BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  SB 1059|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 445-6614         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                              UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 1059
          Author:   Escutia (D) and Morrow (R)
          Amended:  8/21/06
          Vote:     21

           
           SEN. ENERGY, UTIL. & COMMUNICATIONS COMM.  :  10-0, 4/5/05
          AYES:  Escutia, Alarcon, Battin,Bowen, Campbell, Cox, Dunn,  
            Kehoe, Murray, Simitian

           SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE  :  9-0, 4/20/05
          AYES:  Kehoe, Cox, Ackerman, Kuehl, Machado, McClintock,  
            Perata, Soto, Torlakson

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  13-0, 5/26/05
          AYES:  Migden, Aanestad, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn, Battin,  
            Dutton, Escutia, Florez, Murray, Ortiz, Poochigian,  
            Romero

           SENATE FLOOR  :  34-1, 6/1/05
          AYES:  Aanestad, Ackerman, Alarcon, Alquist, Ashburn,  
            Battin, Bowen, Campbell, Cedillo, Cox, Denham, Ducheny,  
            Dunn, Dutton, Escutia, Figueroa, Florez, Kehoe, Kuehl,  
            Lowenthal, Maldonado, Margett, Migden, Morrow, Murray,  
            Perata, Poochigian, Romero, Scott, Simitian, Soto,  
            Speier, Torlakson, Vincent
          NOES:  Hollingsworth
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Chesbro, Machado, McClintock, Ortiz,  
            Runner

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  76-0, 8/28/06 - See last page for vote


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               SB 1059
                                                                Page  
          2

           SUBJECT  :    Electric transmission corridors

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill authorizes the California Energy  
          Commission to designate electric transmission corridor  
          zones, according to a specified process, in which  
          high-voltage electric transmission lines may be built in  
          the future.

           Assembly Amendments  make the following procedural changes  
          (1) the bill no longer requires a city or county to adjust  
          their general plan to be consistent with a transmission  
          corridor zone designated by the California Energy  
          Commission, but requires them to consider the designation  
          when making discussions about proposed land use changes,  
          and (2) the bill now requires the California Energy  
          Commission to review the necessity of designated  
          transmission corridor zones every 10 years instead of every  
          six years.  The amendments also make clarifying, technical  
          changes.

           ANALYSIS  :    Under current law, cities and counties are  
          required to adopt general plans for land use.

          Existing law also provides that the construction of  
          transmission lines is subject to certification, by the  
          Public Utilities Commission (PUC), of public convenience  
          and necessity.  The certification process includes such  
          things as environmental review, and confers eminent domain  
          authority for the project.

          Existing law, SB 1565 (Bowen), Chapter 692, Statutes of  
          2004, requires the California Energy Commission (CEC) to  
          include in its biennial Integrated Energy Policy Report  
          (IEPR) a strategic plan for the state's electric  
          transmission grid.  The next IEPR is due November 1, 2005.

          This bill, in order to identify and reserve for future use  
          land that is suitable for high-voltage transmission lines,  
          authorizes the CEC to designate electric "transmission  
          corridor zones", according to a specified process in which  
          high-voltage electric transmission lines may be built in  







                                                               SB 1059
                                                                Page  
          3

          the future.  

          This bill also:

          1.Specifies the CEC may designate a transmission corridor  
            zone on its own motion or in response to an application  
            from a person seeking a transmission corridor zone  
            designation based on its future plans to construct a  
            high-voltage electric transmission line.

          2.Requires the CEC to charge an applicant for all costs  
            associated with reviewing the application.  For a  
            designation proposed by the CEC, the CEC's costs are to  
            be covered by revenues from the existing energy resources  
            surcharge (for which the CEC is funded through the Energy  
            Resources Programs Account).

          3.Makes the CEC the lead agency, for purposes of the  
            California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), for the  
            designation of any transmission corridor zone.

          4.Requires the CEC to notify affected cities, counties,  
            state and federal agencies, and Native American tribes of  
            a proposed transmission corridor zone and requests that  
            these entities review and provide comments regarding the  
            application.

          5.Authorizes a city or county, upon receiving a request per  
            #4 above, to request a fee form the CEC to cover the  
            city's or county's costs to review a proposed  
            designation.

          6.Requires the affected city or county, upon CEC  
            designation of a transmission corridor zone, to consider  
            the designation when making a land use change within or  
            adjacent to the transmission corridor zone.

          7.Requires an affected city or county, within 10 days of  
            accepting as complete an application for a development  
            project that could threaten the potential construction of  
            a high-voltage line within a transmission corridor zone,  
            to notify the CEC of the proposed project.

          8.Authorizes the CEC, upon notification per #7 above, to  







                                                               SB 1059
                                                                Page  
          4

            recommend revisions to the project to eliminate the  
            threat, and requires the city or county to consider the  
            CEC's recommendation and provide written comments.

