BILL ANALYSIS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: SB 1469 HEARING DATE: April 13, 2010
AUTHOR: Simitian URGENCY: No
VERSION: March 23, 2010 CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta: State Water Resources
Development System: water quality.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The Department of Water Resources (DWR), among other things, is
responsible for:
The construction and management of the State Water Resources
Development System, commonly known as the State Water Project
(SWP).
Developing the California Water Plan. Under current law, "it
is the policy of the state that The California Water Plan,
with any necessary amendments, supplements, and additions to
the plan, is accepted as the master plan which guides the
orderly and coordinated control, protection, conservation,
development, management and efficient utilization of the water
resources of the state."
The State Water Resources Control Board (Board), among other
things, is responsible for:
Administering and enforcing the state's water rights system.
Protecting water quality and enforcing state water quality
laws.
The Delta Stewardship Council (Council) is responsible for
developing a Delta Plan to achieve the two coequal goals of
providing a more reliable water supply for California and
protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem. The
coequal goals shall be achieved in a manner that protects and
enhances the unique cultural, recreational, natural resource,
and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place.
1
PROPOSED LAW
This bill would require DWR, by January 1, 2012, to:
Identify all parties that benefit from waters originating in
the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed and whose
activities impact the Delta watershed.
Develop a process for determining the degree of responsibility
attributable to each of the identified parties for physical
and environmental impacts on the Delta.
Estimate the infrastructure needs for the SWP over the next 30
years, including new facilities and expected repairs and
upgrades to existing facilities.
Estimate the costs, over the next 30 years, of environmental
mitigation and restoration projects associated with the
infrastructure needs of the SWP.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, "One of the acknowledged shortcomings
of the package of water bills that we passed last November was
the lack of a stable long term funding source to implement the
package. Instead, we continued our current funding practice of
creative appropriations of existing bond funds, reappropriation
of previously budgeted but unspent appropriations from various
funds, and, frankly, simply hoping that somehow it will get
fixed in the future. However, the reality is that it won't get
fixed in the future if we don't take steps now to prepare for
that future. That means getting honest about what our real
infrastructure needs will be, how much we will need to invest in
environmental restoration efforts, and, under a beneficiaries
pay concept, precisely who will benefit from these investments."
"SB 1469 is intended to be a vehicle to start this necessary
discussion."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None
COMMENTS
Should DWR Do All This? The bill proposes that DWR identify all
parties that benefit from waters originating in the Delta
watershed, identify all parties whose activities impact the
Delta watershed, and develop a process to determine the degree
of responsibility attributable to each of those identified
parties for physical and environmental impacts on the Delta.
Two issues. First, DWR, as the owner/operator of the SWP, would
2
appear to have a conflict of interest in determining the degree
of benefits and impacts from the Delta watershed and developing
a process to assign responsibilities regarding the Delta
watershed. Second, this determination of benefits/impacts and
development of a process to assign responsibilities would be a
quasi-judicial role more in line with the State Water Board's
roles and responsibilities for both water rights and water
quality. (See amendment 1).
Role of the Water Plan. As noted above, the California Water
Plan is the master plan to guide the development of California's
water resources. By law, DWR is to update it every five years,
and is to include a discussion of "a discussion of various
strategies, including, but not limited to, those relating to the
development of new water storage facilities, water conservation,
water recycling, desalination, conjunctive use, and water
transfers that may be pursued in order to meet the future water
needs of the state. The department shall also include a
discussion of the potential for alternative water pricing
policies to change current and projected uses. The department
shall include in the plan a discussion of the potential
advantages and disadvantages of each strategy and an
identification of all federal and state permits, approvals, or
entitlements that are anticipated to be required in order to
implement the various components of the strategy."
Recent updates of the California Water Plan, including the
update that is currently being released, do discuss the
strategies in general terms, but do so without a quantitative
assessment of needed investments or specific recommendations for
nonstructural programs and policies.
Conversations with the author's office suggest that the intent
is for there to be a comprehensive assessment of the investment
needs of the entire state, not just the investments associated
with the SWP. This suggests that the estimate the
infrastructure needs called for by this bill would best be
addressed in the next update of the California Water Plan, which
is due December 31, 2013. Also, as one of the author's
objectives is to determine, under a beneficiaries pay concept,
precisely who would benefit from these investments, the
provisions of the bill should be expanded to include that issue
as well. (See amendment 2).
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENT 1
3
Amend Section 1 of the bill to give the State Water Board
the responsibility for identifying benefits/impacts and
development of a process to assign responsibilities
regarding the watershed, and place the section in a more
appropriate part of the water code.
AMENDMENT 2
Amend Section 2 of the bill to:
o Clarify that the assessment of investment needs is
for all of California, not just the SWP.
o Explicitly include the assessment of the investment
needs in the requirements for future California Water
Plan updates.
o Add a requirement that the California Water Plan
propose a policy for assigning funding responsibilities
to beneficiaries of water resources investments and
propose a financing strategy for funding responsibilities
proposed to be assigned to the State
o Add a requirement that DWR clearly identify all
relevant assumptions made in making the assessment.
SUPPORT
None Received
OPPOSITION
None Received
4