BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 900 HEARING DATE: July 6, 2009
AUTHOR: De Leon URGENCY: No
VERSION: June 30, 2009 CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Water diversion and use: reporting.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
1.Existing law requires each person who diverts water after
December 31, 1965 to file with the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) a statement of diversion and use before
July 1 of the succeeding year, with certain exceptions. These
exceptions include:
Diversions from a spring that does not flow off the
property on which it is located.
Diversions covered by an application, permit or license
to appropriate water on file with the board.
Diversions regulated by a watermaster appointed by the
department.
Diversions reported by the department in its hydrologic
data bulletins.
Diversions included in the consumptive use data for the
delta lowlands published by the department in its
hydrologic data bulletins.
For use in compliance with the provisions relating to
stock ponds.
The SWRCB separately requires permit and license holders to
report annual use as a condition of the permit or license.
1.Current law requires statements of diversions and use to
include specific information related to the name of the stream
or source of water, the location of the diversion, the
capacity of the diversion facilities, etc.
Beginning January 1, 2012, the statements of diversion and use
are also to include monthly records of water diversions.
However, the following are exempt from having to report
1
monthly diversions:
Surface water diversion with a combined diversion
capacity less than 50 cubic feet per second.
Diverters using siphons in the "tidal zone"; "tidal
zone" being defined as those portions of the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta that are ordinarily subject to tidal action.
1.Also under existing law, it is a misdemeanor to make a willful
misstatement regarding statements of diversion or use and any
person who makes a material misstatement under these
provisions may be civilly liable.
2.Under existing law, statements filed pursuant to these
provisions are for informational purposes only, and, except as
noted above, neither the failure to file a statement nor any
error in the information filed have any legal consequences.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would:
1.Revise the types of water diversions for which the reporting
requirement does not apply, as follows:
Diversions from a spring that does not flow off the
property on which it is located would be exempt only if
that diversion is 25 acre-feet or less. Diversions over 25
acre-feet would no longer be exempt.
Diversions covered by an application on file with the
board would no longer be exempt.
Diversions covered by a registration for small domestic
or livestock stock pond uses would become exempt.
Diversions from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that
have a combined diversion capacity of less than 10 gallons
per minute would become exempt.
Obsolete exceptions to filing statements of annual diversion
or use for diversions reported by DWR in its hydrologic data
bulletins or included in the consumptive use data for the
delta lowlands published by DWR in its hydrologic data
bulletins would also be eliminated.
1.Revise the exceptions to the monthly record requirement as
follows:
Surface water diversion would be exempt only if the
combined diversion capacity less than 10 gallons per
minute. Diversions between 10 gallons per minute and 50
cubic feet per second would no longer be exempt
Diverters using siphons in the "tidal zone" would no
2
longer be exempt.
Details relating to the required contents of the statement of
diversions and use would also be revised.
1.Subject a person to civil liability if that person fails to
file, as required, a diversion and use statement for a
diversion or use that occurs after January 1, 2009, tampers
with any measuring device, or makes a material misstatement in
connection with the filing of a diversion and use statement.
2.Authorize the SWRCB to impose the civil liability in
accordance with a specified schedule.
3.Authorize the SWRCB and DWR to adopt emergency regulations for
the filing of reports of water diversion or use that are
required to be filed by those respective state agencies under
specified statutory provisions.
4.The bill would make additional conforming changes and would
set forth related legislative findings and declarations.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
Supporters point out that existing law exempts from reporting a
narrow class of diverters residing in the Delta. They assert
that these in-Delta diverters collectively divert more water
than is exported to Southern California in an average year.
Without information on all significant diversions in the Delta,
efforts to better manage the struggling ecosystem will continue
to fail. Requiring Delta diverters to monitor and report the
volume and timing of their diversions will help agencies better
understand and assess various stressors on the fragile
ecosystem.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:
None
COMMENTS
10 GPM Exclusion: The bill would exclude from the reporting
requirements "A surface water diversion from the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta ? that has a combined diversion capacity of less
than 10 gallons per minute. This raises two questions
Why So Small? When the faucet is fully open, the typical
garden hose flows at about 10 gallons per minute. It is hard
to believe that there are many, if any, diversions with so
small a capacity. It probably does make sense to exclude
3
very small diverters from the reporting requirements of
diversion and use. It is not clear what the appropriate
threshold for reporting should be. This would require
additional research and discussions with the SWRCB. What is
clear is threshold established under this bill is so small as
to be nearly meaningless.
Why Only For Delta? If it does make sense to exclude very
small diverters from the reporting requirements of diversion
and use, it probably makes sense statewide.
More Filings Mean More Work Means More Costs. The SWRCB
estimates that only a small percentage of diverters that are
required to file Statements of Diversion and Use, actually file
a statement. Making a person subject to civil liability for
failing to file will likely increase the number of filings
significantly. More filings is a good thing. However, this in
turn will result in additional work for the SWRCB. The SWRCB
does not charge a fee for filing the reports. Somehow, the
additional workload costs would need to be covered.
The bill does authorize the SWRCB to develop emergency
regulations to provide for electronic filing of those reports.
Electronic filling should reduce the cost of processing each
individual statements of diversions and use. However, the bill
provides neither a funding source for the SWRCB's efforts to
develop those regulations nor funding for the computer system to
accept and appropriately process those electronic filing.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS:
AMENDMENT 1: On page 5, strike out lines 19 to 21
inclusive and insert:
(e) A surface water diversion that has a combined diversion
capacity of less than ____.
AMENDMENT 2: On page 7, line 9, strike out "10 gallons per
minute" and insert:
____
4
SUPPORT (4/28/09 version)
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Sponsor)
Modesto Irrigation District (Sponsor)
Association of California Water Agencies
California State Grange
City of Corona
Desert Water Agency
East Valley Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Friant Water Authority
Glen Colusa Irrigation District
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Los Angeles Business Council
San Diego County Water Authority
San Fernando Chamber of Commerce
San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership
Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Simi Valley Chamber of Commerce
Three Valleys Municipal Water District
Turlock Irrigation District
Valley Ag Water Coalition
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
Western Municipal Water District
OPPOSITION
None Received
5