AB 13 — Energy: renewable resources: endangered species: environmental impact reports.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 10, Statutes of 2011-12 First Extraordinary Session.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 07, 2011. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
5 sponsors
1 primary, 4 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 8 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
(1) The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) requires the Fish and Game Commission to establish a list of endangered species and a list of threatened species, and requires the Department of Fish and Game to recommend, and the commission to adopt, criteria for determining if a species is endangered or threatened. CESA authorizes the department to authorize the take of threatened species, endangered species, or candidate species by permit if certain requirements are met. CESA authorizes the department, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) and, to the extent practicable, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Bureau of Land Management, to design and implement actions to protect, restore, or enhance the habitat of plants and wildlife that can be used to fully mitigate the impacts of the take of endangered, threatened, or candidate species (mitigation actions) resulting from certain solar thermal and photovoltaic powerplants in the planning area of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. This bill additionally would authorize the department to design and implement these mitigation actions for proposed wind and geothermal powerplants in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. (2) Existing law requires the department to collect, and requires the owner or developer of an eligible project to pay, a one-time permit application fee of $75,000 to the department for deposit into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund. Existing law requires the department to utilize the permit application fee to pay for all or a portion of the department's cost of processing incidental take permit applications pursuant to CESA. This bill would additionally require the department, until January 1, 2016, to collect, and an owner or developer of an eligible project to pay, a permit application fee of either $25,000, $50,000, or $75,000, as specified, to the department for deposit into the Renewable Resources Permitting Account, to be established in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, to pay for all or a portion of the department's cost of processing incidental take permit applications and specified administrative expenses. The bill would define "eligible project" to mean an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. If the permit application fee is determined by the department to be insufficient to complete permitting work due to the complexity of a project, the bill would require the department to collect an additional fee from the owner or developer to pay for its estimated costs, not to exceed an additional $200,000. The bill would require the department and the Energy Commission to enter into a cost-sharing agreement, as specified, governing all eligible projects, as defined, that are subject to the commission's certification requirements. The bill would appropriate $6,000,000 from the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, thereby making an appropriation. Existing law establishes the Renewable Energy Resources Development Fee Trust Fund as a continuously appropriated fund in the State Treasury to serve, and be managed, as an optional, voluntary method for developers or owners of eligible projects, as defined, to deposit fees sufficient to complete mitigation actions established by the department and thereby meet their requirements pursuant to CESA or the certification authority of the Energy Commission. The definition of eligible projects, for purposes of these provisions and fees, is limited to certain solar thermal powerplants and photovoltaic powerplants proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. This bill would expand the definition of eligible projects to include wind and geothermal powerplants proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. By expanding the purposes for which moneys in this continuously appropriated fund may be used, this bill would make an appropriation. (3) The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act establishes the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , and requires it to certify sufficient sites and related facilities that are required to provide a supply of electricity sufficient to accommodate projected demand for power statewide. The act grants the Energy Commission the exclusive authority to certify any stationary or floating electrical generating facility using any source of thermal energy, with a generating capacity of 50 megawatts or more, and any facilities appurtenant thereto. Existing law requires the Energy Commission to establish a process for certain applicants for certification of a solar thermal powerplant that is proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, as defined, that allows the applicant to elect to pay additional fees to be used by the Energy Commission to contract with 3rd parties to assist the Energy Commission staff in performing the analysis otherwise performed by staff in determining whether or not to issue a certification. This bill would expand this process to include any applicant for certification of an eligible renewable energy resource. The bill would require the Energy Commission to provide $7,000,000 in grants to qualified counties, as defined, for the development or revision of rules and policies, including, but not limited to, general plan elements, zoning ordinances, and a natural community conservation plan as a plan participant, to facilitate the development of eligible renewable energy resources, and their associated electric transmission facilities, and the processing of permits for eligible renewable energy resources. The bill would require a general plan element or zoning ordinance that is adopted or revised pursuant to a grant to be completed within 2 years of receipt of the grant and be consistent with the conservation strategies of any natural community conservation plan, if one has been approved or is under development. The bill would prohibit the commission from awarding a grant to a county that is not a "plan participant," as defined, in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in its initial round of grant funding, to establish a preference for a grant to a qualified county in an amount that is adequate to develop a renewable energy element in its general plan that will facilitate the development and siting of eligible renewable energy resources that utilize multiple renewable energy technologies, and to also establish a preference for a grant for those counties that have experience in geothermal energy development and have adopted a geothermal element, as defined, to its general plan. (4) This bill would provide that Section 3 of this bill would be operative only if SB 16 of the 2011–12 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2012. This bill would require Section 3 of this bill to be operative on the effective date of this act or on the effective date of SB 16, whichever is later. (5) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 08/29/11 - Chaptered Current pdf August 29, 2011
- Enrolled 07/15/11 - Enrolled pdf July 15, 2011
- Amended 07/07/11 - Amended Senate pdf July 07, 2011
- Amended 07/01/11 - Amended Senate pdf July 01, 2011
- Amended 04/26/11 - Amended Senate pdf April 26, 2011
- Amended 03/01/11 - Amended Assembly pdf March 01, 2011
- Introduced 02/07/11 - Introduced pdf February 07, 2011
- AB13 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 10, Statutes of 2011-12 First Extraordinary Session.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 12:10 p.m.
