[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6345220,"mediaKeyId","2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f","parentId",2249468,"title","Committee executive session: substitutes and amendments adopted on multiple bills; voice votes recorded, no roll‑call tallies in transcript","audioSeconds",856,"startMs",1974000,"endMs",2830000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f&start=1974&end=2830","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f/thumbnail_1974000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6345220/Washington/Committee-executive-session-substitutes-and-amendments-adopted-on-multiple-bills-voice-votes-recorded-no-rollcall-tallies-in-transcript","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345220-7a4f24392b5fcd471e0f10f7799f3f0a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448310&Signature=L946Z2VL~UsSDcEmqA8BACZpI1KowOZBjYv5ArXdT8eich-8mvFY2yiTXaPP4TFPojDKUcy8poO1p-S01I8NfLmGFKEEkEPQxzFylDWxKiwgYsrPaUkBNZTJxFKbKXPWKjeMqIQ1GUiTHOemPlZjqSJPDOSoTLbSAEEme~Rm-9eVh0NLWOYhHCbaji3Xun0nSH1r1qVO1lljpxJ0QhU-yro0BkKQ3EL~NvD6QgU1J9oJ8lLR3SMYJSxkSBkPIV5TieehcxJbzGuAxsUcaki4Zaq7vYQ535i0WC527qvrjU5CLPlx2IP7yhnxPkeBD3opOkcKx7JO2o84WfwTOTJB6A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate Environment, Energy & Technology","date","2025-02-07T00:00:00Z","article","During the Jan. 31 executive session of the Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee members considered and acted on several bills. Committeeactions were conducted by voice vote; the transcript records outcomes but not roll‑call tallies. Key outcomes recorded in the public transcript are summarized below.

Votes at a glance

- Senate Bill 5175 (photovoltaic module stewardship): Proposed substitute A was adopted by voice vote. The committee then voted to send the proposed substitute with a due‑pass recommendation to the Senate Ways & Means Committee. Outcome: adopted; due‑pass recommendation to Ways & Means (passed subject to signatures).

- Senate Bill 5241 (energy facility/site language and related clarifications): Proposed substitute B was adopted by voice vote. The committee voted to send the proposed substitute with a due‑pass recommendation to the Senate Rules Committee. Outcome: adopted; due‑pass recommendation to Rules (passed subject to signatures).

- Senate Bill 5236 (date and content amendments for anesthesia greenhouse gases; proposed substitute C): The committee adopted proposed substitute C and voted to send the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Ways & Means Committee. Outcome: adopted; due‑pass recommendation to Ways & Means (passed subject to signatures).

- Senate Bill 5360 (environmental crimes; proposed substitute E): Committee considered three floor amendments: E‑1 (offered by Sen. Short) failed by voice vote; E‑2 (Sen. Harris) passed; E‑3 (Sen. Lovett) passed. A motion to refer the bill to Law & Justice failed; the committee ultimately moved the amended proposed substitute forward with a due‑pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. Outcome: substitute amended with E‑2 and E‑3 adopted; bill moved forward with recommendation to Rules (passed subject to signatures).

- Senate Bill 5036 / 5036 variant (climate leadership and accountability reporting; record in transcript as \"50 36\"): The committee voted to send the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Ways & Means Committee. Outcome: adopted; due‑pass recommendation to Ways & Means (passed subject to signatures).

Procedure notes and constraints

- The transcript records voice votes and chair calls for \"aye\" and \"nay\"; no roll‑call votes or individual member tallies were printed in the transcript excerpt.
- Several motions were made by named senators (e.g., Senator Short moved amendment E‑1; Senator Harris moved E‑2; Senator Lovett moved E‑3). Many other adoption motions in the transcript were presented as \"Madam Chair, I move\" without a full printed name in the excerpt.
- Where amendments were debated, the transcript captures brief sponsor remarks and rationale for aye/no votes; one amendment (E‑1) was rejected after the sponsor said it could have unintended consequences.

What the transcript does not show

- Roll‑call tallies or individual yes/no votes for most items; the public record in this transcript shows voice outcomes only.
- Full text of substituted bills or all amendments as enacted into the committee substitute; staff referenced proposed substitute labels (A, B, C, E) and amendment labels (E‑1, E‑2, E‑3), which should be consulted in the official committee packet for exact statutory language.

