BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 209
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Pavley |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|----------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------------|
|Version: |March 19, 2015 |Hearing |March 24, 2015 |
| | |Date: | |
|----------+-----------------------+-----------+-----------------|
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|William Craven |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Surface mining: inspections and financial assurances.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) prohibits a
person from conducting surface mining operations unless the lead
agency for the operation issues a surface mining permit and
approves a reclamation plan and financial assurances for
reclamation. Most often, the lead agency is a local city or
county government, but there are instances in which the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission is the lead agency for
mines in the Bay Area. Also, in cases in which the California
State Mining and Geology Board (Board) has stripped a local
agency of its lead agency status for its failure to implement
state law, the Board serves as the lead agency.
SMARA also requires annual inspections by the lead agency to
ascertain that the mine is in compliance with state law.
Adjustments may then be made, if necessary, to the amount of
financial assurances needed for reclamation, or an amendment to
a reclamation plan may be pursued by the operator where
appropriate in the light of changed physical circumstances of
the mine.
SMARA is meant to be a comprehensive surface mining and
reclamation policy that ensures an adequate supply of mineral
resources while protecting the environment from the adverse
effects of mining. The Office of Mine Reclamation, which is
within the Department, ensures that lead agencies fulfill their
SMARA responsibilities, often taking its own enforcement
SB 209 (Pavley) Page 2
of ?
actions. In addition, the State Mining and Geology Board
promulgates SMARA regulations and serves as an appeals body.
Aspects of SB 1270 (Pavley) which failed in the Legislature last
year are present in this bill as well. In 2013, Governor Brown
signed SB 447 (Lara) which provided temporary leniency to mine
operators who, despite a SMARA violation, were allowed to
continue selling materials to the state. Governor Brown said
that such interim lenience was acceptable "as we take time to
reform the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act-from top to
bottom."
The following year, the administration convened a SMARA task
force which made a series of recommendations and many of those
recommendations were contained in SB 1270.
This year, the administration has convened a stakeholder process
to consider legislative recommendations for SMARA reforms. It
held its first meeting last week. The list of questions that the
administration proposes to focus has considerable overlap with
the issues contained in SB 1270 and SB 209, although SB 209
remains very much a work in progress.
These include, but are not limited to:
Ïcentralized location of all the documents pertaining to
reclamation;
Ïupdating reclamation plans to reflect 1993 standards;
Ïpossible sign-off on reclamation plans by a licensed
professional in which slope stability is an issue;
Ïapproval by local governments of inadequate financial
assurances; expedite the process to claim financial assurances;
avoid early release of financial assurances prior to
reclamation;
Ïfailure to conduct annual inspections, increase training for
lead agency mine inspectors, retain ability of local government
to inspect the mines it owns;
Ïmore clarity on enforcement, initiation of enforcement; role of
state as back-stop;
Ïassess other options than Board take-over of counties; how to
return lead agency status to local government; consider if local
governments should be able to voluntarily opt out of lead agency
status; sort through fiscal issues associated with these
options;
SB 209 (Pavley) Page 3
of ?
Ïconsider adjustments to fees, which are set in statute but
inadequate to fund needs. Additionally, there is about $300,000
in unpaid reporting fees.
PROPOSED LAW
As amended, SB 209 has the following provisions:
1. Re-instate the training by the department of local government
mine inspectors.
2. Establish conditions under which a local government employee
who has been trained is able to inspect mines owned by that
local government.
3. For other annual inspections, require that they be conducted
by a registered professional geologist, geophysicist, or civil
engineer when they involve the professional practice of geology
or engineering.
4. Shift the Office of Mine Reclamation to a Division of Mines,
headed by a new officer, the State Mine Inspector.
5. Add to the annual inspection requirements that proof of the
most recenty approved financial assurance cost amount and the
approved financial assurance cost mechanism be provided.
6. Standardize the format for reclamation plans as directed by
the Board.
7. Add a schedule with time limits for reclamation that can be
confirmed during an annual inspection.
8. Allow local governments to voluntarily opt out of SMARA.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The Sierra Fund, the bill's sponsor, is particularly interested
in issues related to improving annual inspections so that the
related components of SMARA, financial assurances and
reclamation plans, are also more likely to be in compliance.
This group has also suggested to the administration's
stakeholder process that licensed professionals be required to
approve reclamation plans. It also observed that research done
by this committee prior to the introduction of SB 1270 showed
erratic implementation of SMARA across many local jurisdictions,
as well as at the department.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received.
COMMENTS
SB 209 (Pavley) Page 4
of ?
This bill is clearly a work in progress that will respectfully
track the ongoing stakeholder
discussions and the issues raised by the administration.
The recent amendments are placeholders that indicate there will
be future work done on those topics.
Related legislation: AB 1142(Gray) would amend many sections of
SMARA.
SUPPORT
The Sierra Fund
OPPOSITION
None Received
-- END --