BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  April 27, 2015


                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES


                                 Das Williams, Chair


          AB 1242  
          (Gray) - As Introduced February 27, 2015


          SUBJECT:  Water quality:  impacts on groundwater basins:   
          mitigation measures


          SUMMARY:  Requires the State Water Resources Control Board  
          (SWRCB), before requiring instream flows, to evaluate impacts on  
          groundwater, consider alternatives, and mitigate any significant  
          adverse impacts to a groundwater basin.  Prohibits the SWRCB  
          from adopting a statement of overriding considerations or  
          adopting a water quality control plan (WQCP) if there is a  
          significant adverse impact to a groundwater basin.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Maintains that the waters of the state are held in trust for  
            the people of California and cannot be privately owned but can  
            only be reasonably and beneficially used.


          2)Tasks the SWRCB with protecting and enforcing water rights and  
            water quality laws, included delegated water quality  
            authorities under the federal Clean Water Act.  Places nine  
            Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Boards) under  
            the SWRCB.








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  2







          3)Requires the Regional Boards, or SWRCB under specified  
            circumstances, to formulate and adopt WQCPs for all areas  
            within each region of the state that protect beneficial uses  
            of water and meet water quality objectives.


          4)Defines beneficial uses of the waters of the state to include  
            domestic, municipal, agricultural, and industrial supply;  
            power generation; recreation; aesthetic enjoyment; navigation;  
            and preservation and enhancement of fish, wildlife, and other  
            aquatic resources or preserves.


          5)Requires the WQCP to include objectives that will ensure the  
            reasonable protection of all beneficial uses, protection of  
            water quality, and the prevention of nuisance while  
            considering factors such as past, present and probably future  
            beneficial uses of water, environmental characteristics,  
            regional economics, the need to develop housing, and the need  
            to expand and use recycled water.


          6)Requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to prioritize  
            California's groundwater basins in order to focus state  
            resources.  The basins are prioritized as either high, medium,  
            low, or very low based on a combination of factors including,  
            but not limited to, overlying population, level of dependence  
            for urban and agricultural water supplies, and impacts on the  
            groundwater from overdraft, subsidence, saline water  
            intrusion, and water quality degradation.


          7)Requires, by June 30, 2017, the formation of one or more  
            Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in all high and  
            medium priority basins subject to the Sustainable Groundwater  
            Management Act (SGMA).









                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  3






          8)Requires, by January 31, 2020, that GSAs in all high and  
            medium priority basins subject to a chronic condition of  
            overdraft develop and adopt Groundwater Sustainability Plans  
            (GSPs) that provide for the sustainable management of the  
            groundwater basin, as defined.


          9)Requires, by January 31, 2022, that GSAs in all other high and  
            medium priority basins subject to SGMA develop and adopt GSPs.


          10)Allows the SWRCB to impose an interim plan for management of  
            a groundwater basin if no GSA is formed by the deadline, no  
            GSP is adopted by the appropriate deadline, or a GSP is  
            adopted which DWR deems insufficient and where the basin is in  
            a chronic condition of overdraft or in a condition where  
            groundwater pumping is causing a significant depletion of  
            interconnected surface waters. 


          THIS BILL:


          1)Requires the SWRCB to consider GSPs when formulating state  
            policy for water quality control and adopting or approving a  
            WQCP.


          2)Requires, before adopting instream flows that protect  
            beneficial uses of water, that the SWRCB evaluate impacts on  
            groundwater basins (i.e., from increased groundwater pumping  
            in reaction to increased instream flow requirements) and  
            consider alternatives and mitigation measures to avoid or  
            mitigate any adverse impacts on groundwater quality or supply  
            to the extent feasible.


          3)Requires the SWRCB to adopt and implement mitigation measures  








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  4





            for any significant adverse impacts to a groundwater basin  
            caused by increased groundwater pumping.


          4)Prohibits the SWRCB from adopting a WQCP if there is a  
            significant adverse impact to a groundwater basin caused by  
            increased groundwater pumping. 


