BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1739|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1739
Author: Dickinson (D), et al.
Amended: 8/22/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER COMMITTEE : 7-1, 6/24/14
AYES: Pavley, Evans, Hueso, Jackson, Lara, Monning, Wolk
NOES: Cannella
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 8/14/14
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-24, 5/28/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Groundwater management
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill provides specific authority to a
groundwater sustainability agency (GSA), as defined in SB 1168
(Pavley, 2014), to impose certain fees. This bill authorizes
the Department of Water Resources (DWR) or a GSA to provide
technical assistance to entities that extract or use groundwater
to promote water conservation and protect groundwater resources.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/22/14 clarify the relation between
cities/counties and groundwater agencies with respect to land
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
2
use planning, consideration of groundwater plans in local
planning, and consideration of local general plans in
groundwater planning.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/18/14 (1) refine provisions of the
bill regarding state evaluation and intervention regarding
groundwater sustainability plans, (2) delete those parts of the
bill that will be solely in SB 1168 (which has similar
amendments), and (3) make chaptering of the bill contingent on
enactment of SB 1168.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1.Authorizes local agencies to adopt and implement a groundwater
management plan. Requires a groundwater management plan to
contain specified components and requires a local agency
seeking state funds administered by DWR for groundwater
projects or groundwater quality projects to do certain things,
including, but not limited to, preparing and implementing a
groundwater management plan that includes basin management
objectives for the groundwater basin.
2.Establishes the Water Rights Fund (Fund), which consists of
various fees and penalties. The monies in the Fund are
available, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for, among
other things, the administration of the State Water Resource
Control Board's (Board) water rights program.
3.Requires, with certain exceptions, each person who diverts
water after December 31, 1965, to file with the Board a
prescribed statement of diversion and use.
4.Subjects a person to civil liability if that person fails to
file, as required, a diversion and use statement for a
diversion or use that occurs after January 1, 2009, tampers
with any measuring device, or makes a material misstatement in
connection with the filing of a diversion or use statement.
5.Provides that a person who violates a cease and desist order
of the Board may be liable in an amount not to exceed $1,000
for each day in which the violation occurs. Revenue generated
from these penalties is deposited in the Fund.
6.Authorizes the Board or the DWR to adopt emergency regulations
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
3
providing for the filing of reports of water diversion or use
that are required to be filed.
7.Requires the legislative body of each county and city to adopt
a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical
development of the county or city with specified elements,
including, among others, land use and conservation elements.
8.Requires a city or county, upon the adoption or revision of
its general plan, on or after January 1, 1996, to utilize as a
source document any urban water management plan submitted to
the city or county by a water agency.
9.Requires a public water system to provide a planning agency
with certain information upon receiving notification of a
city's or a county's proposed action to adopt or substantially
amend a general plan.
This bill:
1. Provides specific authority to a GSA, as defined in SB 1168
(Pavley, of 2014), to impose certain fees.
2. Authorizes the DWR or a GSA to provide technical assistance
to entities that extract or use groundwater to promote water
conservation and protect groundwater resources.
3. Requires the DWR to prepare and publish a report by December
31, 2016, on its Internet Web site that presents the
department's best estimate, based on available information,
of water available for replenishment of groundwater in the
state.
4. Requires the DWR, by January 1, 2017, to publish on its
Internet Web site best management practices for the
sustainable management of groundwater, and requires the DWR
to prepare and release a report by December 31, 2016, on the
DFW's best estimate of water available for replenishment of
groundwater in the state.
5. Requires a GSA to submit a groundwater sustainability plan
to the DWR for review upon adoption. Requires the DWR to
periodically review groundwater sustainability plans, and by
June 1, 2016, and requires the DWR to adopt regulations for
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
4
evaluating groundwater sustainability plans adopt regulations
for evaluating groundwater sustainability plans, the
implementation of groundwater sustainability plans, and
coordination agreements. These regulations adopted shall
identify appropriate methodologies and assumptions for
baseline conditions concerning hydrology, water demand,
regulatory restrictions that affect the availability of
surface water, and unreliability of, or reductions in,
surface water deliveries to the agency or water users in the
basin, and the impact of those conditions on achieving
sustainability and shall include the historic average
reliability and deliveries of surface water to the agency or
water users in the basin..
6. Requires the DFW to adopt the regulations, including any
amendments thereto, as emergency regulations in accordance
with the Administrative Procedure Act. The adoption of these
regulations is an emergency and shall be considered by the
Office of Administrative Law as necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health and safety, or
general welfare.
7. Authorizes a local agency to submit to the DWR for
evaluation and assessment an alternative that the local
agency believes satisfies the objectives of these provisions.
