If enacted, AB 2605 would lead to more expedited processing of water quality certifications by allowing the State Water Resources Control Board to delegate certain authority to regional boards. Additionally, the bill requires the state board to act on certification requests within 60 days and waives the certification need if no action is taken within this period. This modification aims to balance environmental protection with necessary regulatory flexibility, fostering developments that are increasingly critical in light of California's housing demands and environmental considerations.
Summary
Assembly Bill 2605, introduced by Assembly Member Villapudua, aims to amend the water quality certification process under Section 13160 of the Water Code to improve efficiency and responsiveness regarding state certifications for federal permits involving water discharges. The bill addresses the current challenges in California's housing supply crisis, recognizing the lengthy permitting processes that hinder timely construction and exacerbate housing shortages. By streamlining this certification requirement, the bill seeks to provide a clear mechanism for project proponents to obtain necessary permissions quickly, thereby promoting both housing development and environmental safeguards.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding AB 2605 has generally been supportive among proponents who argue that the reforms will facilitate essential housing projects while maintaining adequate environmental oversight. However, there may be concerns among environmentalists or local agencies regarding the potential risks of expedited processes, suggesting that hurried decision-making could lead to compromises on water quality and ecosystem protection. Balancing these interests will be a focal point during discussions and potential negotiations as the bill progresses through legislative scrutiny.
Contention
Notably, AB 2605 brings to the forefront a discussion about the trade-offs between regulatory efficiency and environmental protection. Critics may voice concerns that hastening the certification processes could lead to diminished scrutiny of projects that could adversely affect water quality. The framing of housing supply as a priority in the bill's language also raises questions about how state interests may sometimes conflict with local environmental considerations, challenging the normative expectations of local governance in environmental policy.
Fee increases clarified to require legislative approval, effluent limitation requirements modified, Pollution Control Agency permitting efficiency reports modified, procedure for filing petition seeking environmental assessment worksheet modified, Pollution Control Agency required to conduct analysis of funding alternatives for its air permit program, and money appropriated.