BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                               AB 1486
                                                                       

                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                         Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
                              2011-2012 Regular Session
                                           
           BILL NO:    AB 1486
           AUTHOR:     Lara
           AMENDED:    August 24, 2012
           FISCAL:     Yes               HEARING DATE:     August 30, 2012
           URGENCY:    Yes               CONSULTANT:       Randy Pestor
            
           SUBJECT  :    CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

            SUMMARY  :    
           
            Existing law  , 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 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.).
            
           This bill  provides legislative intent to enact statutory 
           changes relating to the Budget Act of 2012.

            Amendments taken on the Senate Floor (August 24, 2012 version 
           of the bill) and subsequently referred to the Committee on 
           Environmental Quality pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10:  

           1) Exempt the design, site acquisition, construction, 
              operation, or maintenance of certain elements of the Los 
              Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System 
              (LA-RICS) structures from CEQA if certain conditions are met 
              (e.g., project site is publicly owned and includes certain 
              improvements; project would not have a substantial adverse 
              impact on wetlands, riparian areas, or historical areas; 
              operation of the project would not exceed certain Federal 
              Communications Commission exposure standards).

           2) Define various terms (e.g., "riparian area," "wetlands," 
              "wildlife habitat").









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 2

           3) Contain an urgency clause.

           4) Sunset January 1, 2017.

            COMMENTS  :

            1) Purpose of Bill  .  According to the purpose for the urgency 
              clause in this bill, this bill is needed "In order to ensure 
              that the �LA-RICS] is able to meet strict deadlines that are 
              required to access millions of dollars in federal grants 
              that have been awarded to the LA-RICS . . ."

           According to the LA-RICS website, "�LA-RICS] is a modern, 
              integrated wireless voice and data communication system 
              designed and built to serve law enforcement, fire service 
              and health service professionals throughout Los Angeles 
              County. The new system will provide day-to-day 
              communications within agencies and allow seamless 
              interagency communications for responding to routine, 
              emergency and catastrophic events."

           LA-RICS is composed of 85 member agencies covering 4,000 square 
              miles.  The LA-RICS Authority was formed pursuant to a joint 
              powers agreement and is administered by a board of directors 
              consisting of 8 directors and no more than 17 members 
              identified by specified appointing authorities.

            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, 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 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 3

              extent feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable 
              alternatives to the proposed project.  Prior to approving 
              any project that has received 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) How many towers  ?  The AB 1486 exemption applies to:  a) 
              approximately  80 land mobile radio (LMR) system 180-foot 3 
              or 4 legged towers  with antennas, microwave dishes, and 
              other components (up to 33 of these may be colocation 
              sites); and 2) approximately  255 long-term evolution (LTE) 
              broadband mobile data system 70-foot tapered monopoles  with 
              antennas, microwave dishes, and other components 
              (approximately 33 of these may be collocation sites).

           At some location sites, existing infrastructure may be 
              "leveraged" so not all components would be installed at 
              every site.  Additionally, some of the new towers may 
              replace or upgrade existing towers.

           According to LA-RICS,  a majority of LMR sites and about 239 LTE 
              sites are potentially eligible for the AB 1486 CEQA 
              exemption  , although a more precise number cannot be known 
              because detailed system design is pending.

            4) LA-RICS information on environmental review process  .  The 
              following "frequently asked question" and response is on the 
              LA-RICS website:

                 Will a new tower be constructed in my neighborhood as a 
                result of LA-RICS?  

                Maybe.  The network will be designed with the needs of 
                first responders and the safety of the public first and 
                foremost, which may call for additional tower locations.  









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 4

                LA-RICS will not know the specific location of new towers 
                until a system provider is selected and the environmental 
                assessment is finished.  While this system will inevitably 
                result in the construction of new towers, there are clear 
                economic, environmental and social benefits to using as 
                many existing towers as possible. 

              While this response is not clear on the CEQA process, 
              according to LA-RICS, an environmental assessment (EA) is 
              being prepared in accordance with the federal National 
              Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), with the National 
              Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) as 
              the lead agency.

