AB 30 adds Section 43013.7 to the Health and Safety Code and makes it an urgency statute. It authorizes the sale in California of gasoline blends containing between 10.5% and 15% ethanol by volume notwithstanding an existing prohibition in Section 43830.8, and keeps that authorization in place until two specific regulatory actions occur: (1) the California Environmental Policy Council (CEPC) completes and posts its multimedia evaluation findings for those blends, and (2) the State Air Resources Board (CARB) either adopts a specification for those blends or posts an assessment explaining that a proposed specification cannot meet statutory criteria.
The change is narrowly procedural but materially important: it clears the way for higher-ethanol fuel blends to enter California retail channels immediately while putting the onus on CEPC and CARB to finish a review or justify why a regulatory specification is infeasible. That alters market access, compliance planning, and environmental review timelines for fuel producers, retailers, and regulators without creating a permanent new fuel standard.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill temporarily authorizes retail sales of gasoline with 10.5%–15% ethanol by volume despite the prohibition in Section 43830.8, and keeps that authorization until CEPC posts its multimedia evaluation and CARB either adopts a specification or posts an infeasibility assessment tied to subdivision (f) of Section 43830.8.
Who It Affects
Fuel producers, blenders, refiners, and retail gasoline distributors in California; ethanol suppliers; CARB and the CEPC; and drivers who may purchase higher‑ethanol blends. Vehicle manufacturers and warranty providers will also watch compatibility and labeling issues.
Why It Matters
By removing an administrative block immediately, the bill can change supply options and price dynamics quickly while forcing regulators to complete technical and multimedia reviews or explicitly justify why a formal fuel specification cannot meet statutory requirements.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 30 inserts a temporary rule into California law that lets gasoline blended with 10.5% to 15% ethanol be sold statewide even though Section 43830.8 generally prevents that sale until a coordinated multimedia evaluation and a CARB specification are complete. Practically, the bill creates a conditional market opening: sale of these mid‑level ethanol blends is lawful now, but only until CEPC posts the multimedia evaluation findings and CARB takes one of two specific actions.
Those two CARB actions are discrete and consequential. CARB must either adopt a formal fuel specification for 10.5%–15% ethanol blends or post an assessment on its website showing that a proposed specification cannot meet the criteria in subdivision (f) of Section 43830.8.
The statute therefore forces CARB to choose between producing a binding technical standard or documenting, transparently, why such a standard would fail to meet statutory requirements. The bill does not set technical content for that specification; it only changes the permissibility of sales until CARB and CEPC complete their work.The law expressly preserves CARB’s broader authority: it does not limit CARB’s power to adopt specifications for other fuels or to adopt or enforce specifications for these blends after CARB takes the actions described.
Because the bill is an urgency statute, it took effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature; there is no delayed implementation period. The authorization has no built‑in sunset date — sales remain allowed only until the two triggers are satisfied — which leaves the timing driven entirely by CEPC and CARB’s review processes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill authorizes sale in California of gasoline blends containing 10.5% to 15% ethanol by volume (the mid‑level range) under new Section 43013.7.
Sales are allowed notwithstanding Section 43830.8; the authorization continues only until CEPC publicly posts its multimedia evaluation findings for those blends.
CARB must either adopt a formal specification for these blends or post an assessment explaining that a proposed specification cannot meet the requirements of subdivision (f) of Section 43830.8; both are required triggers to end the temporary authorization.
Section 43013.7(b) preserves CARB’s existing authority to adopt and enforce fuel specifications for other fuels or to regulate these blends after CARB takes the prescribed action.
The law is an urgency statute and took immediate effect to allow market access quickly with the stated goal of helping address gasoline prices.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Temporary authorization of 10.5%–15% ethanol blends
This subsection is the operative core: it explicitly allows retail sale of gasoline blended with 10.5%–15% ethanol despite the prohibitions in Section 43830.8. The authorization is conditional rather than time‑limited — it remains effective until both subsequent regulatory steps (CEPC posting and CARB action) occur. For market actors, that means legal access now but regulatory uncertainty later depending on how quickly the reviews and rulemaking proceed.
