Solar Power Installations:
Navigating Environmental and
Regulatory Issues to Reduce Risk
Michael Gorton, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, Principal Solar
Scott D. Deatherage, Partner, Patton Boggs LLP
Copyright 2011. Definitive Solar Library, Michael Gorton &
Scott D. Deatherage. All rights reserved.
Solar Power
Installations:
Navigating
Environmental and
Regulatory Issues to
Reduce Risk
All too often, solar power project managers hear
the words, “It’s a good project, but it’s located in
the wrong place.” The biggest issues surrounding the
development of medium to large solar projects stem
from lack of research into when and where to build in
order to predict how long a project will take. The most
important consideration relates to environmental
issues, including endangered species and local land
use laws. Both can pose enormous risks for developers
at the local, state and federal levels.
Many large solar energy projects are being proposed
in California’s desert area on land designated by the
federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM). BLM has
received right-of-way requests encompassing more
than 300,000 acres for the development of approximately 34 large solar thermal power plants totaling
approximately 24,000 megawatts.1 These large-scale
efforts to generate electricity without carbon dioxide
emissions have turned the protected desert tortoise
into a symbol of the potential environmental impact—
and impasse—that accompanies these projects.
Karen Douglas, the chairwoman of the California
Energy Commission, which licenses large-scale solar
power plants, said the best way to avoid conflicts
between renewable energy and desert tortoises is for
developers to choose areas not favored by the animal. 2
Michael Gorton—Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman, Principal Solar
Michael Gorton, Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of Principal Solar, is a founding CEO of
TelaDoc, the nation’s leading telehealth company,
where he pioneered a health care model in which
members had access to telephonic physicians
who could review medical records, treat, and
prescribe medication that today supports the
new paradigm in health care reform.
Scott D. Deatherage—Partner, Patton
Boggs LLP
Scott Deatherage, a partner at Patton Boggs LLP,
advises clients on a variety of environmental,
renewable energy, climate change and greenhouse gas regulation. His practice focuses on
permitting, compliance, administrative law and
judicial litigation on a variety of environmental
issues including air emissions, wastewater discharges, hazardous waste, hazardous substances
and toxic substances. He is the author of Carbon
Trading Law and Practice, a comprehensive practical guide to the U.S. and international practice
of carbon emissions trading, which includes a
thorough examination of climate change and
greenhouse gas regulation, emissions trading,
international and EU law, other reduction
programs, carbon credit financing, and the U.S.
regulatory regime for greenhouse gas emissions
and emissions trading.
The Definitive Solar Library is an online resource
for experts, authors and researchers interested in
solar. While may of the papers and resources are
developed inhouse by Definitive and it’s sister
company, Principal Solar, we welcome all authors
that are developing projects and or writing on
topics relevant to the development of the Solar
industry.
For more information, please visit the website:
http://www.DefinitiveSolar.com
A document from the Definitive Library of Solar. © Copyright 2011: Principal Solar, Michael Gorton, Scott D. Deatherage.
All rights reserved. www.DefinitiveSolar.com
1
This is true for all endangered species. Therefore, it’s essential that solar companies and their investors understand the
laws, regulations, and environmental impact before work gets underway. In the case of both medium and large-size
solar power projects, they are well advised to hire an environmental consultant and an environmental attorney to
guide them through both the technical and legal issues related to siting solar projects.
The environmental statutes that may apply to these projects are complex, and require good environmental counsel.
Some of the laws that have led to delays, halting of, or major changes to projects include the National Environmental
Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.
The Regulatory Environment: National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA))
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is a U.S. environmental law that established a U.S. national policy
promoting the enhancement of the environment and also established the President’s Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ).