          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown


          COMMENTS:  


          1)Background.  For 30 years the State Water Project and federal  
            Central Valley Project and others have been required to help  
            meet flow requirements in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta  
            (Delta), but the tributaries to the San Joaquin River avoided  
            any requirements other than experimental flows.   The SWRCB is  
            now engaged in a long-delayed process to determine what level  
            of flows should be provided by the tributaries.  This bill  
            would prohibit the SWRCB from imposing in-stream flow  
            requirements on tributaries to the San Joaquin River unless  
            the SWRCB pays for actions to mitigate when local water users  
            pump more groundwater in response to the loss of surface water  
            dedicated to in-stream flows.  


            The Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers are tributaries to  
            the San Joaquin River.  The San Joaquin River flows northward  
            to join the Sacramento River in the Delta.  The Delta's flow  
            provides part of the drinking water supply for two-thirds of  
            the state's population and water for a multitude of other  
            urban uses as well as supplying some of the state's most  
            productive agricultural areas both inside and outside of the  
            Delta.  The Delta is also one of the largest ecosystems for  
            fish and wildlife habitat production in the United States,  
            including commercial runs of salmon.








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  5







            The SWRCB is responsible for protecting and managing both  
            water rights and water quality in California. As part of its  
            duties, the SWRCB developed a Delta WQCP in 1995 that included  
            requirements as to how much water must be left in-stream at  
            different times to protect and balance all beneficial uses of  
            water including municipal and industrial, agricultural,  
            recreational, and fish and wildlife.  After adopting the Delta  
            WQCP, the SWRCB commenced a water rights proceeding to  
            determine the responsibilities of water rights holders to  
            implement the flow-dependent objectives in the Delta WQCP.   
            The water rights proceeding was massive and included parties  
            with water rights on the Sacramento River and its tributaries,  
            San Joaquin River and its tributaries, and in the Delta.  The  
            hearing was divided into 8 regional phases and the SWRCB  
            encouraged parties to reach settlement agreements with other  
            water rights holders and interested parties as a way of  
            proposing allocations of responsibility to meet the  
            flow-dependent objectives.  


            During Phase 2 of the hearing, parties on the San Joaquin  
            River and its tributaries submitted the San Joaquin River  
            Agreement proposing an allocation of responsibility for  
            releasing "pulse flows" to the Delta during the April-May and  
            October periods, which are most critical to migrating salmon.   
            The parties argued there wasn't sufficient information to  
            determine how much water was needed instream for fish and,  
            therefore, they would also conduct an experiment during the  
            April-May period called the Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan  
            (VAMP).  Under VAMP, parties on the tributaries to the San  
            Joaquin River were paid a fixed amount of money by the federal  
            government in return for maintaining low, medium, and high  
            releases during different years that would be tied to low,  
            medium, and high levels of export water by the State Water  
            Project and federal Central Valley Project pumping plants in  
            the Delta.  The objective was to evaluate the relative  
            relationship between flows down the San Joaquin and export  








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  6





            pumping in the Delta on fish survival.  VAMP ended in 2011  
            after more than a decade during which the full range of flows  
            and export limitations were never provided to complete the  
            experiment and, meanwhile, populations of at-risk fish species  
            crashed in the Delta.  


            The Delta WQCP received a minor update in 2006 but identified,  
            as part of that update, four "emerging issues" including the  
            decline of pelagic or "open water" fish such as smelt and  
            threadfin shad; climate change impacts; Delta and Central  
            Valley salinity; and, San Joaquin River flows.  With regard to  
            San Joaquin River flows, the SWRCB referenced data that showed  
            various fish species within the Delta and San Joaquin River  
            basin that had not shown significant signs of recovery since  
            adoption of the VAMP experiment and recommended additional  
            study.  Thereafter, in 2009, the SWRCB commenced a triennial  
            update of the WQCP that is ongoing and will include a  
            determination of what responsibility parties on the individual  
            tributaries to the San Joaquin River have for contributing to  
            Delta flows.  


