Senate Environmental Quality roundup: hearings on hair relaxers, ports, CEQA, aggregate dust and more; committee advances most bills to next committees

The Senate Committee on Environmental Quality met May 20, 2025, and heard multiple bills affecting public health, air quality, land‑use review and infrastructure. The committee advanced most measures to other committees while several items prompted extended debate between labor, industry, environmental justice groups and air‑quality regulators.

The most immediately consequential items included SB236, which would ban certain endocrine‑disrupting chemicals in commercial hair relaxer products; SB34, which would limit aspects of the South Coast Air Quality Management District's authority over port‑related rulemaking and emphasize collaborative stakeholder plans for emissions reductions; SB607, a wide‑ranging CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) reform package; SB526, which asks the South Coast AQMD to strengthen dust and fence‑line protections for aggregate and recycling facilities near sensitive receptors; and SB675, a targeted streamlining measure for the proposed Seaport San Diego redevelopment.

Why it matters: The bills mix public‑health protections (hair‑product chemical bans), regulatory and procedural changes that could affect local air pollution controls and permitting (ports, CEQA, permitting modernization), and localized community health protections (aggregate facility dust control). Several measures drew sharply differing views over who should decide rules (local air districts vs. the Legislature), how quickly projects should be approved, and how to balance jobs, infrastructure and environmental protection.

SB236 — hair relaxers and toxic chemicals

Senator Weber Pierson presented SB236, which would prohibit manufacturing, distribution or sale in California of hair relaxer products that contain specified endocrine‑disrupting chemicals. "Hair can highlight one's identity, creativity, or culture," Senator Weber Pierson said, and added that the bill is intended to protect consumers from ingredients she and witnesses tied to hormone‑related health risks. Ryan Spencer of the Environmental Working Group testified in support, saying the bill "takes critical action to protect public health by prohibiting the sale or manufacture of hair relaxers in California that contain toxic chemicals like formaldehyde, parabens, and phthalates." The California Black Health Network, represented in testimony by a legislative aide, also urged an "I vote" in support, citing studies that link repeated relaxer use to increased risks of uterine and breast cancers and other conditions. No in‑room opposition witnesses appeared. The committee moved the bill forward to the Judiciary Committee (committee referral recorded as "passed to judiciary" in the roll call).

SB34 — Ports, the indirect source rule and local control

Senator Richardson introduced SB34 as a vehicle to require collaborative stakeholder processes and to add guardrails to any South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD) indirect source rule (ISR) affecting the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach complex. Richardson noted the ports' own Clean Air Action Plan and decades of emission reductions by the ports and industry, and said the bill is intended to protect workforce and local economies while continuing progress toward near‑zero goals.

The hearing drew lengthy testimony from labor and industry: Marvin Pineda of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and Thomas Yellinek of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association described large, long‑term emissions reductions already achieved at the ports and warned that an ISR without clear "guardrails" could divert cargo to other U.S. ports and threaten jobs. The Port of Long Beach and other industry groups registered support. In contrast, Ian McMillan of the South Coast AQMD and environmental law group Earthjustice testified in opposition, saying the district needs authority to pursue additional rules to meet federal air standards and that limiting district authority could prolong health impacts and jeopardize federal funding.

Committee members acknowledged the competing goals: improved air quality and protection of regional jobs and competitiveness. Senator Richardson said the bill aims to keep negotiations at the table rather than impose unilateral mandates. The committee recorded the motion to move SB34 to Transportation (vote recorded as passed on the committee call).

SB526 — Aggregate facilities, fence‑line monitoring and community dust

Senator Menjivar presented SB526 to require an update to South Coast AQMD Rule 1157 to address dust emissions from aggregate recycling and processing facilities near sensitive receptors (residences, parks, schools). Menjivar said stockpile heights and lack of fence‑line monitoring have left nearby communities with constant dust that contributes to respiratory illness and environmental injustice. UCLA law students who worked in Menjivar's clinic summarized their field observations: large open stockpiles, dust deposition on homes and parks, and the concentration of facilities near low‑income neighborhoods.

