Category Archives: House Bills 2022

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.

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.”

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).

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.

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.

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.

HB1389

HB1389 – More detailed regulations and lower insurance requirements for peer-to-peer car sharing businesses.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Corry (R; 14th District; Yakima, Klickitat and Skamania County) (Co-Sponsor Eslick – R)
Current status – House concurred in the Senate amendments.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House 2021 –
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Consumer Protection & Business February 3rd. Replaced by a substitute making minor changes, which are summarized by staff at its beginning, and passed out of committee January 27th.

In the House 2022 – Passed
Reintroduced; had a hearing in Consumer Protection & Business January 13th. Replaced by a substitute which rephrases the point that a peer-to-peer car sharing program does not have to have insurance to cover its assumption of a vehicle owner’s liability for bodily injury or property damage to third parties or uninsured and underinsured motorist or personal injury protection losses while the owner’s car is being shared and makes a few other small changes. Referred to Rules, and passed by the House 96-2 on February 12th.

In the Senate 2022 – Passed
Passed out of Senate Transportation February 17th. Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Business, Financial Services & Trade February 22nd; passed out of committee the 23rd. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor to make the require peer-to- peer car sharing programs to be certain that shared cars have at least twice the minimum insurance required by state law, and passed by the Senate March 2nd.

Summary –
The bill is nearly identical to Representative Corry’s HB2918, which I summarized last year. A striker replaced HB2733 original language with HB2918’s, and it then passed the House nearly unanimously in 2020, but died in committee in the Senate. (This updated version only adds a few lines specifying that various provisions about rental cars don’t apply to peer to peer car sharing.) The bill deletes all of another much simpler set of regulations currently governing this area, Chapter 48.175 RCW., replacing those with finer grained and more specific requirements.

The current law requires companies to provide at least three times the liability coverage required for personal vehicles. This bill only requires them to provide the liability minimums for private vehicles, which are $25,000 for the injury or death of another person; 50,000 for the injury or death of two or more people, and $10,000 for damage to another person’s property. The current law also requires the company to provide collision or comprehensive coverage for at least the actual cash value of the vehicle, if it provides those. (I don’t think the bill’s language would requires a company to, though I’m not sure.)

HB1280

HB1280 – Includes the cost of greenhouse gas emissions and the consideration of all-electric systems in the analysis of buildings the State’s constructing or leasing.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Ramel (D; 40th District; Bellingham) (Co-sponsor Duerr – D)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 1st, and passed out of committee the 23rd. 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 2022 –
Reintroduced in Rules January 10th, passed by the House January 21st.

In the Senate 2022 –

In the House 2021 – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment and Energy January 29th. Passed out of committee February 4th. Referred to the House Committee on the Budget, had a hearing there February 17th, and was passed out February 19th. Referred to Rules. Passed by the House March 9th.

In the Senate 2021 – Died; returned to the House in 2022
Referred to the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology; Had a hearing March 18th and passed out of committee March 23rd. Referred to Rules; did not reach the floor.

Comments –
The bill doesn’t specify how “the costs associated with greenhouse gas emissions from energy consumption” are to be estimated, and whether that’s to include a social cost of carbon or not.

Summary –
The State currently includes energy costs in the life-cycle analysis it requires in considering the costs of buildings over 25,000 sq. ft. and critical facilities that it’s constructing or leasing. It also requires comparing the energy costs of at least three energy systems when designing or renovating one of these buildings; at least one of the potential systems has to “include renewable energy systems”, and at least one of them has to comply with the sustainability design guidelines for a LEED silver rating.

The bill requires considering at least one all-electric system rather that at least one complying with the LEED guidelines, and it requires “including the costs associated with greenhouse gas emissions from energy consumption” in the cost analysis.

HB1103

HB1103 – Requires environmental product declarations and reporting on labor issues for materials used in constructing and renovating State buildings.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Duerr (D; 1st District; Bothell) (Co-Sponsor Shewmake – D)
Current status – Had a hearing in Appropriations January 25th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
SB5366 is a companion bill in the Senate.

In the House 2021-
Had a hearing in the House Committee on the Capitol Budget January 26th. Replaced by a substitute, amended, and passed out of committee February 17th. Wasn’t heard before cutoff for bills in fiscal committees.

In the House 2022 –
Reintroduced in Appropriations.

Comments –
Unlike Representative Doglio’s 2020 bill, HB2744, this simply requires reporting, rather than prioritizing low carbon materials in awarding contracts. (That bill passed the House Committee on the Capital Budget, but died in Appropriations; there was a good deal of testimony at the hearing).

