BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1059
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
1059 (Eduardo Garcia)
As Amended June 24, 2015
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | 76-0 | (May 4, 2015) |SENATE: | 38-0 | (August 20, |
| | | | | |2015) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: E.S. & T.M.
SUMMARY: Requires the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard
Assessment (OEHHA) to update its California Communities
Environmental Health Screening Tool (CalEnviroScreen 2.0) tool
by using relevant environmental data relating to known impacts
of air pollution, water pollution, and toxic sites on the
environmental quality of the communities in the
California-Mexico border region.
The Senate amendments added specific data elements to be
considered for inclusion in the CalEnviroScreen including:
1)Air quality measurements for ozone and particulate matter 2.5
microns and smaller in size in the border region;
2)Vehicle emissions at border crossings;
AB 1059
Page 2
3)Water quality data for waterways that cross the border; and
4)Feasibility of incorporating into the tool information from
Mexico contained in the Pollutant Release and Transfer
Registry.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires the investment plan related to the Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund (GHGR Fund) that is developed and submitted to
the Legislature to allocate:
a) A minimum of 25% of the available moneys in the GHGR
Fund to projects that provide benefits to identified
disadvantaged communities; and,
b) A minimum of 10% of the available moneys in the GHGR
Fund to projects located within identified disadvantaged
communities.
2)Requires the California Environmental Protection Agency
(CalEPA) to develop a methodology that identifies priority
community areas for investment opportunities related to the
GHGR Fund. Requires that these "priority community investment
areas" be identified and updated at least every two years
based on specified geographic, socioeconomic, and
environmental hazard criteria. To meet this requirement OEHHA
has developed the CalEnviroScreen.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
AB 1059
Page 3
COMMENTS:
Need for the bill: According to the author, "The levels of air
pollution in the border region cannot be accurately assessed
without additional air quality monitoring in the area. This
current lack of reliable information may impact funding for
pollution reduction from carbon fees implemented in AB 32
[(Núñez), Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006]."
Investing in priority community investments areas and most
impacted and disadvantaged communities: SB 535 (De León),
Chapter 830, Statutes of 2012, required CalEPA to identify
disadvantaged communities for investment opportunities using the
GHGR Fund. Pursuant to this requirement, OEHHA has developed
the CalEnviroScreen that will use existing environmental,
health, and socioeconomic data to determine the extent to which
communities across the state are burdened by and vulnerable to
pollution. Current law provides for the allocations for GHGR
Fund investments in projects within priority community
investment areas if certain investment levels related to those
communities are not met. A minimum of 10% of revenues deposited
into the GHGR Fund is required to be allocated to fund programs
or projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions or mitigate
direct health impacts of climate change in the "most impacted
and disadvantaged communities" in California.
CalEnviroScreen and border health concerns: Areas of concerns
or gaps in the data used by CalEnviroScreen 2.0 that may need to
be addressed include how pollution originating in Mexico
contributes to the pollution burden in census tracts along the
California-Mexico border. Some of the specific areas of concern
include:
1)Air monitoring data for ozone and particulate matter (PM) 2.5
from Mexico may be needed to account for the air quality
impacts on United States (U.S.) border communities;
2)Diesel particulate matter impacts from idling trucks at the
border crossings;
AB 1059
Page 4
3)Traffic density measurement from roads in Mexico in close
proximity to communities along the U.S.-Mexico border; and
4)Toxic releases and hazardous waste from Mexican facilities in
proximity to the U.S.-Mexico border and their potential for
adverse effects.
The California State Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic
Materials (ESTM) Committee hearings on cross border river water
quality: On March 19, 2015, and March 20, 2015, the ESTM
Committee held a two-part series of hearings in Southern
California focusing on California's role in managing binational
river water quality issues and on ensuring that border
communities, especially disadvantaged communities, are not left
behind in water quality restoration efforts. The first hearings
focused on the progress and challenges facing the Tijuana and
the New River restoration efforts.
Analysis Prepared by:
Bob Fredenburg / E.S. & T.M. / (916) 319-3965
FN:
0001145