BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1665|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1665
Author: Galgiani (D)
Amended: 8/6/12 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 6-1, 7/2/12
AYES: Simitian, Blakeslee, Hancock, Kehoe, Lowenthal,
Pavley
NOES: Strickland
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-22, 5/21/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : California Environmental Quality Act
SOURCE : Public Utilities Commission
DIGEST : This bill specifies that the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to the
closure of a railroad grade crossing by order of the Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) when the PUC has found the
crossing to present a threat to public safety, until
January 1, 2016. This bill also requires a state agency,
whenever it determines that a project is not subject to
CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the state agency
approves or determines to carry out the project, to file a
specified notice of that approval or determination with the
Office of Planning and Research (OPR). CEQA authorizes a
local agency, whenever it determines that a project is not
CONTINUED
AB 1665
Page
2
subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the
local agency approves or determines to carry out the
project, to file a specified notice of that approval or
determination with the county clerk of each county in which
the project will be located.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility
for carrying out or approving a proposed project which
may have a significant effect on the environment 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).
2. Exempts from CEQA any railroad grade separation project
which eliminates an existing grade crossing or which
reconstructs an existing grade separation (Public
Resources Code Section 21080.13, enacted in 1982).
3. Grants the PUC exclusive authority over railroad
crossings, including prescribing the terms of
installation, operation, maintenance, use, and
protection of each crossing, as well as requiring the
closure or separation of grades at any crossing.
This bill, until January 1, 2016, exempts from CEQA the
closure of a railroad grade crossing by order of the PUC
under the above authority if the PUC finds the crossing to
present a threat to public safety.
CEQA authorizes a state agency, whenever it determines that
a project is not subject to CEQA pursuant to designated
provisions and the state agency approves or determines to
carry out the project, to file a specified notice of that
approval or determination with the OPR. CEQA authorizes a
local agency, whenever it determines that a project is not
subject to CEQA pursuant to designated provisions and the
local agency approves or determines to carry out the
project, to file a specified notice of that approval or
CONTINUED
AB 1665
Page
3
determination with the county clerk of each county in which
the project will be located.
This bill requires a state agency that determines that such
a railroad closure grade crossing project is not subject to
CEQA, and the state agency approves or determines to carry
out that project, to file a specified notice with the OPR.
This bill also requires a local agency that makes such a
determination, and approves or determines to carry out that
project, to file a specified notice with the OPR and with
the county clerk in each county in which the project will
be located.
These provisions shall not apply to any crossing for
high-speed rail, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section
185012 of the Public Utilities Code, or any crossing for
any project carried out by the High-Speed Rail Authority,
as described in Section 185020 of the Public Utilities
Code, or a successor agency.
This bill specifies:
Whenever a state agency determines that a project is not
subject to this division pursuant to this section, and it
approves or determines to carry out the project, the
state agency shall file a notice with OPR.
Whenever a local agency determines that a project is not
subject to this division pursuant to this section, and it
approves or determines to carry out the project, the
local agency shall file a notice with OPR and with the
county clerk in each county in which the project will be
located in the manner specified in subdivisions (b) and
(c) of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
The provisions of this bill shall remain in effect only
until January 1, 2016, and as of that date is repealed,
Comments
CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental
effects of applicable projects undertaken or approved by
public agencies. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an
initial study is prepared to determine whether the project
CONTINUED
AB 1665
Page
4
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 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.
The sponsor of this bill, the PUC, has broad and exclusive
power to regulate railroad crossings. According to the
PUC, AB 660 (Galgiani), Chapter 315, Statutes of 2008,
eliminates a provision from Section 2450 of the Streets and
Highways Code which had described a grade separation
project to include removal or relocation of highways or
tracks to eliminate existing at-grade crossings. Section
21080.13 of CEQA exempts certain grade separation projects,
and the PUC combined this exemption with the Streets and
Highways definition to justify claiming a CEQA exemption
for the closure of an at-grade crossing. The PUC feels
that the amendments made by AB 660 eliminated this
exemption.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/7/12)
Public Utilities Commission (source)
American Council of Engineering Companies
California State Council of Laborers
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
in the 2007-08 legislative session, the Legislature adopted
CONTINUED
AB 1665
Page
5
AB 660 (Galgiani) which, among other things, modified
Streets and Highways Code Section 2450. Subsection (b)(3)
of Section 2450 had included projects that removed or
relocated highways or railway tracks to eliminate existing
grade crossings within the definition of a grade
separation. The California Public Resources Code Section
21080.13 exempted these "grade separation projects" from a
CEQA review. By deleting Subsection (b)(3) from Streets
and Highways Code Section 2450, the removal or relocation
of a highway or railroad tracks (i.e., crossing closure
removing the street or highway from the railroad tracks) is
no longer within the definition of a grade separation
project for purposes of the CEQA exemption.
Amending the Public Resources Code to clarify the PUC's
existing authority as exercised in the past will help
ensure the expeditious closure of unsafe railroad
crossings. A number of fatalities occur every year in
California at existing at-grade highway-rail crossing.
This legislation will help ensure that dangerous crossings
can be closed with simple minor modifications without the
delay of an unnecessary CEQA review.
Under this bill, public safety will be the primary
consideration in at-grade crossing closures and will be
handled in an expeditious manner while preserving the due
process rights of the local community affected by the
closure. Furthermore, since most, if not all, the
considerations addressed under CEQA are considered by the
PUC in its crossing closure public hearings and
proceedings, these important considerations will be more
expeditiously aired and resolved.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-22, 5/21/12
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Atkins, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles
Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Davis,
Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani,
Garrick, Gatto, Hall, Hayashi, Hill, Huber, Hueso,
Huffman, Jeffries, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza,
Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, V. Manuel P�rez,
Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
CONTINUED
AB 1665
Page
6
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly,
Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove, Halderman, Harkey, Jones,
Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen,
Norby, Silva, Smyth, Valadao, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Ammiano, Fletcher, Gordon, Hagman, Roger
Hern�ndez, Olsen, Perea
DLW:RJG:d 8/8/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED