Time- Dated Material GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW California Regulatory Notice Register REGISTER 2026, NUMBER 23–Z PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUNE 5, 2026 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS TITLE 2. FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION Conflict–of–Interest Code — Notice File Number Z2026–0526–04 ......................................... 747 AMENDMENT MULTI–COUNTY: Westlands Water District STATE AGENCY: Department of Social Services California State Lottery Commission California Correctional Training and Rehabilitation Agency TITLE 2. STATE ALLOCATION BOARD Leroy F .

Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, Transitional Kindergarten (TK); Amendment of Form SAB 50–1 and Other Forms — Notice File Number Z2026–0526–03 ....................................... 748 TITLE 4. DEPARTMENT OF CANNABIS CONTROL Track and Trace Updates — Notice File Number Z2026–0521–01 ......................................... 756 TITLE 14. FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Sport Fishing 2026 (Inland and Marine) — Notice File Number Z2026–0526–01 ............................. 760 TITLE 22.

DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL Listing Cleaning Products Containing Hydrofluoric Acid as a Priority Product — Notice File Number Z2026–0526–02 ................................................................................. 769 GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Meyer Gulch Fish Passage Improvement Project, 1653–2024–185–001–R1, Mendocino County .......................................................... 773 (Continued on next page)

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTIONS Regulations filed with Secretary of State .............................................................. 774 The California Regulatory Notice Register is an official state publication of the Office of Administrative Law containing notices of proposed regulatory actions by state regulatory agencies to adopt, amend or repeal regulations contained in the California Code of Regulations. The effective period of a notice of proposed regulatory action by a state agency in the California Regulatory Notice Register shall not exceed one year [Government Code § 11346.4(b)].

It is suggested, therefore, that issues of the California Regulatory Notice Register be retained for a minimum of 18 months. CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER is published weekly by the Office of Administrative Law, 300 Capitol Mall, Suite 1250, Sacramento, CA 95814-4339. The Register is printed by Barclays, a subsidiary of West, a Thomson Reuters Business, and is offered by subscription for $409.00 (annual price). To order or make changes to current subscriptions, please call (800) 328−4880. The Register can also be accessed at https://oal.ca.gov .

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 747 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS Information contained in this document is published as received from agencies and is not edited by Thomson Reuters. TITLE 2.

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fair Po - litical Practices Commission, pursuant to the au - thority vested in it by Sections 82011, 87303, and 87304 of the Government Code to review proposed conflict–of–interest codes, will review the proposed/ amended conflict–of–interest codes of the following: CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES AMENDMENT MULTI–COUNTY: Westlands Water District STATE AGENCY: Department of Social Services California State Lottery Commission California Correctional Training and Rehabilitation Authority A written comment period has been established commencing on June 5, 2026, and closing on July 20, 2026.

Written comments should be directed to the Fair Political Practices Commission, Attention: Maia Kocinsky–Kirkham, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3050, Sacramento, California 95811. At the end of the 45–day comment period, the pro - posed conflict–of–interest codes will be submitted to the Commission’s Executive Director for their review, unless any interested person or their duly authorized representative requests, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period, a public hear- ing before the full Commission.

If a public hearing is requested, the proposed codes will be submitted to the Commission for review. The Executive Director of the Commission will review the above–referenced conflict–of–interest codes, proposed pursuant to Government Code Sec - tion 87300, which designate, pursuant to Government Code

Section 87302, employees who must disclose certain investments, interests in real property and income. The Executive Director of the Commission, upon their own motion or at the request of any interested person, will approve, or revise and approve, or re - turn the proposed codes to the agency for revision and re–submission within 60 days without further notice. Any interested person may present statements, ar - guments, or comments, in writing to the Executive Director of the Commission, relative to review of the proposed conflict–of–interest codes.

Any writ - ten comments must be received no later than July 20, 2026. If a public hearing is to be held, oral comments may be presented to the Commission at the hearing. COST TO LOCAL AGENCIES There shall be no reimbursement for any new or in- creased costs to local government which may result from compliance with these codes because these are not new programs mandated on local agencies by the codes since the requirements described herein were mandated by the Political Reform Act of 1974. There- fore, they are not “costs mandated by the state” as de- fined in Government Code

Section 17514. EFFECT ON HOUSING COSTS AND BUSINESSES Compliance with the codes has no potential effect on housing costs or on private persons, businesses, or small businesses. AUTHORITY Government Code Sections 82011, 87303 and 87304 provide that the Fair Political Practices Com - mission as the code–reviewing body for the above conflict–of–interest codes shall approve codes as sub- mitted, revise the proposed code, and approve it as revised, or return the proposed code for revision and re–submission.

REFERENCE Government Code Sections 87300 and 87306 provide that agencies shall adopt and promulgate conflict–of–interest codes pursuant to the Political Re- form Act and amend their codes when change is ne - cessitated by changed circumstances. CONTACT Any inquiries concerning the proposed conflict–of–interest codes should be made to Maia Kocinsky–Kirkham, Fair Politi - cal Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3050, Sacramento, California 95811, or email mkocinsky–kirkham@fppc.ca.gov.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 748 AVAILABILITY OF PROPOSED CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES Copies of the proposed conflict–of–interest codes may be obtained from the Commission offices or the respective agency. Requests for copies from the Com- mission should be made to Maia Kocinsky–Kirkham, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3050, Sacramento, California 95811, or email mkocinsky–kirkham@fppc.ca.gov. TITLE 2.

STATE ALLOCATION BOARD TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN ● 1859.2, 1859.33, 1859.35, 1859.42, 1859.42.1, 1859.51, 1859.60, 1859.61, 1859.73.2, 1859.77.2, 1859.77.3, 1859.78.7.1, 1859.81, 1859.82.1, 1859.82.2, 1859.124.1, 1859.163.5, 1859.164, 1859.167.1, 1859.182 AND 1859.183.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING FORMS ● Form SAB 50–01, Enrollment Certification/Pro- jection, (Rev. 05/09 02/26), which is incorporated by reference and referenced in Regulation Sec - tion 1859.2. ● Form SAB 50–02, Existing School Building Ca - pacity, (Rev. 12/10 02/26), which is incorporated by reference and referenced in Regulation Sec - tion 1859.2. ● Form SAB 50–03, Eligibility Determination, (Rev. 03/25 02/26), which is incorporated by reference and referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2. ● Form SAB 50–04, Application For Funding, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), which is incorporated by reference and referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2. ● Form SAB 50–09; Application for Charter School Preliminary Apportionment, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), which is incorporated by reference and referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2. ● Form SAB 195, Application for Natural Disaster Assistance, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), which is incorpo- rated by reference and referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the State Allocation Board (SAB) proposes to amend the above–referenced regulation sections, including six associated forms, contained in Title 2, California Code of Regulations (CCR). A public hearing is not sched - uled. A public hearing will be held if any interested person, or his or her duly authorized representative, submits a written request for a public hearing to the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period.

Following the public hearing, if one is request- ed, or following the written comment period if no pub- lic hearing is requested, OPSC, at its own motion or at the instance of any interested person, may adopt the proposals substantially as set forth above without fur - ther notice. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE CITATIONS The SAB is proposing to amend the above–referenced regulation sections under the au - thority provided by Sections 17070.35, 17072.13, 17075.15, 17075.20, 17078.64, 17078.72 and 17592.73 of the Education Code.

The proposal interprets and make specific reference Sections 8974, 17009.5, 17017.6, 17017.7, 17021, 17047, 17050, 17051, 17052, 17070.15, 17070.51, 17070.51(a), 17070.54, 17070.59, 17070.71, 17070.77, 17071.10, 17071.25, 17071.30, 17071.33, 17071.35, 17071.40, 17071.46, 17071.75, 17071.76, 17072.10, 17072.12, 17072.13, 17072.15, 17072.18, 17072.20, 17072.30, 17072.33, 17072.35, 17073.15, 17073.16, 17073.20, 17073.25, 17074.10, 17074.16, 17074.265, 17074.30, 17074.56, 17075.10, 17075.15, 17075.20, 17077.30, 17077.35, 17077.40, 17077.42, 17077.45, 17078.52, 17078.54, 17078.56, 17078.58, 17078.72, 17078.72(k), 17079, 17079.10, 17079.20, 17079.30, 17280, 17250.30, 17375, 56026, 100420, 100620, 100820, 101012, 101012(a) (1), 101012(a) (8) and 101122, Education Code;

Section 53311, Govern- ment Code; and Sections 1771.3 in effect on January 1, 2012 through June 19, 2014 and 1771.5, Labor Code. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY OVERVIEW STATEMENT The Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 established, through Senate Bill 50,

Chapter 407, Stat- utes of 1998, the School Facility Program (SFP). The SFP provides a per–pupil grant amount to qualifying school districts for purposes of constructing school fa- cilities and modernizing existing school facilities. The SAB adopted regulations to implement the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, which were ap- proved by the Office of Administrative Law and filed with the Secretary of State on October 8, 1999. OPSC held three stakeholder meetings in the devel- opment of these proposed regulations.

At its meeting on February 25, 2026, the SAB adopted proposed reg- ulatory amendments that implement the methodology for reporting Transitional Kindergarten (TK) enroll -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 749 ment as its own grade category in current New Con - struction enrollment projections. TK enrollment is re - ported as its own grade level to the California Depart- ment of Education which will allow OPSC to validate it as applications for New Construction funding are processed from the new SFP bond authority available through Proposition 2.

The proposed regulations rep - resent a reasonable approach for projecting a school district’s future need for classrooms when TK and Kindergarten enrollment are recognized as separate and distinct grade categories. Attached to this Notice are the proposed regula - tions and six associated forms. The proposed regu - lations can also be reviewed on OPSC’s website at: Laws, Regulations for School Construction Projects . Copies of the proposed regulations and the six asso - ciated forms will be mailed to any person requesting this information by using OPSC’s contact information set forth below in this Notice.

The proposed regula - tions amend the SFP Regulations under the California Code of Regulations, Title 2,

Chapter 3, Subchapter 4, Group 1, State Allocation Board, Subgroup 5.5, Reg - ulations relating to the Leroy F. Greene School Facil - ities Act of 1998. Background and Problem Being Resolved The Kindergarten Readiness Act of 2010 was estab- lished by Senate Bill (SB) 1381,

Chapter 705, Statutes of 2010 (Simitian). The statute shifted the birthday re- quirements for kindergarten and first grade admission and introduced TK. TK was established as the first year of a two–year kindergarten program with a mod - ified curriculum design to be age and developmentally appropriate and designed to prepare children for kin - dergarten. The requirement to provide TK was phased in from the 2022–2023 school year to the 2025–2026 school year. It is still difficult to predict TK enroll - ment year–over–year because TK participation varies across school districts and enrollment is not mandato- ry.

Fluctuating TK enrollment could have a huge im - pact on projected Kindergarten enrollment; however, the proposed regulations provide TK as a new grade category that has an independent five–year enroll - ment projection that will not affect the current K–12 five–year enrollment projection model. The problem being resolved is implementing the ap- proach to phase in the requirement for school districts to report TK enrollment in current New Construction enrollment projections as its own grade category.

