BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
AB 2909 (Levine) - Water: transfer or exchange: expedited
review
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: June 21, 2016 |Policy Vote: N.R. & W. 8 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: No |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: August 8, 2016 |Consultant: Narisha Bonakdar |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: AB 2909 requires the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) and the Department of Water Resources to develop
and implement an expedited 30-day review process for petitions
to transfer or exchange water or water rights if the transfer is
for a reoccurring water transfer or an environmentally
beneficial transfer.
Fiscal
Impact: Unknown, likely in the high hundreds of thousands
(General Fund or special fund) for each agency to develop and
implement the expedited review.
Background: Under current law, a person with a water rights permit or
licensee may temporarily change the point of diversion, place of
use, or purpose of use due to a transfer or exchange of water or
water rights if the transfer meets the following criteria:
The transfer would only involve the amount of water that would
AB 2909 (Levine) Page 1 of
?
have been consumptively used or stored by the permittee or
licensee in the absence of the proposed temporary change.
The transfer would not injure any legal user of the water,
during any potential hydrologic condition that the board
determines is likely to occur during the proposed change,
through significant changes in water quantity, water quality,
timing of diversion or use, consumptive use of the water, or
reduction in return flows.
The transfer would not unreasonably affect fish, wildlife, or
other instream beneficial uses.
A short-term transfer is initiated by a petition to the SWRCB to
change the terms of the permit or license, and is exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Proposed Law:
This bill:
1)Requires the SWRCB to develop and implement an expedited
30-day review process for approval of petitions to temporarily
change the point of diversion, place of use, or purpose of use
due to a transfer or exchange of water or water rights if the
transfer is for a reoccurring water transfer or an
environmentally beneficial transfer.
2)Requires DWR to develop a 30-day review process for
reoccurring water transfers that use State Water Project
facilities.
3)Defines an "Environmentally beneficial transfer" as a transfer
that does not negatively impact an ecosystem's health or local
drinking water supply in the source area and includes any of
the following:
A transfer between water users that is designed to
benefit the environment.
A transfer that protects habitat and sensitive wildlife
or enhances managed wetland supply, wildlife refuges,
ecosystems, and instream flow.
A transfer that benefits local drinking water supplies
by reducing local groundwater overdraft or improving water
quality.
AB 2909 (Levine) Page 2 of
?
A transfer that contributes to the implementation of the
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
1)Defines a "reoccurring water transfer" means a transfer of one
year or less that is substantially similar in volume, time of
year, and hydrologic conditions to a transfer previously
approved by the department or the board in the past 48 months.
2)States that transfers under this bill do not alter the
priority for use of conveyance facilities, and that the
provisions of this bill are in addition to any other law
relating to water transfers or exchanges.
3)Sunsets the bill on January 1, 2022.
Staff Comments:
Purpose. According to the author, "Water transfers make up only
3% of all water use in California. Clearly we can do better.
It is important that we remove as many barriers to transfers as
possible. This bill is a simple step to ensure that where
substantially similar transfers have been completed before they
do not have to go back to square one for approval.
Additionally, a more nimble response to critical environmental
needs is provided. This will allow for improved efficiency in
completing transfers as we move forward and will help us more
efficiently distribute water."
Implementation costs. This bill would require the SWRCB and DWR
to build staff capacity, or redirect staff upon receipt of a
petition, to ensure petitions eligible for the expedited 30-day
approval timeline are completed on time. Each permit approval
requires several specialized staff to review the petition and
determine the impact the diversion will have on the environment
and other water rights holders.
Cost of expediency. As noted in the Senate Natural Resources
and Water analysis, the current process reflects a balancing of
acting quickly versus ensuring no harm to legal water users and
the environment. Reducing the state board's time to process a
short term transfer means reducing the level of effort by the
state board and interested parties to ensure the transfer will
do no harm to any legal water user or the environment.
Additionally, this expedited review will result in the need for
AB 2909 (Levine) Page 3 of
?
additional staff or irregular redirections of staff time to
ensure permits are approved within 30 days.
-- END --