Time- Dated Material GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW California Regulatory Notice Register REGISTER 2022, NUMBER 42-Z PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW OCTOBER 21, 2022 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS TITLE 2. STATE AUDITORS’ OFFICE Conflict–of–Interest Code — Notice File Number Z2022–1011–02 ........................................ 1213 TITLE 2.

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION Conflict–of–Interest Codes — Notice File Number Z2022–1011–05 ....................................... 1213 MULTI–COUNTY: Marin Clean Energy STATE AGENCY: State Water Resources Control Board ADOPTION MULTI–COUNTY: San Pablo Economic Development Corporation TITLE 5. COMMISSION ON TEACHER CREDENTIALING Subject Matter Competence — Notice File Number Z2022–1010–05 ....................................... 1214 TITLE 8. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD Expedited Case Processing — Notice File Number Z2022–1011–01 ....................................... 1218 TITLE 10.

CALIFORNIA FILM COMMISSION Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program — Notice File Number Z2022–1011–03 ............................ 1223 TITLE 11. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act — Notice File Number Z2022–1006–01 ............................................................... 1226 TITLE 11. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Police Body Armor — Notice File Number Z2022–1010–04 ............................................. 1229 TITLE 11.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Centralized List of Firearms Dealers — Notice File Number Z2022–1010–02 ............................... 1232 (Continued on next page)

TITLE 16. BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY Second Signature Removal — Notice File Number Z2022–1010–03 ....................................... 1235 TITLE 16.

DENTAL HYGIENE BOARD OF CALIFORNIA Process Approval of a New RDH Educational Program — Notice File Number 2022–1010–01 ................................................................. 1238 GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Los Angeles River Bikeway and Greenway Project, 2080–2022–016–05, Los Angeles County ............................................ 1241 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Consistency Determination Request for Elk Creek Bridge Replacement Project, 2080–2022–017–01, Mendocino County ...................................................... 1242 DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE 2022 Annual Fee Review Hearing .................................................................. 1242 DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL Explanation of Significant Differences and Public Comment Period ....................................... 1243 PETITION DECISION DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION Decline of Petition from Humberto Diaz Concerning

Section 3177 ........................................ 1244 A V AILABILITY OF INDEX OF PRECEDENTIAL DECISIONS BOARD OF PHARMACY Annual Notice of Availability of Precedential Decisions Index ........................................... 1245

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTIONS Regulations filed with the Secretary of State ......................................................... 1245 The California Regulatory Notice Register is an official state publication of the Office of Administrative Law containing notices of proposed regulatory actions by state regulatory agencies to adopt, amend or repeal regulations contained in the California Code of Regulations. The effective period of a notice of proposed regulatory action by a state agency in the California Regulatory Notice Register shall not exceed one year [Government Code § 11346.4(b)].

It is suggested, therefore, that issues of the California Regulatory Notice Register be retained for a minimum of 18 months. CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER is published weekly by the Office of Administrative Law, 300 Capitol Mall, Suite 1250, Sacramento, CA 95814-4339. The Register is printed by Barclays, a subsidiary of West, a Thomson Reuters Business, and is offered by subscription for $205.00 (annual price). To order or make changes to current subscriptions, please call (800) 328−4880. The Register can also be accessed at https://oal.ca.gov .

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1213 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS Information contained in this document is published as received from agencies and is not edited by Thomson Reuters. TITLE 2. STATE AUDITORS’ OFFICE THE CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODE OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE AUDITOR’S OFFICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the California State Auditor’s Office, pursuant to the authority vest- ed in it by

section 87306 of the Government Code, proposes amendment to its conflict–of–interest code. A comment period has been established commenc - ing on October 22, 2022 and closing on December 5, 2022. All inquiries should be directed to the contact listed below. The California State Auditor’s Office proposes to amend its conflict–of–interest code to include employ- ee positions that involve the making or participation in the making of decisions that may foreseeably have a material effect on any financial interest, as set forth in subdivision (

a) of

section 87302 of the Government Code. The amendment carries out the purposes of the law and no other alternative would do so and be less burdensome to affected persons.

Changes to the conflict–of–interest code include: ● The addition of five new classifications to the list of designated positions. ● Updating six designated position titles to correctly reflect the classification titles. ● Deletion of one designated position no longer used by the California State Auditor’s Office. ● Nonsubstantive, clarifying changes to the disclo - sure categories. ● Minor revisions to the filing language. ● Other technical changes. Agencies please choose one option: The proposed amendment and explanation of the reasons can be obtained from the agency’s contact.

OR X Information on the code amendment is avail - able on the agency’s intranet site and/or attached to this email. Any interested person may submit written com - ments relating to the proposed amendment by submit- ting them no later than December 5, 2022 , or at the conclusion of the public hearing, if requested, which - ever comes later. At this time, no public hearing is scheduled. A person may request a hearing no later than November 21, 2022. The California State Auditor’s Office has deter - mined that the proposed amendments: 1. Impose no mandate on local agencies or school districts. 2.

Impose no costs or savings on any state agency. 3. Impose no costs on any local agency or school district that are required to be reimbursed un - der

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code. 4. Will not result in any nondiscretionary costs or savings to local agencies. 5. Will not result in any costs or savings in federal funding to the state. 6. Will not have any potential cost impact on private persons, businesses or small businesses. All inquiries concerning this proposed amendment and any communication required by this notice should be directed to: Brianna Behnoud, Staff Services Man - ager I, (916) 445–0255, regulations@auditor.ca.gov. TITLE 2.

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fair Polit - ical Practices Commission, pursuant to the authority vested in it by Sections 82011, 87303, and 87304 of the Government Code to review proposed conflict–of– interest codes, will review the proposed/amended conflict–of–interest codes of the following: CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES AMENDMENT M U LT I – COU N T Y: Marin Clean Energy STAT E AGENCY: State Water Resources Control Board ADOPTION M U LT I – COU N T Y: San Pablo Economic Development Corporation A written comment period has been established commencing on October 21, 2022 and closing on December 5, 2022.

Written comments should be di - rected to the Fair Political Practices Commission,

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1214 Attention Daniel Vo, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811. At the end of the 45–day comment period, the pro - posed conflict–of–interest code(

s) will be submitted to the Commission’s Executive Director for his review, unless any interested person or his or her duly autho - rized representative requests, no later than 15 days pri- or to the close of the written comment period, a public hearing before the full Commission. If a public hear - ing is requested, the proposed code(

s) will be submit - ted to the Commission for review. The Executive Director of the Commission will review the above–referenced conflict–of– interest code(s), proposed pursuant to Government Code

Section 87300, which designate, pursuant to Government Code

Section 87302, employees who must disclose certain investments, interests in real property and income. The Executive Director of the Commission, upon his or its own motion or at the request of any interested person, will approve, or revise and approve, or return the proposed code(

s) to the agency for revision and re– submission within 60 days without further notice. Any interested person may present statements, ar - guments or comments, in writing to the Executive Director of the Commission, relative to review of the proposed conflict–of–interest code(s). Any written comments must be received no later than December 5, 2022. If a public hearing is to be held, oral comments may be presented to the Commission at the hearing.

COST TO LOCAL AGENCIES There shall be no reimbursement for any new or in- creased costs to local government which may result from compliance with these codes because these are not new programs mandated on local agencies by the codes since the requirements described herein were mandated by the Political Reform Act of 1974. There- fore, they are not “costs mandated by the state” as de- fined in Government Code

Section 17514. EFFECT ON HOUSING COSTS AND BUSINESSES Compliance with the codes has no potential effect on housing costs or on private persons, businesses or small businesses. AUTHORITY Government Code Sections 82011, 87303 and 87304 provide that the Fair Political Practices Commission as the code reviewing body for the above conflict–of– interest codes shall approve codes as submitted, revise the proposed code and approve it as revised, or return the proposed code for revision and re–submission.

REFERENCE Government Code Sections 87300 and 87306 pro - vide that agencies shall adopt and promulgate conflict– of–interest codes pursuant to the Political Reform Act and amend their codes when change is necessitated by changed circumstances. CONTACT Any inquiries concerning the proposed conflict– of–interest code(

s) should be made to Daniel Vo, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322–5660. AVAILABILITY OF PROPOSED CONFLICT–OF–INTEREST CODES Copies of the proposed conflict–of–interest codes may be obtained from the Commission offices or the respective agency. Requests for copies from the Commission should be made to Daniel Vo, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322–5660. TITLE 5.

COMMISSION ON TEACHER CREDENTIALING CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS, TITLE 5, PERTAINING TO SUBJECT MATTER COMPETENCE The Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Commission) proposes to take the regulatory action described below after considering all comments, ob - jections, and recommendations regarding the pro - posed action. A copy of the proposed regulations is in- cluded with the new proposed text shown in underline. The Commission has not scheduled a public hearing on this proposed action.

However, the Commission will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested person, or their authorized representative, no later than 15 days before the close of the comment period.

SUMMARY OF THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION This proposal would add

section 80096 to Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations. The addition of

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1215 the regulations proposed for

section 80096 will clar - ify the statutory changes made by the enactment of AB 130. These proposed regulations would authorize programs to verify a candidate’s subject matter com - petence by confirming successful completion of spec- ified coursework at a regionally accredited institution of higher education with a grade of C or better.

The regulations would also authorize the use of a bacca - laureate degree from a regionally accredited institu - tion of higher education with an applicable major, as specified, for single subject candidates; a baccalau - reate degree from a regionally accredited institution of higher education with a major of Liberal Studies, Liberal Arts, or Elementary Education for multiple subject candidates; or either of these options for edu - cation specialist candidates.

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person, or his or her authorized rep - resentative, may submit written comments by fax, through the mail, or by email relevant to the pro - posed action. The written comment period closes on December 5, 2022. Comments must be received by that time or may be submitted at the public hear - ing, should one be requested. Interested parties may fax their response to (916) 327–3165; write to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, attn.

