BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                AB 892
                                                                       

                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                        Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
                              2009-2010 Regular Session
                                           
           BILL NO:    AB 892
           AUTHOR:     Furutani
           AMENDED:    July 9, 2009
           FISCAL:     Yes               HEARING DATE:     July 13, 2009
           URGENCY:    No                CONSULTANT:       Randy Pestor
             
            SUBJECT  :    GOODS MOVEMENT EMISSION REDUCTION

            SUMMARY :    
           
            Existing law  , under the Goods Movement Emission Reduction  
           Program (GMERP) Law:

           1) Requires an applicant (local public entity (air pollution  
              control district)) receiving funds under the program to  
              have up to 2 years from the date funds are allocated to  
              award a contract for a project, or else the funds revert to  
              the California Ports Infrastructure, Security, and Air  
              Quality Improvement Account (Account) for allocation.   
              Funds not liquidated within 4 years of the contract award  
              date between the applicant and the contractor must also  
              revert to that Account.

           2) Requires the State Air Resources Board (ARB) to submit an  
              annual report to the Legislature summarizing its activities  
              related to administration of the GMERP Law.  The report  
              must include information relating to funded projects,  
              allocated funds, project locations, project status, and  
              project emission reductions.

            This bill  :

           1) Authorizes returned funds or unspent funds from obligated  
              contracts received by the applicant prior to the end of the  
              4 year liquidation period to be awarded by the applicant to  
              fund equipment projects included on the same competitively  
              ranked list approved by the ARB pursuant to the grant  
              agreement, or if there are no other eligible projects  
              included on that list, returned to the ARB for reallocation  









                                                                AB 892
                                                                 Page 2

              to an applicant pursuant to ARB guidelines.  The ARB  
              guidelines must follow certain priorities and all funds  
              allocated by the applicant must be liquidated within 4  
              years of the original contract award or must revert to the  
              Account.

           2) Requires ARB to include a description of any changes to the  
              grant agreement scope or changes to grant award amounts.

            COMMENTS  :

            1) Purpose of Bill  .  According to the author, "Due to the  
              slowing economy, some GMERP recipients are backing out of  
              their contracts and returning GMERP funds to the district.   
              This may occur because a company cannot fund their share of  
              the project, or the company is simply going out of  
              business.  Although the local air districts have dozens of  
              qualified projects waiting to receive GMERP funding,  
              current law does not allow the air district to apply the  
              returned funds to otherwise qualified projects.  Funds must  
              be returned to the main Prop 1B account, re-appropriated by  
              the legislature, and then awarded by the [ARB]."

           The author notes that this bill "would allow funds resulting  
              from a cancelled contract to be applied to an approved  
              back-up project.  If no eligible project exists, then funds  
              would revert to the [ARB].  The amendment would not change  
              current law with respect to total time a district has to  
              liquidate funds."

            2) Background  .  The Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air  
              Quality and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition  
              1B), approved by voters November 2006, included provisions  
              for $1 billion to reduce emissions associated with freight  
              movement along the state's trade corridors.  SB 88  
              (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review) Chapter 181,  
              Statutes of 2007, among other things included the GMERP Law  
              to provide guidance for ARB to implement the program.

           ARB must consider certain criteria in evaluating projects  
              (e.g., emission reduction magnitude, public health benefit,  
              cost-effectiveness; reduction in greenhouse gases; degree  










                                                                AB 892
                                                                 Page 3

              to which funds are leveraged from other sources).  Projects  
              eligible for funding include replacement, repower, or  
              retrofit of heavy-duty diesel trucks, diesel locomotive  
              engines, harbor craft, and cargo handling equipment;  
              on-shore electrical power; mobile or portable shoreside  
              distributed power generation; and infrastructure  
              electrification to reduce engine idling.

           As noted above, under current law returned or unspent funds  
              from obligated contracts received by the local agency  
              applicant prior to the end of the four year liquidation  
              period must revert to the Account.  AB 892 enables the  
              local agency applicant to fund other equipment projects  
              under certain conditions.

           AB 892 was approved by the Senate Transportation Committee  
              July 7, 2009 (9-0).

            SOURCE  :        South Coast Air Quality Management District  

           SUPPORT  :       Automobile Club of Southern California, Bay  
                          Area Air Quality Management District,  
                          California Air Pollution Control Officers  
                          Association, California State Automobile  
                          Association, Harbor Association of Industry &  
                          Commerce, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution  
                          Control District  

           OPPOSITION  :    None on file