BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 361|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 361
Author: Achadjian (R), et al.
Amended: 9/3/15 in Senate
Vote: 27 - Urgency
SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORG. COMMITTEE: 12-0, 6/29/15
AYES: Hall, Berryhill, Block, Gaines, Glazer, Hernandez, Hill,
Hueso, Lara, McGuire, Runner, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Galgiani
SENATE ENERGY, U. & C. COMMITTEE: 11-0, 7/7/15
AYES: Hueso, Fuller, Cannella, Hertzberg, Hill, Lara, Leyva,
McGuire, Morrell, Pavley, Wolk
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/27/15
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza, Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-0, 6/2/15 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Nuclear powerplants
SOURCE: Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
DIGEST: This bill extends the sunset date for the Nuclear
Planning Assessment Special Account (NPASA) from July 1, 2019,
to August 26, 2025, to continue funding emergency service
programs and planning activities for the Diablo Canyon Power
Plant in San Luis Obispo County. In addition, this bill
requires the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to
convene, or continue, until August 26, 2025, the independent
peer review panel (IPRP) to review Pacific Gas and Electric's
AB 361
Page 2
(PG&E) seismic studies of PG&E's Diablo Canyon Power Plant, a
nuclear facility on the central coast.
Senate Floor Amendments of 9/3/15 require the CPUC to convene,
or continue, until August 26, 2025, the IPRP to review PG&E's
seismic studies of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant. In addition,
the amendments require that the IPRP contract with various state
entities to participate on the panel and provide expertise,
require the IPRP to review seismic studies and hold public
meetings, and require the CPUC to make reports by the IPRP
publicly available on the Internet Web site maintained by the
CPUC. Finally, the amendments add Senator Jackson as coauthor
and add an urgency clause.
The amendments are similar to language from SB 655 (Monning,
2015), which passed the Senate Floor on a 38-0 vote but was
never heard in the Assembly.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Authorizes, under the California Emergency Services Act
(CESA), local government entities to create disaster councils
by ordinance and in turn develop disaster plans specific to
their jurisdictions.
2) Requires, under the Radiation Protection Act of 1999 (RPA),
local governments to develop and maintain radiological
emergency preparedness and response plans to safeguard the
public in the emergency planning zone (EPZ) around a nuclear
powerplant, and generally makes the Office of Emergency
Services (OES) responsible for the coordination and
integration of all emergency planning programs and response
plans created pursuant to the RPA.
3) Requires OES to coordinate the activities of all state
agencies in preparing and implementing the state nuclear
power plant emergency response plan and to perform other
related duties.
4) Prescribes, under CESA, a method for funding state and local
AB 361
Page 3
costs for carrying out these activities that are not
reimbursed by federal funds, with the costs borne by
utilities operating nuclear powerplants with a generating
capacity of 50 megawatts or more.
5) Defines an "electrical corporation" as every corporation or
person owning, controlling, operating, or managing any
electrical plant for compensation within this state, except
where electricity is generated on or distributed by the
producer through private property solely for its own use or
the use of its tenants and not for sale or transmission to
others.
6) Grants the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) with the
regulatory authority over public utilities.
7) Requires the development and maintenance of a nuclear
powerplant emergency response program by state and local
governments based on federal and state criteria.
8) Requires the California Energy Commission (CEC) to compile
and assess scientific studies to determine the potential
vulnerability of the state's largest generating plants due to
aging or a major seismic event, assess the potential state
and local costs associated with accumulating waste at
California's nuclear power plants, and adopt the assessment
by November 1, 2008.
9) Requires all charges demanded or received by any public
utility for any product or commodity furnished or any service
rendered be just and reasonable, and further requires every
public utility to furnish and maintain such adequate,
efficient, just, and reasonable service, instrumentalities,
equipment, and facilities as are necessary to promote the
safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons,
employees, and the public.
This bill:
1) Extends the sunset date for the NPASA from July 1, 2019, to
August 26, 2025, to continue funding emergency service
programs and planning activities for the Diablo Canyon Power
Plant in San Luis Obispo County.
AB 361
Page 4
2) Provides that State and local costs to carry out activities
pursuant to this bill and the RPA that are not reimbursed by
federal funds shall be borne by a utility operating a nuclear
powerplant with a generating capacity of 50 megawatts or
more.
