BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 956
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 956
(Mathis) - As Amended April 13, 2015
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act: exemption
SUMMARY: Establishes an exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for water recycling projects
for specific communities during a drought.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a
negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or
environmental impact report (EIR) for this action, unless the
project is exempt from CEQA (CEQA includes various statutory
exemptions, as well as categorical exemptions in the CEQA
Guidelines).
2)Pursuant to Executive Order B-29-15, suspends CEQA for actions
taken by state agencies to carry out specified drought relief
directives.
3)Defines "recycled water" as water which, as a result of
AB 956
Page 2
treatment of waste, is suitable for a direct beneficial use or
a controlled use that would not otherwise occur and is
therefore considered a valuable resource.
THIS BILL: Exempts from review under CEQA water recycling
projects undertaken by a local agency in response to a drought.
Projects must provide water for drinking and sanitation purposes
to individuals and communities whose groundwater wells have run
dry or exceed primary or secondary drinking water standards.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)Background. CEQA provides a process for evaluating the
environmental effects of applicable projects undertaken or
approved by public agencies. If a project is not exempt from
CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine whether the
project may have a significant effect on the environment. If
the initial study shows that there would not be a significant
effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare a
negative declaration. If the initial study shows that the
project may have a significant effect on the environment, the
lead agency must prepare an EIR.
Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed
project, identify and analyze each significant environmental
impact expected to result from the proposed project, identify
mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to the extent
feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to
the proposed project. Prior to approving any project that has
received environmental review, an agency must make certain
findings. If mitigation measures are required or incorporated
into a project, the agency must adopt a reporting or
monitoring program to ensure compliance with those measures.
AB 956
Page 3
CEQA includes limited exemptions for relatively small-scale
pipeline maintenance and installation projects. CEQA
exemptions under the Governor's Executive Order B-29-15
include investment into new technologies such as integrated
on-site reuse systems, and prioritizing safe drinking water
permits issued by the State Water Resources Control Board.
Although the Executive Order and existing CEQA exemptions
could apply for portions of a water recycling project, neither
would exempt an entire project.
2)Purpose of the bill. According to the author, this bill will
expedite water to communities and individuals whose
groundwater wells have run dry, or where the only available
groundwater is contaminated, by eliminating delays and
potential litigation related to CEQA. The author states that
projects undertaken to provide safe and reliable water
supplies could be delayed or killed by CEQA's lengthy
environmental review processes or litigation.
3)Infrastructure footprint, scale, and feasibility. Typically,
wastewater is treated in municipal water treatment facilities
by separating larger solid material with screens, skimming off
smaller solids in settling tanks, breaking down waste with
microbes in aeration tanks, and treating the clarified water
with ultraviolet light, chemicals, and other processes.
Although technology currently exists to treat wastewater for
direct human consumption, treated wastewater is typically
first deposited into reservoirs, rivers, or aquifers before
being extracted and treated again. This is largely due to
peoples' strong aversion to consuming wastewater directly.
New technologies are currently being developed such as
anaerobic membrane bioreactors, microbial fuel cells, and
using light and electricity to clean water that have the
potential to reduce the cost of wastewater treatment and its
environmental impact.
AB 956
Page 4
It is unclear in this bill as to what the infrastructure
requirements and related environmental effects could
potentially be for the numerous types of projects that provide
water recycling services. The reference in this bill to
communities whose groundwater is depleted or contaminated
implies that these water recycling projects would be primarily
for smaller rural communities, who are largely dependent on
groundwater sources. According to the National Environmental
Services Center, there are currently not any examples of small
system wastewater to drinking water plants for smaller
communities in the US, which the EPA classifies as less than
10,000 people. The smallest wastewater to drinking water
treatment facility identified was found in Texas, serving a
population of approximately 250,000 people. Although the
technology for treating wastewater for drinking purposes is
well-established, the different types of membrane filters that
are required probably make it economically infeasible for
smaller communities.
It is likely that water recycling projects that serve smaller
rural communities will have to originate at a larger water
treatment facility and then use pipelines for conveyance.
Although adding more treatment ponds or infrastructure to an
existing water treatment facility might not have detrimental
environmental impacts, depending on the scale of the project,
building extensive recycled water pipelines could.
4)Prior legislation. This bill has some similarities to AB 2417
(Nazarian) introduced last year which exempted recycled water
pipelines from CEQA. AB 956 is much broader than AB 2417, as
an entire recycled water project is seeking to be exempted
here rather than just the construction of pipelines. AB 2417
died in the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.
AB 956
Page 5
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
None on file.
Opposition
California Native Plant Society
NRDC
Sierra Club
Analysis Prepared by:Paul Jacobs / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092
AB 956
Page 6