BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 953
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 8, 2013

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                 AB 953 (Amiano) - As Introduced:  February 22, 2013

          Policy Committee:                              Natural  
          ResourcesVote:5-3

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill codifies California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)  
          guidelines to require a lead agency preparing an environmental  
          report (EIR) to analyze significant environmental effects  
          resulting from locating a proposed project near, or attracting  
          people to, areas with substantial existing or reasonably  
          foreseeable natural hazards or adverse environmental impacts.   
          This practice is referred to as converse CEQA.  Specifically,  
          this bill: 

          1)Amends the definition of environment in Section 21060.5 of the  
            Public Resources Code to include the health and safety of  
            people affected by existing physical conditions at the  
            location of a project.

          2)Amends the definition of significant effect on the environment  
            in Section 21068 of the Public Resources Code to include  
            people's direct or indirect exposure to a substantial existing  
            or reasonably foreseeable natural hazard or adverse condition  
            of the environment.

          3)Requires an EIR to include a detailed statement setting forth  
            factual determinations of any significant effects that may  
            result from locating the proposed project near, or attracting  
            people to, existing or reasonably foreseeable natural hazards  
            or adverse environmental conditions.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          Minor if any state costs.









                                                                  AB 953
                                                                  Page  2

           COMMENTS  

           1)Purpose.   According to the author, this bill is intended to  
            clarify legislative intent and statutory requirements for EIRs  
            to include the effects of locating a project near natural  
            hazards or adverse environmental such as earthquake faults,  
            sea-level rise, or fire-prone areas, particularly if the  
            project will attract significantly more people to the area.

           2)Background.   CEQA Guidelines require lead agencies to consider  
            the effects of hazardous or adverse environmental conditions  
            on a proposed project.  In addition to the required analysis  
            of a proposed project's significant effects on the  
            environment, Section 15126.2(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states  
            that "(t)he EIR shall also analyze any significant  
            environmental effects the project might cause by bringing  
            development and people into the area affected."  This  
            converse-CEQA analysis is typically used to evaluate and  
            address problems caused by bringing people and new development  
            to areas with poor air quality, incompatible land uses, or  
            hazardous conditions such as heightened seismic activity. 

           3)Ballona Wetlands Land Trust v. City of Los Angeles.  This bill  
            would overturn a court decision that held converse-CEQA  
            analyses requirements are invalid.   The Second District Court  
            of Appeal essentially held that CEQA literally requires the  
            analysis of a project's significant impacts on the environment  
            and not the environment's impacts on the project.  The  
            California Supreme Court refused to grant a petition to review  
            this case.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-