BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Fran Pavley, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 142 Hearing Date: July 14,
2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Bigelow | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Version: |April 6, 2015 Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|William Craven |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Wild and scenic rivers: Mokelumne River.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Act):
1)Declares that it is the policy of the state that certain
rivers that possess extraordinary scenic, recreational,
fishery, or wildlife values be preserved in their
"free-flowing" state, together with their immediate
environments, for the benefit and enjoyment of the people of
the state. Declares that such use of these rivers is the
highest and most beneficial use, and is a reasonable and
beneficial use of water.
2)Defines "free-flowing" as existing or flowing without
artificial impoundment, diversion, or other modification of
the river. (The presence of low dams, diversion works, and
other minor structures does not automatically bar a river's
inclusion within the wild and scenic rivers system (system).
3)Requires that those rivers or segments of rivers included in
the system be classified as one of the following:
a) Wild rivers, which are those rivers or segments of
rivers that are free of impoundments and generally
inaccessible except by trail, with watersheds or shorelines
essentially primitive and waters unpolluted;
b) Scenic rivers, which are those rivers or segments of
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 2
of ?
rivers that are free of impoundments, with shorelines or
watersheds still largely primitive and shorelines largely
undeveloped, but accessible in places by roads; or
c) Recreational rivers, which are those rivers or segments
of rivers that are readily accessible by road or railroad,
may have some development along their shorelines, and may
have undergone some impoundment or diversion in the past.
4)Designates several California rivers and segments thereof as
components of the system.
5)Requires the California Natural Rivers Agency (NRA) to be
responsible for coordinating the activities of state agencies
whose activities affect the rivers in the system with those of
other state, local, and federal agencies with jurisdiction
over matters that may affect the rivers.
6)Requires the NRA to study and submit to the Governor and
Legislature reports on the suitability or nonsuitability for
addition to the system when the Legislature designates
potential additions to the system. The reports shall include
the following:
a) Recommendations and proposals with respect to the
designation of a river or segment;
b) Maps and illustrations to show the area included
within the report;
c) Characteristics which do or do not make the area a
worthy addition to the system;
d) Status of land ownership and use; and
e) Potential uses which will be enhanced, foreclosed,
or curtailed if included in the system.
PROPOSED LAW
The bill would:
1)Require a study by the NRA that analyzes the suitability or
non-suitability of the designation of the Mokelumne River, its
tributaries, or portions thereof as additions to the system.
2) Require the study to include:
a) A suitability analysis that includes the potential
effects on the ability of public agencies and utilities
within the watershed to feasible and projected future water
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 3
of ?
requirements through the development of new water supplies
from the Mokelumne River;
b) Any effects of climate change on river values and water
supply;
c) Instances in which the secretary of the NRA allowed a
water diversion to be constructed on a river segment listed
in the system;
d) Instances in which the State Water Resources Control
Board approved an application to appropriate water from a
river segment that is a part of the system and what
restrictions, if any, were placed on the appropriation of
water as a result of that river segment's inclusion in the
system.
e) Maps and illustrations to show the area included within
the report;
f) Characteristics which do or do not make the area a
worthy addition to the system;
g) Status of land ownership and use; and
h) Potential uses which will be enhanced, foreclosed, or
curtailed if included in the system.
3) Require the NRA's clear recommendation on whether the
Legislature should enact legislation to add the portion or any
segment of the Mokelumne River to the system in a report due on
or before December 31, 2016.
4) Establish interim protections for the Mokelumne during the
study period and implementation of any recommendation to add
segments to the system that prohibit dams, reservoirs, or other
water impoundment facilities from construction unless the
secretary determines that the facility is needed to supply
domestic water to the residents of the county or counties
through which the river and segment flows and the secretary also
determines that the facility will not adversely affect the
free-flowing condition and natural character of the river. This
provision exempts the Amador Water Agency's water rights
application (5647X03) that is pending before the State Water
Resources Control Board.
