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