BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2193
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2193 (Gordon)
As Amended May 23, 2014
Majority vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 15-0
APPROPRIATIONS 16-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Rendon, Bigelow, Allen, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bigelow, |
| |Bocanegra, Dahle, Fong, | |Bocanegra, Bradford, Ian |
| |Frazier, Beth Gaines, | |Calderon, Campos, Eggman, |
| |Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, | |Gomez, Holden, Jones, |
| |Gray, Patterson, | |Linder, Pan, Quirk, |
| |Rodriguez, Yamada | |Ridley-Thomas, Wagner, |
| | | |Weber |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Enacts the Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Act
which would require the director of the Department of Fish and
Wildlife (DFW) to approved habitat restoration and enhancement
projects that meet specified criteria. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the director of DFW to approve a habitat restoration
or enhancement project if the project will maintain existing
levels of human health and safety protection, including but
not limited to flood protection, and meets all of the
following:
a) Is a voluntary habitat restoration project and not
required for mitigation.
b) Is no larger than 5 acres in size.
c) In consistent with or identified in:
i) Federal and state listed species recovery plans or
published protection measures, biological opinions, or
previously approved DFW agreements and permits;
ii) DFW and National Marine Fisheries Service Screening
Criteria or fish passage guidelines;
AB 2193
Page 2
iii) DFW's California Salmonid Stream Habitat Restoration
Manual; or
iv) Scientifically researched studies, guidance
documents or practice manuals that describe best
available habitat restoration or enhancement
methodologies.
d) Will not result in cumulative negative environmental
impacts, as specified.
2)Provides that the director's approval of a project shall be in
lieu of any other permit, agreement, or license.
3)Requires the director within 30 days of receiving a written
request for approval of a habitat restoration or enhancement
project to determine whether the request includes all of the
required information. Requires that the written request
include specified information, including: a full description
of the project and how it will result in a net benefit to any
affected habitat and species; an assessment of the project
area that includes a description of existing flora and fauna
and the potential presence of sensitive species or habitat; a
description of the environmental protection measures
incorporated into the project to protect water quality and
protected species, such that no potentially significant
negative effects to the environment are likely to occur; and
substantial evidence that the project meets the specified
requirements.
4)Requires the director to notify the project proponent and
suspend implementation of the project if at any time the
director determines that the project is no longer consistent
with all of the requirements due to a material change. Within
30 days of receipt of a notification of suspension, the
project proponent may file a written objection with the
director and request a lifting of the suspension. Requires
the director within 30 days of receipt of an objection to
suspension to either revoke the approval or lift the
suspension.
5)Creates the Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Account within
the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, the monies within which
would be available to DFW upon appropriation of the
AB 2193
Page 3
Legislature to administer and implement this bill. Authorizes
DFW to enter into agreements to accept funds for deposit into
the account to supplement existing resources. Authorizes DFW
to impose a schedule of fees for projects, based on the cost
of a project and sufficient to recover all reasonable
administrative and implementation costs of DFW related to the
project.
6)Defines a "habitat restoration or enhancement project" for
purposes of this bill to mean a project the primary purpose of
which is to do one or more of the following:
a) Stream, river bank, lake or other waterway
revegetation to improve habitat;
b) Stream or river bank stabilization with native
vegetation or other predominantly non-rock bioengineering
techniques to reduce erosion and sedimentation;
c) Modification, replacement or removal of fish passage
barriers, as specified;
d) Modifications of existing water diversion
infrastructure to enhance stream flow and improve fish
habitat and survival, including pumps and fish screens;
e) Placement or installation of large wood, gravel, and
other in-stream materials;
f) Sediment source reduction on existing roads;
g) Upland erosion control using bioengineering
techniques and native revegetation;
h) Control and removal of invasive plant species;
i) Installation of fencing and alternative stock water
supply infrastructure;
j) Restoration of freshwater and tidal hydrologic
functions in wetlands and estuaries;
aa) Creation of off-channel habitat to restore historic
rearing and flow refugia;
AB 2193
Page 4
bb) Restoration of floodplains to restore natural
hydrologic function;
cc) Restoration and maintenance of existing off-stream
ponds, including spillway repair and sediment removal;
dd) Other habitat restoration projects requiring permits
from DFW whose primary purpose is to recover listed
species and are included in species recovery plans or
other DFW identified habitat and species recovery
actions.
7) Defines various other terms for purposes of this bill.
8)States legislative findings and declarations regarding the
need for small-scale ecosystem restoration projects to benefit
listed species and the need for more efficient and expedited
processes for willing landowners and local governments to
obtain necessary regulatory approval and permits for such
projects. States legislative intent to provide for
substantial permitting efficiency to encourage increased
implementation of voluntary, environmentally beneficial
small-scale habitat restoration projects that provide an
individual and cumulative net environmental benefit,
incorporate measures to protect against any adverse change,
and follow applicable preexisting state and federal agency
permits, certifications and exemptions.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes DFW as the trustee for the fish and wildlife
resources of California and prohibits any act which could
directly or indirectly "take" threatened or endangered species
listed under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
unless authorized by DFW.
2)Requires DFW authorization if an action could affect an
endangered or rare native plant unless it fits into an
exemption for agricultural activities, timber operations or
mining.
3)Requires a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement with DFW in
order to protect and conserve fish and wildlife resources if
AB 2193
Page 5
an activity could change the bed, bank or channel of a stream
or lake.
4)States that specified activities to assure the maintenance,
restoration, or enhancement of a natural resource, including
small habitat restoration projects for fish, plants or
wildlife that do not exceed five acres in size, are
categorically exempt from further review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
5)Provides DFW with an expedited mechanism to approve specific
types of voluntary on-the-ground habitat restoration projects
that benefit Coho salmon. Projects eligible for the approval
are limited to projects within a region described in an
adopted state or federal Coho salmon recovery plan that do one
or more of the following: restore stream banks, modify water
crossings, or place wood to enhance habitat or increase stream
complexity. Eligible projects are also limited to projects
that are less than five acres in size or 500 linear feet.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee analysis:
1)Increased annual costs to DFW in the $500,000 to $1 million
range, partially offset by fees, to develop and staff the new
permitting program (Habitat Restoration and Enhancement
Account (HREA) and Fish and Game Preservation Fund (FGPF)).
2)One-time cost of approximately $250,000 for DFW to develop a
new database (HREA and FGPF).
COMMENTS : The author has introduced this bill to provide
private landowners, conservation organizations and local public
agencies with streamlined access to the environmental permits
required for small (less than five acres) ecosystem and urban
watershed restoration projects. By providing an efficient path
for regulatory compliance, the author seeks to create new
opportunities for much-needed rural, urban, coastal, and inland
ecosystem restoration projects. As the legislative findings and
declarations in this bill indicate, California is home to many
species that are threatened or endangered, and for some of these
species, immediate recovery actions are necessary to avoid
further population declines or extinctions. While tremendous
demand exists for small-scale ecosystem restoration projects,
AB 2193
Page 6
current regulatory mechanisms create barriers to the ability of
many willing private landowners and local governments to
efficiently access the necessary permits to implement the
projects. Since demand for these public benefit projects
outpaces the regulatory approval process's capacity, hundreds of
small projects designed to benefit California's most vulnerable
wildlife species are not being implemented.
Current law generally requires that project proponents secure
CEQA, CESA, Water Board permits, and streambed alteration
agreement permits for many kinds of small-scale ecosystem
restoration projects. Backlogs and delays associated with
permitting have been identified as substantial barriers to
implementing these small voluntary restoration projects in many
regions throughout the state. This bill is designed to provide
the DFW with a more efficient process for reviewing and
approving small, voluntary restoration projects. One of the
ways it does this is by requiring that more detailed information
necessary for approval of the project be provided upfront in the
application. Eligible projects would be limited to small-scale,
voluntary projects of five acres or less. Project applicants
would be required to demonstrate, among other things, that the
project is consistent with existing state or federal recovery
plans or other specified policies, would provide a net benefit
to affected habitats and species, and would not result in
cumulative impacts.
A similar measure was enacted last session, but only applied to
a more narrow group of projects designed to assist in recovery
of Coho salmon habitat. AB 1961 (Huffman), Chapter 541,
Statutes of 2012, established the Coho Help Act which
streamlined and expedited the approval process for Coho salmon
habitat enhancement projects in order to prevent extinction.
The habitat projects were limited to areas with an approved Coho
salmon recovery plan and included modifications of water
crossings to remove barriers to fish passage (e.g. replacing
culverts), stream bank restoration, and wood placement to
increase the complexity of stream flow (e.g. placing wood stumps
or logs to form pools).
Supporters of this bill, who include groups that work with
farmers, ranchers, water districts, local governments and
nonprofits on ecosystem restoration strategies, assert that
important habitat restoration work to benefit vulnerable
AB 2193
Page 7
wildlife species in California could be significantly ramped up
to meet the demand and need for this work if a new, consolidated
environmental permitting process were developed for small-scale
voluntary ecosystem restoration projects. Supporters assert
this bill will simplify the permitting process at DFW for
landowners, state and local governments, and conservation
organizations proposing to implement small-scale environmentally
beneficial projects, while also ensuring compliance with
necessary environmental protections. Supporters also assert
this bill will assist DFW in meeting goals for species recovery.
Analysis Prepared by : Diane Colborn / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096
FN: 0003719