The way the current Form SAB 50–01 projects kindergar - ten enrollment is by using a linear weighted average and it is calculated independently from grades 1–12. Adding a separate row to Part A of the Form SAB 50–01 for TK enrollment and using an isolated lin - ear weighted average calculation, the current projec - tions for grades K–12 will not be affected.

The new methodology would be phased in for 1) Approved Ap- plications for New Construction that are currently on OPSC’s Workload List and submittals received until the date the proposed regulations become effective, school districts would use the methodology on the cur- rent Form SAB 50–01; 2) Approved Applications re - ceived on or after the effective date of the regulations through October 31, 2026, school districts would have the option to use the methodology on the current Form SAB 50–01 or the new methodology; and 3) submit - tals received on or after November 1, 2026, school dis- tricts would be required to use the new methodolo - gy on the revised Form SAB 50–01.

The phase in ap - proach allows school districts to plan their submittals based on current projections, but also account for tim- ing of the approval of the regulations by the Office of Administrative Law. The use of the November 1, 2026 date is intentional as it aligns with the current regula - tions where the enrollment years reported are deter - mined whether the submittal is made before or on and after November 1 each year.

OPSC performed a search on whether the proposed regulatory amendments were consistent and compat - ible with existing State laws and regulations and did not identify any inconsistent or incompatible exist - ing State laws or regulations. The proposed regula - tory amendments are consistent with and align pro - visions of statute that implement TK enrollment, and are consistent with New Construction enrollment pro- jections.

Proceeding with the implementation of the proposed regulations will provide a positive impact on the state’s economy, as well as the creation of an unknown number of jobs in the school construction industry. Once school districts request the release of state funds, manufacturing and construction–related industries such as architecture, engineering, trades and municipalities may expand based on the demand on these industries.

School districts will have a period of time in which they can elect to report TK enroll - ment using either the current or the proposed version of the Form SAB 50–01, followed by the requirement for school districts to begin reporting TK enrollment separately on the Form SAB 50–01 beginning on No - vember 1, 2026. This allows school districts to base their eligibility on anticipated changes to the projec - tion methodology without impacting applications al - ready submitted or in the process of being submitted. The proposed regulations maintain equity, consisten - cy, and the integrity of the SFP.

Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations The benefit associated with the proposed regula - tions is intended to more accurately project TK enroll- ment on the Form SAB 50–01 so that school districts have the necessary eligibility to construct classrooms needed to house all anticipated TK–12 students within their school districts. Another benefit is implementing a phase in approach, as indicated above, for requir -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 750 ing school districts to report TK enrollment in current New Construction enrollment projections as its own grade category. In addition, the proposed regulations may have a positive impact on the state’s economy, as well as the creation of an unknown number of jobs in the school construction industry, by facilitating fund - ing for school construction. Once school districts re - quest the release of state funds, manufacturing and construction–related industries such as architecture, engineering, trades and municipalities may expand based on the demand on these industries.

Summary of the Proposed Regulations A

summary of the proposed regulations is as follows: Existing Regulation

Section 1859.2 represents a set of defined words and terms used exclusively for these regulations. The proposed amendments: 1) update the revision dates of six associated forms; 2) in four defi - nitions, the word “Kindergarten” is struck out and re - placed with the term “Transitional Kindergarten;” and 3) in the definition for “Existing School Site,” the “K” in K–12 is struck out and “TK” has been added so it reads TK–12. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.33 delineates the types of classrooms that must be identified in a school district’s gross classroom inventory. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that cap - italize defined words and terms, such as School Dis - trict and Classroom throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the pro - posed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.35 sets forth the methodology by which a school district’s existing school building capacity is calculated. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that cap - italize defined words and terms, such as School Dis - trict, Classroom, Portable Classrooms throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplish - ing. There is also one Reference citation struck out as this

section no longer exists in the Education Code. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.42 sets forth the methodology school districts use to calculate their en- rollment projections, including augmenting their en - rollment projections by utilizing dwelling units in ap - proved and valid subdivision maps. This

section also provides for the fifth–year and tenth year enrollment projection criteria. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District and the words “Transitional Kindergarten and” where the methodol - ogy requires the calculation for both Transitional Kin- dergarten and kindergarten enrollments. In subsection (a) (1) the term “Transitional Kindergarten” is added and the word “kindergarten” is struck out to align with Regulation

Section 1859.42.1(

b) below. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.42.1 sets forth permissible supplements to the fifth–year projection of pupil enrollment for Non–Special Day Class pupils and not for High School Attendance Area (HSAA) and Super HSAA enrollment projections based on residen- cy. This

section provides factors which can augment the enrollment projection include pupils that will re - side in dwelling units in an approved and valid sub - division map; children born that will attend kinder - garten in the fifth calendar year following birth; and modified weighting of enrollment projections that best represents the enrollment trends of the district, based upon submittal of 18 consecutive years of en - rollment used to calculate three sets of ten histor - ical enrollment projections. The proposed amend - ments add new subsection (

b) to provide specificity to school districts on what enrollment and/or birth rate data to provide and how the new linear calcula - tion works for reporting TK enrollment in New Con - struction enrollment projections. There are other non– substantive changes that renumber subsections due to new subsection (

b) and capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District and adds the term Transitional Kindergarten throughout this

section to align with what the proposed regulations are accom - plishing, such as specifying when TK classrooms and/or enrollment should be included. Existing Regulation 1859.51 outlines the crite - ria for adjusting a district’s new construction base - line eligibility. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Modernization, New Construction Grant and Classroom throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the proposed regulations are accom - plishing. There are also Reference citations struck out as these sections no longer exist in the Education Code. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.60 sets forth the criteria for a school district to calculate its modern - ization baseline eligibility for each school site. This

section also includes specific assistance to school dis- tricts that have a school facility located on a military installation that is the recipient of a federal grant that requires a local matching share. The proposed amend- ments make non–substantive changes that capital - ize defined words and terms, such as School District, Modernization, New Construction Grant and Class - room throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.61 sets forth spe - cific factors which impact a school district’s capacity to house pupils and therefore require adjustments to the modernization baseline eligibility. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that cap -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 751 italize defined words and terms, such as School Dis - trict, Modernization and Classroom throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.73.2 provides ad- ditional new construction funding to school districts that demolish one–story school buildings for replace - ment with multilevel buildings in order to increase pupil capacity. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Classroom, Mod - ernization, Application, Square Footage, and District Representative throughout this section, as well as adds “TK” in lieu of “K” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.77.2 allows a school district to receive new construction grants that exceed the capacity of a project and to use grant el - igibility determined at a grade level other than the proposed project. It also allows school districts to re - quest to use a reasonable number of grants to con - struct needed facilities, some of which by their na - ture do not house students (i.e., gymnasiums, librar - ies, multi–purpose rooms).

The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Classroom, New Construction Grants, New Construction Eligibil- ity, and Application throughout this section, as well as replaces the word “Kindergarten” with “Transitional Kindergarten” to align with what the proposed regula- tions are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.77.3 allows a school district to receive new construction grants that exceed the capacity of a project and to use grant eligi- bility determined at a grade level other than the pro - posed project, and ensures that proposed use of grants requests have been discussed at districts’ governing boards regularly scheduled public meetings so the pub- lic is aware of the projects and can see how the funds will be spent prior to filing the application. Addition - ally, districts must self–certify to the SAB that the ap- provable housing plan includes specific criteria.

This ensures the school district adequately houses pupils where grants intended to build classrooms are redi - rected for other purposes. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Classroom, New Construction Grant, Square Footage, New Con - struction Eligibility, and Application throughout this section, as well as replaces the word “Kindergarten” with “Transitional Kindergarten” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.78.7.1 provides a modernization supplemental grant for projects with a scope of work that includes the demolition and re - placement of buildings at least 75 years of age or older. This

section sets forth the eligibility criteria and grant calculations for this supplemental grant. The grant amount is aligned with the new construction per pupil grant amount and will be adjusted annually based on the change in the Class B Construction Cost Index as approved by the SAB each January. Recipients of this grant will receive an alternate per–pupil grant amount than provided under the current modernization pro - gram and must replace the building that generated the eligibility for this grant. The regulation also re - quires the replacement of portable buildings with per- manent buildings.

The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Modernization, as well as replac - es the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.81 sets forth spe - cific criteria for school districts and county offices of education to qualify for financial hardship status. This

section specifies the maximum level of total bonding capacity that a school district can have and still be au- tomatically eligible for financial hardship assistance at either $5 million to $15 million, depending on the date the application was received. In addition, subsection (

i) outlines the requirements for school districts to uti- lize bridge financing. These are used as a tool for in - terfund borrowing for school districts to continue with their projects while waiting for the receipt of financial hardship project funding. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Moderniza - tion, Classroom, New Construction, Modernization Adjusted Grant, Application, and New Construction Eligibility throughout this section, as well as replaces “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regu - lations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.82.1 informs school districts what a “School Building” means for purposes of the Facility Hardship Program.

Other cri - teria include, but are not limited to, general factors generating program eligibility as well as placing new limits to program eligibility such as disallowing proj - ects solely to replace components that have reached the end of their useful life, for performance of routine maintenance or repair; issues resulting from the defer- ment of routine maintenance or repair, lack of current code compliance, or the addition of components that were not previously existing; code compliance costs triggered by eligible facility hardship projects may be included as part of the qualified application; time limit on timeframe for application submission for complet - ed projects; and specifies the application documents required to submit a complete Facility Hardship ap - plication for the replacement of School Buildings, for School Buildings that are lost, destroyed, or unable to be repaired, and for School Buildings where the esti -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 752 mated cost to rehabilitate exceeds 50 percent of the cost to replace the building. The proposed amend - ments make non–substantive changes that capital - ize defined words and terms, such as School District, Application, Classroom, Modernization, and Square Footage throughout this section, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.82.2 informs school districts what a “School Building” means for purposes of the Seismic Mitigation Program (SMP).

Other criteria include, but is not limited to, general factors generating program eligibility including lim - its to program eligibility; specifies the criteria a proj - ect must meet in order to qualify as an SMP project; specifies the application documents required to sub - mit a complete SMP application for the replacement of School Buildings; specifies the documents required to submit an SMP application for the replacement of School Buildings that have been lost, destroyed, or unable to be repaired, and describes a licensed de - sign professional for clarity purposes; and specifies the documents required to submit an SMP application for the replacement of School Buildings with interior square footage to be mitigated.

The proposed amend - ments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Ap- plication, and Classroom throughout this section, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.124.1 delineates the maximum square footage and type of facility in the chart for purposes of constructing a Type I or Type II Joint–Use project. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Square Footage and New Construc- tion throughout this section, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regu - lations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.163.5 provides the calculation that determines a Preliminary Charter School Rehabilitation Apportionment based on the el- igible square footage included in the project and addi- tional supplemental grants. This

section clarifies the calculation of supplemental grants, and the require - ments and calculations for initiating and enforcing a Labor Compliance Program as well as for prevailing wage monitoring and enforcement. This

section also aligns Charter Schools Facilities Program (CSFP) re - habilitation supplemental grants with Education Code requirements, specifically

Section 17078.54(d). Fur - ther, subsections (a) (7) and (a) (8) allow applicants to request and reserve funding for energy efficiency and career technical education components as part of a Preliminary Charter School Apportionment for Re - habilitation. The proposed amendments make non– substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Square Footage, Classroom, and New Construction Grant throughout this section, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the pro- posed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.164 sets forth the funding prioritization and processing if the estimat - ed total apportionments for all financially sound Pre - liminary Charter School Applications exceeds the funds available. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Applications, Application, New Construction Eligibility, and School District, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.167.1 speci - fies that the amount of the Final Charter School Ap - portionment may not be increased for site acquisi - tion costs exceeding those calculated under

Section 1859.163.1(b), nor increased for useable acres for the project in excess of the previously approved recom - mended site size by the California Department of Education. This

section also allows applicants to re - quest funding for energy efficiency and Career Tech - nical Education (CTE) components for a Final Charter School Apportionment for a CSFP Rehabilitation proj- ect. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Square Footage, Classroom, and New Construction Grant throughout this section, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regu - lations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.182 specifies the calculations to determine the Overcrowding Relief Grant (ORG) pupil eligibility and how the submittal of the Form SAB 50–11 assists in that determination. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Por - table Classrooms and Classrooms throughout this sec- tion, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Existing Regulation

Section 1859.183 describes the determination of ORG funding to eligible school dis - tricts, and that ORG funds must be used to replace an equivalent number of portable classrooms with permanent classrooms. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as Portable Classrooms, New Construction Eligibility, Permanent Classrooms, and Classroom throughout this section, as well as replac - es the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing.

Existing Form SAB 50–01, Enrollment Certifica - tion/Projection, (Rev. 05/09 02/26), (incorporated by reference), is submitted by applicant school districts to determine initial eligibility for funding under the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 753 SFP. The proposed amendments expand the instruc - tions to include TK Pupil Data whether it is by Enroll- ment/Residency, TK Enrollment Data or TK Residen- cy Data for High School Attendance Area School Dis- tricts. School districts are instructed what to include and what not to include for each

section under Part A1 that applies to their circumstance in order to com - plete the Form. There are non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, as well as the addition of “K–12” to distinguish between “TK” and “K–12” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing, such as specifying when TK classrooms and/or enrollment should be included.

Existing Form SAB 50–02, Existing School Build - ing Capacity, (Rev. 12/10 02/26), (incorporated by reference), is submitted by applicant school districts to determine the total number of pupils that may be housed in the district’s gross classroom inventory. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, as well as re - places the “K” with “TK” to align with what the pro - posed regulations are accomplishing.

Existing Form SAB 50–03, Eligibility Determina - tion, (Rev. 03/25 02/26), (incorporated by reference), is used by school districts to calculate their eligibil - ity for new construction and modernization fund - ing under the SFP. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, such as School District, Square Footage, Classroom, Modernization, Modernization Appor - tionment, and Modernization Grants, to name a few, throughout this Form, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing.

Existing Form SAB 50–04, Application For Fund- ing, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), (incorporated by reference), is submitted by school districts to apply for State fund - ing for new construction and modernization projects. The proposed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing.

Existing Form SAB 50–09, Application for Pre - liminary Charter School Apportionment, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), (incorporated by reference), is used by school districts or charter school entities to apply for prelimi- nary apportionments for qualifying projects. The pro - posed amendments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, as well as re - places the “K” with “TK” to align with what the pro - posed regulations are accomplishing.

Existing Form SAB 195, Application for Natural Disaster Assistance, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), (incorporat- ed by reference), is required to be submitted by school districts to apply for funding for either interim hous - ing assistance following a natural disaster or other as - sistance following a natural disaster, pursuant to Ed - ucation Code

Section 17075.20. The proposed amend- ments make non–substantive changes that capitalize defined words and terms, as well as replaces the “K” with “TK” to align with what the proposed regulations are accomplishing. Statutory Authority and Implementation Education Code

Section 17070.35. (

a) In addition to all other powers and duties as are granted to the board by this chapter, other statutes, or the California Con - stitution, the board shall do all of the following:

(1) Adopt rules and regulations, pursuant to the rulemak - ing provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act,

Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 11340) of

Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, for the administration of this chapter. Government Code

Section 15503. Whenever the board is required to make allocations or apportion - ments under this part, it shall prescribe rules and reg - ulations for the administration of, and not inconsis - tent with, the act making the appropriation of funds to be allocated or apportioned. The board shall require the procedure, forms, and the submission of any infor- mation it may deem necessary or appropriate. Unless otherwise provided in the appropriation act, the board may require that applications for allocations or appor- tionments be submitted to it for approval.

Determination of Inconsistency or Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations TK was established as the first year of a two–year kindergarten program with a modified curriculum de - sign to be age and developmentally appropriate and designed to prepare children for kindergarten. The TK age expansion was phased in from the 2022–2023 school year to the 2025–2026 school year. It is still difficult to predict TK enrollment year–over–year be - cause TK enrollment is not mandatory.

Fluctuating TK enrollment could have a huge impact on projected Kindergarten enrollment; however, the proposed reg - ulations provide TK as a new grade category that has an independent five–year enrollment projection that will not affect the current K–12 five–year enrollment projection model. There was support to phase in the requirement for school districts to report TK enrollment in current New Construction enrollment projections as its own grade category.

The way the current Form SAB 50–01 projects kindergarten enrollment is by using a linear weighted average and it is calculated independently from grades 1–12. Adding a separate row to Part A of the Form SAB 50–01 for TK enrollment and us - ing an isolated linear weighted average calculation, the current projections for grades K–12 will not be af- fected. The new methodology would be phased in for 1) Approved Applications for New Construction that are currently on OPSC’s Workload List and submit -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 754 tals received until the date the proposed regulations become effective, school districts would use the meth- odology on the current Form SAB 50–01; 2) Approved Applications received on or after the effective date of the regulations through October 31, 2026, school dis - tricts would have the option to use the methodology on the current Form SAB 50–01 or the new methodol- ogy; and 3) submittals received on or after November 1, 2026, school districts would be required to use the new methodology on the revised Form SAB 50–01.

The phase in approach allows school districts to plan their submittals based on current projections, but also account for timing of the approval of the regulations by the Office of Administrative Law. The use of the November 1, 2026 date is intentional as it aligns with the current regulations where the enrollment years re - ported are determined whether the submittal is made before or on and after November 1 each year.

After conducting a review, the SAB has concluded that these are the only regulations on this subject area, and therefore, the proposed regulations are neither in - consistent nor incompatible with existing State laws and regulations. The proposed regulations are within the SAB’s authority to enact regulations for the SFP under Education Code

Section 17070.35 and Govern - ment Code

Section 15503. Documents Incorporated by Reference ● Form SAB 50–01, (Rev. 05/09 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. ● Form SAB 50–02, (Rev. 12/10 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. ● Form SAB 50–03, (Rev. 03/25 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. ● Form SAB 50–04, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. ● Form SAB 50–09, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. ● Form SAB 195, (Rev. 01/26 02/26), referenced in Regulation

Section 1859.2 and is incorporated by reference. IMPACT ON LOCAL AGENCIES OR SCHOOL DISTRICTS The Executive Officer of the SAB has determined that the proposed regulations do not impose a mandate or a mandate requiring reimbursement by the State pursuant to

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code. It will not re - quire local agencies, school districts or charter schools to incur additional costs in order to comply with the proposed regulations.

DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION The Executive Officer of the SAB has made the fol- lowing initial determinations relative to the required statutory categories: ● The SAB has made an initial determination that there will be no significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, in - cluding the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. ● The SAB is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. ● There will be no non–discretionary costs or sav - ings to local agencies. ● The proposed regulations create no costs to any local agency or school district requiring reim - bursement pursuant to

Section 17500 et seq., or beyond those required by law, except for the re - quired district contribution toward each project as stipulated in statute. ● There will be no costs or savings in federal fund- ing to the State. ● The proposed regulations create no costs or sav - ings to any State agency beyond those required by law. ● The SAB has made an initial determination that there will be no impact on housing costs.

RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC I M PACT A NA LYSIS Impact to Businesses and Jobs in California The proposed regulations promote transparency be- cause school districts and the school district commu - nity have been collaborating on the proposed regula - tions through a series of stakeholder meetings. TK was established as the first year of a two–year kindergarten program with a modified curriculum design to be age and developmentally appropriate and designed to pre- pare children for kindergarten. The TK age expansion was phased in from the 2022–2023 school year to the 2025–2026 school year.

It is still difficult to predict TK enrollment year–over–year because TK enrollment is not mandatory. Fluctuating TK enrollment could have a huge impact on projected Kindergarten enrollment; however, the proposed regulations provide TK as a new grade category that has an independent five–year enrollment projection that will not affect the current K–12 five–year enrollment projection model.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 755 In addition, the proposed regulations will not nega - tively impact the creation of jobs, the creation of new businesses, and the expansion of businesses in Califor- nia. It is not anticipated that the proposed regulations will result in the elimination of existing businesses or jobs within California. Additionally, the proposed reg- ulations expand the SFP while maintaining program integrity and equity amongst school district projects.

Benefits to Public Health and Welfare, Worker’s Safety, and the State’s Environment ● The proposed regulations promote transparency because school districts and the school district community have been collaborating on the pro - posed regulations through a series of stakeholder meetings. ● There are continued benefits to the health and welfare of California residents and worker safety.

School districts, charter schools, and local edu - cational agencies utilize construction and trades employees to work on school construction proj - ects and although this proposed regulation does not directly impact worker’s safety, existing law provides for the availability of a skilled labor force and encourages improved health and safe - ty of construction and trades employees through proper apprenticeship and training.

Further, pub - lic health and safety is enhanced because a prop - erly paid and trained workforce will build school construction projects that are higher quality, structurally code–compliant and safer for use by pupils, staff, and other occupants on the site. ● There is no impact to the State’s environment from the proposed regulations. The SAB finds the proposed regulations fully con - sistent with the stated purposes and benefits.

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESSES It has been determined that the proposed regulations will not have a negative impact on small businesses in the ways identified in subsections (a) (1)–(4) of Sec - tion 4, Title 1, CCR. The proposed regulations only apply to school districts, local education agencies, and charter schools for purposes of funding school facility projects. Manufacturing and construction–related in - dustries such as architecture, engineering, trades and municipalities may expand based on the demand on these industries.

This may include new [small] busi - nesses, or the expansion of [small] businesses, which have a positive impact on the state’s economy and may also create an unknown number of jobs. SUBMISSION OF COMMENTS, DOCUMENTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Any interested person may present statements, ar - guments or contentions, in writing, submitted via U.S. mail, email or fax, relevant to the proposed regulato - ry action. Written comments submitted via U.S. mail, email or fax must be received at OPSC no later than July 20, 2026 end of day.

The express terms of the pro- posed regulations as well as the Initial Statement of Reasons are available to the public.

