BILL ANALYSIS AB 1504 Page 1 Date of Hearing: January 21, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Kevin De Leon, Chair AB 1504 (Skinner) - As Amended: January 13, 2010 Policy Committee: Natural ResourcesVote:6-2 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No SUMMARY This bill requires the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Calfire), by March 1, 2011, to assess, subject to public and peer review, the adequacy of its forestry regulations and programs to meet the state's greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. FISCAL EFFECT Moderate one-time special-fund costs during 2009-10 and 2010-11, in the range of $200,000 to $400,000, to the extent funding is available. (Air Pollution Control Fund or other special fund.) This measure is contingent upon Calfire's receipt of funds sufficient to cover the costs of the assessment and reviews from the Air Resources Board's (ARB) AB 32 fee revenue or from another public or private source. COMMENTS 1)Rationale . The ARB, in its "scoping plan" to achieve the state's GHG reduction goals, credits the state's forests with sequestering 5 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2E), now and through 2020. In May of 2006, Calfire, as part of an inter-agency working group seeking to ensure the achievement of the state's GHG reduction goals for the forestry sector, committed to assess its forestry regulations and policies to determine their adequacy to meet California's GHG reduction goals. The working group established a completion date for Calfire's review of November AB 1504 Page 2 2009. By November 2009, Calfire had not completed an assessment of its regulations and programs. At that time, however, and in a separate venue, Calfire declared the adequacy of its forestry regulations and programs to meet the state's GHG reduction goals. Given Calfire's lack of progress in completing its assessment and its inconsistent statements, the author concludes it necessary to require Calfire to complete the described assessment and to subject that assessment to public and peer review. 2)Background. a) AB 32 scoping plan relies on carbon sequestration by forestry sector . AB 32 requires California to limit its emissions of GHGs so that, by 2020, those emissions are equal to what they were in 1990. To that end, AB 32 requires ARB to quantify the state's 1990 GHG emissions and to adopt, by January 1, 2009, a scoping plan that describes the board's plan for achieving GHG emissions reductions by 2020. In keeping with AB 32, ARB adopted its scoping plan in December of 2008, which outlined, by economic sector, how the state would reduce its GHG emissions by roughly 175 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2E). The plan identified the state's forests as currently accounting for approximately 5 MMTCO2E, representing the amount of GHGs held, or "sequestered" in the state's existing forests. The scoping plan assumes that the state's forests will continue to sequester this 5 MMTCO2E through 2020, thereby reducing the amount by which the state must reduce its GHG emissions. In addition, AB 32 provides ARB the authority to collect a fee from GHG emissions sources to pay the costs of implementing AB 32. b) Calfire recognizes need to review forestry regulations even as it declares their adequacy. Consistent with AB 32, the scoping plan was developed by ARB with the assistance of other state agencies, including Calfire, most directly responsible for regulating GHG emissions sources. Calfire's existing regulations and policies have been AB 1504 Page 3 devised to protect the state's forest resources from fire, infestation, over harvesting and other threats. They were not devised, however, specifically to ensure the continued carbon sequestration capacity of the state's forests upon which the scoping plan relies. For this reason, Calfire and ARB, as part of an AB 32 working group, identified the need for Calfire to review the effectiveness of existing forest and rangeland regulations and related programs at meeting the state's GHG reduction goals. In May of 2009, the working group published a draft work plan that would enable Calfire to perform the review by November of 2009. To date, Calfire has not completed its review. Nor is Calfire under any legal obligation to do so. Also in November of 2009, and separate from the AB 32 working group, Calfire issued a memo on the relationship between California's regulation of forestry and GHG emissions. In that memo, Calfire concludes that its forestry and related regulations and programs are sufficient to achieve the forestry sector GHG emission targets identified in ARB's scoping plan. 3)Support. Proponents, including several environmental and resource protection organizations, contend it is uncertain whether the state's forestry and related regulations and policies are adequate to achieve the GHG emissions reductions identified in the AB 32 scoping plan. This is because these regulations and policies were not devised with the goal of reducing GHG emissions. These proponents fear that resource constraints or other motivations may prevent Calfire from completing its review of these regulations, or from completing its review adequately, absent legislative direction, thereby jeopardizing adequate reduction of the state's GHG emissions. 4)Opposition. The only registered opposition to this bill is the California Licensed Foresters Association, which contends Calfire will complete its review absent legislative direction. Opponents also may question the legality of using AB 32 fee revenue to fund activities not required by AB 32. Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081