BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Wieckowski, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 1008
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Lara |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Version: |3/28/2016 |Hearing |4/6/2016 |
| | |Date: | |
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Joanne Roy |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act: Los Angeles
Regional Interoperable Communications System: exemption
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), 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 (PRC) §21000 et seq.)
2) Exempts the design, site acquisition, construction, operation or
maintenance of certain Los Angeles Regional Interoperable
Communications System (LA-RICS) equipment and structures, if
specified criteria are met. This provision sunsets January 1,
2017. (PRC §21080.25).
This bill:
1) Exempts from CEQA the design, site acquisition, construction,
operation or maintenance of certain structures and equipment of
LA-RICS, consisting of long-term evolution (LTE) broadband
mobile data system and a land mobile radio (LMR) system, if
specified criteria are met.
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 2 of ?
2) Requires each LA-RICS project exempted from CEQA to meet
specified criteria, including:
a) The project site is publicly owned and already contains
antennas and/or equipment enclosures.
b) The construction and implementation at the project site
would not substantially adversely impact wetlands, riparian
areas, or habitat of significant value, and would not harm
any protected species.
c) The construction and implementation of the project at the
site would not substantially adversely impact historical
resources.
d) Operation of the project would not exceed the maximum
permissible exposure standards established by the Federal
Communications Commission.
e) A new LTE antenna support structure or LMR antenna support
structure would comply with applicable height restrictions;
and certain equipment may not exceed specified height limits.
f) A new central system switch must be located within an
existing enclosed structure at a publicly owned project site
or housed at an existing private communications facility.
3) Specifies that this exemption does not apply if the project site
is located on a school site, or cultural or sacred site.
4) Prior to determining whether this exemption may apply to a
project, requires the LA-RICS Joint Powers Authority (Authority)
to do the following:
a) Hold noticed public hearings in areas affected by the
project to hear and respond to public comments.
b) Provide public notice in a newspaper of general
circulation in the area affected by the project.
5) For an exempted project, requires the Authority to file a notice
of exemption (NOE) with the Office of Planning and Research and
the county clerk in the county in which the project is located
as well as post the NOE on its website.
6) Requires the Authority to post on its website information
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 3 of ?
related to environmental reviews of LA-RICS projects.
7) Requires the Authority and its member agencies to approve use
agreements for the LA-RICS in an open and noticed public
meeting.
8) Extends the sunset for this exemption from January 1, 2017 to
January 1, 2020.
Background
1) CEQA: Environmental review process.
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.
2) What is analyzed in an environmental review?
Pursuant to CEQA, an environmental review analyzing the significant
direct and indirect environmental impacts of a proposed project,
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 4 of ?
may include water quality, surface and subsurface hydrology,
land use and agricultural resources, transportation and
circulation, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions,
terrestrial and aquatic biological resources, aesthetics,
geology and soils, recreation, public services and utilities
such as water supply and wastewater disposal, cultural
resources, and tribal cultural resources.
The analysis must also evaluate the cumulative impacts of any past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects/activities within
study areas that are applicable to the resources being
evaluated. A study area for a proposed project must not be
limited to the footprint of the project because many
environmental impacts of a development extend beyond the
identified project boundary. Also, CEQA stipulates that the
environmental impacts must be measured against existing physical
conditions within the project area, not future, allowable
conditions.
1) LA-RICS.
According to the Authority:
[LA-RICS] will provide improved radio and broadband
communication for the public safety providers of the greater
Los Angeles region. LA-RICS is comprised of two distinct, but
compatible projects: a [LMR] communications and a [LTE]
broadband communications system. Covering 88 cities and the
unincorporated area of Los Angeles County within a 4.084
square mile area, LA-RICS will provide integrated
communications for over 50 law enforcement agencies, 31 fire
departments as well as Emergency Medical Services (EMS),
transportation, and education agencies. The LMR communication
system will provide day-to-day voice and narrowband data radio
communications service for individual public safety agencies,
enable interoperability and interagency communications among
member agencies and mutual aid providers, and support
communications with regional, state, and federal agencies
during disaster events?The LTE wireless network technology
will provide day-to-day broadband data communications service
for individual public safety agencies, provide emergency
responders high speed access to lifesaving multimedia
information, and support the National Public Safety Broadband
Network (NPSBN) initiative.
