.)

Ecology would develop rules for implementing the bill, and for the monitoring procedures; it could collect fees to cover its costs. Owners or operators of these landfills would  have to maintain records on monitoring, testing, landfill operations, and the operation of any gas control or collection device or system. They would have to notify Ecology if the landfill closes, and if they remove or shut down a gas control system. They could request alternatives to the requirements, which Ecology could evaluate on the basis of factors including their compliance history; documentation containing the landfill gas flow rate and measured methane concentrations for individual gas collection wells or components; permits; component testing and surface monitoring results; gas collection and control system operation, maintenance, and inspection records; and historical meteorological data.

HB1657

HB1657 – Reducing the emissions and the safety risks of insufficient overnight commercial truck parking through tax incentives.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Griffey (R; 35th District; Mason County)
Current status – Had a hearing in Finance Tuesday January 25th at 1:30. Amended to increase the minimum qualifying parking space dimensions to 12 feet wide and 70 feet long, and passed out of committee February 4th. Referred to Rules February 7th; still there at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
The findings include a reference to a 2016 survey by the Department of Transportation in which over 60% of truckers reported spending an hour or more per day looking for parking.

The current language of the bill would seem to exempt any buildings on a piece of property that included a qualified truck parking lot from real and personal property taxes, not just the part of it with the actual lot. It doesn’t say anything about how affordable the charging or hydrogen fueling needs to be, about what capacity for charging or refueling some or all of the trucks is required, or that the spaces need to be in a location where they are used by truckers. The intent to continue the incentives isn’t tied to any evidence that 1,000 additional parking spaces would not have been developed in any case.

The exemptions are subject to the standard review by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee. For that, a new tax preference performance statement is supposed to “specify clear, relevant, and ascertainable metrics and data requirements that allow the committee and the Legislature to measure [its] effectiveness in achieving the designated purpose of the exemption.” In relation to this review requirement the bill specifies the tax preference as “intended to provide incentives to increase safe overnight truck parking capacity.”

Summary –
The bill would exempt all real and personal property “upon which there are at least 10 safe, overnight commercial truck parking spaces constructed” from taxes on their value starting with the taxes due in 2023, and continuing until a year after the Secretary of the Department of Transportation certified to the Department of Revenue that the state has sufficient safe, overnight commercial truck parking for its freight delivery needs of the state or January 1, 2033, whichever is sooner. It would exempt the sales of materials and labor used to construct a parking lot with at least ten qualified commercial or port district truck parking spaces from sales and use taxes, if they were accessible and suitable for overnight use, and allowed for charging electric batteries or fuel cells. It adds all leasehold interests in real property owned by a port and used by a tenant to provide qualified port district truck parking spaces to the current list of interests exempt from the leasehold excise tax.

The bill declares the Legislature’s intent to extend the incentive if the number of truck parking spaces suitable for overnight use grows by at least 1,000 spaces while it’s in place, and at least half of the spaces developed have hydrogen fueling access or electric charging access.

Details –
The exemptions would apply to spaces on which substantial construction work began while they were in place; spaces would have to be at least 11′ by 54′; port district spaces would only have to be accessible and available to any commercial truck authorized to be on port property.

SJM8007

SJM8007 – Senate Joint Memorial urging the Federal government to move forward with steps to manage and permanently store spent fuel from commercial nuclear plants.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Brown (R; 8th District; Tri-Cities & Benton County)
Current status – Referred to Environment, Energy & Technology.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would urge Congress and the Secretary of Energy to implement the recommendations of a 2021 study by the Government Accountability Office on commercial spent nuclear fuel.

That recommended Congress consider:
(1) Amending the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to authorize the Department of Energy to initiate a new consent-based process for siting, developing, and constructing new consolidated interim storage and permanent repository facilities;
(2) Creating an independent board to ensure the long-term continuity of leadership for managing spent nuclear fuel;
(3) Restructuring the Nuclear Waste Fund so funds used to develop, construct, and operate a permanent repository are based on the spent nuclear fuel program’s life-cycle costs; and
(4) Directing the Department of Energy to develop and implement an integrated waste management strategy.

HB1644

HB1644 – Allows using the transportation vehicle fund to plan for clean student transportation vehicles, and to develop charging and fueling infrastructure for them.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Senn (D; 41st District; Mercer Island) (Co-sponsor Rep. Ybarra (R; 13th District; Quincy)
Current status – House concurred in the Senate amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in Appropriations January 24th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 27th. Referred to Rules; passed the House 94 to 2 on February 9th.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Early Learning & K-12 Education February 18th; passed out of committee February 23rd. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to include converting or repowering existing fossil fuel pupil transportation vehicles to electric or zero-emission ones, and passed by the Senate March 2nd.

Summary –
The bill specifies that the transportation vehicle fund can also be used to complete a feasibility plan to transition from gas or diesel student transportation vehicles to electric or alternative fuel ones; and for the purchase, installation, and repair of charging and fueling stations for those, as well as other costs necessary for station installation. The amendment in Appropriations simply replaced “alternative fuel vehicles and fueling stations” with “zero emission vehicles and fueling stations.”

SB5543

SB5543 – Creates a program providing rebates for new all electric landscaping equipment in exchange for operating gas and diesel equipment that would be scrapped or recycled.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Carlyle (D; 36th District; Northwest Seattle)
Current status – Scheduled for a hearing in Ways and Means on Thursday February 17th at 4:00 PM.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate –
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology January 11th. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 20th. (The substitute would  convert the rebate for new equipment to a point of sale incentive, structured as a B&O credit on sales of discounted new equipment, limited to one item a year per customer. The credit would be limited to $50,000 per retailer, capped at $2 million altogether, and usable until the end of 2024.)

Summary –
The bill would establish a cash for clunkers pilot exchange program providing rebates for new all electric landscaping equipment, if funds were appropriated for that purpose. (It would be eligible for funding from the Climate Commitment Act – aka the cap and trade program.)

The program would cover edgers, trimmers, chainsaws, and pole saws; leaf blowers and vacuums; walk-behind mowers; ride-on or stand-ride mowers; additional batteries and chargers; and any other equipment approved by the Department of Ecology. Residents who turned in any operable gasoline or diesel landscaping equipment to be scrapped would be eligible for one rebate of $100 on any new piece of all electric equipment costing up to $300 including tax, or a rebate of $200 on a more expensive piece. Commercial landscapers could turn in up to three pieces and get up to three rebates.

The Department of Ecology would administer the program, and could coordinate doing that with local clean air agencies, or regional offices where a local clean air agency doesn’t exist. The department would be required to maintain a public list of retailers that agreed to take old gasoline or diesel equipment for recycling or disposal, and to track the effectiveness of the program by estimating emissions reductions from the exchanges.

Governor’s 2022 Policy and Budget Proposal

Governor’s 2022 Policy and Budget Proposal

Text of the policy brief.

Summary  –
Building decarbonization
Require all new construction to be  ‘net-zero ready’ beginning in 2034, by reducing energy use by 80%, using all-electric equipment and appliances, implementing electrical panel capacity and wiring for solar panels, and incorporating electric vehicle charging and battery storage. Create a state-wide residential reach code with additional requirements for efficiency that local jurisdictions could choose to adopt. ($753,000)

Expand the current performance standards for buildings over 50,000 sq. ft. to cover non-residential and multifamily buildings between 20,000 and 49,999 sq.ft. Provide technical assistance and funding to building owners, prioritized to serve overburdened communities and low-income populations that experience disproportionate environmental harms, and including anti-displacement provisions to protect tenants as a condition of funding. ($1.7 million) Issue $10 million in bonds to leverage utility and Federal weatherization funding for 5,000 low-income households, and provide consumer education about energy efficiency. Issue $16.8 million in bonds to fund energy efficiency work at state agency facilities.