Lynette Roby, 1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, California 95811; or submit an email to Lynette.roby@ctc.ca.gov or David DeGuire at David.DeGuire@ctc.ca.gov. Any written comments received by the closing of the public comment period will be reproduced by the Commission’s staff for each member of the Commission as a courtesy to the person submitting the comments and will be included in the written agenda prepared for and presented to the full Commission at the hearing. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Education Code (EC)

section 44225(

q) authorizes the Commission to adopt the proposed regulations and amendments. These regulations are proposed to implement, interpret, and make specific the following: Education Code

section 44259 pertaining to Subject Matter Competence. INFORMATION DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations In July of 2021 AB 130 (Chapter 44, Statutes of 2021) amended Education Code

section 44259(b)(5)(

A) to allow for additional options to meet the subject mat - ter requirement for preliminary teaching credentials to help address the statewide teacher shortage. Prior to passage of AB 130, candidates could only demonstrate subject matter competency through an examination or completion of a Commission–approved subject matter program. Now candidates may meet the subject matter requirement through coursework or completion of a specific major. Objectives and Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations The Commission has adopted the proposed amend - ments to implement, interpret, and make specific Education Code

section 44259 pertaining to Subject Matter Competence. The addition of the regulations proposed for

section 80096 will clarify the statutory changes made by the enactment of AB 130. Educator preparation programs performing coursework reviews will have clear guidance on the types of coursework and majors that are now applicable to meet the subject matter requirement for a preliminary teaching cre - dential. These regulations would authorize programs to verify a candidate’s subject matter competence by confirming successful completion of specified course- work at a regionally accredited institution of higher education with a grade of C or better.

The regulations would also authorize the use of a baccalaureate de - gree from a regionally accredited institution of high - er education with an applicable major, as specified, for single subject candidates; a baccalaureate degree from a regionally accredited institution of higher ed - ucation with a major of Liberal Studies, Liberal Arts, or Elementary Education for multiple subject candi - dates; or either of these options for education special - ist candidates.

The Commission does not anticipate any specific benefits to the health and welfare of California resi - dents, worker safety, and the state’s environment. However, this rulemaking does address opening the pipeline to teacher employment which benefits indi - viduals exploring teaching as an employment option. This in turn will help to address the teacher shortage providing California’s public–school students with a fully qualified teachers by opening up new options for candidates to meet the subject matter requirement.

Additionally, it may allow for more fully credentialed teachers and fewer teachers on short term or other temporary permits. Determination of Inconsistency/Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations The Commission has determined that the proposed regulation amendments are not inconsistent or incom- patible with existing regulations. After conducting a review for any regulations that would relate to or affect this area, the Commission has concluded that these are the only regulations that concern Subject Matter Competence requirements.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1216 DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTIONS/FISCAL IMPACT The Commission has made the following initial determinations. LOCAL MANDATE These proposed regulations will not impose a man - date on local agencies or school districts that must be reimbursed in accordance with

Part 7 (commencing with

section 17500) of the Government Code. Local education agencies may choose to sponsor educator preparation programs utilizing the proposed regu - lations; however, no mandate exists requiring local agencies or school districts to have educator prepa - ration programs and, therefore, no reimbursement in accordance with

Part 7 (commencing with

section 17500) of the government code is required. FISCAL IMPACT Costs to any local agency or school districts requiring reimbursement pursuant to Government Code

section 17500 et seq. These proposed regulations will not impose a cost to local agencies or school districts requiring reimburse - ment in accordance with

Part 7 (commencing with

section 17500) of the Government Code as sponsoring an educator preparation program which is aligned to the proposed regulations and is not required by law. Cost or savings to any state agency. None. California State Universities, Universities of California, and Local Education Agencies that choose to sponsor preliminary educator preparation programs currently review coursework for prospec - tive candidates. The proposed regulations will provide clear guidance regarding the review of coursework for additional options into a credentialing program.

Additionally, the regulations recognize the fact that there is not a consistent naming system for academ - ic degree majors at institutions of higher education throughout the state. The proposed regulations would save the costs involved in time and workload on the part of personnel at institutions of higher education as it would allow for and recognize majors that are essentially equivalent to those identified in statute but that have different names. With these majors, person - nel would not have to use the coursework evaluation option which is more labor intensive.

Other non–discretionary costs or savings imposed upon local agencies. None. Sponsoring an educator preparation program is not a requirement. Only entities that choose to spon- sor a program could potentially see a staffing cost for transcript review. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state. None. Sponsoring an educator preparation program which is aligned to the proposed regulations is not re - quired by law and would not impact federal funding to the state.

HOUSING COSTS No effect on housing costs exists as these regula - tions only pertain to demonstration of subject matter competence for preliminary teaching credentials. SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT DIRECTLY AFFECTING BUSINESSES, INCLUDING THE ABILITY OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESSES TO COMPETE WITH BUSINESSES IN OTHER STATES The Commission has concluded there is no signif - icant adverse impact on business. These regulations make clear additional options for teacher candidates to demonstrate that they have met the subject mat - ter competence requirement required by California Education Code.

STATEMENT OF THE RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.3(b), the Commission has made the following assessments regarding the proposed regulations: Creation or Elimination of Jobs within California The proposed amendments pertain to the demon - stration of subject matter competence by prospective teachers. These amendments are necessitated by stat - utory changes and will not create or eliminate jobs in California.

The Commission anticipates that the pro - posed amendments are intended to increase opportu - nities for candidates to complete their credentialing requirements thereby possibly increasing the supply of fully prepared teachers who will be ready to enter the California teaching workforce. They will not create or eliminate jobs in California. Creation of New Businesses or Elimination of Existing Business within California The proposed amendments pertain to the demon - stration of subject matter competence by prospective teachers.

These amendments are necessitated by stat - utory changes and will not create or eliminate existing businesses in California. Expansion of Businesses Currently Doing Business within the California The proposed amendments pertain to the demon - stration of subject matter competence by prospective teachers. These amendments are necessitated by statu-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1217 tory changes and will not cause the expansion or elim- ination of existing businesses in California. Benefits of the Regulations The Commission does not anticipate any specific benefits to the health and welfare of California resi - dents, worker safety, and the state’s environment. However, this rulemaking does address opening the pipeline to teacher employment which benefits indi - viduals exploring teaching as an employment option.

Additionally, it recognizes specific collegiate course - work that many prospective teachers may have already taken. If acceptable under these regulations, these pro- spective teachers would see a cost savings in that they would not have to take and pay for the required subject matter examinations.

This in turn is likely to help to address the teacher shortage providing California’s public–school students with fully qualified teachers, thereby reducing the number of teachers on short term or other temporary permits COST IMPACTS ON A REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE PERSON OR BUSINESS The Commission is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. BUSINESS REPORT This proposal does not require a report to be made.

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS The proposed regulations will not have a significant adverse economic impact upon small business. The proposed regulations apply only to educational insti - tutions electing to offer or offering Commission–ap - proved and accredited educator programs. Educational institutions are California State Universities, Universities of California, private four–year colleges and universities, or local education agencies, none of which meet the definition for small business as defined in government code 11342.610.

The vast majority of Commission approved program sponsors are nonprofit educational institutions. Very few institutions of high- er education approved by the Commission at this time are for profit businesses. Because offering an educator preparation program is voluntary, any institution must evaluate whether or not they have sufficient resources to offer a high–quality preparation program in accor - dance with the state adopted standards, state statute, and regulations.

ALTERNATIVES STATEMENT The Commission must determine that no reason - able alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its attention would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the pro - posed action, or would be more cost–effective to af - fected private persons and equally effective in imple - menting the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Commission invites interested persons to present statements or arguments with respect to alternatives to the proposed regulations during the written comment period or at the public hearing. CONTACT PERSON/ FURTHER INFORMATION General or substantive inquiries concerning the proposed action may be directed to Lynette Roby by telephone at 916–324–3668, by mail at Commission on Teacher Credentialing: Attn: Regulations, 1900 Capitol Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95811, or by email to Lynette.roby@ctc.ca.gov or David DeGuire at David. DeGuire@ctc.ca.gov.

General question inquiries may also be directed to the addresses mentioned above. Upon request, a copy of the express terms of the pro - posed action and a copy of the Initial Statement of Reasons will be made available. This information is also available on the Commission’s website at http:// www.ctc.ca.gov/notices/rulemaking.html. In addition, all the information on which this proposal is based is available for inspection and copying.

AVAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS AND TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS The entire rulemaking file is available for inspection and copying throughout the rulemaking process at the Commission office at the above address. As of the date this notice is published in the Notice of Register, the rulemaking file consists of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the proposed text of regulations, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and an economic impact assessment/analysis contained in the Initial Statement of Reasons. Copies may be obtained by contacting Lynette Roby at the addresses or telephone number provided above.

MODIFICATION OF PROPOSED ACTION If the Commission proposes to modify the actions hereby proposed, the modifications (other than non– substantial or solely grammatical modifications) will

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1218 be made available for public comment for at least 15 days before they are adopted. AVAILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS The Final Statement of Reasons is submitted to the Office of Administrative Law as part of the final rulemaking package, following the conclusion of the public hearing. Upon its completion, copies of the Final Statement of Reasons may be obtained by con - tacting Lynette Roby at Lynette.roby@ctc.ca.gov.

AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the reg - ulations can be accessed through the Commission’s website at http://www.ctc.ca.gov/notices/rulemaking. html. TITLE 8. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD The Public Employment Relations Board (PERB or Board) proposes to amend the regulations described below after considering all comments, objections, and recommendations regarding the proposed action. PROPOSED REGULATORY ACTION The Board proposes to amend sections 32147 and

Section 32147 provides for expediting matters before the Board.

Section 32305 provides that pro - posed decisions become final if no timely exceptions are filed. PUBLIC HEARING The Board has not scheduled a public hearing on this proposed action. However, the Board will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested person, or his or her au - thorized representative, no later than 15 days before the close of the written comment period. WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person, or his or her authorized representative, may submit written comments rele - vant to the proposed regulatory action to the Board.

