BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 13
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 30, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE
Marc Levine, Chair
SB
13 (Pavley) - As Amended June 24, 2015
SENATE VOTE: 36-0
SUBJECT: Groundwater.
SUMMARY: This bill makes several technical cleanup changes to
the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) and related
statutory sections. Specifically, this bill:
1)Clarifies in several places that SGMA and its enforcement
provisions are only mandatory in high and medium priority
basins.
2)Corrects a reference to clarify that the time period during
which groundwater extractions cannot be used to establish a
new or expanded groundwater right terminates with either
adoption by the Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) of a
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) or, in the alternative,
with Department of Water Resources (DWR) approval of an
alternative to a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP).
SB 13
Page 2
3)Simplifies and clarifies the SGMA notice process for becoming
a GSA by eliminating redundant and confusing notice provisions
and specifying that overlapping, uncoordinated notices must be
resolved locally before taking effect.
4)Makes the requirements for when a basin or subbasin is
reprioritized to medium or high priority, and thus subject to
SGMA, consistent with SGMA's other deadlines by:
a) Adding that, in addition to forming a GSA within two
years that locals may submit an alternative to a GSP; and,
b) Adding that, in addition to having five years to draft
and adopt a GSP that a reprioritization that occurs before
January 31, 2017, will have until January 31, 2022.
5)Allows a private mutual water company to join a GSA in the
same way that a private water corporation regulated by the
Public Utilities Commission may join a GSA, which is through a
memorandum of agreement or other legal agreement, but
specifies that such agreement will not confer additional
powers to either nongovernmental entity.
6)Clarifies that a local agency's powers to enforce fees and
regulatory requirements are limited to that local agency's own
boundaries.
7)Specifies that only SGMA-required regulations are subject to
the California Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and not
other SGMA-related guidelines or guidance, as specified.
SB 13
Page 3
8)Allows DWR, in a basin that is not being monitored in
compliance with the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation
Monitoring (CASGEM) program, to determine if there is an
interest in establishing a GSP pursuant to SGMA.
9)Corrects several minor wording errors and cross-references.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires DWR to evaluate groundwater basins and designate them
as high, medium, low or very low, according to various factors
including, but not limited to, level of dependence upon the
basin by municipal and agricultural users.
2)Requires that local agencies in high and medium priority
groundwater basins subject to SGMA form one or more local GSAs
by June 30, 2017 in order to develop and implement GSPs that
provide for the sustainable management of the groundwater
basin or subbasin, as defined.
3)Requires that GSAs in basins with chronic overdraft develop
and adopt GSPs for their basin or subbasin by January 31, 2020
and that all other high- and medium-priority basins subject to
SGMA develop and adopt GSPs by January 31, 2022, with certain
exceptions.
4)Requires that adopted GSPs utilize a 50 year planning horizon
that will achieve sustainability in a basin or subbasin within
20 years and include identified milestones at five year
SB 13
Page 4
intervals.
5)Defines sustainable groundwater management in a GSP as
avoiding undesirable results in the basin or subbasin from
groundwater pumping such as the following, where significant
and unreasonable: lowering of groundwater levels: reduction of
groundwater storage; seawater intrusion; degraded water
quality; land subsidence; and, depletions of interconnected
surface waters.
6)Provides GSAs with optional tools for reaching sustainability
including, but not limited to, the ability to conduct
investigations, collect fees, limit pumping, require
measurement and reporting of groundwater extractions, monitor
compliance, charge civil penalties for violations, and
implement plans and programs to recharge a basin or subbasin.
7)Authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board (State
Water Board) to declare a basin in probationary status and
adopt an interim plan for a basin, subbasin, or portion of a
basin or subbasin, under three narrow circumstances:
a) There is no GSA for all or a portion of a basin or
subbasin by June 30, 2017;
b) There is no GSP for all or a portion of a basin or
subbasin by the relevant deadline; or,
c) A submitted GSP is deemed inadequate by DWR and there is
also either:
SB 13
Page 5
i) Chronic overdraft in the basin or subbasin; or,
ii) Groundwater pumping is causing a significant
depletion of interconnected surface waters in the basin
or subbasin.
8)Allows the State Water Board, in an area that has no GSA by
June 30, 2017, to require direct reporting of groundwater
extractions and to charge fees to administer that program.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS: This bill clarifies that low and very low priority
basins are not subject to SGMA enforcement provisions. This bill
clarifies in multiple sections that alternatives to GSPs can
also satisfy various SGMA deadlines. This bill also allows
private mutual water companies to join GSAs in the same manner
as a private water corporation regulated by the Public Utilities
Commission may currently join GSAs but clarifies that such
agreements do not confer governmental-type powers to either type
of private entity. Lastly, the bill simplifies GSA notice
provisions, specifies which SGMA-related regulations are subject
to the APA, and makes other conforming and technical changes.
1)Author's statement: The author states that this bill makes
numerous technical and clarifying amendments necessary to help
implement SGMA and that she does not intend to change any of
the policies embodied by SGMA in this measure. The author
adds that she has "vetted each amendment with the parties
involved in the drafting of SB 1168, SB 1319, and AB 1739" and
SB 13
Page 6
that she "intends to follow this same process with any future
amendments."
2)Background: SGMA and its related statutory provisions were
developed as a three-bill package of legislation after
intensive stakeholder input and involvement, including public
meetings facilitated by Governor Jerry Brown's administration.
Negotiations over SGMA began in earnest after the Governor
released his California Water Action Plan (CWAP) and budget in
January of 2014. The CWAP and budget clearly signaled the
Governor's intention to begin enforcing sustainable
groundwater management through the State Water Resources
Control Board if locals could not or would not do it.
