[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-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",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_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",6116298,"mediaKeyId","2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f","parentId",2733553,"title","Committee hears bill to allow utilities to securitize disaster repair costs; utilities, AG offer differing guardrails","audioSeconds",827,"startMs",45000,"endMs",872000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f&start=45&end=872","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f/thumbnail_45000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6116298/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-allow-utilities-to-securitize-disaster-repair-costs-utilities-AG-offer-differing-guardrails","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116298-7c29eb1aafce0af02fd6b4aff89addd5/orig.mp4?Expires=1776509470&Signature=fue3NMLwDRU38AyIM6sbjc8U8Ke4B2dTCcPFa5xOmnPB0-mVb5fhBhpNsaPrrDQtbAPEVLUXKPXkBDupZENrzgej1PKicZJiigaYdNzx6RcemsX6BWY3XMCTmE6IzdrJCrGdYNG8aV7DhH3nHk2XDCMSW23y0I94hIYdiIFDwNK5A-5~1fKKPjpNLwoMkq8W7HxKC1Vtj87YY-fnYKOZFa6EyWU6dpBG3CYG~R6PVQermRol3iWyMuZoexoixqma06O78Rg5Wo4PawvLIoomUEEXRdY~oXcCoagtVqVNQpx~UMcmro7mEUev6RfeN9b1lRgz00Qb3wo~sgQWORWO4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Washington State Legislature","date","2025-03-21T00:00:00Z","article","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Tuesday heard public testimony on second substitute House Bill 1990, which would allow water, electric and gas utilities to petition the Utilities and Transportation Commission to issue a financing order permitting securitization of certain disaster and emergency costs.

Kim Cushing, staff to the committee, told members the bill would let investor‑owned utilities ask the UTC to designate “bondable expenditures” tied to events subject to a federal or state disaster or emergency declaration and to recover those costs through bonds and a dedicated rate recovery charge. The bill, as described by staff, excludes criminal or civil penalties but otherwise contemplates UTC review of whether the costs are “reasonable and prudent.”

Representative Peter Abarno (R‑20th District), the bill’s prime sponsor in the House, said the tool is intended to spread unusually large, unexpected repair costs over time so customers are not hit with a sudden spike in rates after events such as wildfire, catastrophic flooding or earthquakes. “When a catastrophic event happens … we need to provide as many options for utilities and the UTC to get power to those folks, to get clean water to those folks without the impact to the ratepayer happening all at once,” Abarno said.

Utility witnesses largely supported the bill. Jay Balaspas (Pacificorp), Matt Miller (Puget Sound Energy) and John Rothlin (Avista) told the committee securitization is a rarely used financing tool in other states that can lower customer costs by spreading repayment and by signaling confidence to credit markets. They said the bill preserves a UTC process that would require a separate petition, opportunities for intervenors, and a prudence review before any financing order could issue.

Tad O’Neil, assistant attorney general in the Public Counsel Unit, testified in opposition unless amended. O’Neil said the office supports the general purpose of the bill but requested a specific amendment allowing the UTC to consider whether a utility was negligent or grossly negligent in causing the disaster when deciding what costs are recoverable. He cited out‑of‑state jury findings that established utility negligence in wildfire litigation as an example of where a narrowly worded recovery rule could allow costs tied to negligence to be shifted to ratepayers.

Committee members asked about the relative urgency of wildfire risk compared with other disaster types and whether the bill should be restricted to certain utilities or hazards. Witnesses and the sponsor said wildfire is the most prominent and urgent risk in the West but emphasized the bill’s text covers a broader set of federally or state‑declared disasters, including floods and earthquakes. Utility witnesses and the sponsor said the UTC proceeding is the appropriate venue to sort prudence, cost allocation and other technical issues.

No committee action or vote on HB 1990 occurred at the hearing; the committee suspended the public hearing and later took testimony from remaining proponents. Committee members indicated interest in technical amendments and in the attorney general’s proposed language to address recovery of costs tied to negligence.

Votes at the committee were taken later in executive session on other bills; HB 1990 remained at the public hearing stage at adjournment.