NEPA’s most significant effect was to set up procedural requirements for all federal government agencies to prepare
Environmental Assessments (EAs) and Environmental Impact Statements (EISs). EAs and EISs contain statements of
the environmental effects of proposed federal agency actions.3 NEPA’s procedural requirements apply to all federal
agencies in the executive branch.4 Using the NEPA process, agencies are required to determine if their proposed actions
have significant environmental effects and to consider the environmental and related social and economic effects of
their proposed actions.5 If impacts are identified, the agency would be required to conduct a detailed analysis of those
impacts and issue an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In interpreting NEPA, the Supreme Court has ruled that
federal agencies whose actions are subject to NEPA must take a “hard look” at the environmental impacts caused by
their actions.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires government agencies in making decisions that would affect threatened or
endangered species to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) when governmental action would result in
a “taking” of an endangered species The provision of the law in Section 4 that establishes critical habitat is a regulatory
link between habitat protection and recovery goals, requiring the identification and protection of all lands, water
and air necessary to recover endangered species.6 To determine what exactly is critical habitat, the needs of open
space for individual and population growth, food, water, light or other nutritional requirements, breeding sites, seed
germination and dispersal needs, and lack of disturbances are considered.7
In NEPA cases, environmental groups or concerned individuals or entities may challenge the decision regarding
whether an action would result in significant environmental impacts, whether the EIS study and report were conducted
properly, among other decisions and actions taken under the NEPA or which the plaintiffs argue failed to comply with
NEPA. The decisions are often challenged under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) as well. An arbitrary and
capricious standard is generally applied by courts in reviewing agency decisions subject to NEPA.
2
California and Massachusetts, for example, have their own state versions of NEPA, which are often more strict than the
federal act. On May 12, 2009, the State of Tennessee filed an application with the U.S. Department of Energy to access
Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) funds for its West Tennessee Solar Farm Project in Haywood County, Tenn.
The Environment Assessment report issued by the Department of Energy on September 2010, it was 98 pages long—
to provide an idea of its depth and complexity.
3
Kilowatt (kW): One thousand watts.
• Ten megawatts
Megawatt (MW): One million watts of electricity.
• Ten megawatts can power a small town.
• Five hundred megawatts is utility scale and considered large-scale
Gigawatt (GW): One billion watts or one thousand megawatts.
• One gigawatt can power 800 homes.
4
Specific Issues and Solutions: Impact on Larger Projects
Endangered Species Act. In any construction activity
of the size of a larger land-based solar energy project,
evaluation of the presence and potential impact on
endangered or threatened species and their habitat
must be performed. Clearance from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and potentially state agencies, should
be obtained prior to initiating construction on the
project. The federal Migratory Bird Act and other federal
and state statutes may regulate adverse impacts to
birds, bats, and other species and their habitats.
Federal Lands. Siting of projects on federal lands or
offshore may require compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act, and other federal land use
regulations.
Wetlands. Construction or impacts to wetlands may
arise in certain locations, some of which may be
surprising to project developers, as the area may seem
arid. Wetlands regulations include waters of the United
States, which has been interpreted broadly by the Army
Corp of Engineers that regulates wetlands and issues
permits for construction that impacts wetlands.
Visual Impacts. Adjacent landowners may also complain of visual impacts, which can create opposition by
neighboring landowners, who oppose the presence of
the project.
Interconnection to the Grid. States generally require
approval of interconnection of the project to the grid.
These have to be obtained for projects selling into
the grid in order for the project to sell the electricity
generated. Agreements with the transmission line
company are also required.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Approval
(FERC). Certain projects may require FERC approval.
There are means to avoid this approval, depending on
the project parameters.
Public Utility Commission Approval. Projects may
require state PUC approval or be subject to other
approvals from state agencies.
Clean Water Act Construction Permits. In some areas,
stormwater construction permits may be required
under the federal Clean Water Act and state statutes
before construction begins.
Archeological Impacts. Construction in many areas
may enter ground containing archeological relics and
require compliance with federal and state archeological
impacts. Permits may be required to develop projects in
certain areas.
Federal and State Highway Access. Access to the
project site for construction and operation may require
access to federal and state highways. Access permits for
access to these highways must be obtained from the
federal and state departments of transportation.
5
Environmental Impact Case Study: BrightSource Energy’s
Ongoing Battle8
Oakland, Calif.-based BrightSource Energy has been pushing for more than two years for permission to erect 400,000
solar mirrors across a strip of California’s Mojave Desert. They want permission to construct three solar power plants
on the site that together would generate enough power each year for 142,000 homes, potentially generating billions of dollars of revenue over time. The project would include seven 459-foot metal towers, a natural gas pipeline,
water tanks, steam turbine generators, boilers and buildings for administration and maintenance—with each plant
surrounded by fences. The site has constant sun exposure year-round and is near transmission lines that can carry the
power to consumers.
