REGISTER (Continued on next page) Time- Dated Material EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., GOVERNOR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 2018, NO. 35−Z PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AUGUST 31, 2018 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS TITLE 2. FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION Conflict−of−Interest Code — Notice File No. Z2018−0821−05 ........................................ 1341 Amendment Multi−County: Mid−Peninsula Regional Open Space District Westlands Water District Caliber Schools TITLE 8. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD Life Rings and Personal Flotation Devices — Notice File No.

Z2018−0821−12 ........................... 1342 TITLE 10. BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS Appraisal Management Companies (AMC) Update — Notice File No. Z2018−0821−06 .................... 1345 TITLE 14. FISH AND GAME COMMISSION Lassics Lupine and Coast Yellow Leptosiphon — Notice File No. Z2018−0821−04 ........................ 1347 TITLE 16. CANNABIS CONTROL APPEALS PANEL Appeals Procedures — Notice File No. Z2018−0821−11 .............................................. 1351 TITLE 17. CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE Grant Administration Policy (GAP) Amendments — Clinical Projects — Notice File No.

Z2018−0821−07 ..... 1353 GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE California Endangered Species Act Consistency Determination No. 2080−2018−008−03, Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank Phase 3 Restoration Project, Solano County ......................................... 1358 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Fish and Game Code

Section 1653 Consistency Determination Request for Lawrence Creek Off Channel Pond 2.0 Project (Tracking Number: 1653−2018−025−001−R1), Humboldt County ................. 1363

RULEMAKING PETITION DECISION DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTIONS Notice of Decision on Petition from Carl Higgins Concerning California Code of Regulations, Title 15, Division 3, Adult Institutions, Programs and Parole ......................................... 1364

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTIONS Regulations filed with the Secretary of State ........................................................ 1365 Sections Filed, March 21, 2018 to August 22, 2018 .................................................. 1368 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 REGULA TORY 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 http://www.oal.ca.gov .

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1341 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS Information contained in this document is published as received from agencies and is not edited by Thomson Reuters. TITLE 2.

FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fair Political Practices Commission, pursuant to the authority vested in it by Sections 82011, 87303, and 87304 of the Gov- ernment 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 MULTI−COUNTY: Mid−Peninsula Regional Open Space District Westlands Water District Caliber Schools A written comment period has been established com- mencing on August 31, 2018, and closing on October 15, 2018.

Written comments should be directed to the Fair Political Practices Commission, Attention Brianne Kilbane, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, Cali- fornia 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 her review, unless any interested person or his or her duly autho- rized representative requests, no later than 15 days prior to the close of the written comment period, a public hearing before the full Commission. If a public hearing is requested, the proposed code(

s) will be submitted to the Commission for review. The Executive Director of the Commission will re- view the above−referenced conflict−of−interest code(s), proposed pursuant to Government Code Sec- tion 87300, which designate, pursuant to Government Code

Section 87302, employees who must disclose cer- tain investments, interests in real property and income. The Executive Director of the Commission, upon her or its own motion or at the request of any interested per- son, 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, argu- ments or comments, in writing to the Executive Direc- tor of the Commission, relative to review of the pro- posed conflict−of−interest code(s). Any written com- ments must be received no later than October 15, 2018. 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. Therefore, they are not “costs mandated by the state” as defined in Govern- ment 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 Brianne Kilbane, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322−5660.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1342 A V AILABILITY OF PROPOSED CONFLICT−OF−INTEREST CODES Copies of the proposed conflict−of−interest codes may be obtained from the Commission offices or the re- spective agency. Requests for copies from the Commis- sion should be made to Brianne Kilbane, Fair Political Practices Commission, 1102 Q Street, Suite 3000, Sacramento, California 95811, telephone (916) 322−5660. TITLE 8. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS BOARD General Industry Safety Orders

Section 3389(

a) Life Rings and Personal Flotation Devices (PFD) in Marine Terminal Operations NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Board) proposes to adopt, amend or repeal the foregoing provisions of Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations in the manner described in the Informative Digest, below. PUBLIC HEARING The Board will hold a public hearing starting at 10:00 a.m. on October 18, 2018 in the Auditorium of the State Resources Building, 1416 9th Street, Sacra- mento, California.

At this public hearing, any person may present statements or arguments orally or in writ- ing relevant to the proposed action described in the In- formative Digest. WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD In addition to written or oral comments submitted at the public hearing, written comments may also be sub- mitted to the Board’s office. The written comment peri- od commences on August 31, 2018 and closes at 5:00 p.m. on October 18, 2018. Comments received after that deadline will not be considered by the Board unless the Board announces an extension of time in which to submit written comments.

Written comments can be submitted as follows: By mail to Sarah Money, Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2520 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 350, Sacramento, CA 95833; or By e−mail sent to oshsb@dir.ca.gov. AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Labor Code

Section 142.3 establishes the Board as the only agency in the State authorized to adopt occupa- tional safety and health standards. In addition, Labor Code

Section 142.3 requires the adoption of occupa- tional and health standards that are at least as effective as federal occupational safety and health standards. INFORMATIVE DIGEST OF PROPOSED ACTION/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Section 3389(

a) of Title 8, California Code of Regu- lations requires at least one life ring or a personal flota- tion device (PFD) where employees are exposed to the hazard of drowning. A new subsection (a)(1) is added to specifically address the hazards of drowning that may exist at marine terminals regulated by

Article 14 of the General Industry Safety Orders (GISO). The feder- al counterpart standards require both the life ring and the PFD in marine terminal operations. 29 CFR 1917.26(

f) requires a life ring where the employees’ work exposes them to the hazard of drowning, and 29 CFR 1917.95(b)(1) requires a PFD for those employees who are engaged in work in which they may be pulled into the water while working under certain conditions (working in isolation, etc.). New subsection (a)(1) will ensure that the Title 8 life ring and PFD standards for marine terminal operations are commensurate with the federal standards. Anticipated Benefits This proposal is intended to save marine terminal em- ployees from potential drownings.

Requiring both a readily accessible life ring and a PFD provides employ- ees the needed protection from a drowning hazard. In the absence of one or the other, as allowed in the current state standard, the protection against drowning may not be adequate at times. The proposal renders the state standard at least as ef- fective as the federal standard.

Section 3389(

a) This

section requires employers to provide life rings or PFDs to employees whose work exposes them to the hazard of drowning. It contains an exception statement, which excludes those employees who conduct flume patrols over flumes that are equipped with caps from having to wear a PFD or have a readily accessible life ring. Amendments are proposed to delete the term “conve- niently” and replace with the term “readily” to be com- mensurate with the comparable federal standard and thus ensure employees will be able to utilize a life ring quickly in case of an emergency. Further amendments are proposed for clarity to revise the wording in the ex- ception to exclude employees who conduct flume pa-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1343 trols from having to wear PFDs or use a life ring when the flume is equipped with caps sufficient to effectively guard against drowning. The Board proposes to add a new subsection (a)(1) to make both a life ring and a PFD mandatory in marine terminal operations regulated by

Article 14 of the GISO, where employees are exposed to the hazard of drowning. The proposed subsection (a)(1) is necessary to ensure that the state standard is at least as effective as the federal standard. California marine terminal em- ployees will be further protected by the use of both a life ring and PFD. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION Mandate on Local Agencies and School Districts: None. Cost or Savings to State Agencies: None. Cost to any Local Government or School District Which Must be Reimbursed in Accordance with Government Code Sections 17500 through 17630: None.

Other Nondiscretionary Cost or Savings Imposed on Local Agencies: None. This proposal is not expect- ed to cause any fiscal impact on local governments. Mu- nicipality owned ports such as the ports of Oakland and Long Beach are only chartered by their respective cities who act as property landlords. They are staffed and op- erated by employees who work for PMA member ma- rine terminal and longshoring companies (private enti- ties).

Those employers are responsible for day−to−day operations including the use of all equipment, and worker safety in accordance with the PMA Code book which already requires PFDs and life rings. Cost or Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None. Cost Impacts on a Representative Private Person or Business: Precompiled employment data could not be obtained for jobs in marine terminal operations where employees may be exposed to the hazard of drowning.

Board Staff asked several stakeholders for their respective employ- ment data and number of employees that could be im- pacted by the proposed regulation; however, complete information was not provided. The Federal Register containing the Final Rule on Longshoring and Marine Terminals, V olume 62, No. 143, July 25, 1997, states on page 40190 that federal OSHA used employment data for the Standard Industry Classification (SIC) 4491 — Marine Cargo Handling class to estimate the economic impact of the final rule on marine terminal operations.

Likewise, the Board is also using employment data for the Marine Cargo Han- dling industry class, which is classified as the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 488320 industry class, to estimate the number of em- ployees employed in California marine terminal opera- tions. Per the US Census Bureau data, there were 75 employers employing approximately 15,000 employ- ees belonging to this industry class in California in 2016. Of the 75 employers, 28 are members of the Pa- cific Maritime Association (PMA), which employs 12,000 of the 15,000 employees. The remaining 47 are non−PMA employers.

The Pacific Coast Marine Safety Code (Code), which is a collective bargaining agreement between PMA and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), covers approximately 80% (12,000/15,000 = 80%) of marine terminal employment in California. As the Code requires both the life ring and the PFD, the 28 PMA member employers are already compliant with the proposed regulation, and do not need to purchase any new life rings or PFDs. Outreach to non−PMA ma- rine terminal employers shows that the terminals where the non−PMA employers operate already have life rings.

Therefore, non−PMA employers will only need to ensure they have an adequate number of PFDs for their employees. The 47 non−PMA employers have approximately 3,000 employees. Using a liberal assumption that PFDs would need to be purchased for all employees, and that PFDs cost $48 each, the total cost of this proposal is es- timated to be approximately $144,000. Employers are not expected to incur any new cost for training as the training on the use of life rings and PFDs is already included in the employer’s existing GISO,

Section 3203 Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP).

Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Businesses and Individuals, Including the Ability of California Businesses to Compete: The Board has made an initial determination that this proposal is not expected to result in a statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses/ individuals since the cost of the proposed rulemaking ($144,000) would be less than 0.004% of the revenue for the industry (over $3.6 billion in 2012 as per US Census Bureau data), and also significantly less than the potential monetized benefit resulting from the preven- tion of employee injuries and fatalities due to drowning.

The proposal is not expected to cause any adverse im- pact in terms of the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1344 Significant Effect on Housing Costs: None. SMALL BUSINESS DETERMINATION Federal OSHA estimated approximately 90% of the employers belonging to the marine cargo handling in- dustry class were small businesses (Federal Register V olume 62, No. 143, July 25, 1997, page 40192).

Available Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data for NAICS 4883 — Support Activities for Water Trans- portation (data not available for NAICS 488320) shows that in California, at least 86% of the businesses in 2012 were small businesses based on the revenue limit crite- ria provided by the US Small Business Administration. Using the federal estimate of 90% it is estimated that 68 employers are small businesses (75 x 90%). Of these 68 small businesses, it is estimated that 21 are PMA member employers and the remaining 47 are non−PMA employers.