Summary –
The substitute made a number of minor changes, which are summarized by staff at the beginning of it. The changes made by the first amendment are summarized at the end of that; the second amendment merely added one item to the reporting requirements.

Original bill –
This new bill covers projects receiving funds from the capital budget for new buildings with more than 25,000 sq ft of occupied or conditioned space, and renovations of such buildings that cost more than 50% of the assessed value.

Beginning July 1st 2021, before the final project payment, firms would be required to submit any available environmental product declarations providing robust full life-cycle assessments of the associated greenhouse gas emissions for 90% by weight of any structural concrete; structural steel; reinforcing steel, including rebar; and engineered wood in the project. They’d also have to submit specified information about measures taken to promote labor rights in the supply chain, and a detailed list of working conditions in the final manufacturing facility and in facilities at which production processes that contribute to 80% or more of the product’s cradle-to-gate global warming potential occur. Starting a year later, they’d be required to submit product declarations and labor data for all the covered materials before the final payment, and starting a year after that, they’d have to submit them before the material was installed. If a firm can’t meet the requirements, it bears the burden of providing evidence to show that the data does not exist in a form that is recorded or transferable; that the requirements would be a hardship relative to the size of the firm or the product supplier based on a specific estimate of costs to collect and transfer the information; or that the requirements would disrupt the selected firm’s ability to perform its contractual obligations. [I’m not sure how the first of these items fits with the point of going from requiring “available” product declarations at the beginning to just requiring them the next year…]

Details –
If funds are made available, the Department of Commerce is authorized to provide financial assistance to small businesses, covering at least half what it costs them to produce one of the required environmental product declarations. Starting January 1, 2026, the environmental product declarations would be required to report actual data quality assessments including variability in facility, product, and upstream data for key processes.

The UW’s College of Built Environments is to create a publicly accessible database for covered projects to anonymize and report the required data and promote transparency.

HB1099

HB1099 – Improving the state’s climate response through updates to the state’s comprehensive planning framework.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Duerr (D; 1st District; Bothell) (Co-sponsor Fitzgibbon – D)
Current status – Passed by the Senate March 3rd. Though I thought it hadn’t been, the floor amendment making a lot of cuts to the environmental provisions in the bill was adopted. They are summarized by staff at the end of the amendment. The House refused to concur in the Senate’s version, and the bill went to conference committee. The Senate adopted the conference report, but the House reportedly didn’t have the time to do the same. I think they needed to do that last step for the bill to pass…
Next step would be –
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

In the House 2022 – Passed
Returned to House Rules; reintroduced there, and passed by the House January 21st.

In the Senate 2022 – Passed
Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Housing and Local Government February 1st. Replaced by a striker adding several environmental justice provisions, and adding to the goals of a number of comprehensive plan elements (mostly about environmental issues). Passed out of committee February 17th, and referred to Ways and Means. (There’s a staff summary of the changes at the end of the striker.) Amended in Ways and Means, passed out of committee February 28th and referred to Rules. The amendments replace the measures about climate change and reducing emissions with language about increasing resiliency and addressing extreme weather events, drop the requirement for reporting on per capita miles traveled, make the adoption of Commerce’s model resiliency element optional, and make a couple of other less significant changes.

In the House 2021 – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Environment and Energy January 19th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 28th. Referred to Appropriations, and had a hearing there February 16th. Replaced by a 2nd substitute, amended, passed out of Appropriations, and referred to Rules on February 22nd. Replaced by a striker by the sponsor, amended, and passed by the House March 5th.

In the Senate 2021 –
Referred to the Committee on Housing and Local Government. Had a hearing March 16th. Replaced by a striker and passed out of committee March 24th. Referred to Ways and Means. Had a hearing March 27th, and passed out of Ways and Means March 29th. Then referred to Transportation, had a hearing there April 1st, but didn’t get out of committee. Returned to House Rules in 2022.

Summary –

In Senate Committee-
The striker makes avoiding creating or worsening environmental health disparities and approval of the GHG emissions reductions sub element voluntary rather than mandatory, and makes a couple of other minor changes that are summarized at the end of it.

On the House floor –
The sponsor’s striker made a number of small changes which are summarized at the end of it. Until 2035, the amendment made authorizing missing middle housing with specified provisions in current single family zoning areas count as satisfying the requirements of the greenhouse gas emissions reduction subelement. (The provisions are summarized at the end of it.)
2nd Substitute –
There’s a staff summary of the 2nd substitute’s changes at the beginning of it.. The amendments prohibit Commerce’s guidelines for measures that cities and counties can take to reduce emissions through comprehensive plans and development regulations from including road usage charges, any fees or surcharges related to vehicle miles traveled, or any measures that would regulate or tax transportation service providers, delivery vehicles, or passenger vehicles.