5) Define the reach of the Mokelumne that may be added to the
system as upstream from the upper extent of the Pardee Reservoir
at the elevation of not less than 580 feet above mean sea level.
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 4
of ?
6) Extend existing law prohibiting state agencies from
cooperating with new dams on rivers in the system to the stretch
of the Mokelumne that is subject to the study.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
The goal of the author and many of the supporters is to ensure
that a study is completed before designation of the Mokelumne is
considered in legislation. Last year, Senator Hancock carried SB
1199 which would have achieved such a designation without a
study. That bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
The author and supporters also have requested protection of the
existing water right proposal of the Amador Water Agency now
pending before the State Water Resources Control Board, and the
effect of any designation on water supply reliability.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
According to the author, there is no longer any opposition to
the bill.
COMMENTS
There are different points of agreement among the supporters of
this bill, and there have been active discussions among them to
consider possible amendments. Committee staff was involved in a
recent meeting at which several amendments were agreed upon by
the author and the lead supporters from the conservation
community and the affected water agency. Those amendments
resolve all but one or two of the items still under discussion.
The bill may be amended later by agreement of the stakeholders,
or not. The following amendments have been agreed to by the
stakeholders. These add specified studies and assessments into
the secretary's study, add a date certain by which the interim
protections terminate, geographically define the upper limit of
the river segment to be included in the study, and make other
changes.
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
Page 3, line 1 Add cross reference to 5093.50 for "river
values" - 5093.548(a)(2)
AMENDMENT2
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 5
of ?
Add as 5093.548(a) (3) - page 3 after line 2
"The following feasibility studies and assessments included
within the implementation Plan of the Mokelumne Watershed
Interregional Sustainability Evaluation, Final Report dated
June 2015: 7a, 7b, 7d, 7f. The inclusion of these studies
and assessments in this subsection shall not be construed
as an exemption from a wild scenic designation."
AMENDMENT 3
Page 3, line 19. Extend the report deadline to 12/31/17.
AMENDMENT 4
page 3, line 31 and page 4, line 24) 5093.548(f) - Add
outside limit on interim protection date of December 31,
2021.
AMENDMENT 5
page 4, line 6. Add upper limit on potential designation
area to 5093.549- "from 0.50 miles miles downstream of the
Salt Springs 97-066 Dam to upstream"
AMENDMENT 6
Add uncodified language to allow for state funding of the
following feasibility studies and assessments included
within the implementation Plan of the Mokelumne Watershed
Interregional Sustainability Evaluation, Final Report dated
June 12, 2015 that are identified as: 7a, 7b, 7d, 7f
SUPPORT
Amador City
Amador County Board of Supervisors
Amador County Business Council
Amador County Republican Central Committee
Amador Water Agency
American Whitewater
Association of California Water Agencies
CA Wildlife Foundation/CA Oaks
Calaveras Amador Mokelumne River Authority
Calaveras Community Action Project
Calaveras County Board Of Supervisors
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 6
of ?
Calaveras County Republican Party
Calaveras County Taxpayers Association
Calaveras County Water District
Calaveras Public Utility District
California League of Conservation Voters
California Outdoors
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance
California Water Impact Network
Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation
Central Sierra Mining
City of Ione
City of Jackson
City of Plymouth
City of Sutter Creek
Clean Water Action
East Bay Municipal Utility District
El Dorado Irrigation District
Environmental Water Caucus
First Mace Water Association
Foothill Conservancy
Friends of the River
Jackson Valley Irrigation District
Mountain Counties Water Resources Association
My Valley Springs
Natural heritage Institute
North Coast Rivers Alliance
Northern California Council of the International Federation of
Fly Fishers
O.A.R.S. Companies, Inc.
Pine Grove CSD
Planning and Conservation League
Rabb Park CSD
Sierra Business Council
South Yuba River Citizens League
Terre Rouge & Easton Wines
One individual
OPPOSITION
None Received
-- END --
AB 142 (Bigelow) Page 7
of ?