California Assembly Resolution 141 expresses concern that the state's new energy efficiency standards for replacement tires may impose significant financial burdens on consumers and businesses. The resolution cites industry data suggesting tire costs could rise by up to $365 per set, contradicting official estimates of a smaller increase, and argues that the program's environmental benefits have not fully accounted for the impacts of manufacturing, transporting, and disposing of additional tires. It urges the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to reassess the program by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of affordability, tire safety, and full life-cycle environmental effects.
Existing law vests the Public Utilities Commission with regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations. Under existing law, the commission administers, or otherwise oversees, various public purpose programs, including energy efficiency and conservation programs, cost-effective energy efficiency programs, the Family Electric Rate Assistance program, the California Alternate Rates for Energy program, rate assistance programs for eligible food banks, and home insulation financial assistance programs. Under existing law, those programs are generally funded through a charge on electrical service, which is collected through customer rates. This bill would require the commission, no later than 180 days after filing, to consider and approve an electrical or gas corporation's application to discontinue administration of an energy efficiency program or an energy efficiency portfolio because the program is not cost effective, not reliable, or, in the case of an electrical corporation, because the program is not being used to meet unmet resource needs in its integrated resources planning framework, as provided. Because a violation of a commission order implementing this provision would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Under the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973, the Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state to encourage prudent and responsible forest management of nonindustrial timberlands by approving working forest management plans in advance. Existing law regulates nonindustrial tree farmers and working forest landowners for timberland management purposes, including by setting a maximum acreage each may own, and authorizes a person who intends to become a nonindustrial tree farmer or a working forest landowner to submit to the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection a nonindustrial timber management plan or a working forest harvest plan, respectively, regarding that acreage. Existing law provides a maximum of 2,500 acres owned for nonindustrial tree farmers and nonindustrial timber management plans and a maximum of 10,000 acres owned for working forest landowners and working forest management plans. This bill would increase the maximum acreage for nonindustrial tree farmers and nonindustrial management plans to 4,000 acres and for working forest landowners and working forest management plans to 15,000 acres. Existing law requires the harvest area of a working forest management plan to be contained within a single hydrological area, as defined. This bill would eliminate the requirement that the harvest area of a working forest management plan be contained within a single hydrological area. Existing law requires the working forest landowner who owns, leases, or otherwise controls or operates on all or any portion of any timberland within the boundaries of an approved working forest management plan, and who plans to harvest any of the timber during a given year, to file a working forest harvest notice, as defined, with the department in writing. Existing law exempts the Southern Subdistrict of the Coast Forest District, as described in regulations, from these provisions regarding working forest management plans. This bill would eliminate this exemption.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. This bill would exempt from the requirements of CEQA a project developed solely to serve an urgent public health or housing need, as specified, that is within the boundaries of an expired regional habitat conservation plan, and that had an environmental review completed consistent with the requirements of the regional habitat conservation plan as the plan existed before the plan's expiration. Because the bill would require a lead agency to determine the applicability of this exemption, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