-
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 57. Noes 18. Page 251.).
-
Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 48. Noes 25. Page 250.)
-
Assembly Rule 77 suspended.
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 12 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 11. Page 190.).
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (July 6).
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
In committee: Held under submission.
-
In committee: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 3.) (April 12).
-
Referred to Com. on N.R. & W.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 58. Noes 15. Page 91.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 11. Noes 5.) (March 2).
-
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Measure version as amended on March 1 corrected.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Read second time and amended.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 1.) (February 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
-
From printer.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Skinner · Cosponsor
- Bradford · Cosponsor
- Blanca E. Rubio · Cosponsor
- V. Manuel Pérez · Primary
- V. Manuel Pérez · Cosponsor
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 4 co-sponsors · 117 not signed on · 5 voted No
Sponsors (1)
Co-sponsors (4)
- Skinner
- Bradford
- Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic
- V. Manuel Pérez
Not signed on (117)
117 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 117 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 53 | 17 | 0 | 5 |
| Republican | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 57 | 18 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 23% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Not Voting |
| Gorell | — | Not Voting |
| Halderman | — | Nay |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Butler | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Hagman | — | Nay |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| John A. Pérez | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Nay |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Nay |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Silva | — | Nay |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Valadao | — | Nay |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Not Voting |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Achadjian | — | Nay |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Nay |
| Logue | — | Nay |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Mansoor | — | Nay |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Norby | — | Nay |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Not Voting |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Not Voting |
| Bonnie Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 27 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 29 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 73% | 28% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Negrete McLeod | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Rubio | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Vargas | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Nay |
| Cannella | — | Nay |
| Dutton | — | Nay |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Blakeslee | — | Nay |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Nay |
| La Malfa | — | Nay |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 67% | 33% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Emmerson | — | Nay |
| Runner | — | Nay |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 56% | 33% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Cannella | — | Nay |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Nay |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Not Voting |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| La Malfa | — | Nay |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 54 | 14 | 0 | 6 |
| Republican | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 58 | 15 | 0 | 6 |
| % of votes cast | 73% | 19% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (79)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Conway | — | Nay |
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Nay |
| Hagman | — | Nay |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Butler | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Gorell | — | Not Voting |
| John A. Pérez | — | Not Voting |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Halderman | — | Nay |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Not Voting |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Nay |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Nestande | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Norby | — | Nay |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Valadao | — | Nay |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Not Voting |
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Logue | — | Nay |
| Mansoor | — | Nay |
| Silva | — | Not Voting |
| Swanson | — | Not Voting |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Bonnie Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| V. Manuel Pérez | — | Yea |
| Allen, Benjamin | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Fong, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 65% | 29% | 0% | 6% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Not Voting |
| Harkey | — | Nay |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Donnelly | — | Nay |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Bradford | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Norby | — | Nay |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 11% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Dickinson | — | Yea |
| Halderman | — | Nay |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 13 do?
- (1) The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) requires the Fish and Game Commission to establish a list of endangered species and a list of threatened species, and requires the Department of Fish and Game to recommend, and the commission to adopt, criteria for determining if a species is endangered or threatened. CESA authorizes the department to authorize the take of threatened species, endangered species, or candidate species by permit if certain requirements are met. CESA authorizes the department, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) and, to the extent practicable, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the United States Bureau of Land Management, to design and implement actions to protect, restore, or enhance the habitat of plants and wildlife that can be used to fully mitigate the impacts of the take of endangered, threatened, or candidate species (mitigation actions) resulting from certain solar thermal and photovoltaic powerplants in the planning area of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. This bill additionally would authorize the department to design and implement these mitigation actions for proposed wind and geothermal powerplants in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. (2) Existing law requires the department to collect, and requires the owner or developer of an eligible project to pay, a one-time permit application fee of $75,000 to the department for deposit into the Fish and Game Preservation Fund. Existing law requires the department to utilize the permit application fee to pay for all or a portion of the department's cost of processing incidental take permit applications pursuant to CESA. This bill would additionally require the department, until January 1, 2016, to collect, and an owner or developer of an eligible project to pay, a permit application fee of either $25,000, $50,000, or $75,000, as specified, to the department for deposit into the Renewable Resources Permitting Account, to be established in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, to pay for all or a portion of the department's cost of processing incidental take permit applications and specified administrative expenses. The bill would define "eligible project" to mean an eligible renewable energy resource, as defined in the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program. If the permit application fee is determined by the department to be insufficient to complete permitting work due to the complexity of a project, the bill would require the department to collect an additional fee from the owner or developer to pay for its estimated costs, not to exceed an additional $200,000. The bill would require the department and the Energy Commission to enter into a cost-sharing agreement, as specified, governing all eligible projects, as defined, that are subject to the commission's certification requirements. The bill would appropriate $6,000,000 from the Fish and Game Preservation Fund, thereby making an appropriation. Existing law establishes the Renewable Energy Resources Development Fee Trust Fund as a continuously appropriated fund in the State Treasury to serve, and be managed, as an optional, voluntary method for developers or owners of eligible projects, as defined, to deposit fees sufficient to complete mitigation actions established by the department and thereby meet their requirements pursuant to CESA or the certification authority of the Energy Commission. The definition of eligible projects, for purposes of these provisions and fees, is limited to certain solar thermal powerplants and photovoltaic powerplants proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. This bill would expand the definition of eligible projects to include wind and geothermal powerplants proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. By expanding the purposes for which moneys in this continuously appropriated fund may be used, this bill would make an appropriation. (3) The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act establishes the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , and requires it to certify sufficient sites and related facilities that are required to provide a supply of electricity sufficient to accommodate projected demand for power statewide. The act grants the Energy Commission the exclusive authority to certify any stationary or floating electrical generating facility using any source of thermal energy, with a generating capacity of 50 megawatts or more, and any facilities appurtenant thereto. Existing law requires the Energy Commission to establish a process for certain applicants for certification of a solar thermal powerplant that is proposed to be constructed in the planning area subject to the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, as defined, that allows the applicant to elect to pay additional fees to be used by the Energy Commission to contract with 3rd parties to assist the Energy Commission staff in performing the analysis otherwise performed by staff in determining whether or not to issue a certification. This bill would expand this process to include any applicant for certification of an eligible renewable energy resource. The bill would require the Energy Commission to provide $7,000,000 in grants to qualified counties, as defined, for the development or revision of rules and policies, including, but not limited to, general plan elements, zoning ordinances, and a natural community conservation plan as a plan participant, to facilitate the development of eligible renewable energy resources, and their associated electric transmission facilities, and the processing of permits for eligible renewable energy resources. The bill would require a general plan element or zoning ordinance that is adopted or revised pursuant to a grant to be completed within 2 years of receipt of the grant and be consistent with the conservation strategies of any natural community conservation plan, if one has been approved or is under development. The bill would prohibit the commission from awarding a grant to a county that is not a "plan participant," as defined, in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. The bill would require the Energy Commission, in its initial round of grant funding, to establish a preference for a grant to a qualified county in an amount that is adequate to develop a renewable energy element in its general plan that will facilitate the development and siting of eligible renewable energy resources that utilize multiple renewable energy technologies, and to also establish a preference for a grant for those counties that have experience in geothermal energy development and have adopted a geothermal element, as defined, to its general plan. (4) This bill would provide that Section 3 of this bill would be operative only if SB 16 of the 2011–12 Regular Session is enacted and becomes effective on or before January 1, 2012. This bill would require Section 3 of this bill to be operative on the effective date of this act or on the effective date of SB 16, whichever is later. (5) The California Constitution authorizes the Governor to declare a fiscal emergency and to call the Legislature into special session for that purpose. Governor Schwarzenegger issued a proclamation declaring a fiscal emergency, and calling a special session for this purpose, on December 6, 2010. Governor Brown issued a proclamation on January 20, 2011, declaring and reaffirming that a fiscal emergency exists and stating that his proclamation supersedes the earlier proclamation for purposes of that constitutional provision. This bill would state that it addresses the fiscal emergency declared and reaffirmed by the Governor by proclamation issued on January 20, 2011, pursuant to the California Constitution.
- Who sponsors AB 13?
- AB 13 is sponsored by Skinner, Bradford, Rubio, Blanca E. (Democratic), and V. Manuel Pérez.
- What is the current status of AB 13?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 07, 2011. Enacted.
- Where can I track AB 13?
- Track AB 13 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 13
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 13
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →