HB1871 – Establishes a moratorium on the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council’s siting alternative energy facilities, pending a report on the Energy Independence Act and recommendations of a Joint Legislative Committee.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Klicker (R; 16th District; Walla Walla) (Co-Sponsors Dent, Chase, Ybarra, and Sutherland – Rs)
Current status – Scheduled for a hearing in the House Committee on Environment and Energy Friday January 25th at 8:00 AM.
Next step would be – Action by the committee.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.

Comments –
The bill’s findings assert that viewshed, wildlife, and land use patterns in specific counties of the state are being permanently impacted to deliver carbon-free energy benefits to the most populous counties of the state; that voters in those counties opposed the renewable energy mandate in I-937, but have ended up with the projects and transmission lines that required; that they feel these facilities have not brought the promised “green jobs,” meaningful tax revenue, or local environmental benefits “in so far as these local communities were already served with clean, affordable hydroelectric energy”; and that the Legislature should consider providing producer counties with mitigation payments, viewshed impairment payments, or supplemental economic development assistance to improve equity and environmental justice.

Summary –
The bill would establish a moratorium on siting alternative energy facilities through the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council process, which allows bypassing the local permitting process in certain cases, pending a comprehensive performance report on the effects of the Energy Independence Act and the recommendations of a Joint Legislative Committee.

By December 1, 2022, the Department of Commerce would have to submit a report on alternative energy siting inequity to a Joint Select Committee and the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature. The report would have to contain an assessment of the beneficial impact of the energy independence act on Washington’s fuel mix, including:
(a) An assessment of the beneficial impact of the energy independence act on Washington’s fuel mix, including the percentage of that coming from the renewable resources promised and promoted by the Act; and a calculation of the cumulative expenditures between 2006 and 2020 on compliance costs by each electric utility subject to the Act to meet its requirements for using renewable energy resources; purchasing of renewable energy credits; and spending four percent of retail revenues on renewable resources.
(b) An assessment of the capital expenditures in each county in Washington on renewable resources in each of those years;
(c) An assessment of the impacts associated with those capital expenditures on state and local tax revenue, the property tax base in each county, and the sources of revenues dedicated to local school districts, including the impacts, if any, on state and local effort assistance funding;
(d) An identification of the number and type of jobs created in each county as a result of implementing the Act, categorizing them as short-term construction jobs; long-term jobs outlasting facility construction; regulatory or compliance jobs created at state agencies, electric utilities, or local governments; and jobs related to the production or marketing of electricity from a new renewable energy resource;
(e) A calculation of the cumulative incremental cost above the least cost wholesale energy resource of compliance with the Act’s targets – for each utility, and in aggregate for all utilities in Washington;
(f) A calculation of the incremental cost of renewable resources eligible under the Act, including wind and solar, relative to other nongreenhouse gas emitting energy resources, such as electricity derived from nuclear or hydroelectric facilities, based on the average wholesale market price of electricity from those other nongreenhouse gas emitting energy resources during these years, and,
(g) A generalized description and map of the areas of Washington that electric utilities consider to have available resources for potentially economical utility-scale wind or solar energy facility development.

It would require the Department of Commerce to form a utility technical advisory group to consult in preparing the report, inviting the participation of a representative from each utility that currently subject to the Act’s renewable energy and conservation requirements. (Commerce could also ask for input from other utilities.)

The bill would create a Joint Legislative Committee on alternative energy facility siting, consisting of two Senators and two Representatives from each party, and alternates, chosen by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House. It would review the report, and review inequities in where large alternative energy projects have been sited in Washington; inequities in where they are expected to be sited, and forms of economic development assistance, mitigation payments, and viewshed impairment payments that counties not hosting their per capita share of alternative energy resources “should provide” to counties that host more than their per capita share. The Committee would report its findings and any
recommendations to the committees of the Legislature with jurisdiction over environment and energy laws by December 1, 2023. Recommendations could be made by a simple majority, and two or more members could report minority findings if the committee didn’t reach majority-supported recommendations.