California Air Resources Board

USGBC California’s (USGBC-CA) deep bench of members are sustainability and green building professionals with a strong commitment to addressing climate change and other local, state, and international environmental issues. Our members are designers, engineers, public agency and utility staff, consultants, product manufacturers, and service providers. Our mission is to transform California through the built environment into a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable place for all. Our goals include advancing environmental justice by developing diverse talent, and systemic change based on impactful solutions to address our urgent environment and social challenges.

Overall, USGBC-CA supports the use of legislation to drive climate accountability by companies operating within California. Its focus on larger companies drives accountability from those who influence the market most and have the most resources available to dedicate staff to the activities described. Furthermore, the requirement of 3rd-party oversight helps ensure that the data present is truthful and accurate to the greatest
extent possible.

The language as currently written would benefit from further clarification of the three following items:

- Logistics of accounting for scope 3: It is unclear from the current wording of SB 253 where Scope 3 emission accounting starts and ends. For example, how do joint venture projects, whereby multiple parties are responsible for delivering the scope at hand, account for emissions? In the instance of rental equipment, who has reporting responsibility (i.e. financial vs. operational ownership). For entities that subcontract work, understanding where the lines are drawn is crucial to understanding the impact this legislation will bring.

- Concerns about double-counting: Regarding SB 253, is concerned about the potential for double-counting emissions, e.g. a general contractor calculating our Scope 3 emissions overlaps with the Scope 3 emissions that a client would count for their building portfolio. Who reports these emissions in a subcontracting relationship is unclear.

- Data security: It is not clear from the documents provided if the submitted data will be publicly available and how the state plans on ensuring data security with the submitted information.

While USGBC-CA lauds the bill in its attempts to further transparency and accounting for GHGs, we have concerns that the bill may be overreaching in that it appears to attempt to influence national, if not global, accountability standards through state law. Indeed, by
implementing a law that transcends state boundaries, these bills may have the unintended consequence of being brought to attention at the federal level.

Opportunities for Modification
Given the ambiguities and concerns outlined above, our recommendation that CARB consider making SB 253’s proposed Scope 3 emissions reporting requirements voluntary until further clarification is provided on reporting delineation.