Allow consumer owned utilities to fund incentive programs to switch customers from fossil fuels to clean, efficient electric space and water heating, as investor-owned and co-op utilities currently can. Require gas utilities to create decarbonization plans every four years, subject to review, approval, and enforcement by the UTC. ($308,000)

Implement the Climate Commitment Act (aka the cap and trade program)

Create an Office of Climate Commitment Accountability to align and strengthen existing climate laws, rules, and policies; prioritize funding to reduce emissions and address climate risks; comprehensively engage overburdened communities; work with agencies to develop and implement a biennial strategic climate work plan with performance milestones and accountability measures, and identify how state law can be improved to support the state’s climate commitment. ($1.9 million)

Allow Ecology to use cap and trade revenues to fund work the Act requires on how emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries (EITEs) must reduce their share of the state’s emissions through 2050. Create a $50 million grant program to help them plan and implement decarbonization strategies.

Pass legislation developed in consultation with the tribes improving the process in the original Act that Inslee vetoed. It would include protecting sacred sites, elevating disputes to the governor and elected tribal leaders, engaging in mediation, and requiring funding applicants to notify tribes early about projects that may impact their rights and interests. The  Governor’s budget includes funding for tribes to engage with this process, and for additional staff at the  Office of Indian Affairs to help with engagement and consultation. ($4.2 million)

Provide additional funding for for air quality monitoring in impacted communities ($2 million) , and for the Department of Ecology’s and Natural Resources’ new responsibilities under the Act. ($3.7 million)

Invest in clean transportation -.

Provide $100 million a year for point of sale rebates for EVs with an MSRP under $55,000 for sedans and $80,000 for vans, SUVs and pickup trucks.These rebates would be available to people who earn under $250,000 per year as a single-tax filer, or under $500,000 as joint filers, and would provide $7,500 for new all electric and fuel cell vehicles, $5,000 for used ones, and $1,000 for zero-emission motorcycles and e-bikes. People with incomes below $61,000 (60% of state median income) would get an additional $5,000 rebate for a new or used EV. Provide $4.2 million to develop implementation plans to transition state fleets to zero-emission vehicles, build out electric vehicle charging infrastructure, maintain chargers, and manage the program.

Use at least half of the $127.3 million in new funds expected to be generated by the cap and trade program in the last quarter of the biennium for transportation activities in overburdened communities. Provide $324 million in new support from the General Fund for ferry electrification projects. Provide $33 million in additional capital and planning grants to help transit agencies shift to alternative fuel buses; $45 million in additional funding for safe routes to school and bicycle and pedestrian safety grants; $10 million to fund a new transit access grant program; and $30 million in additional funding for special needs transit grants, with at least half of each of these set aside to support transitions in overburdened communities. The budget proposal also includes $29 million in additional funding to support EV charging infrastructure, education, outreach, and EV adoption; $7.2 million to fund state bikeways and trail networks; and $4 million in bonds to support the Mount Vernon Library Commons Project, which includes 75 EV charging stations along I-5. (Much of this additional funding would come from new revenue from the cap and trade program.)

Investments in clean energy –

Make the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council a standalone agency with dedicated funding; add tribal government representatives to the council; and improve its processes in various ways, including adding procedures for different kinds of clean energy projects and tribal consultation requirements. ($1 million)

Fund additional staff at Fish and Wildlife to help with mitigation decisions for solar facility proposals to enable clean energy generation and protect shrub-steppe habitats.The Department of Ecology would also get new staff to enhance clean energy siting and help with permits. The Department of Commerce would be funded to conduct a study of the benefits of agrivoltaics, the dual use of land for agriculture and solar energy. ($902,000).

Support a sales-and-use tax deferral for projects to construct clean energy manufacturing facilities, store renewable energy, and produce clean fuels and renewable and green electrolytic hydrogen. Issue $17.6 million in bonds to fund an aluminum smelter restart project in Whatcom County which will reduce emissions by at least 750,000 tons per year and fund the development of infrastructure by the Grant County PUD to support construction of a solar manufacturing facility.

Provide $100 million in grants for solar and energy systems to utilities, tribes, school districts, local governments, state agencies, housing authorities and nonprofits. These would include projects that provide benefits to overburdened communities and vulnerable populations, as well as priority funding for tribes and rural communities. Fund the Workforce Training and Educating Coordinating Board and Department of Commerce to develop a workforce development, training and transition plan in consultation with stakeholders. ($407,000) Provide $24.8 million to the Clean Energy Transition Workforce Account to directly support workers and their eligible expenses. Fund construction of a battery fabrication testbed for testing the performance of new battery technology at the University of Washington Clean Energy Institute with $7.5 million in bonds and $3.5 million from the general fund.

There’s a summary of all the Governor’s 2022 supplemental capital and operating budget proposals, including a number of additional smaller items, at the end of the policy brief.

SB5528

SB5528 – Allows a regional transit authority to create enhanced service zones with improved service from rail or high capacity systems, to be approved by residents of the zone and financed by them.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Pedersen (D; 43rd District; Seattle); Co-Sponsor Rep. Liias (D; 21st District; Everett)
Current status – Senate concurred in the House amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB2062 is a companion bill in the House.

Comments –
It’s hard to see how the operators of commercial parking facilities without attendants are supposed to be able to keep track of how many of the vehicles that used them were exempt from a commercial parking tax.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Transportation February 24th; passed out of committee the 28th. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to prevent a regional transit authority from proceeding with improvements financed by an enhanced service zone if they will delay the estimated completion date of high capacity improvements in an existing voter-approved regional transit plan by more than six months rather than preventing this if it would create a material and unreasonable delay. Passed by the House March 3rd.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Transportation  January 13th; replaced by a substitute making changes that are summarized by staff at the beginning of it, and passed out of committee February 7th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate February 11th.

Summary –
The bill would authorize regional transit authorities to create enhanced zones to improve rail or high capacity service in ways that directly benefited residents of the zone. A zone would have to be recommended to the authority by an advisory committee whose members represented the proposed zone, and then authorized in a special election by the voters in the zone. The improvements would be financed by increasing the maximum rate of the local special motor vehicle excise tax available to regional transit authorities in counties with a population over 1.5 million from .85% to 1.5% within the enhanced zone, and/or through a local commercial parking tax.

The parking tax could be imposed as a tax on commercial parking businesses in the zone, based on the number of stalls or gross proceeds, or as a tax “for the act or privilege of parking a motor vehicle in a facility operated by a commercial parking business.” In that case, it would still be collected and paid by operator of the facility, but it might be a fee per vehicle or proportional to the charge for parking, and might vary according to a number of reasonable factors including the facility’s location, the time of day, or the duration of the parking. It would also apply to leased spaces as well as temporary parking, unless those were for buildings’ residents. Carpools, vehicles with a disabled parking placard, and government vehicles would be exempt.

An enhanced service zone would have to be within the transit authority’s boundaries and include at least all of a city or town within them; it could also include one or more entire adjacent cities or towns and adjacent unincorporated areas. There might also be multiple enhanced service zones encompassing the same city or town, or adjacent unincorporated area.

HB1623

HB1623 – Requires the next annual meeting of Commerce, the UTC, electric utilities, and other stakeholders to specifically address the extent to which we’re at risk of rolling blackouts and power supply inadequacy events.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Mosbrucker (R; 14th District; Klickitat County) (Co-sponsor Rep. Fitzgibbon – D)
Current status – Vetoed by the Governor.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment & Energy January 11th; replaced by a substitute eliminating language in the findings stressing risks and adding language about the benefits of transitioning off fossil fuels and steps that are reducing risks, and passed out of committee January 14th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House February 10th.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 16th, and passed out of committee the 22nd. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate March 1st.