            5) Any agenda or minutes relating to a CEQA exemption  ?  
              According to agendas and minutes for the LA-RICS Authority 
              meetings available from the LA-RICS website relating to CEQA:

            January 5, 2012, minutes  , under administrative matters, Approve 
              Contract for Environmental Documentation Services - Pat 
              Mallon (pgs. 3-4):  includes approval of contract with 
              Utrasystems for environmental documentation services, and 
              amended the 2011-2012 budget allocation for environmental 
              services from the original $800,000 to $1.976 million.

           Under "items for future discussion and/or action by the board;" 
              pg. 5:   "Chair Fujioka stated that there may be a special 
              meeting regarding CEQA legislation."

            February 2, 2012, minutes  , under Director's Report - Pat Mallon; 
              pg. 2:  "Environmental Services - Environmental Services 
              contract has commenced and staff has visited 160 in the last 
              three weeks.  Staff is also conducting weekly conference 
              calls with NTIA regarding CEQA/NEPA process."

            March 29, 2012, agenda  , under Administrative Matters; pg. 2:  
              included a recommendation to delegate authority to the 
              Executive Director to execute a contract with Jacobs Project 
              Management Co. (Jacobs).  The scope of work for Jacobs 
              included the following items relating to CEQA:  a) 
              coordinating implementation of CEQA mitigation monitoring and 
              reporting program (pg. A-2; b) assisting in environmental 
              documentation preparation and processing in conformance with 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 5

              CEQA and NEPA (pg. A-7); c) preconstruction activities 
              including CEQA/NEPA studies (pg. A-10); d) compliance with 
              CEQA and NEPA regulations during design review activities for 
              each subsystem (pg. A-18); and e) implementation of CEQA/NEPA 
              mitigation measures (pg. A-23).

            March 29, 2012, minutes  , under Administrative Matters/Action 
              Items (pgs. 2-3):  Motion to approve the Jacobs contract was 
              approved. 

            July 11, 2012, minutes  , under Director's Report - Pat Mallon; 
              pg. 2:  "Executive Director Mallon reported that they were 
              working with Sacramento on the CEQA legislation.  The trailer 
              bill did not make it to the final version of the budget that 
              was approved by the Senate and Assembly.  The legislature is 
              on break until August and the bill may be introduced as 
              another trailer bill or as a stand-alone bill."

              Based on the Ultrasystems and Jacobs contracts referenced 
              above, one would assume that LA-RICS is proceeding with CEQA 
              and NEPA documentation for the project rather than seeking a 
              CEQA exemption.  According to LA-RICS, Ultrasystems will be: 
               a) providing environmental documentation necessary for 
              notices of exemptions that would be filed in accordance with 
              AB 1486, b) preparing environmental documentation for LMR 
              and LTE towers that do not meet the AB 1486 exemption 
              conditions, and c) preparing the federal NEPA environmental 
              assessment to be approved by NTIA.

            6) Status of funding  .  According to Pat Mallon, LA-RICS 
              Executive Director, as of August 29, 2012, approximately $80 
              million in funding is available for the LMR system, with 
              certain portions of that amount expiring each year.  For 
              example, $23 million must be expended by September 2012, but 
              LA-RICS is expected to get an extension to spend that 
              amount.

           For the LTE system, $154.6 million is available from NTIA, with 
              $70 million for equipment being temporarily suspended.  The 
              remaining $84.6 million must be expended by August 31, 2013.

            7) Blaming CEQA  .  It is not unusual for certain interests to 
              assert that a particular exemption will expedite 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 6

              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:

                  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, according to a study on the issue, 
              "Despite criticisms that CEQA often results in litigation, 
              CEQA-related litigation is relatively rare."  The study 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 7

              noted that the number of lawsuits to the number of CEQA 
              reviews "yields an estimate of one lawsuit per 354 CEQA 
              reviews."  A review of CEQA challenges in the City of Los 
              Angeles from January 2011 through July 20, 2012, shows that 
              of 1182 projects reviewed under CEQA, 18 were challenged.  A 
              2012 Office of Planning and Research survey of planning 
              directors regarding barriers to infill, with an 87% 
              response, shows that CEQA is not even ranked in the top ten 
              barriers - planning directors ranked it 12th.

              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)?