Comments may also be submitted by facsimile (FAX) at (916) 327–6377 or by e–mail at james.coffey@ perb.ca.gov. The written comment period closes on December 6, 2022, which is 46 days after the pub - lication of this notice. The Board will only consider comments received at the Board offices by that time. Submit written comments to: James Coffey, Senior Regional Attorney Public Employment Relations Board 1031 18th Street Sacramento, CA 95811 AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Pursuant to Government Code

section 3541.3(g), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA; Government Code

section 3540 et seq.). Pursuant to Government Code sections 3509(

a) and 3541.3(g), the Board is au- thorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regu - lations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Meyers–Milias–Brown Act (MMBA; Government Code

section 3500 et seq.). Government Code

section 3513(

h) authorizes the Board to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regula - tions to carry out the provisions and effectuate the pur- poses and policies of the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act; Government Code

section 3512 et seq.). Government Code

section 3563(

f) authorizes the Board to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and poli - cies of the Higher Education Employer–Employee Relations Act (HEERA; Government Code

section 3560 et seq.). Pursuant to Public Utilities Code sec - tion 99561(f), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the pro - visions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Transit Employer–Employee Relations Act (TEERA; Public Utilities Code

section 99560 et seq.). Pursuant to Government Code sections 3541.3(

g) and 71639.1(b), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (Trial Court Act; Government Code

section 71600 et seq.). Pursuant to Government Code sections 3541.3(

g) and 71825(b), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the pro - visions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act (Court Interpreter Act; Government Code

section 71800 et seq.). Government Code sec - tion 3524.52(a), authorizes the Board to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the pro - visions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Judicial Council Employer–Employee Relations Act (JCEERA; Government Code

section 3524.50 et seq.).

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1219 Pursuant to Government Code sections 3541.3(

g) and 3555.5(c), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provi - sions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Public Employee Communication

Chapter (PECC; Government Code

section 3555 et seq.). Pursuant to Government Code sections 3541.3(

g) and 3551(a), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effec - tuate the purposes and policies of the Prohibition on Public Employers Deterring or Discouraging Union Membership

chapter (PEDD; Government Code sec - tion 3500 et seq.). Pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code

section 10421(e), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and pol- icies of the Building a Better Early Care and Education System Act (Childcare Provider Act; Welfare and Institutions Code

section 10420 et seq.). Pursuant to Public Utilities Code

section 40122.1(a), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and reg - ulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Orange County Transit District Act (OCTDA; Public Utilities Code

section 40122.1 et seq.). Pursuant to Public Utilities Code

section 28849(b), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the provisions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Act (BART Act; Public Utilities Code

section 28848 et seq.). Pursuant to Public Utilities Code

section 102399(b), the Board is authorized to adopt, amend and repeal rules and regulations to carry out the pro - visions and effectuate the purposes and policies of the Sacramento Regional Transit District Act (SacRT Act; Public Utilities Code

section 102398 et seq.). General reference for

section 32147 of the Board’s regulations: sections 3509, 3513(h), 3524.52(a), 3541.3(n), 3551(a), 3555.5(c), 3563(m), 71639.1 and 71825, Government Code; sections 28849(b), 40122.1(a), 99561(m), and 102399(b), Public Utilities Code; and

section 10421(e), Welfare and Institutions Code. General reference for

section 32305 of the Board’s regulations: 3509, 3509.3, 3513(h), 3524.52(a), 3524.76, 3520.8, 3541.3(k), 3541.3(n), 3541.35, 3551(a), 3555.5(c), 3563(j), 3563(m), 3563.5, 71639.1, 71639.15, 71825 and 71825.05, Government Code; sections 28849(a), 40122.1(a), 99561( j), 99561(m), 99561.4, and 102399(b), Public Utilities Code; and

section 10428.5(a), Welfare and Institutions Code. POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW PERB is a quasi–judicial agency which oversees public sector collective bargaining in California. PERB presently administers fourteen collective bargain - ing statutes, ensures their consistent implementation and application, and adjudicates disputes between the parties subject to them.

The statutes administered by PERB are: the Meyers–Milias–Brown Act (MMBA) of 1968, which established collective bargaining for California’s city, county, and local special district em- ployers and employees; the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) of 1976, establishing collective bargaining in California’s public schools (K–12) and community colleges; the State Employer–Employee Relations Act of 1978, known as the Ralph C.

Dills Act (Dills Act), establishing collective bargaining for state government employees; the Higher Education Employer–Employee Relations Act (HEERA) of 1979, extending the same coverage to the California State University System, the University of California System and Hastings College of Law; the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Transit Employer–Employee Relations Act (TEERA) of 2003, which covers supervisory employees of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority; the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (Trial Court Act) of 2000 and the Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act (Court Interpreter Act) of 2002, which together provide for collective bargaining rights for most trial court employees; the Public Employee Communication

Chapter (PECC) of 2017, which conferred PERB juris- diction over violations of the PECC; the Prohibition on Public Employers Deterring or Discouraging Union Membership (PEDD) of 2018, which conferred PERB jurisdiction over violations of the PEDD; the Building a Better Early Care and Education System Act of 2019, known as the Childcare Provider Act (CCPA), establishes collective bargaining for family childcare providers who participate in a state–funded early care and education program.

In 2020, the Legislature gave PERB jurisdiction over the Bay Area Rapid Transit District Act (BART Act), where the Board has juris - diction over disputes relating to employer–employee relations at BART, and jurisdiction over the Orange County Transit District Act (OCTDA) in the Public Utilities Code giving PERB jurisdiction over unfair practice charges at the Orange County Transportation Authority.

In 2021, the Legislature gave PERB juris - diction over disputes relating to employer–employee relations of the Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT) for those exclusive representatives that have elected to move one or more of its bargaining units to the jurisdiction of PERB for unfair practice charges. The proposed amendments update the Board’s rules that govern expediting matters at each division of PERB’s proceedings, as well as procedures concern - ing the finality of Board agent decisions in certain representation matters.

These amendments are intend- ed to fill gaps, resolve ambiguities, and simplify the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1220 Board’s procedures and processes for case adjudica - tion to make the expediting process more understand - able to attorneys and non–attorneys alike. Over time, the Legislature has continued to place additional public employers under PERB’s jurisdic - tion. As a consequence, the Legislature has added more than two million public employees and their associated caseloads to the Board’s jurisdiction. In response, PERB has continued to evaluate changes to case processing intended to be more efficient and streamlined.

On April 13, 2017, the Board approved a Case Processing Efficiency Initiative to generate ideas for the improvement and streamlining of case processing. The Board solicited feedback from staff and constituents on the updates needed to make our proceedings efficient and user–friendly, keeping in mind that many constituents are non–attorneys or pro per litigants unfamiliar with legal procedures in an administrative law setting.

PERB’s case–adjudica - tion processes differ from other judicial forums in that non–attorney parties may not only self–represent (pro per litigants) but may be represented by non–attorney representatives. It is therefore not uncommon for non– attorneys to appear on behalf of individuals or organi- zations and navigate their way through PERB’s case adjudication processes and the corresponding regula - tions.

As revealed through the stakeholder meetings that were part of the Case Processing Efficiency Ini - tiative, PERB’s case processing regulations are often unnecessarily complicated, incomplete, obsolete, or ambiguous. These problems often cause litigants to commit errors or missteps, which delay case adjudi - cation. Aside from the delays, these errors create ad - ditional work for PERB’s attorneys and judges. For this reason, the Board determined it was necessary to amend its regulations, including its expedite reg - ulations, to make them user–friendly, detailed, and understandable.

On June 14, 2018, the Board approved the Case Processing Efficiency Initiative Report, which includ- ed amending its regulations to provide for an expedit - ed process for charges based on the level of complex - ity of the charge. INFORMATIVE DIGEST

Section 32147 concerns expediting matters before the Board. The proposed changes include additional rules clarifying in which division of the Board a mo - tion to expedite may be filed, which differs based on whether the motion is for a single division of PERB or all divisions. The amended regulation also includes new filing requirements concerning how to label a motion to expedite, whether the motion may be includ- ed with other documents, the deadline for filing a re - sponse to the motion, and whether a reply brief may be filed.

Additionally, the amended regulation identifies matters filed under specified PERB regulations that are subject to mandatory expediting by the Board. The amended regulation also describes the criteria that the Board considers when ruling on a motion to expedite a matter that is not subject to mandatory expediting, and whether the denial of the motion is with prejudice.

The amended regulation further sets forth procedures for expediting, such as: how expedited matters are pri- oritized over other matters; the labeling of documents filed in an expedited case; and whether expedited mat- ters may be placed in abeyance or continued.

Section 32305 concerns the finality of Board agent decisions. The proposed changes include adding cases arising under

section 61215 to the listing of matters arising under specified PERB regulations, where a Board agent’s decision is final unless the Board itself issues a decision not later than 180 days from the date exceptions were filed with the Board, and clarify - ing that the Board shall not grant abeyances in these matters. The amended regulation further provides an additional matter that requires an expedited Board process. CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING STATE REGULATIONS The Board has determined that the proposed regula- tory amendments are not inconsistent or incompatible with existing regulations.

After conducting a review of all regulations that would relate to or affect this area of California law, the Board has determined that due to PERB’s exclusive jurisdiction to implement and enforce the labor relations acts within its jurisdiction, the amended regulations are the only regulations con - cerning the implementation and enforcement of these laws. Therefore, the Board has concluded that these regulations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATION As part of PERB’s Case Processing Efficiency Initiative, the Board seeks to make the agency’s pro - cedures for case processing easier to understand and therefore more accessible to non–attorney parties and representatives. As part of this initiative, PERB deter- mined that it needed to amend its expedite regulations to eliminate ambiguities and add missing information. By making these changes, the proposed amendments will reduce case processing errors, which, in turn, will improve case processing times.

In addition, the pro - posed amendments will make case adjudication more consistent. As one example, PERB’s rules provide that the Board itself, the Chief Administrative Law Judge

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1221 or the General Counsel may expedite any matter pend- ing before the Board. The current rules, however, are silent regarding the filing of a motion to expedite pro- ceedings within a single division of PERB or the filing of a motion to expedite at all divisions. The current rules also do not specify the deadline for a party to file a response to the motion to expedite and whether a reply brief may be filed after the opposing party files its response.

