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 ?