SB 4

Bill Subjects

Abstract

(1) Existing law requires various state agencies to administer programs relating to water supply, water quality, and flood management in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Johnston-Baker-Andal-Boatwright Delta Protection Act of 1992 (Delta Protection Act) creates the Delta Protection Commission and requires the commission to prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-term resource management plan for specified lands within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) . This bill would revise and recast the provisions of the Delta Protection Act to, among other things, reduce the number of commission members, as specified. The bill would require the commission to appoint at least one advisory committee consisting of representatives from specified entities to provide input regarding the diverse interests within the Delta. The bill would require the commission to adopt, not later than July 1, 2011, an economic sustainability plan containing specified elements and would require the commission to review and, as determined to be necessary, amend the plan every 5 years. The bill would require the commission to prepare and submit to the Legislature, by July 1, 2010, recommendations on the potential expansion of or change to the primary zone or the Delta. The bill would establish the Delta Investment Fund in the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund, upon appropriation by the Legislature, would be required to be expended by the commission to implement the regional economic sustainability plan. The bill would establish in the Natural Resources Agency the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy. The conservancy would be required to act as a primary state agency to implement ecosystem restoration in the Delta and to support efforts that advance environmental protection and the economic well-being of Delta residents. The bill would specify the composition of the conservancy and grant certain authority to the conservancy, including the authority to acquire real property interests from willing sellers or transferors. The conservancy would be required to use conservation easements to accomplish ecosystem restoration whenever feasible. The conservancy would be required to prepare and adopt a strategic plan to achieve the goals of the conservancy. The strategic plan would be required to be consistent with certain plans. The bill would establish the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy Fund in the State Treasury. Moneys in the fund would be available, upon appropriation, to finance projects, including ecosystem restoration and economic sustainability projects. (2) Existing law requires the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency to convene a committee to develop and submit to the Governor and the Legislature, on or before December 31, 2008, recommendations for implementing a specified strategic plan relating to the sustainable management of the Delta. This bill would enact the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009. The bill would establish the Delta Stewardship Council as an independent agency of the state. The council would be required to consist of 7 members appointed in a specified manner. The bill would specify the powers of the council. The bill would require the council, on or before January 1, 2012, to develop, adopt, and commence implementation of a comprehensive management plan for the Delta (Delta Plan) , meeting specified requirements. The bill would require a state or local public agency that proposes to undertake certain proposed actions that will occur within the boundaries of the Delta or the Suisun Marsh to prepare, and submit to the council, a specified written certification of consistency with the Delta Plan prior to taking those actions. By imposing these requirements on a local public agency, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would establish an appeal process by which a person may claim that a proposed action is inconsistent with the Delta Plan, as prescribed. The bill would impose requirements on the Department of Water Resources in connection with the preparation of a specified Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) . The BDCP would only be permitted to be incorporated in the Delta Plan if certain requirements are met. The bill would establish the Delta Independent Science Board, whose members would be appointed by the council. The bill would require the Delta Independent Science Board to develop a scientific program relating to the management of the Delta. The bill would require the State Water Resources Control Board to establish an effective system of Delta watershed diversion data collection and public reporting by December 31, 2010. The bill would require the board to develop new flow criteria for the Delta ecosystem, as specified. The board would be required to submit those determinations to the council. The bill would require the board, in consultation with the council, to appoint a special master for the Delta, referred to as the Delta Watermaster. The bill would grant specified authority to the Delta Watermaster. (3) The California Bay-Delta Authority Act establishes the California Bay-Delta Authority in the Resources Agency. The act requires the authority and the implementing agencies to carry out programs, projects, and activities necessary to implement the Bay-Delta Program, defined to mean those projects, programs, commitments, and other actions that address the goals and objectives of the CALFED Bay-Delta Programmatic Record of Decision, dated August 28, 2000, or as it may be amended. This bill would repeal that act. The bill would impose requirements on the council in connection with the repeal of that act. (4) Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to convene an independent technical panel to provide information to the department and the Legislature on new demand management measures, technologies, and approaches. "Demand management measures" means those water conservation measures, programs, and incentives that prevent the waste of water and promote the reasonable and efficient use and reuse of available supplies. This bill would require the state to achieve a 20% reduction in urban per capita water use in California by December 31, 2020. The state would be required to make incremental progress towards this goal by reducing per capita water use by at least 10% on or before December 31, 2015. The bill would require each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets and an interim urban water use target, in accordance with specified requirements. The bill would require agricultural water suppliers to implement efficient water management practices. The bill would require the department, in consultation with other state agencies, to