Comments
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 5 of ?
2) Purpose of Bill.
According to the author:
[LA-RICS] is the single greatest emergency preparedness and
homeland security need in the Los Angeles region. The system
will provide direct communication interoperability between law
enforcement, fire, Federal, State and military agencies in
major disasters, such as floods, fires, earthquakes, and
terrorist incidents. The LA-RICS Project is especially
critical given the tragic event of September 11th, which
demonstrated the necessity of an interoperable communications
system that would assist first-responders in saving lives. SB
1008 would extend the current CEQA exemption deadline for the
LA-RICS project for three additional years, from January 1,
2017, to January 1, 2020.
The extension of the current CEQA exemption is needed to
continue to build out the LA-RICS LTE broadband system and LMR
system, and would facilitate the timely environmental review
and construction of sites that would be used for this
important project. The Federal environmental review process,
under the National Environmental Policy Act, for the LA-RICS
Project sites, which is still required for the CEQA-exempt
sites, has taken longer than previously anticipated.
The proposed extension is especially essential for the
continued build out of the LA-RICS system which is funded by
the critical Federal Broadband Technology Opportunities
Program (BTOP) grant awarded to the LA-RICS Authority by the
U.S. Department of Commerce. Recently enacted Federal
legislation provided a five-year extension for BTOP grant
recipients, including LA-RICS, through Federal Fiscal Year
2020. The extension would allow much needed additional time
for LA-RICS to construct additional sites to increase coverage
and capacity of the LTE broadband system, and ensure that
these sites are streamlined for environmental review,
constructed and completed on time to enable first responders
to communicate in all emergencies and major disasters.
The exemption will not apply to undeveloped land or
privately-owned land. It will only apply to sites on
publicly-owned land where telecommunication infrastructure is
already located such as on existing police, sheriff or fire
station sites which already contain existing antenna support
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 6 of ?
structure.
Sites will not be located in environmentally sensitive areas,
such as wetlands, riparian areas, or habitat of significant
value, and would not adversely affect historical resources.
3) AB 1486 (Lara) Letter to the Journal.
On August 24, 2012, AB 1486 (Lara, Chapter 690, Statutes of 2012)
was amended to exempt from CEQA certain LA-RICS projects and was
passed by the Legislature on August 31, 2012. Because of AB
1486's rush through the legislative process, some requirements
did not make it into the final version of the bill. However, in
order to stay true to commitments made on AB 1486, the author
wrote a Letter to the Journal on August 31, 2012, stating his
intent that the bill include additional, specified requirements
in order for the LA-RICS exemption in AB 1486 to apply to a
project. SB 1008 includes those requirements specified in the
author's Letter to the Journal so as to ensure that the
exemption more accurately reflects AB 1486 requirements in their
entirety.
4) What is lost with a CEQA exemption?
It is not unusual for certain interests to assert that a particular
exemption will expedite construction of a particular type of
project and reduce costs. This, however, frequently overlooks
the benefits of adequate environmental review where lead and
responsible agencies are legally accountable for their actions
to:
Inform decisionmakers and the public about project impacts;
Identify ways to avoid or significantly reduce
environmental damage;
Prevent environmental damage by requiring feasible
alternatives or mitigation measures;
Disclose to the public reasons why an agency approved a
project if significant environmental effects are involved;
Involve public agencies in the process; and,
Increase public participation in the environmental review
and the planning processes.
If a project is exempt from CEQA, certain issues should be
addressed. For example:
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 7 of ?
How can decisionmakers and the public be aware of impacts,
mitigation measures, and alternatives of a project because of
the exemption?
Is it appropriate for the public to live with the
consequences when a project is exempt and impacts may not be
mitigated and alternatives may not be considered regarding
certain matters, such as air quality, water quality, and noise
impacts?
Because adverse project impacts do not disappear when they
are not identified and mitigated, does an exemption result in
a direct transfer of responsibility for mitigating impacts
from the applicant to the public (i.e., taxpayers) if impacts
are ultimately addressed after completion of the project?
If taxpayers, rather than the project applicant, are
ultimately responsible for mitigating certain impacts of such
a project after project completion, what assessments or taxes
will be increased to fund mitigation or pay for alternatives
at a later date?
