BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 1

          Date of Hearing:   April 24, 2012

           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY AND TOXIC MATERIALS
                                Bob Wieckowski, Chair
                    AB 2117 (Gorell) - As Amended:  April 11, 2012


           SUBJECT  :   Stormwater discharge permits.

           SUMMARY  :  Prohibits the State Water Resource Control Board 
          (SWRCB) from adopting stormwater effluent standards or 
          limitations more stringent than the provisions of the Federal 
          Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) until January 1, 
          2017.  Specifically,  this bill  : 

             1.   Makes a series of legislative findings related to 
               stormwater discharges and regulations identifying the high 
               cost of stormwater controls and limitations of end-of-pipe 
               regulations.

             2.   Prohibits the SWRCB or Regional Water Quality Control 
               Boards (RWQCBs) from implementing new stormwater effluent 
               standards or limitations more stringent than the provisions 
               of the Clean Water Act until January 1, 2017.

             3.   Requires the SWRCB, in consultation with affected 
               stakeholders, to prepare a comprehensive statewide 
               stormwater plan and submit it to the Legislature by January 
               1, 2016.  The plan shall consider and include:

                  a.        The full spectrum of stormwater constituents 
                    and contain recommendations for necessary legislation 
                    to ensure that individuals subject to stormwater waste 
                    discharge requirements do not have responsibility to 
                    remove constituents from their stormwater discharge 
                    that they did not create and have no control over. 

                  b.        The costs and benefits of stormwater capture 
                    and reuse compared to the costs and benefits of 
                    stormwater discharge regulation.

             4.   Provides that the requirement to prepare a stormwater 
               plan is subject to an agreement by the United States 
               Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to provide funds to 
               cover the cost of preparing the plan.








                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 2


             5.   Allows ex-parte communication with staff and members of 
               the SWRCB or RWQCBs regarding pending storm water waste 
               discharge requirements by affected parties, provided that 
               the discussion is publicly disclosed.

           EXISTING FEDERAL LAW:  

             1.   Establishes, pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act, 
               the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 
               to regulate point source discharges of pollutants into U.S. 
               waters.  An NPDES permit sets specific discharge limits for 
               point sources discharging pollutants into U.S. waters and 
               establishes monitoring and reporting requirements as well 
               as special conditions.

             2.   Authorizes individual states to implement the program 
               allowing states to impose more stringent requirements or 
               expand the scope of its program to meet State priorities.

           EXSISITNG STATE LAW:

              1.   Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, 
               regulates discharges of pollutants in storm-water and urban 
               runoff by regulating, through the NPDES, industrial 
               discharges and discharges through the municipal storm drain 
               systems and from industrial activity.

             2.   Provides that if an adjudicative proceeding is pending 
               or impending before a RWQCB, ex parte communications with 
               that SWRCB or RWQCB members regarding an issue in that 
               proceeding are prohibited pursuant to the Administrative 
               Procedure Act.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Not Known 

           COMMENTS  : 

           Need for the Bill  :  According to the author, "This bill is 
          designed to provide the opportunity for a much-needed 
          comprehensive view of California's stormwater program.  
          California's program is focused on end-of-pipe regulation which 
          places overall burden on facility operators and municipalities 
          to control pollution sources they have no control over, such as 
          those from aerial deposition.  These make up a substantial 








                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 3

          portion of stormwater pollution.  The bill's purpose is to pause 
          the current program to federal requirements while such study 
          occurs and the legislature can consider potential program 
          revisions.  The State and Regional Water Boards currently lacks 
          the clear direction and attention warranted for long-term 
          solutions, goals, and alternatives". 

           Regulation of stormwater discharge  .  Water runoff from cities, 
          highways, industrial facilities and construction sites can carry 
          pollutants that harm water quality and impair the beneficial 
          uses of California waters.  The SWRCB and the US EPA regulate 
          the runoff and treatment of storm water in industrial, municipal 
          and residential areas of California.  

          Most stormwater discharges are considered point sources and 
          require coverage by an NPDES permit.  The CWA, as amended, 
          relies primarily on a different approach for regulating storm 
          water discharges than for traditional point sources.  Federal 
          regulations read,  "Unlike NPDES industrial wastewater permits 
          which typically contain specific end-of-pipe effluent limits 
          based on ? available treatment technology, �municipal storm 
          water] permits usually include programmatic requirements 
          involving the implementation of best management practices (BMP) 
          in order to reduce pollutants discharged to the maximum extent 
          practicable (MEP)."  (55 Fed.Reg. 47990, 48043 (Nov. 16, 1990.)  
           
           
          Cities and other jurisdictions that operate large, medium and 
          small storm water systems, as well as specific industrial 
          activity sites, including constructions sites that disturb more 
          than an acre of land, must apply for storm water permits.  The 
          SWRCB provides policy and regulatory oversight, on behalf of the 
          federal government. 

           Status of California has Several Storm Water Regulatory 
          Programs.   

              1)   Construction:  Projects that disturb one or more acres 
               of soil or that disturb less than one acre but are part of 
               a larger common plan of development, are required to obtain 
               coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm 
               Water Associated with Construction Activity.  There have 
               been as many as 15,000 active permitted in this program 
               area in the past.  (SWRCB Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ was 
               adopted in 2009 and became effective July 1, 2010).  