Substitute –
There’s a summary by staff of the changes, which are significant, at the beginning of the substitute.

Original bill –
The bill adds adapting to and mitigating the effects of a changing climate, helping to achieve statewide targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and per capita vehicle miles traveled, preparing for climate impacts scenarios, and protecting “environmental, economic, human health, and safety” to the list of goals for planning under the Growth Management Act and the Shoreline Management Act.

It requires a new climate change and resiliency element in comprehensive plans, designed to result in reductions in overall greenhouse gas emissions, avoid the adverse impacts of climate change, and enhance resiliency. (Emissions reduction planning is required for counties with at least 100 people per square mile and a population of at least 200,000, or at least 75 people per square mile and an annual growth rate of at least 1.75%, and for the cities within them. It’s encouraged for the rest. Resiliency planning is required for jurisdictions planning under the GMA and is encouraged for others.)

The greenhouse gas emissions reduction subelement of the comprehensive plan must be reviewed and approved by the Department of Commerce, after public comment, and must be designed to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from the jurisdiction’s transportation and land use systems, reduce vehicle miles traveled within the jurisdiction, and prioritize reductions in communities that experience disproportionate impacts and harm due to air pollution.

The resiliency subelement must be designed to identify and protect natural areas resilient to climate impacts, as well as areas of vital habitat for safe passage and species migration; and address natural hazards created or aggravated by climate change, including sea level rise, landslides, flooding, drought, heat, smoke, wildfire, and other effects of changes to temperature and precipitation patterns. It’s to enhance resiliency equitably, and must prioritize actions in communities that will disproportionately suffer from compounding environmental impacts and be most impacted by natural hazards due to climate change.

(In collaboration with other agencies, the Department of Commerce is to create a model resiliency element that may be used by jurisdictions in developing their plans. It’s to establish minimum requirements or include model options for fulfilling the bill’s requirements; and should provide guidance on identifying, designing, and investing in infrastructure that supports community resilience to climate impacts, including the protection, restoration, and enhancement of natural infrastructure as well as traditional infrastructure, natural areas and vital habitat. It should provide guidance on identifying and addressing natural hazards created or aggravated by climate change; and must recognize and promote as many co-benefits of climate resilience as possible – such as salmon recovery, ecosystem services, and supporting treaty rights.)

During the 2024 update cycle, the larger and faster growing jurisdictions for which emissions reduction planning is required must adopt goals, policies, and actions that are likely to result in reductions of emissions and vehicle miles traveled that comply with the state’s greenhouse gas reduction targets. The Department of Commerce, in consultation with other agencies, is to estimate the required reductions. (However, adopting and implementing a climate action plan satisfies this requirement if it achieves “meaningful reductions” in greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled.) These jurisdictions’ 2032 updates have to fully comply with the rest of the requirements. (The bill also specifies that these jurisdictions’ land use plans “should” give special consideration to achieving environmental justice and “must” avoid creating or worsening environmental health disparities; it specifies that they must reduce and mitigate the risk to lives and property posed by wildfires, including reducing residential development in their wildland urban interface.)

The bill adds pedestrian and biking facilities to the inventory for transportation facilities and services needs; it requires level of service standards for them and forecasts of mutimodal transportation demand. It prohibits denying approval of a development if it’s possible to provide for its transportation needs through pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements, increased or enhanced public transportation service, ride-sharing programs, demand management, or other strategies funded by the development, even if it fails to meet traffic level of service standards.

It requires regional transportation planning organizations encompassing at least one of the larger and faster growing jurisdictions to adopt a regional emissions and vehicle miles reduction plan for all jurisdictions in the organization. This must implement the State’s goals for reductions in per capita vehicle miles traveled, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector consistent with the Department of Commerce’s estimates of the area’s proportional share of what’s needed to meet the State’s targets, allocating vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions reductions that must be achieved to the larger jurisdictions after taking into account the reductions achieved within them by the regional plan. It must prioritize reductions in communities that have experienced disproportionate harm due to air pollution. (The comprehensive plans of jurisdictions would be required to be consistent with their regional plans.)

The bill requires parks and recreation planning to add consideration of the health disparities map published by the Department of Health to increase green space in the most pollution-burdened locations.

Commerce is also to publish a summary of annual vehicle miles traveled in each city and the unincorporated portions of each county in the state. It’s to update its shoreline master program guidelines, requiring them to address the impact of sea level rise and increased storm severity on people, property, and shoreline natural resources and the environment.