The proposed amendments add language expressly identifying with whom to file a motion to expedite proceedings within a single division or at all divisions of the Board, while also providing a deadline for a party’s response to the motion and clarifying that no reply briefs shall be filed unless ordered. The proposed amendments also specify which cas - es must be expedited from initial filing to conclusion, without any motion or order. For cases that are not subject to mandatory expediting, the proposed amend- ments set forth applicable criteria used in determin - ing whether a case should be expedited.

PERB’s cur - rent rule governing expediting cases does not specify which cases require mandatory expediting, nor does it provide significant detail regarding the criteria for granting a motion to expedite. As a result, the current regulations lack sufficient details to best guide con - stituents on how to file, challenge, or provide briefing for a motion to expedite proceedings. The proposed amendments address the problem by defining which cases shall be expedited, and by specifying the criteria that will be considered to determine whether to expe - dite cases that are not subject to mandatory expediting.

Essentially, the proposed amendments continue the Board’s efforts to update its case processing regula - tions to provide constituents with easy to understand yet comprehensive rules on case processing.

NO EXISTING AND COMPARABLE FEDERAL REGULATION OR STATUTE During the process of developing these proposed regulatory amendments, the Board has conducted a search for any similar federal regulations and statutes on this topic and has determined that there are no ex - isting, comparable federal regulations or statutes, as these proposed regulatory changes apply solely to public employers and employee organizations under the jurisdiction of the California public sector labor relations statutes set forth above.

Therefore, the Board has concluded that these regulations are neither incon- sistent nor incompatible with existing federal regula - tions or statutes. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Board has made the following initial determinations: Mandate on local agencies and school districts: The proposed action would not impose any new mandate. Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code

section 17500 et seq.: The proposed action would not impose any new costs which must be reimbursed. Other non–discretionary cost or savings imposed upon local agencies: The proposed action would not result in any new costs which must be reimbursed, or savings imposed upon local agencies. Cost or savings to state agency: The proposed action would not result in any new costs or savings. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: The proposed action would not result in any new costs or savings.

Cost impact on private persons or directly affected businesses: The agency is not aware of any cost im - pacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. Significant adverse economic impact on business including the ability of California businesses to com - pete with businesses in other states: The proposed ac - tion will have no impact. Significant effect on housing costs: There will be no effect on housing costs. Business Reporting Requirement: The proposed ac- tion will not require a report to be made.

The Board has determined that the amended regula- tions will not affect small business because the amend- ed regulations will only affect public employers, pub - lic employees, and public employee organizations. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Board concludes that the amendment of the reg- ulations will neither create nor eliminate jobs in the State of California, nor result in the elimination of ex- isting businesses, or create or expand businesses in the State of California.

BENEFIT ANAL YSIS By updating the expedite regulations, PERB will improve public sector labor relations by providing nec- essary information and clarity to parties about PERB’s standards and processes. This will improve efficien - cies in PERB’s resolution of labor disputes, which will promote full communication between public employers and their employees in resolving disputes

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1222 over wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The proposed regulatory action will not adversely affect the health and welfare of California residents, worker safety, or the State’s environment. The proposed regulatory action will further the poli - cies underlying prompt resolution of labor disputes by providing a process to expediently resolve alleged vi - olations of California’s labor relations laws.

California residents’ general welfare will be benefitted by stable collective bargaining and dispute resolution, which translates to continuous delivery of the essential ser - vices that California’s public agencies and employees provide to California’s communities. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), a rulemaking agency must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the agency or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the agency would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the ac- tion is proposed, would be as effective and less bur - densome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost–effective to affected pri- vate persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Board invites interested persons to present statements or arguments with respect to alternatives to the amended regulations at the scheduled hearing or during the written comment period.

CONTACT PERSONS Any questions or suggestions regarding the pro - posed action should be directed to: James Coffey, Senior Regional Attorney Public Employment Relations Board 1031 18th Street Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 584–5676 E–mail: james.coffey@perb.ca.gov The backup person for these inquiries is: Ronald Pearson, Supervising Regional Attorney Public Employment Relations Board 1031 18th Street Sacramento, CA 95811 (916) 591–3166 E–mail: ronald.pearson@perb.ca.gov Please direct requests for copies of the proposed text (the “express terms”) of the regulations, the initial statement of reasons, the modified text of the regu - lations, if any, or other information upon which the rulemaking is based, to James Coffey at the above address.

PRELIMINARY ACTIVITIES On February 6, 2020, PERB held a stakeholder meet- ing to discuss the expedited decision process as part of the Case Processing Efficiency Initiative. PERB held a public meeting on October 14, 2021, wherein the pub- lic was given the opportunity to provide comments re- garding implementation of these regulations. During the public meeting, constituents provided comments as well as recommendations to the Board. In response, the Board agreed to amend its expedite regulations for approval at the next public meeting.

On December 9, 2021, the Board itself approved the publication of the proposed regulatory text and the commencement of the formal rulemaking process. A VAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Board will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying throughout the rulemaking process at its office at the above address. As of the date this notice is published in the California Regulatory Notice Register, the rulemaking file con - sists of this notice, the express terms of the amended regulations and the initial statement of reasons.

Copies of these documents may be obtained by contacting James Coffey at the above address, and are also avail- able on the Board’s website at www.perb.ca.gov. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After holding a hearing, if one is requested, and con- sidering all timely and relevant comments, the Board may amend the regulations substantially as described in this notice.

If the Board makes modifications that are sufficiently related to the originally proposed text, the modified text with changes clearly indicated shall be made available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date on which the Board adopts the regu - lation as revised. Requests for copies of any modified regulation and/or the final statement of reasons should be sent to the attention of James Coffey at the above address. The Board will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days after the date on which they are made available.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1223 A VAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, copies of the final statement of reasons may be obtained by contacting James Coffey at the above address. A VAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of this notice of proposed action, the initial statement of reasons, and the text of the amended reg- ulations can be accessed through PERB’s website lo - cated at www.perb.ca.gov throughout the rulemaking process. Written comments received during the writ - ten comment period will also be posted on PERB’s website.

The final statement of reasons or if applica - ble, notice of a decision not to proceed, will be posted on PERB’s website following the Board’s action. TITLE 10. CALIFORNIA FILM COMMISSION California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program Notice is hereby given that the California Film Commission (CFC) proposes to adopt the regulations described below after considering all comments, ob - jections and recommendations regarding the proposed action. Proposed Regulatory Action The CFC proposes to adopt new sections 5530 through 5541 in

Article 4 of

Chapter 7.75 of Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations in order to im - plement, interpret and make specific Revenue and Taxation Code sections 17053.98, 17053.99, and 23698 relating to a film and television tax credit program. No public hearing is scheduled; however, any inter- ested person or their duly authorized representative may request a public hearing no later than fifteen (15) days prior to the close of the public comment period.

Written Comment Period Any interested person, or their authorized repre - sentative, may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to the Agency. Written comments will be accepted by the Agency until 5:00 p.m. on December 6, 2022. Submit comments to: Name: Hedvig Marx Address: California Film Commission, 7080 Hollywood Boulevard, Hollywood, CA 90028 Email: SoundstageIncentive@film.ca.gov Authority and Reference The proposed regulation will be adopted under the authority of Government Code

section 11152, and Rev- enue and Taxation Code sections 17053.98(k)(10) and 23698(k)(10). The proposed regulation implements, interprets, and makes specific Revenue and Taxation Code sections 17053.98, 17053.99 and 23698. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW The California Film Commission (CFC) proposes to adopt new sections 5530, 5531, 5532, 5533, 5534, 5535, 5536, 5537, 5538, 5539, 5540, and 5541, constituting

Article 4 of

Chapter 7.75 of Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations. The regulations establish a pro - cedure for allocating tax credits to qualified taxpayers in the motion picture industry.

Summary of Related Existing Laws and Regulations: Existing law provides for a similar program, the California Film and Television Program 3.0 (Program 3.0), allocating tax credits to qualified taxpayers in the motion picture industry until June 30, 2025.

The pro - visions in the existing program provide for applicants to file a written application for the allocation of the tax credit and for the CFC to establish criteria for allo - cating tax credits, determine and designate applicants who meet the requirements to apply for the tax credit, and issue the credit certificate to the qualified taxpayer upon completion of an eligible and approved qualified motion picture. The existing program does not contain any provisions to incentivize the construction or reno- vation of soundstages in the state.

In 2021, the Legislature and Administration ap - proved Senate Bill (SB) 144 (Ch. 114, Stat. 2021), as modified by Assembly Bill (AB) 176 (Ch. 256, Stat. 2021), which among other things, created a new tax credit incentive program associated with the con - struction of soundstages in California. Specifically, the Legislature added a new subdivision (

k) to sec - tions 17053.98 and 23698 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, containing direction to the CFC to adopt emer - gency regulations to implement the new California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program, applicable to taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2022, and before January 1, 2032. The California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program, as required by SB 144 and as implemented via these proposed regulations, establishes a tax credit for qualified motion pictures produced in a certified studio construction project fa - cility.

To receive the tax credit, a qualified taxpayer is required to film their qualified motion picture on a soundstage or soundstages newly constructed or reno- vated as part of a studio construction project certified by the CFC. The qualified taxpayer may also be eligi-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1224 ble for additional credit percentage points if they meet or make a good–faith effort to meet the diversity goals stated in their application for above– and below–the– line workers. Broad Objectives and Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulations will provide a program to the motion picture industry allocating tax credits for qualified motion pictures.

These tax credit incen - tives will encourage production companies regardless of distribution outlet to film in California instead of other states, provinces, and countries offering incen - tives. The California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program is structured to encourage job creation and provides separate funding categories to ensure tax credits for multiple types of productions.

The California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program will help create jobs and benefit the economy by building on the success of California’s previous and existing film and television tax credit programs which have generated billions in production spending for the state. Construction of soundstages in California has not kept pace with growth in film production, and this Program will incentivize the building and renovation of soundstages in California.

