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