8. Requires the DWR to review any of the above-described
submissions at least every five years after initial
submission to the DWR.
9. Authorizes the DWR to conduct inspections to obtain an
inspection warrant.
10.Authorizes the Board to designate a basin as a probationary
basin, if the Board makes a certain determination.
11.Authorizes the Board to develop an interim plan for a
probationary basin if the Board, in consultation with the
DWR, determines that a local agency has not remedied a
deficiency that resulted in designating the basin as a
probationary basin within a certain timeframe.
12.Authorizes the Board to adopt an interim plan for a
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
5
probationary basin after notice and a public hearing and
requires state entities to comply with an interim plan.
13.Authorizes the Board to rescind all or a portion of an
interim plan if the Board determines at the request of
specified petitioners that a groundwater sustainability plan
or adjudication action is adequate to eliminate the condition
of long-term overdraft or condition where groundwater
extractions result in significant depletions of
interconnected surface waters.
14.Provides that the Board has authority to stay its
proceedings relating to an interim plan or to rescind or
amend an interim plan based on the progress made by a
groundwater sustainability agency or in an adjudication
action.
15.Provides that the money in the Fund is available for
expenditure, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the
purpose of Board enforcement. Requires the Board to adopt a
schedule of fees in an amount sufficient to recover all costs
incurred and expended from the Fund by the Board.
16.Authorizes the Board to issue a cease and desist order in
response to a violation or threatened violation of any
decision or order of the Board or any extraction restriction,
limitation, order, or regulation adopted or issued.
17.Establishes groundwater reporting requirements for a person
extracting groundwater in an area within a basin that is not
within the management area of a groundwater sustainability
agency or a probationary basin. Requires the reports to be
submitted to the Board or in certain areas, to an entity
designated as a local agency by the Board, as specified.
Requires each report to be accompanied by a specified fee.
18.Authorizes the Board or the DWR to adopt emergency
regulations providing for the filing of reports of water
extraction.
19.Requires, prior to the adoption or any substantial amendment
of a general plan, the planning agency to review and consider
a groundwater sustainability plan, groundwater management
plan, groundwater management court order, judgment, or
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
6
decree, adjudication of water rights, or a certain order or
interim plan by the Board.
20.Requires the planning agency to refer a proposed action to
adopt or substantially amend a general plan to any
groundwater sustainability agency that has adopted a
groundwater sustainability plan or local agency that
otherwise manages groundwater and to the Board if it has
adopted an interim plan that includes territory within the
planning area.
21.Requires a groundwater sustainability agency or an entity
that submits an alternative to provide the planning agency
with certain information as is appropriate and relevant,
including a report on the anticipated effect of the proposed
action on implementation of a groundwater sustainability
plan.
22.Provides that the provisions against superseding the land
use authority of cities and counties applies to that
authority within the overlying basin, including the city or
county general plan, and requires a groundwater
sustainability plan to take into account the most recent
planning assumptions stated in local general plans overlying
the basin.
23.Requires, after January 31, 2020, the DFW, in consultation
with the Board, to determine that a groundwater
sustainability plan is inadequate or that the groundwater
sustainability program is not being implemented in a manner
that will likely achieve the sustainability goal.
24.Provides that the basin, after January 31, 2022, be managed
under a groundwater sustainability plan or coordinated
groundwater sustainability plans if none of the following
have occurred:
A. A groundwater sustainability agency has adopted a
groundwater sustainability plan for the entire basin.
B. A collection of local agencies has adopted
groundwater sustainability plans that collectively
serve as a groundwater sustainability plan for the
entire basin.
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
7
C. The DFW has approved an alternative, as specified.
25.Provides that the basin be managed, as specified, after
January 31, 2022, if both of the following have occurred:
A. The DFW, in consultation with the Board, determines
that a groundwater sustainability plan is inadequate or
that the groundwater sustainability plan is not being
implemented in a manner that will likely achieve the
sustainability goal.
B. The Board determines that the basin is in a
condition of long-term overdraft or in a condition
where groundwater extractions result in significant
depletions of interconnected surface waters.
26.Revises the definition of "undesirable result," and
specifies that certain authority granted to a groundwater
sustainability agency to control groundwater extractions
shall be consistent with applicable elements of a city or
county general plan, except as specified.
27.Provides that this bill is contingent on the enactment of SB
1168 (Pavley, of 2014).
Background
California is the last state without an enforceable set of
statewide groundwater management standards. While some of
California's groundwater basins are sustainably managed, many
are not.
