BILL ANALYSIS Ó ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1665| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: AB 1665 Author: Galgiani (D) Amended: 8/6/12 in Senate Vote: 21 SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 6-1, 7/2/12 AYES: Simitian, Blakeslee, Hancock, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Pavley NOES: Strickland SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8 ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-22, 5/21/12 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : California Environmental Quality Act SOURCE : Public Utilities Commission DIGEST : This bill specifies that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the closure of a railroad grade crossing by order of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) when the PUC has found the crossing to present a threat to public safety, until January 1, 2016. This bill also requires a state agency, whenever it determines that a project is not subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the state agency approves or determines to carry out the project, to file a specified notice of that approval or determination with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). CEQA authorizes a local agency, whenever it determines that a project is not CONTINUED AB 1665 Page 2 subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the local agency approves or determines to carry out the project, to file a specified notice of that approval or determination with the county clerk of each county in which the project will be located. ANALYSIS : Existing law: 1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed project which may have a significant effect on the environment to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA (CEQA includes various statutory exemptions, as well as categorical exemptions in the CEQA guidelines). 2. Exempts from CEQA any railroad grade separation project which eliminates an existing grade crossing or which reconstructs an existing grade separation (Public Resources Code Section 21080.13, enacted in 1982). 3. Grants the PUC exclusive authority over railroad crossings, including prescribing the terms of installation, operation, maintenance, use, and protection of each crossing, as well as requiring the closure or separation of grades at any crossing. This bill, until January 1, 2016, exempts from CEQA the closure of a railroad grade crossing by order of the PUC under the above authority if the PUC finds the crossing to present a threat to public safety. CEQA authorizes a state agency, whenever it determines that a project is not subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the state agency approves or determines to carry out the project, to file a specified notice of that approval or determination with the OPR. CEQA authorizes a local agency, whenever it determines that a project is not subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the local agency approves or determines to carry out the project, to file a specified notice of that approval or CONTINUED AB 1665 Page 3 determination with the county clerk of each county in which the project will be located. This bill requires a state agency that determines that such a railroad closure grade crossing project is not subject to CEQA, and the state agency approves or determines to carry out that project, to file a specified notice with the OPR. This bill also requires a local agency that makes such a determination, and approves or determines to carry out that project, to file a specified notice with the OPR and with the county clerk in each county in which the project will be located. These provisions shall not apply to any crossing for high-speed rail, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 185012 of the Public Utilities Code, or any crossing for any project carried out by the High-Speed Rail Authority, as described in Section 185020 of the Public Utilities Code, or a successor agency. This bill specifies: Whenever a state agency determines that a project is not subject to this division pursuant to this section, and it approves or determines to carry out the project, the state agency shall file a notice with OPR. Whenever a local agency determines that a project is not subject to this division pursuant to this section, and it approves or determines to carry out the project, the local agency shall file a notice with OPR and with the county clerk in each county in which the project will be located in the manner specified in subdivisions (b) and (c) of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. The provisions of this bill shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed, Comments CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects of applicable projects undertaken or approved by public agencies. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine whether the project CONTINUED AB 1665 Page 4 may have a significant effect on the environment. If the initial study shows that there would not be a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare a negative declaration. If the initial study shows that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR. Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed project, identify and analyze each significant environmental impact expected to result from the proposed project, identify mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to the extent feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. Prior to approving any project that has received environmental review, an agency must make certain findings. If mitigation measures are required or incorporated into a project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring program to ensure compliance with those measures. The sponsor of this bill, the PUC, has broad and exclusive power to regulate railroad crossings. According to the PUC, AB 660 (Galgiani), Chapter 315, Statutes of 2008, eliminates a provision from Section 2450 of the Streets and Highways Code which had described a grade separation project to include removal or relocation of highways or tracks to eliminate existing at-grade crossings. Section 21080.13 of CEQA exempts certain grade separation projects, and the PUC combined this exemption with the Streets and Highways definition to justify claiming a CEQA exemption for the closure of an at-grade crossing. The PUC feels that the amendments made by AB 660 eliminated this exemption. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 8/7/12) Public Utilities Commission (source) American Council of Engineering Companies California State Council of Laborers ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, in the 2007-08 legislative session, the Legislature adopted CONTINUED AB 1665 Page 5 AB 660 (Galgiani) which, among other things, modified Streets and Highways Code Section 2450. Subsection (b)(3) of Section 2450 had included projects that removed or relocated highways or railway tracks to eliminate existing grade crossings within the definition of a grade separation. The California Public Resources Code Section 21080.13 exempted these "grade separation projects" from a CEQA review. By deleting Subsection (b)(3) from Streets and Highways Code Section 2450, the removal or relocation of a highway or railroad tracks (i.e., crossing closure removing the street or highway from the railroad tracks) is no longer within the definition of a grade separation project for purposes of the CEQA exemption. Amending the Public Resources Code to clarify the PUC's existing authority as exercised in the past will help ensure the expeditious closure of unsafe railroad crossings. A number of fatalities occur every year in California at existing at-grade highway-rail crossing. This legislation will help ensure that dangerous crossings can be closed with simple minor modifications without the delay of an unnecessary CEQA review. Under this bill, public safety will be the primary consideration in at-grade crossing closures and will be handled in an expeditious manner while preserving the due process rights of the local community affected by the closure. Furthermore, since most, if not all, the considerations addressed under CEQA are considered by the PUC in its crossing closure public hearings and proceedings, these important considerations will be more expeditiously aired and resolved. ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-22, 5/21/12 AYES: Alejo, Allen, Atkins, Beall, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Garrick, Gatto, Hall, Hayashi, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, V. Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez CONTINUED AB 1665 Page 6 NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove, Halderman, Harkey, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby, Silva, Smyth, Valadao, Wagner NO VOTE RECORDED: Ammiano, Fletcher, Gordon, Hagman, Roger Hernández, Olsen, Perea DLW:RJG:d 8/8/12 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END **** CONTINUED