Committee staff and members indicated continued work on some bills and said several items were being sent to other committees for additional jurisdictional review and concurrence.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Environment, Energy & Technology - 2/7/2025 10:30 AM","oneSentenceSummary","During the committee’s executive session the panel adopted proposed substitutes and amendments on several bills (including PV stewardship, energy facility language, and environmental crimes) and moved multiple bills forward with due‑pass recommendations; several amendments passed and one failed by voice vote.","taxTitle","Environment, Energy & Technology, Senate, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20502,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345225,"Bill would require Ecology to post and notify public about sewage spills; advocates back transparency, agency flags implementation needs",524,3140000,3664000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f&start=3140&end=3664","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f/thumbnail_3140000.jpg","/articles/6345225/Washington/Bill-would-require-Ecology-to-post-and-notify-public-about-sewage-spills-advocates-back-transparency-agency-flags-implementation-needs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345225-b28b569a27eb4622e94637ea75f57148/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448310&Signature=j-wBQTcRlmWyjJV-ghdzTtNC59Ls9KG0VXulbCDJZToMMkWP8sTFpV3MHnogSdg8I45zQbi-0dG37az43z3Ow-gb-JyTRkXRFvhaoU4DhYuKk9BzOG9bNConDwy0X~8~Ekx9sNZHiLIETbmsS3-fTOsm2cVqggIcCdrhDoXXppP9c3bhZDzA2eadJlsDoRSAoAQ5Lk6Yi-elrl2KGUi98qBzGvLsqdWw9~2BFM02SZsmJ8J5ThZyXbwZ9ICHzuu9ZP7Aavpfv2aE~eUQQDD0vZX3MhgPwhmcp725DUW-Ko5NH4o2IzJqioZLXiZADMaE6GC7lQ6fmNpKDlNMaNDOgQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 5450, discussed in the Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Jan. 31, would require the Department of Ecology to publish a public‑facing website with a mapping interface for reported sewage spills and to implement a public notification system that gives members of the public the option to receive alerts within four hours of Ecology receiving notice of a spill.

Sponsor Sen. Patty Kuderer (Vice Chair Slatter presiding for public testimony in the hearing) and others said the bill is intended to increase transparency and allow residents, recreational users, and businesses to make informed choices about water use and public health. \"Hundreds of sewage spills occur in our state every year,\" a sponsor noted, and multiple witnesses said current reporting is difficult to find and often buried in PDF reports.

Supporters included the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, Washington Conservation Action and Surfrider Foundation, who argued that rapid public notification and easy access to spill data would protect public health, shellfish beds and recreation. Kelsey Payne of the Snoqualmie Tribe said timely public information would help families make decisions about their health and well‑being and foster trust between wastewater managers and communities.

Department of Ecology staff said they support transparency but described practical implementation constraints: Ecology currently receives roughly 300 incident reports a year and its permitting system is not staffed for 24/7 incident posting and notification. Ecology noted the agency does not have the authority or expertise to recommend specific public‑safety responses (for example, whether to close a beach or shellfish harvesting area) — those determinations rest with the Department of Health and local health agencies.

Advocates said other states already provide timely public notice and argued Washington can do the same. Washington Conservation Action reported a volunteer study that found dozens of spills in a single community that were not readily discoverable. Ecology suggested technical changes, such as clarifying which spills trigger public notification and where notification content would come from, and noted a fiscal estimate of roughly $1.1 million to implement the system using the Model Toxics Control operating account.