The Program also seeks to increase diversity within the film and television production workforce via required submission of a di- versity workplan and report for the production, which includes a statement of diversity goals and strategies. Additionally, the Program provides disadvantaged youth with training opportunities to prepare them for a career in the motion picture industry. The program encourages infrastructure growth by allocating tax credits to eligible qualified motion pic - ture projects that film on newly constructed or renovat- ed soundstages certified by the CFC.

Aside from im - pacting the productions that participate in the Program directly, production infrastructure growth will enable California to increase the number of productions and therefore, jobs and dollars spent in state. In addition, the Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program specif - ically encourages skilled and trained construction labor job creation, by incentivizing construction and renovation of soundstages within the state, subject to specific workforce eligibility requirements.

The proposed regulations clarify and instate the spe- cific processes necessary to implement the California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program in accor - dance with statute, enabling the state to operate the Program and realize its benefits. Consistency And Compatibility with Existing State Regulations: During the process of developing these regulations, the CFC has conducted a search of any similar regula- tions on this topic and has concluded that these regu - lations are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations.

The CFC has endeavored to ensure that these regulatory amendments comply with the non–duplication standard found in Title 1, California Code of Regulations. In some instances, the amended regulations duplicate California statute in part where the statute is cited as “authority” or “reference” for the proposed regulation and the dupli- cation or overlap is necessary to satisfy the “clarity” standard of Government Code

section 11349.1(a)(3).

ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC IMPACT The California Film Commission has made the fol - lowing determinations: ● Mandate on local agencies and school districts: None. ● Cost or savings to any state agency: None. ● Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Govern - ment Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. ● Other nondiscretionary cost or savings imposed on local agencies: None. ● Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None. ● Significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with busi - nesses in other states: None. ● Potential cost impact on representative person or businesses: The agency is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action.

EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS The California Film Commission has determined that the proposed regulations will not directly affect small businesses. The businesses that may elect to par- ticipate in the Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program and in such cases will be complying with these regu - lations are film production companies or soundstage developers and are as such not small businesses, as defined in

section 11342.610 of the Government Code. Small businesses in California may, however, provide goods and services to the businesses electing to com - ply with these regulations and thus benefit from the additional filming in California. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT In accordance with Sections 17053.98 and 23698, the CFC is not required to provide an economic im - pact analysis. However, it is worth noting that the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1225 Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program is optional and only applies to entities who elect to participate, and further, that the parameters and functions of a tax credit program such as this ensures that any partici - pating entities will contribute to a positive economic impact on the state, its existing businesses, and op - portunities for prospective businesses, as credits are allocated based on percentages of actual in–state spending for labor, goods, and services.

The CFC has found that the adoption of these regulations will: (1) facilitate the creation of jobs within California; (2) fa- cilitate the creation of businesses within California; and (3) facilitate the expansion of businesses currently doing business within California. As stated above, an- ticipated benefits of these regulations are that the tax credit incentive in question will encourage production companies regardless of distribution outlet to film in California instead of other states, provinces and coun- tries offering incentives.

Allocation of credits in the California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program is based on qualified ex - penditures, including qualified wages, thereby incen - tivizing instate job creation and spending on goods and services. Multiple types of productions are eligi - ble to apply for tax credits. The Program is enabling California to increase the number of productions and therefore, jobs and dollars spent in state.

In addition, the Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program specifi - cally benefits skilled and trained construction labor by incentivizing construction and renovation of sound - stages within the state, subject to workforce require - ments; this contributes to safe working conditions as well as job creation.

The California Soundstage Filming Tax Credit Program further benefits the wellbeing of Californians by promoting intentionally diverse motion picture pro- duction, providing motion picture production training opportunities for disadvantaged youth, and preventing motion picture production migration to other states and countries with less civil rights and protections for the workers on those productions.

REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The California Film Commission must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Commission or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Board would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the ac- tion is proposed or would be as effective as and less burdensome to affected private persons than the pro - posed action, or would be more cost effective to affect- ed private persons and equally effective in implement- ing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

CONTACT PERSON Inquiries concerning the proposed action may be directed to: Name: Nancy Rae Stone Email: Nancy.Stone@film.ca.gov Phone No.: (323) 860–2960 The backup contact person for these inquiries is: Name: Hedvig Marx Email: Hedvig.Marx@film.ca.gov Phone No.: (323) 817–4115 or (310) 290–6501 Questions on the substance of the proposed regula - tions may be directed to: Name: Hedvig Marx Email: Soundstagelncentive@film.ca.gov Phone No.: (323) 817–4115 or (310) 290–6501 AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After the close of the forty–five (45) day public comment period, the CFC may adopt the proposed regulation.

As a result of public comments, either oral or written, that are received by the CFC regarding this proposal, the CFC may determine that changes to the proposed regulation are appropriate. If the CFC makes modifications that are sufficiently related to the orig - inally proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the CFC adopts the regulations as revised.

The CFC will provide notifi - cation of any such modifications to all persons whose comments were received during the public comment period, all persons whose comments (written or oral) were received at the public hearing (if one is held) and all persons who requested notice of such modi - fications. Otherwise, please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of Hedvig Marx at the above email address. The CFC will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days after the date on which they are made available.

A VAILABILITY OF INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS, RULEMAKING FILE AND EXPRESS TERMS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS The CFC has established a rulemaking file for this regulatory action, which contains those items re - quired by law. The file is available for inspection at the California Film Commission, 7080 Hollywood Boulevard, Suite 900, Hollywood, California during normal business working hours (9 am–5 pm). Please

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1226 contact Hedvig Marx at the above email address to arrange a date and time to inspect the files. As of the date this Notice is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice, the Initial Statement of Reasons and the proposed text of the regulations. Copies of these items are available, upon request, from the Contact Person designated in this Notice. A VAILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS The CFC is required to prepare a Final Statement of Reasons.

Once the CFC has prepared a Final Statement of Reasons, a copy will be made available to anyone who requests a copy. Requests for copies should be ad- dressed to the Contact Person identified in this Notice. OFFICE INTERNET WEBSITE The Office maintains an Internet website for the electronic publication and distribution of written ma - terial. Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons and the text of the regu - lations can be accessed through our website at: www. film.ca.gov TITLE 11. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DIVISION 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL

CHAPTER 4. SUPERVISION OF TRUSTEES AND FUNDRAISERS FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES ACT The Department of Justice (Department) proposes to adopt

section 328.1 of title 11, division 1,

chapter 4 of the California Code of Regulations concerning giving notice to the Attorney General of certain trans- actions involving all or substantially all of the assets of a charitable corporation or trust, or assets in charitable trust held by a mutual benefit corporation. PUBLIC HEARING The Department has not scheduled a public hear - ing on this proposed regulatory action. However, the Department will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested per - son, or their authorized representative, no later than 15 days before the close of the written comment period.

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person or their authorized represen - tative may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action. The written comment pe - riod closes on December 6, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. Only written comments received by that time will be con - sidered. Please submit written comments to: Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General Charitable Trusts

Section Attn: Sandra Barrientos, Deputy Attorney General 300 S. Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 (213) 269–6551 sandra.barrientos@doj.ca.gov NOTE: Written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be released to the public upon request. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Authority: Sections 5913, 7913 and 9633, Corporations Code;

Section 16106, Probate Code. Reference: Sections 5913, 7238, 7913 and 9633, Corporations Code;

Section 16106, Probate Code, Sections 12586 and 12587, Government Code. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations: The Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act (Act), Government Code

section 12580 et seq., provides the Attorney General with enforcement and supervisory powers over all charitable corporations, unincorporated associations, trustees and other legal entities holding property for charitable purposes, commercial fundraisers for char - itable purposes, fundraising counsel for charitable purposes, and commercial coventurers. The Act estab- lishes the Registry of Charitable Trusts, which is ad - ministered by the Department of Justice. (Gov.

Code, § 12587.1.) Organizations and persons subject to the Act are required to register and file periodic reports with the Attorney General, among other requirements. (Gov. Code, §§ 12585, subdivision (a), 12586, 12599, 12599.1, 12599.2.). The Attorney General is authorized to make rules and regulations regarding the Act, in - cluding the time for filing reports, the content of such reports, and the manner of executing and filing them. (Gov. Code, §§ 12586, subdivision (b), 12587.) Existing law regulates trust administration and re - quires a trustee to administer the trust according to

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1227 the trust instrument. (Prob. Code, § 16000.) Existing law defines a charitable trust and prescribes the du - ties of the trustee of a charitable trust. (Id., § 16100 et seq.; Gov. Code, § 12580, et seq.) In recent years, there have been an increasing number of cases involv- ing self–dealing by charitable trustees that are making their way through California courts.

For example, the Attorney General: (1) brought an action to remove the trustees of the Jean Schroeder Education Trust and to recover real property that was improperly sold to the trustee (People of the State of California v. Bishop (Super. Ct. Napa.

County, 2014) No. 26–65141); (2) ne- gotiated a settlement requiring Lithuanian Assistance Foundation to pay $7 million to resolve claims that charitable assets were improperly transferred to its of- ficers, directors and related entities (https://oag.ca.gov/ news/press–releases/attorney–general–becerra–an - nounces–7–million–settlement–against–lithuanian ); and (3) brought an action against a trustee for failure to transfer charitable assets to the Livewire Lindskog Foundation, breaches of fiduciary duty, and misuse of charitable assets, including improper loans of trust as- sets to the trustee’s friends (People ex rel.

Becerra v. Shine (2020) 46 Cal.App.5th 288, 292). Given the increasing frequency of cases involving the misappropriation of trust assets, the Legislature revised the law to provide greater oversight of trustees who seek to dispose of such assets. Effective July 1, 2022, a trustee holding assets subject to a charitable trust is required to give written notice to the Attorney General at least 20 days before the trustee sells, leases, conveys, exchanges, transfers, or otherwise disposes of all or substantially all of the charitable assets. (Prob.

Code, § 16106, subdivision (a).) The Attorney General is required to establish rules and regulations to admin- ister these provisions. (Id., subdivision (b).) By requiring charitable trusts to make such a filing with the Attorney General, Assembly Bill No. 900 imposes the same requirements on charitable trusts that presently exist for charitable corporations. (Corp.