As the PMA member employers are already compliant with the proposed regulation, on- ly the 47 non−PMA member small businesses are ex- pected to incur costs as a result of the proposed rule- making. However, this proposal is not expected to re- sult in any adverse economic impact on individual small businesses since the maximum cost of the pro- posed rulemaking is expected to be small, approximate- ly $3,050 ($144,000/47) per business.

It is reasonable to speculate that this cost per business could be less since not all the employees may be exposed to the haz- ard of drowning, and the PFD does not have to be exclu- sively worn by one particular employee, as it may be shared or reused by other employees. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT/ANALYSIS The proposed regulation will not have any significant effect on the creation or elimination of California jobs or the creation of new businesses or the elimination of existing California businesses or affect the expansion of existing California businesses.

Staff estimates that each of the 47 non−PMA employers could incur a cost of $3,050 for the PFDs. BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposal is expected to save marine terminal em- ployees from potential injury and death caused by drowning by having readily available life rings and PFDs for the employees’ protection. The proposal also renders the state standard at least as effective as the fed- eral standard, to the extent that Title 8 will include a re- quirement that both life rings and PFDs be provided in the workplace. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

Section 11346.5(a)(13), the Board must determine that no rea- sonable alternative it considered to the regulation or that has otherwise been identified and brought to its at- tention would either 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 implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law than the proposal described in this Notice.

The Board invites interested persons to present state- ments or arguments with respect to alternatives to the proposed regulation at the scheduled public hearing or during the written comment period. CONTACT PERSONS Inquiries regarding this proposed regulatory action may be directed to Lara Paskins (Staff Services Manag- er

I) and back−up contact person Michael Manieri (Principal Safety Engineer) at the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board, 2520 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 350, Sacramento, CA 95833; (916) 274−5721. A V AILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF THE PROPOSED REGULATION AND RULEMAKING FILE The Board will have the entire rulemaking file avail- able for inspection and copying throughout the rule- making process at its office at the above address.

As of the date this notice is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this notice, the proposed text of the regulation, the Initial Statement of Reasons, supporting documents, or other information upon which the rulemaking is based. Copies may be obtained by contacting Ms. Paskins or Mr. Manieri at the address or telephone number listed above. A V AILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After holding the hearing and considering all timely and relevant comments received, the Board may adopt the proposed regulation substantially as described in this notice.

If the Board 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 at least 15 days before the Board adopts the regulation as revised. Please re- quest copies of any modified regulation by contacting

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1345 Ms. Paskins or Mr. Manieri at the address or telephone number listed above. The Board will accept written comments on the modified regulation for at least 15 days after the date on which they are made available. A V AILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, copies of the Final Statement of Reasons may be obtained by contacting Ms. Paskins or Mr . Manieri at the address or telephone number listed above or via the internet.

A V AILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET The Board will have rulemaking documents avail- able for inspection throughout the rulemaking process on its website. Copies of the text of the regulation in an underline/strikeout format, the Notice of Proposed Ac- tion and the Initial Statement of Reasons can be ac- cessed through the Standards Board’s website at http://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb. TITLE 10. BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Bureau of Re- al Estate Appraisers (“Bureau”) is proposing to take the action described in the informative digest below.

Any interested person may present statements or arguments relevant to the action proposed, orally or in writing, at a hearing to be held at: Department of Consumer Affairs 1102 Q Street, Suite 4100 Sacramento, CA 95811 Date: October 16, 2018 Time: 10:00 a.m. Written comments including those sent by mail, fac- simile, or email to the address listed under “Contact Person” in this Notice, must be received by the Bureau at its office not later than 5:00 p.m. on October 15, 2018 or must be received by the Bureau at the hearing.

The Bureau, upon its own motion or at the instance of an y interested party, may thereafter adopt the proposals substantially as described below or may modify such proposals if such modifications are sufficiently related to the original text. With the exception of technical or grammatical changes, the full text of any modified pro- posal will be available for 15 days prior to its adoption from the person designated in this Notice as contact per- son 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 1 1310, 1 1313, 11314, 11315,11315.1, 11316, 11343, 11350, and 11361 of the Business and Professions Code and to implement, inter- pret and make specific Sections 10, 480, 490, 11302, 11310, 11315.5, 11320, 11321, 11360, 11361, 11345.2, 11345.3, 11345.4, 11345.45, and 11345.6, of the Busi- ness and Professions Code and Civil Code

section 1090.5, the Bureau is considering revising sections 3500, 3576, 3577, and 3721 to Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations as described in this Notice. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW Senate Bill (SB) 547 (Hill,

Chapter 429, Statutes of 2017, effective January 1, 2018) changed several pro- visions of Bureau law to comply with federal law and increase consumer protections. As a result of these changes, the Bureau proposes to amend its regulations t o implement, interpret, or make specific the new statu- tory changes. Specifically,

section 3500 encompasses regulatory

definitions. Some of these

definitions were redefined or created with SB 547. The Bureau proposes to use the

definitions i n its regulatory language.

Section 3576 details the requirements for controlling persons of Appraisal Management Companies (AMC). The Bureau proposes to eliminate regulatory language that repeats statutory language as it is unnecessary. The Bureau also proposes to require AMCs report when their registration has been refused, denied, canceled, suspended, or revoked in any state.

Section 3577 contains several proposed changes in- cluding removing language already in statute, creating a minimum record retention period, clarifying exam- ples of undue influence, prohibiting AMCs from alter- ing appraisal reports, and revising how AMCs can re- move appraisers from their panel. The Bureau proposes to make a few minor edits to

Section 3721 to ensure the grounds for discipline apply t o AMCs. Business and Professions Code sections 11310, 11313, 11314, 11315, 11315.1, 11316, 11343, 11350, and 11361 authorize the Bureau to adopt regulations to establish conditions for the registrations and operation of AMCs, as well as to enforce and administer the Bu- reau’s law. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS There are many benefits. First, the regulations will us e the same defined terms as used in statute to sync the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1346 terms and make it easier to read and understand. Sec- ond, it will eliminate unnecessary language such as rep- etition of statutory language thereby reducing the size of the regulations. Third, it will require AMCs to report registration discipline in other states so the Bureau can determine if action should be brought here to protect Californians. Fourth, the proposal will establish a mini- mum record retention period for AMCs to ensure records are maintained when needed for investigations.

Fifth, undue influence will be further defined to prevent its use against appraisers. Sixth, it will prohibit AMCs from altering reports thus ensuring the product is from the appraiser. Seventh, it will revise how AMCs can re- move appraisers from their panel to allow AMCs to re- move appraisers as needed. CONSISTENCY OR COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING STATE REGULATIONS During the process of developing these regulations, the Bureau has conducted a search of any similar regu- lations on this topic and has determined that there is no reasonable

interpretation of any state regulation that is inconsistent or incompatible with the proposed action. FISCAL IMPACT ESTIMATES Fiscal Impact on Public Agencies Including Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: Y es, absorbable cost for additional reporting requirement and possible enforcement if fail to report. Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. Cost to, or mandate imposed on, any Local Agency or School District for Which Government Code Sections 17500−17630 Require Reimbursement: None.

Business Impact: The Bureau initially determines that the proposed regulation will not have a significant, statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting business, including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. The pro- posed language will require AMCs keep records for five years. Clients already require these records be kept for at least five years so there will likely be no business impact on those AMCs. Impact on Jobs/New Businesses: None of the pro- posed changes will impact jobs or the formation of new businesses.

Cost Impact on Representative Private Person or Business: 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 other than the retention period dis- cussed above. Effect on Housing Costs: None. Effect on Small Businesses: The Bureau initially de- termines that the proposed regulation will not have a significant, statewide adverse economic impact direct- ly affecting small businesses. The proposed language will require AMCs keep records for five years.

Typical- ly, these records are kept electronically for years any- way so there will likely be no business impact on those AMCs. For those who do not keep the records for the proposed five−year period, there will be a slight cost for maintaining those records for the five−year period. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT Impact on Jobs/New Businesses: There will be no creation or elimination of jobs or businesses nor will it affect the expansion of existing businesses. Benefits: There are many benefits.

First, the regula- tions will use the same defined terms as used in statute to sync the terms and make it easier to read and under- stand. Second, it will eliminate unnecessary language such as repetition of statutory language thereby reduc- ing the size of the regulations. Third, it will require AMCs to report registration discipline in other states so the Bureau can determine if action should be brought here to protect Californians. Fourth, the proposal will establish a minimum record retention period for AMCs to ensure records are maintained when needed for in- vestigations.

Fifth, undue influence will be further de- fined to prevent its use against appraisers. Sixth, it will prohibit AMCs from altering reports thus ensuring the product is from the appraiser. Seventh, it will revise how AMCs can remove appraisers from their panel to allow AMCs to remove appraisers as needed. Occupations/Businesses Impacted: Appraisal Man- agement Companies. Reporting Requirements: AMCs will need to report within 10 days of its registration being refused, denied, canceled, suspended, or revoked in any state. Comparable Federal Regulations: None.

Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State’s Environment: AMCs will need to report to the Bureau when their registration has been refused, denied, can- celed, suspended, or revoked in any state. This will ben- efit the health and welfare of Californians by ensuring only qualified AMCs are registered in California. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Bureau must determine that no reasonable alter- native considered by the Bureau or that has otherwise

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1347 been identified and brought to the attention of the Bu- reau would be more effective in carrying out the pur- pose for which the action is proposed, would be as ef- fective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would be more cost− effective to affected private persons and equally effec- tive in implementing the statutory policy or other provi- sion of law. Any interested person may present statements or ar- guments orally or in writing relevant to the above deter- minations a t the above−mentioned hearing.

INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS AND INFORMATION The Bureau has prepared an initial statement of rea- sons which contains the purpose, rationale, and necessi- t y for the proposed action. The proposed text, this notice, the statement of rea- sons, and any other relevant documents are on the Bu- reau’s website at www.brea.ca.gov. Click the “Laws & Enforcement” tab at the top of the page.

Under the head- i ng “Rulemaking Notifications” find the documents as- sociated with this rulemaking subject: “AMC Update.” A V AILABILITY AND LOCATION OF THE ST ATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATION AND RULEMAKING FILE All the information upon which the proposed regula- tions are based is contained in the rulemaking file which i s available for public inspection by contacting the per- son named below. As of the date this notice is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this notice, the proposed text of the regulation and the initial statement of reasons.

Copies may be obtained by contacting the person named below or by accessing the website as provided above. A V AILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After holding the hearing and considering all timely an d relevant comments received, the Bureau may adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this notice. If the Bureau 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 be- fore the Bureau adopts the regulations as revised.

Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of the contact person named below. The Bureau will accept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days after the date on which they are made available. A V AILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, copies of the Final Statement of Reasons may be obtained by contacting the person named b elow.

