BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 267
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 28, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE
Jared Huffman, Chair
SB 267 (Rubio) - As Amended: April 13, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 37-1
SUBJECT : Water supply assessment: photovoltaic and wind
energy projects
SUMMARY : Specifies that a photovoltaic or wind energy plant
that uses water below a specific threshold is not subject to the
requirement to do a water supply assessment (WSA) just because
it is over 40 acres in size.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Revises the definition of "project" subject to a WSA to
exclude a proposed photovoltaic or wind energy generation
facility approved on or after the effective date of this bill
that demands an amount of water equivalent to, or less than,
the amount of water required by a 250 dwelling unit project.
2)Repeals, as of January 1, 2017, the exemption for photovoltaic
and wind energy projects by reverting to the prior definition
of a project.
EXISTING LAW
1) Requires a city or county that determines a project is
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to
identify any public water system that may supply water for
the project and to request those public water systems to
prepare a specified WSA.
2) Requires the city or county, if no public water system is
identified, to prepare the WSA.
3) Defines a "project" subject to a WSA as, among other things,
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.
SB 267
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS :
In 2001, the Legislature passed, and Governor Davis signed SB
610 (Costa), and SB 221 (Kuehl), Chapter 642, Statutes of 2001.
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."
To assist local governments in deciding whether to approve
projects, SB 610 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 CEQA requires compliance with the SB 610
requirements.
The WSA is prepared by the public water system that may provide
water for the project, or, if the city or county identifies no
such public water system, the city or county prepares the WSA.
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.
A project requiring a WSA can be any of the following proposed
uses: residential developments with over 500 dwelling units;
shopping centers or businesses that employ more than 1,000
persons or have more than 500,000 square feet of floor space;
commercial office buildings employing more than 1,000 persons or
having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space; hotels or
motels having more than 500 rooms; industrial, manufacturing, or
processing plants, or industrial parks 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; mixed-use
projects that include one or more of the above; or any other
project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or
SB 267
Page 3
greater than, the amount of water required by a 500 dwelling
unit project.
Supporting arguments: According to the author, "As California
moves toward requiring 33 percent of our energy to be from
renewable sources, we must do everything possible to reach this
important goal. SB 267 addresses a recent court decision that
has caused proposed renewable energy facilities to evaluate
project water needs beyond what is currently required in CEQA,
just because they will occupy 40 acres or more. Wind and solar
photovoltaic renewable energy projects do not use significant
water and should not be required to study water use above and
beyond CEQA. To apply a requirement that is clearly intended
for large water users will stymie the state's ongoing efforts to
encourage renewable energy projects." Supporters add that,
"Given the low water use of wind projects, applying the WSA
requirement to the CEQA process is an unnecessary expense and
delay that wind companies can ill afford, particularly now as
renewable projects are trying to qualify for the federal cash
grant program."
Opposing arguments : According to the Sierra Club, the "most
significant concern is the exemption of a renewable energy
project from the water supply assessment process. Regardless of
the possible noble intentions of a project, it is unjust and a
disservice to the existing community to approve a project
without assessing the impact to local water supply. With
California's water supply under intense pressure from climate
change, increasing population and development, the water supply
assessment process is the best safeguard to ensure a community's
vital water supply is not exhausted due to poor planning."
Other opponents to this bill state that they are worried about
the "precedent of codifying industry-specific exemptions from
�WSA] requirements."
Committee staff suggest that because the Legislature is taking
the extraordinary step of considering an industry-specific
exemption for photovoltaic and wind energy projects based on the
de minimis water usage of those technologies, it would be
prudent to lower the threshold in this bill (page 3, lines 6-8)
from "an amount of water equivalent to, or less than, the amount
of water required by 250 dwelling units" to a number that more
SB 267
Page 4
accurately reflects the actual maximum water usage that is
expected.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Wind Energy Association (co-source)
County of Kern (co-source)
NextEra Energy
Opposition
Association of California Water Agencies (unless amended)
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Sierra Club
Analysis Prepared by : Tina Cannon Leahy / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096