BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
SB 1306 (Blakeslee) - State Water Resources Control Board.
Amended: May 2, 2012 Policy Vote: EQ 5-1
Urgency: No Mandate: No
Hearing Date: May 21, 2012 Consultant: Marie Liu
This bill does not meet the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Bill Summary: SB 1306 would expand the requirement for the State
Water Resources Control Board (board) to conduct an external
scientific peer review to include general permit application
requirements for stormwater discharges and a conditional waiver
of waste discharge requirements from irrigated lands except
under some conditions.
Fiscal Impact: On-going costs of $30,000 to $60,000 from the
Waste Discharge Permit Fund (special fund) for additional peer
review. Existing annual fees are likely sufficient to cover
these costs.
Background: Existing law requires the board to enter into an
agreement with the National Academy of Sciences, the University
of California, the California State University, or similar
scientific institution in order to conduct an external
scientific peer review of any rule proposed by the board.
General permits and conditional waiver requirements are not
themselves rules or regulations but rather implement adopted
rules and regulations thus they are not currently subject to
peer review. However, for the most part, a peer review is
conducted on the scientific basis of the regulation which the
permit or waiver is implementing.
Proposed Law: This bill would expand the peer review
requirements to general permits, specifically stormwater and
agricultural discharge permits, if there are fees available for
such a review. This bill would specify that this requirement is
considered fulfilled if a scientific peer review was done on the
scientific basis of an adopted rule.
SB 1306 (Blakeslee)
Page 1
Staff Comments: This bill is attempting to address the small
portion scientific information that may be used in adopting a
stormwater or agricultural discharge permit that may not have
been peer reviewed. The board estimates that this bill would
necessitate three to five additional peer reviews a year at an
annual cost of $30,000 to $60,000. Even though this bill only
requires peer review of general permits if there is a fee
available to pay for the review, this requirement imposes a cost
pressure on the board. However, the board estimates that
existing annual fees discharge permits are sufficient to fulfill
the provisions of the bill.
Recommended Amendments: Staff recommends technical amendments to
clarify that the lack of sufficient fees to cover the cost of a
peer review only exempts the peer review requirement in the case
of a general permit application for stormwater discharges or a
conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements.