BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2655
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 12, 2010

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                     AB 2655 (Eng) - As Amended:  April 26, 2010 

          Policy Committee:                              Natural  
          ResourcesVote:6-0

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

           SUMMARY  

          This bill authorizes the Natural Resources Agency (NRA) to  
          develop a program to mitigate the effect of infrastructure  
          projects regionally or statewide and in advance of those  
          projects.  Specifically, this bill: 

          1)Defines "infrastructure planning agency" to mean the  
            Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Department of  
            Water Resources (DWR), California Energy Commissions (CEC),  
            High Speed Rail Authority, a metropolitan planning  
            organization, a regional transportation planning agency, or  
            other public agency that implements infrastructure projects.

          2)Authorizes NRA to (a) implement regional advance mitigation  
            plans (RAMPs) for planned infrastructure projects that  
            identify and implement mitigation measures before the relevant  
            projects are approved, (b) acquire, restore, manage, monitor,  
            and preserve lands, or fund those activities in accordance  
            with a RAMP, and (c), establish or fund the creation of  
            mitigation banks.

          3)Authorizes NRA to use, or allow infrastructure planning  
            agencies to use, mitigation credits to fulfill the mitigation  
            requirements of planned infrastructure projects.
           
          4)Creates an Advance Infrastructure Mitigation Fund (AIMF) for  
            receipt of reimbursement payments provided by infrastructure  
            planning agencies pursuant to this bill.
           
           FISCAL EFFECT  









                                                                  AB 2655
                                                                  Page  2

          1)One-time costs, ranging from $500,000 to $875,000 in 2010-11  
            and 2011-12, to Department of Fish and Game (DFG), on behalf  
            of NRA, to implement the bill.  Those costs include five new  
            Staff Environmental Scientists-four based regionally and one  
            in headquarters to determine the scope of workload and  
            identify areas of the state where RAMPs may occur (Advance  
            Infrastructure Mitigation Fund (AIMF), created by this bill).

          2)Ongoing annual costs of as much as $2 million to DFG, to the  
            extent RAMPs are developed and implemented (AIMF).  Activities  
            would likely include reviewing and approving plans, permitting  
            projects, and preparing contracts and grants.

          3)Minor, absorbable costs to NRA.







































                                                                  AB 2655
                                                                  Page  3

           COMMENTS  

           1)Rationale  .  The author contends public agencies, working  
            together before infrastructure projects reach approval, can  
            better identify regional mitigation opportunities that will  
            satisfy anticipated mitigation requirements.  The result, the  
            author argues, will be avoided project delay and increased  
            cost effectiveness resulting from early action and economies  
            of scale.

           2)Background  .  

              a)   Regional Advanced Mitigation  .  According to proponents  
               of regional advanced mitigation, RAMPs allow planning  
               agencies to estimate and combine impacts from multiple  
               projects in a similar region or watershed prior to  
               implementation, aggregate those impacts, and then mitigate  
               by restoring or acquiring larger or more cohesive habitat.   


                i)     Ramping Up for RAMPs in California.   Since 2008, a  
                 working group of state and federal agencies, including  
                 Caltrans, DWR, DFG, Parks and Recreation, U.S. EPA, Army  
                 Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and  
                 the Nature Conservancy have been exploring the potential  
                 for implementing regional advance mitigation in  
                 California.  A pilot program in the Central Valley will  
                 begin this fall to assess whether certain DWR and  
                 Caltrans projects share similar impacts that can be  
                 mitigated in advance on a regional basis.

                ii)    Other State Have Ramped Up Too  .  North Carolina,  
                 Georgia and Florida have implemented variations on the  
                 RAMP concept.  According to the North Carolina Department  
                 of Transportation, 90% of its wetlands mitigation needs  
                 have been fulfilled through its RAMP and no projects have  
                 been delayed due to mitigation issues since the start of  
                 the program.
           
             b)   Mitigation You Can Bank On  .  Mitigation or conservation  
               banking allows a project developer to purchase mitigation  
               credit instead of the developer undertaking the mitigation  
               him.  The value of the mitigation credit is priced  
               according to the amount needed to undertake habitat  
               restoration or acquire acreage in an existing conservation  








                                                                  AB 2655
                                                                  Page  4

               project.  Because mitigation banking transfers liability  
               for mitigation from the developer to the banker, it is  
               oftentimes preferred by developers.  At the same time,  
               regulators frequently prefer mitigation banking because it  
               provides regulatory certainty in that money for mitigation  
               is secured and the mitigation projects are proven.  

               California state agencies already use mitigation banking.   
               According to the policy committee analysis of this bill,  
               the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection  
               (CalFire) has approved roughly 35 public and private  
               mitigation and conservation banks in the state.  Credits  
               can be purchased for impacts to wetlands, vernal pools,  
               burrowing owls, Giant Garter Snakes, Swainson's Hawk,  
               Red-legged Frogs, and San Joaquin Kit Fox.  Caltrans also  
               is a bank developer, having approved a 67-acre wetland bank  
               in Sacramento County, and a purchaser of credits from  
               private banks.

           3)Related Legislation  .  This bill is substantially identical to  
            AB 1321 (Eng, 2009), which was held by this committee.

           4)Supporters  , including the Nature Conservancy and several other  
            environmental organizations, cite the purported advantages of  
            RAMPs mentioned above-allowing planning agencies to estimate  
            and combine impacts from multiple projects in a similar region  
            or watershed prior to implementation, aggregate those impacts,  
            and then mitigate by restoring or acquiring larger or more  
            cohesive habitat. 

           5)There is no registered opposition to this bill  .

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081