Code, §§ 5913, 9633.) Charitable corporations may re- quest a waiver of the notice requirements. (Ibid.) Similarly, a mutual benefit corporation holding as - sets in charitable trust must give written notice to the Attorney General 20 days before it sells, leases, con - veys, exchanges, transfers or otherwise disposes of any or all of the assets held in trust unless the Attor - ney General has given the corporation a written waiv- er of this

section as to the proposed transaction. (Corp. Code, § 7913.) Effect of the Proposed Rulemaking: For purposes of giving notice to the Attorney General of certain transactions involving all or sub - stantially all of the assets of a charitable corporation or trust, the proposed rulemaking defines “substantially all” assets to mean an asset or assets equal to or ex - ceeding 75 percent of the value of all assets held at the time of the notice or at any time during the six–month period before submitting the notice.

The proposed rulemaking also sets a standard for the Attorney General’s review of requests for waiv - er of the notice requirements. The Attorney General may waive notice for a particular transaction if the Attorney General determines that the transaction pos - es no risk to the public interest and the financial cost to the charitable corporation, trust, or mutual benefit cor- poration of providing notice to the Attorney General outweighs the potential benefit to the public interest. Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations: Existing law establishes two means of regulating charitable trusts.

The Probate Code imposes fiducia - ry duties upon trustees to ensure that assets are prop - erly managed. Additionally, the Attorney General is vested with significant oversight of charitable assets, including the authority to bring not only an action against a person who misuses charitable assets, but also an action seeking to stop the diversion of char - itable assets. In tandem, these statutory schemes are intended to deter and remedy fraud, misuse and im - proper self–dealing.

However, without forewarning of major liquidations of charitable assets, the Attorney General is limited to prosecuting malfeasance after it has occurred. To enable the Attorney General to proactively carry out these responsibilities, AB 900 requires a trustee holding assets subject to a charitable trust to provide written notice to the Attorney General 20 days before disposing of all or substantially all of the charitable assets.

By requiring charitable trusts to make such a filing with the Attorney General, AB 900 imposes the same requirements on charitable trusts that present - ly exist for charitable corporations. (Corp. Code, §§ 5913, 9633.) The proposed rulemaking defines “substantially all” assets so that a charitable corporation or trustee has clear guidance on when the notice requirement is trig- gered. The information provided in the notice enables proactive enforcement action, including legal action to halt misuse or diversion of charitable assets.

The proposed rulemaking also creates a standard for the Attorney General to evaluate requests to waive the notice requirements. The Attorney General may waive notice for a particular transaction if the Attor - ney General determines that the transaction poses no risk to the public interest and the financial cost to the charitable corporation, trust, or mutual benefit cor - poration of providing notice to the Attorney General outweighs the potential benefit to the public interest. Comparable Federal Regulations: There are no existing federal regulations or statutes comparable to these proposed regulations.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1228 Determination of Inconsistency/Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations: The Department has determined that these pro - posed regulations are not inconsistent or incompati - ble with existing State regulations.

After conducting a review for any regulations that would relate to or af- fect this area, the Department has concluded that this regulation will complement the existing regulations regarding notice to the Attorney General in Sections 999.1 through 999.4 of Title 11 and these are the only regulations that concern giving notice to the Attorney General of certain transactions involving all or sub - stantially all of the assets of a charitable corporation or trust, or assets in charitable trust held by a mutual benefit corporation. Forms Incorporated by Reference: None. Other Statutory Requirements: None.

On February 28, 2022, the Department issued an invitation for comments as part of its preliminary rulemaking activities under Government Code

section 11346, subdivision (b). DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Department’s Initial Determinations: Mandate on local agencies or school districts: None. Cost or savings to any state agency: None. Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. Other non–discretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies: None. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None.

Cost impacts on representative person or business: The Department is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would necessarily incur in reasonable compliance with the proposed action. The obligation to give notice is a re - sult of the statutes. The proposed action defines “sub - stantially all” assets so that a charitable corporation or trustee knows when the statutory notice requirement is triggered. Significant effect on housing costs: None.

Significant, statewide adverse economic impact di - rectly affecting businesses, including ability to com - pete: The Department has made an initial determina - tion that that the proposed action will not have a sig - nificant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

Results of the Economic Impact Assessment (EIA): The Department concludes that it is (1) unlikely that the proposal will create or eliminate jobs within the state, (2) unlikely that the proposal will create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within the state, (3) unlikely that the proposal will result in the expansion of businesses currently doing business within the state. The Department also concludes that:

(1) The proposal would benefit the health and welfare of California residents. By providing a definition of “substantially all” assets, charitable corpora - tions and trustees have clear guidance on when the notice requirement is triggered. The 75 per - cent rule enhances Attorney General oversight of trusts and charitable corporations.

(2) The proposal would not benefit worker safety be- cause it does not regulate worker safety standards.

(3) The proposal would not benefit the state’s envi - ronment because it does not change any applica - ble environmental standards. Business report requirement: Probate Code

section 16106 and Corporations Code sections 5913 and 9633 require trustees and charitable corporations to give notice to the Attorney General before they sell, lease, convey, exchange, transfer, or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of their assets. The proposed regu - latory action defines “substantially all” assets so that trustees and charitable corporations understand when the notice requirement is triggered. The Department finds it is necessary for the health, safety or welfare of the people of this state that pro - posed

section 328.1, which requires a report, applies to businesses. Small business determination: The Department has determined that this proposed action does not affect small businesses because charitable entities are ex - empt from the definition of “small business.” (Gov. Code, § 11342.610, subdivision (b)(6).) CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), the Department must de- termine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Department or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Department would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in im- plementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Department has determined that the proposed regulations are the most effective way to define “sub - stantially all” assets. The 75 percent rule provides clear guidance on when the notice requirement is triggered and ensures that the Attorney General has appropriate oversight of charitable corporations and trusts. The

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1229 cost of compliance is minimal: in borderline cases, a trustee can err on the side of caution by simply provid- ing written notice. The Attorney General may waive notice for a par - ticular transaction if the Attorney General determines that the transaction poses no risk to the public inter - est and the financial cost to the charitable corporation, trust, or mutual benefit corporation of providing no - tice to the Attorney General outweighs the potential benefit to the public interest.

CONTACT PERSONS Inquiries concerning the proposed administrative action may be directed to: Department of Justice Office of the Attorney General Charitable Trusts

Section Attn: Sandra Barrientos, Deputy Attorney General 300 S. Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 (213) 269–6551 sandra.barrientos@doj.ca.gov Questions regarding procedure, comments, or the substance of the proposed action should be addressed to the above contact person. In the event the contact person is unavailable, inquiries regarding the pro - posed action may be directed to the following backup contact person: Marlon Martinez Department of Justice 300 S.

Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 (213) 269–6437 regulations@doj.ca.gov A VAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Department will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying through - out the rulemaking process upon request to the contact person above.

As of the date this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice, the Text of Proposed Regulations (the “ex - press terms” of the regulations), the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the pro - posed rulemaking is based. The text of this Notice, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemak - ing is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag.ca.gov/charities/laws.

Please refer to the contact information listed above to obtain copies of these documents. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After the Department analyzes all timely and rel - evant comments received during the 45–day public comment period, the Department will either adopt these regulations substantially as described in this notice or make modifications based on the comments.

If the Department makes modifications which are sufficiently related to the originally–proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the Department adopts the regulations as re - vised. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of the name and address indicated above. The Department will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days af - ter the date on which they are made available.

A VAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, a copy of the Final Statement of Reasons will be available on the Department’s web- site at https://oag.ca.gov/charities/laws. Please refer to the contact information included above to obtain a written copy of the Final Statement of Reasons. A VAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemaking is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag.ca.gov/charities/laws. TITLE 11.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DIVISION 1. ATTORNEY GENERAL

CHAPTER 11. POLICE BODY ARMOR The Department of Justice (Department) proposes to clean up outdated regulations by repealing sections 941, 942, 943, 944, 945, 946, 947, 948, 949, 950, 951, 952, 953, 954, 955, 956, and 957 of title 11, division 1,

chapter 11 of the California Code of Regulations con- cerning Police Body Armor.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1230 PUBLIC HEARING The Department has not scheduled a public hear - ing on this proposed regulatory action. However, the Department will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested per - son, or their authorized representative, no later than 15 days before the close of the written comment period. WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person or their authorized represen - tative may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action.

The written comment pe - riod closes on December 6, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. Only written comments received by that time will be con - sidered. Please submit written comments to: Department of Justice Government Law

Section Marlon Martinez 300 South Spring Street, 9th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90013 (213) 269–6437 Regulations@doj.ca.gov NOTE: Written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be released to the public upon request. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Authority: Penal Code

Section 31355 Reference: Penal Code Sections 31310, 31315, 31320, 31325, 31330, 31355 INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations: In the 1970’s, the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (NILECJ), the re - search, development, and evaluation agency of the United States Department of Justice, published the first performance standard for ballistic–resistant po - lice body armor, establishing the first minimum per - formance requirements and test methods for the bal - listic resistance of body armor designed to protect the torso. The standards were published in the 1978 publi- cation, The Ballistic Resistance of Police Body Armor, NILECJ Standard–0101.01.

Around the same time, California undertook a sim - ilar effort and the Department of Justice (Department) adopted regulations, which mostly duplicated the fed- eral standards and testing methodology established by the NILECJ in 1978 for the state’s own police body armor standard. However, the federal standards have significantly evolved since then and the 1978 publi - cation has been superseded on numerous occasions. NILECJ, now known as the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), published their most recent body armor standard in 2008, Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor, NIJ Standard–0101.06.

However, California’s police body armor regulations remain unchanged since their adoption in 1978. Although the Department has statutory authority to operate a testing program for police body armor, it does not currently operate a funded program for this purpose and has not done so for several decades.

In contrast, the federal NIJ operates a robust, longstand - ing program that continuously establishes and updates voluntary minimum performance standards for body armor, conducts testing against these standards to ensure that body armor complies with the standards, and sponsors research to improve body armor. (Mark Greene, “Body Armor: Protecting Our Nation’s Offi - cers From Ballistic Threats, ” NIJ Journal 280, Janu - ary 2019.) NIJ is currently working on a revision to its standard to be published as Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor, NIJ Standard–0101.07.