Written comments, submitted via U.S. mail, email or fax, regarding the proposed regulatory action, re - quests for a copy of the proposed regulatory action or the Initial Statement of Reasons, and questions con - cerning the substance of the proposed regulatory ac - tion should be addressed to: Lisa Jones, Regulations Coordinator Mailing Address: Office of Public School Construction 707 Third Street, 3rd Floor West Sacramento, CA 95605 Email Address: lisa.jones@dgs.ca.gov Fax Number: (916) 375–6721 AGENCY CONTACT PERSONS General or substantive questions regarding this No - tice of Proposed Regulatory Action may be directed to Ms.

Lisa Jones at (279) 946–8459. If Ms. Jones is un- available, these questions may be directed to the back- up contact person, Mr. Michael Watanabe, Deputy Ex- ecutive Officer, at (279) 946–8463. ADOPTION OF REGULATIONS Please note that, following the public comment pe - riod, the SAB may adopt the regulation substantially as proposed in this notice or with modifications, which are sufficiently related to the originally proposed text and notice of proposed regulatory activity.

If modifi - cations are made, the modified text with the changes clearly indicated will be made available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date on which the SAB adopts the regulations. The modified regulation(

s) will be made available and provided to: all persons who testified at and who submitted written comments at the public hearing, all persons who submitted written comments during the public comment period, and all persons who requested notification from the agency of the availability of such changes. Requests for copies of any modified regula - tions should be addressed to the agency’s regulation coordinator identified above. The SAB will accept

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 756 written comments on the modified regulations during the 15–day period. SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WILL REQUIRE A NEW NOTICE If, after receiving comments, the SAB intends to adopt the regulation with modifications not sufficient- ly related to the original text, the modified text will not be adopted without complying anew with the notice requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. RULEMAKING FILE Pursuant to Government Code

Section 11347.3, the SAB is maintaining a rulemaking file for the proposed regulatory action. The file currently contains: 1. A copy of the text of the regulations for which the adoption is proposed in strikeout/underline. 2. A copy of this Notice. 3. A copy of the Initial Statement of Reasons for the proposed adoption. 4. The factual information upon which the SAB is relying in proposing the adoption. As data and other factual information, studies, re - ports or written comments are received they will be added to the rulemaking file.

The file is available for public inspection at OPSC during normal working hours. Items 1 through 3 are also available on OPSC’s Internet Web site at: Laws, Regulations for School Construction Projects then scroll down to School Fa - cility Program, Pending Regulatory Changes, Feb - ruary 25, 2026 Non–Emergency Regulations, and click on the links entitled 45–day Public Notice, Ini - tial Statement of Reasons, Proposed Regulation Text, Forms SAB 50–01 through 50–04 and Forms SAB 50–09 and 195. ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

Section 11346.5(a) (13), the SAB must determine that no rea - sonable alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the pro - posed action, or would be more cost–effective to af - fected private persons and equally effective in imple - menting the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The alternative to these proposed regulations would be the SAB take no action and continue to have school districts report TK enrollment combined with kinder - garten enrollment. This could result in school districts not having the necessary eligibility to construct class - rooms needed to house all TK–12 students within their school districts. AVAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, the Final Statement of Reasons will be available, and copies may be requested from the agency’s regulation coordinator named in this no- tice or may be accessed on the website listed above. TITLE 4.

DEPARTMENT OF CANNABIS CONTROL TRACK AND TRACE UPDATES Notice is hereby given that the Department of Can - nabis Control (Department) proposes to adopt the amended regulations described below after consider - ing all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action. PUBLIC HEARING The Department will hold a virtual public hearing on Tuesday, July 21, 2026, beginning at 10:00 a.m. Attendees may participate via WebEx online meeting platform or telephone conferencing.

To participate via WebEx online meeting platform, please contact Lilly Quynn at 1–844–612–2322 or outreach@cannabis.ca.gov by 4:30 p.m. on Monday, July 20, 2026, to request a link to the meeting. A link to the meeting will also be posted on the Department’s website no later than 9:00 a.m. the day of the hearing. For those who wish to attend the hearing in per - son, including those who require reasonable accom - modation, limited seating will be available in the De - partment Hearing Room, 2920 Kilgore Road, Ran - cho Cordova, CA 95670.

Please contact Lilly Quynn at 1–844–612–2322 or outreach@cannabis.ca.gov by 4:30 p.m. on Monday, July 20, 2026, to request to at- tend the hearing in person or by 4:30 p.m. on Mon- day, June 26, 2026 , if reasonable accommodations are necessary. Participants will be given instructions on how to provide oral comments once they have accessed the hearing. The hearing will proceed on the dates noted above until all testimony is submitted or 12:00 p.m., whichever is later. At the hearing, any person may present oral or written statements or arguments rele - vant to the proposed action.

The Department requests, but does not require, that persons who make oral com- ments at the hearing also submit a written copy of their testimony via email.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 757 WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person, or their authorized represen- tative, may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action by mail or email to: Department of Cannabis Control Legal Affairs Division 2920 Kilgore Road Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 Email: publiccomment@cannabis.ca.gov The written comment period closes on Monday, July 20, 2026. To be considered by the Department, a comment must be received by Monday, July 20, 2026. AUTHORITY Business and Professions Code

section 26013. REFERENCE Business and Professions Code sections 26013, 26067, 26069, 26070, 26100, 26104, 26110, 26120, 26140, 26160, and 26161. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Summary of Existing Laws and Effect of the Proposed Action The Medicinal and Adult–Use Cannabis Regula - tion and Safety Act (MAUCRSA) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 26000 et seq.) generally governs commercial can - nabis activity in California. The provisions of Cali - fornia Code of Regulations (CCR), title 4, division 19 further implement, interpret, and make specific many MAUCRSA statutes.

These existing laws define com- mercial cannabis terms, govern sampling and testing of final–form cannabis goods, and establish the Cali - fornia Cannabis Track and Trace (CCTT) system and impose specific use and reporting requirements on all licensees. The changes proposed in this rulemaking action would provide additional safeguards against fraudu - lent transactions and other potential abuses of the sys- tem to engage in “lab shopping,” including requiring all parties to a transfer of cannabis goods to approve the transfer before a shipping manifest may be gener - ated by the system.

The proposed changes would clar- ify and supplement existing data entry requirements to ensure the accuracy of system data. The proposed changes would require licensed retailers to enter cer - tain tax information when recording sales in the sys - tem. The proposed changes would require licensed re- tailers to provide Certificates of Analysis (COAs) to customers upon request. Evaluation of Inconsistency with Federal Laws The United States Drug Enforcement Administra - tion lists cannabis as a

Schedule 1 Drug under the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. § 812). This means that commercial cannabis activity is illegal under federal law. However, California, through the MAUCRSA and other laws, has decriminalized the cultivation, sale, and possession of cannabis goods for persons aged 21 or older and for medicinal patients.

Objectives and Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations The objectives of the proposed regulatory changes are strengthening California’s regulated cannabis in - dustry and protecting public health and safety by pre - venting distributor diversion of cannabis to the illicit market, preventing lab shopping and potency inflation, improving the accuracy and quality of data entered in the CCTT system by licensees, and giving consum - ers immediate and full access to cannabis test results.

The changes will strengthen the integrity of the legal cannabis supply chain and reduce illegal diversion that undercuts the legal market and unfairly disadvantages legal operators. The changes will greatly reduce the volume of adulterated and misbranded products that pass laboratory testing and end up on retail shelves. Other regulators, including the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), will bene - fit from improved recordkeeping and reporting of ac - curate sales data, while consumers will benefit from more transparent sales receipt information, including a clear price breakdown.

Consumers will further ben - efit from increased access to regulatory testing results, allowing for better–informed purchasing decisions and increased confidence and participation in the reg - ulated cannabis market. Evaluation of Inconsistency/Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations After careful evaluation, the Department has deter - mined that the proposed changes are not inconsistent or incompatible with existing regulations.

Disclosures Regarding the Proposed Action The Department has made the following initial determinations: ● Mandate on local agencies or school districts: None. ● Cost to any local agency or school district required to be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. ● Cost or savings to any state agency: The Depart - ment will incur costs of approximately $555,165 in developing and implementing CCTT system enhancements and monitoring compliance with the new regulations.

The proposed regulations are expected to result in unquantified tax revenue increases and significant savings for CDTFA.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 758 ● Other nondiscretionary cost or savings imposed upon local agencies: None. ● Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None. ● Effect on housing costs: None. ● Significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the abili - ty of California businesses to compete with busi - nesses in other states: None. ● Cost impacts on a representative private person or business: For a typical business, including a small business, one–time up–front expenses of $2,130.

For typical retail businesses, including small businesses, who must upgrade their Point of Safe (POS) system, annual recurring expenses of $7,800. Results of the Standardized Regulatory Impact Analysis (SRIA) The Department believes that the proposal will eliminate approximately 857 existing jobs and 47 ex - isting businesses. The Department believes that larger businesses, especially larger retailers, will generally be at a competitive advantage over smaller businesses when these changes take effect.

The Department be - lieves that the proposal would result in an increase in investment in California of approximately $1.28 mil - lion. The Department does not expect the proposal to incentivize any innovation in the regulated commer - cial cannabis market. The Department believes that the proposal will improve the health of California resi- dents, worker safety, and the state’s environment.

Summaries of, and Responses to, Department of Finance (DOF) Comments on the Standardized Regulatory Impact Analysis Comment #1: The SRIA must provide an estimated effective date and implementation period of the pro - posed regulation, even if these periods are subject to uncertainty. Response #1: The SRIA has been edited to include an estimated effective date and implementation pe - riod. The precise date of full implementation is un - known but is generally expected to be shortly after the regulations are implanted. This is defined as approxi - mately fall 2026 through fall 2027.

Comment #2: While the SRIA quantifies 12–month impacts, it does not clarify whether these costs are ongoing or limited to the first year following imple - mentation. The SRIA must assess the estimated eco - nomic impacts to businesses and/or individuals over a multi–year period, or the SRIA must explicitly state that the estimated economic impacts only occur with - in the first 12 months with justification. Response #2: The SRIA and STD. 399 have been edited to distinguish between one–time and annual re- curring costs and benefits (sections 4.5.1, 4.5.8).

The net present value of total costs and benefits to busi - nesses and individuals over a 3–year period following implementation has been included in both the SRIA (section 4.5.1) and the STD. 399. A 3–year period is chosen because costs are expected to decrease over time as producers adjust to regulations and as produc- tion from compliant businesses replaces noncompliant production. That is, it is reasonable to expect compli - ant market participants to quickly expand production in the first few years following implementation, and therefore quantifiable costs and benefits would not persist.

However, unquantified human and environ - mental benefits from reducing potency inflation and preventing harmful products from entering the market would persist. The components included in total costs and benefits have been defined in the SRIA (section 4.5.1).

Costs include: ● Annual recurring direct costs to businesses of $11.44 million, including $6.58 million to labs from reduced testing, $3.85 million in labor costs, and $1.02 million on POS systems. ● One–time direct costs of $1.20 million to retail businesses in the first 12 months of implementa - tion, including $0.26 million for POS systems and $0.94 million in labor costs for COA disclosures. ● Average annual recurring direct costs of $47.43 million in decreased gross output from decreased retail spending. ● Average annual recurring direct costs to individ - uals of $5.33 million in lost consumer surplus due to market shifts. ● Average annual recurring indirect and induced effects of $47.05 million.