CEPC multimedia evaluation requirement
This paragraph requires that the authorization persists only until the California Environmental Policy Council completes and publicly posts its multimedia evaluation findings for the 10.5%–15% blends as required under Section 43830.8. That places a concrete transparency requirement on CEPC: its posted findings are a trigger for changing the legal status of the blends. The statute does not set a deadline for CEPC’s review, so the timeline depends on CEPC’s capacity and process.
CARB must adopt a specification or post an infeasibility assessment
CARB faces a binary choice: adopt a regulatory specification for these blends or post an assessment on its website demonstrating that a proposed specification cannot satisfy subdivision (f) of Section 43830.8. Practically, this forces CARB either to finish a technical rulemaking that sets fuel quality and emissions expectations or to explain publicly why a specification cannot meet statutory criteria, preserving transparency while ending the temporary permissibility only after CARB’s public action.
Preservation of CARB authority
This saving clause clarifies that allowing sales now does not narrow CARB’s power to regulate other fuels or to adopt specifications for 10.5%–15% blends after it completes whatever action it chooses. It prevents any argument that the temporary authorization permanently limits future regulatory steps, compliance obligations, or enforcement.
Immediate effective date to address gasoline prices
The bill declares itself an urgency statute and states that it takes effect immediately for the purpose of developing solutions to reduce gasoline prices. Legally, that means the temporary authorization became effective on the Governor’s signature; administratively, regulators and market participants must operate under the new permissibility without a staged implementation period.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- California gasoline retailers and distributors — they gain an immediate additional supply option (mid‑level ethanol blends) that can improve inventory flexibility and potentially lower wholesale costs, without waiting for CEPC/CARB to finish reviews.
- Ethanol producers and blenders — domestic and regional ethanol suppliers stand to increase market access into California, expanding demand for denatured ethanol in the 10.5%–15% range.
- California motorists and fleet operators — consumers may see more fuel options and potential price relief if suppliers pass lower blend costs to retail prices, particularly in regions where supply constraints previously limited ethanol use.
- Independent refiners and fuel blenders — firms capable of producing blended fuels can scale operations to supply the allowed blends, capturing margin opportunities during the interim period.
Who Bears the Cost
- California Air Resources Board (CARB) — CARB must either finish a specification or prepare and publish an infeasibility assessment under subdivision (f) of Section 43830.8; both options require technical work and political exposure.
- California Environmental Policy Council (CEPC) and coordinating agencies — CEPC must complete and publish a multimedia evaluation that will be scrutinized; the workload and scrutiny increase without a statutory deadline.
- Retailers and distributors — they face operational and liability risks from carrying mid‑level ethanol blends (equipment compatibility, labeling, staff training) and potential later compliance costs if CARB adopts stringent specifications.
- Vehicle manufacturers and warranty providers — increased availability of non‑E10 blends raises concerns about compatibility, warranty claims, and the need for consumer disclosure; manufacturers may have to update guidance or warranty policies.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits immediate market relief and expanded fuel supply against the precautionary regulatory process designed to assess environmental, vehicle compatibility, and public‑health impacts: it expedites access to potentially lower‑cost fuels now while deferring the full technical and multimedia review that would normally justify a permanent specification.
The bill resolves an administrative blockage by making sales lawful now, but it creates procedural and market uncertainty that regulators and industry must manage. The authorization is open‑ended until CEPC and CARB complete specified actions; because the statute sets no deadlines, the interim period could be short or prolonged depending on agency capacity and political will.
That uncertainty complicates commercial decisions: suppliers may invest to supply mid‑level blends, only to face new technical specifications or limits later from CARB rulemaking.
The statute also raises technical and environmental trade‑offs. Mid‑level ethanol blends change fuel volatility, emissions profiles, and potentially evaporative and tailpipe emissions; CARB’s subdivision (f) criteria are the statutory yardstick for whether a specification can be adopted, but the bill does not define how those criteria apply to real‑world supply chain and vehicle fleet heterogeneity.
Finally, the law shifts the political optics — it prioritizes rapid market access to influence prices while delegating complex environmental evaluation to CEPC and CARB. That trade‑off may invite litigation or political pressure if stakeholders argue the temporary authorization harms air quality or vehicle integrity.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.