Effect of the Proposed Rulemaking: These proposed regulations would repeal California’s outdated police body armor regulations. Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations: Firearms are one of the most dangerous threats faced by law enforcement officers. Ballistic–resistant soft body armor has saved the lives of many police of- ficers. Body armor is critical safety equipment that law enforcement and corrections officers need for person - al protection.

As reflected in Department of General Services, Bid Specification 8470–2208, Ballistic Body Armor Level IIIA , the State of California follows the most current federal standards when procuring police body armor, which protects the safety and welfare of California’s police officers and residents by ensuring state law enforcement agencies have the most up–to– date information to make decisions regarding body armor. The repeal of the outdated regulations will re - move the inconsistency between the Department’s reg- ulation and the State’s current procurement practices.

Comparable Federal Regulations: There are no existing federal regulations or statutes comparable to these proposed regulations. Determination of Inconsistency/Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations: The Department has determined that these regula - tions are inconsistent with the State’s current procure- ment policies and procedures. (See e.g., Department of General Services, Bid Specification 8470–2208, Ballistic Body Armor Level IIIA.)

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1231 Forms Incorporated by Reference: None. Other Statutory Requirements: None. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Department’s Initial Determinations: Mandate on local agencies or school districts: None. Cost or savings to any state agency: None. Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. Other non–discretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies: None. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None.

Cost impacts on representative person or business: The Department is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would nec- essarily incur in reasonable compliance with the pro - posed action. Significant effect on housing costs: None.

Significant, statewide adverse economic impact di - rectly affecting businesses, including ability to com - pete: The Department has made an initial determina - tion that the proposed action will not have a signifi - cant, statewide adverse economic impact directly af - fecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

Results of the Economic Impact Assessment (EIA): The Department concludes that it is (1) unlikely that the proposal will create or eliminate jobs within the state, (2) unlikely that the proposal will create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within the state, and (3) unlikely that the proposal will result in the expansion of businesses currently doing business within the state. The Department also concludes that:

(1) The proposal would benefit the health and welfare of California residents by repealing regulations that are inconsistent with current police body ar - mor standards. Currently, California’s standards are outdated. By repealing these regulations, the Department’s regulations will no longer be out of step with the most current federal standards for police body armor, standards that have improved police officer safety.

(2) The proposal would benefit worker safety because it repeals an outdated method of testing police body armor that does not conform to the current federal standard, which better protect California law enforcement while in the line of duty.

(3) The proposal would not benefit the state’s envi - ronment because it does not change any applica - ble environmental standards. Business report requirement: None. Small business determination: The Department has determined that this proposed action does not affect small businesses because it pertains only to law en - forcement, not private businesses. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), the Department must de- termine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Department or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Department would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in im- plementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Department has determined that the proposed action is the most effective way to follow the estab - lished national standards for police body armor. CONTACT PERSONS Inquiries concerning the proposed administrative action may be directed to: Department of Justice Government Law

Section Marlon Martinez 300 South Spring Street, 9th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90013 (213) 269–6437 Regulations@doj.ca.gov Questions regarding procedure, comments, or the substance of the proposed action should be addressed to the above contact person. In the event the contact person is unavailable, inquiries regarding the pro - posed action may be directed to the following backup contact person: Department of Justice Government Law

Section Julia Zuffelato 1300 I Street, Suite 1270 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 210–6040 Julia.Zuffelato@doj.ca.gov A VAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Department will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying throughout

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1232 the rulemaking process upon request to the contact person above. As of the date this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice, the Text of Proposed Regulations (the “express terms” of the regulations), the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemaking is based.

The text of this Notice, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemaking is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag. ca.gov/regulations. Please refer to the contact informa- tion listed above to obtain copies of these documents. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After the Department analyzes all timely and rel - evant comments received during the 45–day public comment period, the Department will either adopt these regulations substantially as described in this notice or make modifications based on the comments.

If the Department makes modifications which are sufficiently related to the originally–proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the Department adopts the regulations as re - vised. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of the name and address indicated above. The Department will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days af - ter the date on which they are made available.

A VAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, a copy of the Final Statement of Reasons will be available on the Department’s web- site at https://oag.ca.gov/regulations. Please refer to the contact information included above to obtain a written copy of the Final Statement of Reasons. A VAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemaking is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag.ca.gov/regulations. TITLE 11.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS

CHAPTER 2. CENTRALIZED LIST OF FIREARMS DEALERS The Department of Justice (Department) proposes to adopt

section 4025 of title 11, division 5,

chapter 2 of the California Code of Regulations concerning no - tice to the Department upon the transfer of a firearm to law enforcement subsequent to a denied private party sale, transfer, or loan when the firearm cannot be re - turned to the seller, transferor, or loaner. PUBLIC HEARING The Department has not scheduled a public hear - ing on this proposed regulatory action. However, the Department will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested per - son, or their authorized representative, no later than 15 days before the close of the written comment period.

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person or their authorized represen - tative may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action. The written comment pe - riod closes on December 6, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. Only written comments received by that time will be con - sidered. Please submit written comments to: Kelan Lowney Department of Justice P.O.

Box 160487 Sacramento, CA 95816 (916) 210–2377 bofregulations@doj.ca.gov NOTE: Written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., address, phone, email, etc.) become part of the public record and can be released to the public upon request. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Authority:

Section 28050, Penal Code. Reference:

Section 28050, Penal Code. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations: A private party sale of a firearm must be conducted through a licensed firearms dealer. Existing law re - quires a firearms dealer who is unable to process the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1233 sale, transfer, or loan of a firearm to return the fire - arm to the person making the sale, transfer, or loan. However, the dealer is prohibited from returning the firearm if that person is prohibited from possessing a firearm. In those cases, the dealer is required to trans - fer the firearm to a law enforcement agency. (Pen.

Code, § 28050, subdivision (e).) Effective January 1, 2022, a dealer who delivers possession of a firearm to a law enforcement agency is required to notify the Department within 72 hours af - ter the delivery of the firearm in a manner and format prescribed by the Department. (Pen. Code, § 28050, subdivision (g).) The Department maintains the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) Entry System, a web–based application used by firearms dealers to report the sale, loan, trans- fer, redemption, and acquisition of handguns and long guns to the Department, as required by state law. (Pen. Code, § 28205; Cal.

Code Regs., tit. 11, § 4200 et seq.) Effect of the Proposed Rulemaking: The proposed regulation prescribes the procedure for a dealer to notify the Department that a firearm has been delivered to a law enforcement agency. The Report of Dealer Relinquishment, forms BOF 1401A and 1401B, have been developed for this purpose. Starting July 1, 2024, the dealer will report this in - formation electronically via the DROS Entry System (DES). The DES will generate a form for the dealer and law enforcement officer to sign.

Anticipated Benefits of the Proposed Regulations: The proposed regulation provides the procedure for a dealer to meet their obligation of notifying the Department that a firearm has been delivered to a law enforcement agency. This regulation protects public safety by implementing a statutory requirement that the Department be notified of each transfer of a fire - arm. This is particularly important when the original firearm possessor has been determined to be prohibit - ed from possessing a firearm.

Comparable Federal Regulations: There are no existing federal regulations or statutes comparable to these proposed regulations. Determination of Inconsistency/Incompatibility with Existing State Regulations: The Department has determined that these proposed regulations are not inconsistent or incompatible with existing State regulations. After conducting a review for any regulations that would relate to or affect this area, the Department has concluded that these are the only regulations that concern the transfer of a firearm to law enforcement when a private party transfer or loan is denied.

Forms Incorporated by Reference: None. Other Statutory Requirements: None. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Department’s Initial Determinations: Mandate on local agencies or school districts: None. Cost or savings to any state agency: The cost to the Department to process the form will be approximately $447.00 annually. Cost to any local agency or school district which must be reimbursed in accordance with Government Code sections 17500 through 17630: None. Other non–discretionary costs or savings imposed on local agencies: None. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None.

Cost impacts on representative person or business: The Department estimates that a representative pri - vate person or business will necessarily incur $2.91 to complete and submit the required form. The average firearms dealer will face the above scenario once ev - ery 49 years. Significant effect on housing costs: None.

Significant, statewide adverse economic impact di - rectly affecting businesses, including ability to com - pete: The Department has made an initial determina - tion that that the proposed action will not have a sig - nificant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

Results of the Economic Impact Assessment (EIA): The Department concludes that it is (1) unlikely that the proposal will create or eliminate jobs within the state, (2) unlikely that the proposal will create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within the state, (3) unlikely that the proposal will result in the expansion of businesses currently doing business within the state. The Department also concludes that:

(1) The proposal would benefit the health and wel - fare of California residents by creating a proce - dure for a dealer to report to the Department that a firearm has been delivered to a law enforcement agency because the owner is not eligible to own a firearm. The regulation would protect public safety by implementing a requirement that keeps firearms out of the hands of persons who are pro- hibited from owning or possessing a firearm.

(2) The proposal would not benefit worker safety be- cause it does not regulate worker safety standards.

(3) The proposal would not benefit the state’s envi - ronment because it does not change any applica - ble environmental standards.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1234 Business report requirement: The proposed regu - lation requires the dealer to report the delivery of a firearm to law enforcement on a form prescribed by the Department. On and after July 1, 2024, the dealer shall report the information to the Department via the DES. The DES will generate a form for the dealer and law enforcement officer to sign. The Department finds it is necessary for the health, safety or welfare of the people of this state that proposed

section 4025, which requires a report, applies to businesses. Small business determination: The Department has determined that this proposed action affects small businesses. Requiring the dealer to notify the Depart - ment via the prescribed form is the easiest way to make sure that the dealer provides all required information. Once the DES is updated, the dealer will make the re- port electronically via the DES. Dealers are already familiar with using the DES to report transactions to the Department. The DES will also generate a form for the dealer and law enforcement officer to sign. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), the Department must de- termine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Department or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Department would be more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action or would be more cost–effective to affected private persons and equally effective in im- plementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.