Ending: The committee did not advance HB 1990 on Tuesday. Sponsors and stakeholders signaled they expect additional negotiation on specific UTC‑process language, the role of negligence findings, and how charges would be allocated across customer classes if the bill moves forward.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Environment, Energy & Technology - 3/21/2025 10:30 AM","oneSentenceSummary","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee on Tuesday heard public testimony on House Bill 1990, which would let utilities securitize some disaster and emergency costs by petitioning the Utilities and Transportation Commission.","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},6116289,"Burke‑Gilman missing‑link bill sparks sharply divided testimony as committee weighs narrow SEPA exemption",5066,1256000,6322000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f&start=1256&end=6322","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f/thumbnail_1256000.jpg","/articles/6116289/Washington/BurkeGilman-missinglink-bill-sparks-sharply-divided-testimony-as-committee-weighs-narrow-SEPA-exemption","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116289-27b966b12dfcd095d1b9cc1066110c85/orig.mp4?Expires=1776509470&Signature=m7XRZIqiXS0Zr~E6RJ17hh~wumupPreOEp5IqvmFcjKDsFxXmJCpnhAm8tHqTL-p8UvBmAoGNPRVq72VjeuvSlDd20X3~ByLQO0C42svQtaFpfSBqJhSnz5tToPr85GfIfGZQfEmLaJOeW7bLQlHiBA1rPYJGCofIOgkyidWq~X89aW8vyTHEdiqfo1RKLjQdZQrjfrLrnWwp6K6qcIF6IxLqfzkz4Nr-wOjYFNN6VVBtQLEYuQVsaGLsfIbHW~XlU9fb6tUh5XMOIDahqLgtoyaB2qhWONizVCbWtuY3SyYEE3A0a98nb0FNil2aoR2LmUmBCqshE0K4ghjx6JcCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee received extended, often heated testimony on Engrossed House Bill 1814, a narrowly tailored proposal to create a categorical exemption from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for certain trail or path projects.

Staff summarized the bill as establishing a SEPA exemption for trail or path projects of 10 acres or less located on railroad rights‑of‑way designated for interim trail use and situated in cities with populations of at least 500,000. The bill requires public notice at the project start, middle and end of the proposed location and mandates that applicants seek “meaningful consultation” with any federally recognized tribe that may be affected, with procedural requirements for that consultation included in the bill text.

Representative Joe Fitzgibbon (30th Legislative District), the prime sponsor, said the measure responds to a decades‑long delay on the 1.4‑mile “missing link” in the Burke‑Gilman Trail through Ballard. Fitzgibbon emphasized that the bill does not pick a route — Schill’s (Shilshole) Avenue or Leary Way — and said SEPA’s unique role in tribal notice remains intact because the bill requires meaningful tribal consultation.

Testimony split sharply. Cascade Bicycle Club and Washington Bikes officials argued that the missing link creates a dangerous corridor that has produced emergency responses and at least one fatality; they said a legislative exemption would prevent SEPA litigation from further delaying completion and said experience on other completed trail gaps shows overall travel times for freight change negligibly while safety improves.

By contrast, dozens of business owners, maritime industry associations, manufacturers and industrial property owners said the Schill’s Avenue alignment crosses an active industrial and maritime corridor where heavy trucks, ready‑mix concrete vehicles and marine operations move frequently. They argued bicyclists and trucks crossing at grade would create traffic hazards, impair truck egress and put union jobs and longstanding maritime businesses at risk. Several witnesses said the city of Seattle already adopted funding for an alternate route on Leary Way and that the matter should be resolved at the city level, not by a state SEPA exemption. Multiple speakers described long litigation involving this corridor; opponents also raised potential soil contamination and cleanup issues tied to converting a rail line to trail.

Several senators expressed concern about setting precedent for SEPA exemptions and about ensuring tribes have an opportunity to consult. Fitzgibbon and supporters pointed to specific bill language requiring tribal outreach and contended the measure was narrowly crafted for a high‑density, built‑out corridor with a long regulatory and litigation history.

The hearing included a broad cross section of local voices: business and industrial representatives who said the trail would directly affect operations along Schill’s Avenue; trail advocates and bicyclists who said the missing link is a significant public‑safety hazard; attorneys litigating the SEPA cases; and students and residents who urged more streamlined approvals for environmental and active‑transport projects. The committee did not vote on the bill Tuesday.

Ending: The record showed a sharply divided local debate over safety, economic impact and the proper role of SEPA. Sponsors said the bill is narrowly tailored and includes tribal consultation obligations; opponents urged that city processes and SEPA remain the proper avenues for resolving concerns.