3) Requires the PUC to develop and transmit to OES an equitable
method of assessing a utility operating a powerplant for its
reasonable share of state agency costs.
4) Specifies that each local government involved shall submit a
statement of its costs, as required, to OES.
5) Specifies that upon notification by OES, from time to time,
of the amount of its share of the actual or anticipated state
and local agency costs, a utility shall pay this amount to
the State Controller for deposit in the NPASA, which is
continued in existence, for allocation by the State
Controller, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to carry
out activities pursuant to this bill and the RPA.
6) Specifies that the State Controller shall pay from the NPASA
the state and local costs relative to carrying out the
provisions of this bill and the RPA.
7) Specifies that upon appropriation by the Legislature, the
State Controller may disburse up to 80 percent of a fiscal
year allocation from the NPASA, in advance, for anticipated
local expenses. The OES shall review program expenditures
related to the balance of the funds in the account and the
Controller shall pay the portion, or the entire balance, of
the account, based upon those approved expenditures.
8) Specifies that the total annual disbursement of state costs
from a utility operating a nuclear powerplant within the
state for activities pursuant to this bill and RPA, shall not
exceed the lesser of the actual costs or the maximum funding
levels established under the provisions of this bill.
9) Specifies that of the annual amount of two million
forty-seven thousand dollars ($2,047,000) for the 2009-10
fiscal year, the sum of one million ninety-four thousand
dollars ($1,094,000) shall be for support of OES for
activities pursuant to this bill and the RPA, and the sum of
AB 361
Page 5
nine hundred fifty-three thousand dollars ($953,000) shall be
for support of the California Department of Public Health
(CDPH) for activities pursuant to this bill and the RPA.
10)Specifies that the total annual disbursement for each fiscal
year, commencing July 1, 2009, of local costs from a utility
shall not exceed the lesser of the actual costs or the
maximum funding levels established in this bill, in support
of activities pursuant to this bill and the RPA. The maximum
annual amount available for disbursement for local costs
shall, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2009, be one
million seven hundred thirty-two thousand dollars
($1,732,000) for the Diablo Canyon site.
11)Specifies that the amounts paid by a utility under this bill
shall be allowed for ratemaking purposes by the PUC.
12)Provides that the amounts available for disbursement for
state and local costs shall be adjusted and compounded each
fiscal year by the larger of the percentage change in the
prevailing wage for San Luis Obispo County employees, not to
exceed five percent, or the percentage increase in the
California Consumer Price Index from the previous fiscal
year.
13)Specifies that the amounts available for disbursement for
state and local costs as specified shall be cumulative
biennially. Any unexpected funds from a year shall be
carried over for one year. The funds carried over from the
previous year may be expended when the current year's funding
cap is exceeded.
14)Provides that when this bill becomes inoperative, any
amounts remaining in the special account shall be refunded to
a utility contributing to it, to be credited to the utility's
ratepayers.
15)Requires the CPUC to convene, or continue, until August 26,
2025, the IPRP to review PG&E's seismic studies of the Diablo
Canyon Power Plant, including the surrounding areas of the
facility and areas of nuclear waste storage.
16)Requires the IPRP to contract with the CEC, the California
Geological Survey, the Coastal Commission, the Alfred E.
AB 361
Page 6
Alquist Seismic Safety Commission, the OES, and the County of
San Luis Obispo to participate on the panel and provide
expertise.
17)Requires the IPRP to review the seismic studies and hold
public meetings.
18)Requires the CPUC to make reports by the IPRP publicly
available on the Internet Web site maintained by the CPUC.
19)Includes an urgency clause.
Background
Nuclear Power Plant Regulation. In 1979, following the accident
at Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, the
California State Legislature mandated that OES, together with
the CDPH and affected counties, investigate the consequences of
a serious nuclear power plant accident. Based on site-specific
studies in 1980, EPZs around the plant sites were established in
detail and integrated plans were developed. Legislation
mandating the Nuclear Power Plant Program has been continuous
since 1979, enacted as Government Code and Health and Safety
Code sections, called the Radiation Protection Act.
