Category Archives: Senate Bills 2023

SB5057

SB5057 – Delaying the building performance standards by two years, and creating a work group on their financial impacts and building efficiency policy. (Dead.)
Prime Sponsor – Senator Mullet (D; 5th District; Issaquah) (Co-sponsor Schoesler – R)
Current status – Had a hearing January 27th in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology. Replaced by a substitute, amended, and passed out of committee February 17th. Referred to Ways and Means, and had a hearing there on February 22nd. Passed out of committee February 24th and referred to Rules. Sent to the X file March 10th.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Substitute –
This reduces the delays in compliance for large buildings to one year, removes the two year delays for smaller buildings, adds a couple of people to the work group, has Commerce convene it instead of the WSU Energy Program, and provides for a financial hardship exemption. The amendment requires reporting on the financial impacts to all covered Tier 1 buildings, not just the State buildings, and adds a representative of the owners of those buildings to the work group.

Summary –
The bill delays the compliance dates by which covered commercial buildings would have to meet the State’s energy performance standards for two years. Buildings over 220,000 sq. ft. would have to comply by June 2028; those between 90,000 and 220,000 sq. ft. would have to comply by June 2029, and the remaining buildings over 50,000 sq. ft. would have to comply by 2030. It would also delay the date for completing the rules, the reporting dates, and the other dates for implementing the standards by the same amount.

It would delay the schedule for creating SB5722’s energy management and operations requirements for commercial buildings between 20,000 sq. ft. and 50,000 sq. ft. and multi-family over 50,000 sq. ft. and the eventual performance standards for those by two years as well.

The bill would also have the WSU extension energy program create a work group with the help of the State Energy Office. It would report on the financial impacts of complying with the performance standard for state-owned buildings, and make recommendations to the Legislature about building energy efficiency, including identifying investments or other strategies and timelines for increasing energy efficiency in the sector. It would provide a cost-benefit analysis of options to meet the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the sector, including energy efficiency; and “recommend any changes” to Chapter 285, Laws of 2019. This was HB1257, and includes the current performance standards and benchmarking requirements for commercial buildings over 50,000 sq. ft. (It also includes the cost-effective conservation requirements for gas utilities, setting the social cost of carbon, various provisions about renewable gas, and EV infrastructure requirements for the Building Code Council.)

The work group would include a representative for OSPI; one for each of the public four-year higher education institutions; one for the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges; one for DSHS; one for the Department of Corrections; one for Enterprise Services; and two from a national association for industrial and office parks.

SB5039

SB5039 – Requires utility planning for wildfire risks and identification of best management practices.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Rolfes (D; 23rd District; Kitsap County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology January 11th. Replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee February 7th. Referred to Ways and Means, and scheduled for a hearing there at 1:30 PM on Wednesday February 22nd.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1032 is a companion bill in the House.

Summary –
Requires each electric utility to create a wildfire management plan by October 31, 2024 and update it every three years. An independent consultant selected by the State Energy Office after consultation with stakeholders and the public would develop the format for the plans and a list of recommended actions to be included in them, including best practice guidance for those actions. Each utility’s plan would include a review of its specific circumstances and incorporate the appropriate identified actions from the list; abutting utilities could develop collaborative plans. Private utilities’ plans would be reviewed by the Utilities and Transportation Commission and public utilities’ would be reviewed by their governing boards, in consultation with various other agencies. Reviewers would provide feedback to the utilities, but as I read the bill, it doesn’t quite require their approval of the plans. (They’re to “confirm” whether it contains the appropriate recommended actions.) The bill also disclaims any State responsibility for subsequent problems.)

