Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Renewable Energy Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Counties seek ability to recover NEPA review costs for renewable projects under AB 70
Summary
Nevada Association of Counties presented AB 70, a compromise bill allowing counties to recover up to $50,000 in actual costs to review renewable energy project applications subject to NEPA. Supporters framed the measure as a stability tool for local engagement; industry witnesses remained neutral after months of negotiation.
Vincent Guthro, executive director of the Nevada Association of Counties, told the Senate Committee on Growth and Infrastructure that Assembly Bill 70 provides a mechanism for counties to recover the actual costs of reviewing renewable energy applications that trigger the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
"This bill and its first reprint represents a lot of compromise, and a lot of work that was done for an agreement between local entities and renewable energy developers," Guthro said, summarizing the bill's intent to allow counties to recover up to $50,000 in actual costs for NEPA‑related review and planning.
What the bill does: Guthro described provisions that permit prepayment with a refund if prepayments exceed actual costs, allow developers to request proof of actual costs before reimbursement, and avoid preempting previously negotiated local agreements. The bill would not retroactively alter local ordinances or special use permits that predate a project's NEPA‑triggered application.
Stakeholder reaction: Jayna Moan of The Nature Conservancy said TNC supports AB 70 because it provides counties a pathway to greater engagement on permitting renewable facilities and transmission. Industry witnesses, including the Solar Energy Industries Association, testified they were neutral after months of discussions and amendments and thanked NACO for its work on balancing county participation while allowing projects to proceed.
Why it matters: Proponents said the measure addresses county capacity and helps ensure local governments can participate meaningfully in the federal permitting process without derailing development. Supporters framed AB 70 as a compromise that clarifies reimbursement while preserving local negotiation and economic development.
Next steps: Committee testimony closed with the sponsor and stakeholders in neutral or supportive positions; no vote was recorded in the hearing transcript.