","The Senate committee heard more than three hours of testimony Tuesday on House Bill 1814, a narrowly targeted proposal to exempt some trail or path projects from SEPA review, prompted by a long‑running dispute over the Burke‑Gilman Trail ‘missing link’ through Ballard in Seattle.",{"_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},6116278,"Committee advances four bills in executive session; amendments adopted and due‑pass recommendations sent",324,2225000,2549000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f&start=2225&end=2549","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f/thumbnail_2225000.jpg","/articles/6116278/Washington/Committee-advances-four-bills-in-executive-session-amendments-adopted-and-duepass-recommendations-sent","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116278-82f20704bf1aa11dbfb8a9fa08ff8602/orig.mp4?Expires=1776509471&Signature=ZFB-yTtF6fDeUSDv1k6AEGp20uFOQqmoJo0mVIoMB5H0KmBeDiHyZwkiBCzJjlmJHYmfsNE101Mk7M~SZF12QHGNfkYosbIQ6Nv-4PoR-ps27TShd8Cjp2MSMdbddx2OBeOq~xA8ggJ-ZeK8fZfrcSlaP5CPoJcXJHeiojGZJls5qvt0A-ze4LTKyIzW0gvfmoPpwD2Rupwzz0h7stk2hlg-kOe1ifDv6F18p9m5qKXotPYO4lqBij6Sv~XJNoUzqJZfxGAI3BFE8FEOD13mhU32AycVma-k3sD-Fxz-rLD6jQMgSYFRCxLLtnGBuzQlZn6YmCqpkVY-JWNsQsIwVw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee held an executive session in which members adopted an amendment and advanced four substitute House bills by voice votes.

Key outcomes:
• Substitute House Bill 1253 (joint use agreements): Senator Behnke offered and the committee adopted a striking amendment A intended to synchronize ownership and control language among public utility districts, cities and joint operating agencies. The committee then moved the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. The committee record states the bill passed subject to signatures.

• Substitute House Bill 1302 (utility connection charge waivers for industrial symbiosis): The committee moved the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Rules Committee by voice vote; the record shows the bill passed subject to signatures.

• Engrossed House Bill 1461 (joint operating agency procurement thresholds): The committee moved the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Rules Committee by voice vote; the record shows the bill passed subject to signatures.

• Substitute House Bill 1670 (sewage‑containing spills): The committee moved the bill with a due‑pass recommendation to the Ways and Means Committee. Sponsors urged the bill as a public‑health transparency measure; the committee approved the motion by voice vote.

The votes were recorded as voice votes in committee; the transcript records “all in favor say aye” and did not list recorded no votes during the session.

Ending: All four bills were recommended for further action (Rules or Ways and Means) following adoption of a technical striking amendment and voice votes in executive session.","In executive session the Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee adopted an amendment and moved four substitute House bills forward by voice votes.",{"_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},6116282,"Chelan PUD urges committee to allow public utility districts to use captive insurance amid rising wildfire premiums",289,3365000,3654000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f&start=3365&end=3654","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f/thumbnail_3365000.jpg","/articles/6116282/Washington/Chelan-PUD-urges-committee-to-allow-public-utility-districts-to-use-captive-insurance-amid-rising-wildfire-premiums","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116282-20a91b2d6a9f9d409ccd1d3c83b4b23d/orig.mp4?Expires=1776509471&Signature=BzHgC8r6Ufx4I-gMDW-DK0Bu4jSm6uZvFTkOJyFTdvx2spyNEKZZZd27nEc~BGBX9xNC1CTJNlnllYxU8Mx-qxh2l5BnSF3moNXbMNDdYQfQvKG2IEOi4-bcvsx8pJmrB5UEg6ouO7U-UM4vwgmDwjXH6Jvrm61v4ug1ifeXwsWCDztKxusKI0zENIllN9NCJIFQz8BE30ZKAuVGLHomUsEQIw2u~NIH8JRuM-9wJKo3ilPi1IHpWCNSmTbKq~e-sy3giO6OMHDUigiOujYrXya2c96vZL7ghVxg1yEyxrE~iTr0u7jMDpr-flkSo3NbMr~HTCQCQff5MIpUUwYuwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 1842, which would authorize public utility districts to participate in or own captive insurance entities, received proponent testimony from Chelan County PUD representatives on Tuesday.

Alicia Kinney Claussen, staff to the committee, summarized that captive insurance allows an entity or group of entities to form a separate insurer to underwrite risks that commercial markets will not cover efficiently. A 2023 report from the Office of the Insurance Commissioner on utility liability insurance markets recommended captive insurance as an option for utilities.