CONTACT PERSON Inquiries or comments concerning the proposed rule- making action may be addressed to: Kyle Mutef f, Legal Counsel 1102 Q Street, Suite 4100 Phone: 916−341−6126 FAX: 916−440−7406 kyle.muteff@brea.ca.gov The backup person is: Thu Tran 1 102 Q Street, Suite 4100 Phone: 916−440−7876 FAX: 916−440−7406 Thu.Tran@brea.ca.gov TITLE 14.

FISH AND GAME COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fish and Game Commission (Commission), pursuant to the au- thority vested by sections 1904 and 2070 of the Fish and Game Code and to implement, interpret or make specif- ic sections 1755, 1904, 2062, 2067, 2070, 2072.7 and 2075.5 of said Code, proposes to amend subsections (a)(15)(

I) and (a)(25)(

B) of

Section 670.2, Title 14, Cal- ifornia Code of Regulations, relating to Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon — Plants of California Declared to be Endangered, Threatened, or Rare. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW

Section 670.2, Title 14, California Code of Regula- tions (CCR), provides a list, established by the Califor- nia Fish and Game Commission (Commission), of plants designated as endangered, threatened or rare in California. The Commission has the authority to add or remove species from this list if it finds that the action is warranted. As required by Fish and Game Code

Section 2075.5, subdivision (e)(2), the Commission must initiate pro- ceedings in accordance with the Administrative Proce-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1348 dure Act to amend

Section 670.2 to add Lassics lupine (Lupinus constancei) and coast yellow leptosiphon (Leptosiphon croceus) to the list of endangered plants. In making the recommendation to list Lassics lupine pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Depart- ment) identified the following primary threats: (1) pre- dation and herbivory; (2) climate change; (3) vegetation encroachment; (4) the vulnerability of small popula- tions; and (5) fire.

More detail about the current status of Lassics lupine can be found in the Report to the Fish and Game Commission, “Status Review of Lassics lupine (Lupinus constancei)” (Department of Fish and Wildlife, January 2018). In making the recommendation to list coast yellow leptosiphon pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, the Department identified the following primary threats:1) recent and ongoing development and land−use changes; 2) impacts from invasive plant species; 3) erosion; 4) human activities such as tram- pling; and 5) the vulnerability of small populations.

More detail about the current status of coast yellow lep- tosiphon can be found in the Report to the Fish and Game Commission, “Status Review of Coast Yellow Leptosiphon (Leptosiphon croceus)” (Department of Fish and Wildlife, December 2017). The proposed regulation will benefit the environment by protecting Lassics lupine and coast yellow lep- tosiphon as endangered plants. Commission staff has searched the California Code of Regulations and has found that the proposed regula- tion is neither inconsistent nor incompatible with exist- ing State regulations.

No other State entity has the au- thority to list threatened and endangered species. NOTICE IS GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing, relevant to this action at a hearing to be held at the Radisson Fresno Conference Center, 1055 Van Ness Avenue, Fresno, California, on Thursday, October 18, 2018, at 8:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. It is re- quested, but not required, that written comments be submitted on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 4, 2018, at the address given below, or by email to FGC@fgc.ca.gov.

Written comments mailed (to Fish and Game Commission, PO Box 944209, Sacramento, CA 94244−2090), or emailed to the Commission office, must be received before 12:00 noon on October 12, 2018. All comments must be received no later than Oc- tober 18, 2018, at the hearing in Fresno, California. If you would like copies of any modifications to this pro- posal, please include your name and mailing address.

A V AILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulation in underline and strikeout format can be accessed through the Commission’s website at www.fgc.ca.gov. The reg- ulations as well as all related documents upon which the proposal is based (rulemaking file), are on file and available for public review from the agency representa- tive, Valerie Termini, Executive Director, Fish and Game Commission, 1416 Ninth Street, Box 944209, Sacramento, California 94244−2090, phone (916) 653−4899.

Please direct requests for the above− mentioned documents and inquiries concerning the reg- ulatory process to Valerie Termini or Sheri Tiemann at the preceding address or phone number. Jeb Bjerke, Senior Environmental Scientist, Department of Fish and Wildlife, has been designated to respond to questions on the substance of the proposed regula- tions. Mr. Bjerke can be reached at (916) 651−6594 or by email at Jeb.Bjerke@wildlife.ca.gov.

A V AILABILITY OF MODIFIED TEXT If the regulations adopted by the Commission differ from but are sufficiently related to the action proposed, they will be available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date of adoption. Any person interested may obtain a copy of said regulations prior to the date of adoption by contacting the agency representative named herein. If the regulatory proposal is adopted, the final state- ment of reasons may be obtained from the address above when it has been received from the agency pro- gram staff.

IMPACT OF REGULATORY ACTION/RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT The potential for significant statewide adverse eco- nomic impacts that might result from the proposed reg- ulatory action has been assessed, and the following ini- tial determinations relative to the required statutory cat- egories have been made: (

a) Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Business, Including the Ability of California Businesses to Compete with Businesses in Other States: While the statutes of CESA do not specifically prohibit the consideration of economic impact in determining if listing is warranted, the Attorney

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1349 General’s Office has consistently advised the Commission that it should not consider economic impact in making a finding on listing. This is founded in the concept that CESA was drafted in the image of the federal Endangered Species Act. The federal act specifically prohibits consideration of economic impact during the listing process. Listing under CESA is a two−stage process. During the first stage, the Commission must make a finding on whether or not the petitioned action is warranted.

By statute, once the Commission has made a finding that the petitioned action is warranted, it must initiate a rulemaking process to make a corresponding regulatory change. To accomplish this second stage, the Commission follows the statutes of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The provisions of the APA, specifically sections 11346.3 and 11346.5 of the Government Code, require an analysis of the economic impact of the proposed regulatory action. While

Section 11346.3 requires an analysis of economic impact on businesses and private persons, it also contains a subdivision (

a) which provides that agencies shall satisfy economic assessment requirements only to the extent that the requirements do not conflict with other State laws. In this regard, the provisions of CESA leading to a finding are in apparent conflict with

Section 11346.3, which is activated by the rulemaking component of CESA. Since the finding portion of CESA is silent as to consideration of economic impact, it is possible that subdivision (

a) of

Section 11346.3 does not exclude the requirement for economic impact analysis. While the Commission does not believe this is the case, an abbreviated analysis of the likely economic impact of the proposed regulation change on businesses and private individuals is provided. The intent of this analysis is to provide disclosure, the basic premise of the APA process. The Commission believes that this analysis fully meets the intent and language of both statutory programs. Designation of Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon as endangered will subject them to the provisions of CESA.

CESA prohibits take and possession except as may be permitted by the Department, the Native Plant Protection Act, or the California Desert Native Plants Act. Endangered status for Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon is not expected to result in any significant adverse economic effect on small business or significant cost to private persons or entities undertaking activities subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

CEQA requires local governments and private applicants undertaking projects subject to CEQA to consider de facto endangered species to be subject to the same requirements under CEQA as though they were already listed by the Commission in

Section 670.2 (CEQA Guidelines,

Section 15380). Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon have been recognized as rare plants in California for several decades, qualifying them for protection under CEQA Guidelines

Section 15380. Required mitigation as a result of lead agency actions under CEQA, whether or not the species is listed by the Commission, may increase the cost of a project. Such costs may include, but are not limited to, purchasing off−site habitat, development and implementation of management plans, establishing new populations, installation of protective devices such as fencing, protection of additional habitat, and long−term monitoring of mitigation sites. Lead agencies may also require additional actions should the mitigation measures fail, resulting in added expenditures by the proponent.

If the mitigation measures required by the CEQA lead agency do not minimize and fully mitigate to the standards of CESA, listing could increase business costs by requiring measures beyond those required by CEQA. Although compliance with CESA could result in some additional costs for projects that affect State−listed species, the distributions of Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon are very restricted. Furthermore, Lassics lupine only occurs on land that is under federal jurisdiction.

It is unlikely that there will be many significant actions affecting the species that will be subject to the application of CESA or CEQA. Coast yellow leptosiphon is restricted to one small population on a single sea bluff. Therefore, designating Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon as endangered is unlikely to have any significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1350 California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. (

b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in California; Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State’s Environment: The Commission does not anticipate that there will be any impacts on the creation or elimination of jobs, the creation of new businesses, the elimination of existing businesses or the expansion of businesses in California as a result of the designation of Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon as endangered.

The entire distribution of Lassics lupine is limited to two small and remote populations located entirely on federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Coast yellow leptosiphon is restricted to one small population on a single sea bluff. Because of these localized distributions, adding Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon to the list of endangered species under CESA is unlikely to affect the creation or elimination of jobs or businesses within the State as a whole. The Commission does not anticipate benefits to the health and welfare of California residents or to worker safety.

The Commission anticipates benefits to the State’s environment by the protection of Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon. (

c) Cost Impacts on a Representative Private Person or Business: Designation of Lassics lupine and coast yellow leptosiphon as endangered is unlikely to have any cost impacts on a representative private person or business. The entire distribution of Lassics lupine is limited to two small and remote populations located entirely on federal land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.

Because Lassics lupine only occurs on land that is under federal jurisdiction and coast yellow leptosiphon is restricted to one small population on a single sea bluff, it is unlikely that there will be any actions affecting the species that will be subject to the application of CESA or CEQA, or that will result in any cost impacts on a representative private person or business. Furthermore, designation of threatened or endangered status, per se, would not necessarily result in any significant cost to private persons or entities undertaking activities that were subject to CEQA.

CEQA presently requires private applicants undertaking projects subject to CEQA to consider de facto endangered (or threatened) and rare species to be subject to the same protections under CEQA as though they are already listed by the Commission in

Section 670.2, Title 14, CCR. (CEQA Guidelines,

Section 15380.) Any added costs should be more than offset by savings that would be realized through the informal consultation process available to private applicants under CESA. The process would allow conflicts to be resolved at an early stage in project planning and development, thereby avoiding conflicts later in the CEQA review process, which would be more costly and difficult to resolve. 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. (

d) Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State: None. (

e) Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies: None. (

f) Programs Mandated on Local Agencies or School Districts: None. (

g) Costs Imposed on any Local Agency or School District that are Required to be Reimbursed Under

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4, Government Code: None. (

h) Effect on Housing Costs: None. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS It has been determined that the adoption of these reg- ulations may affect small business. The Commission has drafted the regulations in Plain English pursuant to Government Code Sections 11342.580 and 11346.2(a)(1). CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES The Commission must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Commission, or that has

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1351 otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Commission, 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 proposed action, or would be more cost−effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law. TITLE 16.

CANNABIS CONTROL APPEALS PANEL DIVISION 43, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS NOTICE OF PROPOSAL TO ADD RULES 6000−6018 PROCEDURES TO APPEAL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS AGAINST CANNABIS LICENSEES OR APPLICANTS The Cannabis Control Appeals Panel (Panel) propos- es to adopt the proposed regulations described below after considering all comments, objections, and recom- mendations regarding the proposed action.