Summary –
RCW 19.280.065 requires the Department of Commerce and the UTC to convene a meeting with utilities and other stakeholders at least once a year to discuss the current, short-term, and long-term adequacy of energy resources to serve the state’s electric needs, and address specific steps the utilities can take to coordinate planning. The convenors provide a summary of each meeting, and any recommended actions, to the Governor and the Legislature.

This bill would require the meeting in 2022 to address the extent to which we’re at risk of rolling blackouts and power supply inadequacy events; survey stakeholders for recommendations on policy options to prevent severe blackouts; focus discussion on the extent to which an aggressive timeline for building and transportation system electrification may require new state policies for resource adequacy; and seek to identify regulatory and statutory incentives to enhance and ensure resource adequacy and reliability during a clean energy transition. (It would also make the requirement for annual meetings expire January 1, 2030 rather than January 1, 2025.)

HB1620

HB1620 – Creates an extreme weather response grant program to help fund community cooling and heating centers.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Leavitt (D; 28th District; Tacoma) (Co-sponsors Reps. Boehnke – R & Shewmake – D)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on State Government & Elections  February 16th, and passed out of committee the 23rd. Referred to Ways and Means; had  a hearing there February 26th; passed out of committee the 28th. Referred to Rules.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Community & Economic Development on January 12th; passed out of committee January 14th. Referred to Appropriations. Had a hearing there January 24th, was amended to add activities needed for safety if there’s “severe poor air quality from wildfire smoke” to the list of reimbursable local costs. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of Appropriations January 27th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House February 9th.

Summary –
If funding were appropriated for it, the State Military Department would develop and implement an extreme weather response grant program to help counties, cities, and towns that have emergency management organizations; joint local emergency management associations; and tribes with the costs of responding to community needs during periods of extremely hot or cold weather. Funding would be available to communities that could demonstrate they lacked the resources to address those needs and the costs were incurred to benefit socially vulnerable populations.

Grants could be provided through the State’s disaster response account for establishing and operating warming and cooling centers, including renting equipment, buying supplies and water, staffing, and other associated costs; transporting people to centers; buying fans or other supplies needed for cooling of congregate living settings; providing emergency temporary housing; and other activities necessary for life safety during extremely hot or cold weather.

HB1631

HB1631 – Creates a sustainable farms and fields advisors network to assist interested food producers and processors.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County)
Current status – Referred to Appropriations. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
The bill contains a list of things the advisors are supposed to do, but it also says interlocal agreements between each group of conservation districts are supposed to set the workload and priorities for the advisor that group hires.

In the House –
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Rural Development January 11th; passed out of committee January 26th.

Summary –
The bill would create a sustainable farms and fields advisors network to help agricultural producers and food processors increase energy efficiency, use green energy, sequester carbon, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The State Conservation Commission would develop the network and groups of adjacent conservation districts would each hire, host, and share the services of an advisor. The advisors would consult with interested farmers and food processors to help them develop sustainable farms and fields plans to reduce their carbon footprint by increasing energy efficiency, increasing their utilization and production of green energy, sequestering carbon, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. They would also inform conservation districts, farmers, and food processors about local, state, and federal funding opportunities, including the State’s sustainable farms and fields grants (assuming that program was funded this session), to help achieve these goals. Each group of districts would establish a committee to develop a prioritized list of farmers and food processors interested in working with the advisor, and each advisor’s workload and priorities would be set according to an interlocal agreement established between those districts.

The Commission would hire a coordinator for the advisors, who would also be responsible for disseminating current information about energy efficiency and climate-smart practices and funding opportunities, applying for grants, writing progress reports, and other needed activities. In consultation with Washington State and the University of Washington, the Commission would evaluate and update the most appropriate carbon equivalency metric to apply to the sustainable farms and fields grant program by July 1, 2024. (Unless it identified a better metric, it would consider the storage of 3.67 tons of biogenic carbon for one hundred years as the equivalent of avoiding one ton of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, and calculate annual storage as a linear proportion of that.)

The Commission would report to the Legislature and the Governor every two years on the sustainable farms and fields grant program and the advisors, including grants awarded, projects funded, greenhouse gas emissions reduced, and carbon sequestered. It would also update, at least annually, a public list of projects and pertinent information including a summary of state and federal funds, private funds spent, landowner and other private cost-share matching expenditures, the total number of projects, and an estimate of carbon sequestered or emissions reduced.

HB1619 – 2022

HB1619 – Updates some State appliance efficiency standards and adds others.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Fitzgibbon (D; 34th District; Vashon Island, Southwest Seattle) Co-Sponsor Representative Hackney (D; 11th District; South Seattle, Tukwila)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 16th, and passed out of committee the 22nd. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate March 1st.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House  –
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment & Energy January 11th; substitute passed out of committee January 14th. (The substitute exempts kitchen range hoods, removes cables with plugs for regular household 15 and 20 amp circuits from the efficiency requirements, and removes the original bill’s exemption for publicly available chargers.) Referred to Rules, amended by the prime sponsor on the floor and passed by the House February 10th. ( The floor amendment exempts EV charging cords that plug into standard household 120 V outlets from the requirements, and allows Commerce to delay or suspend requirements in the public interest.)

Summary –
Original bill –
The bill would remove the State’s current efficiency requirements for residential pool pumps and uninterruptible power supplies. It would require portable air purifiers, commercial ovens, and electrical vehicle supply equipment to meet the current Energy Star standards as of January 1, 2024. It would expand the definition of residential ventilating fans to include fans supplying inside air as well as exhaust fans, and have them reach the most recent Energy Star standard by January 1, 2024. It would update the requirements for portable electric spas by reference to the recent update of California’s standard, and change the requirement for commercial hot food holding cabinets from 40 watts/cubic foot to the Energy Star standard (version 2.0).

SB5526

SB5526 – Requires a report to the Legislature on the global availability of lithium and rare earth minerals used in battery manufacturing.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Fortunato (R; 31st District; Auburn)
Current status – Had a hearing in Business, Financial Services & Trade January 20th. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee February 1st. Referred to Rules; still there at cutoff. Sent to the “X” file February 17th.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comment –
I hope the study will take account of recent work by Amory Lovins, the founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute, about how the substitution of other materials, technological innovations, and increasing recycling are rapidly reducing the need for rare minerals in these applications. (See “RMI Reality Check: Greener, Friendlier Alternatives Exist for Rare Minerals in Batteries“)

Summary –
Substitute –
The substitute would also have Commerce research successful approaches and methods used to develop infrastructure for recycling EV batteries, including incentives for manufacturers to extract critical materials from them for reuse and requirements for designing them to support recycling. It would have the Department collaborate with Ecology in drafting legislation to establish a statewide recycling program for EV batteries, and allow collaborating with PNNL and the Joint Center for the Deployment and Research in Earth Abundant Materials as well. It specifies that this work is subject to appropriation, and requires a report to the Legislature by June 30th 2023.

Original bill –
The bill would require the Department of Commerce to report to the Legislature on the global availability of lithium and rare earth minerals used in battery manufacturing, since “the State is increasingly encouraging new energy storage technologies such as electric vehicles and electric grid scale battery storage … dependent on rare earth minerals and difficult-to-source earth components.”