Thereafter, Assemblymember Roger Dickinson introduced AB 1739
and Senator Fran Pavley introduced SB 1168 in February of
2014. AB 1739 and SB 1168 were the response of both
Legislative houses that such far-reaching and historic policy
should be developed through legislation.
To help with that effort, on March 11, 2014 the Assembly Water,
Parks & Wildlife Committee held an informational hearing on
Management of California's Groundwater Resources and on March
18, 2014 the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee,
chaired by Senator Pavley, held an informational hearing on
Managing California's Groundwater: Issues and Challenges.
Both hearings revealed that dropping groundwater levels were
wreaking havoc across an ever widening swath of farms and
communities. Land subsidence was buckling infrastructure,
cracking irrigation canals, and depositing threatening levels
of sediment into flood control structures. Streams were being
dewatered, depriving both senior water rights holders and
wildlife of crucial surface flows. Coastal zones were
suffering saline water intrusion. And the lower the water
tables fell the greater the cost to drill new wells and pump
water, for those that could afford to do so in the first
place. Some poor communities with shallow wells simply went
dry.
SB 13
Page 7
In April, the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA),
which was working with Assemblymember Dickinson on AB 1739,
produced its Recommendations for Achieving Groundwater
Sustainability. In May, the California Water Foundation
(CWF), which was working with Senator Pavley on SB 1168,
published its Recommendations for Sustainable Groundwater
Management: Developed Through a Stakeholder Dialogue. Both
groups then worked with the two authors to refine the bill
language and create a locally-driven sustainable groundwater
management framework. CWF also launched a new web site
featuring a diverse set of agricultural, water agency,
environmental, and environmental justice leaders under the
banner: Everyone's Talking About Water. For Once, They're
Saying the Same Thing. The featured "voices" included
everyone from Miles Riter of Driscoll Strawberries to Curtis
Knight of California Trout.
On May 22, 2014, after holding multiple stakeholder meetings
and receiving significant stakeholder response, the Governor's
office posted its own draft statutory language to its
groundwater web site. Thereafter, Assemblymember Dickinson and
Senator Pavley, who were now each other's principle
coauthor's, worked with the Governor's Office throughout the
July Legislative Recess to hold four
professionally-facilitated stakeholder meetings attended by
hundreds of people, both in person and through conference
capabilities. At the end of those discussions both bills were
amended into identical form and a fifth
professionally-facilitated stakeholder meeting to discuss the
amendments was held. Following that final stakeholder
discussion, the language was split into two
contingently-enacted pieces of legislation.
SB 13
Page 8
The Administration however felt there needed to be an
additional response to some outstanding concerns of
agricultural stakeholders and others, including how the State
would treat the "good actors" in a basin that was not being
sustainably managed (now called a "probationary basin"). As a
result a third bill, SB 1319 (Pavley), was amended to modify
AB 1739 and SB 1168. On September 16, 2014, Governor Jerry
Brown held a signing ceremony at the State Capitol referring
to the 3-bill package enacting SGMA and related statutes as
historic and stating, "We have to learn to manage wisely
water, energy, land and our investments. That's why this is
important."
3)Prior and related legislation:
The three-bill package of legislation forming SGMA and related
statutes is:
SB 1168 (Pavley), Chapter 346, Statutes of 2014; AB 1739
(Dickinson) Chapter 347, Statutes of 2014; and, SB 1319
(Pavley), Chapter 348, Statutes of 2014.
This is one of 7 currently-active bills in the Legislature
proposing changes to SGMA and its related statutes.
AB 617 (Perea) is the most directly-related bill. AB 617
makes substantive changes to SGMA including, but not limited
to, allowing mutual water companies to join GSA's using Joint
Powers of Agreement, which conflicts with the provisions of
this bill.
SB 13
Page 9
AB 453 (Bigelow) allows groundwater management plans adopted
prior to SGMA to be amended and extended; allows a local
agency to impose fees and collect groundwater extraction
information for developing and adopting a revised groundwater
management plan; and, prohibits Water Rights Fund fees from
being used for SGMA enforcement.
AB 938 (Salas) specifies that when a basin is reprioritized to
high or medium and thus becomes subject to SGMA then extended
SGMA deadlines apply to a combination of agencies (plural) and
not just an agency (singular).
AB 939 (Salas) changes the time period for providing technical
data upon which a SGMA fee is based from 10 days before the
meeting to adopt the fee to 20 days before such meeting.
AB 1242 (Gray) requires the State Water Board, when setting
in-stream flows, to take into account any groundwater
management plan, including under SGMA, and requires the State
Water Board to identify projects for fish recovery that may be
undertaken in lieu of instream flows.
AB 1390 (Alejo) creates a streamlined process for groundwater
adjudications, including allowing SGMA plans to be
incorporated.
SB 226 (Pavley) adds procedures for streamlined groundwater
adjudications to SGMA.
4)Supporting Arguments: Supporters advise that this bill will
SB 13
Page 10
provide appropriate clarifications of last year's statute that
do not impact underlying policy. Supporters also request
adding additional language to clarify that when DWR receives
notices from parties who desire to be a GSA that those notices
are complete. Supporters advise that DWR has stated the
statute does not provide it the authority to require notices
to be complete before posting them.
5)Opposing arguments: None on file.
6)Suggested Committee amendment: Before a local agency can
become the GSA for an area it must submit a notice for DWR to
post on its web site. SGMA details various requirements that
must be incorporated into that notice; however, it does not
state the notice must be complete before DWR posts it.
Committee staff recommends that this bill, page 10, line 18,
be clarified as follows:
(b) The department shall post all complete notices
received under this section in accordance with Section
10733.3.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Groundwater Coalition
Clean Water Action
SB 13
Page 11
Community Water Center
Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
Union of Concerned Scientists
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Tina Leahy / W., P., & W. / (916)
319-2096