BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2595
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2595 (Hall) - As Amended: May 1, 2012
Policy Committee: Water, Parks and
Wildlife Vote: 9-1
Natural Resources 6-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) to convene
a taskforce of specified public agencies and private
stakeholders to consider ways to improve the statewide
permitting process for seawater desalination and to submit a
report, by December 31, 2012, to the Legislature on that topic.
The bill appropriates, to the Department of Water Resources
(DWR), $250,000 from Proposition 84's Safe Drinking Water and
Water Quality Projects monies to pay for the work of convening
the taskforce.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)One-time costs of an unknown amount, collectively in the low
hundreds of thousands, to the following agencies to
participate in the taskforce and prepare the report: OPC,
DWR, the State Water Resources Control Board, State Lands
Commission, Coastal Commission, Department of Public Health,
California Energy Commission, Environmental Protection Agency,
Natural Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation
and Department of Fish and Game (various special funds).
2)One-time appropriation of $250,000 from Proposition 84's Safe
Drinking Water and Water Quality Projects monies. (DWR
reports that, of the Proposition 84 funds identified by this
bill, only $25,000 remains available for appropriation.)
3)Cost pressure in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars to
fund the work of the public agencies participating in the
taskforce (General Fund, special funds and bond funds.)
AB 2595
Page 2
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. The author reports that, in some cases, a
desalination project must apply for about 30 local, state and
federal permits, which often requires duplicative information
or related information in a slightly different format. The
effect, the author contends, are costly and unnecessary delays
to projects that increase water supplies while diversifying
the state's water portfolio. The author intends the taskforce
and report required by this bill to identify improvements to
the desalination permitting process that maintain other
regulatory requirements, such as environmental protection.
2)Background . Water desalination refers to the removal of salt
and dissolved solids from brackish water or seawater.
Desalination is a recognized part of the state's water
portfolio and has the potential to supply considerable amounts
of drinking water to California. However, desalination
projects potentially harm natural resources and the
environment. In any case, attempts to establish desalination
project have been limited in California, despite its
successful use in other parts of the world, due to high energy
use and great expense. Recently, the relative cost of
desalination has decreased, increasing interest in, and
requests for permitting for, specific desalination projects.
Under current law, proposed desalination projects necessarily
require permitting by multiple agencies, depending upon the
location of the proposed project, its characteristics and the
characteristics of the site of the proposed project. Existing
law provides permitting authority to various local, state and
federal agencies with authority over decisions concerning
issues such as land use, threatened and endangered species,
state lands, public health and welfare, transportation and
utilities. For example, any project in the Coastal Zone must
be approved by the Coastal Commission, while projects on tide
and submerged lands and beds of navigable channels, streams,
rivers, creeks, lakes, bays and inlets generally must be
permitted by the State Coastal Commission.
In 2002, the Legislature passed AB 2717 (Chapter 957,
Hertzberg), which directed DWR to convene the California Water
Desalination Task Force to report to the Legislature on
potential opportunities and impediments to using desalination,
AB 2595
Page 3
and to examine what role, if any, the state should play in
furthering the use of desalination technologies. The
following statement was included among the report's many
findings: economically and environmentally acceptable
desalination should be considered as part of a balanced water
portfolio to help meet California's existing and future water
supply and environmental needs.
The report made 29 recommendations, including several
regarding desalination projects, in general, and desalination
permitting, in particular, many of which have yet to be
implemented. Notable among those recommendations was (a) the
need to review each desalination project on a case-by-case
basis to ensure adequate consideration of the unique
characteristics of each project and the local environment in
which the project would operate, and (b) that desalination,
where economically and environmentally appropriate, should be
an element of a balanced water supply portfolio, which also
includes conservation and water recycling to the maximum
extent practicable.
In 2006, voters approved Proposition 84-the Safe Drinking
Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and
Coastal Protection Bond Act. Proposition 84 authorizes $5.4
billion in general obligation bonds to fund safe drinking
water, water quality and supply, flood control, waterway and
natural resource protection, water pollution and contamination
control, state and local park improvements, public access to
natural resources, and water conservation efforts. The
proposition designates $1 billion to DWR for grants for
projects that help local public agencies meet the long term
water needs of the state, including the delivery of safe
drinking water and the protection of water quality and the
environment. Of that $1 billion allocation, $900 million was
designated for projects in specific regions, leaving $100
million available to DWR for multi-regional needs or issues of
statewide significance.
3)Support. This bill is supported by CalDesal (sponsor) and
other water industry groups, as well as the Metropolitan Water
District of Southern California and some municipal water
agencies, who would benefit from faster, less costly
permitting of desalination projects.
4)Opposition . This bill is opposed by the Natural Resources
AB 2595
Page 4
Defense Council, the Sierra Club and other environmental and
conservation advocacy groups who contend it vital that water
desalination undergo thorough, case-by-case review by all
relevant agencies before being permitted.
These opponents argue (a) the proponents have failed to
demonstrate a problem; (b) the bill contradicts state's
balanced portfolio approach to water policy by privileging
desalination over other water supply solutions; and (c) the
bill would inappropriately use oversubscribed public bond fund
monies to fund an activity that mainly benefits private
entities with the resources to develop, recommend and advocate
desalination permitting reforms on their own.
Opponents note Coastal Commission data that shows that the
desalination permitting times by that agency average seven
months, if one excludes the permitting times for projects
submitted by one project applicant that the commission
describes as intentionally uncooperative.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081