HB1603

HB1603 – Shifting funding obligations for non-highway transportation programs from the transportation budget to the general fund.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Barkis (R; 2nd District; Southern Pierce County, Yelm & Lacey) (Co-sponsor Rep. Stokesbary – R, Auburn)
Current status – Referred to Appropriations.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would shift funding obligations for non-highway transportation programs from the transportation budget to the general fund. Beginning July 2025, the general fund would be responsible for financing projects that correct fish barriers on public lands; Americans with Disabilities Act upgrades to transportation facilities; new buildings where primarily state transportation employees work; mobility and public transit-related grants, social services, and programs, such as regional mobility grants, rural mobility grants, vanpool grants, and any pilot or expired grants that are to be continued; programs designated as green or clean fuel programs, such as green transportation capital grants, the clean alternative fuel vehicle charging and refueling infrastructure program, and the clean alternative fuel car sharing program for underserved and low-income communities; programs that provide tax incentives for the purchase or lease of battery electric or alternative fuel vehicles, as well as for other equipment that supports vehicle conversions to alternative fuels; safe routes to schools grants; bicycle and pedestrian pathways that are not an integrated part of a highway project or are administered by any agency other than the department of transportation; capital and operation costs for intercity passenger rail service; assistance funding for freight rail programs; and stormwater facility upgrades and maintenance near highways where untreated runoff containing 6 CPPD and 6 CPPD quinone is killing significant amounts of salmon. It would allow any projects in the nickel, transportation partnership, and connecting Washington transportation packages to get additional appropriations from the general fund if the funding for them through the transportation appropriations act was insufficient to pay for their associated obligations .

The bill would establish a legislative work group to implement the transition. In particular, the bill would replace the annual transfers from the transportation multi-modal account of $2.5 million for rail capital improvements; $45 million for the regional mobility grant program; and $10 million for the rural mobility grant program with transfers from the general fund. It would stop providing the general fund with payments from the electric vehicle account in the transportation budget to cover the lost revenue from the tax exemptions for light and medium duty fuel cell plug-in electric vehicles. It would stop providing the general fund with payments from the multi-modal account in the transportation budget to cover the lost revenue from the sales and use tax exemptions for commercial clean alternative fuel vehicles (which are currently capped at $32.5 million), and for the the lost revenue from the tax exemptions for alternative fuel infrastructure (which are currently capped at $32.5 million).

The bill also declares the Legislature’s intent to fund commute trip reduction programs from the general fund, along with currently expired multi-modal pilot programs (if they’re ever renewed), such as the student ORCA card pilot program, the transit coordination grant program, and the green transportation capital grant program.

SJM8006

SJM8006 – Senate Joint Memorial expressing support for a National Infrastructure Bank.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Hasegawa (D; 11th District; Seattle)
Current status – Had a hearing in the House Committee on Consumer Protection & Business February 21st; passed out of committee the 23rd. Referred to Rules.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the Senate – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Business, Financial Services & Trade January 13th. Passed out of committee January 25th, and passed by the Senate February 15th.

Summary –
Original bill –
The bill would communicate the Legislature’s support for the creation of a National Infrastructure Bank, and its reasons for that support, to the President and both houses of the United States Congress.

SB5495

SB5495 – Prohibits scrap metal dealers from buying a catalytic converter from anyone but a business or the owner of the vehicle from which it came.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Jeff Wilson (R; 19th District; Southwest Washington)
Current status – Had a hearing in Law & Justice January 25th; replaced by a substitute, passed out of committee, and referred to Ways and Means February 3rd. Had a hearing February 5th; replaced by a 2nd substitute and passed out of committee February 7th. Referred to Rules. Sent to the X file February 17th
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1815 addresses converter thefts, by requiring unique identifying marks on them and creating a task force on the issue; so does HB1873, which is identical to this bill except that it would make a second or subsequent violation of the current law’s prohibitions on removing identifying marks from metal property, or entering into a transaction where they’ve been deliberately and conspicuously altered, a Class C felony. See also HB1994.

Summary –
Substitutes –
The initial substitute would have made unlawful possession and attempting the unlawful sale or purchase of a catalytic converter crimes. It appropriated $4 million to have the State Patrol develop a comprehensive enforcement strategy targeting metal theft, including a grant and training program for local law enforcement and a database on people who attempt to purchase or sell unlawfully obtained metals or attempt to conduct transactions under the influence of controlled substances. It removed a couple of the original’s new regulations on scrap metal businesses.

The 2nd Substitute (which I’m assuming overrides a couple of successful previous amendments to the first substitute in the same session) reduces the appropriation to $2 million; shifts the administration of the law enforcement strategy targeting metal theft and the grant program to the Criminal Justice Training Commission and the responsibility for the database to Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs; and makes a couple of other small changes in the rules about metal transactions.

Original bill –
The bill expands the regulations about scrap metal dealers to prohibit them from buying a catalytic converter from anyone but a commercial enterprise or the owner of the vehicle from which it came. (The owner would have to provide the year, make, model, and vehicle identification number for the vehicle.) It adds precious metals to the dealers’ reporting requirements for “private metal property” and “non-ferrous metal property” transactions (though it doesn’t specify that addition each time those others are specified). It requires a five day delay before cash payments can be made for these materials, and requires keeping records of them for at least three years.

It makes it a gross misdemeanor, and a civil infraction subject to a $1,000 fine, for any scrap metal business and for any owner, partner, or employee of one to purchase or receive private metal property knowing that it’s stolen.

SB5494

SB5494 – Prohibits products that contain olefins derived from methanol manufactured from natural gas.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Jeff Wilson (R; 19th District; Southwest Washington)
Current status – Referred to Environment, Energy & Technology.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would prohibit the sale or distribution of products containing olefins derived from methanol manufactured from natural gas, on the grounds (according to the bill’s findings) that the Department of Ecology refused to permit the proposed Kalama methanol plant because “the manufacturing process does not comply with Washington’s rules for reducing global emissions” and that it’s only consistent for us to not support its being done anywhere else.

SB5493

SB5493 – Reopens the Renewable Energy System Incentive Program, but only for residential systems.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Jeff Wilson (R; 19th District; Southwest Washington)
Current status – Referred to Environment, Energy & Technology.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The Renewable Energy System Incentive Program established by ESSB 5729 in 2017 for residential and commercial renewable energy projects and for community solar projects reached its $100 million cap early in 2019, though the bill would have allowed new enrollments for another two and a half years if the funding had not been used up. This bill would reopen the program for residential systems only.

It would place a new $100 million cap on the program as a whole. Incentives would still be distributed to customers by participating utilities, with funding for those provided to each utilitiy as credits against its taxes, up to an annual limit of one and one-half percent of its power sales in 2014 or $250,000, whichever was greater. The reopened program would phase down the incentives in the same way, going from $0.16/kWh for systems certified in 2022 down to $0.10/kWh in 2025, and stepping the Made in Washington bonus from $0.05/kWh down to $0.02/kWh. Annual payments for a residential system would still be limited to $5,000. There would still be a one-time application fee of $125.

Details –
Utility participation in the program is still voluntary. Puget Sound Energy submitted a letter withdrawing from it in December 2019. (Apparently, PSE and some other utilities withdrew from the program because the law required the Energy Program to keep accepting applications after the money for funding them ran out, confusing people and supporting some misleading sales pitches by some bad actors; withdrawing from the program shut down applications in a utility’s service territory.) I don’t know if they’ll renew their participation now or not, though it would seem likely. A comment on the WSU Energy Program’s web page about its administration of the  program does make it sound as if residential projects on PSE’s waiting list at that point might well be eligible for a renewed program.

The bill drops the requirements for a report on the program to the Legislature.