Committee members asked technical questions and heard multiple offers from stakeholders to assist with implementation details. The bill does not change permit requirements for dischargers; it compiles and publishes reports Ecology already receives and formalizes a timeframe and public‑notification mechanism.","Senate Bill 5450 would direct Ecology to publish an interactive map of reported sewage spills and provide public notifications within four hours of receipt; tribal, conservation and public‑health groups supported the bill while Ecology described staffing and jurisdictional clarifications needed for implementation.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345230,"Committee hears opposing views on bill to limit high‑sulfur ship fuel and scrubber discharges in Washington waters",2338,2832000,5170000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f&start=2832&end=5170","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f/thumbnail_2832000.jpg","/articles/6345230/Washington/Committee-hears-opposing-views-on-bill-to-limit-highsulfur-ship-fuel-and-scrubber-discharges-in-Washington-waters","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345230-4bdc7d24c4cc42bd433112af0c0c81cb/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448310&Signature=JZfL~tyAofNnsYf6QuiLo1Q8H3X1-CP6TR5TiSIRkf79V-bS7lCBaARTx7WnqShLr7J1VbS~5faG~jlAh2v9bVare~Ejkr5vb0-iVbLOYSsOTqFji0gk9QRb0ye-fVoV7Nhy~JAtDhkKB5Vg-3RFDXfYXj~k208KwodFNPDnqoFuBJQu5y~iAAcai72IxF8Vhqyo0ExiYyvKJK-d4oLJJSg1Cgar-yFW8UDq4X35x9Gbz4QgR1rkwDQjXat3vXMYTgJxAItui69TRETYT19Cr3aqQosC52GcdRq28ZYD5U~FNUe0dKede04GOuQpQqNUVZOpynjTmsLEeDP7nXaQbg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Jan. 31 heard hours of testimony on Senate Bill 5519, a measure that would bar vessels from using marine fuels exceeding 0.1% sulfur by weight while operating within 3 nautical miles of Washington shorelines beginning Jan. 1, 2028, and would establish recordkeeping and limited noncompliance fee provisions.

Sponsor Sen. Liz Lovelett (D‑40) framed the bill as a public‑health and environmental protection measure for the Salish Sea and Puget Sound. \"These fuels are far more readily available than they were even 10 years ago,\" Lovelett said, and argued the bill would reduce particulates and other pollutants that affect marine life, crew and coastal communities.

Industry associations, ports and some carriers opposed the bill or urged major revisions. Jacqueline Moore of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association warned of \"clear legal as well as jurisdictional challenges,\" citing federal preemption and Ninth Circuit precedent. The Northwest Seaport Alliance and Port of Seattle representatives raised concerns that closed‑loop scrubbers (which collect wash water for shore disposal) provide water‑quality benefits when managed at berth, and that the bill’s fee language could inadvertently penalize vessels already compliant with low‑sulfur fuel standards.

Ports and carrier groups also warned that a strict state standard could complicate deployment of new low‑ or zero‑carbon fuels, such as green methanol, if national or international guidelines are not aligned. The Port Of Seattle noted voluntary and regulatory measures already in place — including shore‑power agreements and international emission control areas (ECAs).

Public‑health and environmental witnesses urged the committee to limit scrubber discharges or require cleaner fuels. Dr. Emery Dooley, testifying for Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, said particulate matter from ship emissions is linked to heart and lung disease and warned scrubbers convert air pollution into acidic, toxic wastewater. Friends of the Earth, Global Underwater Explorers and local dive and conservation groups said scrubber wash water is toxic to marine organisms even at low concentrations and asked the state to follow California’s precedent.

Tribal and fishing industry witnesses described risks to salmon, shellfish and treaty‑protected resources. Lummi fisherman Jay Julius urged passage to protect salmon and orca and to uphold treaty responsibilities.

Ecology staff called for technical amendments to ensure exemptions for public‑safety vessels and research vessels and suggested aligning fee deposit language with existing state accounts. Ecology noted the bill would provide important public‑health and environmental benefits by preventing scrubber discharge into state waters.

Stakeholder debate focused on: (1) whether the state can regulate fuel use and scrubber discharges without conflicting with federal maritime law and international treaties; (2) whether closed‑loop scrubbers that offload wastewater at berth should be treated differently than open‑loop systems that discharge at sea; and (3) the bill’s potential impact on future low‑carbon fuels and port operations.