PUBLIC HEARING The Panel will hold a public hearing starting at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday October 17, 2018, or as soon after that as business before the Panel will permit, at the State Personnel Board Building, 1st Floor Auditorium, 801 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA 95814. At the hearing, any person may present statements or argu- ments orally or in writing about the proposed action de- scribed in the informative digest. It is requested, but not required, that persons making oral comments at the hearing submit a written copy of their testimony.

WRITTEN COMMENT PERIOD Any interested person, or his or her authorized repre- sentative, may submit written comments relevant to the proposed regulatory action to the Panel at its address be- low. Comments may also be submitted by email to philip.laird@bcsh.ca.gov. The written comment period closes at 5:00 p.m. on October 15, 2018. The Panel will consider only comments received at the Panel of- fices by that time.

Submit comments to: Philip Laird Cannabis Control Appeals Panel 801 Capitol Mall, Suite 601 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916−653−4090 Email: Philip.laird@bcsh.ca.gov AUTHORITY AND REFERENCE Business and Professions Code

section 26042 autho- rizes the Panel to adopt these proposed regulations. The proposed regulations implement, interpret, and make specific sections 26042, 26043, and 26044 of the Busi- ness and Professions Code. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW This rulemaking action creates, clarifies and makes specific the procedures to be followed by a cannabis li- cense applicant or existing cannabis licensee who has had a denial of his or her application, or any disciplinary action taken against his or her existing license, by a state licensing agency. Business and Professions Code

section 26042 pro- vides that, “The panel shall adopt procedures for ap- peals similar to the procedures used in

Article 3 (com- mencing with

Section 23075) and

Article 4 (commenc- ing with

Section 23080) of

Chapter 1.5 of Division 9 of the Business and Professions Code. Such procedures shall be adopted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with

Section 11340) of

Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Govern- ment Code).” Additionally, Business and Professions Code

section 26043 defines who may appeal a decision to the Panel, restricts the Panel from accepting new evi- dence not considered by the licensing authority, and limits review to the following questions: whether the li- censing authority has proceeded without or in excess of its jurisdiction; whether the licensing authority has pro- ceeded in the manner required by law; whether the deci- sion is supported by the findings; and, whether the find- ings are supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. Finally, Business and Professions Code

section 26044 permits the Panel to remand cases to the licensing authority when it is discovered that there exists evidence which, in the exercise of reason- able diligence, could not have been produced or which was improperly excluded at the underlying hearing. The statute also instructs that in any case the Panel shall enter an order either affirming or reversing the decision of the licensing authority, and that the Panel may direct the reconsideration of the matter to the licensing author- ity in light of any reversal it issues.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1352 These proposed regulations will set forth the rules on how to file and serve a notice of appeal; how to file and serve the administrative record; how to file and serve any documents through email; how to file briefs that ar- gue a party’s position; the method by which dates for oral argument may be scheduled; limits on oral argu- ments; how to move to remand a case due to new evi- dence; how to file and serve motions; the reasons for which the Panel may dismiss an appeal; when Panel members are to disqualify or recuse themselves from hearing a case; the method by which the Panel may grant a stay; how the Panel handles settlements; the timeframe in which the Panel will enter its final order; the form of Panel orders; and prohibited ex parte com- munications.

The broad objectives of this regulation are to bring the Panel into compliance with Business and Profes- sions Code

section 26042, and to otherwise establish a clear, consistent, and predictable appeals process for applicants, licensees, licensing authorities, and the Pan- el to follow. FORMS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE 1) CCAP Form 6003, Notice of Appeal (New 04/18) 2) CCAP Form 6005, Certification of Email Address (New 04/18) The proposed addition of Rule 6003 incorporates by reference CCAP Form 6003, Notice of Appeal (New 04/18), which is required to be completed and submit- ted to the Panel by the appellant in order to initiate his or her appeal.

The proposed addition of Rule 6005 incorporates by reference CCAP Form 6005, Certification of Email Ad- dress (New 04/18), which is required to be submitted to the Panel by all parties to an appeal to determine whether or not they agree to receive service of docu- ments through email. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS The proposed addition of Rules 1600−1618 will ben- efit cannabis applicants, licensees, and licensing au- thorities by clearly defining the process they must fol- low when filing or responding to the appeal of a cannabis licensing decision.

The regulations will also explain and clarify what the Panel’s timelines and crite- ria are for hearing and deciding cases, creating greater transparency through the appeals process. Additionally, the regulations will benefit the Panel by creating a defined structure by which the Panel will ac- cept, hear, and decide appeals. This will allow the Panel to handle its caseload in a uniform and consistent man- ner, and to more easily track and process the status of appeals.

CONSISTENCY EV ALUATION The Panel has determined that these proposed regula- tions are not inconsistent or incompatible with existing regulations. This is because the law creating the Panel and its underlying appeals process is new and has had no implementation up to this point. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION The Panel has made the following initial 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 Government Code

section 17500 through 17630: None. Other nondiscretionary cost or savings imposed on local agencies: None. Cost or savings in federal funding to the state: None. Cost impacts on a representative private person or business: The Panel anticipates that an appellant’s fees to have the underlying administrative record prepared and copied for the Panel, set by the Office of Adminis- trative Hearing’s regulations, will likely average around $300 depending on the length of the underlying administrative hearing and number of documents ad- mitted into evidence.

Statewide adverse economic impact directly affect- ing businesses and individuals: None. Significant effect on housing costs: None. RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS/ASSESSMENT The Panel concludes that the proposal will not: (1) create or eliminate jobs in California; (2) create new businesses or eliminate existing businesses within Cali- fornia; or (3) affect the expansion of businesses current- ly doing business within California.

Benefits of Proposed Action to the Health and Wel- fare of California Residents, Worker Safety, and the State’s Environment: These regulations merely ensure an orderly and consistent method for cannabis license applicants and licensees to appeal administrative deci- sions that are adverse to them. These regulations en- hance due process for Californians by helping facilitate a more streamlined system of administrative appeal outside of the existing judicial system. Otherwise, these regulations do not benefit worker safety or the state’s environment.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1353 Effect on small businesses: The Panel has determined that the proposed regulations affect small businesses only to the extent a small business uses the appeals process for cannabis licensure. In such instance, the small business benefits from the enforcement of the regulation in that the regulations provide a predictable and orderly method for the small business to appeal an adverse decision concerning the small business’ license. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), the Panel must determine that no reasonable alternative it considered or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Panel 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 per- sons than the proposed action or would be more cost− effective to affected private persons and equally effec- tive in implementing the statutory policy or other provi- sions of law.

The Panel invites interested persons to present state- ments with respect to alternatives to the proposed regu- lations during the written comment period or, as need- ed, the scheduled hearing.

CONTACT PERSON Inquiries concerning the substance of the proposed action and requests for copies of the proposed text of the regulations, the initial statement of reasons, the modi- fied text of the regulations, if any, and other information upon which the rulemaking is based should be directed to: Philip Laird Cannabis Control Appeals Panel 801 Capitol Mall, Suite 601 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916−653−4090 Email: Philip.laird@bcsh.ca.gov The backup contact person for these inquiries is: Catherine Ohaegbu Cannabis Control Appeals Panel 801 Capitol Mall, Suite 601 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916−653−4090 Email: Catherine.Ohaegbu@bcsh.ca.gov A V AILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS, TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS, AND RULEMAKING FILE The Panel will have the entire rulemaking file avail- able for inspection and copying throughout the rule- making process at its office at the above address.

As of the date this notice is published in the Notice Register, the rulemaking file consists of this notice, the proposed text of the regulations, and the initial statement of rea- sons. Copies may be obtained by contacting Philip Laird, or the alternative contact person at the address, phone number, or e−mail address listed above. A V AILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After considering all timely and relevant comments received, the Panel may adopt the proposed regulations substantially as described in this notice.

If the Panel 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 Panel adopts the regulations as revised. Please send requests for copies of any modified regulations to the attention of Philip Laird at the address indicated above. The Panel will ac- cept written comments on the modified regulations for 15 days after the date on which they are made available.

A V AILABILITY OF THE FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Upon its completion, copies of the Final Statement of Reasons may be obtained by contacting Philip Laird at the above address. A V AILABILITY OF DOCUMENTS ON THE INTERNET Copies of the Notice of Proposed Action, the Initial Statement of Reasons, and the text of the regulations in underline and strikeout can be accessed through our website at https://www.ccap.ca.gov/. TITLE 17. CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE FOR REGENERATIVE MEDICINE Division 4 — California Institute for Regenerative Medicine

Chapter 5,

Section 100503 Deadline for Submission of Written Comment: October 15, 2018 — 5:00 p.m.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1354 Public Hearing Date: None Scheduled Subject Matter of Proposed Amendments: Grant Administration Policy for Clinical Stage Projects SUBMITTAL OF COMMENTS Any interested party may present comments in writ- ing about the proposed amendments to the agency con- tact person named in this notice. Written comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. on October 15, 2018. Comments regarding this proposed action may also be transmitted via e−mail to GAPComments@cirm.ca.gov or by facsimile trans- mission to (415) 396−9141.

PUBLIC HEARING At this time, no public hearing has been scheduled concerning the proposed regulations. If any interested person or the person’s representative requests a public hearing, he or she must do so in writing no later than Oc- tober 1, 2018. SECTIONS AFFECTED The proposed regulatory action amends

Section 100503 to

Chapter 5 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations, and the document incorporated by ref- erence into

section 100503. AUTHORITY

Article XXXV of the California Constitution and Health and Safety Code

Section 125290.40, subdivision (j). REFERENCE Sections 125290.30, 125290.35, 125290.40, 125290.45, 125290.50, 125290.60, 125290.70, 125292.10, Health and Safety Code. INFORMATIVE DIGEST/POLICY STATEMENT OVERVIEW The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (“Institute” or “CIRM”) was established in 2005 after the passage in 2004 of Proposition 71 (the “Act”), the California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative. The statewide ballot measure established a new state agency to make grants and provide loans for stem cell research, research facilities and other vital research opportuni- ties.

The Independent Citizens’ Oversight Committee (“ICOC”) is the 29−member governing board for the In- stitute. The ICOC members are public officials, ap- pointed on the basis of their experience earned in Cali- fornia’s leading public universities, non−profit aca- demic and research institutions, patient advocacy groups and the biotechnology industry.