                                                                 AB 2117
                                                                  Page 4

           
             2)   Industrial:  Specific industrial activities must use the 
               best technology available to reduce pollutants in their 
               discharges.  In addition, they are required to develop both 
               a stormwater pollution prevention plan and a way to monitor 
               their progress.  There is an average of 10,000 active 
               permittees in this program area.  (SWRCB Order No. 
               97-03-DWQ is expired and its replacement is undergoing 
               public review in 2012).

             3)   Municipal:  Large and small municipal sewer system 
               operators must comply with permits that regulate stormwater 
               entering their systems under a two phase system.  Phase 1 
               regulates storm water permits for medium (serving between 
               100,000 and 250,000 people) and large (serving 250,000 
               people) municipalities.  The largest, single municipal 
               discharger in California is the California Department of 
               Transportation (Caltrans) and their network of highways and 
               road facilities.  (Caltrans Status: Pending Public Review). 
               (Phase II Status: SWRCB Order No. 2003-0005-DWQ is expired 
               and its replacement will undergo public review).

           What does it mean to prohibit a new stormwater effluent standard 
          or limitation more stringent than the Federal CWA?    The issue 
          of whether a SWRCB stormwater permit is more stringent than 
          federal law requires has been heavily litigated, and the 
          creation of any new phrase such as "stormwater effluent 
          standards or limitations more stringent than the provisions of 
          the Federal Water Pollution Control Act" would raise questions 
          about the results of that litigation.  It would also result in 
          additional litigation over whether the phrase was being complied 
          with for any new stormwater permits, including the three pending 
          permits currently being developed by the SWRCB (the Caltrans 
          municipal storm water permit, the Phase II municipal storm water 
          general permit, and the industrial general storm water permit).  
           
           
          In the municipal storm water context, the Los Angeles Superior 
          Court ruled on August 15, 2011, that the Los Angeles Regional 
          Water Board's Los Angeles County municipal storm water permit 
          was not more stringent than the applicable "maximum extent 
          practicable" federal standard.  The Court stated that the search 
          for a comparable federal regulation for each permit requirement 
          "utterly ignores and misapplies the flexible regulatory standard 
          inherent in the Clean Water Act."  This case is now on appeal.  








                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 5

          In the industrial storm water context, the Sacramento Superior 
          Court ruled on December 27, 2011, that the SWRCB's general 
          construction storm water permit did not contain more stringent 
          requirements than federal law.  The Court in this case similarly 
          explained that "�t]he lack of a numeric �effluent limitation 
          guideline adopted by US EPA] for pH or turbidity does not 
          indicate that the pH and turbidity �numeric effluent limitations 
          in the construction general permit] are more stringent than 
          �Clean Water Act] requirements." 

           Ex-parte Communications  .   Rules regarding ex parte 
          communications have their roots in constitutional principles of 
          due process and fundamental fairness.  With public agencies, ex 
          parte communications rules also serve an important function in 
          providing transparency.

          According to the SWRCB, the ex parte communications rules 
          reflect the SWRCB and RWQCBs hybrid powers.  Unlike the 
          Legislature, the SWRCB and RWQCBs have attributes of both 
          legislative power and judicial power.  The ex parte 
          communications prohibition arises when the water boards are 
          exercising their judicial power

          Argument in Support  .  According to a coalition of business 
          organizations, "the proposed stormwater discharge requirements 
          currently pending before the State Board have extremely high 
          implementation costs for very minimal water quality 
          improvements.  The wide range of individuals and entities 
          subject to the storm water waste discharge requirements are 
          already suffering from the down economy.  A five year moratorium 
          on exceeding federal standards will allow the regulated 
          community and the State Board an opportunity to assess current 
          discharges and devise a holistic and long-term solution which is 
          based on sound science." 

           Augments in Opposition  .  According to the Natural Resources 
          Defense Council and Clean Water Action, "this bill represents a 
          misguided, unnecessary, and inconsistent with the federal Clean 
          Water Act.  Its passage would result in more pollution and 
          direct interference with administration of the Clean Water Act, 
          resulting in California losing authority to issue pollution 
          control permits under the Act, contrary to the long-standing 
          intent of the Legislature."

          "AB 2117 would compromise Clean Water and Violates the Federal 








                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 6

          Clean Water Act.  Under the Clean Water Act, the U.S. EPA 
          administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
          ("NPDES") permit program to control water pollution from 
          sources, including stormwater runoff, that discharge pollutants 
          to waters of the United States.  The Legislature has directed 
          that California assume responsibility for administering the 
          federal program, as provided for by EPA regulations."

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   
           
          Support 
           
          California Building Industry Association
          California Chamber of Commerce
          California League of Food Processors  
           California League of Food Processors
          California Manufacturers & Technology Association
          California Metals Coalition
          California Precast Concrete Association
          Chemical Industry Council of California
          City of Atascadero
          City of Ceres
          City of Pismo Beach
          City of Vacaville
          Department of the Navy
          Lumber Association of California & Nevada
          National Federation of Independent Business
          Southwest California Legislative Council
          Suisun City
          Western Wood Preservers' Institute
           


          Opposition 
           
          Clean Water Action
          Heal the Bay
          Natural Resources Defense Council
          Sierra Club California
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Bob Fredenburg / E.S. & T.M. / (916) 
          319-3965 










                                                                  AB 2117
                                                                  Page 7