The consultant’s list is to include actions related to:
(a) Vegetation management along transmission and distribution lines and near associated equipment;
(b) Infrastructure inspection and maintenance repair activities, schedules, and record keeping;
(c) Modifications or upgrades to facilities and construction of new facilities to incorporate cost-effective measures to minimize fire risk;
(d) Preventative programs, including adoption of new technologies to harden utility infrastructure;
(e) Operational procedures;
(f) Identification of appropriate widths for vegetation management and rights-of-way, including the consideration of fire-resistant vegetation alternatives;
(g) Protocols for disabling reclosers and deenergizing portions of the electric system along with associated communication plans for impacted parties and the public, including highly impacted communities, vulnerable populations, and persons reliant on electricity to maintain necessary life functions; and
(h) Public and interested parties’ engagement and communication plans addressing wildfire safety and risk mitigation.

Each electric utility’s protocols have to include plans for mitigating the public safety impacts of deenergizing portions of the system, considering the impacts on critical first responders, local and tribal governments, health and communication infrastructure, and those populations at increased risk. Decisions about whether or not to shut down parts of the system are reserved to the utilities.

SB5037

SB5037 – Preventing the Energy Code from prohibiting the use of natural gas in buildings. (Dead.)
Prime Sponsor – Senator Lynda Wilson (R; 17th District; Vancouver) (Co-Sponsor MacEwen – R)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology. Still in committee by cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead bill.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would prevent the State Energy Code from prohibiting “the use of natural gas for any form of heating, or for uses related to any appliance, in any building.” (It would also remove achieving “the broader goal of building zero fossil-fuel greenhouse gas emission homes and buildings” from the language specifying what the Building Code Council is to design the Code to do.)

SB5018

SB5018 – Transferring estimated sales and use tax revenue from expenditures by the Department of Transportation from the general fund to the motor vehicle fund.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Fortunato (R; 31st District; Auburn)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Transportation.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
See the Transportation section of the Topics index for several similar proposals this session.

Summary –
The bill would transfer the estimated sales and use tax revenue from expenditures by the Department of Transportation from the general fund to the motor vehicle fund. It would apply to any revenue from the Department’s expenditures on purchases of “any tangible personal property, digital products, or labor.”

SB5017

SB5017 – Dedicating the sales and use taxes on motor vehicles to highways.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Fortunato (R; 31st District; Auburn)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
See the Transportation section of the Topics index for several similar proposals this session.

Summary –
The bill would require the use tax revenue and the six and five- tenths percent sales tax revenue from new or used retail sales of a vehicle, including private-party sales, to be used exclusively for highway purposes. (It would not apply to the revenue from car rentals.)

SJR8200

SB5030 – Placing a Constitutional amendment on the ballot requiring revenue from road use charges and similar measures to be used for highways.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Fortunato (R; 31st District; Auburn)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Transportation.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would propose a Constitutional amendment to voters on the November 2023 ballot. If adopted, it would require “any state revenue collected from a road usage charge, vehicle miles traveled fee, or other similar type of comparable charge” to be used exclusively for highway purposes.

SB5030

SB5030 – Adds ten years to the tax exemption for hog fuel used for electricity, steam, heat or biofuel.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Van De Wege (D; 24th District; NW Olympic Peninsula) (Co-Sponsors Short & Schoesler – Rs; Wellman – D)
Current status – Referred to the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.
Next step would be – Scheduling a hearing.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB1018 is a companion bill in the House.

Comments –
The same proposal was introduced by Representative Chapman in 2021 as HB1387, but did not get a hearing. It passed the House last year as HB1924, under Representative Tharinger’s sponsorship.

Summary –
The bill would extend the current sales and use tax exemptions for hog fuel used to produce electricity, steam, heat, or biofuel for ten years, until June 2034. (The bill declares the policy objective of the exemption is to increase the ability of beneficiary facilities to provide at least 75 percent of their employees with medical and dental insurance and a retirement plan, but this is not a requirement. It’s only to be used by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee in evaluating the effectiveness of the exemption.)

JLARC reviewed a previous exemption in 2019. It estimated that the exemption would save the sixteen participating facilities $5.6 million over the 2021-2023 biennium. Employment had only gone down by 281 jobs between 2013 and 2017, from 5,139 jobs to 4,858, so that exemption easily met the stated policy goal of retaining at least 75% of the jobs.