              When some suggest that CEQA "reforms" may be needed, others 
              note various provisions of CEQA that already provide 
              streamlined approaches, including master and focused EIRs; 
              transit priority and residential project streamlining 
              (enacted by SB 375 (Steinberg, Ducheny) Chapter 728, 
              Statutes of 2008); expedited review for environmental 
              mandated projects; special procedures for various types of 
              housing projects (enacted by SB 1925 (Sher, Polanco) Chapter 
              1039, Statutes of 2002); various litigation, mediation, 
              tiering, and other revisions (SB 1456 (Simitian) Chapter 
              496, Statutes of 2010); amendments to procedures relating to 
              findings of overriding consideration (AB 231 (Huber) Chapter 
              432, Statutes of 2010); infill project and other 
              streamlining provisions (SB 226 (Simitian) Chapter 469, 
              Statutes of 2011); and several categorical exemptions 
              contained in the CEQA Guidelines.  Challenges to CEQA 
              determinations must be commenced within an unusually short 
              30 days of an agency's filing of a notice of determination.  
              Also, no later than 20 days from the date of service upon a 
              public agency, the public agency must file a notice with the 
              court setting a time and place for all parties to meet and 
              attempt to settle the litigation.

            1) Support and opposition concerns  .  According to the Los 
              Angeles County Fire Department (LAFD), "LA-RICS is a 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 8

              collaborative effort of law enforcement, fire service, and 
              health service professionals with elected and appointed 
              officials working towards the goal of providing a voice and 
              data communication platform for regional public safety 
              agencies."  LAFD asserts that "Earlier this year, the 
              Federal government passed legislation that impacted both LTE 
              and LMR systems requiring LA-RICS to significantly change 
              course in order to address such legislation.  Given the 
              current grant deadlines and unanticipated Federal action, 
              LA-RICS faces significant challenges and uncertainty 
              regarding the ability to complete environmental review 
              required under CEQA prior to spending the grant as 
              required."

           According to opponents, "The LA-RICS project would involve 
              multiple 180-foot high microwave towers, bristling with 
              transmitters and antennae, on public property across the 
              fence line from private homes or businesses.  This 
              large-scale project is exactly the kind of project that 
              needs environmental review and cannot reasonably bypass the 
              standard environmental process due to pressing deadline.  
              The fact that the LA-RICS project must be substantially 
              complete by August 2013 under the Broadband Technology 
              Opportunities Program (BTOP) grant is an inadequate 
              justification for CEQA exemption, especially when the 
              funding for such an expansive project hasn't yet been 
              granted.  Delays in the project are the result of 
              mismanagement, not CEQA."  
            
            2) Any transparency  ?  Because of concerns over the need for 
              transparency and public involvement, the Committee required 
              a noticed public hearing process prior to a lead agency 
              using an exemption for a bicycle transportation plan (SB 
              1380 (Rubio)), bicycle lanes consistent with a bicycle 
              transportation plan (AB 2245 (Smyth)), and certain roadway 
              improvements (AB 890 (Olsen)).

           According to LA-RICS, a use agreement is required with each 
              public agency where a tower will be located and there will 
              be a public process for each of those entities when they 
              approve a tower site.  Additionally, according to LA-RICS 
              staff:  a) the LA-RICS board will take action at a noticed 
              public meeting prior to submitting the EA to NTIA; and b) 









                                                               AB 1486
                                                                 Page 9

              LA-RICS will include the following information on its 
              Internet website:  i) draft and final environmental 
              documentation in compliance with CEQA and NEPA, ii) the date 
              of filing required CEQA notices, and iii) all NTIA notice 
              and hearing information regarding approval of the EA 
              pursuant to NEPA.  The author has agreed to submit a letter 
              to the Journal regarding compliance with the above LA-RICS 
              procedures if this bill is approved by the Committee.  
            
            SOURCE  :        LA-RICS, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County 
                          Sheriff Lee Baca  

           SUPPORT  :       California Professional Firefighters, Health 
                          Services Los Angeles County, Paramount
            
           OPPOSITION  :    California Coastal Protection Network, 
                          California League of Conservation Voters, 
                          California Native Plant Society, Natural 
                          Resources Defense Council, Planning and 
                          Conservation League, Sierra Club California