           Comments

          Purpose  .  According to the author's office, the purpose of  
          this bill is to provide direction on electric transmission  
          infrastructure and to coordinate planning and permitting  
          for transmission projects, which is currently divided  
          between a multitude of federal, state, and local agencies,  
          as well as private corporations, who either own or manage  
          pieces of the transmission grid.
           Background  .  The CEC's 2003 Integrated Energy Policy Report  
          claims that the state's bulk transmission system needs  
          major upgrades and improvements.  The CEC says there is a  
          gap between its policy documents and the construction of  
          high-voltage transmission lines.  The CEC claims no one is  
          identifying the corridors needed for future transmission  
          lines, nor is anyone protecting these pathways from  
          encroachment by development.

          In response to the fact that no specific state agency was  
          charged with planning for the future of the transmission  
          system as a whole, SB 2565 (Bowen), Chapter 962, Statutes  
          of 2004, was enacted to require the CEC to develop a  
          strategic transmission plan that recommends actions  
          required to implement investments needed to ensure  
          reliability, relieve congestion, and to meet future growth  
          in load and generation.  The strategic plan was required to  
          be included in the IEPR adopted on November 1, 2005.  As  
          part of the SB 1565 process, the CEC identified and  
          evaluated potential transmission corridors to accommodate  
          future siting and construction of needed transmission  
          lines.  The CEC transmission plan is only a recommendation  
          and does not possess the authority to formally designate  
          such corridors to ensure that they will be available when  
          needed.

           Opposition  .  Just as a local zoning ordinance does not  
          approve specific developments, the designation of a  
          transmission corridor zone pursuant to the bill would not  
          constitute approval in whole or in part of any specific  
          transmission project, nor would a transmission corridor  







                                                               SB 1059
                                                                Page  
          5

          zone designation substitute for any of the federal, state  
          or local permits required to construct a transmission line  
          itself.  Similarly, the designation of a transmission  
          corridor zone would not give eminent domain authority to a  
          project proponent, or justify condemnation of specific  
          properties necessary to accommodate the construction of a  
          transmission line.  Those procedures follow an application  
          to construct a transmission line with the relevant  
          permitting agencies, like the Public Utilities Commission  
          and others, and not the CEC.

          The PUC is opposed to this bill because currently the PUC  
          is the lead agency in the siting of all transmission lines  
          and substations for applications submitted by the  
          investor-owned utilities.  The PUC is concerned that this  
          bill would confuse and complicate this arrangement by  
          turning aspects of the siting of transmission lines over to  
          the CEC by allowing applicants to apply directly to the CEC  
          for transmission corridor designation, and by requiring the  
          CED to be the lead CEQA agency.  The bill creates a new  
          planning tool which doesn't currently exist and doesn't  
          conflict with any existing authority.

          In response, the author's office indicates that designation  
          of transmission corridors is intended as an optional  
          up-front planning process, to identify areas suitable for  
          future transmission lines, and that will precede the  
          permitting process for any particular line.  The PUC will  
          continue as the permitting agency for the investor-owned  
          utilities that are subject to its jurisdiction.  Among its  
          decision-making responsibilities for investor-owned utility  
          transmission applications, the PUC will also remain the  
          CEQA lead agency.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  Yes

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/29/06) 

          California Energy Commission
          California Chamber of Commerce
          Department of Finance
          Imperial Irrigation District Energy
          Office of the Governor







                                                               SB 1059
                                                                Page  
          6

          Pacific Gas and Electric Company
          Sempra Energy

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  8/29/06) 

          Public Utilities Commission


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Aghazarian, Arambula, Baca, Bass, Benoit, Berg,  
            Bermudez, Blakeslee, Bogh, Calderon, Canciamilla, Chan,  
            Chavez, Chu, Cogdill, Cohn, Coto, Daucher, De La Torre,  
            DeVore, Dymally, Emmerson, Evans, Frommer, Garcia,  
            Haynes, Jerome Horton, Shirley Horton, Houston, Huff,  
            Jones, Karnette, Keene, Klehs, Koretz, La Malfa, La Suer,  
            Laird, Leno, Leslie, Levine, Lieber, Lieu, Liu, Matthews,  
            Maze, McCarthy, Montanez, Mountjoy, Nakanishi, Nation,  
            Nava, Negrete McLeod, Niello, Oropeza, Parra, Pavley,  
            Plescia, Richman, Ridley-Thomas, Sharon Runner, Ruskin,  
            Saldana, Salinas, Spitzer, Strickland, Torrico, Tran,  
            Umberg, Vargas, Villines, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee,  
            Nunez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Goldberg, Hancock, Mullin, Vacancy


          NC:cm  8/29/06   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****