            Parties on the tributaries to the San Joaquin River have  
            advised that if they are required to leave more flows  
            in-stream they will simply pump more groundwater.  As a  
            result, they maintain, it is the SWRCB's potential action that  
            will be responsible for additional degradation of their  
            groundwater basins.  In this bill they seek to have the SWRCB  
            analyze the potentially significant impact of a local increase  
            in groundwater pumping on the basin and then require the SWRCB  
            and not local entities mitigate for any increased degradation.


            The most likely mitigation that the SWRCB would require in  
            accordance with this bill is adoption of a GSP pursuant to  
            SGMA.  However, all basins on the eastern side of the San  
            Joaquin River are already ranked as high priority and thus are  
            already required to adopt a SGMA plan or submit an alternative  








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  7





            plan that meets SGMA's requirements by the appropriate  
            deadlines.


          2)Author's statement:
            


          For the past year, the SWRCB has considered a proposal to  
          develop new unimpaired flow requirements on the Tuolumne,  
          Merced, and Stanislaus rivers.  The proposed plan would require  
          an additional 350,000 acre feet of water annually to be diverted  
          from the rivers to flow out to the San Francisco Bay Delta.





          If adopted, the Board's proposal will devastate the groundwater  
          basins in the Valley by reducing surface water recharge  
          opportunities and eliminating surface water deliveries to  
          domestic and agricultural water users.  The Board recognizes  
          these impacts would have significant "but unavoidable" adverse  
          impacts to the region.





          In 2014, the Legislature passed the Sustainability Groundwater  
          Management Act which promised to empower local communities with  
          the tools to achieve sustainable management goals.  The adoption  
          of the Board's proposal without mitigating measures would deny  
          Central Valley basins one of the most important tools in that  
          tool box: the ability to recharge the depleted groundwater table  
          with surface flows.











                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  8







          AB 1242 would ensure that the Board consider and mitigate the  
          adverse impact of any new water quality control plan.  It would  
          also require the Board to implement mitigation measures to  
          reduce identified significant adverse impacts, and would  
          prohibit the adoption of plans with adverse impacts that cannot  
          be sufficiently mitigated.


          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:




          Support


          Agricultural Council of California


          Building and Construction Trades Council of Stanislaus, Merced,  
          Tuolumne and Mariposa   


             Counties


          California Women for Agriculture


          California Farm Bureau Federation


          City of Atwater City Council


          City of Ceres, Office of the Mayor









                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  9






          City of Dos Palos, Office of the Mayor


          City of Gustine City Council


          City of Livingston, Office of the Mayor


          City of Los Banos, Office of the Mayor


          City of Merced, Office of the Mayor


          City of Modesto,  Office of the Mayor


          City of Patterson, Office of the Mayor


          City of Turlock, Office of the Mayor


          Coalition of California Utility Employees


          Electrical Workers of Stanislaus, Merced, Tuolumne and Mariposa  
          Counties


          Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District


          Greater Merced Chamber of Commerce


          Harris Farms








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  10







          IBEW Local 1245


          Latino Community Roundtable


          League of California Cities Central Valley Division


          Merced County Board of Supervisors


          Merced County Farm Bureau Board of Directors


          Merced Irrigation District


          Modesto Chamber of Commerce


          Modesto Irrigation District


          Northern California Water Association


          Stanislaus Business Alliance


          Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors


          Stanislaus County Chapter of California Women for Agriculture


          Stanislaus County Farm Bureau








                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  11







          Stevinson Water District


          Turlock Chamber of Commerce


          Turlock Irrigation District


          Western Growers Association


          Yosemite Community College District


          Yosemite Farm Credit Association


          One individual




          Opposition


          California League of Conservation Voters


          Center for Biological Diversity


          Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation


          Clean Water Action









                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  12






          Community Water Center


          Friends of the River


          Klamath Riverkeeper


          Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability


          Natural Resources Defense Council


          Sierra Club California


          The Nature Conservancy


          Union of Concerned Scientists







          Analysis Prepared by:Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)  
          319-2092















                                                                    AB 1242


                                                                    Page  13