BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2168
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 9, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2168 (Chesbro) - As Amended: April 25, 2012
Policy Committee: Natural
ResourcesVote:7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
As proposed to be amended, this bill requires the director of
the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to
coordinate with a Timber Harvest Plan's (THP) interdisciplinary
review team to ensure that all necessary members of the team are
present at the preharvest inspection, if such an inspection is
needed.
FISCAL EFFECT
Minor, absorbable costs to CAL FIRE, which might need to engage
in a small amount of communication by telephone or email.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author intends this bill to respond to
industry concern to ensure that all necessary members of the
team are present for the preharvest inspection if an
inspection is needed.
2)Background. The Forest Practices Act of 1973 requires logging
operations to comply with an approved THP-a document that
describes the proposed logging operation and measures the
logger will undertake to prevent environmental damage or
mitigation measures to compensate for such damage. A THP must
be approved by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
(Calfire) and reviewed by several other state agencies-the
Department of Conservation, the State Water Resources Control
Board and the Department of Fish and Game (DFG). An approved
THP is considered "functionally equivalent" under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), meaning timber
AB 2168
Page 2
harvesting consistent with an approved THP is not subject to
an environmental impact report under CEQA.
The THP program is one of the only state regulatory programs
not funded mainly or entirely by fees on the regulated
parties. For over a decade, the LAO has recommended the
Legislature implement a THP fee on the timber industry to
cover regulatory costs, which recently have ranged from
approximately $17 million to $22 million annually, almost all
of which is paid from the General Fund.
Industry generally opposes the LAO's fee proposal, contending
the THP program is more costly than necessary and increased
fees will reduce in-state logging. Environmentalists generally
claim the THP program is insufficiently stringent to warrant
functional equivalence under CEQA.
In late 2007, the Assembly Committee on Accountability and
Administrative Review heard testimony related to the THP
program, including the LAO fee recommendation. Subsequent to
that hearing, Committee chair Roger Dickinson and the author
of this bill convened an ongoing THP working group similar to
the working group.
3)Author's amendments add Assemblymember Dickinson as a
coauthor.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081