BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1263|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1263
Author: Wieckowski (D) and Pavley (D)
Amended: 8/19/16
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 4-2, 4/6/16
AYES: Wieckowski, Hill, Leno, Pavley
NOES: Gaines, Bates
NO VOTE RECORDED: Jackson
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8
SENATE FLOOR: 21-13, 5/9/16
AYES: Allen, Block, De León, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez,
Hertzberg, Hill, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire,
Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Pavley, Wieckowski, Wolk
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Cannella, Fuller, Glazer, Huff,
Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Roth, Stone, Vidak
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bates, Beall, Gaines, Galgiani, Hueso,
Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 39-30, 8/18/16 (FAIL) - See last page for vote
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 43-30, 8/25/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Public water system: permits
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill requires the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) to review permit applications for new water
systems and authorizes SWRCB to deny a permit if it is found
that the service area of the public water system can be served
by one or more currently permitted public water systems, as
SB 1263
Page 2
specified.
Assembly Amendments clarify the process by which SWRCB would
review, approve or deny an application for a new public water
system and provides a process by which to appeal a decision to
the SWRCB.
ANALYSIS: Existing law, under the California Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA):
1)Requires SWRCB to regulate drinking water and enforce the
federal SDWA and other regulations.
2)Requires permits for the operation of public water systems;
permit applications to the SWRCB must include a technical
report.
3)Authorizes the SWRCB, upon determination that an application
is complete, to make a specified investigation, and, if deemed
necessary, impose permit conditions, requirements for system
improvements, and time schedules to ensure an affordable,
reliable, and adequate supply of water at all times that is
pure, wholesome, and potable.
4)Prohibits a public water system that was not in existence on
January 1, 1998, or changes ownership after that date, from
receiving a permit unless the system demonstrates that the
water supplier possesses adequate financial, managerial, and
technical capability to ensure delivery of pure, wholesome,
and potable drinking water.
5)Allows the SWRCB to delegate primary responsibility for the
administration and enforcement of the SDWA within a county to
a local health officer if certain criteria are met. Existing
law requires that the local primacy agency (LPA) be empowered
SB 1263
Page 3
with all of the authority granted to the SWRCB over the
specified public water systems.
This bill requires a person submitting an application for a
permit for a proposed new public water system to first submit a
preliminary technical report to the SWRCB at least six months
before initiating construction of any water-related development.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the technical report to include an analysis of other
public water systems within three miles of the proposed new
system and the ability to connect to or utilize the resources
from those public water systems.
2)Requires the technical report to include an analysis of all
water supplies for the proposed new public water system and
the ability to meet 20-year water demand under a variety of
hydrologic conditions.
3)Authorizes SWRCB to deny a permit if it is feasible to connect
to an existing system or if the new system is unsustainable.
4)Authorizes SWRCB to direct the applicant to engage in
negotiations to receive services from existing water systems.
5)Subjects the ability of a local primacy agency to issue a
permit for a public water system to SWRCB oversight.
6)Prohibits a city or county from issuing a building permit for
new residential development when the proposed water supply is
bottled water, transported by a water hauler, or provided by a
water-vending machine or a retail water facility.
Background
SB 1263
Page 4
1)History of California drinking water program.
California's drinking water program was created in 1915, when
the Bureau of Sanitary Engineering was established by the
State Board of Health. The bureau's primary duty at that time
was to prevent and eliminate water-borne diseases.
In 1974, the federal SDWA was passed to protect public health
by regulating the nation's public drinking water supply, which
requires the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US
EPA) to establish mandatory nationwide drinking water
standards. It also requires water systems to monitor public
water supplies to ensure drinking water standards are met and
report to consumers if the standards are not met.
Two years after the federal act was passed, California adopted
its own SWDA. The state's Act has two main goals: to continue
the state's drinking water program, and to be the delegated
authority (referred to as the "primacy") by US EPA for
enforcement of the federal act. And, as required by the
federal act, the state's drinking water program must set
drinking water standards that are at least as stringent as the
US EPA's standards.
In 1989, AB 21 (Sher, Chapter 823, Statutes of 1989) amended
California's SDWA. This law requires the development of a
comprehensive safe drinking water plan, sets forth
requirements for adopting primary drinking water standards,
requires large water systems to identify all reasonable
measures to reduce contaminant levels in their water, and
requires operators of public water systems to notify the
California Department of Health Services (CDHS subsequently
DPH) and the public whenever the system is not in compliance
with drinking water standards.
SB 1263
Page 5
In 1993, CDHS (subsequently DPH) submitted to the Legislature
the report entitled, "Drinking Water into the 21st Century:
Safe Drinking Water Plan for California" (1993 Plan).
In 1996, the California Legislature enacted SB 1307 (Calderon,
Chapter 755). SB 1307 amended Section 116355 of the Health
and Safety Code to require a periodic update of the original
Plan.
However, DPH did not release an update of the Safe Drinking
Water Plan and was subsequently sued by California Rural Legal
Assistance in 2009 for failing to ensure safe drinking water
in certain communities, including failing to comply with this
reporting requirement. The suit was settled in 2011 and
included a requirement that DPH complete the Safe Drinking
Water Plan update within three years.
In 2012, the California Legislature passed the Human Right to
Water Law, adding to the Water Code the declaration that it be
the "established policy of the state that every human being
has the right to safe, clean, affordable and accessible water
adequate for human consumption, cooking and sanitary
purposes."
In April 2013, US EPA sent notice to DPH for noncompliance
with the requirements of the federal SDWA, its implementing
regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Safe Drinking
Water State Revolving Fund (SDWSRF) grant agreements funded by
the US EPA for fiscal years 2009-11.
The letter of noncompliance from the US EPA was the result of
DPH's failure to meet federal SDWA requirements regarding the
administration of SDWSRF. This included not disbursing
federal funds in a timely matter. At one point in 2012, DPH's
drinking water fund had an unspent balance of $455 million,
which was the largest unspent balance of any state in the
United States.
SB 1263
Page 6
The failing of DPH to effectively administer SDWSRF put in
jeopardy California's federal appropriation for the SDWSRF,
precipitating the discussion to consolidate the administration
of the SDWSRF and the Clean Water SRF, which was then
administered separately by SWRCB.
In March 2014, the California Environmental Protection Agency
and the Health and Human Services Agency published their
Drinking Water Reorganization and Transition Plan stating that
the Administration had evaluated the governance structure of
the state's drinking water and water quality activities and
concluded that "aligning the state's drinking water and water
quality programs in an integrated organizational structure
would best position the state to both effectively protect
water quality, while meeting current needs and future demands
on water supplies."
SB 861 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 35,
Statutes of 2014) transferred the Drinking Water Program DPH
to SWRCB effective July 1, 2014, creating the new Division of
Drinking Water within SWRCB and made other statutory changes
to create efficiencies and adoption and administration of the
Drinking Water Program.
SWRCB directly enforces the SDWA for all large water systems
(those with 200 or more service connections). For small water
systems (those with less than 200 connections), local health
departments can be delegated to have regulatory authority as
the LPA.
As of January 2014, there were 7,642 public water systems in
California classified into three different categories: 3,015
Community Water Systems serving communities with full-time
residents; 1,489 Non-Transient Non-Community Water Systems
serving the same non-residents at least six months per year
(e.g., schools, places of work, and prisons); and 3,138
SB 1263
Page 7
Transient Non-Community Water Systems serving non-residents at
least 60 days per (e.g., restaurants & campgrounds).
2)Risks for people dependent on small water systems.
When larger systems exceed maximum contaminant levels, those
problems are usually corrected promptly. In contrast, over
time, small water systems, because of their small base of rate
payers, are much less able to remain compliant with state
drinking water standards. This is especially true when water
system users include disadvantaged communities, defined as any
community where the median household income is below 80
percent of the statewide median household income. This problem
with small water systems experiencing the bulk of violations
extends across water system categories. In addition to the
community systems where residents may have repeated long-term
exposure to contaminants in impure water, many Non-Transient
Non-Community systems include schools, where vulnerable
populations may also get substantial repeated exposure to
contaminants. In 2014, 68 schools or day-care facilities with
their own water systems served contaminated water to more than
24,000 people.
As reported in a Senate Office of Research report, SWRCB's
Drinking Water Division estimated that in 2014, 472
out-of-compliance drinking water systems served more than
275,000 people.
3)New Public Water Systems.
Over the last five years, approximately 100 new public water
systems have been created, including 12 Community (11.7%), 34
Non-Transient Non-Community (33%), and 57 Transient
Non-Community (55.3%) Systems.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
SB 1263
Page 8
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, SWRCB costs
are minor and absorbable.
SUPPORT: (Verified8/25/16)
California League of Conservation Voters
Clean Water Action
Community Water Center
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Environment California
Environmental Working Group
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Food and Water Watch
Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
Natural Resource Defense Council
Sierra Club California
Tri-City Ecology Center
Union of Concerned Scientists
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/25/16)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 39-30, 8/18/16 (FAIL)
AYES: Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Bonilla, Brown, Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Chiu, Cooley, Dodd, Eggman, Cristina Garcia,
Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon,
Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lopez, Low, McCarty,
Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Santiago,
Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber, Williams, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chang,
Chávez, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Gray, Grove, Hadley,
Harper, Jones, Kim, Lackey, Linder, Maienschein, Mathis,
SB 1263
Page 9
Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Salas,
Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bloom, Bonta, Burke, Chu, Cooper, Dababneh,
Daly, Frazier, Roger Hernández, O'Donnell, Quirk
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 43-30, 8/25/16
AYES: Alejo, Arambula, Atkins, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Chiu, Cooley, Dababneh, Dodd, Eggman, Cristina
Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez,
Gordon, Gray, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer,
Levine, Lopez, Low, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Quirk,
Rodriguez, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Weber,
Williams, Wood, Rendon
NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chang,
Chávez, Dahle, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Grove, Hadley,
Harper, Jones, Kim, Lackey, Linder, Maienschein, Mathis,
Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Salas,
Steinorth, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Brown, Burke, Chu, Cooper, Daly, O'Donnell,
Ridley-Thomas
Prepared by:Rachel Machi Wagoner / E.Q. / (916) 651-4108
8/29/16 9:42:09
**** END ****