BILL ANALYSIS 1
1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
AB 1529 - Wyman Hearing Date:
June 25, 2002 A
As Amended: January 10, 2002 FISCAL B
1
5
2
9
DESCRIPTION
Existing law requires public utilities to secure a certificate
of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) from the California
Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) prior to constructing any gas
or electric line, plant or system.
Existing law , the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA), requires CEQA
lead agencies, including the CPUC, to approve or disapprove
development projects within 180 days of certification of the
project Environmental Impact Report, or 60 days from adoption of
a negative declaration or determination of exemption from CEQA.
The PSA further requires responsible agencies to approve or
disapprove development projects within 180 days of a lead
agency's approval.
Existing law , SB 960 (Leonard, Peace, and Sher), Chapter 856,
Statutes of 1996, states the intent of the Legislature that the
CPUC establish reasonable time periods for the resolution of
proceedings, that it meet those deadlines, and requires the
CPUC's final decision to be issued not later than 60 days after
the issuance of the proposed decision in rate-setting
proceedings.
This bill requires the CPUC to act "as expeditiously as
possible," but in no event exceed the PSA timelines, when
reviewing or acting upon an application for a CPCN to authorize
the construction of any gas or electric plant, line or
extension.
BACKGROUND
The CPUC's process for issuing a CPCN for major utility
construction projects includes environmental review pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In many cases,
the CPUC is the lead agency under CEQA. The notable exception
is an application to construct a thermal power plant over 50
megawatts, in which case the California Energy Commission is
functionally the CEQA lead agency. The CPUC may share lead
agency responsibilities with a federal agency in cases where
joint CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act review are
required.
The Permit Streamlining Act currently applies to the CPUC in
general, in any proceeding where CEQA applies, including a CPCN
or a Permit to Construct, which apply to electric transmission
projects less than 200 kV. CPCN proceedings are generally
categorized as rate-setting, so the SB 960 deadlines referenced
above also apply.
According to the author, California was in an energy crisis, and
still has energy supply needs.
COMMENTS
1)The law is the law . It is unclear what requiring the CPUC to
"act as expeditiously as possible" would do to change its
treatment of applications for CPCNs. As noted above, the
CPUC, in its review of a CPCN, is currently subject to the
PSA, so it is already prevented from exceeding the timelines
set forth in that Act.
2)Does one size fit all? While this bill appears simply to
duplicate existing law, it may be more restrictive than the
PSA. One could argue that this bill would prevent the
extension of PSA-prescribed timelines by mutual agreement.
The PSA provides for extension by mutual agreement, but this
bill says PSA timelines may be exceeded "in no event." One
consequence could be that the CPUC is compelled to deny a CPCN
application at the expiration of the timeline, which would
necessitate re-filing, even if the applicant wanted an
extension. The bill does not provide for penalties or
otherwise say what happens if the timelines are exceeded.
ASSEMBLY VOTES
Assembly Floor (44-3)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (19-0)
Assembly Natural Resources Committee
(8-0)
Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee
(15-0)
POSITIONS
Sponsor:
Author
Support:
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Oppose:
None on file
Lawrence Lingbloom
AB 1529 Analysis
Hearing Date: June 25, 2002