Industry groups including CalCEMA (California Construction and Industrial Materials Association) and others opposed a statewide rule change, arguing the bill would apply a local problem to the entire South Coast AQMD region and would disrupt the material supply chain by limiting stockpile heights and inventory practices. Menjivar responded she is open to narrowing the geographic scope or focusing on specific facilities and that the bill targets only facilities within a defined distance of sensitive receptors.

The committee took the bill up and moved SB526 to Appropriations (vote recorded on the committee call as passed). The record shows active engagement from community groups (Coalition for Clean Air, Communities for a Better Environment, California Environmental Justice Alliance) and trade groups (CalCEMA, CA Chamber of Commerce).

SB318 and permitting modernization

Senator Becker presented SB318, the "California Clean Air Permit Modernization Act," aiming to modernize local permitting to better recognize zero‑ or near‑zero technologies and to create clearer pathways for projects that use certified cleaner technologies. Supporters included environmental consultants and community groups that said the bill would help bring cleaner technologies into permitting. Opposition came from the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (representing local air districts) and trade groups that argued the bill would upend long‑standing responsibilities between CARB and local air districts and could slow permitting while creating federal preemption risk for Title V programs. The committee recorded a tied or split vote on the motion to send SB318 to Appropriations; the measure was placed on call for further consideration.

SB607 — CEQA reform (Fast & Focused CEQA Act)

Senator Wiener presented SB607, a broad package of targeted CEQA reforms intended to reduce litigation and accelerate environmentally beneficial projects (housing, transit, renewable energy) while preserving protection of natural and otherwise sensitive lands. Wiener and cosponsors said the bill focuses on process improvements, clearer administrative records and targeted exemptions so that projects that pose no substantial environmental risk are not derailed by lengthy review or litigation.

Opponents, including Earthjustice, the Planning and Conservation League, state building trades and multiple environmental justice groups, argued the bill makes sweeping changes that would reduce CEQA's ability to secure project‑specific mitigation and protect frontline communities. They highlighted provisions that change the standard courts use to review whether a negative declaration was appropriate and warned the changes could allow many industrial projects to proceed without full EIR analysis. After extended testimony, supporters and opponents agreed to continue talks; the committee moved SB607 to Local Government (vote recorded on the committee call).

SB675 — Seaport San Diego streamlining

Senator Padilla presented SB675 (targeted streamlining for an Environmental Leadership Development Project designation) to require responsible agencies to act within fixed timelines after a lead agency certifies an EIR for the Seaport San Diego redevelopment project. Supporters — labor unions and the project developer — said the project will create thousands of construction and permanent jobs and deliver major public benefits while meeting strict environmental standards. Opponents, including Defenders of Wildlife and the Coastal Commission, said the bill could constrain other permitting processes (e.g., State Endangered Species Act, Porter‑Cologne) and asked for clarified triggers and timing so responsible agencies can conduct their own required technical reviews. Senator Padilla agreed to continue negotiations; the committee recorded the bill passage to Rules (as amended).

SB674 — boxed wine and small spirits containers (CRV)

Senator Cabaldon presented SB674 to reduce the California Redemption Value (CRV) on boxed wine and small single‑serve spirit containers from 25' to 10' to address competitiveness and recycling behavior for newer packaging types. Industry supporters (Tetra Pak, Wine Institute) urged the change; the Glass Packaging Institute opposed reducing the CRV until recycling rates for those containers rise above current levels. The committee moved the bill forward to Appropriations (vote recorded on the committee call).

SB819 — geothermal fees study

Senator Padilla presented SB819 to direct DTSC to study the effect of exempting geothermal waste from generation and handling fees, citing the role of Imperial Valley geothermal and lithium resources in clean energy and battery supply chains. No opposition appeared in the room. The committee moved SB819 to Appropriations (vote recorded on the committee call).

