BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                      



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 234|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 234
          Author:   Hancock (D)
          Amended:  8/24/12
          Vote:     21

           
          PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT

           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 8/30/12
          (pursuant to Senate Rule 20.10)
          AYES:  DeSaulnier, Gaines, Harman, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Rubio, 
            Simitian
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Pavley, Wyland

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  Not available


           SUBJECT  :    Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program

           SOURCE  :     California Association of Port Authorities


           DIGEST  :    This bill requires the California Air Resources 
          Board (ARB) to disperse eligible funds from the Highway 
          Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security 
          Bond Act of 2006 (Bond Act) for projects that provide 
          shorepower for vessels to applicants on a quarterly basis, 
          and also authorizes ARB to withhold 10% of reimbursable 
          costs until the project demonstrates its ability to power a 
          vessel at berth.  

           Assembly Amendments  delete the prior version of the bill, 
          which dealt with the Board of Equalization, and instead add 
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 234
                                                                Page 
          2

          the current language.

           ANALYSIS :    

          Existing law:  

           1. Enacts the Bond Act, approved by the voters as 
             Proposition 1B on November 7, 2006, that includes a $1 
             billion Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program (Prop 
             1B Program) administered in partnership between ARB and 
             local agencies (air districts and ports) to quickly 
             reduce air pollution emissions and health risk from 
             freight movement along California's trade corridors.  
             Authorizes funds for on-shore electrical power for ocean 
             freight carriers calling at the state's seaports to 
             reduce the use of auxiliary and main engine ship power.  


           2. Establishes, through ARB's "Regulation to Reduce 
             Emissions from Diesel Auxiliary Engines on Ocean-Going 
             Vessels while at Berth at a California Port," measures 
             to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter, 
             nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxides from the use of 
             auxiliary diesel engines and diesel-electric engines 
             from the operation of auxiliary engines on container 
             vessels, passenger vessels, and refrigerated cargo 
             vessels while these vessels are docked at berth at a 
             California port.  

           3. Establishes ARB, in partnership with local air 
             districts, to oversee all air pollution control efforts 
             to attain and maintain health-based air quality 
             standards in California.  

           Comments
           
          Ocean-going vessels are a significant source of harmful air 
          emissions in California that negatively affect the health 
          of millions of residents.  Technologies are currently 
          available that provide shoreside electrical power to a ship 
          at berth while its main and auxiliary engines are turned 
          off.  Such technologies in place are commonly referred to 
          as cold ironing, alternative maritime power, shorepower or 
          shore supply.  These technologies are eligible for grant 







                                                                SB 234
                                                                Page 
          3

          funding through the Prop 1B Program administered by ARB.  
          The grant funds are passed through ARB and administered by 
          the regional air quality management districts with the 
          grantee.  In accordance with the Prop 1B Program, local 
          agencies can receive grant funding from ARB provided that 
          they can demonstrate a project's capability to reduce 
          hoteling (or at-berth) emissions and associated health 
          impacts from diesel-fueled auxiliary engines on board ships 
          docked at California ports by either on-shore applications 
          or ship engine emission capture technologies.  

          In December 2007, ARB approved a regulation to reduce 
          emissions from diesel auxiliary engines on container ships, 
          passenger ships, and refrigerated-cargo ships while 
          berthing at a California port.  The regulation defines a 
          California port as the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, 
          Oakland, San Diego, San Francisco, and Hueneme.  The 
          regulation provides vessel fleet operators visiting these 
          ports two options to reduce at-berth emissions from 
          auxiliary engines:  (1) turn off auxiliary engines for most 
          of a vessel's stay in port and connect the vessel to some 
          other source of power, most likely grid-based shore power; 
          or (2) use alternative control techniques that achieve 
          equivalent emission reductions.  

          Further, the Prop 1B Program authorized $100 million for 
          shorepower projects or emission capture technologies.  By 
          statute, these Prop 1B Program funds can only be used for 
          emission reductions "not otherwise required by law or 
          regulation."   Further, the Prop 1B Program implementing 
          statutes requires ARB to adopt guidelines to administer the 
          $100 million port emission reduction program to include the 
          following:  

           1. An application process for the funds and any limits on 
             administrative costs.  

           2. Requirements that local agencies identify the useful 
             life of the project and project delivery milestones as 
             part of the application process.  

           3. Criteria for selection of local agency projects and 
             equipment projects.  








                                                                SB 234
                                                                Page 
          4

           4. Requirements for match funding.  

           5. The method by which ARB will consider an air basin's 
             status in achieving state and federal air quality 
             standards.  

