Senator Edgar Flores, sponsor of Senate Bill 260, told the committee the bill is intended to protect outdoor workers from hazardous wildfire smoke without unnecessarily disrupting essential services. "When we originally started this bill ... we wanted to provide direction as a state and say, look, when the air quality hits a 150, we want certain things to occur. When it hits 200, we want different things to occur," Flores said, adding that the bill instead sends the issue to regulators so they can tailor protections by industry.

Jackie Spicer of the Nevada Environmental Justice Coalition, who worked with the sponsor on language, told the committee Nevada's arid climate and rising wildfire risk make fine particulate matter from smoke a serious health threat: "Smoke from wildfires contains fine particulate matter which is a harmful and dangerous pollutant that can enter our bloodstream and trigger serious respiratory and cardiovascular health problems." She said SB 260 directs the Division of Industrial Relations to develop regulations that would require employers to monitor air quality and reduce exposure when AQI reaches unhealthy (150) and hazardous (200) levels, provide employee communication and training, and set a process for determining when personal protective equipment or work stoppages are required.

Supporters — including the Nevada State AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter, Northern Nevada Building Trades and multiple conservation and labor groups — urged passage, arguing workers need clear guidance and that a regulatory approach allows stakeholder input by industry. Several business groups, including the Nevada Builders Alliance and Nevada Policy, opposed the measure as drafted, arguing the bill would impose onerous daily reporting and compliance burdens; many trade organizations ultimately reached neutral positions after negotiations and amendments that sent standards to the Division of Industrial Relations.

Testimony and committee discussion repeatedly emphasized carve-outs and flexibility: the sponsor and proponents said essential emergency work (firefighters, utilities, emergency services) would be carved out or addressed in regulation, and the regulatory process would allow distinctions by industry (for example, differences between continuous concrete pours and routine outdoor tasks). Committee members asked whether school policies or other existing standards cover vulnerable populations; proponents said the bill targets outdoor workers only and that school districts and indoor settings are governed separately.

The committee moved SB 260 in a work session and voted to advance the measure (do pass); the motion passed on a voice vote. The chair assigned the floor statement to Assembly member Torres Faucette.