Ron Gibbs, manager of insurance and risk management for Chelan County PUD, said his utility has seen premiums increase by more than 400% since 2019 despite not being responsible for an insured wildfire loss and that commercial markets are reducing capacity. Gibbs said captive insurance could allow PUDs to buy wildfire reinsurance and access coverage not otherwise available. Ryan Smolinski, staff attorney for Chelan PUD, said the proposed bill narrowly modifies state insurance statutes to allow PUD participation and that the PUD worked with the Office of the Insurance Commissioner to limit the changes to public utility districts.

Ending: Both testifiers asked the committee to adopt HB 1842 to give PUDs another tool to manage wildfire and liability risk. No committee action was taken on Tuesday.

","House Bill 1842 would let public utility districts participate in or own captive insurance companies to manage utility liability risks, including wildfire reinsurance. Chelan County PUD testified it faces sharply rising premiums and limited market capacity and urged the Legislature to grant PUDs the same tool investor‑owned utilities already use.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6116294,"Committee hears bill to require UTC approval of investor‑owned utilities' wildfire mitigation plans",2796,924000,3720000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f&start=924&end=3720","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2733553-87f4f1b41963af824ba88c3d6bf9e38f/thumbnail_924000.jpg","/articles/6116294/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-require-UTC-approval-of-investorowned-utilities-wildfire-mitigation-plans","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6116294-27ab8d77b07eaf959ffdac21b9cbc102/orig.mp4?Expires=1776509471&Signature=XwAiYn2A0SVoSZoLlN7L8dMu~aIwmmLyaCj1d2KxgBk-BXDobrD9pMbP7RJr6riVq27mB7Koyu~d-69g3aU4SElWQDxVt47uCDN3ejyqN5JC--d0wVtJT1LR-yVzBYTt~H9LS~xsikRizXlhUvkgqul-DSqbcLH-oBG5ZQnlIR1gUEy2p69HFmVop4wpokHtCJwKT-5FnaQy8LFmLI02STOtq5wFnbyOHHiLiT732G5O39tcycp117GeFM05OgsZBBRQ5l7yDL7BmhwPw8KxxbeU0mrw3isbDkSwJEuhXYK9LLXKCp1t7Z97Y1DFcphtZ32WkkPRH~fgrILh0wGezA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Environment, Energy & Technology Committee took testimony on Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1522, which would create a statutory process for the Utilities and Transportation Commission to review and approve investor‑owned electric utility wildfire mitigation plans.

Kim Cushing, committee staff, summarized the bill and its background. The statute would repeal the existing investor‑owned utility wildfire plan statute and require investor‑owned utilities to file plans with the UTC “as soon as possible” after the new law takes effect. The UTC would have between 90 and 120 days to approve, reject or approve with conditions a plan after holding at least one public workshop and a hearing, staff said. The bill also directs the UTC to adopt rules addressing vegetation management, public power safety shutoffs and service restoration, and requires a UTC fee to cover plan review.

Representative (Rep.) Dett (identified in the hearing record) described the bill as the product of multi‑year stakeholder negotiations and emphasized that approval and continuity of wildfire mitigation plans were aimed at preventing catastrophic fires. Dett told the committee the bill focuses on planning and does not provide liability protection to utilities.

Utility witnesses — including John Rothlin of Avista, Jay Balaspas of PacifiCorp and Matt Miller of Puget Sound Energy — voiced support for the bill. They described existing mitigation activity, noted the value of public stakeholder input and said UTC review would add regulatory rigor. Industry witnesses and credit‑market representatives also suggested that a formal approval process could be viewed positively by credit rating agencies and thereby reduce borrowing costs for utilities over time.

A staff fiscal note attached to the bill notes a projected state General Fund impact of just over $200,000 per biennium to the Department of Commerce’s Energy Resilience and Energy Management Office for subject‑matter expertise, training and workshop support.

Ending: Committee members asked clarifying questions about scope and whether the UTC process would create meaningful additional protections or costs. The hearing record closed with utility and industry support for the bill; no committee vote was taken on Tuesday.

","Engrossed House Bill 1522 would require investor‑owned electric utilities to file wildfire mitigation plans with the Utilities and Transportation Commission for approval, update plans every three years, and align filings with multiyear rate plans. Utilities and industry groups supported oversight and frequent updates.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears bill to allow utilities to securitize disaster repair costs; utilities, AG offer differing guardrails

Burke‑Gilman missing‑link bill sparks sharply divided testimony as committee weighs narrow SEPA exemption

Committee advances four bills in executive session; amendments adopted and due‑pass recommendations sent

Chelan PUD urges committee to allow public utility districts to use captive insurance amid rising wildfire premiums

Committee hears bill to require UTC approval of investor‑owned utilities' wildfire mitigation plans