BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2270
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
2007-2008 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 2270
AUTHOR: Laird & Feuer
AMENDED: June 12, 2008
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: June 16, 2008
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Bruce Jennings
SUBJECT : RECYCLED WATER: WATER QUALITY
SUMMARY :
Existing law :
1) Authorizes a residential water softening or conditioning
appliance to be installed if certain conditions are met.
2) Provides that a local agency may limit the availability, or
prohibit the installation, of residential water softening
or conditioning appliances that discharge to the community
sewer system if the local agency makes specified findings
in an ordinance.
3) Requires that any ordinance banning the installation of
water softeners be prospective and may not require the
removal of residential water softening or conditioning
appliances that are installed before the effective date of
the ordinance.
4) Provides that any water softening appliance in place at a
residential dwelling prior to January 1, 1980, in those
areas being served by sewage treatment facilities that have
been limited with regard to salt loading pursuant to
Division 7 of the Water Code and for which the appropriate
regional water quality control board (RWQCB) makes a
finding that the control of residential salinity input is
necessary to provide compliance with those limitations, may
be continued in operation for a period no longer than four
years.
5) Authorizes the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District, or
AB 2270
Page 2
any successor district, to adopt an ordinance requiring the
removal of all installed residential self-regenerating
water softeners that discharge to the community sewer
system, if the sanitation district makes specified findings
and includes them in the ordinance, pursuant to SB 475 by
Senator Runner (Chapter 393, Statutes of 2006).
This bill :
1) Requires the Department of Water Resources to update
recycling "targets" every five years, as specified (e.g.,
information from appropriate regional boards and water
management plans).
a) Requires the department to include revised targets in
the California Water Plan beginning in 2013.
2) Requires an urban water supplier to include in its urban
water management plan information on recycled water, as
specified (e.g., a description of the quantity of treated
wastewater meeting recycled water standards).
3) Requires a permittee to submit the recycled water use
information on an annual basis to a regional board.
4) Requires any person authorized to supply or distribute
recycled water to annually report to the appropriate
regional board the amount of recycled water supplied or
distributed in the previous year.
5) Authorizes a local agency maintaining a community sewer
system to act to control residential salinity inputs (e.g.,
water softeners) to protect the state's water quality,
based on a finding by the state board or a regional board
that residential salinity input will contribute to
achieving water quality objectives, as based on one or more
of several actions adopted by the state or regional board
(e.g., water quality control plans, waste discharge
requirements, cease and desist orders).
a) Actions to control residential salinity inputs may
include various types of controls (e.g., requiring
plumbing permits, the removal of water softeners).
AB 2270
Page 3
b) If a local agency adopts an ordinance requiring the
removal of a water softener, the local agency is
required to provide a program to compensate owners, as
determined by a local agency.
c) Provides a standard of judicial review that is based
on a review of evidence; and, is according to the same
as the standard of review required for the corresponding
water quality action which serves as the basis for the
finding.
6) Requires the department and the state board to promote 2005
California Water Plan policies related to water use
efficiency and recycled water in the priorities for
awarding state water management grants and loans.
COMMENTS :
1) Purpose of Bill . This bill would advance the use of
recycled water in the state by removing barriers to its
use, improving water quality and tracking progress in
meeting the State's target for recycled water. AB 2270
would address Recycled Water Task Force recommendations by
promoting the use of recycled water and removing barriers
to implementation.
Specifically the bill addresses two areas of water recycling:
a) Statewide target for recycled water . The bill expands
the Department of Water Resources' (DWR) leadership role
in promoting recycled water by directing the department
to set and update numeric targets for recycled water, and
to incorporate the targets in the California Water Plan.
The bill also would improve tracking of the recycled water
supply in the state and the progress in meeting the
targets by requiring recycled water producers and urban
water suppliers to more accurately report their recycled
water use to the regional boards and the DWR.
b) Water softeners . The bill provides local agencies
with another tool for managing salts by limiting the use
of softeners that contribute to salt problems. This
authority is provided contingent upon the State or
AB 2270
Page 4
regional board making a finding that the limitation on
softeners will contribute to achievement of water quality
objectives.