SB5492

SB5492 – Requires Ecology to develop a program for collecting, managing, and recycling wind turbine blades, paid for by the manufacturers.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Jeff Wilson (R; 19th District; Southwest Washington)
Current status – Scheduled for a hearing in Environment, Energy & Technology Wednesday January 19th at 8:00 AM.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –

According to a recent Bloomberg article 85% of the steel, copper, electronics, and gearing in the turbines themselves can be recycled or reused, but the fiberglass blades “can’t easily be crushed, recycled or repurposed.” (One company presses them into pellets and uses them in fiber board.) They’re a tiny part of the state’s waste stream; the Electric Power Research Institute estimates that all blade waste through 2050 will equal roughly .015% of all the waste going to landfills in 2015 alone. It isn’t at all clear that the life-cycle carbon footprint of recycling them won’t be larger than just landfilling them. Perhaps the bill is intended to create business for some company or organization, or make wind projects more expensive, but the time, energy, and money it will take to do this might well be better spent on many other kinds of waste that we could actually recycle or reuse effectively, or on other kinds of climate action projects altogether…

The bill’s a revised version of Senator Wilson’s SB5174, which died in the Senate Rules Committee last session. It currently requires stewardship plans to be submitted by July 1, 2024, even though Ecology isn’t required to have finished the guidance for them until January 1, 2024.

Summary –
The bill requires Ecology to develop “guidance” for a program for collecting, managing, and recycling wind turbine blades by January 2024. It’s supposed to be a “self-directed” program, and is supposed to be implemented and paid for by their manufacturers, but it must be based on one or more stewardship organizations operating and implementing as agents on their behalf, and it has to be approved by Ecology. (“Manufacturers” are defined to include retailers and importers of blades; they would be allowed to participate in an approved national program instead, if there were one Ecology determined has requirements substantially equivalent to the State’s.)

Plans must describe how manufacturers will finance the system and include an adequate funding mechanism ensuring blades can be delivered without cost to the last owner or holder to takeback locations within the region in which they were used and that are as convenient as reasonably practicable; accept all blades sold in or into Washington after July 1, 2024; identify how stakeholders including installers, demolition firms, and recycling and treatment facilities will receive information needed to properly dismantle, transport, and treat the blades; and establish performance goals, including one for reusing and recycling at least 85% of the weight of collected blades.

There are reporting requirements, fees to cover Ecology’s administrative costs, and penalties on manufacturers of up to $10,000 a blade (after an initial warning) for each sale or installation of one without an approved stewardship plan. (The bill prohibits installations, and provides for issuing warnings to installers, but it only applies penalties to manufacturers.)

HB1607

HB1607 – Allows the Safe Routes to Schools program’s funding to be used for planning, developing, and installing safe routes to new schools being constructed.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Rude (R; 16th District; Walla Walla)
Current status – Referred to Appropriations.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would have appropriations to the Safe Routes to Schools program made out of the general fund rather than from the Multi-Modal Account and the Transportation Partnership Account, and would allow the program to pay for the planning, development, and installation of safe routes from nearby neighborhoods to schools under construction as well as to existing schools. It would require the Secretary of Transportation and the Superintendent of Public Instruction to report to the Legislature on whether administration of the program should be shifted from the Department of Transportation to OSPI, and (if they recommended a transfer) on options for one that would satisfy Federal requirements.

HB1577

HB1577– Issuing up to $4.943 billion in bonds, backed by a tax on fossil fuels, to be used for clean transportation investments and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Hackney (D; 11th District; South Seattle, Renton, and Tukwila) (Co-sponsor Wicks – D)
Current status – Referred to the Committee on Environment and Energy
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill retains the carbon tax and bond provisions of SB5373, but it would direct 60% of the revenue to transportation investments that reduce emissions, and the remaining 40% to a variety of projects focused on clean energy, efficiency, and emissions reductions. It makes some adjustments to 5373’s environmental justice provisions and its reporting requirements, specifies that Ecology has the authority to regulate indirect emissions, and requires the department to exercise specified powers under the Clean Air Act to ensure that the emissions it regulates will be reduced to the levels required by the State’s targets if it determines by October 30th 2025 that the bill’s provisions are not likely to be enough to do that.

Details about the changes from 5373 (In process…) –

Investments –
Revenue from the bill must be used by the Department of Commerce for projects and incentive programs in Washington that yield verifiable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in excess of baseline practices, for community engagement to support decision making on priority investments, and with high priority placed on funding projects that directly benefit economically distressed areas.

At least 35% of total investments must provide “direct and meaningful benefits” to vulnerable populations within the boundaries of highly impacted communities designated by the Department of Health’s cumulative impact analysis. At least 25% of total investments must benefit projects in rural areas, “or” at least 10% of total investments must be used for programs, activities, or projects formally supported by a resolution of an Indian tribe, with priority given to otherwise qualifying projects directly administered or proposed by a tribe. (There’s a provision I don’t follow saying that projects meeting both of these last two requirements “may count toward the requisite minimum percentage for this subsection”.)

Sixty percent of the funds remaining after servicing bonds must go to miles ahead transportation investments in programs, activities, or projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions or mitigate the impact of greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, including:
1. Reducing vehicle miles traveled, including transportation demand management, non-motorized transportation, affordable transit-oriented housing, and high-speed rural broadband;
2. Increasing public transportation services, including public transit;
3. Deploying vehicle charging and refueling infrastructure with a strong emphasis on underserved communities and low to moderate-income members of the workforce not readily served by transit, or located in corridors with emissions that exceed federal or state standards. Supporting alternative fuel car sharing programs to provide opportunities to them;
4. Providing financing assistance to facilitate purchasing battery and fuel cell electric vehicles by lower income residents;
5. Providing grants to transit authorities for cost-effective capital projects reducing the carbon intensity of the system including electrification of fleets, modification or replacement of capital facilities to facilitate fleet electrification or renewable hydrogen refueling, upgrades to transmission and distribution systems, and construction of charging and fueling stations;
6. Supporting small trucking firms converting vehicles to cleaner alternative fuels, access to necessary fueling infrastructure, and assistance in mitigating the costs of the transition to cleaner fuel vehicles;
7. Electrifying and decarbonizing the state’s vehicle and passenger ferry fleet, and converting state, county, city, and public transit agency fleets to clean alternative fuels;
8. Reducing or mitigating the impacts of copollutant emissions in overburdened communities or vulnerable populations, including the expansion of monitoring networks for them;
9. Reducing emissions from vessels, onshore equipment and vehicles, including provision of shore power, reducing vehicle congestion and excessive idling, and installing clean fuel infrastructure;
10. Investing in rail and high-speed rail with the incremental installation of rail electrification integrated with local power generation; and
11. Supporting converting farm vehicles to cleaner alternative fuels, acquisition of and access to fueling infrastructure, and mitigating the costs of the transition to cleaner fuel vehicles.

