BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 637|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 637
Author: Allen (D)
Amended: 6/2/15
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 6-1, 4/14/15
AYES: Pavley, Allen, Hueso, Jackson, Monning, Wolk
NOES: Stone
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller, Hertzberg
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 4/29/15
AYES: Wieckowski, Hill, Jackson, Leno, Pavley
NOES: Gaines, Bates
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 5/28/15
AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza
NOES: Bates, Nielsen
SUBJECT: Suction dredge mining: permits
SOURCE: The Sierra Fund
DIGEST: This bill establishes criteria for permits for suction
dredge mining by the Department of Fish and Wildlife
(department) and the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB).
ANALYSIS:
SB 637
Page 2
Existing law:
1)Requires the department to issue a permit, if the department
determines that the use of a vacuum or suction dredge will not
be deleterious to fish, upon the payment of a specified fee.
2)Designates the issuance of permits to operate vacuum or
suction dredge equipment to be a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act and suspends the issuance of permits
and mining pursuant to a permit until the department has
completed an environmental impact report for the project as
ordered by the court in a specified court action.
3)Existing law prohibits the use of any vacuum or suction dredge
equipment in any river, stream, or lake of this state until
the Director of Fish and Wildlife makes a prescribed
certification to the Secretary of State, including certifying
that new regulations fully mitigate all identified significant
environmental impacts and that a fee structure is in place
that will fully cover all costs to the department related to
the administration of the program.
4)Provides that the SWRCB and the California regional water
quality control boards prescribe waste discharge requirements
in accordance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and
the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (state act). The
state act, with certain exceptions, requires a waste
discharger to file certain information with the appropriate
regional board and to pay an annual fee. The state act
additionally requires a person, before discharging mining
waste, to submit to the regional board a report on the
physical and chemical characteristics of the waste that could
affect its potential to cause pollution or contamination and a
report that evaluates the potential of the mining waste
discharge to produce acid mine drainage, the discharge or
leaching of heavy metals, or the release of other hazardous
substances.
This bill:
1)Prohibits the department from issuing permits for suction
dredge mining.
SB 637
Page 3
2)Authorizes the department, after the certification pursuant to
Section 5653.1 is made, to issue permits when an application
is deemed complete, a determination that includes any permit
required under the federal Clean Water Act and California
water law.
3)Provides that if the state or regional water board determines
that no water quality or water rights permit is needed, such
determination would become a part of the permit determination
made by the department.
4)Provides that if the state or regional water board determines
that a waste discharge report (permit) is authorized, but not
required, to address water quality impacts of:
a) Mercury loading to downstream reaches of surface water
bodies;
b) Methylmercury formation in water bodies;
c) Bioaccumulation of mercury in aquatic organisms; and
d) Resuspension of metals.
The appropriate water board will also have authority to
specify conditions or areas where the discharge of waste from
suction dredge mining is prohibited, consistent with existing
law, and to prohibit any particular methods of suction dredge
mining that it determines would cause or contribute to
violations of water quality objectives or unreasonably effect
beneficial uses of water.
5)Defines suction dredges as equipment that contains any of the
following:
a) A hose that vacuums sediment from a waterway;
b) A motorized pump;
c) A motorized sluice box.
Background
The moratorium on permits was caused, in part, by litigation and
SB 637
Page 4
subsequent legislation that required an environmental impact
report and regulations that would fully mitigate all identified
significant environmental effects as well as a fee structure
that would fully cover the department's costs to administer this
program. This history is recounted in the findings in Section 1
of this bill. The moratorium would remain in effect until the
director certifies to the Secretary of State that the conditions
in Section 5653.1 of the Fish and Game Code have been satisfied.
The department's environmental review concluded, in part, that
it did not have regulatory authority to address the impacts of
suction mining that were instead within the jurisdiction of the
SWRCB.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
A minimum of $450,000 to $600,000 annually for the first two
years from Waste Discharge Permit Fund (special fund) to the
SWRCB to develop the permit.
Unknown ongoing costs to the Waste Discharge Permit Fund
(special fund) to the SWRCB to administer the permit.
Unknown one-time costs likely in the hundreds of thousands of
dollars from the Safe Drinking Water Account to the SWRCB to
update other related regulations to allow the discharge of
mercury.
SUPPORT: (Verified 5/29/15)
The Sierra Fund (source)
Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center
Clean Water Action
Defenders of Wildlife
Karuk Tribe
Klamath Forest Alliance
Klamath Riverkeeper
Sierra Nevada Alliance
SB 637
Page 5
South Yuba River Citizens League
Yurok Tribe
OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/29/15)
Western Mining Alliance
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Clean Water Action supports this bill in
order to enable the SWRCB to use its existing regulatory
authority under the federal Clean Water Act to permit suction
dredge mining activities in order to ensure that the discharge
from those operations does not degrade the water quality of
California surface water.
The Sierra Nevada Alliance, a coalition of 85 groups in the
Sierra, points out that research commissioned by the SWRCB shows
that the plume of water that comes from suction dredges does not
meet state water quality standards.
The Sierra Fund states that the legislative moratorium was based
on a rigorous, scientific evaluation of the impacts of suction
dredge mining. It states that the SWRCB can use its existing
regulatory structure to ensure mitigation of impacts prior to
the issuance of a permit by the department.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The Western Mining Alliance conveyed
the following major points:
1)The vast majority of suction dredge miners are not wealthy and
that a new permitting process may be too expensive and price
these individuals out of this activity.
2)Miners disagree with the assertion that their activity
transforms elemental mercury into methyl mercury or that
mercury levels in California rivers are unsafe.
3)Miners in fact remove mercury (and lead from ammunition and
fishing weights) from streams. As for mercury, miners would
welcome a way to lawfully transfer the mercury to an
SB 637
Page 6
authorized recipient.
Prepared by:William Craven / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116
6/2/15 21:19:20
**** END ****