The issue: Two dozen federally threatened rare tortoises live on this stretch of six square miles of habitat. The Sierra Club
and other environmentalists have fought to have the solar complex relocated to preserve the land, which is home to
rare plants and wildlife, including the desert tortoises, the Western burrowing owl and bighorn sheep. Such disputes can
persist for years, especially as California pushes to generate one-third of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has received more than 150 applications for large-scale solar projects on 1.8
million acres of federal land in California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Utah. In California alone, such
projects could claim an area the size of Rhode Island, transforming the state into the world’s largest solar farm.
In November, federal and state biologists proposed that the company catch and move the tortoises and preserve them
elsewhere on 12,000 acres, a proposal that could cost BrightSource an estimated $25 million. It will likely be months
before state and federal regulators considering the plan make a decision on the tortoises’ fate. In the meantime,
heavy-handed regulation could end the proposed project. At a time when the White House is pushing for the rapid
development of green power, this is an important test case that could have an enormous impact on California and the
future of solar power.
6
In a similar case, a U.S. District Judge Larry Burns of the Southern District of California recently granted a preliminary
injunction that will delay a major solar power project in California. His ruling came in response to a request from the
Quechen Tribe, which claims it was not properly consulted about the project earmarked for federal land near El Centro.9
They claim that Tessera Solar, the company managing the
project, and the government did not consult with the tribe in
detail about the potential damage that could be caused by the
solar project. The environmental impact statement prepared
for the project conceded that archaeological sites could be
compromised. The tribe argued in court that the Bureau of
Land Management had violated the National Environmental
Policy Act, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and
other statutes by not fully assessing the potential impact of the
project. In the 26-page order, Burns found the tribe prevailed
over its NHPA claim because although BLM had consulted with
the tribe over the historical significance of the site, it had done
so in a “general and cursory” way.10
Environmental Impact Case Study: The Blythe Solar Power
Project’s Success Story11
The Blythe Solar Power project—the world’s largest power plant using heat from the sun to generate electricity—
proposed to cover 7,025 acres on a site 216 miles east of Los Angeles, Calif., producing as many as 1,000 megawatts,
using rows of parabolic mirrors to focus the sun’s energy onto tubes that carry heated oil to a boiler, which sends steam
to a turbine.
Under the 2009 economic stimulus package passed by Congress, developers of renewable-energy projects can seek
grants for 30 percent of their costs in lieu of an investment tax credit if construction begins by the end of this year. Thus,
timing for construction is of imminent importance.
In October of 2010, the planned $6 billion project won approval from U.S. Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar, qualifying under the 2009 economic stimulus package
passed by Congress whereby developers of renewable-energy projects can seek
grants for 30 percent of their costs in lieu of an investment tax credit if construction
begins by the end of 2010.
As part of the project, Solar Millennium LLC of Oakland, Calif., agreed to fund
conservation measures protecting the desert tortoise and Mojave fringe-toed
lizard in return for permission to build the Blythe Solar Power Project on public
land. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) supports the project, most of
which is near industrial and agricultural lands appropriate for solar development.
NRDC has called on Salazar to develop national guidelines for renewable-energy
development on public lands.
7
To mitigate potential environmental impacts, Solar Millennium must provide funding for more than 8,000 acres of
habitat supporting the desert tortoise, western burrowing owl, bighorn sheep and fringe-toed lizard. The California
Energy Commission, which regulates solar-thermal projects that generate at least 50 megawatts, approved Blythe on
Sept. 15, 2010.
The project involved extensive environmental review and analysis, which contributed to endorsement by such
organizations as NRDC. Blythe will create 1,066 jobs at the peak of construction and 295 permanent jobs.
According to the NRDC, the Blythe site had the following positive attributes:12
• Adjacent to developed lands, including industrial and agricultural lands;
• Near a new non-controversial transmission line that has already been approved;
• Much of it was located in an area that environmental groups identified for study for potential solar energy
development.