Of the $112.45 million in total first–year costs, $111.25 million are annually recurring costs. The net present value (NPV) of total costs over the first year of implementation and subsequent two years would be $324.55 million, with a range of $157.78 million to $501.46 million. These costs would be primarily im - posed on businesses producing or handling noncom - pliant products. Consumers and compliant businesses would benefit from the proposed regulations.

Benefits include: ● Total direct benefits to businesses of $12.65 mil - lion, including savings on lab spending of $6.58 million, increased industry labor of $4.79 mil - lion, and $1.28 million to business management services from spending on POS systems. ● Direct benefits to consumers from reducing po - tency inflation of $10.57 million, with a lower bound of $4.88 million per year and upper bound of $17.58 million from no longer paying extra for inflated potency. ● Indirect and induced effects of $5.52 million.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 759 The NPV of total benefits over three years would be $61.42 million, with a range of $52.67 million to $92.27 million. Estimates of total costs and benefits in the first 12 months of implementation were adjusted to reflect total economic impacts as the sum of the direct, in - direct, and induced impacts (sections 4.4, 4.5.1, 4.7), and the components of these costs and benefits were clarified.

The previous calculation combined changes in income, value added, and total output in the total impact calculation; however, total output includes in - come and value added. Initial costs and ongoing costs in the SRIA and STD. 399 for a typical business have been edited as well to reflect just one–time initial costs (as opposed to all first–year costs) and annual recurring costs, re - spectively.

Initial and annual costs are described for retailers (instead of an average spread across all busi - nesses as in the previous version), which account for 44% of direct costs to businesses (this includes change in gross output at retail). The overall one–time up–front cost increase of $1.20 million, spread across all 1,560 licensed cannabis retailers, would be $770 per business. Annual recurring direct costs for retail - ers, which are $49.47 million of the $111.25 million in ongoing costs, would be $31,700 per business.

Comment #3 : The SRIA should provide lower–bound and upper–bound economic impact and revenue estimates due to the wide range of outcomes possible, particularly regarding the regulations’ esti - mated effects on the cannabis market. For example, the SRIA states that there is considerable uncertain - ty in potency inflation and diversions into the illicit market, with a wide range of outcomes for cannabis retailers.

The estimate used for the total impact is the midpoint of a decrease of $47.7 million but the SRIA states that the decrease could range from $18.8 million to $78.1 million, which would accordingly lead to a much larger or lower total economic and revenue im - pacts. Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) should augment the analysis with a sensitivity analysis to es - timate how total economic impacts may vary under different plausible market effects by providing lower bound and upper–bound economic impact and reve - nue estimates.

Response #3: Lower– and upper–bound ranges have been included for indirect and induced effects esti - mated via IMPLAN analysis (section 4.4), total bene - fits and costs in the first 12 months of implementation (section 4.5.1), and the net present value of costs and benefits over 3 years (section 4.5.1). The revised range of total costs to businesses and individuals is $112.45 million in the first 12 months of implementation, with a lower bound of $55.07 mil- lion and upper bound of $173.32 million. The expected benefits of the proposed regulations are $28.74 mil - lion.

The lower and upper bounds of total benefits are $21.70 million and $37.09 million, respectively, in the first 12 months of implementation. The sensitivity range reflects uncertainty in how the industry and consumers may response to changes in reported potency and diversions to the illicit market. Comment #4 : The SRIA must quantify fiscal im - pacts on local revenues. Reductions in cannabis sup - ply and demand in the licensed market will likely im - pact local government agencies’ revenues through the varying local cannabis tax rates across jurisdictions.

Changes in state tax revenue should be included in the fiscal impacts

section rather than characterized as changes in investment so that the fiscal impacts sec - tion fully reflects all impacts to the state. Response #4: Estimated changes in local and state tax revenues have been included in total fiscal impacts (section 4.6). The overall expected change in fiscal impacts is $13.39 million, which includes a decrease of $10.46 million in state tax revenue, a decrease of $2.37 million in local tax revenue, and $0.56 million in fiscal costs to the Department of Cannabis Control.

Decreased tax revenue is the result of decreased sales revenue from reducing potency inflation and removing products from the market that are potentially harmful to humans and the environment. Potentially offsetting fiscal benefits from decreased enforcement, compli - ance, and inspection efforts, or higher consumer confi- dence in the licensed market leading to increased sales and tax revenue, have not been quantified. Considering the range of impacts to gross output at retail and resulting change in local and state tax reve - nue, the overall range of fiscal impacts is $5.63 million to $21.69 million.

Investment in the state has been revised to only in - clude changes in value added (section 4.5.3), which in- clude a decrease of $59.02 million from the market ad- justment and decreased lab spending, and an increase of $4.34 million from increased spending on labor and POS systems. The net effect is a decrease of $54.68 million. Small Business Determination The proposed regulations would affect approximate- ly 5,500 licensed businesses of all types, approximate- ly 97 percent of which are estimated by the Depart - ment to be small businesses. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a) (13), the Department must de- termine that no reasonable alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 760 the proposed action, or more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policies or other provisions of law.

CONTACT PERSONS Inquiries concerning the proposed rulemaking ac - tion may be directed to: Melissa Brokken Department of Cannabis Control 2920 Kilgore Road Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 916– 465–9025 Regulations@cannabis.ca.gov The backup contact person for these inquiries is: Kaila Fayne Department of Cannabis Control 2920 Kilgore Road Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 916– 465–9025 Regulations@cannabis.ca.gov AVAILABILITY OF THE INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS, PROPOSED REGULATION TEXT, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Department will make the entire rulemaking file, including all documents relied upon, available for inspection and copying throughout the rulemak - ing process at its office at the above address.

As of the date this Notice is published in the Notice Regis - ter, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice, the pro- posed text of the regulations, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the STD. 399. Please direct requests to inspect or copy the rulemaking file to the contact per - son(

s) listed above. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After considering all timely and relevant comments received, the Department may adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this notice. If the Department makes modifications that are suffi - ciently related to the originally proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly in - dicated) available to the public for at least 15 days be- fore adopting the regulations as revised. Please direct requests for copies of any modified regulations to the contact person(

s) listed above. The Department will accept written comments on the modified regulations for the duration of the period of public availability. AVAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, the Department will make copies of the Final Statement of Reasons available. Please direct requests for copies to the contact per - son(

s) listed above. AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Ini - tial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regu - lations with modifications highlighted, as well as the Final Statement of Reasons, when complet - ed, and modified text and notices thereof, if any, may be accessed via the Department’s website at https://www.cannabis.ca.gov/cannabis–laws/ rulemaking/. TITLE 14.

FISH AND GAME COMMISSION SPORT FISHING 2026 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the California Fish and Game Commission (Commission), pursuant to the authority vested by Sections 110, 200, 205, 219, 255, 265, 270, 275, 315, 316.5, 399, 713, 1050, 1053.1, 1055.1, 2003, 2084, 7149.8, 7380, 7701, 7708 of the California Fish and Game Code and to implement, interpret or make specific Sections 37, 67, 110, 200, 205, 219, 255, 265, 270, 275, 316.5, 711, 713, 1050, 1053.1, 1055.1, 2084, 7060, 7149.8, 7380, 7381, 7382 of said Code, proposes to amend Sections 1.62, 1.73, 1.74, 2.10, 2.11, 4.20, 5.00, 5.65, 5.85, 5.88, 6.34, 6.35, 7.00, 7.40, 7.50, 8.00, 8.10, 28.25, 28.30, 28.32, 28.35, 230, and 701, Title 14, California Code of Reg- ulations, relating to Sport Fishing 2026 (Inland and Marine) INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW This regulatory proposal combines California De - partment of Fish and Wildlife (Department) and pub - lic requests for changes to California Code of Regu - lations (CCR) Title 14, sections 1.62, 1.73, 1.74, 2.10, 2.11, 4.20, 5.00, 5.65, 5.85, 5.88, 6.34, 6.35, 7.00, 7.40, 7.50, 8.00, 8.10, 28.25, 28.30, 28.32, 28.35, 230, and 701, for the 2026 sport fishing regulatory cycle.

This proposal contains multiple amendments that would clarify sport fishing regulations, increase angler op - portunities, change gear requirements, change fish measurement and sampling protocols, improve the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 761 steelhead report card and low–flow regulations, and protect vulnerable fish populations. These proposed regulatory changes are needed to effectively manage California’s sport fisheries, and correct errors and in - accuracies in the existing regulations to reduce public confusion and improve regulatory enforcement. The Department is proposing changes to the following regulations in Title 14, CCR: Regulation Language Clarifications: The proposed changes are necessary in order to en - hance clarity or fix errors, and do not alter the applica- tion or enforcement of these regulations: ●

Section 2.11, Special Fishing Methods — Lake County: In 2014, Clear Lake Hitch were listed under California Endangered Species Act (CESA) as threatened and can no longer be taken without a CESA incidental take permit or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The language in Sec - tion 2.11 conflicts with the take prohibitions for Clear Lake Hitch and needs to be removed from Title 14 CCR. ●

Section 5.65, Shad, American : In 2025 there was a regulation change to allow spearfishing as a method of take for American Shad in the Val - ley District in

Section 2.30. The proposed change would add spearfishing as a method of take al - lowable for American Shad in the Valley District in

Section 5.65. This would make

Section 5.65 consistent with

Section 2.30. ●

Section 5.85, subsection (a) (2), Trout: This pro- posal would add

Section 7.00, which lists general regulations in each District, to the list of sections excepted from general statewide trout regula - tions. This proposal would remove ambiguities associated with wardens enforcing fishing regu - lation violations. ●

Section 6.34, Southern District Definition: The current regulations definition of the “Southern District” in

Section 6.34 erroneously copies the Sierra District definition. This change would cor- rect the language to the as–intended definition of the Southern District. ●

Section 7.50, subsection (b) (90), McCloud Riv- er and Tributaries : This proposal would clean up, reorganize, and group streams with simi - lar regulations in subsection 7.50(b) (90) for the McCloud River and tributaries. This would sim - plify the regulation, making it easier to under - stand by grouping waters with similar regulations. ●

Section 7.50(b) (145), Sq. Valley Creek : The name of Sq. Valley Creek was changed by federal legislation through the Department of Interior’s Order 3404 on September 8, 2022 to Yét Atwam Creek. This proposal would make the regulation text consistent with federal legislation. ●

Section 230, subsection (g) (2), Issuance of Per- mits for Contests Offering Prize for the Taking of Game Fish : There is a minor grammar error in subsection 230(g) (2) which has an ungram - matical ‘s’ that would be removed from the word “changes”. ●

Section 7.40, subsection (b) : Updates to other regulations sections have been made in this pro - posal to update or remove unnecessary referenc - es to subsections 7.40(

b) and 7.50(

b) due to the continual changes in the numbering of these sec - tions when waters are added or removed. There are minor edits to text to align subsection 7.40(

b) and 7.50(

b) language with the updated

Section 8.00 language that is part of this proposal which will clarify boundaries in both sections where de- scriptions are unclear, provide consistent place - ment of text, and update subsection references between

Section 8.00 and subsection 7.40(

b) where needed. Changes To Increase Fishing Opportunities The proposed changes described below would in - crease fishing opportunities in the effected regulation sections. ●

Section 4.20, subsection (

d) Bait Fish Use in the Sacramento River (Shasta and Tehama Co.): This proposed change would move the up - per limit of the Sacramento River upstream from Highway 32 Bridge to Deschutes Bridge for bait fish use. Generally, declining fish populations as- sociated with drought and climate change have limited many fishing opportunities. At the same time Striped Bass populations have expanded into more areas of the Sacramento River, especially after the Red Bluff Diversion Dam was perma - nently opened.

This proposed change would allow live fin fish to be used further up the Sacramento River which would increase fishing opportuni - ties for striped bass and other non–native fishes that are currently limited use of lures and other methods. It may also increase harvest of these non–native species which could have a potential benefit on vulnerable salmonid populations. ●

Section 5.00, subsection (b), Black Bass (Lassen and Modoc Co.) : This proposed change would remove the black bass minimum size requirement from waters in Lassen and Modoc counties, ex - cept for Mountain Meadows Reservoir where the minimum size would remain at 12 inches. Growth rates of largemouth bass are typically slow within Lassen and Modoc counties due shorter growing season attributable to the high elevation. Addi - tionally, reservoirs containing large bass popula - tions are often overrun with stunted bass and few bass are able to reach the 12–inch minimum size

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 762 requirement for harvest. The 12–inch minimum size requirement reduces the number of harvested bass, which could affect the bass populations by further stunting their growth. Removing the min- imum size requirement in these locations would increase the harvest of smaller bass and improve the size class structure within the bass popula - tions. Mountain Meadows Reservoir is still re - covering from being drained in 2015 and has the potential to grow trophy class bass as it has in the past.

The 12–inch minimum size requirement at Mountain Meadows Reservoir would be main- tained under the General Statewide Restrictions regulations allowing the bass population to grow and allow more small young bass to grow to the 12–inch size minimum and larger. ●

Section 7.00, subsection (b) (2), District Gen - eral Regulations—Sierra District (Shasta and Tehama Co.): This proposed change would in - crease fishing opportunity by allowing the use of bait during summer months within anadromous streams in Shasta and Tehama counties when anadromous fish are not present. Declining fish populations associated with drought and climate change have limited many fishing opportunities. At the same time, striped bass populations have expanded into more areas of the Sacramento Riv- er, especially after the Red Bluff Diversion Dam was permanently opened.

The proposed split sea- son with June 16 to September 30 dropped the ar- tificial lure requirement for allowable use of live fin fish as bait during this period when bass. ●

Section 7.40, subsection (b) (11), Battle Creek (Shasta and Tehama Co.): This proposed change would re–open lower Battle Creek from 1,250 feet below Coleman Fish Hatchery weir to its confluence with the Sacramento River from June 30 to December 31, with the restriction that only artificial lures with barbless hooks may be used. This change would provide recreational angling opportunities for native and non–native warm - water fish species and hatchery–origin trout and steelhead. ● Lower Battle Creek from the mouth to Cole- man Fish Hatchery weir is currently closed to angling year–round.

Allowing angler ac - cess to lower Battle Creek beginning June 30 will increase fishing opportunities on Striped and Black Bass. Battle Creek was historically a popular steelhead fishery but was closed to angling in the early 1990’s to ensure that Coleman National Fish Hatchery would annually secure sufficient adult steel- head broodstock. ● Returns of hatchery–origin steelhead to Coleman National Fish Hatchery are now routinely in excess of broodstock collection targets. Presently these fish are only avail - able to recreational anglers in the mainstem Sacramento River.

However, due to a vari - ety of factors, contact with these fish in the mainstem Sacramento River is extremely low. Furthermore, the mainstem Sacra - mento River steelhead fishery is primarily boat–based. Shore–based steelhead fishing on lower Battle Creek would provide op - portunity to much broader angling interest groups. ●

Section 7.40, subsection (b) (50), Klamath Riv- er Basin Regulations: This proposed change would increase fishing opportunity in the Klam - ath River by allowing catch and release fishing within anadromous sections of the mainstem Klamath River from the Copco Road bridge at Copco to Lakeview Road bridge near Iron Gate (Siskiyou County). The open season would be a summer season from the fourth Saturday in May through August 31, with a restriction that only artificial lures with barbless hooks may be used.

Additional restrictions include a zero harvest lim- it for hatchery trout and steelhead as well as be - ing closed to the take and possession of Chinook Salmon. This change would provide a recreation- al angling opportunity for freshwater fish during the summer months within the Klamath Dam Removal project area. The proposed summer sea- son regulations would provide consistency with currently open waters adjacent to and upstream of this subsection. ●

Section 7.50, subsection (b) (47), Fall River Complex (Shasta and Siskiyou Co.): This pro - posed change would remove subsections (47) (

L) Fall River Pond and (47) (

M) Fall River Lake from 7.50(b)

(47) Fall River Complex (Shasta and Siskiyou Co.). If removed from 7.50(

b) Fall River Pond and Fall River Lake would then fall under regulation

Section 5.85(a) (1) statewide general trout regulations for take allowances. ●

Section 7.50, subsection (b) (149), Susan Riv - er (Lassen Co.) and

Section 8.10, Susan Riv - er Youth Derby : This proposed change would revert fishing regulations to the previous trout opener (Last Saturday in April through Nov. 15). The proposed change would also update language to include a special open season for youth par - ticipating in the Youth Fishing Derby in

Section 8.10 to start prior to the proposed earlier season start. Reverting to the traditional trout season will increase angler opportunity by lengthening

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 763 the season in the spring and shortening the win - ter season. During much of the winter the river is typically unfishable (due to ice and snow), so the winter provides little to no opportunity. Water in the Susan River can warm significantly in the late spring and early summer, as releases from McCoy Flat and Hog Flat reservoirs increase. Having the season open earlier will provide more opportunity while angling conditions are good, while not impacting spawning.

Changes to Fishing Gear, Measuring, and Sampling The following proposed changes are related to fishing gear, measuring and sampling regulation restrictions: ● Sections 1.62, 28.25, 28.30, 28.32, and 28.35, Minimum and Maximum Size and Alternate Length: This proposed change would amend

Section 1.62 to more clearly define the method to determine total length of finfish. The proposal would clarify that total length is measured with the fish’s mouth closed, ly - ing flat on a horizontal surface, and that the tail may be pinched, fanned, or naturally swung. Fanning and swinging of a fish’s tail is expressly allowed for salm- on and halibut but not specified in the general maxi - mum length in

Section 1.62. It has been a long–time practice for our law enforcement officers to allow this technique, but it is not consistently understood by an - glers. Importantly, crew onboard Commercial Passen- ger Fishing vessels have requested clarification, to en- sure they are measuring passenger’s fish correctly. The proposed change also includes changing the phrase “fish, mollusks or crustaceans” to “finfish or invertebrates” and clarifies that measurement of inver- tebrate species is specified within the individual inver- tebrate regulations.

The proposal also changes exist - ing language that refers to “mollusks, or crustaceans” to the term “invertebrates” which is more inclusive and encompasses other groups like echinoderms. It clarifies that methods to determine length for inver - tebrates are found in the individual sub sections for those species. The proposed change additionally removes alternate length measurements from

Section 1.62, and from the sections for barracuda, kelp and sand basses, and white sea bass, sections 28.25, 28.30, and 28.35 re - spectively. Alternate length is proposed to be removed as it causes unnecessary confusion and concerns with law enforcement. The allowance of retaining filleted fish, with associated minimum fillet lengths provided for these species, makes the use of an alternate length unnecessary. A provision to use either total length or a 5–pound minimum weight limit for bonito, found in

section 28.32, was established to make recreational catch limits consistent with commercial catch limits. ●

Section 1.73, Salmon: This proposed change would require any person in possession of a recreationally taken salmon in which an adipose fin is present to provide the Department a tissue sample upon request. This includes the addi - tional requirement of all persons fishing for salmon to provide a tissue sample from unmarked (i.e., adipose fin present) salmon upon request by an authorized agent or employee of the Department. Amending bi - ological sample collection requirements to allow for use of Parentage–Based Tagging (PBT) in fisheries surveys advances fisheries monitoring in a number of ways.

PBT is highly efficient, as the tagging pro - cess requires only genotyping the parents to produce a 100% tag rate of offspring, which can lead to higher tag recovery rates and improved statistical precision of estimates. Additionally, there is no physical tag loss or handling mortality associated with PBT, parent - age assignments can be obtained non–lethally via a small tissue sample, and large–scale tagging can oc - cur at a much lower cost compared to physical mark - ing and tagging methods.

This proposal would allow the Department to integrate PBT recovery data into the current salmon management framework, allowing tissue samples to be collected from unmarked salmon contacted in monitoring programs. ●

Section 2.10(b) (3) and (b) (4), Hook and Weight Restrictions: This proposed change would allow for the usage of a small lightweight weight directly attached be - low a hook and expansion of fishable waters with treble hooks on non–buoyant lures. The amend - ment of subsections 2.10(b) (3) and (4) would clar - ify regulations for the public and wildlife offi - cers. The change to weights being allowed below a hook would not apply to lakes and reservoirs, the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta, or the Colorado Riv - er as outlined in subsection 2.10(b).

The change to the use of treble hooks on non–buoyant lures would have an expanded boundary within the Valley Dis - trict. The use of treble hooks on non–buoyant lures would be permissive in portions of the mainstem Sac- ramento, American, Feather, and Yuba rivers. The gear type allowed in the newly permissive sections would be limited to lures made of soft or hard plas - tics, or wood, which would reduce snagging risk to salmonid species while creating more opportunity for non–salmonid angling. In the angling community there is confusion about the legality of techniques and tackle.

This confusion stems from the popularity of the techniques that uti - lize this configuration in other states, similar fisheries occurring here in California, and because the method is permissible in lakes, reservoirs, and the Delta. This change would improve law enforcement’s ability to

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 764 enforce these regulations consistently across the state and reduce the need to intervene as frequently. ●

Section 7.40(b) (40) (A)1. and 2., Eel River: This proposed change would update the gear re - striction boundary to align with more recognizable features providing clarity for both anglers and law en- forcement. The boundary line would change from the mouth of the Eel River to Fulmor Road, and instead be the mouth to Cock Robin Island, resulting in a slight shift downstream (~.5 miles).

