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