BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2013-2014 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: SB 985 HEARING DATE: April 22, 2014
AUTHOR: Pavley URGENCY: No
VERSION: April 9, 2014 CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
DUAL REFERRAL: Environmental QualityFISCAL: No
SUBJECT: Stormwater Resource Planning
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The Stormwater Resources Act (SRA) authorizes, but does not
require, cities, counties, and special districts to develop and
implement stormwater resources plans (plans). Such plans are
required to, among other things:
Be developed on a watershed basis.
Provide for community participation in plan development and
implementation.
Be consistent with and assist in compliance with various water
quality requirements.
Be consistent with any adopted Integrated Regional Water
Management Plans (IRWMPs).
Plans are required to identify, among other things:
Opportunities to augment local water supply through
groundwater recharge or storage for beneficial reuse of
stormwater.
Opportunities for source control for both pollution and
stormwater runoff volume, onsite and local infiltration, and
reuse of stormwater.
Projects to reestablish natural water drainage treatment and
infiltration systems, or mimic natural system functions to the
maximum extent feasible.
Opportunities to develop or enhance habitat and open space
through stormwater management, including wetlands, riverside
habitats, parkways, and parks.
Projects and programs to ensure the effective implementation
of the stormwater resource plan pursuant to this part and
achieve multiple benefits.
1
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would:
1.Recast the findings and declarations emphasizing that
stormwater and dry weather runoff are underutilized sources of
surface water and groundwater supplies that should be captured
and put to beneficial use.
2.Define stormwater and dry weather runoff, and make conforming
changes to the Rainwater Capture Act of 2012.
3.Require plans to also:
Identify and prioritize stormwater and dry weather
runoff capture projects for implementation in a
quantitative manner, using a metrics-based and integrated
evaluation and analysis of multiple benefits to maximize
water supply, water quality, flood management,
environmental, and other community benefits within the
watershed.
Identify and prioritize opportunities to use of lands or
easements in public ownership for stormwater and dry
weather runoff projects.
1.Delete the requirement that plans be consistent with IRWMPs.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, "If we are going to reduce our
dependence on imported water through regional solutions, we must
become more frugal with our water. In many parts of the state
stormwater and dry weather runoff are underutilized sources of
surface water and groundwater supplies. Instead of being viewed
as a resource, they are often seen as a problem that must be
moved to the ocean as quickly as possible or as a source of
contamination, contributing to a loss of usable water supplies
and the pollution and impairment of rivers, lakes, streams, and
coastal waters."
"SB 985 builds on my SB 790 from 2009 by more finely focusing
the Stormwater Resources Act on the capture and use of
stormwater and dry weather runoff. Stormwater resource plans
remain voluntary. The bill now makes clear that the entity
creating the plan is responsible for developing the necessary
elements, including identifying public lands for potential
projects and the development and use of appropriate analytics."
'We must be smarter in how we approach water management in
California. SB 985 represents an important part of that smarter
2
approach."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
The Association of California Cities - Orange County asserts
this bill would "place additional burdens on local government as
it relates to stormwater resources planning." They argue "Many
local governments already look for and identify opportunities
for wastewater infiltration reuse. It is unnecessary for the
state to mandate this process on publically owned lands, which
will require additional staff time and local government
resources, both of which are scarce due to thin budgets."
COMMENTS
Potential Bond Funding. Most of the bond proposals include
funding for stormwater projects, a number of which explicitly
link to the SRA. Some also provide that bond funds can be used
to develop stormwater resources plans.
De-linkage with IRWMP. In practice, stormwater resources plans
and IRWMPs are developed by different groups for different
purposes. To date there doesn't appear to have been any
instances where stormwater resources plans and IRWMPs have
conflicted.
Related Measures:
AB 2403(Rendon) - would modify the definition of water for
purposes of complying with Proposition 218 to specifically
include recycled water and reclaimed stormwater intended for
the provision of water service.
Referred to Environmental Quality Committee. This analysis does
not address issues within the purview of the Senate
Environmental Quality Committee. Issues likely to be raised by
that committee include:
Whether there is need for guidance by state board regarding
the types of analytics necessary to support stormwater
resources plans and if so, what types of issues should be
addressed?
Whether stormwater resources plans could to be considered as a
part of an alternative compliance plan for municipal or
stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits, and if so, identifying the necessary
prerequisites.
Whether compliance with this part should be a condition of any
future stormwater bond funds.
Other water quality related issues associated with stormwater
3
and dry weather runoff.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: None
SUPPORT
City of Signal Hill
Community Conservation Solutions
Planning and Conservation League
OPPOSITION
Association of California Cities - Orange County
4