Protective Changes for Vulnerable Populations The following proposed changes are recommend - ed to protect vulnerable populations while preserving fishing opportunities: ● Sections 6.35 and subsection 7.00(b) (2), Sierra District Definition and District General Reg - ulations: This proposed change would modify the Sierra district boundary in

Section 6.35 to include a small

section of Yuba County (“Yuba County east of New Bullards Bar Dam;”) to pro - tect experimentally reintroduced Chinook fish, This change would also close Chinook Salmon fishing in the North Fork Feather River (NFFR) above Chester Diversion Dam, and on the North Yuba River (NYR) above New Bullards Bar Dam all year in

Section 7.00(b) (2).This proposal with also add two specific subsections in

Section 7.00,the Sierra District (adding (b) (3) and (b) (4), the NFFR above Chester Diversion Dam, and on the NYR above New Bullards Bar Dam, which will be closed to Chinook Salmon fishing all year. This closure does not include New Bullards Bar, just the tributaries. Scientific studies are currently being implemented within the NFFR, led by the California Department of Water Resources, and in the NYR, led by the Department, evaluating Spring–Run Chinook Salmon reintroduction to these historical habitats.

Changing the regulation to close fishing of Chinook Salmon at all times of the year in these waterways will allow for study fish through various developmental stages (eggs, alevin, fry, parr, smolt, adult) to remain in the study area informing study results and reintro - duction efforts. ●

Section 7.40, subsection (

b) addition of Creeks with Special Regulations: This proposed change would recommend adding new special regula - tion sections for Clear Creek (added as subsec - tion (b) (28)), Cow Creek (added as subsection (b) (36)), Cottonwood Creek (added as subsection (b) (35)), and Paynes Creek (added as subsection (b) (74)). This proposal would also change the An- telope Creek boundary from the confluence with the North Fork downstream to Ponderosa Way crossing on the North Fork and South Fork to make angling more protective for Central Valley steelhead in this subsection.

Local fishing oppor- tunities are currently very limited due to a variety of overlapping regulations, some of which are not necessary. Allowing the public, especially chil - dren to catch warm water fish with bait in anadro- mous streams in the middle of the summer when anadromous fish species are not present would be very beneficial to the public and the Depart - ment’s Recruit, Retain, Reactivate (R3) goals.

With the exception of Clear Creek, Cow Creek, Cottonwood Creek, and Paynes Creek, the major- ity anadromous tributaries have specific protec - tive regulations already present in 7.40; adding Clear Creek, Cow Creek, Cottonwood Creek, and Paynes Creek will complete this protective set of regulations. These additions will result in renum- bering most of subsection 7.40(

b) bodies of water to maintain alphabetical listing. ●

Section 7.50(b) (6), Arroyo Seco River (Monte- rey Co.): On the Arroyo Seco River (Monterey Co.), above the waterfall located approximately 3.5 miles above the U.S. Forest Service Ranger Station, change the trout bag limit from 5 trout to 5 Brown Trout and 0 Rainbow Trout, and add a Special Restriction of “only artificial lures with barbless hooks may be used”. The upper Arroyo Seco River contains a population of native Coastal Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), offering a unique sport fishing opportunity in the Salinas River watershed in Monterey County.

Like oth - er trout populations throughout California, this population of native Coastal Rainbow Trout has likely been negatively impacted by increasingly severe drought conditions. The population has also likely been impacted by degradation of in - stream habitat conditions due to recent wildfires, such as the Dolan fire. The current fishing regu - lations allow for the harvest of 5 trout per person per day above the waterfall on the Arroyo Seco River.

The upper Arroyo Seco River is in rela - tively close proximity to urban areas; thus, with the current 5 trout bag limit, there is the potential for high angler harvest of Coastal Rainbow Trout. The lack of a gear restriction for trout currently allows the potential for high deep–hooking and catch and release mortality rates that can be asso- ciated with the use of bait and barbed hooks when angling non–anadromous salmonids.

Additional - ly, the upper Arroyo Seco contains a non–native population of Brown Trout ( Salmo trutta) which offers sport fishing opportunities, though they may negatively impact native Coastal Rainbow Trout through competition and predation. Chang- ing trout regulations in the upper Arroyo Seco to a 5 Brown Trout and 0 Rainbow Trout bag limit

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 765 with an artificial lures with barbless hooks only special restriction will ensure that this recreation- al Rainbow Trout fishery is protected and sustain- able, while allowing recreational anglers the op - tion of harvesting non–native brown trout. ●

Section 7.50, subsection (b) (90), McCloud Riv- er and Tributaries (Shasta and Siskiyou Cos) : This proposed change would add Trout Creek into subsection 7.50(b) (90), McCloud River and Trib- utaries under proposed paragraph (G), to provide angling regulation protections for McCloud Riv - er Redband Trout (MRRT), consistent with other streams in the MRRT Refugium. Trout Creek has been identified as a high priority conservation stream, but not included as a “Core Conserva - tion Stream” in MRRT Conservation Agreement (CA) (2017).

Confounding genetic results prior to the completion of the CA was the justification for Trout Creek to be excluded as a core conserva - tion stream. However, since the genetics results, the Department has identified a “95% barrier” where MRRT collected upstream of the barrier were shown to be genetically distinct, and Rain - bow Trout collected downstream of the barrier were shown to be slightly introgressed (Rain - bow Trout cross with MRRT). Additionally, non–native Brown Trout are found downstream of the barrier but not upstream.

The Department is currently working with the private landowner to improve the 95% barrier to ensure introgressed and non–native trout are unable to pass upstream at all flows, thence protecting the genetically dis- tinct population upstream. In addition to improv - ing the barrier, angling regulation changes are necessary to provide further protection for this population. The proposed angling regulations are consistent with Swamp Creek in the Refugium which provides a stable MRRT population where catch and release recreational angling will have no population level impacts.

Steelhead Fishing Report and Restoration Card Changes, Sections 1.74, 5.88, and 701 To better align with seasonal adult steelhead run timing, improve data management, and assess non–compliant reporting, the Steelhead Fishing Re - port and Restoration Card (Card; steelhead report card) reporting period is proposed to be changed from a 12–month calendar period to a 9–month reporting period. The adjusted Card reporting period would be August 1st through April 30th the following year and required to be returned or reported to the Department by May 31st.

The Card would be required for anglers targeting any steelhead or Rainbow Trout in anad - romous waters during this 9–month period. Anglers would be able to obtain the subsequent season Card starting July 1st to allow time for the Department to process the previous season’s Cards returned by May 31st. Any Card holder who fails to return or re - port by the May 31st deadline shall be subject to a non–refundable non–return fee and will not be able to obtain the subsequent season Card until that fee is paid.

From May 1st through July 31st of each year, an- glers would not need a Card to fish for steelhead or Rainbow Trout in anadromous waters. Shifting the reporting months to mirror the 9–month period run timing of steelhead would allow the De - partment to process Cards more efficiently and have data readily available to inform management strate - gies for the steelhead fishery statewide.

By shifting the reporting period to 9 months, the Department will have time between seasons to assess non–compliance and can implement penalties prior to the subsequent year’s Card is issues, including fees and prohibitions for non–compliant report card holders. Shifting the reporting period to mirror the season - al run timing of returning and spawning steelhead between August to April will increase the ability to more accurately analyze data and manage steelhead runs.

Adult steelhead are generally not present in most anadromous waters from May through July, so there is not a need to collect angler data during these months. Anglers will still be able to fish for Rainbow Trout/ steelhead during these months in waters open to an - gling, however a Card will not be required. Anglers will also be able to continue to harvest a hatchery steelhead if caught during these months and not have to report on the Card. Additionally, the proposal would clarify that the Card is required when targeting Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss, in anadromous waters.

There is currently a loophole in the language that allows an angler to state they are not fishing for steelhead, only Rainbow Trout, which technically does not require a Card.

For improved enforcement, the language would be updated to include both terms and would require anglers to have a report card and fill it out when tar - geting either Rainbow Trout or steelhead in anadro - mous waters Low–Flow Regulation Changes, Sections 7.00, 7.40 subsection (b), 7.50 subsection (b), and 8.00 This proposed change would reorganize, condense, and clean up the language in the low–flow regulations, standardize the identification of stream gauges, and remove streams from 8.00 that lack low–flow criteria. ●

Section 7.00, District General Regulations: This proposal would add

Section 8.00, which lists low–flow restrictions to the to the paragraph about existing restrictions (such as methods, gear, fishing hours, and use of bait) when angling in District waters. This proposal would remove am- biguities associated with anglers following reg -

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 766 ulations for low flow conditions, as well as war - dens enforcing fishing regulation violations. ●

Section 7.40, subsection (

b) and 7.50, subsec - tion (b), Updates to Special Water Bodies re - garding Low–Flow: Proposed changes through - out the special waters tables in subsections 7.40(

b) and 7.50(

b) serve to better align subsection 7.40(

b) language with the updated

Section 8.00 language that is part of this proposal. Organiza - tional changes, improves consistency informing the angler to be aware of low–flow consider - ations for the re–organized subsections 8.00(a), (b), or (c). These changes are necessary to clarify boundaries in both sections where descriptions are unclear, provide consistent placement of text, and update subsection references between 8.00, 7.40(b), and 7.50(

b) as needed. In subsection (

b) for Arroyo Seco Corralitos Creek, Llagas Creek, Pajaro River, Salinas River and tributaries, Uvas or Carnadero Creek references to

Section 8.00 are removed, as these waters are proposed as be - ing removed from the Low Flow restrictions due to lack of low flow threshold. ●

Section 8.00, Low–Flow Restrictions: This pro- posed change would rewrite, reorganize, and sim- plify the low–flow regulations. A new website for low–flow fishing restrictions was launched in ear- ly 2025, which brought more attention to the lan- guage and content in

Section 8.00. Subsections 8.00(

a) and (b), which previously directed anglers to different regional phone lines, may now be combined and condensed into the revised subsec- tion 8.00(

a) now that there is an online platform during the time period of September 1 through April 30. Subsection 8.00(

c) for the San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Monterey county water bodies is restructured to the revised sub -

section 8.00(b). This effort began as an initiative to remove redundancies and improve stylistic in - consistencies in the regulation (i.e. standardized identification of stream gauges with U.S. Geo - logical Survey (USGS) gauging station number, stream, and nearest town), and turned into a more expansive effort to improve

Section 8.00 in its en- tirety for conciseness, clarity, and consistency in language, after input from Department regional staff. These changes will make the regulations easier to understand, thereby reducing angler confusion. ● The proposed changes described in subsections 8.00(a) (1) through (3) and (b) (1) through (3), would allow the ability to make split block deci - sions instead of solid block decisions. Allowing split block decisions has the potential to provide additional opportunity by adding angling days and reduce angler frustration.

The current regu - lations specify the days when Department staff will determine low–flow fishing closures, and fishing on all days between Department updates shall either be opened or closed (solid block de - cision). Now with the new website, it is easier to display and update information, and the Depart - ment could provide more flexibility in determin - ing low–flow fishing closures. Instead of closing or opening fishing for an entire two–to–four–day period, the Department could choose to close fishing for only part of the two–to–four–day peri- od (split block decision).

Split block decisions will allow the Department to be more flexible and pre- cise in applying closures only to days when flows are predicted to fall below minimum thresholds. ○ New subsection 8.00(a): consolidate and up- date the low–flow conditions for river and stream closures including those water bodies listed from north to south within Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma, Napa, and Marin counties.

