BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1249
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1249 (Salas)
As Amended June 30, 2014
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |58-17|(January 27, |SENATE: |32-4 |(August 21, |
| | |2014) | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: W., P. & W.
SUMMARY : Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) integrated
regional water management plans (IRWMPs) to include
consideration of the impacts of drinking water contaminated by
nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, or hexavalent chromium, should
those contaminants exist within the boundaries of the plan.
2)Requires that if an area within the IRWMP planning area has
nitrate, arsenic, perchlorate, or hexavalent chromium
contamination, the plan shall include the following:
a) The location and extent of that contamination in the
region;
b) The impacts caused by the contamination to communities
within the region; and
c) Existing efforts being undertaken in the region to
address the impacts.
The Senate amendments add arsenic, perchlorate, and hexavalent
chromium contamination to the priority contaminates to be
addressed in the IRWMP.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill required the DWR's IRWMPs
to include consideration of the impacts of drinking water
contaminated by nitrates.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, this bill would result in cost pressures at least in
the millions of dollars to existing and future bond monies
available for IRWMP development and implementation.
AB 1249
Page 2
COMMENTS : According to the author, "this bill is intended to
provide direction to the California Department of Water
Resources to give preference, in the Integrated Regional Water
Management Grant program, to funding plans that address nitrate
impacts for areas identified by the State Water Resources
Control Board as nitrate high-risk areas.
"If an area within the boundaries of a funding plan has been
identified as a nitrate high-risk area by the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the plan must include an
explanation of how the plan addresses the nitrate contamination.
If the plan does not address the nitrate contamination, an
explanation of why the plan does not address the contamination
must be included."
Drinking water contamination in California: While many
contaminants are present in California's groundwater and
drinking water, nitrate contamination has been the focus of
recent study. SB 1 X2 (Perata), Chapter 1, Statutes of 2008,
Second Extraordinary Session, required SWRCB, in consultation
with other agencies, to prepare a report to the Legislature
focusing on nitrate groundwater contamination in the state and
potential remediation solutions. In response, SWRCB contracted
with the University of California, Davis to gather information
for the report, which was released in January 2012. The study
showed that nitrate loading to groundwater in the four-county
Tulare Lake Basin and the Monterey County portion of the Salinas
Valley is widespread and chronic, and is overwhelmingly the
result of crop and animal agricultural activities. Due to long
transit times, the impact of nitrates on groundwater resources
will likely worsen in scope and concentration for several
decades.
In a study conducted on 2,584 community water systems by SWRCB
under AB 2222 (Caballero, Chapter 670, Statutes of 2008), 680
were identified that rely on a contaminated groundwater source.
These systems serve nearly 21 million people, and 75% of those
systems rely entirely on groundwater.
The SWRCB study, released in January 2013, found that the ten
most frequently detected principal contaminants were found in
over 90% of the active contaminated groundwater sources (wells)
identified in this report. In decreasing order of detection,
these contaminants are: arsenic, nitrate, gross alpha activity,
AB 1249
Page 3
perchlorate, tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene, uranium,
1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, fluoride, and carbontetrachloride.
Integrated regional water management funding: The IRWMP Grant
Program operated by DWR manages General Obligation Bond funds
from various sources, including Proposition 84 of 2006.
Proposition 84 amended the Public Resources Code to authorize
the Legislature to appropriate $1 billion for IRWMP projects
that assist local public agencies in meeting long term water
needs, including the delivery of safe drinking water and the
protection of water quality and the environment.
Analysis Prepared by : Bob Fredenburg / E.S. & T.M. / (916)
319-3965
FN: 0005068