The Act charges the ICOC with developing standards and crite- ria to make grant awards and to develop standards and criteria for proper oversight of awards. (§ 125290.50.) To that end, CIRM adopted the CIRM Grants Adminis- tration Policy for Clinical Stage Projects (“GAP”). Existing

section 100503 incorporates by reference the GAP and indicates that recipients of grants for clini- cal stage projects will be subject to this particular GAP . This

section indicates that amendments to the policy will be applied to current active grants at the next bud- get period after the effective date of any amendments. This grants administration policy incorporated by reference by

section 100503 serves as the terms and conditions for Clinical Stage Projects funded by the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) pursuant to clinical stage funding opportunities. In ad- dition, it provides guidance to applicants and Awardees regarding their responsibilities. Principal investigators, program directors, and organizational officials with grants management responsibilities are urged to read this document carefully and to refer to relevant sections for answers to questions that arise concerning the ad- ministration of CIRM awards.

Applicants and Awardees may be required to document compliance with any and all provisions set forth in the policy. In furtherance of CIRM’s mission to accelerate the development of stem cell therapies to patients with un- met medical needs, CIRM seeks to continuously im- prove upon its policies and procedures to ensure a more streamlined, predictable process for awarding and ad- ministering grants. As part of that goal, CIRM proposes to initiate a new round of amendments to the Grants Ad- ministration Policy for Clinical Stage Projects (Clinical GAP). The following changes are proposed.

With the excep- tion of these proposed amendments, the remainder of the Clinical GAP will remain in effect, except for minor technical/clarifying fixes. A. Allowable and Unallowable Project Costs These sections describe the types of direct project costs CIRM funding may and may not support. CIRM proposes generally to follow the NIH Grants Policy Statement on allowable costs and highlight areas of common interest to its Awardees as follows:

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1355 Allowable • Insurance that is deemed necessary and specific to the project not otherwise covered by Facilities or Indirect costs, including clinical trial insurance and medical liability (malpractice) insurance when the project involves human subjects.

Unallowable • Legal costs incurred in defending or prosecuting claims, whether equitable or monetary. • Intellectual property costs including, but not limited to, invention, copyright, patent, licensing or royalty costs, filing fees, translation costs, examination fees, annuity costs and grant fees, and related attorney’s fees. • Routine, patient standard of care costs or any cost of care covered by a third party provider. B.

Clinical Trial Registration Requirement CIRM proposes to add a requirement for all CIRM− funded clinical trials to be registered and to submit the results of the trial in accordance with FDAAA 801 re- quirements. These requirements include registering the trial no later than 21 days after the first patient is en- rolled in the trial and publishing the results no later than 12 months after completion of the trial. C. Delete Description of Scoring CIRM proposes to remove the paragraph in

Section II.E. Application Review that describes clinical appli- cation scoring. The current statement is inconsistent with the GWG bylaws, which modified the definition of a Tier 3 score. Given the existing conflict and the poten- tial for future inconsistencies if the Board approves fu- ture changes to the GWG bylaws regarding scoring, CIRM suggests removing this language from the Clinical GAP . D.

Prior Approval Request — Change in California Organization Eligibility CIRM proposes to add a requirement for a CIRM− funded Awardee to immediately report whether their organization’s status as a California−based or Non− California−based organization has changed in light of the fact that such status will determine the scope of al- lowable project costs.

If a California−based Organization becomes a Non− California−based organization, CIRM will propose to reduce the remainder of the award effective the date the organization’s status changed to only cover the allow- able project costs available to Non−California−based organizations. If a Non−California−based organization becomes a California−based organization, CIRM pro- poses to maintain the existing award amount as ap- proved by the ICOC but allow the Awardee to reallocate remaining funds to also cover any additional allowable project costs available to California−based organizations. E.

Award Conversion Under this section, recipients of CIRM’s Clinical Stage Program awards have the option to treat their awards as loans within the earlier of the submission of an application for marketing approval by the Food and Drug Administration or seven years from the effective date of the award. Unless the parties agreed to different terms, the awardee would be required to repay the loan balance within ten days of making the loan election at a rate that would escalate based on the date of repayment. The loan election would become final only after the awardee has satisfied the terms of the election.

If an awardee does not make this election, its award would be treated as a grant. The proposed amendments make nonsubstantive amendments to delete references to non−existent funding opportunities and propose op- tional language regarding payback terms. F. Award Termination This

section describes the circumstances under which failure of compliance may lead to CIRM action with re- gard to the Award, including termination of the Award. CIRM proposes to broaden this provision to address the circumstance where an Awardee or the Award become ineligible based on the criteria for that program.

ANTICIPATED BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED REGULATION To the extent the regulation facilitates use of the funds and encourages development of intellectual property and return to the state as required by law, and to the ex- tent California institutions apply for and receive re- search funds, such requirements are indirectly attribut- able to increased economic activity spurred by the in- vestment research funds in the state and resultant posi- tive business and employment development.

Also, to the extent the regulation makes it possible for the ex- penditure of research funds in the state, and to the extent that research results in medical treatments and cures for chronic disease and injury, the regulation indirectly benefits the health and welfare of California residents who will benefit from such treatments and cures. CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING STATE REGULATIONS CIRM has conducted an evaluation for any other reg- ulations on this area and has concluded that this is the only regulation concerning administration of CIRM− funded Awards for late−stage research projects.

There- fore, the proposed amendments are neither inconsistent nor incompatible with any other existing state regulations.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1356 INCORPORA TED BY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS California Institute for Regenerative Medicine Grants Administration Policy (GAP) for Clinical Stage Projects, Sections “II” through and including “VI” in their entirety; As to

Section “I”, only part “I.B.”, (“Ab- breviations”), “I.C.,” (“Defined Terms”), “I.D.” (“Types of Support”) and “I.E.” (“Roles and Responsi- bilities”), Rev. 06/17. DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS CIRM has made the following initial determinations: MANDATE ON LOCAL AGENCIES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS None. EFFECT ON SMALL BUSINESS CIRM has determined that the proposed amendments will have no impact on small businesses. The regulation implements conditions on awarding and administering grants for stem cell research.

This research is conduct- ed almost exclusively by large public and private non- profit institutions. As such, the amendments to the reg- ulation are not expected to adversely impact small busi- ness as defined in Government Code

Section 11342.610. IMPACT ON LOCAL AGENCIES OR SCHOOL DISTRICTS CIRM has determined that the proposed amendments do not impose a mandate on local agencies or school districts, nor do they require reimbursement by the state pursuant to

Part 7 (commencing with

Section 17500) of Division 4 of the Government Code because the amend- ments do not constitute a “new program or higher level of service of an existing program” within the meaning of

Section 6 of

Article XIII of the California Constitu- tion. CIRM has also determined that no nondiscre- tionary costs or savings to local agencies or school dis- tricts will result from the proposed amendments. COSTS OR SA VINGS TO STATE AGENCIES CIRM has determined that no savings or increased costs to any agency will result from the proposed amendments. EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDING TO THE STATE CIRM has determined that no costs or savings in fed- eral funding to the state will result from the proposed amendments. EFFECT ON HOUSING COSTS CIRM has determined that the proposed amendments will have no effect on housing costs.

SIGNIFICANT STATEWIDE ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT DIRECTLY AFFECTING BUSINESSES CIRM has made an initial determination that the pro- posed amendments will not have a significant statewide adverse economic impact directly affecting businesses, including the ability of California Businesses to com- pete with businesses in other states. COST IMPACTS ON REPRESENTATIVE PRIV ATE PERSONS OR BUSINESSES CIRM has made an initial determination that the adoption of these amendments will not have a signifi- cant cost impact on representative private persons or businesses.

CIRM 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 amendments. RESULTS OF ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS The above analysis is based on that fact that the pro- posed amendments do not impose new requirements on existing business operations or functions of other agen- cies or individuals but implement standards for seeking and using state grant funds for scientific research. In most cases, such grants include funds to cover overhead and other indirect costs of the research, including most compliance activities.

CIRM has made an initial deter- mination that it is unlikely the proposed amendments will impact the creation or elimination of jobs, the cre- ation of new businesses or the elimination of existing businesses, or the expansion of businesses currently do- ing business within the State of California, nor directly impact the health and welfare of California residents, worker safety, and the state’s environment.

However, applicants and Awardees of CIRM funds for clinical stage projects would have a clear understanding of their responsibilities in accepting and using state funds for stem cell research, which ultimately benefits the citi- zenry of California. In addition, to the extent the regula-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1357 tion facilitates use of the funds and encourages inven- tion and return to the state as required by law, and to the extent California institutions apply for and receive re- search funds, such requirements are indirectly attribut- able to increased economic activity spurred by the in- vestment research funds in the state and resultant posi- tive business and employment development.

Also, to the extent the regulation makes it possible for the ex- penditure of research funds in the state, and to the extent that research results in medical treatments and cures for chronic disease and injury, the regulation indirectly benefits the health and welfare of California residents who will benefit from such treatments and cures. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES In accordance with Government Code

Section 11346.5, subdivision (a)(13), CIRM must determine that no reasonable 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 or would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons or would be more cost−effective to affected private per- sons and equally effective in implementing the statuto- ry policy or other provision of the law than the proposal described in this Notice.

CIRM invites interested per- sons to present statements or arguments with respect to alternatives to the proposed amendments at the sched- uled hearing or during the written comment period. A V AILABILITY OF STATEMENT OF REASONS AND TEXT OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS CIRM has prepared an Initial Statement of Reasons, and has available the express terms of the proposed amendments, all of the information upon which the amendments are based, and a rulemaking file. A copy of the Initial Statement of Reasons and the proposed text of the regulation may be obtained from the agency con- tact person named in this notice.

The information upon which CIRM relied in preparing this proposal and the rulemaking file are available for review at the address specified below. A V AILABILITY OF CHANGED OR MODIFIED TEXT After holding the hearing and considering all timely and relevant comments, CIRM may adopt the proposed amendments substantially as described in this notice. If CIRM makes modifications that are sufficiently related to the originally proposed text of the amendments, it will make the modified text (with the changes clearly indicated) available to the pubic for at least 15 days be- fore it adopts the regulations as amended.

Requests for the modified text should be addressed to the agency contact person named in this notice. CIRM will accept written comments on any changes for 15 days after the modified text is made available.

AGENCY CONTACT Written comments about the proposed regulatory ac- tion; requests for a copy of the Initial Statement of Rea- sons, the proposed text of the amendments; and in- quiries regarding the rulemaking file may be directed to: Scott T ocher Deputy General Counsel California Institute for Regenerative Medicine 1999 Harrison Street, #1650 Oakland, CA 94612 (415) 740−8735 Questions on the substance of the proposed regulato- ry action may be directed to: Gabe Thompson Director of Portfolio Operations and Performance 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1650 Oakland, CA 94612−3515 Phone/Fax: 510−340−9166 The Notice of Proposed Regulatory Amendment, the Initial Statement of Reasons and any attachments, and the proposed text of the amendments and existing regu- lation are also available on CIRM’s website, www.cirm.ca.gov.

AV AILABILITY OF FINAL STATEMENT OF REASONS Following its preparation, a copy of the Final State- ment of Reasons mandated by Government Code Sec-

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1358 tion 11346.9, subdivision (a), may be obtained from the contact person named above. GENERAL PUBLIC INTEREST DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION NO. 2080−2018−008−03 Project:Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank Phase 3 Restoration Project Location:Solano County Applicant: Wetland Resources LLC Notifier:WRA Inc.