The Department has determined that the proposed regulation is the most effective way for a dealer to re - port the delivery of a firearm to law enforcement. A simple form was created for the dealer to report this information to the Department while the Department updates the DES. Starting July 1, 2024, the dealer will report this information electronically via the DES. The DES will generate a form for the dealer and law enforcement officer to sign. CONTACT PERSONS Inquiries concerning the proposed administrative action may be directed to: Kelan Lowney Department of Justice P.O.

Box 160487 Sacramento, CA 95816 (916) 210–2377 bofregulations@doj.ca.gov Questions regarding procedure, comments, or the substance of the proposed action should be addressed to the above contact person. In the event the contact person is unavailable, inquiries regarding the pro - posed action may be directed to the following backup contact person: Timothy Mulligan Department of Justice P.O.

Box 160487 Sacramento, CA 95816 (916) 210–2153 bofregulations@doj.ca.gov A VAILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Department will have the entire rulemaking file available for inspection and copying through - out the rulemaking process upon request to the contact person above.

As of the date this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this Notice, the Text of Proposed Regulations (the “ex - press terms” of the regulations), the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the pro - posed rulemaking is based. The text of this Notice, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemak - ing is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regs.

Please refer to the contact information listed above to obtain copies of these documents. AVAILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After the Department analyzes all timely and rel - evant comments received during the 45–day public comment period, the Department will either adopt these regulations substantially as described in this notice or make modifications based on the comments.

If the Department makes modifications which are sufficiently related to the originally–proposed text, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the public for at least 15 days before the Department adopts the regulations as re - vised. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of the name and address indicated above. The Department will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days af - ter the date on which they are made available.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1235 A VAILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, a copy of the Final Statement of Reasons will be available on the Department’s web- site at https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regs. Please refer to the contact information included above to obtain a written copy of the Final Statement of Reasons.

A VAILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the express terms, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and any information upon which the proposed rulemaking is based are available on the Department’s website at https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regs. TITLE 16. BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY SECOND SIGNATURE REMOV AL TITLE 16. DIVISION 1.

CALIFORNIA BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the California Board of Accountancy (CBA or Board) is proposing to take the action described in the Informative Digest, after considering all comments, objections, and rec - ommendations regarding the proposed action. PUBLIC HEARING The Board has not scheduled a public hearing on this proposed action. However, the Board will hold a hearing if it receives a written request for a public hearing from any interested person, or his or her au- thorized representative, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period.

A hearing may be requested by making such request in writing addressed to the individuals listed under “Contact Person” in this Notice. WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Written comments, including those sent by mail, facsimile, or e–mail to the addresses listed under Contact Person in this Notice, must be received by the CBA at its office by Monday, December 5, 2022, or must be received by the CBA at the hearing.

The CBA, upon its own motion or at the request of any interested party, may thereafter adopt the proposals substantially as described below or may modify such proposals if such modifications are sufficiently related to the origi- nal text. With the exception of technical or grammati- cal changes, the full text of any modified proposal will be available for 15 days prior to its adoption from the person designated in this Notice as contact person and will be mailed to those persons who submit written or oral testimony related to this proposal or who have requested notification of any changes to the proposal.

Authority and Reference: Pursuant to the authority vested by sections 5010 and 5095 of the Business and Professions Code 1 (BPC) and to implement, interpret, or make specific sections 5093, and 5095 of the BPC, the CBA is considering changes to Division 1 of Title 16 of the California Code of Regulations 2 (CCR), as described herein. INFORMATIVE DIGEST A. Informative Digest The CBA is a board within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) responsible for regulating the practice of public accounting in California.

The CBA proposes to amend sections 12 and 12.5 of title 16 of the CCR relating to the experience requirements for Certified Public Accountant (CPA) licensure. BPC

section 5010 authorizes the CBA to adopt, repeal, or amend regulations as may be reasonably necessary and expedient for the orderly conduct of the CBA ’s affairs and for the administration of the Accountancy Act. Additionally, BPC

section 5095 au- thorizes the CBA to adopt regulations to implement this

section including, but not limited to, a procedure for applicants under

section 5092 or

section 5093 to qualify under this section. Applicants for CPA licensure must complete a min- imum of 12 months of general accounting experience as described in Title 16, Division 1, CCR

section 12 and those seeking the authority to sign reports on attest engagements must complete a minimum of 500 hours of attest experience as described in Title 16, Division 1, CCR

section 12.5. All applicants must have their respective experience documented on a Certificate of General Experience and, if seeking attest authority, a Certificate of Attest Experience. Currently, there are four forms, two Certificate of General Experience forms and two Certificate of Attest Experience forms that differ based on where the applicant completes their experience.

Two forms are designated for applicants completing general account- ing or attest experience in a public accounting firm, and the other two forms are designated for applicants completing general accounting or attest experience in private industry or government. Different Certificates of General and Attest Experience forms are required based on where the ap- 1 Unless otherwise specified, all sections refer to the Business and Professions Code. 2 Unless otherwise specified, all California Code of Regulations sections refer to title 16.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1236 plicant completed their experience because of differing requirements for the second person signing the form. Experience completed in a public accounting firm re - quires the second person signing the form to be a li - censed CPA. Experience completed in a private indus- try company or a government agency does not require the second person signing the form to be a licensed CPA and instead requires this individual to have a higher level of responsibility than the supervisor.

Requiring two signatures on the Certificate of General Experience and Certificate of Attest Experience forms as described in Title 16, Division 1, CCR sections 12 and 12.5 places an unnecessary burden on candidates and licensees to obtain the sig - nature from a second licensee at a public accounting firm or a second person with higher authority at a pri - vate industry company or government agency.

This requirement no longer fits with industry standards as the second signer may not be directly involved with the supervised experience but must sign the experi - ence form certifying that the experience indicated on the form is accurate. Additionally, this will reduce ap- plicant and employer confusion over which of the four forms to complete and submit to the CBA. When the incorrect form is submitted to the CBA for review, the CBA must request the appropriate form to be submit - ted. Until the correct form is received, the applicant’s file remains in a pending status.

This delays the pro - cessing time for the application and delays the issu - ance of the applicant’s CPA license. This proposal seeks to eliminate the second signa - ture requirement from Title 16, Division 1, CCR sec - tions 12 and 12.5, update the Certificate of General Experience and Certificate of Attest Experience to re- flect this elimination, and repeal two of the four forms, resulting in only one for general accounting experi - ence and one for attest experience. B.

Policy Statement Overview/Anticipated Benefits of Proposal The California Legislature established the California Board of Accountancy (CBA) with the regulation of the accounting profession, with an express purpose to protect consumers.

This is reflected in the CBA ’s mission statement: “To protect consumers by ensuring only qualified licensees practice public accountancy in accordance with established professional standards.” Eliminating the second signature requirement will enable the CBA to accept an experience form with only one supervisor signature, and the CBA will more closely align with industry standards and the CPA li - censure requirements of other state boards of accoun - tancy. This will not only eliminate a burdensome step for both candidates and licensees as well as reduce po- tential delays in the application process.

The repeal of two experience forms will result in there being one form for each type of authority ( i.e., general and attest). Requiring separate experience forms will no longer be needed after eliminating the requirement for a second signature. This is because there will no longer be a need to distinguish between the second person signing the experience form being either a licensed CPA in a public accounting firm or having a higher level of responsibility in a private in - dustry company or government agency.

This will re - duce confusion over which experience form to submit by reducing the number of forms available to appli - cants and supervisors. Additionally, revisions to the Certificate of General Experience and Certificate of Attest Experience forms will include technical revisions to no longer reference outdated CCR references and to remove the require - ment that supervisors not use black ink when signing the form. This ensures accuracy with the experience forms and will improve clarity and understanding of the forms for both candidates and licensees.

This pro - posed rulemaking also contains changes to clarify that a “licensee” must verify the applicant’s experience, to revise the forms’ description, and to make gener - al grammar corrections to the text. Collectively, these remaining changes improve the readability and clarity of the regulatory text. C.

Consistency and Compatibility with Existing State Regulations During the process of developing these regulations and amendments, the CBA has conducted a search of similar regulations on this topic and has concluded that these regulations are neither inconsistent nor in - compatible with existing state regulations.

INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE The following documents are currently incorporat - ed by reference: ● Form 11A–6A Rev. 4/20 Certificate of Attest Experience (Public Accounting) ● Form 11A–6 Rev. 4/20 Certificate of Attest Experience (Private Industry or Government) ● Form 11A–29 Rev. 11/17 Certificate of General Experience (Public Accounting) ● Form 11A–29A Rev. 11/17 Certificate of General Experience (Private Industry or Government) The following documents are incorporated by refer - ence via modification to existing text: ● Form 11A–30 Rev. 01/22 Certificate of General Experience ● Form 11A–7 Rev. 01/22 Certificate of Attest Experience

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2022, VOLUME NUMBER 42-Z 1237 FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATES Fiscal Impact on Public Agencies Including Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: The CBA estimates one–time publication costs of $1,160 ($580 each) to eliminate the requirement for a second signer on the Certificate of General Experience and the Certificate of Attest Ex - perience forms and to post the revised forms on the CBA website. Any costs will be absorbable within existing resources. The regulations do not result in any costs or savings in federal funding to the state.

Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None Local Mandate: None Cost to Any Local Agency or School District for Which Government Code Sections 17500–17630 Re - quire Reimbursement: None Business Impact: The CBA has made an initial de - termination that the proposed regulatory action would have no significant statewide adverse economic im - pact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

Because this regulatory proposal impacts individ - uals seeking to demonstrate satisfactory completion of an experience requirement for CPA licensure. The proposed amendments do not change the requirement for applicants to submit the appropriate experience form to the CBA as part of the application process. Business Reporting Requirements: This regulatory proposal does not require business - es to file a report with the board.

Cost Impact on Representative Private Person or Business: The CBA is not aware of any cost impacts that a representative private person or business would nec - essarily incur in reasonable compliance with the pro - posed action. Effect on Housing Costs: None EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS The CBA has determined that the proposed regu - lations would not affect small businesses. This reg