The other forty percent of the money must be spent on projects and
programs including:
1. Activities to restore and improve forest health and reduce vulnerability to drought, insect infestation, disease, and other threats to healthy forests including silvicultural treatments, seedling development, thinning and prescribed fire and postfire recovery activities to stabilize and prevent unacceptable degradation to natural and cultural resources and minimize threats to life and property resulting from wildfire. (Priority must be given to programs, activities, or projects aligned with various current forest plans.)
2. Supplementing the growth management planning and environmental review fund for making grants or loans to local governments for the planning costs;
3. Deploying renewable energy resources, distributed generation, energy storage, demand side technologies and strategies, and other grid modernization projects;
4. Supporting programs, activities, or projects within the Department of Commerce’s clean energy fund;
5. Increase the energy efficiency or reducing the greenhouse gas emissions of industrial facilities including proposals to implement upgrading the energy efficiency of equipment, reducing process emissions, or switching to less emissions intensive fuels;
6. Achieving energy efficiency or emissions reductions in the agricultural sector including fertilizer management, soil management, bioenergy, and biofuels (including funding the sustainable farms and fields grant program); preserving or increasing carbon sequestration and storage benefits in soils, marine and freshwater areas; and through forest management, planting, and forest products.
7. Increasing energy in new and existing buildings, including weatherization and other retrofits, or promoting low-carbon architecture, including the use of low carbon building materials;
8. Funding programs, activities, or projects within the Department of Commerce’s weatherization plus health initiative;
9. Promoting the electrification and decarbonization of new and existing buildings;
10. Improving energy efficiency, including district energy, and investments in market transformation of energy efficiency products; and
11. Providing incentives and technical assistance to stationary sources to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and co-pollutants.

Increasing Ecology’s authority –
The bill specifies that the definitions of “emissions” that Ecology can regulate under the Clean Air Act include indirect emissions of greenhouse gases resulting the consumption, use, combustion, or oxidation of the petroleum products and natural gas. It specifies that the Department can require persons that produce or distribute products that emit greenhouse gases in the state to comply with air quality standards, emission standards, or emission limitations on greenhouse gases. It requires Ecology to decide by October 30th 2025 whether it’s likely that the tax will reduce the emissions it covers enough to obtain their share of the reductions needed to reach the State’s targets, and it requires Ecology to use its authority under the Clean Air Act to impose enough additional limitations on those emissions to reach the targets if it determines that the tax is not likely to do that.

Other changes –

The environmental justice and equity panel is now to provide “guidance” as well as recommendations about the development and implementation of the programs, projects, and activities funded by the bill. It has an additional member representing the agricultural community. The bill now says the Department of Commerce must “apply recommendations through iterative consultation with the environmental justice and economic equity panel” in the development of policies and procedures for the allocation of funding under this section, as well as the implementation plan, rather than saying it must “seek recommendations” on those from the panel.

The bill no longer allows fossil fuels that are subject to another jurisdiction’s carbon price to count that charge as a credit against their obligations under the bill. It adds several additional kinds of reporting. It rewrites Section 13, about managing taxable and non-taxable bond proceeds to comply with the IRS rules. It adds some details to the language about fair labor standards.

HB1572

HB1572 – Exempts rental car company purchases of EVs and hybrids from sales and use taxes; applies the current tax on car rentals to peer-to-peer car sharing.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Fitzgibbon (D; 34th District; West Seattle)
Current status – Referred to the Committee on Finance.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would exempt a rental car company’s purchases of electric and hybrid vehicles to be used exclusively as rentals from the sales and use taxes. It would apply the current 5.9% tax on car rentals to peer-to-peer car sharing transactions, unless rental car companies were authorized to use reseller permits to buy vehicles for use as rental cars, or were exempted from paying “sales or use tax or or any other tax generally applicable to a transaction involving the acquisition of any motor vehicle.” [That seems to mean that this new tax would not apply if the bill passed, since the bill does seem to exempt them from sales and use taxes, so I don’t see what this provision is intended to do.]

HB1548

HB1548 – Frees regular hybrids without plugs from the extra $75 transportation electrification fee for EVs and alternative fuel vehicles.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Klippert (R; 8th District; Benton County) (Co-Sponsor Shewmake – D)
Current status – Referred to the House Committee on Transportation
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
Currently fully electric vehicles, other alternative fuel vehicles, plug-in hybrids and regular hybrids pay an additional $75 a year as a transportation electrification fee, which goes to supporting the adoption of electric vehicles until July 1, 2025. (After that, the money will go to the regular motor vehicle account.) The bill would eliminate the fee for regular hybrids.

HB1457

HB1457 – Facilitating the installation of broadband facilities on limited access highways.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Wiley (D; 49th District; Vancouver) (Co-Sponsors Riccelli, Kloba, Santos, Slatter, Shewmake, Ramel, and Hackney – Ds)
Current status –
In the House – Passed
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation; had a hearing there February 16th. Amended and passed out of committee February 22nd; referred to Rules. Replaced by a striker from the prime sponsor and passed by the House March 8th. House concurred in the Senate’s changes April 15th.
In the Senate –
Referred to the Transportation Committee. Had a hearing March 16th; replaced by a striker and passed out of committee March 30th. Referred to Rules. Passed by the Senate unanimously April 10th, and returned to the House for consideration of concurrence.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
Senate Transportation Striker –
This authorizes the Department of Transportation to install conduit for broadband when doing highway projects if no broadband operator chooses to do it, and makes a few other minor changes which are summarized at the end of it.

House Striker –
The striker expands the Department of Transportation’s current authority to grant franchises for using state highways to construct and maintain various facilities to include fiber optics, and adds a number of items to the potential Joint Transportation Committee report.
Amendments –
The amendments broadened the study to include all highway corridors and made a couple of other very small changes.

Original bill –
Requires the Department of Transportation to proactively provide broadband facility owners with information about planned limited access highway projects to collaboratively identify opportunities for installing of broadband infrastructure during the appropriate phase of these projects when such opportunities exist.

If specific funding’s appropriated the bill would have the Joint Transportation Committee oversee a consultant’s study to recommend:
1.An effective Department of Transportation strategy, and specific limited access highway corridors, that could be used to address missing fiber connections and inadequate broadband service in underserved parts of the state;
2. The most promising planning and financing tools for installing conduit in anticipation of future fiber installation by others;
3. Opportunities for mutually beneficial partnerships between
the Department and service providers to provide broadband for transportation purposes such as intelligent transportation systems, cooperative automated transportation/autonomous vehicles, transportation demand management, and highway maintenance; and,
4. Strategies for mitigating potential safety, operations, and preservation impacts related to the recommendations.

The study would also have to include an examination of any State and Federal laws and regulations that could prevent or limit the
implementation of the recommendations, as well as recommendations for modifications to the applicable State laws and regulations.

HB1502

HB1502 – Specifies competitive bidding procedures counties may use in designing and procuring electric ferries.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Wiley (D; 49th District; Vancouver) (Co-Sponsors Griffey – R, Ramel, Paul, Lekanoff, Berry, Ortiz-Self, Hackney, Harris-Talley, and Pollet – Ds)
Current status –
In the House – Passed
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation; had a hearing there February 17th. Amended and passed out of committee February 22nd; referred to Rules. Passed the House February 26th.

In the Senate –
Referred to the Committee on Transportation. Had a hearing March 15th, and passed out of committee March 30th. Referred to Rules, and passed by the Senate, unanimously, April 11th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill simply lists procedures in detail; they seem to be optional, except for a couple. I’m not sure whether a county already has the legal authority to buy an electric ferry or not, but it sounds as if it does.

The amendment would require the Department of Transportation’s Office of Equal Opportunity to specify a percentage of the contract award amount for county electric ferry procurement that the prime contractor would have to meet by subcontracting with small businesses.

HB1537

HB1573 – Terminates some tax exemptions for particular uses of fossil fuels.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Ramel (D; 40th District; Bellingham) (Co-sponsors Harris-Talley, Berry, and Macri – D’s)
Current status – Referred to the House Committee on Finance. Had a hearing March 23rd.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
As of January 1st, 2022, the bill would eliminate the current blanket state and local use tax exemptions for natural gas, compressed natural gas, or liquefied natural gas used as a transportation fuel. It would continue to exempt their use by a transit agency, if it had been doing that before 2025. It would continue to exempt renewable natural gas used as a transportation fuel, and compressed or liquefied versions of that. It would exempt users from the tax if they offset that consumption with renewable gas credits purchased from a distribution business in the state.

It removes the current exemption from the tax to fund the pollution liability insurance program for natural gas, petroleum coke, and liquid fuel or fuel gas used in petroleum processing .

It removes the current exemption for propane or natural gas used to heat chicken houses.

SB5452 – 2021

SB5452 – Requires giving electric bicycles the same access to non-motorized dirt trails and closed roads that regular bicycles are given.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Cleveland (D; 49th District; Vancouver) (Co-Sponsors Liias – D and Jeff Wilson – R)
Current status – Converted to a study and passed.
In the Senate – Passed
Referred to Senate Committee on Transportation; had a hearing on February 18th. Replaced by a substitute and voted out of committee February 22nd. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor in a very minor way and passed by the Senate unanimously March 8th. Senate concurred in the House amendments April 14th.

In the House – Passed
Referred to the Committee on Rural Development, Agriculture & Natural Resources. Had a hearing March 16th. Replaced by a striker and passed out of committee March 23rd. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House April 11th. Returned to the Senate for consideration of concurrence.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –

Striker in the House –
This would postpone the due date for the study by nine months, to September 30th, 2022, and would allow people with a current State disabled parking permit to ride Class 1 & 2 electric bicycles on these trails and roads until June 30th, 2023, or the creation of rules or legislation about the issue.

Substitute –
The substitute converts the bill to a study by the Department of Natural Resources, and a study by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to decide which classes of electric-assisted bicycles are acceptable on these trails and roads under each agencies’ management, and where.

Original –
The bill would only apply to Class 1 and Class 3 e-bikes. Class 1 bikes only provide power from the battery when the rider is pedaling, provide electric assistance up to 20 miles an hour, and would be allowed on non-motorized trails. Class 3 bikes do not include pedaling, have a maximum speed of 28 miles an hour, and would be allowed on roads with nonmotorized access.

SB5461

SB5461 – Authorizes up to $500 million in bonds to implement DNR’s 20 Year Forest Health Plan, funding forest health and community resilience.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Wagoner (R; 39th District; Skagit County)
Current status – Referred to Senate Ways and Means.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
These would be general obligation bonds, could be issued over eight biennia, and could only be issued if the Legislature had already appropriated the proceeds. (The Forest Health Plan envisions applying techniques such as thinning and prescribed burns to over a million acres.)

SB5460

SB5460 – Authorizes Director of Licensing to make and enforce rules for the current autonomous vehicle self-certification testing pilot program.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Nguyen (D; 34th District; West Seattle)
Current status –
In the Senate – Passed
Referred to the Senate Committee on Transportation; had a hearing February 18th; drastically amended and voted out of committee February 22nd. Referred to Rules. Passed unanimously by the Senate March 8th.

In the House –
Referred to the Transportation Committee. Had a hearing Monday March 15th, and passed out of committee March 31st. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House April 11th.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
Amendments –
The first amendment in Transportation, by Senator Padden (R – Spokane Valley) removed the section granting the Department of Licensing authority to make rules to administer and implement the AV self-certification testing pilot program. The second amendment, by the sponsor, delayed the program’s start for a year, until October 2022.

Original bill –
The bill would explicitly authorize the Director of Licensing to adopt and enforce rules to administer and implement the autonomous vehicle self-certification testing pilot program that’s already on the books. (It also drops the current prohibition of screens that the driver can see and that can display video besides a backup camera’s.)

SB5457

SB5457 – Extends tax exemptions for commuter ride sharing vehicles to any carpool or vanpool transporting at least three people, including the driver.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Saldaña (D; 37th District; Seattle)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Transportation; had a hearing on February 18th.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
This is a companion bill to HB1514.

Summary –Summary –
Currently, the Commute Trip Reduction Incentives Act provides tax exemptions for vehicles that will be used for at least three years in commuter car pools or van pools making one round trip a day. They’re exempted from the State sales and use taxes, and from the motor vehicle excise tax. (It also exempts them from the regulations applying to drivers or owners of motor vehicles operated for hire, common carriers and public transit carriers, and protects those promoting ride sharing from any civil suits arising from the maintenance or operation of the vehicles.)

The bill expands the scope of these provisions by dropping the references to commuting, and redefining ridesharing as any “carpool or vanpool arrangement whereby one or more groups” of at least three people and not more than fifteen, including the driver, are transported. (I don’t know if this definition would include operations like Uber Pool or not.)

HB1534

HB1534 – Expands HB1513’s carbon tax to cover energy intensive trade exposed manufacturing industries, giving them a gradually reduced number of tradable credits against the tax over time, and ways to earn bonus credits.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Shewmake (D; 42nd District; Whatcom County) (Co-sponsor Lekanoff – D)
Current status – Referred to the House Committee on Environment and Energy.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
HB1513 would have the Department of Ecology make recommendations to the Legislature about how to apply its carbon tax to energy intensive trade exposed industries. This bill would tax the carbon content of the full life cycle emissions of fossil fuels sold or used by energy intensive trade exposed manufacturing industries at the same rates and with the same potential increases as HB1513 – starting at $25/tonne in 2022, a year earlier than HB1513’s tax, and increasing at 2% a year plus inflation, with the same provisions for additional increases if the sector is not achieving its share of the reductions needed to meet the state’s targets. (If a particular facility had achieved its own share of those reductions it would be exempt from the additional increases on its sector.) Revenues from the tax could only be used to fund the working families tax exemption and for workforce transition investments.

By June 30, 2022, the Department of Commerce, in consultation with Ecology, would have to create objective numeric criteria for identifying the covered EITE facilities, including those in the cement, steel, aluminum, food processing, pulp and paper, and aircraft, missile, and space craft production industries, and for identifying their greenhouse gas emissions. The rules would also establish an emissions baseline for each facility, taking into account its output and the number of employees. The Department of Ecology is to create rules for calculating the carbon content of emissions, as in HB1513.

The bill would exempt fuels that the State’s prohibited from taxing by Federal law or by laws about Indians’ property, fuel exported from the state, aircraft fuels, and any fuels that aren’t fossil fuels. (Since it only applies to emissions from facilities, it drops a number of HB1534’s exemptions for things like agricultural fuels.)  Fuels that have already paid a carbon tax or charge on their lifecycle emissions to another jurisdiction would be eligible for a credit of up to that amount against the tax owed in Washington.

EITE’s would pay the tax on natural gas sold to or used at their facilities. Motor vehicle fuel and special fuel used at facilities would be taxed through HB1513. The bill specifies other reporting requirements including new ones for refineries, and details about which parties would be responsible for paying the tax and when.

Until July 1, 2030, a facility would be able to take a credit against the tax equal to what it would have paid on 70% of its emissions in 2019,  plus any bonus credits it earned. A new facility beginning activities in 2020 through 2029 would be able to take an initial credit for the tax on 70% of their emissions in the first year (plus bonus credits). If an estimate by Ecology of the emissions a facility was expected to produce given its output and current standards of technology were available before 2030, and was lower than its 2019 emissions, a facility could take a credit for 70% of that estimate, plus bonus credits. (Exactly which facilities can use which of these last two options isn’t clear to me.) Credits would be tradeable and bankable.

Beginning in July 2030, facilities would be able to claim bonus credits plus a credit for 70% of the tax that would be owed on the same industrial output at a best in class benchmark designated by Ecology, or bonus credits plus a credit for 70% of the emissions Ecology determines the facility would produce if all life-cycle cost-effective efficiency measures identified by a third-party energy service company using OFM’s Washington state life-cycle cost tool were implemented. (If a benchmark hasn’t been set, a facility can claim credits for 70% of the emissions Ecology estimates it’s expected to produce or 70% of its emissions for the most recent year with data, plus bonuses.)

