AB 1242
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 1242 (Gray) – As Introduced February 27, 2015
SUBJECT: Water quality: impacts on groundwater basins: mitigation measures
SUMMARY: Requires the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), before requiring
instream flows, to evaluate impacts on groundwater, consider alternatives, and mitigate any
significant adverse impacts to a groundwater basin. Prohibits the SWRCB from adopting a
statement of overriding considerations or adopting a water quality control plan (WQCP) if there
is a significant adverse impact to a groundwater basin.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Maintains that the waters of the state are held in trust for the people of California and cannot
be privately owned but can only be reasonably and beneficially used.
2) Tasks the SWRCB with protecting and enforcing water rights and water quality laws,
included delegated water quality authorities under the federal Clean Water Act. Places nine
Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Boards) under the SWRCB.
3) Requires the Regional Boards, or SWRCB under specified circumstances, to formulate and
adopt WQCPs for all areas within each region of the state that protect beneficial uses of
water and meet water quality objectives.
4) Defines beneficial uses of the waters of the state to include domestic, municipal, agricultural,
and industrial supply; power generation; recreation; aesthetic enjoyment; navigation; and
preservation and enhancement of fish, wildlife, and other aquatic resources or preserves.
5) Requires the WQCP to include objectives that will ensure the reasonable protection of all
beneficial uses, protection of water quality, and the prevention of nuisance while considering
factors such as past, present and probably future beneficial uses of water, environmental
characteristics, regional economics, the need to develop housing, and the need to expand and
use recycled water.
6) Requires the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to prioritize California's groundwater
basins in order to focus state resources. The basins are prioritized as either high, medium,
low, or very low based on a combination of factors including, but not limited to, overlying
population, level of dependence for urban and agricultural water supplies, and impacts on the
groundwater from overdraft, subsidence, saline water intrusion, and water quality
degradation.
7) Requires, by June 30, 2017, the formation of one or more Groundwater Sustainability
Agencies (GSAs) in all high and medium priority basins subject to the Sustainable
Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
AB 1242
Page 2
8) Requires, by January 31, 2020, that GSAs in all high and medium priority basins subject to a
chronic condition of overdraft develop and adopt Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs)
that provide for the sustainable management of the groundwater basin, as defined.
9) Requires, by January 31, 2022, that GSAs in all other high and medium priority basins
subject to SGMA develop and adopt GSPs.
10) Allows the SWRCB to impose an interim plan for management of a groundwater basin if no
GSA is formed by the deadline, no GSP is adopted by the appropriate deadline, or a GSP is
adopted which DWR deems insufficient and where the basin is in a chronic condition of
overdraft or in a condition where groundwater pumping is causing a significant depletion of
interconnected surface waters.
THIS BILL:
1) Requires the SWRCB to consider GSPs when formulating state policy for water quality
control and adopting or approving a WQCP.
2) Requires, before adopting instream flows that protect beneficial uses of water, that the
SWRCB evaluate impacts on groundwater basins (i.e., from increased groundwater pumping
in reaction to increased instream flow requirements) and consider alternatives and mitigation
measures to avoid or mitigate any adverse impacts on groundwater quality or supply to the
extent feasible.
3) Requires the SWRCB to adopt and implement mitigation measures for any significant
adverse impacts to a groundwater basin caused by increased groundwater pumping.
4) Prohibits the SWRCB from adopting a WQCP if there is a significant adverse impact to a
groundwater basin caused by increased groundwater pumping.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1) Background. For 30 years the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project and
others have been required to help meet flow requirements in the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta (Delta), but the tributaries to the San Joaquin River avoided any requirements other
than experimental flows. The SWRCB is now engaged in a long-delayed process to
determine what level of flows should be provided by the tributaries. This bill would prohibit
the SWRCB from imposing in-stream flow requirements on tributaries to the San Joaquin
River unless the SWRCB pays for actions to mitigate when local water users pump more
groundwater in response to the loss of surface water dedicated to in-stream flows.
The Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers are tributaries to the San Joaquin River. The
San Joaquin River flows northward to join the Sacramento River in the Delta. The Delta's
flow provides part of the drinking water supply for two-thirds of the state's population and
water for a multitude of other urban uses as well as supplying some of the state's most
productive agricultural areas both inside and outside of the Delta. The Delta is also one of
the largest ecosystems for fish and wildlife habitat production in the United States, including
commercial runs of salmon.
AB 1242
Page 3
The SWRCB is responsible for protecting and managing both water rights and water quality
in California. As part of its duties, the SWRCB developed a Delta WQCP in 1995 that
included requirements as to how much water must be left in-stream at different times to
protect and balance all beneficial uses of water including municipal and industrial,
agricultural, recreational, and fish and wildlife. After adopting the Delta WQCP, the
SWRCB commenced a water rights proceeding to determine the responsibilities of water
rights holders to implement the flow-dependent objectives in the Delta WQCP. The water
rights proceeding was massive and included parties with water rights on the Sacramento
River and its tributaries, San Joaquin River and its tributaries, and in the Delta. The hearing
was divided into 8 regional phases and the SWRCB encouraged parties to reach settlement
agreements with other water rights holders and interested parties as a way of proposing
allocations of responsibility to meet the flow-dependent objectives.
During Phase 2 of the hearing, parties on the San Joaquin River and its tributaries submitted
the San Joaquin River Agreement proposing an allocation of responsibility for releasing
"pulse flows" to the Delta during the April-May and October periods, which are most critical
to migrating salmon. The parties argued there wasn't sufficient information to determine
how much water was needed instream for fish and, therefore, they would also conduct an
experiment during the April-May period called the Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan
(VAMP). Under VAMP, parties on the tributaries to the San Joaquin River were paid a fixed
amount of money by the federal government in return for maintaining low, medium, and high
releases during different years that would be tied to low, medium, and high levels of export
water by the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project pumping plants in the
Delta. The objective was to evaluate the relative relationship between flows down the San
Joaquin and export pumping in the Delta on fish survival. VAMP ended in 2011 after more
than a decade during which the full range of flows and export limitations were never
provided to complete the experiment and, meanwhile, populations of at-risk fish species
crashed in the Delta.
The Delta WQCP received a minor update in 2006 but identified, as part of that update, four
"emerging issues" including the decline of pelagic or "open water" fish such as smelt and
threadfin shad; climate change impacts; Delta and Central Valley salinity; and, San Joaquin
River flows. With regard to San Joaquin River flows, the SWRCB referenced data that
showed various fish species within the Delta and San Joaquin River basin that had not shown
significant signs of recovery since adoption of the VAMP experiment and recommended
additional study. Thereafter, in 2009, the SWRCB commenced a triennial update of the
WQCP that is ongoing and will include a determination of what responsibility parties on the
individual tributaries to the San Joaquin River have for contributing to Delta flows.
Parties on the tributaries to the San Joaquin River have advised that if they are required to
leave more flows in-stream they will simply pump more groundwater. As a result, they
maintain, it is the SWRCB's potential action that will be responsible for additional
degradation of their groundwater basins. In this bill they seek to have the SWRCB analyze
the potentially significant impact of a local increase in groundwater pumping on the basin
and then require the SWRCB and not local entities mitigate for any increased degradation.
The most likely mitigation that the SWRCB would require in accordance with this bill is
adoption of a GSP pursuant to SGMA. However, all basins on the eastern side of the San
Joaquin River are already ranked as high priority and thus are already required to adopt a
AB 1242
Page 4
SGMA plan or submit an alternative plan that meets SGMA's requirements by the
appropriate deadlines.
2) Author's statement:
For the past year, the SWRCB has considered a proposal to develop new unimpaired flow
requirements on the Tuolumne, Merced, and Stanislaus rivers. The proposed plan would
require an additional 350,000 acre feet of water annually to be diverted from the rivers to
flow out to the San Francisco Bay Delta.
If adopted, the Board’s proposal will devastate the groundwater basins in the Valley by
reducing surface water recharge opportunities and eliminating surface water deliveries to
domestic and agricultural water users. The Board recognizes these impacts would have
significant “but unavoidable” adverse impacts to the region.
In 2014, the Legislature passed the Sustainability Groundwater Management Act which
promised to empower local communities with the tools to achieve sustainable
management goals. The adoption of the Board’s proposal without mitigating measures
would deny Central Valley basins one of the most important tools in that tool box: the
ability to recharge the depleted groundwater table with surface flows.
AB 1242 would ensure that the Board consider and mitigate the adverse impact of any
new water quality control plan. It would also require the Board to implement mitigation
measures to reduce identified significant adverse impacts, and would prohibit the
adoption of plans with adverse impacts that cannot be sufficiently mitigated.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Agricultural Council of California
Building and Construction Trades Council of Stanislaus, Merced, Tuolumne and Mariposa
Counties
California Women for Agriculture
California Farm Bureau Federation
City of Atwater City Council
City of Ceres, Office of the Mayor
City of Dos Palos, Office of the Mayor
City of Gustine City Council
City of Livingston, Office of the Mayor
City of Los Banos, Office of the Mayor
City of Merced, Office of the Mayor
City of Modesto, Office of the Mayor
City of Patterson, Office of the Mayor
City of Turlock, Office of the Mayor
Coalition of California Utility Employees
Electrical Workers of Stanislaus, Merced, Tuolumne and Mariposa Counties
Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District
Greater Merced Chamber of Commerce
AB 1242
Page 5
Harris Farms
IBEW Local 1245
Latino Community Roundtable
League of California Cities Central Valley Division
Merced County Board of Supervisors
Merced County Farm Bureau Board of Directors
Merced Irrigation District
Modesto Chamber of Commerce
Modesto Irrigation District
Northern California Water Association
Stanislaus Business Alliance
Stanislaus County Board of Supervisors
Stanislaus County Chapter of California Women for Agriculture
Stanislaus County Farm Bureau
Stevinson Water District
Turlock Chamber of Commerce
Turlock Irrigation District
Western Growers Association
Yosemite Community College District
Yosemite Farm Credit Association
One individual
Opposition
California League of Conservation Voters
Center for Biological Diversity
Coastal Environmental Rights Foundation
Clean Water Action
Community Water Center
Friends of the River
Klamath Riverkeeper
Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability
Natural Resources Defense Council
Sierra Club California
The Nature Conservancy
Union of Concerned Scientists
Analysis Prepared by: Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092