Source: https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/IA747290E039643E09503E467CE4A3317?viewType=FullText&amp%3BoriginationContext=documenttoc&amp%3BtransitionType=CategoryPageItem&amp%3BcontextData=%28sc.Default%29&transitionType=Default&contextData=%28sc.Default%29
Timestamp: 2019-05-21 13:20:30
Document Index: 548016521

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1037', '§ 1037', '§ 1037', '§ 895', '§ 898', '§ 4555', '§ 898', '§ 1037', '§ 1037', '§ 4582', '§ 4555', '§ 1034', '§ 1034', '§ 1037', '§ 1037']

§ 1037.5. Review Teams to Be Established.
14 CA ADC § 1037.5BARCLAYS OFFICIAL CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
Subchapter 7. Administration
Article 2. Timber Harvesting Plan
14 CCR § 1037.5
Interdisciplinary review teams shall be established by the Director to review Plans and assist the Director in the evaluation of proposed Timber Operations and their impacts on the environment.
(a) Review Team Composition. Each review team, when possible, shall consist of a representative from each of the following agencies: the appropriate RWQCB, CDFW, CGS, a representative of county government when the county government so requests, California Coastal Commission (for Plans in the coastal zone), California Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (for Plans in the Tahoe Basin) and CAL FIRE. The Director shall request a representative from the Department of Parks and Recreation in the case of Plans that may affect values in publicly owned parks. The Director may request other federal, state, or county agencies, or Native Americans as defined in 14 CCR § 895.1, when appropriate, to assist as advisors in the review process. The CAL FIRE's representative shall be the review team chairperson and shall be an RPF.
(b) Review Team Function. The function of the review team shall be to assist the Director in determining if Plans are in conformance with Board Rules and to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of Timber Operations. Review criteria employed by a team shall be consistent with this function. The Board's regulations provide direction for those situations noted during the review which are not addressed by specific Rules (See 14 CCR §§ 898.1(f), 901-903.2, 1655 & PRC § 4555). In evaluating a Plan, the review team shall review any discussion of Feasible alternatives or additional mitigation to the proposed Timber Operation as prescribed in 14 CCR § 898. Plan reviewers must consider the economic as well as the environmental benefits of Feasible alternatives. The review team shall serve in an advisory capacity to the Director in making recommendations on Plans.
In the event that any member of the review team concludes that the Plan as filed would have a significant adverse effect on the environment, that member shall explain and justify this conclusion in writing as specifically as possible. The member shall provide in writing suggested site-specific mitigation measures, if any, that will substantially lessen these impacts.
(c) Chairperson Tasks. The Department is the lead agency in the review of Plans. The review team chairperson shall direct the review team meetings, coordinate the interdisciplinary review of Plans and develop recommendations on Plans for the Director's consideration.
(d) Review Team Meetings. The Director or his designee is responsible for establishing and scheduling the meeting of a review team to perform the necessary review of Plans for the Department.
Review team meetings shall be open to the RPF, Supervised Designee, the landowner, and the Timber Owner and, insofar as possible without disrupting the work of the team, to the public. The chairperson may impose limitations on the scope of any public participation at the meetings. All interested Persons will normally be allowed to attend team meetings. On occasions when space or other considerations will require some limitation on attendance the review team chairperson shall endeavor to allow for attendance of at least one representative for each of the various agencies, organizations or special interest groups.
(e) Non-Concurrence. If a member of the review team does not concur with the chairperson's recommendation to the Director, the member shall submit in writing, within 5 days of the review team meeting and before the action required by 14 CCR § 1037.4, the specific reasons why the recommendation does not provide adequate protection of the resources for which his or her agency has responsibility. The submission to the Director shall also include recommendations on measures or actions the Director should take to address the asserted deficiency, as provided by the Rules of the Board. A non-concurring member's comments shall be considered based on the comments' specificity and relation to the member agency's area(s) of expertise and statutory mandate, as well as the level of documentation, explanation or other support provided with the comments. If a non-concurrence is filed on a Plan, the review team chairperson shall prepare a written report explaining how the concerns cited in the non-concurrence have been addressed in the Plan and how the natural resources of concern will be protected during Timber Operations.
(f) Mitigation. Mitigation and protective measures developed by members of the review team shall be consistent with 14 CCR §§ 1037.3, 1037.5(b), 1037.5(h), and PRC § 4582.6(b). Unless the RPF and review team member agree to mitigation measure(s), such mitigation and protective measures shall be explained and justified in writing and be based upon the evaluation of site-specific conditions at the appropriate scale.
(1) During the review of a Plan, including the preharvest inspection, members of the review team may recommend incorporation of mitigating measures into the Plan which are consistent with the forest practice Rules and which would improve the Plan or assist in significantly lessening adverse impacts of the operation on any Timberland resources. The submitter may or may not agree with concerns expressed by the suggestions or may offer alternatives. If the submitter, after consultation with the RPF who prepared the Plan, agrees with the suggested mitigation measures or changes, they are to be incorporated in the Plan. The Director may only require incorporation into the Plan of mitigation measures that are based on Rules of the Board.
(2) Members of the review team may suggest protective measures for incorporation into the Plan when express authority for such measures is not contained in the Rules and regulations of the Board. If the RPF rejects incorporation of such measures into the Plan, the Director shall determine if approval of the Plan without the suggested measures could result in immediate significant, and long-term Harm to the natural resources of the state. If the Director finds that the state's resources are so endangered, the provisions of PRC § 4555 shall be followed.
(g) Review of Plans by Review Teams. Before the Director makes a determination on a Plan, a review team shall review the Plan. The review team shall do the following:
(1) Before the Director accepts a Plan for filing or before the fifth working day after filing, a review team shall review the Plan. The purpose of this review is to assist this Department in determining whether a preharvest inspection (initial inspection) is necessary and what areas of concern are to be examined during the inspection, if it is to be made. If a preharvest inspection is determined by the Department to be unnecessary, the review team shall make its recommendation to the Director no later than five working days after a Plan is filed.
(2) After the preharvest inspection and before the Director's determination on a Plan, the review team shall meet to review all the information on the Plan and develop a recommendation for the Director.
(3) Requests, if any, for additional information, from the Plan submitter during the review period shall be as prescribed by 14 CCR § 1034 and other conditions in the Rules. Such requests shall be supported by reasons for the request.
During the review period, the Director shall be responsible for determining whether requests for information not contained in the Plan as filed or developed in preharvest inspection by review team members, reviewing agencies and members of the public, are consistent with the Forest Practice Rules, are reasonably necessary and should be requested from Plan submitters. The Director's determination of additional information to be provided by Plan submitters shall be guided by standards of practicality and reasonableness, recognizing the statutory review period of the FPA, the requirements of 14 CCR § 1034 and the availability of information from alternative sources.
(h) Review Team Recommendations. The review team chairperson shall develop for each Plan reviewed, a recommendation for the Director's consideration. When developing recommendations, the review team chairperson shall carefully consider all the information available and the views and opinions expressed by all team members. The advice of review team members shall be utilized in determining whether appropriate alternatives have been selected and included in a Plan and if implementation of the Plan would cause significant damage to natural resources. The Director shall evaluate the review team recommendation in light of their specificity, as well as the level of documentation, explanation or other support provided with the recommendation and the agency's statutory mandates and areas of expertise.
(i) Communications with Plan Submitter. The Plan submitter, and the RPF who prepared the Plan, and review team members, shall be provided by the Department with copies of preharvest inspection reports, nonconcurrences and review team recommendations so they are kept informed and are better able to respond promptly to the Department relative to changes that may be needed in a Plan before it is acted upon by the Director.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 4551 and 21080.5, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 4512, 4513, 4551.5, 4582.6, 21000(g), 21002 and 21080.5, Public Resources Code; and Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Arcata Nat. Corp. (1976) 59 Cal.App.3d 959; 131 Cal.Rptr. 172.
1. New section filed 8-9-83; designated effective 10-1-83 (Register 83, No. 37).
2. Amendment of subsection (b) filed 7-3-86; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 86, No. 27).
3. Amendment filed 8-26-91; operative 8-26-91 pursuant to Government Code section 11346.2(d) (Register 92, No. 20).
4. Amendment of subsection (a) and Note filed 11-27-91; operative 12-27-91 (Register 92, No. 25).
5. Amendment of subsection (d) and Note filed 11-26-97; operative 1-1-98 pursuant to Public Resources Code section 4554.5 (Register 97, No. 48).
6. Amendment of subsections (a) and (e) filed 5-31-2000; operative 7-1-2000 (Register 2000, No. 22).
7. New subsection (f), redesignation and amendment of former subsection (f) as subsections (f)(1)-(2) and amendment of subsection (h) filed 11-7-2001; operative 1-1-2002 pursuant to Public Resources Code section 4551.5 (Register 2001, No. 45).
8. Amendment of subsection (a) filed 11-25-2002; operative 1-1-2003 pursuant to Public Resources Code section 4551.5 (Register 2002, No. 48).
9. Change without regulatory effect amending subsection (a) filed 2-17-2017 pursuant to section 100, title 1, California Code of Regulations (Register 2017, No. 7).
10. Change without regulatory effect amending section filed 10-31-2017 pursuant to section 100, title 1, California Code of Regulations (Register 2017, No. 44).
14 CCR § 1037.5, 14 CA ADC § 1037.5