Category Archives: 1st Senate Hearing 2024

SB6138

SB6138 – Promoting the establishment of thermal energy networks.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Shewmake (D; 40th District; Bellingham) (Co-Sponsors Hasegawa, Nobles, Saldaña – Ds)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology on  January 24th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB2131 is a companion bill in the House.

Summary –
The bill would authorize electrical and gas companies to own, operate, or manage nonemitting thermal energy networks piping fluids for transferring heat in and out of buildings to improve energy efficiency and/or eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions of current heating and cooling, domestic hot water or refrigeration. Investor owned projects would have to be reviewed and approved by the UTC, which could authorize the recovery of the costs in rates; public projects would be reviewed and approved by their governing bodies.

The bill would create a pilot project program, giving investor owned gas companies priority for developing projects in their service areas if they notified the UTC of their intention to do a project within a year after the bill took effect and deployed a project within 30 months. The bill would require the UTC to consider a considerable number of factors in deciding whether to approve projects, including the customers and low-income customers served, the use of the existing natural gas workforce and efforts to transition it to thermal energy work, maintaining infrastructure safety and reliability; its ability to meet 100 percent of the customers’ demand for space heating; public health benefits, coordination with any electric utility providing service to the area, and its potential to enable gas pipeline decommissioning and supplant the need for gas pipeline replacement and the associated costs. (There are other items, as well as a list of optional factors that the UTC might take into consideration.) Companies would have to include pilot projects in their RFP’s requests for energy resources, and if a company determined it could deploy a pilot project at the lowest reasonable cost itself instead of deploying one through a heat purchase or energy services agreement, it would be authorized to do that. The UTC might authorize merging a company’s rate bases for its gas and thermal network operations; if a company did that it would have to monetize any benefits it received from Federal and State incentives and use them to mitigate rate impacts on customers.

The bill would require the Department of Commerce to create a grant program to support gas company projects in the program, subject to the availability of amounts specifically appropriated for that. Grants would cover the difference between the company’s lowest reasonable cost resources under its current business practices and the costs of building and operating the pilot project. In reviewing grants, Commerce would consider the same factors that the UTC would be required to take into account in deciding whether to approve them.

The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee would review the program and report on it to the appropriate committees of the Legislature.

SB5992

SB5992 – Requiring applicants seeking energy facility site certification for a project generating electricity using renewable resources to provide evidence of an adequate water supply for it.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Warnick (R; 13th District; SouthCentral Washington) (Co-Sponsor King, R)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology on January 24th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB2042 is a companion bill in the House.

Comment –
My guess is that this is about the proposal for a pumped storage facility at Goldendale.

Summary –
The bill would require applicants seeking site certification through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council for a project generating electricity using renewable resources to provide evidence of an adequate water supply for it.

SB5965

SB5965– Reducing the environmental impacts of the clothing industry.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Nguyen (D; 34th District; White Center)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology January 12th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
HB2068 is a companion bill in the House.

Comments
The bill sets a greenhouse emissions reduction requirement, but it looks to me as if it lets retailers and manufacturers set their own targets wherever they like for quite a few things, and I’m not sure if it’s intended to do more about situations where a disclosure would simply say “We’re doing very little about that”, or if it simply intends to get clear about what is and isn’t happening at this point.

Summary
The bill would require every clothing retailer or manufacturer doing business in the state and having more than $100 million in annual gross revenue to disclose various environmental policies, processes, and outcomes, including the significant real or potential adverse environmental impacts of its operations and targets for prevention and improvement. They’d have to identify the suppliers of at least 50% of the volume in their supply chain, from raw materials to final production, making a good faith effort to prioritize the ones involving the largest environmental risks. They would have to report on their policies, processes, and activities for identifying, preventing, mitigating, and accounting for potential adverse impacts, including the findings and outcomes of those activities. They’d have to identify relevant policies for responsible conduct of businesses such as theirs and provide information on steps they’d taken to embed those in their own policies and management systems. They’d have to disclose any areas of significant environmental risk they’d identified in their activities and business relationships, and the adverse impacts of those — identified, prioritized, and assessed in the context of their own activities and business relationships. They’d need to disclose the criteria they’d used to prioritize those risks, as well as any actions or plans to prevent or mitigate them. If the information was available, they’d have to include estimated timelines, targets, and benchmarks for improvement and their outcomes. They’d need to disclose measures to track implementation and results, and their provision of or cooperation in any remediation.

Beginning in 2027, they’d be required to establish, track, and disclose progress towards various performance targets, which the bill would require them to meet. They’d have to report independently verified figures for the annual volume of material they’d produced, including a breakdown by material type, and figures for how much production had been displaced with recycled materials as compared to growth targets. They’d have to establish and disclose quantitative baseline and reduction targets for energy and greenhouse gas emissions, water, and chemical management. (Their greenhouse gas emissions reporting would have to be independently verified, and conform to a World Resources Institute target guidance and to its reporting standard.) They’d have to disclose targets for impact reductions, and plans for tracking due diligence implementation and results including, where possible, estimated timelines and benchmarks for improvement.

The bill would authorize civil suits against retailers and manufacturers alleged to be failing to comply with the bill’s requirements, and would authorize suing Ecology to make it investigate alleged violations or make it enforce the requirements. Ecology would publish an annual report on compliance, Violating a disclosure, performance target achievement, or reporting requirement of the bill’s would be subject to a penalty of up to $5,000 for each violation in the case of a first offense, and up to $20,000 for each repeat offense.

SB5876

SB5876 – Streamlining the application processes for state voluntary programs funding water and salmon ecosystem investments.
Prime Sponsor – Senator Fortunato (R; 44th District; Buckley)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks January 15th. Still in committee at cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
If funds were specifically appropriated for it, the bill would require the Puget Sound Partnership, the Department of Ecology, the Recreation and Conservation Office, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State Conservation Commission to work together to create a streamlined application process for state voluntary programs funding water quality, watershed restoration, and salmon recovery. They’d be required to work on improving grant application processes and streamlining management processes for recipients; improving connectivity and accountability between project proponents and agencies; streamlining and improving the accuracy of reporting of accomplishments by recipients; and improving collaboration and information sharing among grant managers. They’d agree on a biennial work plan selecting priority projects and deliverables; create working groups and identify agency staff to support projects, and identify representatives of the agencies to serve as a working group supporting coordination and communication between other working groups and agency leaders. (Agencies could make substantive changes to the work plan that they agreed on at any time.)

The agencies would be required to use an interagency forum for staff members making grants to share updates, develop common resources, leverage successes, and consider innovative approaches; maintain regular dialogue with applicants to identify administrative challenges, barriers, and gaps; engage agency leaders in prioritizing and implementing improvements to funding systems; and secure and mobilize resources to move a clear plan of work agreed on by the agencies forward.

In addition to improving administrative processes for voluntary funding programs within their existing authority, they might develop policy recommendations about improvements for consideration by the Legislature; develop joint application forms; or establish other working groups including invited experts and stakeholders to support discussions, provide additional technical capacity, and improve coordination.

The agencies would be required to make an annual report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature on their actions and administrative improvements.

SB5826

SB5826 – Requiring rates or charges authorized by the UTC to recover utilities’ costs in implementing the Climate Commitment Act to be listed on customers’ bills.
Prime Sponsor – Senator MacEwan (R; 35th District; Mason County)
Current status – Had a hearing in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology on  January 24th. Still in committee by cutoff.
Next step would be – Dead.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Summary –
The bill would authorize the UTC to consider and perhaps approve tariff schedules that contain rates or charges requested by utilities to recover their costs for implementing requirements of the Climate Commitment Act. The Commission would require utilities to include any corresponding rate increase or charge as a line item on each customer’s bill.