BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 754
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 754
AUTHOR: Evans
AMENDED: April 15, 2013
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: May 1, 2013
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Joanne Roy
SUBJECT : CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
SUMMARY :
Existing law , under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA):
1) Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility
for carrying out or approving a proposed discretionary
project 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). (Public
Resources Code §21000 et seq.).
2) Requires a negative declaration and EIR be prepared by a
public agency or by environmental consultants under direct
contract and supervision of the lead agency. (§21082.1).
3) Provides a maximum monetary amount a project applicant is
required to pay for mitigation measures to avoid or
mitigate the project's impacts on archaeological resources.
(§21083.2).
4) Establishes a procedure for a later project or infill
project to tier off of a previous EIR. (§§21094 and
21094.5). For purposes of tiering an environmental review
for an infill project, defines "planning level decision" as
"the enactment or amendment of a general plan or any
general plan element, community plan, specific plan, or
zoning code." (CEQA Guidelines §15183.3(f)(2)).
SB 754
Page 2
5) Provides that public agencies should not approve projects
as proposed if feasible mitigation measures are available
which would substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects of such projects. (§21002).
This bill :
1) Prohibits a project applicant, or environmental consultant
retained by the project applicant, to contract for, direct,
or prepare the initial study, negative declaration, or EIR.
2) Removes the cap on the amount a project applicant is
required to pay for mitigation measures related to
archaeological resources.
3) Prohibits a later project or infill project from tiering
off a previous EIR if the previous EIR was certified more
than seven years prior to the issuance of a notice of
preparation of an EIR for the later project or infill
project or the commencement of the environmental review of
the later project or infill project, whichever is earlier.
4) Authorizes a person meeting specified requirements to bring
an action or proceeding to enforce the implementation of
mitigation measures if a project applicant fails to
implement those measures.
COMMENTS :
1) Purpose of Bill . According to the author, "CEQA is the
state's cornerstone environmental law?SB 754 would promote
independence and neutrality in environmental review by
prohibiting lead agencies from delegating oversight of
review to developers. This bill would allow more
flexibility in designing mitigation measures for impacts to
archaeological and Native American cultural resources by
removing an arbitrary cap on mitigation. It would promote
current and relevant environmental reviews by limiting the
shelf-life of older environmental impact reviews to seven
years. Finally, since mitigation is the heart of CEQA
success, this bill creates a more coherent process for
mitigation enforcement, providing notice and time for
SB 754
Page 3
developers and lead agencies to implement mitigation before
legal action may be taken to enforce mitigation."
2) 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, then 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 an 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.
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.
3) Mitigation enforcement . SB 754 authorizes a person to
bring an action or proceeding to enforce the implementation
of mitigation measures if a project applicant fails to
implement those measures. Among the specified requirements
to bring such an action, a person must give notice of the
alleged failure to mitigate to various entities then wait
60 days prior to commencing a private action. Sixty days
is a long and likely unnecessary period of time to give the
project applicant or responsible party to rectify the
SB 754
Page 4
situation. The purpose of mitigation is to reduce
significant impacts to the environment, but a lot of
potential damage can happen in two months. For example, it
only takes a few minutes to cut down an elderberry bush,
which is critical habitat for the threatened species,
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle.
An amendment is needed to delete the 60-day waiting period.
SOURCE : Planning and Conservation League
SUPPORT : Center for Biological Diversity
Clean Water Action
Coastal Conservation Network
Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation
Endangered Habitats League
Environmental Defense Center
Foothill Conservancy
Forests Forever
Friends of the Eel River
North Country Watch
Our Green Challenge
Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los
Angeles
Planning & Conservation League
Rural Residents and Friends
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
Sierra Nevada Alliance
Sierra Club California
Transportation Solutions Defense and Education
Fund
OPPOSITION : None on file