BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2501
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 30, 2008 

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mark Leno, Chair

                    AB 2501 (Wolk) - As Amended:  April 17, 2008 

          Policy Committee:                              Water, Parks &  
          Wildlife     Vote:                            9-4
                        Natural Resources                     6-2

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:               

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to  
          include climate change analyses in all of its water management  
          reports and plans and appropriates $610,160,000 of available  
          bond proceeds to fund a variety of water-related projects.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Moderate GF costs, in the range of $500,000 in 2008-09 and $1  
            million annually thereafter, to DWR to develop information on  
            non-State Water Project (SWP) hydrological basins and to  
            prepare a report quantifying the energy savings and greenhouse  
            gas emission reductions associated with water supply  
            development.

          2)Moderate GF costs, in the range of $100,000 in 2008-09 and   
            $200,000 annually thereafter, to the State Water Resources  
            Control Board (SWRCB) to provide its input on the energy  
            savings and greenhouse gas quantification.

          3)Moderate GF costs, in the range of $250,000 primarily in  
            2009-10, to the SWRCB to establish groundwater contamination  
            pilot projects in the Tulare Lake Basin and the Salinas  
            Valley, to establish an interagency task force, and to report  
            to the Legislature.

          4)Appropriates $610,160,000 from bond proceeds authorized by  
            Prop 1E ($204 million),    Prop 84 ($402.4 million), and Prop  
            50 ($3.76 million).  This appropriation, to the extent it  
            results in already authorized bonds being sold, results in an  








                                                                  AB 2501
                                                                  Page  2

            increase in the annual GF debt service requirement of about  
            $40 million.

           SUMMARY CONTINUED

           Specifically, this bill:

          1)Requires DWR to include a climate change analysis in its  
            biennial report regarding SWP delivery capability, the  
            quintennially-produced California Water Plan (Bulletin 160),  
            all Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta reports, the State Plan of  
            Flood Control, and California Groundwater (Bulletin 118).

          2)Requires DWR, by July 1, 2009, to review or develop climate  
            change information for the state and each hydrologic basin for  
            use by the state and local agencies and to make this  
            information available on the DWR website.

          3)Prohibits DWR, for integrated regional water management plans  
            submitted after January 1, 2011, from providing grant funds to  
            an applicant unless that applicant's plan considered related  
            climate change impacts.

          4)Requires urban water suppliers and agricultural water  
            suppliers, when updating their water management plans, to  
            include information on climate change impacts to their water  
            supply.

          5)Requires DWR, by January 1, 2010, to report to the governor  
            and the Legislature energy savings and greenhouse gas emission  
            reductions associated with water supply development.

          6)Requires the SWRCB and regional water boards, when updating  
            their water quality control plans, to consider related climate  
            change impacts.

          7)Appropriates $610,160,000 from three already authorized  
            general obligation resources bonds, as follows:

              a)   Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of  
               2006 (Prop 1E) 

                i      To DWR to acquire, design, and construct essential  
                 emergency preparedness supplies   and projects to reduce  
                 the risk of levee failure in the delta ($54 million).








                                                                  AB 2501
                                                                  Page  3


               ii     To DWR for grants for stormwater flood management  
                 projects that reduce the risk of flood damage and provide  
                 other benefits ($150 million).

              b)   Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood  
               Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006  
               (Prop 84)

               i      To the Department of Public Health (DPH) for grants  
                 for small community drinking water system infrastructure  
                 improvements and related actions to meet safe drinking  
                 water standards ($50 million).  

                ii     To DPH for grants for projects to prevent or reduce  
                 the contamination of groundwater that serves as a source  
                 of drinking water ($50.4 million).  

                iii    To DWR for planning grants and local groundwater  
                 assistance grants ($40 million).  

                iv     To DWR for drinking water intake facility projects  
                 to improve the quality of drinking water supplies from  
                 the delta ($55 million).  

                v      To DWR and the Central Valley Flood Protection  
                 (CVFP) Board to improve the department's ability to  
                 respond to levee breaches and to reduce the potential for  
                 levee failure ($60 million).  

                vi     To DWR and the CVFP Board to acquire, preserve,  
                 protect, and restore delta resources by funding projects  
                 that improve the stability of the delta levee system,  
                 reduce land subsidence, and assist in restoring the delta  
                 ecosystem ($100 million).
                
                vii    To DWR to complete the planning and feasibility  
                 studies associated with new surface storage under the  
                 California Bay-Delta Program ($12 million).
                
                viii   To DWR for planning and feasibility studies to  
                 identify potential options for the reoperation of the  
                 state's flood protection and water supply systems to  
                 optimize the use of existing facilities and groundwater  
                 storage capacity ($15 million).








                                                                  AB 2501
                                                                  Page  4

                
                ix     To DWR to begin addressing how the state water  
                 system should respond to climate change ($10 million).  

                x      To DWR for planning and feasibility studies to  
                 implement Delta Vision                ($10 million).
                
             c)   Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach  
               Protection Act of 2002      (Prop 50)  .  

                To DWR for planning and feasibility studies associated with  
               surface storage under the California Bay-Delta Program  
               ($3.76 million).

          8)Requires the SWRCB to develop pilot projects in the Tulare  
            Lake Basin and the Salinas Valley that focus on nitrate  
            contamination.
           
          COMMENTS  

           1)Rationales  .  The author believes that climate change will have  
            major impacts on the state's overall efforts to manage water  
            supply and water quality, and that these impacts will vary  
            significantly from region to region and basin to basin.  The  
            combined effect of changes to annual snow pack, the levels,  
            forms and timing of precipitation, the ability of current  
            water storage and flood control facilities to protect property  
            and public safety, and the options available to enhance water  
            supply and reduce water demand will require the state and each  
            local water supplier to integrate these potential impacts into  
            their water management plans.

            With regard to the $610,160,000 appropriation of resources  
            bond proceeds, the author contends that prompt progress needs  
            to be made on planning, designing, and completing projects  
            that enhance flood protection and the supply and quality of  
            water, especially as they relate to the delta.  The author  
            argues bond proceeds should be appropriated outside the Budget  
            Act.

           2)Prior Legislation  .  In 2007, AB 224 (Wolk) would have required  
            many of the same climate change actions to be undertaken by  
            DWR and SB 1002 (Perata) would have appropriated $610,890,000  
            of various resources bond proceeds for water-related projects  
            and would have established the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas  








                                                                  AB 2501
                                                                  Page  5

            Valley pilot projects.  AB 224 was held on the Senate  
            Appropriations Committee suspense file, while SB 1002 was  
            vetoed by the governor, who did not support the appropriations  
            without a more comprehensive water supply package, including  
            new GO bond authorizations, being passed by the Legislature.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Steve Archibald / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081