develop a single standardized water use reporting form. The bill, with certain exceptions, would provide that urban retail water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2016, and agricultural water suppliers, on and after July 1, 2013, are not eligible for state water grants or loans unless they comply with the water conservation requirements established by the bill. The bill would repeal, on July 1, 2016, an existing requirement that conditions eligibility for certain water management grants or loans to an urban water supplier on the implementation of certain water demand management measures. (5) Existing law, until January 1, 1993, and thereafter only as specified, requires certain agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt water management plans. This bill would revise existing law relating to agricultural water management planning to require agricultural water suppliers to prepare and adopt agricultural water management plans with specified components on or before December 31, 2012, and update those plans on or before December 31, 2015, and on or before December 31 every 5 years thereafter. An agricultural water supplier that becomes an agricultural water supplier after December 31, 2012, would be required to prepare and adopt an agricultural water management plan within one year after becoming an agricultural water supplier. The agricultural water supplier would be required to notify each city or county within which the supplier provides water supplies with regard to the preparation or review of the plan. The bill would require the agricultural water supplier to submit copies of the plan to the department and other specified entities. The bill would provide that an agricultural water supplier is not eligible for state water grants or loans unless the supplier complies with the water management planning requirements established by the bill. (6) Existing law generally prohibits the state, or a county, city, district, or other political subdivision, or any public officer or body acting in its official capacity on behalf of any of those entities, from being required to pay any fee for the performance of an official service. Existing law exempts from this provision any fee or charge for official services required pursuant to specified provisions of law relating to water use or water quality. This bill would expand the exemption to other provisions relating to water use, including provisions that require the payment of fees to the State Water Resources Control Board for official services relating to statements of water diversion and use. (7) Existing law authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board to investigate all streams, stream systems, lakes, or other bodies of water, take testimony relating to the rights to water or the use of water, and ascertain whether water filed upon or attempted to be appropriated is appropriated under the laws of the state. Existing law requires the board to take appropriate actions to prevent waste or the unreasonable use of water. Under existing law, the board makes determinations with regard to the availability of recycled water. This bill would authorize the board, in conducting an investigation or proceeding for these purposes, to order any person or entity that diverts water or uses water to submit any technical or monitoring report related to the diversion or use of water by that person or entity. The bill would authorize the board, in connection with the investigation or proceeding, to inspect the facilities of any person or entity to determine compliance with specified water use requirements. (8) Existing law authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board, upon the submission of a petition signed by a claimant to water of any stream system requesting a determination of rights among the claimants to that water, to enter an order granting the petition. After granting the petition, the board is required to investigate the stream system to gather information necessary to make a determination of the water rights of that stream system. This bill would authorize the board to initiate a determination of rights under its own motion if after a hearing it finds, based on substantial evidence, that the public interest and necessity will be served by a determination of rights. (9) Existing law declares that the diversion or use of water other than as authorized by specified provisions of law is a trespass. Existing law authorizes the administrative imposition of civil liability by the board for a trespass in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which the trespass occurs. Moneys generated by the imposition of civil liability under these provisions are deposited in the Water Rights Fund. This bill would provide that a person or entity committing a trespass may be liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000 or $5,000 for each day in which the trespass occurs, as specified, or the highest market value of the water, whichever is the greater amount. The moneys would be required to be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified. The bill would establish the Water Rights Protection Subaccount in the Water Rights Fund. Specified penalties would be required to be deposited in the subaccount. The bill would state legislative intent regarding the expenditure of the moneys in the subaccount. (10) Existing law, with certain exceptions, requires each person who diverts water after December 31, 1965, to file with the State Water Resources Control Board a prescribed statement of diversion and use. Existing law requires a statement to include specified information, including, on and after January 1, 2012, monthly records of water diversions. Under existing law, the monthly record requirement does not apply to a surface water diversion with a combined diversion capacity from a natural channel that is less than 50 cubic feet per second or to diverters using siphons in the tidal zone. Existing law subjects a person who makes a material misstatement in connection with the filing of the diversion and use statements to administratively imposed civil penalties in the amount of $500 for each violation. This bill would revise the types of water diversions for which the reporting requirement does not apply, including, among other diversions, a diversion that occurs before January 1, 2009, if certain requirements are met. The bill would delete exceptions to the monthly record requirement, and revise requirements relating to the contents of the statement of diversions and use. The bill would subject 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 and use statement. The board would be authorized to impose the civil liability in accordance with a specified schedule. Funds recovered pursuant to these provisions would be required to be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified. The bill would authorize the board and the Department of Water Resources to adopt emergency regulations for the electronic filing of reports of water diversion or use that are required to be filed with those respective state agencies under specified statutory provisions. The bill would establish a rebuttable presumption, in any proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that an appropriative right has ceased or is subject to prescribed action, that no use required to be included in a statement of diversion and use occurred unless that use is included in a statement that is submitted to the board within a specified time period. The bill would require a person who files a statement of diversion and use, and certain petitions involving a change in a water right, to pay an annual fee, for deposit in the Water Rights Fund. The bill would include as recoverable costs, for which the board may be reimbursed from the fund upon appropriation therefor, costs incurred in connection with carrying out requirements relating to the statements of diversion and use and the performance of duties under the public trust doctrine and provisions that require the reasonable use of water. (11) Existing law authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements, including requirements set forth in a decision or order relating to the unauthorized use of water. Any person who violates a cease and desist order 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 Water Rights Fund. This bill would increase, as specified, the civil penalties that apply to a person who violates a cease and desist order. The bill would impose civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for a failure to comply with various reporting or monitoring requirements, including requirements imposed pursuant to the public trust doctrine. The bill would authorize the board to impose additional civil liability, in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day in which a violation occurs, for the violation of a permit, license, certificate, or registration, or an order or regulation involving the unreasonable use of water. Funds derived from the imposition of these civil penalties would be deposited in the Water Rights Fund, as specified. The bill would require that, in a proceeding before the board in which it is alleged that an appropriative water right has ceased, or is subject to prescribed action, there would be a rebuttable presumption that no use occurred on or after January 1, 2009, unless that diversion or use was reported to the board within 6 months after it is required to be filed with the board. (12) Existing law authorizes a local agency whose service area includes a groundwater basin that is not subject to groundwater management to adopt and implement a groundwater management plan pursuant to certain provisions of law. Existing law requires a groundwater management plan to include certain components to qualify as a plan for the purposes of those provisions, including a provision that establishes funding requirements for the construction of certain groundwater projects. This bill would establish a groundwater monitoring program pursuant to which specified entities, in accordance with prescribed procedures, may propose to be designated by the Department of Water Resources as groundwater monitoring entities, as defined, for the purposes of monitoring and reporting with regard to groundwater elevations in all or part of a basin or subbasin, as defined. The bill would require the department to work cooperatively with each monitoring entity to determine the manner in which groundwater elevation information should be reported to the department. The bill would authorize the department to make recommendations for improving an existing monitoring program, and to require additional monitoring wells under certain circumstances. If the department makes a specified determination with regard to a basin or subbasin, the department would be required to notify the counties within which that basin or subbasin is located. Upon such notification, the counties would be required to take certain action related to groundwater monitoring, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program. Under certain circumstances, specified entities with authority to assume groundwater monitoring functions with regard to a basin or subbasin would not be eligible for a water grant or loan awarded or administered by the state, unless certain actions occur. (13) Existing law requires the department to conduct an investigation of the state's groundwater basins and to report its findings to the Governor and the Legislature not later than January 1, 1980. This bill would repeal that provision. The department would be required to conduct an investigation of the state's groundwater basins and to report its findings to the Governor and the Legislature not later than January 1, 2012, and every 5 years thereafter. (14) Existing law, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006, an initiative bond act approved by the voters at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, authorizes the issuance of bonds in the amount of $5,388,000,000, of which $1,000,000,000 is made available to the Department of Water Resources, upon appropriation therefor, to meet the long term water needs of the state. Eligible projects are required to implement integrated regional water management plans and include fisheries restoration and protection projects. A portion of these funds may be expended directly or granted by the department to address multiregional needs or issues of statewide significance. This bill would appropriate $28,000,000 of these funds to the department for the department to expend, as specified, on the Two-Gates Fish Protection Demonstration Program managed by the United States Bureau of Reclamation. The bill would make a statement of legislative intent to finance the activities of the Delta Stewardship Council and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy from funds made available pursuant to the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006 and the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Bond Act of 2006. (15) The Budget Act of 2009 made appropriations for the support of the State Water Resources Control Board for the 2009–10 fiscal year, with certain payments from the Water Rights Fund. This bill would amend and supplement the Budget Act of 2009 by making an additional appropriation from the fund to support water rights enforcement. The bill would, commencing with the 2010–11 fiscal year, continuously appropriate $3,750,000 on an annual basis only from fee revenue in the fund to the board for the purpose of funding permanent water rights enforcement positions. (16) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.