BILL ANALYSIS AB 1504 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 1504 (Skinner) As Amended August 17, 2010 Majority vote ----------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |43-28|(January 27, |SENATE: |24-12|(August 31, | | | |2010) | | |2010) | ----------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: NAT. RES. SUMMARY : Requires the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDF, or CALFIRE), in consultation with the Air Resources Board (ARB), by March 1, 2011, to assess the capacity of its forest and rangeland regulations to meet or exceed the state's greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The Senate amendments remove the requirement that a timber harvesting plan (THP) must estimate carbon dioxide emissions from timber operations. Senate amendments also require any studies contracted for by either ARB or CDF to be paid for with fees generated by AB 32. EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires ARB, pursuant to AB 32, to adopt a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to 1990 levels by 2020 and adopt regulations to achieve maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions. ARB is required to adopt and update every five years a scoping plan for achieving these reductions from sources or categories of sources. 2)Requires CDF, pursuant to the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act (Act) of 1973, to create and maintain a comprehensive system of regulation of all timberlands to assure that: where feasible, the productivity of timberlands is restored, enhanced, and maintained and; the goal of maximum sustained yield of high-quality timber products is achieved while giving consideration to values relating to recreation, watershed, wildlife, range and forage, fisheries, regional economic vitality, employment, and aesthetic enjoyment. AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill: AB 1504 Page 2 1)By March 1, 2011, required CDF, in consultation with ARB, to assess the capacity of its forest and rangeland regulations and non-regulatory forestry programs to meet or exceed the state's GHG reduction goals. At a minimum, CDF must consider: a) Whether relevant statutory or regulatory requirements governing a timber harvesting plan, sustained yield plan or its equivalent, non-industrial timber management plan, or any other discretionary approval for timber harvesting are sufficient to ensure a net reduction or sequestration of carbon emissions from primary forest carbon sources, sinks or reservoirs; b) Whether regulations governing conversion of timberland and forestland, as defined, to non-timber and non-forest uses are sufficient to offset lost sequestration capacity and carbon emissions associated with the non-timber use; and, c) Whether forest growth, harvest and conversion information obtained through CDF's regulatory and non-regulatory programs and other local, state and federal sources is sufficient and reliable to track changes in carbon stocks, including net emissions and reductions, across the state's forested landscape. 2)By December 1, 2010, CDF must publish a draft assessment, including any recommendations, for a 30-day public review and comment period. 3)Required ARB, in consultation with CDF, to convene an independent panel of no less than three qualified experts to peer-review the draft assessment. At least two experts shall be selected from academia. CDF must incorporate the panel's findings or recommendations or describe in writing the reasons, based on substantial evidence, for rejecting a finding or recommendation. 4)Defined "net reduction or sequestration of carbon emissions" to mean an increase in carbon stocks over time of a primary forest carbon source, sink or reservoir compared to a baseline. 5)Defined "primary forest carbon source, sink or reservoir" to AB 1504 Page 3 include standing live or dead trees, soil, shrubs and herbaceous understory, lying dead wood, litter, duff, and forest products. 6)Is contingent upon receipt of sufficient funding from the ARB pursuant to its AB 32 fee revenue authority or any other public or private source. FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill would require a one time cost of $800,000 to $1 million to the General Fund for reviewing or updating existing regulations. COMMENTS : According to the author's office, this bill is necessary to ensure that CDF's assessment is completed in a timely manner, and to ensure that it reflects the most defensible science on carbon sequestration and forestry practices. The bill essentially codifies Task #2 of the Interagency Forestry Working Group (IFWG), established in December 2008 by the Natural Resources Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency, and ARB as the official forestry subgroup of the Climate Action Team to provide guidance on all forest-related climate strategies and policies. The IRWG proposed Task #2 (in addition to 3 other tasks) on May 6, 2009 and set a completion date of November 2009. However, presumably due to resource constraints, including state employee furloughs, this deadline was not met. On November 24, the IFWG outlined a work plan for Task #2 though it did not include any timeline for completion. At the same time, but in a different venue, CDF appears to have already answered the questions posed by Task #2. In a November 12, 2009 memo, responding to concerns raised by the Department of Fish Game regarding the climate impacts of a non-industrial timber management plan (NTMP), CDF concludes, without any supporting documentation, that "?the provisions of the [Forest Practices Act] and [Forest Practice Rules] while not specifically targeted to address GHG relationships will support the targets for the Forest Sector" identified in the Scoping Plan. While the NTMP itself may, in fact, mitigate or offset carbon emissions associated with timber harvesting, CDF extrapolates this conclusion, without substantiation, across its entire regulatory program. The Board of Forestry's (BOF) 2008 AB 32 Strategic Plan to ARB essentially reaches the same conclusion, again, without any supporting evidence. This raises AB 1504 Page 4 the concern that CDF may not be in the best position to complete the above assessment objectively. According to the Scoping Plan, California's forests currently sequester approximately 5 million metric tons (MMT) of carbon dioxide annually. This means that the atmospheric uptake and sequestration of carbon from forest growth is greater than emissions from fires, harvesting, land conversion, and decomposition. There were significant limitations (e.g., temporal, spatial, and methodological), however, to the study that formed the basis for the above sequestration rate so ARB is planning on updating its assessment by winter 2010. Nonetheless, the Scoping Plan tasks CDF and BOF with evaluating how its current regulations and programs will continue to achieve the 5 MMT target by 2020 (Task #2). Since the conversion of timberland and forestland (a broader category) to non-timber and non-forest land uses is one threat to the maintenance of this target, the Scoping Plan also suggests that regulatory changes could dissuade conversion or require mitigation for the lost sequestration capacity. From 1999 to 2008, about 1,500 acres of timberland per year have been converted to non-timber uses. CDF is just beginning to determine how it will implement Task #2. Possible options include a top-down approach, comparing carbon inventory trends longitudinally and retrospectively teasing out possible explanations for this trend, or a risk-based approach, assessing the capacity of its rules or programs to mitigate threats (e.g., wildfires, conversions) to carbon stocks. There are many existing forest practice rules that, on a project-by-project basis, may have the effect of offsetting overall carbon emissions (e.g., streamside buffer or retention rules) or contributing to emissions (e.g., rules that permit the harvesting of old-growth or older trees). However, these rules were not developed with carbon sequestration in mind so the challenge is to determine which rules have the incidental benefit of increased carbon storage and whether new rules or amendments are necessary to increase storage or mitigate emissions in order to meet or maintain the Scoping Plan target. Pursuant to its responsibilities under the California Environmental Quality Act, CDF is requiring large landowners (greater than 50,000 acres) to analyze the GHG impacts of their preferred timber harvest management regimes across their entire ownership. These landowners are currently required to AB 1504 Page 5 demonstrate, through a sustained yield plan (SYP), "maximum sustained production" of high-quality timber products, balancing growth and harvest over a 100-year planning horizon. An SYP describes a landowner's management regime, and proposed growth and harvest rates, and contains environmental analysis of this regime on a programmatic scale. Analysis Prepared by : Jessica Wesbrook / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0006282