BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 2561 Hearing Date: August 31,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Irwin | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |As Proposed To Be Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Dennis O'Connor |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Water supply planning: projects: photovoltaic or
wind energy generation facility
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
Background
In 2001, the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed SB 610
(Costa) and SB 221 (Kuehl). Collectively, these two bills are
also known as the "show us the water" bills. The purpose of
these bills, as noted in the findings for SB 610, was "to
strengthen the process pursuant to which local agencies
determine the adequacy of existing and planned future water
supplies to meet existing and planned future demands on those
water supplies."
In establishing the definition of a "project," the authors
strove to develop criteria that were easily identifiable to city
and county planning staff - such staff typically don't have the
background necessary to determine the water demand for a
project, but could easily determine the square footage of an
industrial park, for example.
In 2011, then Senator Rubio introduced SB 267. As heard in the
Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee, that bill would
AB 2561 (Irwin) Page 2
of ?
have revised the definition of "project" to exclude a renewable
energy plant that would not demand an amount of water equivalent
to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500
dwelling unit project.
As noted in the Natural Resources and Water Committee analysis
of SB 267, supporters offered at least three reasons for the
bill.
1)Avoiding litigation. In the aftermath of an appellate court
decision clarifying the application of the 40 acre definition
of a "project" under SB 610, opponents of solar projects in
San Diego County and San Bernardino County are challenging the
projects on the basis that the projects do not comply with
CEQA because there was no "water supply assessment" (WSA.)
2)Expediting Process. WSA's can be complex, particularly where
groundwater is used and no urban water management plan has
been prepared (typically the case because renewable energy
projects are usually in rural locales.) In addition to higher
costs, preparing a WSA can add several months to getting final
approval for a project.
3)Expiring Tax Credits. To qualify for the Production Tax
Credit for Renewable Energy, wind projects must be placed in
service by 12/1/2012.
The Natural Resources and Water Committee analysis of SB 267
also noted that "[w]hile an initial review of available studies
suggest that at least some photovoltaic and wind energy
facilities do indeed seem to use little water, industry specific
exemptions have not been tried in the context of SB 610
requirements. Consequently, it might make sense to impose a
sunset on the exemption."
Existing Law
Requires a WSA whenever a city or county determines a proposed
"project" is subject to CEQA. The WSA must be included in any
CEQA document prepared for the project. In turn, a provision of
AB 2561 (Irwin) Page 3
of ?
CEQA requires compliance with the SB 610 requirements.
1)Defines a "project" requiring a WSA is any of the following:
a) A proposed residential development of more than 500
dwelling units.
b) A proposed shopping center or business establishment
employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than
500,000 square feet of floor space.
c) A proposed commercial office building employing more
than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet
of floor space.
d) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500
rooms.
e) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing
plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000
persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having
more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.
Until 1/1/17, a proposed photovoltaic or wind energy
generation facility is not a project if the facility would
demand no more than 75 acre-feet of water annually.
f) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the
projects specified in this subdivision.
g) A project that would demand an amount of water
equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water
required by a 500 dwelling unit project.
2)The WSA is prepared by the public water system that may
AB 2561 (Irwin) Page 4
of ?
provide water for the project, or, if the city or county
identifies no such public water system, the city or county
prepares the WSA.
3)The WSA is required to include a discussion regarding whether
the total projected water supplies (during normal, single dry,
and multiple dry water years) over the next 20-years will meet
the projected water demand associated with the proposed
project, over and above that required for existing and planned
future uses. Further, when a water supply for a proposed
project includes groundwater, the WSA must include additional
information about the sufficiency of the groundwater supply.
PROPOSED LAW
Extends for one year the current exclusion of proposed
photovoltaic or wind energy facilities from the definition of a
"project" required to have a WSA.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, "AB 2561 will extend, by one year, an
exclusion from water supply assessments for large solar and wind
projects. These projects require very little water and thus
were exempted from the assessments through previous legislation.
A one year continuation of this exclusion will help ensure that
California is not delayed in reaching its renewable goals and
will allow a full vetting of this policy in the subsequent
legislative session."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The Sierra Club writes, "Water supply availability assessments
are tools to ensure that projects have access to water, and
should they need secondary sources, they can get that water
without significant impacts. This is an important tool to
prevent waterless development, a tragedy that we have faces
AB 2561 (Irwin) Page 5
of ?
repeatedly during this current drought. We should not drop this
tool for renewable energy, but instead ensure that renewable
energy is sited in places where there is adequate water to
service it. This will allow for a smoother increase in
renewable energy without causing water supply problems."
COMMENTS
Buys time. In the absence of this bill, the exemption would
expire. By extending the exemption one year, this bill will
allow for the reasoned analysis.
Positions Uncertain. The committee has a number of letters of
opposition to the August 19, 2016 version of the bill. Staff
has heard that many, but not all, of those oppose intend to
remove their opposition with the proposed amendments.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: Per RN 16 25313
SUPORT:
CalWEA
Independent Energy Producers Association
Large Scale Solar Association
OPPOSITION
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Special Districts Association
Center for Biological Diversity
Clean Water Action
Community Water Center
Defenders of Wildlife
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Food and Water Watch
Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
Sierra Club California
-- END --