Local governments are also required to develop and maintain
radiological emergency preparedness and response plans to
safeguard the public in the EPZ around a nuclear power plant and
to take specified actions within that zone. Utilities also have
a role to play, including developing and maintaining
radiological emergency preparedness and response plans in
coordination with state and local governments and to coordinate
with state and local governments in maintaining nuclear power
plant education information.
Diablo Canyon - nuclear power on the seismically active Central
Coast. Diablo Canyon Power Plant is a two-unit nuclear
powerplant located in San Luis Obispo County. The power
production facility and support operations sit on approximately
900 acres adjacent to the Pacific Ocean between Avila Beach and
Montano del Oro State Park. According to PG&E, the plant
produces approximately 10 percent of California's energy load
and about 20 percent of PG&E's overall electricity production.
The powerplant is licensed by the federal Nuclear Regulatory
AB 361
Page 7
Commission (NRC) to operate until 2024 and 2025, respectively,
for units 1 and 2.
Since the initial siting of Diablo Canyon, PG&E and the state
have been aware that the plant lies within a seismically active
zone. Recently, seismologists have become aware of the
possibility of an earthquake directly beneath the powerplant.
In 2008, in response to statutory direction, the CEC released
its assessment of the potential vulnerability of Diablo Canyon
to a major disruption due to a seismic event. As part of that
assessment, the CEC recommended that PG&E use three-dimensional
geophysical seismic reflection mapping and other advanced
techniques to supplement ongoing seismic research programs; and
that CEC and other appropriate state agencies evaluate whether
these studies should be required as part of the Diablo Canyon
license renewal feasibility studies for the CPUC. Soon after,
the CPUC directed PG&E to incorporate the recommendations from
the CEC report into its feasibility study to extend the
operating licenses of Diablo Canyon.
In 2009, PG&E filed an application with NRC to extend Diablo
Canyon's operation by 20 years. The licensing decision rests
wholly with the NRC. However, the CPUC will decide the
reasonableness of PG&E's request to recover the costs for
continued operation of the powerplant.
In 2010, the CPUC formally decided to convene, via contract, its
IPRP, composed of itself, the CEC, the California Geological
Survey, the California Coastal Commission, and the California
Seismic Safety Commission. The IPRP would conduct an
independent review of PG&E's seismic studies to enhance CPUC's
ability to assess the reasonableness of Diablo Canyon's proposed
license renewal.
The IPRP has conducted several reports assessing PG&E's seismic
studies of Diablo Canyon. Following the 2011 earthquake in
Japan that severely damaged the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power
plant, NRC required PG&E to conduct additional, advanced seismic
studies of the area around and underneath Diablo Canyon. PG&E
requested that NRC delay its decision on PG&E's relicensing
request so that PG&E could conduct the seismic studies. The NRC
agreed. The contract for the IPRP expires on November 30, 2015.
PG&E's advanced seismic studies are ongoing. They will likely
AB 361
Page 8
continue past 2015.
Related Legislation
SB 657 (Monning 2015) requires the CPUC to convene, or continue,
until August 26, 2025, the IPRP to review PG&E's seismic studies
of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, including the surrounding
areas of the facility and areas of nuclear waste storage. (Held
in Assembly Rules Committee)
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, the provisions
dealing with extending the sunset date for the NPASA would
result in total revenues of $8.5 million to the NPASA (special)
to cover OES's costs between 2019 and 2024. In addition, a
passthrough of $13.3 million to the NPASA (special) that is
collected and distributed by OES on behalf of local agencies for
their costs between 2019 and 2024.
The provisions dealing with the requirement that the CPUC
convene the IPRP would result in approximate annual costs of
$200,000 until fiscal year 2025-26 to the Public Utilities
Reimbursement Account (special) for IPRP contract costs. All
costs are anticipated to be reimbursed by PG&E.
SUPPORT: (Verified9/4/15)
Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility
California Public Utilities Commission
OPPOSITION: (Verified9/4/15)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 75-0, 6/2/15
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom,
AB 361
Page 9
Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau,
Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman,
Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo
Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hadley,
Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim,
Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis,
Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte,
O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark
Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams,
Wood, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Brough, Chávez, Cooper, Grove, Harper
Prepared by:Felipe Lopez / G.O. / (916) 651-1530
9/4/15 19:09:13
**** END ****