BILL ANALYSIS
AB 892
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 892 (Furutani) - As Amended: April 15, 2009
Policy Committee: Gov OrgVote:13-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
Authorizes a sponsoring local agency that has received Goods
Movement Emission Reduction Program (GMERP) funds to reallocate
unexpended funds to a previously approved backup project.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Authorizes a local agency that has received GMERP funds for a
project to reduce goods movement-related emissions, prior to
the passage of four years since the funds were awarded, to
reallocate those funds to another project that previously was
approved by the Air Resources Board (ARB).
2)Specifies that priority for reallocation goes to projects that
are both in the same emission source category and in the same
trade corridor as the original project, and second priority
goes to projects that are only in the same trade corridor as
the original project.
3)Specifies that all GMERP funds not expended within four years
of the original project award shall revert to the Proposition
1B bond fund for reappropriation by the Legislature and award
by ARB.
4)Requires ARB to include in an annual report already required
by law a description of any changes to the scope of grant
agreements or to the award amounts described in a grant
agreement pursuant to this bill.
FISCAL EFFECT
This bill allows local agencies to reallocate GMERP funds,
potentially in the tens of millions of dollars, for local
AB 892
Page 2
projects that otherwise would be subject to reappropriation by
the Legislature and award by ARB.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . According the author, economic slowdown has led
many recipients of GMERP bond funds to cancel the projects for
which they received the bond funds from the sponsoring local
agency. Currently, funds for such cancelled projects would
revert to the Proposition 1B fund, to be reappropriated by the
Legislature and once again awarded by ARB to sponsoring local
agencies. The author contends that allowing a local agency to
award funds authorized for one project to a second, backup
project that has prior ARB approval will better achieve the
goals of Proposition 1B and legislative intent-to maximize the
emission reduction benefits and achieve the earliest possible
health risk reduction in communities heavily impacted by goods
movement.
2)Proposition 1B of 2006 provided, among other monies, $1
billion for reduction of emissions related to the movement of
freight along California's trade corridors. The proposition
specifies that funded emissions reductions must not be
otherwise required by law.
SB 88 (Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) of 2007
established the GMERP for the distribution of Proposition 1B
funds for the replacement, repower, or retrofit of heavy-duty
trucks, locomotives, commercial harbor craft, ocean-going
vessels related to freight, and cargo-handling equipment with
cleaner technology alternatives. SB 88 directed ARB to
develop program guidelines so as to maximize the emission
reduction benefits and achieve the earliest possible health
risk reductions in communities heavily impacted by goods
movement.
Under the GMERP, ARB awards grants to fund projects proposed
by local agencies that are involved in freight movement or air
quality improvements associated with goods movement
activities, such air pollution control districts, ports, and
regional transportation agencies. The local agencies then
provide financial incentives to owners of equipment used in
freight movement to upgrade to cleaner technologies,
consistent with GMERP guidelines. ARB targets funding for each
trade corridor as follows:
AB 892
Page 3
a) $550 million for Los Angeles/Inland Empire trade
corridor.
b) $250 million for Central Valley and Sacramento trade
corridor.
c) $140 for San Francisco Bay Area trade corridor.
d) 60 million for San Diego/Border trade corridor.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081