A number of different entities may manage some aspect of
groundwater in California. These include:
Special Districts . Many types of special districts have some
groundwater related authorities under the water code and other
statutes. Such districts include county water districts,
municipal utility districts, community service districts, and
water replenishment districts.
Special Act Districts . The Legislature has created a number
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
8
of special districts whose specific purpose is to manage one
groundwater basin or another. These include agencies such as
the Orange County Water District and Fox Canyon Groundwater
Management Agency.
Court Appointed Watermasters . In an adjudication, the court
determines who has rights to pump from the groundwater basin,
how much they can pump, etc. The court also typically
appoints someone to be the "Watermaster" whose job is to
ensure that the basin is managed in accordance with the
court's decree.
Cities and Counties . The courts have held that cities and
counties, under their general police powers, have the
authority to enact ordinances regarding groundwater. More
than 20 counties have done so, generally addressing issues
such as banning transfers of groundwater out of the county.
Counties also issue drilling permits for water wells.
The powers to manage groundwater vary. In most special act
districts, the authorizing act allows the agency to require
groundwater users to report their extractions to the agency, who
can then levy fees for groundwater management or water supply
replenishment. Some acts also provide the special district the
authority to limit exports and extractions.
For most non-special act districts, the authority to manage
groundwater derives from what is commonly referred to as AB 3030
(Water Code Section 10750 et seq.). AB 3030 allows, but does
not require, certain defined existing local agencies to develop
groundwater management plans in defined groundwater basins and
subbasins.
An AB 3030 plan can be developed only after a public hearing and
adoption of a resolution of intention to adopt a groundwater
management plan. If landowners representing more than 50% of
the assessed value of lands within the proposed district do not
protest the plan, the plan can be adopted within 35 days. If
landowners representing a majority of the assessed value in the
proposed district oppose the plan, cannot be adopted and no new
plan may be attempted for one year.
AB 3030 plans cannot be adopted in adjudicated basins or in
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
9
basins where groundwater is managed under other sections of the
Water Code without the permission of the court or the other
agency.
Once the plan is adopted, rules and regulations must be adopted
to implement the program called for in the plan. Many plans
that have been adopted are relatively simple and in some cases
are a means of defining boundaries.
There are 149 adopted AB 3030 plans.
If a local agency wishes to receive state funds administered by
DWR for groundwater projects or for other projects that directly
affect groundwater levels or quality, the local agency must have
an AB 3030 plan or equivalent groundwater management plan meets
specific requirements. These requirements are sometimes known
as "SB 1938 [Machado, Chapter 603, Statutes of 2002]
requirements."
This January, the Governor released his final California Water
Action Plan (CWAP). Among the many initiatives in the CWAP is a
call to improve sustainable groundwater management:
Groundwater is a critical buffer to the impacts of
prolonged dry periods and climate change on our water
system. The administration will work with the Legislature
to ensure that local and regional agencies have the
incentives, tools, authority and guidance to develop and
enforce local and regional management plans that protect
groundwater elevations, quality, and surface
water-groundwater interactions. The administration will
take steps, including sponsoring legislation, if necessary,
to define local and regional responsibilities and to give
local and regional agencies the authority to manage
groundwater sustainably and ensure no groundwater basin is
in danger of being permanently damaged by over drafting.
When a basin is at risk of permanent damage, and local and
regional entities have not made sufficient progress to
correct the problem, the state should protect the basin and
its users until an adequate local program is in place.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
10
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
No additional state costs for fiscal year (FY) 2014-15 through
FY 2018-19 to the DWR for initial activities.
Annual costs $3.5 to $4 million from the General Fund
beginning in FY 2017-18 to DWR to review plans and to provide
ongoing technical support.
Annual costs of $260,000 to $390,000 from the Water Rights
Funds (special) for FY 2014-15 through FY 2016-17 to the SWRCB
for initial activities.
Annual costs of $325,000 to $600,000 from the General Fund
beginning in FY 2017-18 to the SWRCB for review of GSPs.
Unknown annual costs, estimated to be approximately $1.5 M,
from the Water Rights Fund (special) to the SWRCB for
enforcement actions beginning in FY 2017-18. These costs
would be at least partially offset by fees.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/25/14)
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
Association of California Water Agencies
Barona Bank of Mission Indians
Bay Area Council
California Council of Geoscience Organizations
California Groundwater Coalition
California Groundwater Council
California Tribal Business Alliance
California Trout
California Water Foundation
California Waterfowl Association
City of Los Angeles, Mayor's Office
Community Alliance with Family Farmers
East Bay Municipal Utility District
EMAX Laboratories, Inc.
Groundwater Resources Association of California
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
11
Horizon Environmental, Inc.
