BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2117
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2117 (Gorell) - As Amended: May 1, 2012
Policy Committee: Environmental
Safety and Toxic Materials Vote: 9-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill requires the State Water Resources Control Board, in
consultation with affected stakeholders, to prepare a
comprehensive statewide stormwater plan and submit it to the
Legislature by January 1, 2015.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Annual costs of at least $150,000 (equivalent to one staff
member) to the board in 2012-13 through 2014-15 to conduct
research and analysis and prepare the report (special fund).
2)One-time costs of approximately $150,000 to the board to
contract with outside entities to conduct basic research
(special fund).
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . The author contends the state and regional boards
lack the clear direction and attention warranted for long-term
solutions, goals and alternatives, and instead focus on
end-of-pipe regulations that entail extremely high
implementation costs for minimal water quality improvements.
The author intends this bill to provide the opportunity for a
comprehensive view of California's stormwater program.
2)Background . The State Water Resources Control Board, in
conjunction with nine semiautonomous regional boards,
regulates water quality in the state. The regional
boards-which are funded by the state board and are under the
state board's oversight-implement water quality programs in
accordance with policies, plans, and standards developed by
AB 2117
Page 2
the state board.
The state board carries out its water quality responsibilities
by (a) establishing wastewater discharge policies and
standards; (b) implementing programs to ensure that the waters
of the state are not contaminated by underground or
aboveground tanks; and (c) administering state and federal
loans and grants to local governments for the construction of
wastewater treatment, water reclamation, and storm drainage
facilities.
3)This bill is supported by many industry groups who pay waste
discharge fees.
4)The bill is opposed by several groups that advocate for
environmental protection.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081