It is also not unusual for certain interests to blame CEQA
lawsuits. However, the total number of CEQA cases filed
averages about 200 cases per year statewide and make up
approximately 0.02% of 1,100,000 civil cases filed annually in
California. The California Attorney General's office conducted
a case study of CEQA challenges in the City and County of San
Francisco from July 2011 through December 2011 and found that 18
lawsuits were filed out of 5,203 projects considered under CEQA.
CEQA litigation is low considering the thousands of projects
subject to CEQA each year as well as for the volume of civil
litigation in general statewide.
In addition, those citing CEQA and CEQA litigation as a problem
do not indicate the result of that litigation. Were significant
impacts that were not evaluated in the initial document
ultimately addressed? What would have been the result if those
impacts had not been mitigated (e.g., flooding, exposure of
people to hazards, inadequate public services, congestion)?
1) LA-RICS past issues.
LA-RICS has not been without its share of problems such as labor
disputes, environmental concerns, and public protests. Some
issues that have arisen over the last year include:
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 8 of ?
a) By mid-February 2015, 13 of the 86 cities dropped out of
LA-RICS, which leaves those remaining to carry a larger
portion of the costs. Also, some cities refused to approve
sites, which reduced the number of sites for the LTE network.
b) In March 2015, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
ordered a halt to the construction of towers at county fire
stations citing a lack of transparency and complaints that
the project was moving forward without adequate notice to
residents. Firefighters raised concern about radio frequency
emissions causing the potential health hazards to them and
neighboring residents.
c) On April 1, 2015, the Los Angeles City Council members
voted to stop build-out of the LTE system as well, citing
potential financial burdens on the city.
d) On April 3, 2015, the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) suspended a $154 million
grant to the Authority for LA-RICS, noting the project was
"severely behind schedule." Federal officials ordered
communications project managers to "stop all work
immediately" and directed LA-RICS authority to submit an
amended LTE network plan by April 13, 2015 that was
acceptable to the Los Angeles City Council, the Los Angeles
County Board of Supervisors, and NTIA.
The LTE network plan began with potentially 232 sites; when the
suspension occurred, the number of sites had decreased to
177; the revised LTE network plan reduced the number to 82
sites.
e) In November 2015, the Los Angeles City Council members
unanimously voted to opt out of its membership to LA-RICS
citing potential cost advantage of deploying a new city-owned
LMR network. According to a city report, if the city had
remained a member of LA-RICS after November 24, 2015, the
city would have been liable for 29%-33% of all LA-RICS costs.
f) The LA-RICS projects subject to this bill require an
environmental review under the National Environmental
Protection Act (NEPA). According to the author, the federal
environmental review process for the LA-RICS project sites
has taken longer than previously expected - In fact, the
SB 1008 (Lara) Page 9 of ?
closing date for the public review period for the Draft
Programmatic Environmental Assessment (DPEA) for the LA-RICS
LMR project is April 5, 2016. The Authority complied with
CEQA for the LMR sites that were not exempt pursuant to PRC
§21080.25; and issued the Final EIR for the LA-RICS LMR
System on March 21, 2016.
The author states, "The Authority approved sites in the LTE
project in 2014 and 2015 and determined that all LTE sites were
exempt from review under CEQA pursuant to PRC §21080.25, the
statutory CEQA exemption specifically adopted for LA-RICS." A
question arises as to whether some of these issues could have
been avoided or mitigated through the CEQA process such as
providing transparency and a forum to address public concerns
about health risks to firefighters and local residents, which as
noted above, were serious enough concerns to make both the City
of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
halt construction in March 2015.
Also, considering that the NEPA review has yet to be completed
for the LMR project and the CEQA review is done, a question
arises as to how much time the CEQA exemption actually saved.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 1486 (Lara, Chapter 690, Statutes of 2012) exempted the design,
site acquisition, construction, operation or maintenance of certain
LA-RICS equipment, and sunsets January 1, 2017.
SOURCE: County of Los Angeles
County of Los Angeles Sheriff's Department
SUPPORT: California Chamber of Commerce
California State Sheriffs' Association
OPPOSITION: California League of Conservation Voters
Sierra Club California
-- END --