Lake and streambed alteration agreements: exemptions: culverts and bridges.

Assembly Member Gallagher anchors AB 975 in a tightly targeted, time-bound exemption designed to address post-disaster repair needs for critical rural infrastructure in Sutter County, specifically for small bridges and culverts. The measure creates a temporary carve-out from the lake and streambed alteration requirements for projects repairing or reconstructing a bridge 30 feet or less in length or a culvert 70 feet or less, where damage or destruction occurred between January 1, 2022, and December 31, 2024, with the exemption remaining inoperative after January 1, 2027. The exemption is conditioned on certain safeguards, including a mandatory environmental diligence step and a pre-work written notification to the wildlife agency.

Key mechanisms govern how the exemption operates: the project must not be listed in a particular environmental permit record, and there must be a mandatory biological survey to identify species presence with consultation for protective measures that are then implemented. The exemption expressly does not apply to the state highway system or to locations at or near connections to state highways. In addition to the notification requirement—written to the wildlife agency within 14 days of beginning work—the activity remains subject to the broader regulatory framework that governs wildlife resources, with a violation triggered if notification is not provided. A legislative finding accompanies the measure, describing the necessity of a special statute to address Sutter County’s unique evacuation-related infrastructure risk.

Implementation and stakeholder impacts flow from these provisions: local governments, utilities, and other project sponsors meeting the size and timing thresholds would gain a streamlined path for small, post-disaster repairs that avoids the standard lake-and-streambed alteration process, while still conducting a species survey and applying protection measures. The wildlife agency’s engagement remains a feature of the process, ensuring environmental considerations are addressed through the mandatory survey and mitigation steps. The exemption’s EPIMS-related exclusion introduces a project-specific eligibility cutoff, and the sunset provision creates a built-in point for reevaluation as conditions evolve and the temporary need beyond 2027 is assessed.

Contextual and policy considerations frame the broader implications: the bill relies on a localized, special-statute approach rather than a general statutory change, reflecting a concern for rural infrastructure reliability and evacuation routes. By tying the exemption to explicit time limits, a mandatory notification protocol, and environmental safeguards, the measure preserves a level of environmental oversight even as it accelerates certain repairs. The fiscal and administrative effects are not accompanied by new funding; instead, they hinge on potentially shifted administrative tasks for the wildlife agency and on the costs borne by project sponsors for surveys and mitigation, with the scale limited by geographic and categorical constraints.