BACKGROUND Wetland Resources LLC (Applicant) proposes to construct 37.99 acres of vernal pools within the Phase 3 Restoration Area, along with associated habitat en- hancements (adjacent mounds and swales). The Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank Phase 3 Restoration Project (Project) will occur at the Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank (Mitigation Bank) located in northwestern Solano County, east of the city of Fairfield, California. During the construction period, grading and/or soil dis- turbance will occur within the entire 188.38 acre limit of disturbance.

Constructed vernal pools will include two pool types: crustacean breeding pools and shallow vegetation pools. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) does not anticipate constructed pools to be suitable for California tiger salamander breeding. Equipment used for excavation and grading for the restoration work will include pan scrapers, graders, track bulldozers, loaders, excavators, dump trucks, and box graders. The proposed Project will construct swales to convey surface flow between existing and new vernal pools and seasonal wetlands. Swales will be about 10 feet wide and 6 inches deep.

These shallow, wide swales will function similarly to those found in natural vernal pool systems, in which water from accumulated precipita- tion can overflow sequentially from one pool to the next before eventually draining to a larger waterway. These swales generally conduct water only after periods of relatively heavy precipitation and generally do not re- tain water; thus, they often lack wetland characteristics.

CDFW does not expect the swales constructed within the Phase 3 Restoration Area to support jurisdictional wetlands or California tiger salamander, although it is possible that portions of some of the swales will devel- op wetland characteristics. The Applicant will distribute native soil excavated to create pools and swales within the Phase 3 Restoration Area to restore mima mound upland habitat adjacent to the constructed vernal pools. Mima mounds reinforce the structure and hydrology of vernal pool landscapes by creating well−defined patterns of high ground and low ground.

CDFW expects the restoration of mima mounds to provide a more complex upland habitat than is generally available across much of the Phase 3 Restoration Area, and increase habitat suitability for burrowing mammals. An increase in abundance and distribution of burrowing mammals may benefit Cali- fornia tiger salamander, which locally prefer driest up- land habitat. Mammal burrows in the Phase 1 and 2 restoration area were observed at the tops of construct- ed mounds at a higher density than the existing condi- tions in Phase 3 where available habitat is uniformly low and relatively wet.

The Applicant will construct the mounds with a spacing and pattern similar to pre− disturbance conditions, based on historic aerial imagery of on−site areas and examinations of preserved vernal pools at the nearby Jepson Prairie Preserve. The mounds will be approximately 1.5 to 3.5 feet tall and 20 to 70 feet in diameter, with average side slopes of 12:1. The Project activities described above are expected to incidentally take 1 California tiger salamander (Am- bystoma californiense) where those activities take place within the entire 188.38−acre limit of disturbance, the Phase 3 Restoration Area (Figure 3).

In particular, Cali- fornia tiger salamander could be incidentally crushed, entombed in burrows or soil cracks as a result of exca- vation and grading using pan scrapers, graders, track bulldozers, loaders, excavators, dump trucks, and box graders, and entrained in vernal pools and swales after construction is complete. The Central California dis- tinct population segment of the California tiger sala- mander is designated as a threatened species pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) (69 Fed.

Reg. 47212−47248, August 4, 2004; 50 C.F.R. § 17.11, subd. (h)) and California tiger salamander is a threatened species pursuant to the Cali- fornia Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. 1Pursuant to Fish and Game Code

section 86, “‘Take’ means hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” See also Environmental Protection Information Center v. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (2008) 44 CAL.4th 459,507 (for purposes of incidental take per- mitting under Fish and Game Code

section 2081, subdivision (b), “‘take’ . . .means to catch, capture or kill”).

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1359 Code, § 2050 et seq.). (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 670.5, subd. (b)(3)(G).) California tiger salamander individuals have been documented in the large playa pool in the northeast por- tion of the Phase 3 Restoration Area and in pools within the remnant agricultural channel along the northern boundary of the Phase 3 Restoration Area but have not been found within the agricultural drains interspersed within the Phase 3 Restoration Area.

California tiger salamanders have also been observed within dispersal distance of the Phase 3 Restoration Area in a number of other pools throughout the Mitigation Bank, including pools in the Phase 1 and 2 Restoration Areas. Most of the wetland habitat within the Phase 3 Restoration Area does not pond for a duration sufficient to allow for metamorphosis.

Because of the proximity of the nearest documented California tiger salamander, dispersal pat- terns of California tiger salamander, and the presence of suitable California tiger salamander habitat within the Project site, the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (Service) determined that California tiger salamander is reasonably certain to occur within the Project site and that Project activities are expected to result in the inci- dental take of California tiger salamander. According to the Service, the Project will result in the temporary loss of 150.39 acres of upland California tiger salamander habitat.

Construction of the Project will also result in the permanent loss of 37.99 acres of upland habitat for the California tiger salamander through conversion to vernal pools and the permanent loss of 2.82 acres of upland/movement habitat through conversion to swales. Because the Project is expected to result in take of a species designated as threatened under the ESA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) consulted with the Service as required by the ESA. On July 13, 2018, the Service issued a Biological Opinion (Service file No. 08ESMF00−2017−F−3189) (BO) to the USACE.

The BO describes the Project, requires the Ap- plicant to comply with terms of the BO and its inciden- tal take statement (ITS), and incorporates additional measures. On July 18, 2018, the Director of CDFW received a notice from WRA, Inc., on behalf of the Applicant re- questing a determination pursuant to Fish and Game Code

section 2080.1 that the BO, including the ITS, are consistent with CESA for purposes of the Project Cali- fornia tiger salamander. (Cal. Reg. Notice Register 2018, No. 31−Z, p. 1239.) DETERMINATION CDFW has determined that the BO, including the ITS, is consistent with CESA as to the Project and Cali- fornia tiger salamander because the mitigation mea- sures contained in the BO and ITS meet the conditions set forth in Fish and Game Code

section 2081, subdivi- sions (

b) and (c), for authorizing incidental take of CESA−listed species.

Specifically, CDFW finds that: (1) take of California tiger salamander will be inciden- tal to an otherwise lawful activity; (2) the mitigation measures identified in the BO and ITS will minimize and fully mitigate the impacts of the authorized take, are roughly proportional in extent to the impact of the au- thorized taking, and are capable of successful imple- mentation; (3) adequate funding is ensured to imple- ment the required avoidance minimization and mitiga- tion measures and to monitor compliance with, and ef- fectiveness of those measures; and (4) the Project will not jeopardize the continued existence of California tiger salamander.

The mitigation measures in the BO and ITS include, but are not limited to, the following: Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Prior to construction activities, Applicant will pur- chase 40.81 acres of California tiger salamander upland/movement habitat preservation credits from the Mitigation Bank for land in a different location from the 40.81 acres it will convert to vernal pools and swales, or from a Service− and CDFW−approved bank with a ser- vice area covering the Mitigation Bank, and will pro- vide documentation of the purchase to the Service and CDFW. • Applicant will provide mitigation for temporary impacts by restoring 147.57 acres of upland mound topography and achieving Performance Standards. • Applicant will complete pool and mound construction and grading in any given area within the same work season to prevent multi−year project impacts. • Construction activities will avoid California tiger salamander breeding habitat in playa pools in the northeastern portion of the Action Area with a minimum 250−foot setback, to avoid hydrologic impacts and reduce impacts to any potentially aestivating California tiger salamander.

California tiger salamanders have also been documented in vernal marsh in Pools K, M, and N in the northern portion of the Action Area. These pools are located

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1360 in a separate watershed area and are separated from the proposed work area by a 6−foot berm and embankment and unlike the playa pool, levee banks, and canal bottoms provide aestivation opportunities near these features. A buffer has not been provided around these pools to reduce impacts to any potentially aestivating California tiger salamander. • Applicant will place temporary construction fencing around the work area prior to grading that is designed not to impede movement of California tiger salamander.

A Service−approved biologist will oversee placement and installation of construction fencing. • Prior to any earth−moving activities, the Service−approved biologist will survey the entire fenced area for California tiger salamander and/or burrows or soil cracks that may be inhabited by California tiger salamander.

Soil cracks and burrows that may be inhabited by California tiger salamander will be flagged. • The Service−approved biologist will be present for the excavation of all soil cracks and burrows that may be inhabited by California tiger salamander and will look for California tiger salamander in the excavated material. If the Service−approved biologist finds any California tiger salamander individuals, the biologist will relocate the individuals to a suitable burrow outside the work area. • Applicant will not conduct work if it is raining.

The Service−approved biologist will check the National Weather Service by 6:00 a.m. on the day prior to a scheduled work day to see if there is a 5 percent or greater probability of rain forecasted overnight.

If there is less than a 5 percent probability of rain forecasted, then before work begins the following morning, the Service−approved biologist or a construction crew member trained by the Service−approved biologist will check for California tiger salamander under any equipment, vehicles, or stored materials, and all excavated steep−walled holes or trenches all of which will have ramps to allow wildlife to exit.

If there is a 5 percent or greater probability of rain forecasted overnight, then before work begins the next morning, the Service−approved biologist will conduct a more extensive inspection of the construction area for California tiger salamander. In addition, Applicant will instruct construction personnel to maintain vigilance regarding potential increased California tiger salamander activity. • The Service−approved biologist will be on−site each day during initial grading and soil moving activities to watch for any California tiger salamander that may appear on the site.

The Service−approved biologist will complete walking surveys following earth−moving equipment to look for California tiger salamander during initial groundbreaking. If the Service−approved biologist discovers one or more California tiger salamander individuals, the Applicant will stop work in the immediate area, and the Service−approved biologist will relocate the animal. Prior to the initiation of construction, the Applicant will prepare a California tiger salamander relocation plan and receive approval of the plan from the Service and CDFW.

The plan will provide details on selected relocation sites (on−site gopher burrows) as well as specific procedures to follow for relocating any California tiger salamander found during construction. Only a biologist with credentials approved by the USFWS and CDFW may handle California tiger salamander to move an individual to safety unless it is in immediate danger. Handling and relocations will occur under the guidance of a biologist who holds a federal 10(a)(1)(

A) permit and state Memorandum of Understanding to handle California tiger salamander. The Service−approved biologist will limit the duration of handling and captivity. While in captivity, the Service−approved biologist will keep the California tiger salamander in a cool, dark, moist, aerated environment, such as a clean and disinfected bucket or plastic container with a damp sponge.

Containers used for holding or transporting will not contain any standing water. • Applicant will report any California tiger salamander observed in the Phase 3 Restoration Area to the USFWS and CDFW immediately by phone and within 24 hours by email. With regard to CDFW, Applicant will contact Janice Gan ( janice.gan@wildlife.ca.gov, (916) 944−0481) and Craig Weightman ( craig.weightman@ wildlife.ca.gov, (707) 944−5577). The report will minimally include the time of day and weather, location of disturbance and relocation site, and a photograph and brief description of animal’s condition.

As will be outlined in the California tiger salamander relocation plan, the Service−approved biologist will relocate the California tiger salamander to suitable relocation burrows within appropriate habitat (e.g., the opening of a ground burrow outside of the construction area) and monitor it until it is

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1361 determined that the California tiger salamander is not imperiled by predators or other dangers. The Service−approved biologist will not relocate the captured California tiger salamander to any property other than the Elsie Gridley Bank. • If a California tiger salamander individual is injured as a result of proposed activities, the Service−approved biologist will immediately take it to a CDFW− or Service−approved wildlife rehabilitation or veterinary facility.

The Applicant will identify the facility before starting activities that may affect California tiger salamander. The Applicant will bear any costs associated with the care or treatment of injured California tiger salamander. The Applicant will notify CDFW and the Service of the injury to the California tiger salamander immediately by telephone and e−mail followed by a written incident report.

Notification will include the date, time, location, and circumstances of the incident and the name of the facility where the animal was taken. • Vehicles and equipment will enter and exit the Phase 3 Restoration Area via existing roads and gates, as well as via two temporary access drives, which Applicant will install to provide construction access locations that will otherwise be inaccessible. Construction of the temporary access drives will require the construction of low ramps to over roadside ditches located just outside the Mitigation Bank property. Applicant will place geo−web fabric and a

section of culvert in each ditch, and place clean gravel, cobble, or a similar substrate over the culvert to form a stable roadway connecting the work area to the adjacent road. Applicant will stabilize all of the entry points providing construction access from adjacent roads to meet regional standards outlined by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Applicant will place a layer of large gravel on the ground at each entrance to dislodge mud and other materials from vehicles exiting the construction site.

Applicant will remove the two temporary access drives upon completion of work, including culverts, gravel, and all other materials. • Applicant will initially plant the constructed vernal pools with vernal pool plant seed collected from on−site directly from plants and/or the soil surface in late spring. Applicant will collect seed in small quantities from a large number of existing on−site pools with the intent of establishing high diversity of species rather than high initial cover in the constructed pools.

Applicant will collect seed from no more than 25 percent of any single pool in order to maintain vernal pool plant cover and diversity in the donor pools. Applicant may collect seed using a vacuum mower, vacuum or similar mechanical or hand collection methods. Applicant will not collect seed in locations known to support special status plant species. • Applicant will distribute plant seed prior to or concurrent with the onset of the rainy season, which occurs in the fall or early winter.

Constructed vernal pools must meet vegetation performance criteria, and CDFW may employ corrective actions if the pools are not meeting their targets. Applicant may conduct supplemental seeding in subsequent years if necessary using on−site collected seed or commercially produced seed grown from a regional or on−site source.

To maximize the likelihood of success, Applicant may control non−native invasive plant species prior to spreading of vernal pool plant seed. • Prior to construction, Applicant will fence the northern perimeter of the Phase 3 Restoration Area to exclude grazing. • Applicant will control target invasive plants including perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) and stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens) prior to initiation of construction in order to limit establishment in the restoration area. • Applicant will exclude grazing during the first growing season following construction to allow for grass establishment and development of rootmass and soil structure sufficient to support grazing animals.

Applicant will re−introduce grazing in the late spring and summer following construction when soils have dried sufficiently to support grazing animals. Applicant will manage grazing to provide habitat suitable for California tiger salamander movement by reducing plant biomass to target levels described in the RMP and subsequent annual monitoring reports. • Applicant will maintain a readily available copy of best management practices (BMPs) with the construction foreman/manager at the Action Area when construction activities take place. Applicant will provide the name and telephone number of the

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1362 construction foreman/manager to appropriate agencies prior to groundbreaking. • Applicant will implement BMPs, as identified by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and in the Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan, to control erosion both during and after work activities. Erosion control measures are critical to prevent soils, sediments, runoff from dust control, or hazardous materials from entering preserved wetlands or adjacent water bodies.

BMP measures may include, but are not limited to, silt fencing, straw wattle, vegetative strips, hydroseeding, and temporary sediment disposal. • Applicant will restrict fueling, cleaning, and other maintenance of vehicles and equipment to designated areas and inform workers of the importance of preventing spills, having appropriate clean−up measures should a spill occur, and the necessity of cleaning up any spills immediately. Clean−up activities will be in accordance with applicable local, state, and/or federal regulations. Applicant will properly maintain and clean machinery to prevent spills and leaks.

Post construction compliance reports will document any spills. • Applicant will place high−visibility fencing, a minimum of 4 feet in height, along all the boundaries of the construction zone prior to groundbreaking. The purpose of this fence will be to prevent construction vehicles or personnel from entering preserved or otherwise protected habitat. Applicant will place the fencing a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of preserved wetlands to prevent any disruption of sensitive areas.

At the beginning of each workday, the biologist will inspect the fence surrounding the active work area and ensure that the Applicant is maintaining the fence in good condition. Applicant will not remove the fencing until the completion of grading activities. • The proposed Project will follow specific procedures and practices necessary to suppress the generation of fugitive dust during construction activities, including covering of vehicles hauling loose material, regular watering of construction areas, and stabilization of disturbed areas.

Applicant will treat unprotected or bare soils on a regular basis during restoration work to minimize wind erosion. Possible treatments include, but are not limited to, watering and/or covering areas with tarps, straw, or erosion control blankets. Water for dust control will not result in ponding that lasts for more than a few hours, and, therefore, will not result in inadvertent seed germination or cyst hatching. • Applicant will minimize the number of access routes, number, and size of staging areas, and total area of project activity as much as possible.

Applicant will clearly mark routes and boundaries, and restrict heavy equipment to established roadways. Vehicular traffic will observe a speed limit of 20 miles per hour, and all stockpiling of equipment and vehicles will occur only in designated areas. • Applicant will initiate a trash abatement program before starting construction and continue the program for the duration of construction.

The program will ensure that trash and food items are contained in closed, animal−proof containers and removed regularly (once every 3 days) to avoid attracting opportunistic predators. • Applicant will prohibit firearms and domestic dogs from the project area during construction (except for authorized security or law enforcement personnel). • Upon completion of construction activities, Applicant will remove from the action area and properly dispose of all construction refuse including, but not limited to, broken equipment parts, wrapping material, cords, cables, wire, rope, strapping, twine, buckets, metal or plastic containers, and boxes.

Monitoring and Reporting Measures • Applicant will monitor the California tiger salamander restored uplands annually for up to 5 years following completion of the restoration or until the Performance Standards are met. The Performance Standards require that the Applicant show the restored areas to be similar to reference sites in Phases 1 and 2.

The CDFW−approved monitoring methods will begin the year following completion of Phase 3 Restoration and will involve sub−sampling sufficient portions of Phase 3, taking into account factors such as pasture, density/extent of wetlands, proximity to California tiger salamander breeding habitat, and other variables that may influence the abundance and distribution of burrows or other features of upland habitat potentially used by California tiger salamander. Measured parameters will include aestivation habitat as burrow density and upland movement function as suitably low grass height and/or standing biomass.

Applicant will compare the annual results to a reference site in Phase 1 and 2 in which burrow density and grass biomass are monitored. Applicant will select reference sites from portions of Phase 1 and 2 with similar slope,

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1363 soils, and proximity to breeding habitat to Phase 3, which have demonstrated restoration of upland habitat supporting burrowing mammals. • Following the period of active construction, the restored habitat within the Phase 3 Restoration Area will be managed primarily through managed grazing and invasive plant control following guidelines established in the 2004 Resource Management Plan for the Elsie Gridley Mitigation Bank. • The BO requires the Applicant to monitor the vernal pools and California tiger salamander upland/movement habitat annually for up to 5 years following completion of the restoration or until the Performance Standards are met.

Although not a condition of the BO, CDFW requests a copy of all monitoring reports. The reports should include dates construction occurred and the success of revegetation and restoration. Financial Assurances • Prior to construction activities a Security shall be provided in the amount of $35,075, which is 10 percent of the $350,750 Phase 3 construction cost estimate. • The Security shall be held by CDFW or a CDFW−approved entity and shall be provided in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or another form of Security approved in advance in writing by CDFW’s Office of the General Counsel.

The Security shall allow CDFW to draw on the principal sum if CDFW, in its sole discretion, determines that the Permittee has failed to meet the Performance Standards within 5 years of the completion of the Phase 3 Restoration. • The Security shall be released to the Permittee after CDFW has confirmed in writing that all secured requirements have been satisfied. Pursuant to Fish and Game Code

section 2080.1, take authorization under CESA is not required for the Project for incidental take of California tiger salaman- der, provided the Applicant implements the Project as described in the BO, including adherence to all mea- sures contained therein, and complies with the mitiga- tion measures and other conditions described in the BO and ITS. If there are any substantive changes to the Project, including changes to the mitigation measures, or if the Service amends or replaces the BO and/or ITS, the Applicant shall be required to obtain a new consis- tency determination or a CESA incidental take permit for the Project from CDFW. (See generally Fish & G. Code,§§ 2080.1, 2081, subds. (

b) and (c)). DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FISH AND GAME CODE

SECTION 1653 CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION REQUEST FOR Lawrence Creek Off Channel Pond 2.0 Project (Tracking Number: 1653−2018−025−001−R1) Humboldt County California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Request to Approve on August 20, 2018, that Trout Unlimited proposes to carry out a habitat restora- tion or enhancement project pursuant to Fish and Game Code

section 1653. The proposed project involves ex- cavating and replacing sediment to construct an upland habitat feature along the streambank, and installing up to 45 pieces of large wood. The proposed project will be carried out on an unnamed tributary of Lawrence Creek, located approximately 9 miles north of Highway 36 on Lawrence Creek Mainline Road in Humboldt County, California.

On July 11, 2018, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) re- ceived a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the terms of, and obtain coverage under, the General 401 Water Quality Certification Order for Small Habitat Restoration Projects (General 401 Order) for the Lawrence Creek Off Channel Pond 2.0 Project.

The Re- gional Water Board determined that the Project, as de- scribed in the NOI, was categorically exempt from Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (section 15333 — Small Habitat Restoration Projects) and met the eligibility requirements for coverage under the General 401 Order. The Regional Water Board is- sued a Notice of Applicability (WDID No. 1B180100WNHU; ECM PIN No. CW−849374) for coverage under the General 401 Order on August 15, 2018. Trout Unlimited is requesting a determination that the project and associated documents are complete pur- suant to Fish and Game Code

section 1653 subdivision (d). If CDFW determines the project is complete, the District will not be required to obtain an incidental take permit under Fish and Game Code

section 2081 subdi- vision (

b) or a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement under Fish and Game Code

section 1605 for the pro- posed project. In accordance with Fish and Game Code

section 1653 subdivision (e), if CDFW determines during the review, based on substantial evidence, that the request is not complete, Trout Unlimited will have the opportunity to submit under Fish and Game Code

section 1652.

