BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 972|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 972
Author: Simitian (D), et al.
Amended: 4/9/12
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 4-0, 3/19/12
AYES: Simitian, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Pavley
NO VOTE RECORDED: Strickland, Blakeslee, Hancock
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT : Environmental quality: California
Environmental
Quality Act
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill revises the scoping meeting notice
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
and enhances notice requirements of completion of
environmental impact reports, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA):
1.Requires a lead agency to call at least one scoping
meeting for a proposed project that may affect highways
or other facilities under Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) jurisdiction, if requested by Caltrans, or for
a project of statewide, regional, or area-wide
CONTINUED
SB 972
Page
2
significance. Notice of at least one scoping meeting
must be provided to the following:
A. A county or city that borders on the county or city
within which the project is located, unless otherwise
designated annually by agreement.
B. A responsible agency.
C. A public agency that has jurisdiction by law with
respect to the project.
D. A transportation planning agency and public
agencies having transportation facilities within the
jurisdiction.
E. An organization or individual who has filed a
written request for notice.
2.Sets various notice requirements and requires an agency
to mail specified notices to any person who has filed a
written request for notices with either the governing
body clerk or the agency director. The agency may
require requests for notices to be annually renewed and
may charge a fee for providing the service. Notices to
be provided include the notice of preparation (NOP) of an
environmental impact report (EIR), scoping meeting
notice, and a notice of determination (NOD).
3.Requires a copy of a notice of completion (NOC) of an EIR
to be provided by the State Clearinghouse to any
legislator in whose district the project has an
environmental impact if the legislator requests the
notice and the State Clearinghouse has received it.
This bill:
1.Requires a scoping meeting notice to also be provided to
any entity that has filed a written request for the
notice.
2.Requires an NOC to also be mailed to any person who has
filed a written request for notices.
SB 972
Page
3
3.Repeals the legislator NOC notice requirement, adds this
requirement under Section 21092.2, and also requires an
NOP to be provided to a legislator under the same
conditions as for receipt of an NOC.
Comments
Purpose of the bill . Under current law, a person may file
a written request with an agency to receive certain CEQA
notices. However, this provision does not reference the
NOC. Current law also enables a legislator to receive an
NOC for a project in their district that has an
environmental impact, but there is no reference to the NOP.
According to the author, this bill "ensures that a person
requesting CEQA notices from public agencies also receives
NOCs, along with other notices required under current law.
The author also notes this bill "enables legislators to be
aware of proposed projects in their district early in the
CEQA process, when there is an NOP for an EIR, rather than
later when the NOC is filed." This bill also revises
scoping meeting notice requirements.
Brief background on CEQA . CEQA provides a process for
evaluating the environmental effects of a project, and
includes statutory exemptions, as well as categorical
exemptions in the CEQA guidelines. If a project is not
exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine
whether a project 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
SB 972
Page
4
project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.
If a mitigation measure would cause one or more significant
effects in addition to those that would be caused by the
proposed project, the effects of the mitigation measure
must be discussed but in less detail than the significant
effects of the proposed project.
Improving scoping . According to the CEQA guidelines, early
consultation solves many potential problems that would
arise in more serious forms later in the review process.
The guidelines also provide that scoping has been helpful
to agencies in identifying the range of actions,
alternatives, mitigation measures, and significant effects
to be analyzed in depth in an EIR and in eliminating from
detailed study issues found not to be important. The
guidelines further note that scoping has been found to be
an effective way to bring together and resolve the concerns
of affected federal, state, and local agencies, the
proponent of the action, and other interested persons
including those who might not be in accord with the action
on environmental grounds.
Under CEQA, a scoping meeting notice must be provided to
certain public agencies. An organization or individual may
file a written request to receive the notice, but there is
no provision allowing an entity to receive a scoping
meeting notice upon request if that entity is not otherwise
required to receive notice - such as a special district or
nearby city that does not border the county or city within
which the project is located. This bill provides an
opportunity for these entities to file a written request to
receive the scoping meeting notice.
Related Legislation
SB 226 (Simitian), Chapter 469, Statutes of 2011, contains
various amendments to CEQA, including streamlined
procedures for certain infill areas, as well as an
amendment to Section 21083.9 allowing public agencies to
comment on planning and zoning matters (required under
Planning and Zoning Law) concurrently with project scoping
meetings under CEQA. Provisions in this bill relating to
SB 972
Page
5
scoping meeting notice to other entities were addressed in
a similar fashion in AB 1581 (Carter) of 2010 (that died on
the Senate Inactive File) and SB 620 (Correa) of 2011
(Senate Environmental Quality Committee hearings were
cancelled at the author's request).
Provisions in this bill relating to NOPs and NOCs were
contained in the March 21, 2011 version of SB 880
(Corbett), Chapter 6, Statutes of 2012, but were
subsequently stricken when the bill was amended to address
another issue.
Encouraging early comments . According to the Senate
Environmental Quality Committee, SB 226 contained
provisions to address late comments on environmental
documents that were stricken due to opposition from many
interest groups. While the notice and scoping provisions
in this bill encourage earlier comments, and thereby help
to avoid the need for late comments, the author is
continuing to meet with various interest groups to further
address late comment concerns.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
DLW:do 4/23/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****