California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 2267 — Marine resources and preservation.

Last action — In committee: Held under submission.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Game, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to conditionally approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied, including a finding that the alternative of partial removal provides a net environmental benefit and substantial cost savings compared to the alternative of full removal of these structures. The act requires the first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure to pay, in addition to other specified costs, the startup costs incurred by the department or the State Lands Commission to implement the act, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations. The act requires the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department, as specified. The act requires the Ocean Protection Council, for purposes of determining whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit, to establish specified criteria, to consult with the department, the California Coastal Commission, the State Lands Commission, the California Ocean Science Trust, and other responsible agencies as to those criteria, and requires certification that partial removal complies with the California Environmental Quality Act, among other things. The act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal, and requires the applicant, upon conditional approval for conversion, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines "cost savings" to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act, and specifically provides for the inclusion of certain costs in cost savings. This bill would specifically include certain additional costs in "cost savings" calculations for purposes of these provisions, as specified. The bill would specify additional costs in "cost savings" calculations to be used for applications submitted on or before January 1, 2017, and would no longer require the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department for those applications, as specified. The bill would require the council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board, among other entities.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Held under submission.

  2. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  3. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (June 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. Referred to Com. on N.R. & W.

  5. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 73. Noes 0. Page 5141.)

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  8. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 25).

  9. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  10. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  11. Read second time and amended.

  12. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (April 24).

  13. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  14. Referred to Com. on W., P. & W.

  15. Read first time.

  16. From printer. May be heard in committee March 27.

  17. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

  • Hall · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

  • Hall

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Alquist — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea

Official roll call →

AB 2267 HALL Assembly Third Reading

Passed 73 Yea · 0 Nay · 7 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 2000
Unaffiliated 70007
Democratic 1000
Total 73007
% of votes cast 91%0%0%9%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Butler — Yea
Fong — Yea
Carter — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Cook — Yea
Allen — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Halderman — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Conway — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huber — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Knight — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Perea — Yea
Silva — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torres — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Hall — Yea
Fletcher — Not Voting
Lara — Yea
Beall — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Donnelly — Not Voting
Norby — Not Voting
Valadao — Not Voting
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Logue — Yea
Ma — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Monning — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Williams — Not Voting
Eng — Yea
Feuer — Not Voting
Davis — Not Voting
Dickinson — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 16000
Democratic 1000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Gatto — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Campos — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Lara — Yea
Davis — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Hill — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

Passed 12 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 11001
Republican 1000
Total 12001
% of votes cast 92%0%0%8%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Halderman — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Fong — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Lara — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Williams — Yea
Campos — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
Roger Hernández — Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

environment
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 2267 do?
The California Marine Resources Legacy Act establishes a program, administered by the Department of Fish and Game, to allow partial removal of offshore oil structures. The act authorizes the department to conditionally approve the partial removal of offshore oil structures, if specified criteria are satisfied, including a finding that the alternative of partial removal provides a net environmental benefit and substantial cost savings compared to the alternative of full removal of these structures. The act requires the first person to file an application on and after January 1, 2011, to partially remove an offshore oil structure to pay, in addition to other specified costs, the startup costs incurred by the department or the State Lands Commission to implement the act, including the costs to develop and adopt regulations. The act requires the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department, as specified. The act requires the Ocean Protection Council, for purposes of determining whether partial removal provides a net environmental benefit, to establish specified criteria, to consult with the department, the California Coastal Commission, the State Lands Commission, the California Ocean Science Trust, and other responsible agencies as to those criteria, and requires certification that partial removal complies with the California Environmental Quality Act, among other things. The act requires the State Lands Commission to determine the cost savings of partial removal, and requires the applicant, upon conditional approval for conversion, to apportion a percentage of the cost-savings funds in accordance with a prescribed schedule to specified entities and funds. The act defines "cost savings" to mean the difference between the estimated cost to the applicant of complete removal of an oil platform, as required by state and federal leases, and the estimated costs to the applicant of partial removal of the oil platform pursuant to the act, and specifically provides for the inclusion of certain costs in cost savings. This bill would specifically include certain additional costs in "cost savings" calculations for purposes of these provisions, as specified. The bill would specify additional costs in "cost savings" calculations to be used for applications submitted on or before January 1, 2017, and would no longer require the payment of startup costs to be reimbursed by the department for those applications, as specified. The bill would require the council, in determining whether partial removal of the structure would provide a net benefit to the marine environment compared to full removal of the structure, to take certain adverse impacts to air quality into account and to consult with the State Air Resources Board, among other entities.
Who sponsors AB 2267?
AB 2267 is sponsored by Hall.
What is the current status of AB 2267?
This bill died with 2011-2012 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 2267?
Track AB 2267 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2267

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 2267

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →