BILL ANALYSIS
AB 435
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 435 (De La Torre) - As Amended: April 14, 2009
Policy Committee:
UtilitiesVote:15-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to
study the efficacy of state and federal agencies conducting
concurrent environmental reviews of proposed transmission
facilities.
FISCAL EFFECT
Minor absorbable costs to the PUC for the required assessment.
COMMENTS
Purpose . The author intends for this bill is to streamline the
transmission line siting process, which can take up to 10 years,
depending on the distance and complexity of the geography. The
California Independent System Operator (CAISO) performs much of
the transmission planning. The responsibility for actually
building the transmission lines lies with the
transmission-owning utilities, most of whom need to obtain prior
approval from the PUC. If it deems the project as warranted,
the PUC conducts a public hearing process and issues a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN). The
utilities must then initiate a filing at the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) to request cost-recovery for both
inter- and intra-state transmission lines.
The utilities are frequently delayed with construction because
the federal government owns much of the land that transmission
lines must cross. Of the federal government agencies required
to provide approval, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is
involved the most. The transmission-owning utilities are
AB 435
Page 2
concerned that the BLM process is too slow, there's not enough
staff, and the existing staff are spread too thin among the 50
states. The state imposes additional delays depending on
whether the transmission line traverses a state park, or whether
there's an endangered species in the proposed corridor. This
bill seeks better coordination in the pre-development process
among state and federal agencies, and particularly whether
certain required activities can be done simultaneously in order
to the reduce time required for project approval.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081