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Inyo County
Irvine Ranch Water District
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Los Angeles City Council
Luhdorff & Scalmanini Consulting Engineers
Mayor of Los Angeles
Montclair Environmental Management, Inc.
Orange County Water District
Pala Band of Mission Indians
Parker Groundwater
Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians
PRO Water Equity
Quinn Environmental Strategies, Inc.
Raymond Basin Management Board
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
San Gabriel Valley Water Association
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Sierra Club California
Sullivan International Group, Inc.
The Source Group, Inc.
Todd Groundwater
Trout Unlimited
United States Department of Defense, Regional Environmental
Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District
Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians
WILDCOAST
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/25/14)
African American Farmers of California
Agricultural Council of California
Allied Grape Growers
Almond Hullers & Processors Association
Association of California Egg Farmers
Blue Diamond Growers
California Agricultural Aircraft Association
California Ammonia Company
California Association of Nurseries and Garden Centers
California Bean Shippers Association
California Blueberry Association
California Canning Peach Association
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
12
California Cattlemen's Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Citrus Mutual
California Cotton Ginners Association
California Cotton Growers Association
California Dairies, Inc.
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Fresh Fruit Association
California Grain & Feed
California Groundwater Association
California League of Food Processors
California Pear Growers Association
California Seed Association
California State Floral Association
California Tomato Growers Association
California Warehouse Association
California Women for Agriculture
Campos Brothers Farms
Dairy Farmers of America-Western Area
Del Monte Foods
Family Business Association
Family Winemakers
Fruit Growers Supply Company
Grower-Shipper Association of Central California
Grower-Shipper Association of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo
Counties
Kern County
Land O' Lakes
Nisei Farmers League
Northern California Water Association
Pacific Coast Producers
Raisin Bargaining Association
Sacramento Regional Water Authority
San Joaquin County
Stockton East Water District
Sun-Maid Growers of California
Sunsweet Growers Inc.
Valley Ag Water Coalition
Western Agricultural Processors Association
Western Growers Association
Western Plant Health Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the California Water
Foundation (CWF), "AB 1739 addresses one of California's most
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
13
pressing water management issues - the need for improved and
sustainable groundwater management. The current drought and its
immediate impacts to the state's groundwater resources compel us
to search for solutions now so we are better prepared for
further droughts. Improved groundwater management will protect
critical water supplies and provide ecosystem and economic
benefits to the mid- and long-term.
"A new statewide policy for sustainable groundwater management
is urgently needed, and AB 1739 is an important piece of this
discussion. Numerous stakeholders have been involved and are
continuing to toward together on this legislation and ? SB 1168
[Pavley]. CWF is working with both authors to help ensure that
these bills provide the right provisions to empower local
groundwater management agencies with new tools and authorities,
and to create an appropriate state 'backstop' that will allow
the state to intervene, only when needed, to ensure groundwater
management goals are met."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the California Farm
Bureau Federation, "We are concerned the current process is
rushed to meet arbitrary deadlines without adequate time to
address such a complex issue. This measure will have huge
long-term economic impacts on farms, the State and local
economies and county tax roles, with a very real potential to
devalue land and impact farms and businesses viability and in
turn impact jobs. We believe groundwater must be managed
locally/regionally and that overlying property rights are
protected to avoid a taking. Without addressing these issues
with stakeholder input, this measure will certainly create a
significant fiscal impact to the state when many are forced to
defend their overlying property rights through adjudication.
"Overall, Farm Bureau believes we do not have a groundwater
problem solely from a lack of regulation, but from a failure to
update our water capture and delivery system to today's
conditions. Any legislation that creates a new groundwater
management regime must be coupled with real, substantive actions
to increase surface water supplies and restore water supply
reliability. The complexities of groundwater, groundwater
management and interactions with surface water are too great to
rush to judgment and to an isolated solution. We are not
suggesting the status quo, nor are we suggesting do nothing, but
we do recommend a carefully thought through process to develop
CONTINUED
AB 1739
Page
14
appropriate protections of our groundwater resources for future
generations. For these reasons we are actively engaged with
others to develop a path forward, but we must oppose AB 1739."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 48-24, 5/28/14
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta,
Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Chesbro, Cooley, Daly, Dickinson, Fong, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez,
Gonzalez, Gordon, Roger Hern�ndez, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Lowenthal, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Pan, Perea,
John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon,
Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NOES: Allen, Bigelow, Ch�vez, Conway, Dahle, Donnelly, Fox,
Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove, Hagman, Harkey, Jones, Linder,
Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Nestande, Olsen,
Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Achadjian, Dababneh, Eggman, Frazier, Gray,
Hall, Holden, Vacancy
RM:d 8/25/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED