California lawmakers have advanced a bill aimed at streamlining approval of transmission projects, but not before substantially stripping down the legislation.
The Senate Environmental Quality Committee voted 6-0 on July 3 to pass an amended version of Assembly Bill 3238 by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia (D). The bill now goes to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
As previously proposed, AB 3238 would have removed a requirement for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for the expansion of an existing right-of-way for transmission lines and equipment on state land. The provision would have applied to an expanded right-of-way up to 200 feet wide and would have expired on Jan. 1, 2030.
The project to be sited on the expanded right-of-way would still be subject to CEQA, Garcia explained during the July 3 committee hearing. He said the idea was to remove duplicative review where rights-of-way exist and land is already disturbed.
“Let me be clear … if the current version of this bill goes into effect, not one shovel will go into the ground without a CEQA review of the project,” he told the committee.
But the bill was opposed by a long list of environmental and other groups. Some, including committee chair Sen. Ben Allen (D), worried about the impact on state parks.
“I’m personally not going to put my stamp on anything that’s going to make it easier for folks to run big transmission lines in the middle of a state park,” Allen said.
Opponents also objected to a provision in the bill that would have created a rebuttable presumption that the benefits of a transmission project outweighed its environmental impacts – if the project was included in a CAISO transmission plan.
Normally under CEQA, an agency must issue a statement of overriding consideration to allow a project to move forward despite environmental impacts.
Allen expressed concern that “we could be turning CEQA into just a rubberstamp process.”
“Creating a rebuttable presumption would replace the need to provide justification and evidence that the project is truly worth [the environmental impacts],” Allen said. “That’s the concern here.”
The section of the bill creating a rebuttable presumption was removed. It was replaced with a statement that under CEQA, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) “may include CAISO’s factual findings regarding a project’s objectives and benefits in the commission’s statement of objectives and any statement of overriding considerations.”
“Doing so is consistent with CEQA guidelines,” the new language states. “Nothing in CEQA requires the commission to ignore such findings and it is reasonable for the commission to recognize them.”
Meeting Climate Goals
Garcia said the goal of his legislation is to accelerate the buildout of electric transmission infrastructure to meet state climate goals.
“Our state has set these targets for a reason, right?” he said. “We’re not going to meet them if we don’t take these types of bold action.”
The amended bill retained a provision setting a 270-day limit for the CPUC to complete environmental review for a transmission project and decide whether to approve it.
It would also simplify a project applicant’s requirements to submit information at the beginning of the environmental review process.
Supporters of the previous version of the bill include San Diego Gas & Electric, Pacific Gas and Electric, Advanced Energy United and the California Community Choice Association.