SB797 — undergrounding transmission lines study

Senator Choi presented SB797 to create a CPUC‑led working group to study undergrounding and insulating power lines in wildfire‑prone areas, prioritization and ratepayer impacts; the committee advanced the measure to Energy, Utilities and Communications with no in‑room opposition.

SB441 — CARB transparency and removal process (failed to advance)

Senator Hurtado presented SB441, proposing additional transparency for CARB rulemaking and a legislative removal mechanism for board members. Opposition included the Coalition for Clean Air and many environmental groups that argued the bill would undermine CARB's independence and the administrative process; the measure did not secure sufficient support in committee and failed to advance. Senator Hurtado said she accepted some committee amendments but intended to keep the removal authority intact; opponents warned of a chilling effect on independent, science‑based decision making.

Votes at a glance (committee actions and destinations)

- SB236 (Weber Pierson) — Ban on certain endocrine‑disrupting chemicals in hair relaxers — moved to Judiciary (committee action: passed on committee call). Support: Environmental Working Group, California Black Health Network; no in‑room opposition recorded.

- SB34 (Richardson) — Stakeholder process / guardrails for port indirect source rule — moved to Transportation (passed on committee call). Support: ILWU, PMSA, port and industry groups; Opposition: South Coast AQMD, Earthjustice, environmental and community groups.

- SB526 (Menjivar) — Update South Coast AQMD Rule 1157 to strengthen dust containment and require fence‑line monitoring and lower pile heights near sensitive receptors — moved to Appropriations (passed on committee call). Support: UCLA environmental clinic, community groups; Opposition: CalCEMA, business groups.

- SB318 (Becker) — Clean air permit modernization (technology recognition, clearinghouse, transparency) — referred to Appropriations; committee vote was split and placed on call for further consideration.

- SB607 (Weiner) — Fast & Focused CEQA reform — moved to Local Government (passed on committee call); generated substantial opposition from environmental justice groups, environmental NGOs and some labor groups; supporters include counties, housing and business coalitions.

- SB675 (Padilla) — Targeted streamlining for Seaport San Diego ELDP project — moved to Rules (passed on committee call); opponents requested clearer timing and permit triggers for resource agencies.

- SB674 (Cabaldon) — CRV reduction for boxed wine/small spirits (25' to 10') — moved to Appropriations (passed on committee call). Industry proponents include Tetra Pak and Wine Institute; Glass Packaging Institute opposed.

- SB819 (Padilla) — DTSC study of geothermal waste handling fee exemptions — moved to Appropriations (passed on committee call); no in‑room opposition.

- SB797 (Choi) — CPUC working group on undergrounding/insulating power lines in wildfire areas — moved to Energy, Utilities & Communications (passed on committee call).

- SB441 (Hurtado) — CARB transparency and legislative removal authority — did not advance in committee (failed to secure a favorable motion during the hearing); supporters asked for oversight; opponents warned of undermining technical independence.

What to watch next

- South Coast AQMD rulemaking on the ports (indirect source rule) remains the focal, near‑term flashpoint. SB34 aims to alter the political framework for that rule, and the bill's next stop, Transportation, and subsequent floor consideration will be closely watched by labor, industry and environmental groups.

- CEQA reform (SB607) will be contested as it moves through Local Government; sponsors and opponents told the committee they would continue negotiations.

- The localized dust protections of SB526 may be narrowed in amendments or implemented through district rule updates; municipalities and the air district remain key actors.

Meeting context and tone

Testimony ranged from technical briefings (air emissions inventories, permitting details) to community testimony and legal analysis about process and fairness. Several authors accepted committee amendments and all parties indicated a desire to continue negotiations. The hearing underscored persistent tensions between local control and state‑level standardization, and between protecting public health and minimizing economic disruption.

Ending

The committee completed a full agenda and sent most measures to the next legislative committees for further review. Several bills will continue to be negotiated; committee leaders encouraged ongoing engagement from stakeholders and staff to refine technical details and implementation language.