Some important lessons learned by the Blythe project about how to develop solar projects include:13
• Early engagement and guidance are critical—when companies have invested time and money in a site, it’s harder
for them to make changes that would improve the project;
• Trying to improve projects after major investments have been made in them is no substitute for careful
comprehensive planning, designing and siting projects in cooperation with scientists, local stakeholders, and
conservationists. Doing this helps reduce costs and conflict at the back end;
• The U.S. Department of the Interior should develop national siting guidance for future renewable energy
development on public lands so that better projects are sited and built in the future.
Keep in mind that California is one of the most difficult states in terms of regulations and that each state is different.
Building on private land, on the other hand presents fewer issues, particularly if the land has already been farmed
or undergone other forms of use where natural resource protection is less of an issue. It’s more expensive than BLM
land but in some cases can be developed more quickly. BrightSource Energy, the same company that has been
struggling with environment impact concerns in the Mojave desert, plans to build 2.6 gigawatts of solar power plants
to deliver electricity to the Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison on private land it purchased last year
in Nevada.14
But finding suitable private land isn’t easy. A solar thermal power plant uses a field of mirrors to concentrate the
sunlight for heating up water or oil. The process generates steam, which is then used to drive turbines for producing
electricity. Solar thermal companies often require hundreds of acres in one piece that are preferably flat and close to a
water source (for cooling) and transmission substations. The government owns large swaths of land in the west that is
being used for national parks, national forests and state parks. The BLM land that exists will potentially be opened up
for mining, drilling, grazing, and other resource mining, as well as for recreation. Residential desert communities are
chopped up and have been sold in parcels. Some property owners also raise the price for power project developers,
sometimes at five times its normal asking price.15
8
Below are some specific issues for larger solar projects—
which could also affect some smaller projects:
Additionally, private land does not necessarily preclude
a lengthy and difficult permitting process. For example,
a developer might still need approval from the
California Energy Commission to develop a solar farm
on a private parcel in the state. And if a solar company
obtained a federal loan guarantee to fund a project, it
would have to go through the federal environmental
review process even if the project was set on private
land.16 If the DOE is providing a loan guaranty or
certain other federal agencies are taking “major federal
action,” NEPA would have to be complied with and
the entity could find itself in the same delay, halting,
or with a major expense to address. In California and
certain other states, “little NEPAs” apply so that the
state NEPA-type statute may result in similar issues
even if the federal NEPA does not apply. Large solar
photovoltaic (PV) projects can face the same types of
delays. While not necessarily taking up the land mass
as solar thermal plants, projects of 50 or 100 MW will
take up to 300 to 600 acres respectively to construct.
Depending on their location, these projects may affect
tortoises or other endangered species.
At the close of 2010, the Interior Department wrapped
up an unprecedented year of solar energy development
week by granting final approval to the Crescent
Dunes Solar Energy Project in south-central Nevada’s
Big Smoky Valley.17 The BLM’s record of decision
(ROD) authorizing construction of the 110-megawatt
concentrated solar-thermal plant is the ninth fasttracked solar project BLM has approved on federal
lands since October. The company behind this project,
SolarReserve faced many of the same kind of questions
that other large-scale solar projects have faced. They
also worked with the Defense Department to place
the plant’s receiver tower—equivalent in height to a
65-story building—behind a small mountain range in
the Big Smoky Valley so that it did not interfere with
operations at Nellis Air Force Base and its Nevada Test
and Training Range southeast of the plant site.18 The
lesson is that successful companies like Blythe Solar
Power and SolarReserve strived to identify a site with
low impacts in the first place and remained flexible
throughout the process.
Environmental Assessment Checklist: Larger Land-based
Projects
Resources evaluated in an environmental assessment (EA)
include the following:
• Land Use and Visual Resources—Land use of the project
site must be consistent with county regulations.
• Air Quality—Impact on regional air quality would include
short-term, temporary and localized increases in criteria pollutants during installation activities.
• Noise—Temporary and short-term noise generated during
construction; appropriate hearing protection for workers during construction; operational noises affecting offsite receptors.
• Geology and Soils—Clearing and grading during construction activities; disturbance of onsite soils; potential for erosion; storm-water pollution prevention.
• Water Resources—Erosion and sedimentation controls.
• Groundwater—Impacts on wetlands; maintenance of the
grounds to maintain roadways and the solar infrastructure;
mowing and use of various herbicides to control vegetation
around the roads and solar arrays; herbicide use.
• Biological Resources—Depending on site and level of previous cultivation; adverse effects on resident plants or animals.
• Cultural Resources—Adverse impacts.
• Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice—Temporary
construction jobs; creation of full-time jobs during operations; human health or environmental impacts as a result of
construction; effects on minority or low-income populations.
• Utilities—Amount of electricity generated; natural gas use;
potable water usage; sanitary wastewater generated.
• Transportation—Effects on local transportation network
based on additional construction employees, material deliveries, and equipment deliveries.
• Waste Management—Construction activities and operation of the facility; hazardous waste.
• Public and Occupational Health and Safety—Construction
worker exposure to hazards and occupational injury; compliance with existing health and safety requirements.
• Cumulative Impacts—Analysis of cumulative impacts for
the proposed project.
9
Medium Size Solar Projects
Medium-sized solar projects involve ground and roof installations in municipalities and cities. For the most part, they
do not involve NEPA issues, as many large projects do. While the state of California, for example, has been at the
forefront of developing large-scale solar power plants, as well as smaller installations in homes and businesses, there is
a definite lack of middle-scale solar projects.19 As part of its commitment to the development of renewable electricity,
however, the state’s electricity regulatory agencies have proposed a next-generation buy-back price plan mediumsized solar project to help open a new market opportunity.20
Cities can run on solar energy with medium size concentrated solar PV systems. An example of this is Nipton, Calif.,
population 20. The town has plans to generate 85 percent of its energy through an 80 kilowatt solar plant—the highest
percentage of solar electricity used in any U.S. town. Its plant will rely on High Gain Solar Arrays (HGS), which uses
single-axis tracking and metallic reflector racks that concentrate light onto strips of monocrystalline silicon cells.21 HGS
combines the durability of silicon solar cells with thin-film solar’s low cost.22
Skyline, the company behind this initiative, tapped into government and regional funding, as well as a partnership for
a demo site. The company, one of only six to receive a $3 million Department of Energy grant for solar photovoltaic
research, has already raised $24.6 million in funds from investors and constructed a 24-kilowatt demonstration plant in
San Jose, Calif., with funding from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA).23
The Orange County Convention Center was awarded a $2.5 million grant from the state of Florida to be used, along
with other funding sources, to install a one-megawatt rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) system.24 The largest PV system
of its kind in the southeastern United States, the solar panel project was complete last year. The PV system utilizes highefficiency, flat-plate collectors, expected to occupying approximately 200,000 square feet of roof space on the North/
South Building. The one-megawatt solar PV system generates 1,300 to 1,500 megawatt hours of electricity per year,
which is equivalent to the power used by 80 to 100 typical homes, and it does this without producing any greenhouse
gas emissions.25
The company enlisted a technology solution expert that worked closely with the state and county to develop a
solar power solution that would help them achieve their greenhouse gas reduction objectives.26 The tech company
designed, managed and installed five solar PV systems in various locations around Concourse South of the Convention
Center. This 1.1-megawatt rooftop array covers an area equivalent to five football fields, and is the largest rooftop solar
array in the Southeast. The challenge was that solar panels had to do more than generate energy. They also needed
to function in the severe weather conditions of Florida. The tech company installed panels designed to withstand
Category-3 hurricanes and temperatures of more than 120 degrees Fahrenheit in a way that was not only secure but
made the best use of rooftop space.27 The rooftop solar PV array generates an estimated 1.1 kilowatt hours of power—
enough electric power to meet the needs of up to 100 homes for a year.28 The solar array generates all this power
without producing any greenhouse gases or air pollutants of any kind. The more energy the Convention Center can
generate on its own, the less it has to buy, which has helped the OCCC reduce total energy costs significantly.29
10
Issues Specific to Rooftop Solar Panel Installation
With more growth in rooftop solar development on the horizon, state and local governments throughout the United
States are searching for better ways to protect solar access. Most of the recent increase in rooftop solar installations
comes in response to generous state and federal government incentives and financing mechanisms. As of July 2009,
42 states and the District of Columbia had adopted net metering programs that allow utility customers who generate
power on their property (typically from small-scale solar or wind devices) to send excess power onto the electric grid
and receive a credit on their electricity bills.30
Larger solar rooftop installations have only recently seen major development throughout the United States. Issues to
be aware of involve leases that address rights of access and shared use of facilities and that also provide that facilities
not be subject to liens by the landowner or the landowner lenders.31
The real estate issues of solar rooftop installations also require consideration. Distributed-generation projects frequently
provide for on-site electrical use, off-site electrical use or both. The rent is often a nominal amount since the space for
the operation of the solar facilities is provided as part of the landowner’s (or ground lessee’s) agreement to purchase
the generated electricity.32
Rooftop projects may be with either ground lessors or with landowners. Where ground lessors make the lease, another
layer of legal relationships is involved as the lease is basically a sublease for the solar facilities. Leases must deal with
special issues such as insuring that there is no interference with solar exposure from neighboring landowners as well
as the ground lessee or landowner.33
Several communities in the United States have developed solar access planning guidelines and/or ordinances.
Data gathering, policy determination and development, and integrating new and/or existing statutes with solar access
are necessary steps in the process. Zoning is a common mechanism used to protect solar access.34 Zoning ordinances
and building codes related to problems for solar access pertain to:35
• Height
• Yard projection
• Setback from the property line
• Lot orientation
• Exterior design restrictions
• Lot coverage requirements.
According to a report issued by Sunrun, a national home energy provider, varying local solar permitting and inspection
processes add an average of more than $2,500 per home installation.36 The report, which was designed to indentify
inconsistencies in local permitting as a significant barrier to sustainable solar energy, says the Department of Energy
(DOE) can use existing guidelines to standardize local permitting and deliver the equivalent of a new $1 billion solar
subsidy over five years.37 The DOE is currently reviewing the report’s findings.
11
CONCLUSION
Finding a solar energy site depends upon understanding the full breadth of legal, regulatory and environmental
issues associated with the land in question, in particular for large-scale projects. To avoid long-term delays and
expense, it’s imperative that developers do their research and rely on an environmental consultant and an environmental
attorney to: determine the best place and the best time to build; identify potential obstacles and develop solutions to
those challenges; or recommend looking for another site. Environmental issues have proven to be the most tenacious
problems for solar power developers, especially for large projects.
For medium projects that are often placed on urban land or on rooftops, zoning and local permitting can become
challenging. Dealing with local agencies and neighboring landowners can present delays in getting permits and
beginning construction. Again, engaging a consultant and attorney to guide the developer through the maze of
technical and legal issues can be critical to timely approval and construction of the project.
The best approach is to find land that has been previously framed out. Natural desert invariably offers the biggest
issues. But as finding private land becomes more difficult—and as the field of solar energy continues to grow—the
alternative is to do the homework. Fixing issues after major investments have been made is a potential recipe for
disaster. Only careful, comprehensive planning, designing and siting projects in cooperation with scientists, federal
and state agencies, local stakeholders and conservationists will lead to the kind of success story that Blythe Solar
Power experienced.
12
END NOTES
1
Large Solar Energy Projects;The California Energy Commission; October 29, 2010; http://www.energy.ca.gov/siting/solar/index.
html; accessed December 7, 2010.
2
Woody, Todd; For the Desert Tortoise, a Threat and an Opportunity; New York Times; November 17, 2010; http://green.blogs.
nytimes.com/2010/11/17/for-the-desert-tortoise-a-threat-and-an-opportunity/; accessed December 7, 2010.
3
U.S. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (December 2007). A Citizen’s Guide to the NEPA: Having your Voice Heard.
Washington, D.C. pp. 2–7. http://www.nepa.gov/nepa/Citizens_Guide_Dec07.pdf. Retrieved 2008-10-11.
4
CEQ. 40 CFR Section 1508.12: Terminology: Federal agency. Code of Federal Regulations.
5
CEQ.
6
Wilcove, David S.; Margaret McMillan (2006). “Class of ‘67”. In Dale Goble, J. Micharl Scott, Frank W. Davis. The Endangered Species
Act at Thirty. 1. Island Press.
7
Endangered Species Act; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_Species_Act#cite_note-28; accessed November 22, 2010.
8
Reed, Saxon; A clash of environmental ideals in the Mojave Desert: Solar-energy project vs. endangered desert tortoises; LA Times;
January 4, 2010; http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2010/01/clash-of-environmental-ideals-in-the-mojave-desertsolarenergy-project-vs-endangered-desert-tortoise.html; accessed November 30, 2010.
9
Balchunas, Michael; Imperial Valley Solar Project Dealt Setback by Federal Judge ; The Solar Home and Business Journal; Dec. 16,
2010; http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/12/23/injunction%20tessera.pdf; accessed January 19, 2011.
10
Balchunas, Michael; Dec. 16, 2010.
11
Efstathiou Jr., Jim; U.S. Approves California Solar-Thermal Plant, World’s Largest; Bloomberg; October, 25, 2010; http://www.
bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-25/u-s-to-approve-california-solar-thermal-plant-world-s-largest.html; accessed November 30,
2010.
12
Natural Resources Defense Council; Largest-ever Solar Project Approved in California; http://www.nrdc.org/media/2010/101025b.
asp; accessed November 30, 2010.
13
NRDC.
14
Wang, Ucilia; Pros and Cons of Putting Solar Thermal on Private Land; GreenTech Solar; June 15, 2009; http://www.
greentechmedia.com/articles/read/pros-and-cons-of-putting-solar-thermal-on-private-land/; accessed November 30, 2010.
15
Wang; June 15, 2009.
16
Wang; June 15, 2009.
17
Streater, Scott; SOLAR: Interior wraps up unprecedented permitting year; E&E News; December 23, 2010; http://www.eenews.net/
public/Landletter/2010/12/23/3; accessed January 20, 2011.
18
Streater, Scott; December 23, 2010.
19
Concentrating Photovoltaic Solar Makes Big News in a Small Town, Nipton CA; California Green Solutions; http://www.
californiagreensolutions.com/cgi-bin/gt/tpl.h,content=3695&?utm_medium=calgreen&utm_source=related&utm_term=solar+en
ergy+solar+concentrating+solar; accessed December 1, 2010.
20
California Green Solutions.
21
California Green Solutions.
13
22
California Green Solutions.
23
California Green Solutions.
24
Center strengthens commitment to environmental change; March 18, 2009; http://greencitiesmedia.com/2009/03/orangecounty-convention-center-launches-solar-project/; accessed December 1, 2010.
25
Center strengthens commitment to environmental change; March 18, 2009.
26
Case Study: Orange County Convention Center; Johnson Controls; http://www.makeyourbuildingswork.com/wp-content/
themes/jci/pdf/Orange_County_Convention_Center_Case_Study.pdf; accessed December 1, 2010.
27
Case Study: Orange County Convention Center.
28
Case Study: Orange County Convention Center.
29
Case Study: Orange County Convention Center.
30
Rule, Troy; Shadows on the Cathedral: solar access laws in a different light; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; April 8,
2010; University of Illinois Law Review; http://www.law.uiuc.edu/lrev/publications/2000s/2010/2010_3/Rule.pdf; accessed January
20, 2011.
31
Solar plants and rooftop installations; http://www.rcoatslaw.com/Firm%20Info/Practice%20Areas/Solar%20Plants%20and%20
Rooftop%20Installations.aspx; accessed January 20, 2011.
32
Solar plants and rooftop installations.
33
Solar plants and rooftop installations.
34
Energy Savers; Community Solar Access; http://www.energysavers.gov/renewable_energy/solar/index.cfm/mytopic=50013?print;
accessed January 20, 2011.
35
Energy Savers
36
Sunrun Report Exposes $1 Billion in Unnecessary Solar Costs; January 20, 2011; http://www.sunrunhome.com/about-sunrun/
sunrun-in-the-news/press-releases/sunrun-report-exposes-1-billion-in-unnecessary-solar-costs; accessed January 25, 2011.
37
Sunrun; January 20, 2011.
14