BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair 2015 - 2016 Regular Session AB 1176 (Perea) - Vehicular air pollution. ----------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Version: July 7, 2015 |Policy Vote: T. & H. 10 - 0, | | | E.Q. 7 - 0 | | | | |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Urgency: Yes |Mandate: No | | | | |--------------------------------+--------------------------------| | | | |Hearing Date: August 24, 2015 |Consultant: Marie Liu | | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------- This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. Bill Summary: AB 1176 would create the Advanced Low-Carbon Diesel Fuels Access Program which will provide capital assistance for projects that expand advanced low-carbon diesel fueling infrastructure in communities that are disproportionately impacted by environmental health hazards and where the greatest air quality impacts can be identified. Fiscal Impact: Ongoing annual costs of $225,000 to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF, special) for program development, grant administration, and review of contract extensions. Ongoing annual costs of up to $350,000 to the GGRF (special) for the ARB to provide project review and GGRF expenditure oversight. AB 1176 (Perea) Page 1 of ? Background: GGRF: The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (referred to as AB 32, HSC §38500 et seq.) requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to determine the 1990 statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions level, to approve a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to that level that will be achieved by 2020, and to adopt GHG emissions reductions measures by regulation. ARB is authorized to include the use of market-based mechanisms to comply with the regulations. Under this authority, the ARB initiated the cap-and-trade program. All monies, except for fines and penalties, collected pursuant to the cap-and-trade program deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) (Government Code §16428.8). Existing law requires that the GGRF only be used to facilitate the achievement of reductions of GHG emissions consistent with AB 32 (HSC §39710 et seq.). To this end, the Department of Finance, in consultation with the ARB and any other relevant state agencies, is required to develop, as specified, a three-year investment plan for the moneys deposited in the GGRF. The investment plan must allocate a minimum of 25% of the funds to projects that benefit disadvantaged communities and to allocate 10% of the funds to projects located within disadvantaged communities. Additionally, the ARB, in consultation with CalEPA, is required to develop funding guidelines for administering agencies receiving allocations of GGRF funds that include a component for how agencies should maximize benefits to disadvantaged communities. LCFS: The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was adopted by the ARB in 2009 in response to an executive order by Governor Schwarzenegger for with the goal of reducing GHG emissions from the transportation sector by 16 million metric tons by 2020. The LCFS requires producers of petroleum based fuels to reduce the carbon intensity (CI) of transportation fuels by 10% by 2020. The CI is based on emissions from the production, delivery, and use of the fuel. CalEnviroScreen: CalEnviroScreen was developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment on behalf of the AB 1176 (Perea) Page 2 of ? California Environmental Protection Agency for the purpose of identifying communities that are disproportionately burned by multiple sources of pollution. CalEnviroScreen is used to designate disadvantaged communities that must benefit from a minimum of 25% of the expenditures of GGRF. Proposed Law: This bill would create the Advanced Low-Carbon Diesel Fuels Access Program which will provide capital assistance for projects that expand advanced low-carbon diesel fueling infrastructure in communities that are disproportionately impacted by environmental health hazards and where the greatest air quality impacts can be identified. The program would give priority to projects that meet all of the following: Located in or near disadvantaged communities as identified by CalEnviroScreen. Demonstrates the potential for cobenefits, including reducing emissions of criteria pollutants or toxic air contaminants. Quantifies and measures cost-effectiveness and impacts on disadvantaged and low-income populations. Ability to leverage additional public or private funding. Has the ability to obtain immediate benefits. Includes marketing and education outreach strategies designed to increase the cost effectiveness of the program's goals. The program would be administered by the CEC in consultation with the ARB and be funded by the GGRF. The CEC would be required to develop guidelines for the program by March 1, 2016. This bill would also the CEC to extend a contract, grant, loan, or award issued under the Alternative and Renewable Fuel and Vehicle Technology Program (ARFVTP) for two years if the moneys are reprioritized by the CEC to apply towards a project that benefits disadvantaged communities. AB 1176 (Perea) Page 3 of ? Staff Comments: To implement this bill, the CEC would need 1 position to develop guidelines for the grant program the implement and manage the grants at an annual cost of $170,000. Staff notes that these costs are considerably lower than typical estimates to develop and implement grant programs. The lower cost can be partially a result of the CEC having previously administered grants for similar projects, particularly under the ARFVTP. These guidelines could be used as the basis for the new program envisioned under this bill. Still, the CEC's costs may be viewed as a minimum. Staff notes that the bill requires the guidelines to be developed by March 1, 2016. Presuming this bill goes into effect in October of this year as an urgency measure, the CEC would have five months to develop the guidelines, which presumably would be considered regulations and therefore subject to the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The development of regulations takes at least one year, typically two. Even emergency regulations typically take one year at the CEC. Thus is unclear whether the CEC could meet the timelines established in the bill. Typically adopting a regulation on short-frame results in additional administrative costs that do not appear to be considered in the CEC's estimate for this bill. The CEC also anticipates approximately $50,000 in additional workload annually to consider requests to extend contracts under the ARFVTP. The ARB also notes that it would have costs associated with this bill. Specifically, the ARB notes workload associated with coordinating with the CEC for the administration of the new grant program, ensure compliance with the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the Alternative Diesel Fuel Regulation, developing quantification methodologies, reporting on program and project status, and evaluating disadvantaged community benefits. For these responsibilities the ARB estimates it would need two positions at an annual ongoing cost of $350,000 assuming the grant program will not be allocated more than $20 million in GGRF funding. Staff notes that ARB's estimated workload may be duplicative of work that would be performed by the CEC as the administering agency of the grant program. AB 1176 (Perea) Page 4 of ? Staff notes that there are multiple programs under CEC and ARB that fund infrastructure related to clean cars. By creating a new program, the state may be spending more on administration of multiple programs relative to the amount of financial assistance issued. One of the programs that previously offered assistance to low-carbon diesel was the ARFVTP. However, the 2015-16 investment plan update does not include additional funding for diesel substitute infrastructure because private investment is supporting large-scale biodiesel blending. Staff notes that if there is sufficient private investment in low-carbon diesel so that it is no longer an eligible project under the ARFVTP, will use of GGRF for this purpose be a cost-effective way of reducing GHG emissions? Staff notes that expenditures of GGRF must reduce GHG emissions. However, the list of eligible equipment under the bill includes some items that may not lead to a reduction of GHG emissions- in particular, signage and point-of-sale systems. Additionally, staff notes that the GHG emission reductions associated with expanded fueling infrastructure will be dependent on how much fuel is dispensed. Thus the emission reductions for these projects are somewhat uncertain and will not likely be realized in the short-term. This bill directs the CEC to fund projects that are in communities that are "disproportionately impacted by environmental hazards," which is defined. However, the bill also directs the CEC to use disadvantaged communities identified by CalEnviroScreen pursuant to SB 535. Staff recommends that if the CEC is to use the SB 535 definition of disadvantaged communities, the phrase "disproportionately impacted by environmental health hazards" can be deleted from the bill to avoid confusion. Staff notes that there are multiple bills being considered by both houses of the Legislature that propose projects that would AB 1176 (Perea) Page 5 of ? be eligible to receive GGRF funds. It is unclear how these bills will interact with each other. Staff notes that a discussion on the spending of GGRF is anticipated in August as part of a budget discussion. -- END --