New subsection 8.00(b): consolidate and update the low–flow conditions for river and stream closures in - cluding those water bodies listed from north to south within San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Mon- terey counties. BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS As stated in Fish and Game Code

Section 1700, Conservation of Aquatic Resources, it is the policy of this state to encourage the conservation, maintenance, and utilization of the living resources of the ocean and other waters under the jurisdiction and influence of the state for the benefit of all the citizens of the state and to promote the development of local fisheries and distant water fisheries based in California in harmo - ny with international law, respecting fishing and the conservation of the living resources of the ocean and other waters under the jurisdiction and influence of the state.

The objectives of this policy include, but are not limited to, the maintenance of sufficient populations of all species of aquatic organisms to ensure their contin- ued existence, and the maintenance of a sufficient re - source to support a reasonable sport use. Adoption of scientifically–based sport fish seasons, size limits, and bag and possession limits provides for the main - tenance of sufficient populations sport fish to ensure their continued existence.

The benefits of the proposed regulations are consis- tent with the sustainable management of California’s sport fisheries, general health and welfare of Califor - nia residents, and promotion of businesses that rely on sport fishing throughout California.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 767 CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING REGULATIONS

Article IV,

Section 20 of the State Constitution spec- ifies that the Legislature may delegate to the Fish and Game Commission such powers relating to the pro - tection and propagation of fish and game as the Leg - islature sees fit. The Legislature has delegated to the Commission the power to regulate recreational fishing in waters of the state (Fish and Game Code sections 200, 205, 315, and 316.5). The Commission has re - viewed its own regulations and finds that the proposed regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

The Commission has searched the California Code of Regulations and finds no other state agency regulations pertaining to sport fishing seasons, bag, gear and possession limits PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Comments Submitted by Mail or Email It is requested, but not required, that written com - ments be submitted on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 30, 2026 at the address given below, or by email to FGC@fgc.ca.gov. Written comments mailed, or emailed to the Commission office, must be received before 12:00 noon on August 7, 2026.

If you would like copies of any modifications to this proposal, please include your name and mailing address. Mailed com - ments should be addressed to Fish and Game Commis- sion, P.O. Box 944209, Sacramento, CA 94244–2090. Meetings NOTICE IS GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing, relevant to this action at a hearing to be held in the California Natural Resources Headquarters Building, Second Floor, 715 P Street, Sacramento, California , which will commence at 8:00 a.m. on June 17, 206, and may continue at 8:00 a.m. on June 18, 2026.

The Com - mission will make a reasonable effort to provide the public additional opportunities to observe or provide comment in the meeting through the Zoom videocon - ference platform by computer, mobile device, or tele - phone connections. However, the Commission cannot guarantee the accessibility or functionality of the re - mote connection options. Should technical issues af - fect remote attendee access or quality, an attempt will be made to resolve them, but the meeting will contin - ue with in–person attendees.

Instructions for partici - pation in the webinar/teleconference hearing will be posted at www.fgc.ca.gov in advance of the meeting or may be obtained by calling (916) 653–4899. Please refer to the Commission meeting agenda, which will be available at least 10 days prior to the meeting, for the most current information.

NOTICE IS ALSO GIVEN that any person inter - ested may present statements, orally or in writing, rel- evant to this action at a hearing to be held in the Cal- ifornia Natural Resources Headquarters Building, Second Floor, 715 P Street, Sacramento, Califor - nia, which will commence at 8:00 a.m. on August 12, 2026 and may continue at 8:00 a.m. on August 13, 2026. The Commission will make a reasonable effort to provide the public additional opportunities to ob - serve or provide comment in the meeting through the Zoom videoconference platform by computer, mobile device, or telephone connections.

However, the Com- mission cannot guarantee the accessibility or func - tionality of the remote connection options. Should technical issues affect remote attendee access or qual- ity, an attempt will be made to resolve them, but the meeting will continue with in–person attendees. In - structions for participation in the webinar/teleconfer - ence hearing will be posted at www.fgc.ca.gov in ad- vance of the meeting or may be obtained by calling (916) 653–4899. Please refer to the Commission meet- ing agenda, which will be available at least 10 days prior to the meeting, for the most current information.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Ini - tial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regula - tion in underline and strikeout format can be accessed through the Commission website at www.fgc.ca.gov. The regulations as well as all related documents upon which the proposal is based (rulemaking file), are on file and available for public review from the agency representative, Melissa Miller–Henson, Executive Director, Fish and Game Commission, 715 P Street, Box 944209, Sacramento, California 94244–2090, phone (916) 653–4899.

Please direct requests for the above–mentioned documents and inquiries concern - ing the regulatory process to Melissa Miller–Henson or David Haug at FGC@fgc.ca.gov or at the preced - ing address or phone number. Maggie McCann, Se - nior Environmental Scientist (Specialist), Fish - eries Branch, Department of Fish and Wildlife, (fisheries@wildlife.ca.gov) has been designated to respond to questions on the substance of the pro - posed regulations.

AVAILABILITY OF MODIFIED TEXT If the regulations adopted by the Commission dif - fer from but are sufficiently related to the action pro - posed, they will be available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date of adoption. Circumstanc - es beyond the control of the Commission (e.g., tim - ing of Federal regulation adoption, timing of resource data collection, timelines do not allow, etc.) or changes

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 768 made to be responsive to public recommendation and comments during the regulatory process may preclude full compliance with the 15–day comment period, and the Commission will exercise its powers under

Section 265 of the Fish and Game Code. Regulations adopted pursuant to this

section are not subject to the time pe - riods for adoption, amendment or repeal of regulations prescribed in sections 11343.4, 11346.4, 11346.8 and 11347.1 of the Government Code. Any person interest- ed may obtain a copy of said regulations prior to the date of adoption by contacting the agency representa - tive named herein. If the regulatory proposal is adopted, the final state- ment of reasons may be obtained from the address above when it has been received from the agency pro- gram staff.

IMPACT OF REGULATORY ACTION/ RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The potential for significant statewide adverse eco - nomic impacts that might result from the proposed regulatory action has been assessed, and the following initial determinations relative to the required statutory categories have been made: (

a) Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Business, Including the Ability of California Businesses to Compete with Businesses in Other States: The proposed action will not have a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. The pro - posed changes provide clarification of existing regu - lations that are necessary for the continued preserva - tion of fisheries resources, while providing sport fish - ing opportunities and thus, the prevention of adverse economic impacts. (

b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in California; Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State’s Environment: The Commission does not anticipate adverse im - pacts on the creation or elimination of jobs within the state. The Commission does not anticipate adverse im- pacts on the creation of new business, the elimination of existing businesses or the expansion of business - es in California.

The proposed changes are to provide clarification of existing regulations or that provide mi- nor increases in fishing opportunities. These changes are not anticipated to change the level of fishing activ- ity enough to affect the demand for goods and services related to sport fishing enough to impact the demand for labor, nor induce the creation of new businesses, the elimination, nor the expansion of businesses in California. The Commission anticipates benefits to the envi - ronment by the sustainable management of fishery resources throughout the state.

The Commission an - ticipates general benefits to the health and welfare of Californians through expanded outdoor recreational opportunities and responsible management of public resources. The Commission does not anticipate any benefits to the health and welfare of California resi - dents or to worker safety. (

c) Cost Impacts on a Representative Private Person or Business: The Commission is not aware of any cost impacts that a business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. The proposed non–reporting fee for steelhead report cards introduc - es a $20 fee to any card holder failing to return/report by the May 31st deadline. Any angler who doesn’t pay the non–reporting fee after the deadline will not be able to obtain any subsequent season’s card until that fee is paid.

This fee can be entirely avoided if the an - gler returns the card in compliance with the regula - tion, or if anglers choose to fish in anadromous waters from May 1st through July 31st of each year, as they would not need a card to fish for steelhead or Rainbow Trout during that period. (

d) Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/ Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None. No changes to costs or savings to federal funding are anticipated by the proposed clarification of existing regulations. The Department program im - plementation and enforcement are projected to remain the same with a stable volume of fishing activity. Department staff estimate that currently 30–35% of anglers return their steelhead report card, with an average of approximately 43,500 cards sold over the last six years 1, for an average of 30,450 to 28,275 non–returned cards.

The proposed $20 non–return fee would mean a maximum potential of $609,000– $565,500 would be accrued in fines, representing ad - ditional revenue for the Department.

However, this does not take into account a likely increase in return rates or the fact that not everyone will pay the fine, as suggested by the exact same changes from the lob - ster report card, which had an approximate 16% return rate from 2008–2011 without a non–return fee and in- creased reporting to 39%–54% from 2014 to 2025. 2 1 https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?Documen - tID=178047&inline 2 https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/Invertebrates/ Lobster

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2026, VOLUME NUMBER 23–Z 769 If the steelhead report card increased reporting rates similarly by 20–30%, the Department would have a projected 50–65% return rate and could potentially see 21,750 to 13,050 unreturned cards with a maxi - mum revenue potential of $435,000 to $261,000 in ac- crued fines (average of $348,000). See STD 399 ad - dendum for further details. (

e) Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. (

f) Programs Mandated on Local Agencies or School Districts: None. (

g) Costs Imposed on any Local Agency or School District that is Required to be Reimbursed Under

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4, Government Code: None. (

h) Effect on Housing Costs: None. (

i) Business Reporting Requirements: The proposed action does not impose a business re - porting requirement. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS It has been determined that the adoption of these regulations may affect small business. The Commis - sion has drafted the regulations in Plain English pur - suant to Government Code Sections 11342.580 and 11346.2(a) (1).

CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Commission must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Commission, or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Commission, would be more effective in carry- ing out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affect - ed private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law. TITLE 22.

DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL LISTING CLEANING PRODUCTS CONTAINING HYDROFLUORIC ACID AS A PRIORITY PRODUCT CONTROL REFERENCE NUMBER: R–2025–09R NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Depart - ment of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) propos - es to amend the California Code of Regulations, title 22, division 4.5,

chapter 55,

article 11,

section 69511, and adopt

section 69511.11. This proposed amendment pertains to the identification of a Priority Product un - der the Safer Consumer Products (SCP) Regulations, approved by the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) and filed with the Secretary of State on August 28, 2013 (effective date: 10/01/2013; OAL Regulatory Ac- tion Number: Z–2012–0717–04). COMMENT PERIOD A public comment period for the rulemaking has been established commencing on June 5, 2026, and closing on July 20, 2026.

Statements, arguments, or contentions regarding the rulemaking and/or supporting documents must be submitted in writing (electronically or in hard–copy) or presented orally or in writing at a public hearing, if a hearing is requested, for them to be considered by DTSC before it adopts or amends these regulations. Only comments received or postmarked on or before that date will be considered. Written comments may be submitted electron - ically through the SCP Information Management System, CalSAFER at: https://calsafer.dtsc.ca.gov/.

While DTSC prefers comments to be submit - ted through the CalSAFER system, interested per - sons may also submit their comments in an email to: SaferConsumerProducts@dtsc.ca.gov or through the DTSC regulations email address at regs@dtsc.ca.gov. Please include the DTSC reference number for this rulemaking package in the subject of your message. Direct hard–copy written comments to the Director’s Office — Regulatory Review Unit, as specified below. PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing has not been scheduled for this rulemaking.

However, DTSC will conduct a hear - ing if a written request for a public hearing is re - ceived from any interested person