Cities Index.
Agenda Item

Cotati City Council
July 9, 2024

Document
Agenda Item
Meeting
July 9, 2024
Body
Cotati City Council
Original file
97 KB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on cotaticity.primegov.com. That file is the official record.

Cotati City Council
Agenda Staff Report
Item type: REGULAR AGENDA (ACTION)
To: City Council
Subject: DISCUSS AND POTENTIALLY TAKE A POSITION ON
SENATE BILL (SB) 1298, CERTIFICATION OF THERMAL
POWERPLANTS: DATA CENTERS.

Date: July 9, 2024
Written by: Damien O'Bid, City Manager
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council review and discuss SB 1298 and determine if the City Council will issue a letter of opposition to this bill.

Background
At the June 25, 2024 City Council meeting, under Future Agenda Items, the City Council requested that staff agendize a discussion on SB 1298 for the July 9, 2024 City Council meeting.

Existing law vests the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission with the exclusive power to certify all locations on which an electrical transmission line or thermal powerplant is constructed, or is proposed to be constructed, and related electrical transmission lines or thermal powerplants. Existing law authorizes the commission to exempt from certification a thermal powerplant with a generating capacity of up to 100 megawatts, and modifications to existing generating facilities that do not add capacity in excess of 100 megawatts, if the commission finds that no substantial adverse impact on the environment or energy resources will result from the construction or operation of the proposed facility or from the modifications.

Under California Public Resources Code, Section 25120, a “Thermal powerplant” means 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. Exploratory, development, and production wells, resource transmission lines, and other related facilities used in connection with a geothermal exploratory project or a geothermal field development project are not appurtenant facilities for the purposes of this division. “Thermal powerplant” does not include any wind, hydroelectric, or solar photovoltaic electrical generating facility.

Analysis/Discussion
This bill would additionally authorize the commission to exempt from certification a thermal powerplant with a generating capacity of up to 150 megawatts if specified requirements are met, including that it is used solely as a backup generation facility for a data center, it is located on the customer side of the meter and is not interconnected to the distribution system, a skilled and trained workforce is used to perform all construction work on the facility, as specified, the commission finds that no substantial adverse impact on the environment or energy resources will result from the construction and operation of the facility, and the commission obtains a determination from the applicable air pollution control district or air quality management district that the facility’s backup generation technology meets the best available control technology. requirements. The bill would automatically repeal its provisions on January 1, 2030.

At the time of publication of this agenda item, SB 1298 has passed out of the Senate and is in the Assembly policy committee. As indicated on the attached documents, Cal Cities has taken a ”watch” position on this bill, so is neither supporting or opposing the bill in its current form.

If the City Council wishes to issue a letter of opposition, the attached template opposition letter is the suggested template to use.

Financial Considerations
There is no direct financial impact to the City by issuing a letter of opposition.

Environmental Issues
If a letter of opposition is issued by the City Council, it will not have a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be determined with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA review. This general rule can be applied to activities which could be subject to the CEQA process, but which logic dictates should not be subject to CEQA review. Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed resolution is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 14.03.021 of the CEQA Guidelines in that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant impact on the environment.

← All documents from this meeting