The Department of Labor and Industries would develop a point system for various business practices, employee benefits, or policies concerning treatment of workers, and establish a minimum threshold of points to be used as a baseline for awarding bonus credits. It could consider a variety of practices, benefits, or policies, with a special emphasis on:
1. Having collective bargaining agreement, or a policy where the employer agrees to remain neutral, work with, or provide information to a labor organization for unionizing employees;
2. Offering at least 85% of employees health insurance, with the majority of premiums funded by the employer; coverage equal to or better than a silver plan on the Washington exchange, and including an option for dependents.
3. Providing at least 85% of employees a living wage, at a level the Department establishes as appropriate, but which must be at least the median hourly wage of the county in which a project is sited;
4. Offering at least 85% of employees retirement benefits;
5. Prioritizing hiring workers displaced from or having an elevated likelihood of being displaced from sectors vulnerable to a transition to a low-carbon economy; living close to the workplace, and facing barriers to employment; and,
6. Using state-registered apprenticeship programs.
The Department  may establish different standards for different sectors to reflect variations in workplace conditions and may include other flexibility mechanisms to facilitate protection of workers and to ensure that project sponsors are highly likely to be able to comply with the criteria.

Facilities that have met the minimum threshold of points for employment performance standards that the Department establishes can earn bonus credits to apply against their carbon tax obligations. They can get credits covering an additional 2% of their emissions for exceeding the minimum threshold of points. If they exceed the threshold and have not reduced the number of full-time jobs associated with the facility over the most recent two years they can get credits covering an additional 3.5% of their emissions. If they exceed the threshold and increase employment they can get credits covering 3.5% of their emissions plus credits covering the percentage of their emissions corresponding to the percentage of increased full time employment at the facility over the previous year, up to a cap on bonus credits at covering 5% of their emissions.

The bill has the same provisions for reporting refineries’ emissions as HB1513 does, if they’re designated as EITEs. Like HB1513, it would stop the Department of Ecology from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, but would authorize it to use the full extent of its authority to regulate them under the Act to help achieve the state’s targets for reductions if the tax were invalidated. It also requires Ecology to create rules for measuring the carbon content of covered emissions.

 

SB5444

SB5444 – Creates a per mile charge on electric and hybrid vehicles, replacing the current special fees; extends the $75 transportation electrification fee to cover all plug-ins.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Saldaña (D; 37th District; Seattle) (Co-sponsors Hobbs, Nguyen and Nobles – Ds)
Current status – Referred to the Committee on Transportation; had a hearing on February 18th. Amended and passed out of committee March 16th. Referred to Rules. Dead.
Next step would be – Action by the Rules Committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
Senator Fortunato’s SJR8207 would amend the Constitution to require any revenue from road usage charges of vehicle miles traveled fees to be spent for highway purposes.

Summary –
Senate Transportation amendment –
This shifts the implementation dates back a year and makes some other minor changes which are summarized by staff at the beginning of it.

Original bill –
The bill requires the Department of Licensing and the Transportation Commission to develop a plan for imposing a per mile charge on electric and hybrid vehicles in place of the current special fees on them. (Owners of plug-in vehicles that can go at least 30 miles on the battery are currently charged an extra $150 a year in place of the gas tax, and they, hybrid, and other alternative fuel vehicle owners are charged another $75 a year to support developing charging infrastructure, green transit, and other clean alternative fuel infrastructure.) The new system would begin July 1 2026, and collect an annual fee for vehicles that can go over 30 miles on the battery of $0.02/mile for three years, increasing to $0.025/mile after that. It would continue the annual $75 fee and expand that to apply to plug-ins with less battery range as well. (Thus, if you drove 10,000 miles a year in an all electric vehicle, you’d pay $275/year, and then $325.) By July 1, 2025 at the latest, owners of vehicles that can go over 30 miles on the battery would be able to choose to switch to the new system early, and would be exempted from the $75 fee (an ongoing exemption according to Plug-In America, though I don’t think that’s clear; it depends on whether you read “actively participate in the program” as referring to the pilot program or the road use charge program). At least 500 varied State light vehicles would be required to participate in it (starting as early as July 2024 if that were feasible), but without paying the fees.

The plan has to take account of previous State research on replacing the gas tax with a road usage charge, and must include:
1. Different mileage reporting methods;
2. Recommended payment collection means and rates for achieving cost efficiency, fairness, minimal administrative cost, payment compliance, consumer choice, and for preserving individual privacy;
3. Options for collaborating with other states or countries in developing and administering the per mile funding system;
4. Evaluation and comparison of the benefits and costs of allowing payment plan options and annual payment;
5. Any recommended statutory changes, including suggested offsets or rebates to the per mile fees that might be approved by the Legislature;
6. Specific recommendations to better align the system with other vehicle-related charges and potentially establish the framework for broader implementation of a per mile funding system, including analysis of the preferred method for addressing potential 18th Amendment restrictions;
(g) A recommended implementation and governance structure, and a transition plan with the Department as the agency operating and administering the funding system;
(h) A recommendation on the best agency to be lead public outreach and education;
(i) Recommendations for augmenting vehicle owner privacy in light of new and emerging mileage reporting methods or technologies, and proposed rules to be adopted by the Commission to protect privacy in the system; and
(j) Detailed information on a recommended periodic review and evaluation process to ensure the system is achieving the policy and revenue goals established by the Legislature.

The bill exempts any personally identifying information of persons reporting mileage or vehicle location information as part of a complying with a mileage tax from disclosure, except to law enforcement agencies in accordance with a court order. The bill prohibits collecting any  personally identifying information beyond what’s necessary to calculate, report, and collect the per mile fee, unless the vehicle owner provides written consent for collecting more. Reporting is allowed to collect general location data if an owner chooses that specific reporting method; proper disclosure of the method was made according to rules adopted by the Transportation Commission; and the owner specifically consents to its reporting. The bill prohibits reporting specific location data to the Department or any subdivision of the state, including travel patterns, origins, destinations, waypoint locations, or times of travel, unless a vehicle owner specifically consents to the recording or reporting. The bill establishes an affirmative public duty to ensure that per mile information is protected with reasonable operational, administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure its confidentiality and integrity; to implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices to protect the information from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure; and to implement and maintain a usage and privacy policy to ensure that the collection of information respects  individuals’ privacy and civil liberties. Any system data retained longer than needed to ensure proper mileage account payment has to have all personally identifying information removed and may only be used for public purposes.

HB1518

HB1518 – Allows state agencies to purchase paper made with lower CO2 emissions as well as 100% recycled paper.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Stonier (D; 49th District; Clark County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on State Government and Elections February 9th.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House – Passed
Referred to the House Committee on State Government & Tribal Relations. Had a hearing March 10th, 2021. Did not advance further that session. Reintroduced and had a new hearing in the committee the first day of the 2022 session; amended to take effect immediately and passed out of committee January 13th. Referred to Rules. Passed by the House unanimously January 28th.

In the Senate –

Summary –
State law currently requires purchasing 100% recycled paper for use in copiers and printers, or paper at the highest recycled content that can be used effectively by existing machines. The bill would also allow the purchase of paper that emitted at least 40% less than “standard copy paper”, which is defined as emitting 1,186 kilograms of CO2 per metric ton of paper produced, instead of 100% recycled paper. It would allow the purchase of paper “produced in a process that yields a high reduction in carbon dioxide” in situations where the current law requires the purchase of paper with the highest usable recycled content for machines that can’t use 100% recycled paper effectively.