No committee vote occurred at the hearing. Multiple parties offered to provide technical analyses, including federal preemption and international law assessments, and Ecology offered implementation edits to the bill language.","Senate Bill 5519 would prohibit ships from using fuel above 0.1% sulfur by weight within 3 nautical miles of Washington shorelines beginning in 2028; industry groups warned of legal and operational impacts while environmental, tribal and public‑health witnesses urged the change to protect water and air quality.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6345236,"Senate hearing advances bill directing Ecology to test biosolids for PFAS and report to Legislature",2513,1937000,4450000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f&start=1937&end=4450","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2249468-0a6747e8a4799d5471a5f9448841d67f/thumbnail_1937000.jpg","/articles/6345236/Washington/Senate-hearing-advances-bill-directing-Ecology-to-test-biosolids-for-PFAS-and-report-to-Legislature","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6345236-212b7bd911ce65a328c4637af6dde315/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448310&Signature=elYfnDWaFU9pFFgXVkZO0BVK2eQvAVAWv0iCGEO2oXB~OYqCNicqdJ6LnO8t2lHZ940Skeqefkb~RiWcbU-IgJdWirP7DiEmK~c7G4QJwSXZEd4ZbnB2kjtDTX4nUjJcwHt1pwDsknEJXCjxQ0TlS51PkmIAoXJX-VNL2ofpy5R4K0nfajuG7WGrP7ec71~iwYBRdRf0cwuRO~B1L35T2Fyt-PWa4cbckjNgexcEKGtSeis5h3XiMGR2bdlIWKhJO64RFlkhM1QhN7q6eN0w0LCtwOziJmXGr~j6u4oW9M97ETG0SNChhGA0JuSInYvo6nxLwfNMv6vOCnv-LI5GOA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Jan. 31 heard testimony on Senate Bill 5033, a measure that would require the Department of Ecology to develop PFAS sampling and testing requirements for biosolids and to report findings and recommendations to the Legislature by late 2028.

Committee staff described biosolids as nutrient‑rich organic material from wastewater treatment that can be applied to land as a fertilizer and said the bill would convene an advisory group and set deadlines for Ecology’s work. \"By 07/01/2027, after consulting with the advisory committee, Ecology must establish a PFAS sampling or testing requirement for biosolids regulated under the program,\" staff told the committee.

Why it matters: PFAS (per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances), also known as \"forever chemicals,\" do not break down in the environment and have been regulated in other media such as drinking water and firefighting foam. The bill seeks to quantify how much and which PFAS compounds are present in Washington biosolids before lawmakers consider regulatory action.

Sponsor Sen. Jeff Wilson (R‑19) told the committee he brought the bill to create a deliberative, science‑based process. \"Biosolids are incredibly important to Washington State farmers,\" Wilson said. \"Biosolids with question mark levels of forever chemicals may not be good.\" He described the work as intended to let a diverse advisory group recommend thresholds and testing methods.

More than a dozen stakeholders testified. Local governments, wastewater utilities and statewide utility associations generally supported the bill’s focus on science but asked for technical changes and extra time for labs and implementation. Scott Hazelgrove of the Washington Association of Sewer and Water Districts said the bill \"is a great first step\" but requested additional time and urged that Ecology be the single regulator to avoid a patchwork of local rules.

Environmental and public‑health advocates and some residents urged stronger action, including an outright ban on land application of biosolids. Darlene Shanfold of the Olympic Environmental Council said land application \"must stop,\" citing PFAS, microplastics and other contaminants. Several speakers urged including septage and historically applied areas in any testing regime and asked for faster timelines than those contained in the bill.

Department of Ecology staff said the bill will produce data needed to inform policy decisions but noted the agency’s interpretation of a section of the bill could authorize local restrictions on biosolids application, which may create regulatory inconsistency. Ecology also provided a fiscal estimate: a net fiscal impact of about $770,000 over the four‑year outlook charged to the biosolids account, with no general‑fund impact, according to committee staff briefing the bill.

Committee discussion focused on scope — whether to include septage, historically treated sites and small treatment works — and on timelines for sampling, analysis and reporting. Multiple presenters recommended aligning regulated analytes and methods with U.S. EPA methods that are already in development or use.

The bill does not propose immediate restrictions; rather, it establishes a process for Ecology and an advisory committee to develop sampling/testing requirements, complete an analysis of PFAS in Washington biosolids and report recommendations to the Legislature by Dec. 1, 2028.

Stakeholders asked the committee to clarify statutory authority and to consider whether Ecology or local governments should retain certain authorities. The hearing record includes technical comment letters and offers from utilities and Ecology to help draft amendments.","A Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee hearing heard wide public testimony on Senate Bill 5033, which would require the Department of Ecology to convene an advisory group, set PFAS sampling/testing requirements for biosolids and deliver multi‑year analyses and a legislative report.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee executive session: substitutes and amendments adopted on multiple bills; voice votes recorded, no roll‑call tallies in transcript

Bill would require Ecology to post and notify public about sewage spills; advocates back transparency, agency flags implementation needs

Committee hears opposing views on bill to limit high‑sulfur ship fuel and scrubber discharges in Washington waters

Senate hearing advances bill directing Ecology to test biosolids for PFAS and report to Legislature