           6. Requirements that grant agreements between ARB and 
             local agencies identify project milestones and remedies 
             for failure to meet project milestones.  

           7. Accountability and auditing requirements, including 
             provisions for audits of project expenditures and 
             outcomes.  

          ARB adopted the guidelines in March 2010, governing the 
          expenditure of the Prop 1B Program's $100 million grant 
          funds for port emission reduction projects.  The 
          guidelines, among other items, require:  

           1. Projects to be plug-in ready prior to funds to be 
             reimbursed to applicants.  

           2. Large shipping lines to meet 50% fleet plug-in 
             shoreside requirements in 2014-2016.  

           3. Shorepower electrification contracts to include 
             provisions for non-performance penalties.  

           4. A statement that all grant funds will be forfeited for 
             any grid-based ships at berth or ship emissions capture 
             and control system project that is not fully operational 
             by December 31, 2013, unless the grant funds will fund a 
             berth project that serves only ships not subject to 
             ARB's shorepower regulations.  

          In spring 2011, subsequent to the adoption of the 
          guidelines, California's regional air quality management 
          districts, the entities managing the Prop 1B Program 
          funding on behalf of ARB, solicited requests for the use of 
          the grant monies to the ports.  The Ports of Hueneme, Long 
          Beach, Los Angeles, and Oakland each requested grant 
          funding for their particular shorepower, electrical plug-in 
          infrastructure projects.  To receive their Prop 1B Program 
          grant funds, the Ports of Hueneme, Long Beach, and Los 







                                                                SB 234
                                                                Page 
          5

          Angeles separately entered into contracts with the South 
          Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast).  
          Further, the Port of Oakland entered into a Prop 1B Program 
          grant agreement with the Bay Area Air Quality Management 
          District.  
           
          ARB's current Prop 1B Program guidelines (guidelines) allow 
          reimbursement to the ports for funds that they have 
          expended for their shorepower grant projects only upon 
          demonstration of actual vessel "plug-in" of the project, 
          thus giving ARB and the California's regional air quality 
          management district's assurances that the equipment is 
          functional.  According to this bill's sponsor, the 
          California Association of Port Authorities (CAPA), they 
          contend that the ports may have difficulty meeting this 
          requirement due to construction schedules, the nature of 
          port operations, and the shipping industry's readiness for 
          shore power.  They indicate that the ports have no control 
          over the availability and deployment of vessels to a 
          particular berth, particularly as many of the on-shore 
          power-ready vessels may not be deployed until mid-2014.  

          Rather than waiting for final reimbursement based upon 
          actual vessel plug in, this bill would require ARB to 
          revise their guidelines to provide an alternative 
          definition of operability that would consider a project 
          fully operational if the facility providing on-shore 
          electrical power has completed a building and safety 
          inspection and load bank testing.  Upon the guideline's 
          revision, this will provide more flexibility to ARB to 
          approve payments to ports upon project completion.  
          Furthermore, this will also provide relief in regards to 
          the guideline's penalty provisions that require on-shore 
          power systems to be constructed by December 31, 2013.  
          Under the guidelines, ports unable to meet this deadline 
          will be penalized grant funds if unable to meet this date.  


           Timely distribution of state funds to ports  .  In addition, 
          it is the author's office contention that the state has 
          sold the bonds designated for shoreside power projects and 
          is currently holding these funds and paying interest on 
          these funds and that it is unreasonable to require ports 
          that are subdivisions of the state that are making 







                                                                SB 234
                                                                Page 
          6

          improvements to public lands, including state tidelands, to 
          borrow funds to complete their projects.  The author's 
          office further indicates that "this creates a situation 
          where the state and ports end up paying double-interest 
          because one subdivision of the state, ARB, has placed a 
          rigid reimbursement requirement on other subdivisions of 
          the state."  

          Although ARB has traditionally distributed grant funds upon 
          completion of projects, CAPA contends that nothing in 
          Proposition 1B, or related enabling legislation, prohibits 
          the distribution of funds on a reimbursement basis as 
          project proponents appropriately spend funds.  This 
          "reimbursement" method, often based on monthly reimbursable 
          invoicing, is the method used by many state and federal 
          entities (including the California Transportation 
          Commission) for funding infrastructure improvement 
          projects; including other Bond Act funded projects.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes   
          Local:  No

          According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, onetime 
          costs of several hundred thousand dollars, equivalent to 
          the efforts of two to three fulltime staff, to ARB for 
          revising the Prop 1B Program guidelines.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/29/12)

          California Association of Port Authorities (source)
          Port of Oakland
          Port of Hueneme


          JJA:d  8/31/12   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****