BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1739
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1739 (Dickinson)
As Amended April 22, 2014
Majority Vote
WATER, PARKS & WILDLIFE 9-5 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Rendon, Bocanegra, Fong, |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, |
| |Frazier, Gatto, Gomez, | |Bradford, |
| |Gonzalez, Rodriguez, | |Ian Calderon, Campos, |
| |Yamada | |Eggman, Gomez, Holden, |
| | | |Pan, Quirk, |
| | | |Ridley-Thomas, Weber |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Bigelow, Allen, Beth |Nays:|Bigelow, Donnelly, Jones, |
| |Gaines, Gray, Patterson | |Linder, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires sustainable groundwater management in all
groundwater subbasins determined by the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) to be at medium to high risk of significant
economic, social and environmental impacts due to an
unsustainable and chronic pattern of groundwater extractions
exceeding the ability of the surface water supplies to replenish
the subbasin. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires, by January 1, 2020, that in each groundwater basin
identified by DWR as high or medium priority (Priority Basins)
under the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation
Monitoring Program (CASGEM) that an overlying groundwater
management agency (GMA) adopt a sustainable groundwater
management plan (SGMP) and update it every five years.
2)Requires that SGMPs for Priority Basins (which include both
basins and subbasins) must include, in addition to the minimum
current components for voluntary groundwater management plans
(GMPs), the following:
a) Sustainable groundwater management objectives, including
an analysis of demonstrating how the objectives will
achieve sustainable groundwater management within 20 years
of the implementation of the plan, and an identification of
AB 1739
Page 2
the parties responsible for achieving the objectives;
b) A minimum 50 year planning and implementation horizon;
c) Provisions for the annual submission of performance
reports; and,
d) Procedures for the regular submission of monitoring data
to DWR for CASGEM and locally to stakeholders.
3)Exempts from SGMP requirements any groundwater basin, or
portion of a groundwater basin, that is subject to groundwater
management pursuant to other provisions of law or a court
order, judgment, or decree.
4)Requires SGMPs covering different portions of a groundwater
basin not to conflict or impede each other.
5)Empowers a GMA to:
a) Incorporate other areas overlying the groundwater basin
that are not covered by another SGMP;
b) Request an adjustment of a groundwater basin boundary to
address hydrologic conditions and other features and other
features based upon a technical analysis;
c) Enter into different types of legal agreements to
facilitate participation among entities;
d) Raise funds for the purposes of sustainable groundwater
management;
e) Regulate the pumping of groundwater;
f) Establish, assume, or cooperatively manage well
permitting programs; and,
g) Enforce the GMA's SGMP.
6)Prohibits new extractions from the groundwater as of a
AB 1739
Page 3
not-yet-specified date, or the date adopted by the GMA,
whichever is earlier, unless the groundwater basin has a SGMP.
Excludes single-family domestic wells from that prohibition.
7)Allows money in the existing Local Groundwater Assistance
Fund, which is used for planning and implementation of GMPs to
also be used for SGMP planning and implementation.
8)Allows Local Agency Formation Commissions to provide special
technical assistance and an expedited timeline to facilitation
the formation of local and regional GMAs.
9)Requires cities and counties, upon the adoption or revision of
a general plan, to utilize GMPs and SGMPs as source documents.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water
Board) with broad powers to regulate the waste and
unreasonable use of water, including groundwater. But there
is no statewide permitting requirement for percolating
groundwater, which is the majority of groundwater.
2)Encourages local agencies to work cooperatively to manage
groundwater resources within their jurisdictions and, if not
otherwise required by law, to voluntarily adopt GMPs.
3)Requires that a GMP contain components related to funding,
management, and monitoring in order for a local agency to be
eligible for groundwater project funds administered by DWR.
4)Requires, under CASGEM, that groundwater basins identified in
DWR's Groundwater Report, Bulletin 118, to be regularly and
systematically monitored locally and the information to be
readily and widely available. Requires DWR to perform the
groundwater elevation monitoring function if no local entity
will do so but then bars the county and other entities
eligible to monitor that basin from receiving state water
grants or loans.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
AB 1739
Page 4
1)Increase costs to DWR in the range of $250,000 to $313,000 to
provide technical assistance and approve groundwater plans
every five years. This bill likely will require between 100
and 125 plans to be developed. The cost of review and
approval is estimated to be about $2,500 per plan.
This bill specifies that any costs are eligible for funding
under the Local Groundwater Assistance Fund. However, there
is currently no balance in this fund.
2)Create unknown, potentially significant, reimbursable local
government costs.
COMMENTS : California uses more groundwater than any other State
in the Nation and yet there are no required statewide standards
for sustainable groundwater management.
On March 11, 2014 the Assembly Water, Parks & Wildlife Committee
held an informational hearing on Management of California's
Groundwater Resources. Discussions during that hearing
acknowledged that while some overdraft reverses temporarily
during wet periods there are areas of the State where pumping
over the long term exceeds recharge leading to declining
groundwater levels and adverse overdraft-related environmental,
social, or economic effects. Examples of those effects can
include land subsidence that causes infrastructure to buckle and
impairs flood control, the drying up of shallow wells requiring
deeper and more expensive wells, including in communities that
can least afford them, and the leaching of surface water streams
thus impairing surface water rights and affecting ecosystems.
One DWR estimate pegged the current level of chronic long-term
overdraft at a rate of 1.5 million acre-feet per year. However,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration satellite data
shows the rate may be closer to 4.4 million acre-feet per year
statewide.
The California Water Action Plan, released by Governor Brown's
administration last December highlighted the need for better
groundwater management at the local level but also advised the
State Water Board, under its current authorities, could "act as
a backstop when local or regional agencies are unable or
unwilling to sustainably manage groundwater basins." The
Governor's January budget then proposed $2.9 million to DWR to
collect and update groundwater data and $1.9 million and 10
positions for the State Water Board for the backstop. The
AB 1739
Page 5
Governor's May revision of the budget includes an increase of
$2.5 million in General Fund and in 2014-15 and $5 million
annually for four additional years to support local groundwater
management efforts. That was followed by the Governor's Office
releasing, on May 22, 2014 a 32-page proposal detailing a draft
statewide sustainable groundwater management program and
including suggested statutory language.
The Legislature is also moving forward with proposals to develop
a statutory framework for sustainable groundwater management.
This bill represents the Assembly's effort. A parallel process
is occurring in the Senate through SB 1168 (Pavley) of the
current legislative session. Both bills present initial
sustainable groundwater management concepts that will continue
to be developed, refined, and in some cases re-defined, with
extensive stakeholder involvement.
The author states that in many areas, including parts of the San
Joaquin Valley, overdraft of groundwater has become a serious
problem and while a number of groundwater basins and subbasins
are under sound local and regional management, others are not.
The author adds that while existing authorities and requirements
for managing groundwater provide a strong foundation, managing
to a sustainable level of groundwater requires additional tools
that build upon that foundation. The author advises that this
bill seeks to address several critical policy objectives that
are central to improving local and regional groundwater
management efforts and achieving sustainable groundwater levels,
especially in high and medium risk overdraft basins and
subbasins.
Analysis Prepared by : Tina Cannon Leahy / W., P. & W. / (916)
319-2096 FN:
0003784