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1364 RULEMAKING PETITION DECISION DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION NOTICE OF DECISION ON PETITION TO AMEND REGULATIONS Pursuant to Government Code 11340.7 Petitioner Carl Higgins, #J−06160 Department Contact Person Please direct any inquiries regarding this action to Ying Sun, Chief, Regulation and Policy Management Branch, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, P.O. Box 942883, Sacramento, CA 94283−0001. Availability of Petition The petition to amend regulations is available upon request directed to the Department’s contact person.

Authority Penal Code Sections: 5054 and 5058 Provisions of California Code Of Regulations Affected: Title 15, Crime Prevention and Corrections Division 3, Adult Institutions, Programs and Parole

Summary of Petition and Department Decision: Subsection 3177(b)(1)(

A) Petitioner’s Request: Remove the language “with- out a criminal conviction.” Reason for Request: Petitioner states that if an in- mate is not criminally convicted, he or she should not be denied family visits based on “theory or allegations.” Department’s Response: Mr. Higgins’s request is denied. California is one of only four states that grants family visits. CDCR’s mission is to protect the public by safely and securely supervising adult and juvenile offenders, to provide effective rehabilitation and treat- ment, and to successfully reintegrate offenders into the community.

CDCR recognizes the value of visitation as a means to improve the safety of prisons, as well as to establish and maintain meaningful connections with family and the community; however, family visits are a privilege granted to inmates, and not a right. Family vis- its are a creation of CDCR regulations under the general authority of PC Sections 5054 and 5058, not of any statute, and may be restricted or eliminated by amend- ment or repeal of those regulations. Family visits occur in designated private units on prison grounds.

As such, inmates and their overnight visitors are not subject to constant and direct supervi- sion by custody staff. Because family visits are not con- stantly and directly supervised, staff’s supervision of inmates with violent and serious offenses, prior arrests or convictions, or in−custody misconduct documented in Rules Violation Reports would be limited and pose a risk to the safety and security of the institutions. In gen- eral, such inmates require a higher degree of direct su- pervision while incarcerated than do inmates with less serious histories of criminal offenses and in−custody misconduct.

The intent of the visiting policy is to establish a visit- ing process which promotes safety in the prison, main- tains meaningful family and community connections, and prepares inmates for successful release and rehabil- itation. CCR Subsection 3177(b)(

l) is intended to pro- hibit family visiting for inmates convicted of sexual of- fenses, spousal abuse, sexual abuse, and sexual battery. CDCR is responsible for the safety of visitors, and giv- en that family visiting takes place in an area without the constant and direct supervision of custody staff, it is of the utmost importance that CDCR only approve family visits for inmates with no history of such offenses. CCR Subsections 3177(b)(1)(A)−(

B) were adopted to rein- force the provisions of CCR

Section 3173.1, which specifically applies to visiting with minors, and broad- ens the regulations to encompass family visiting in gen- eral. Family visits can be prohibited in order to maintain the safety and security of the institutions when conduct detailed in CCR

Section 3177(b)(1) is determined to ex- ist even though there is no criminal conviction. For in- stance, a parolee could have had his or her parole re- voked for molesting a minor or an inmate could have had his or her visiting privileges terminated for molest- ing a minor, yet he or she was neither prosecuted for nor convicted of the crime. The evidentiary burden chosen is substantial evidence because this same evidentiary burden exists for denial of good time credits for disci- plinary infractions under PC

Section 2932(c)(5) and CCR

Section 3320. Subsection 3377.1(b)

(9) Petitioner’s Request: Add the language “dismissal by the judge of sex related charges.” Reason for Request: Petitioner states a dismissal by a judge is equivalent to an acquittal or not guilty verdict. Department’s Response: Mr. Higgins’s request is denied. Pursuant to CCR Subsection 3377.1(b)(9), a “R” suffix shall not be applied if an inmate was acquit- ted or found not guilty of a sex−related offense found under PC

Section 290. A dismissal is not equivalent to an acquittal. An inmate’s guilt is not tried in a dismissal

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1365 and the court’s reasoning for granting a dismissal varies. Subsection 3377.1(b)

(5) Petitioner’s Request: Remove the “R” suffix from an inmate’s classification if the sex offense charge has been dismissed by a judge. Reason for Request: Petitioner states if the District Attorney (DA) was not able to prove the sex−related charge the Department is biased by applying the “R” suffix based on “theory,” e.g., the DA’s comments and police reports. Department’s Response: Mr. Higgins’s request is denied. A court’s disposition for dismissal is not a judgement of an inmate’s guilt. Furthermore, pursuant to CCR

Section 3377.1(

b) through (b)(5), a “R” suffix evaluation shall be conducted when the inmate has a history of arrest or detention, has charges which were subsequently dismissed, or if no disposition is rendered for any offense listed in PC

Section 290. CDCR is obli- gated to uphold the integrity of public safety during the course of an inmate’s incarceration based on his or her history of sex−related offenses. A “R” suffix evalu- ation considers arrest reports, DA comments or any oth- er official document in the event of sentencing reduc- tion or amendments (i.e. plea deals/dismissals). Addi- tionally, CDCR does not utilize a theory based ap- proach when conducting “R” suffix evaluations, but rather utilizes a fact−finding−based approach that is applied to official documents (e.g., police reports and DA comments).

CDCR does not consider the legal doc- uments provided by courts or law enforcement agen- cies to be “theory” but rather a legally recognized sum- mary of the circumstances of an alleged crime. Pursuant to CCR Subsection 3177(b)(l)(A), family visiting may be restricted when substantial documented evidence or information of misconduct exists, with or without a criminal conviction.

CDCR relies upon arrest reports and DA comments pertaining to the circumstances and events of the crime in question, and conducts a review based upon these documents to determine if an inmate poses a threat to the safety of inmates, staff, or the pub- lic. If substantial documented evidence of misconduct is present, even without a criminal conviction, CDCR may restrict visiting privileges. Subsection 3377.1(b)

(14) Petitioner’s Request: Add CCR Subsection 3377.l(b)(l4) to state that if the inmate has “not shown any involvement in a sex−related act or incident for 16 years of incarceration, the Classification Committee has the authority to remove the “R” suffix.” Reason for Request: Petitioner states the “R” suffix should be removed if the inmate has shown he or she has rehabilitated themselves and taken steps in self−help programs. Department’s Decision: Mr. Higgins’s request is de- nied. CDCR does not use the rationale described by Mr. Higgins to consider the removal of a ‘R’ suffix.

While an inmate has been incarcerated, and likely removed from the potential to commit additional sex crimes, a meaningful evaluation of an inmate’s proclivity to com- mit additional sex crimes cannot be measured.

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY ACTIONS REGULATIONS FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE This

Summary of Regulatory Actions lists regula- tions filed with the Secretary of State on the dates indi- cated. Copies of the regulations may be obtained by contacting the agency or from the Secretary of State, Archives, 1020 O Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, (916) 653−7715. Please have the agency name and the date filed (see below) when making a request. File# 2018−0711−01 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

Definitions and General Provisions The Board of Equalization submitted this action without regulatory effect, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 1,

section 100, to add a multijuris- dictional assessment appeals board for which the partic- ipating counties do not adopt a set of rules and regula- tions to the definition of “board” in a regulation that contains

definitions applicable to county equalization hearings. The proposed change is based on the enact- ment of formation of and procedures for a multijurisdic- tional assessment appeals board in S.B. 447 (Stats.2017, c. 132). Title 18 AMEND: 301 Filed 08/20/2018 Agency Contact: Rose Smith (916) 323−9656 File# 2018−0711−02 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Mining Properties The Board of Equalization submitted this action without regulatory effect, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, title 1,

section 100, to remove refer- ences to leach pads, tailing facilities, or settling ponds from a regulation pertaining to the valuation of mining and mineral properties and to remove Revenue and Tax- ation Code

section 53.5 as a reference citation to the regulation. The proposed changes make the regulation consistent with A.B. 1718 (Stats.2017, c.592).

CALIFORNIA REGULATORY NOTICE REGISTER 2018, VOLUME NO. 35-Z 1366 Title 18 AMEND: 469 Filed 08/20/2018 Agency Contact: Rose Smith (916) 323−9656 File# 2018−0813−01 CALIFORNIA HEALTH FACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY Lifeline Grant Program The California Health Facilities Financing Authority submitted this emergency readoption action to keep in effect emergency regulations adopted on February 23, 2018 to implement the Clinic Lifeline Act of 2017, en- acted in Government Code

section 15438.11. The emergency regulations established the Lifeline Grant Program. The proposed regulations provide eligibility and evaluation criteria, eligible costs, and an applica- tion procedure and related procedures for specified small and rural health facilities to receive grants through the program.

Title 4 ADOPT: 7213, 7214, 7215, 7216, 7218, 7219, 7220, 7221, 7222, 7223, 7224, 7225, 7227, 7228, 7229 Filed 08/22/2018 Effective 08/22/2018 Agency Contact: Rosalind Brewer (916) 653−8243 File# 2018−0809−01 CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE APPEALS BOARD Conflict−of−Interest Code This is a Conflict−of−Interest code that has been ap- proved by the Fair Political Commission and is being submitted for filing with the Secretary of State and printing only.

Title 22 AMEND: 5200 Filed 08/16/2018 Effective 09/15/2018 Agency Contact: Kim Hickox (916) 263−6806 File# 2018−0703−04 COMMISSION ON PEACE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING Investigation and Trial Preparation Course This regular rulemaking amends two sections and the Post Administrative Manual, incorporated by refer- ence, to revise the training requirements for district at- torney investigators or inspectors. Title 11 AMEND: 1005, 1015 Filed 08/15/2018 Effective 10/01/2018 Agency Contact: Connie A.

Paoli (916) 227−2803 File# 2018−0802−04 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION Inmate and Parolee Name Change The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation amended a regulation that provides procedures for in- mates and parolees to change names. The action makes the regulation consistent with S.B. 310 (Stats.2017, c. 856), which amended Code of Civil Procedure

section 1279.5 to allow inmates and parolees to petition a court directly for name changes. Title 15 AMEND: 3294.5 Filed 08/20/2018 Effective 09/01/2018 Agency Contact: Rosie Ruiz (916) 445−2244 File# 2018−0705−02 DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE Sales of Restricted Livestock Drugs and California Pre- scription Drugs This rulemaking action by the Department of Food and Agriculture adopts sixteen sections regarding the sale of restricted livestock drugs and California pre- scription drugs.

This action will: 1) establish the licens- ing scheme for restricted livestock drug licensees, in- cluding the requirements for applications; 2) establish licensee responsibilities for operations including re- quirements related to sale, storage, and recordkeeping; and 3) establish requirements regarding pharmacist oversight.