BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �





           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                                                                 |
          |         SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER         |
          |                   Senator Fran Pavley, Chair                    |
          |                    2013-2014 Regular Session                    |
          |                                                                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

          BILL NO: AB 2759                     HEARING DATE: June 10, 2014
          AUTHOR: Committee on Water, Parks and WildlifeURGENCY: No
          VERSION: March 24, 2014              CONSULTANT: Dennis O'Connor
          DUAL REFERRAL: Judiciary             FISCAL: Yes
          SUBJECT: Interstate water rights.
          
          BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
          California water law includes provisions governing appropriation  
          of waters that flow out of and into California.  One provision  
          holds that the entire flow of water in any natural stream which  
          carries water from the State of California into any other state  
          is subject to use in the State of California.  Moreover, the  
          rights to those waters shall be prior and superior to any rights  
          to the waters of such streams held under the laws of any other  
          state.

          Another set of statutes provides that California will recognize  
          water rights held by a neighboring State if that State  
          recognizes water rights held in California.  However, those  
          statutes specifically exclude the Walker River from that  
          reciprocity.

          In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Sporhase v. Nebraska, found  
          as unconstitutional Nebraska statutes which were similar to  
          those California statutes described above.  Specifically, the  
          Court found that the reciprocity requirement of the Nebraska  
          statute violates the Commerce Clause as imposing an  
          impermissible burden on interstate commerce; that is, the  
          reciprocity provision operates as an explicit barrier to  
          commerce between Nebraska and its adjoining States.

          PROPOSED LAW
          This bill would repeal the unconstitutional provisions of Civil  
          Code Section 1410a and Water Code Section 1230.  It would  
          replace Water Code Section 1230 with language clarifying that  
          were there is an interstate compact, Supreme Court decree, or  
          other interstate allocation, water right administration should  
                                                                      1







          be consistent with that allocation.  The bill amends Water Code  
          Section 1231 to make it applicable to the Walker River basin,  
          and includes technical amendments consolidating Water code  
          Section 1231 and 1232 into a single section.

          ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: None

          ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: None

          COMMENTS: None 
          
          SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS: None 

          SUPPORT: None Received
          
          OPPOSITION: None Received
          






























                                                                      2