The Board finding would be based on evidence and data in
the record -- as currently required of all Board findings
and water quality actions.
The bill also requires that a local agency provide
reasonable compensation if a local ordinance requires
removal of existing softeners.
c) Salts & Softeners. One of the barriers to using
recycled water is if there is a high salt content in the
recycled water.
The State and regional boards have recently placed
significant attention on salt management for water
quality protection and to promote increased use of
recycled water. The Board's Draft Recycled Water Policy
would require salt management plans, and the Draft
Strategic Plan lists salt management as an action needed
for groundwater protection.
In urban areas with hard water, one source of salt is
generated from a certain type of water softener -
referred to as a self-regenerating softener. Salt
released from this type of softener can contribute on
average 1 pound per day of salts. Depending on the other
salt sources and the number of softeners in a region-
this can be a present a significant salt problem.
In response to this problem the Recycled Water Task Force
Report recommended that: "The Legislature should amend
the HS Code to reduce the restrictions on local ability
to impose bans on, or more stringent standards for,
residential water softeners".
Under Section 116786 of the HS Code, local agencies are
prohibited from placing restrictions on existing
softeners, and are only authorized to restrict the use of
prospective softeners if the local agency first does the
following:
AB 2270
Page 5
Regulates all other nonresidential salt sources in the
area;
Conducts an independent study quantifying the levels
of all salinity discharges in the area.
Determines that restricting softeners is a "necessary
means" of achieving compliance with water quality
requirements.
The requirements in existing law essentially place one
product, "the self-regenerating softener", at a higher
protected status than all other sources of salt pollution
regulated by the state and regional boards. Government Code
Section 54739 et seq. authorizes local agencies to regulate
discharges from industrial (and commercial) sources. AB
2270 enables local agencies to also regulate salt discharges
from residential sources caused by water softeners.
2) Background . According to the author, growing population,
local and regional water shortages, the recent federal
court decision to limit freshwater exports from the Delta,
climate change, and the need to protect California's fish
and wildlife make it imperative that the State manage its
water resources as efficiently as possible. Recycled water
provides additional water supplies that are a
cost-effective and drought proof method of helping meet
California's water needs.
Recycled water is used for many purposes including
agricultural irrigation, landscape irrigation, groundwater
recharge, and seawater intrusion barriers. Before recycled
water can be used for these beneficial uses, the regional
water quality control boards and Dept. of Public Health
require treatment to remove pollutants that could be
harmful to the beneficial use. One major pollutant that is
costly to remove is salt-and high salts can reduce the
ability of the recycled water to be used for irrigation and
groundwater recharge purposes.
The need to increase the state's use of recycled water but
ensure protection of public health is reflected in many
AB 2270
Page 6
Code sections. Water Code Sections 13575 - 13583 establish
a statewide goal to recycle 700,000 acre feet of water by
2000 and 1 million acre feet by 2010. However, progress
has been slow. The 2000 goal was not met, and based on the
2005 California Water Plan; the state could be 20 years
behind in meeting the 2010 goal.
In response to the failure to meet the state's 2000 goal, the
Legislature in 2001 added Water Code Section 13578 (AB 331,
Goldberg). Section 13578 requires the DWR to convene a
statewide task force and report back to the Legislature on
the opportunities for, and obstacles to, increasing the use
of recycled water. The Task Force Report was issued in
June 2003 and included 26 recommendations.
3) Regulating Water Softeners . As cogently explained by Alf
Brandt with the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife
Committee, the authorization of local regulation of water
softeners is an issue of substantial controversy, and
arises out of a long history of legislative debate over
water softeners, dating back 25 years. The Health & Safety
Code includes provisions for use of residential water
softeners and suggests that Californians have a "right to a
water supply that is effective and functional for domestic
requirements." The statutory connection to water softeners
seems to imply a right to use water softeners to achieve
that "effective and functional" water supply. The statute
therefore limits local agency authority to regulate
softeners, requiring the agency to make certain findings as
to the necessity of such regulation( Health & Safety Code
116786). These findings must be substantiated by an
"independent study of discharges of all sources of
salinity," and the agency must enforce limits on
non-residential saline discharges before limiting water
softeners. Limits on softeners may only be prospective,
barring any requirement of removal of existing water
softeners and allowing owners of such softeners to continue
discharging salt into community sewers. Advocates of this
bill assert that these requirements are burdensome and
costly, discouraging local agencies from doing anything
about softeners' saline discharges, which can exceed a
pound of salt each day from each softener.
AB 2270
Page 7
After the state did not meet the 2000 target of 700,000
acre-feet of recycled water use, the Legislature created a
task force to examine, among other things, state and local
regulations that limit the use of recycled water. The 2003
Recycled Water Task Force report made the following
recommendation:
Local agencies should be empowered to regulate the discharge
of residential water softeners in the same manner as other
sources of discharge into sewers. Legislation should be
proposed to amend the Health and Safety Code Sections
116775 through 116795 to reduce the restrictions on the
local ability to impose bans on or more stringent standards
for residential water softeners.
Opponents from the water softener industry point to the long
history of legislative debate over limitations on
softeners, and assert that local agencies have not
justified the need for any change. They argue that this
bill is unnecessary because local agencies that follow the
statutory process ultimately may regulate water softeners,
noting two cities that now regulate water softeners. Bill
advocates respond that salinity discharge standards have
been increased, making it more difficult to comply and
requiring urgent action that cannot be delayed to complete
a multi-year, costly study of salinity inputs. The City of
Dixon notes that it has received an immediate cease &
desist order and a civil fine that threatens their entire
city, while citizens continue to dump salt into their
sewer. Dixon complains that the State penalizes cities
while preventing local agencies from having direct control
over salt from softeners. Some opponents suggest that this
bill is "outlawing an industry and denying citizens the
right to improve the quality of their water." These
opponents do not explain that there are alternatives to the
self-regenerating water softeners that discharge
significant amount of salts into public waste water. No
one has a "right" to discharge pollutants into the public.
AB 2270 allows local regulation of salinity inputs where
the community has a problem with salinity discharges or
recycling, but does not outlaw the water softener industry.
By allowing each agency to make the determination how to
regulate salinity inputs, the bill allows tailored
AB 2270
Page 8
responses to specific problems facing each community, which
may differ.
4) How Does Existing Law Affect Pollution? While neither
supporting nor opposing the legislation, the observations
of the Director of Public Works with the City of Lathrop
provide a relevant illustration of the problem in current
law, from the perspective of one city:
"The City recently adopted an ordinance restricting the use of
self-regenerating water softeners?.Based on experience,
existing law does not facilitate a local agency's ability
to control pollution in a cost-effective and timely
way?.the City commenced with a salinity study that meets
the requirements for an independent study pursuant to
California Health and Safety Code Section 116786. The
necessary technical and legal work took over two years to
complete and the City incurred both engineering and legal
costs, which exceeded over $100,000. The City's
situation should have been simple. Instead, 2 and years
and many rate payer dollars later, the City was finally
able to take the action necessary to control what has been
a problem since plant start-up. Existing law prevented the
City from acting immediately to correct this situation.
Furthermore, during this 2 and year delay, additional
self-regenerating water softeners were installed which
exacerbated the TDS [total dissolved solids] problem."
5) Double Referral to Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee . If this measure is approved by this committee,
the do pass motion must include the action to re-refer the
bill to the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee.
SOURCE : Assemblymembers Laird and Feuer
SUPPORT : Association of California Water Agencies
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
California Coastkeeper Alliance
California Farm Bureau Federation
Cities of Dixon, Fillmore, Riverside, San Jose
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
AB 2270
Page 9
Olivenhain
San Diego County Water Authority
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
WateReuse
Water Replenishment District of Southern California
OPPOSITION : B&D Quality Water, Inc.
California Groundwater Association
Culligan Water Solutions
GE Water & Process Technologies
Pacific Water Quality Association
South Bay Salt Works
Water Quality Association
100 water softening businesses
2 individuals