(1)Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards. Existing law requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policy for water quality control.

The bill would require the state board, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds, as specified, during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency. The bill would require that the principles and guidelines allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to support public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage, among other things. The bill also would require the state board, prior to adopting those principles and guidelines, to allow for public comment and hearing, as provided. The bill would make the implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation of funds by the Legislature for this purpose.

(2)Existing law authorizes the state board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements relating to water use. Existing law authorizes civil liability for a person or entity in violation of a term or condition of a permit, license, certificate, or registration issued by, an order adopted by, or regulations adopted by, the state board in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

This bill would authorize the state board to issue a cease and desist order when a diversion or use violates or threatens to violate an applicable principle or guideline adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage, and would authorize up to a $500-per-day civil liability for a person or entity who violates one of those principles or guidelines.

(1)Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards. Existing law requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policy for water quality control.

The bill would require the state board, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds, as specified, during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency. The bill would require that the principles and guidelines allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to support public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage, among other things. The bill also would require the state board, prior to adopting those principles and guidelines, to allow for public comment and hearing, as provided. The bill would make the implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation of funds by the Legislature for this purpose.

(2)Existing law authorizes the state board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements relating to water use. Existing law authorizes civil liability for a person or entity in violation of a term or condition of a permit, license, certificate, or registration issued by, an order adopted by, or regulations adopted by, the state board to be held civilly liable for in an amount not to exceed $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

This bill would authorize the state board to issue a cease and desist order when a diversion or use violates or threatens to violate an applicable principle or guideline adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The bill would authorize shortage, and would authorize a $500-per-day civil liability for a person who violates a principle or guideline adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage to be held liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $500 for each day that the violation occurs. one of those principles or guidelines.

(1)Existing law establishes the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards. Existing law requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policy for water quality control.

The bill would require the state board, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds, as specified, during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency. The bill would require that the principles and guidelines allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to support public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage, among other things. The bill also would require the state board, prior to adopting those principles and guidelines, to allow for public comment and hearing, as provided. The bill would make the implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation of funds by the Legislature for this purpose.

(2)Existing law authorizes the state board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements relating to water use. Existing law authorizes a person or entity in violation of a term or condition of a permit, license, certificate, or registration issued by, an order adopted by, or regulations adopted by, the state board to be held civilly liable for an amount not to exceed $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

This bill would authorize the state board to issue a cease and desist order when a diversion or use violates or threatens to violate an applicable limitation or requirement principle or guideline adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The bill would authorize a person who violates a principle, guideline, or requirement principle or guideline adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage to be held liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

(1)Existing law establishes within the Natural Resources Agency the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards. Existing law requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policy for water quality control.

The bill would require the state board to establish a program, board, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds, as specified, during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency. The bill would require that the principles and guidelines provide allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to support public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage, among other things. The bill also would require the state board, prior to adopting those principles and guidelines, to allow for public comment and hearing, as provided. The bill would make the implementation of these provisions contingent upon an appropriation of funds by the Legislature for this purpose.

(2)Existing law authorizes the state board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements relating to water use. Existing law authorizes a person or entity in violation of a term or condition of a permit, license, certificate, or registration issued by, an order adopted by, or regulations adopted by, the state board to be held civilly liable for an amount not to exceed $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

This bill would authorize the state board to issue a cease and desist order when a diversion or use violates or threatens to violate an applicable limitation or requirement adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The bill would authorize a person who violates a principle, guideline, or requirement adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage to be held liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

(1)Existing law establishes within the Natural Resources Agency the State Water Resources Control Board and the California regional water quality control boards. Existing law requires the state board to formulate and adopt state policy for water quality control.

The bill would require the state board to establish a program, in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds, as specified, during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency. The bill would require that the principles and guidelines provide for the development of watershed-level plans to support public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage, among other things. The bill also would require the state board, prior to adopting those principles and guidelines, to allow for public comment and hearing, as provided.

(2)Existing law authorizes the state board to issue a cease and desist order against a person who is violating, or threatening to violate, certain requirements relating to water use. Existing law authorizes a person or entity in violation of a term or condition of a permit, license, certificate, or registration issued by, an order adopted by, or regulations adopted by, the state board to be held civilly liable for an amount not to exceed $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

This bill would authorize the state board to issue a cease and desist order when a diversion or use violates or threatens to violate an applicable limitation or requirement adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The bill would authorize a person who violates a principle, guideline, or requirement adopted by the state board for the diversion and use of water in specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage to be held liable in an amount not to exceed the sum of $500 for each day that the violation occurs.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 1272

Author:(Wood)

As Enrolled Ver:July 3, 2024

2/3 vote

SUMMARY

Requires, upon appropriation, the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board), in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in applicable coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

1. Requires that the principles and guidelines allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water and authorizes the Water Board and DFW to participate in the development of locally generated plans.
2. Authorizes the Water Board to adopt these principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control.
3. Authorizes the Water Board and DFW to identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience, which may include monetary incentives and improved permitting pathways.
4. Requires the Water Board to allow for at least 60 days for public comment and hold a hearing before adopting the principles and guidelines.
5. Authorizes the Water Board and DFW, to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water uses transition to more sustainable water management and authorizes the Water Board and DFW, in consultation with other agencies, to administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
6. Specifies the characteristics of applicable coastal watershed.
7. Specifies watersheds and diversion that are exempt from the provisions of this bill.
8. Provides that the Water Board may use its existing authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
9. Deems an action of the Water Board or DFW to implement this bill to be within a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided that the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
10. Makes findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

Governor's Veto Message

"The bill would require the [Water Board], in consultation with the [DFW], to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in certain coastal watersheds during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency.

While I support efforts to protect coastal watersheds from the extreme dry conditions exacerbated by climate change, this bill creates significant, ongoing costs in the millions of dollars that should be considered in the annual budget process.

In partnership with the Legislature, we enacted a budget that closes a $46.8 billion deficit in 2024-25 and a projected deficit of $27.3 billion in 2025-26 through balanced solutions that avoided deep program cuts to vital services and protected investments in education, health care, climate, public safety, housing, and social service programs that millions of Californians rely on. It is important to remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications that are not included in the budget, such as this measure.

For this reason, I cannot sign this bill."

COMMENTS

Until the series of atmospheric river-fed storms of January 2023, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent going forward. In addition, research published in February 2022 indicates that Southwestern North America is currently experiencing the worst "megadrought" in the last 1200 years. The recent storms and flooding experienced in the beginning of 2023 have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

Which Watersheds? Applicable water sheds include those which drain into the Pacific Ocean, are identified in recovery plans for endangered anadromous fish, and are located wholly within regional water quality control board regions 1, 2, and 3, Regions 1, 2, and 3 cover the north coast, San Francisco Bay, and central coast regions.

Watersheds that meet all the criteria for the principles and guidelines include, for example:

1. Navarro, Eel, and Ten Mile Rivers in Mendocino County
2. Sonoma Creek in Sonoma County
3. San Gregorio and Pescadero Creeks and similar streams in San Mateo County
4. Big Sur River in Monterey County

Watersheds with reservoirs that provide instream flows, and therefore would be excluded from the provisions of principles and guidelines, include Trinity River, Klamath River, and Russian River watersheds.

According to the Author

"In 2021, California experience the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state's water management system deals with drought. We can't wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change."

Arguments in Support

Environmental groups, including The Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited, and Planning and Conservation League, among others, write in support of this bill pointing out that "California water managers can no longer afford to treat these extreme weather patterns as temporary or 'emergency' events" and rather the state must plan for them. They advocate that a "key component of this planning" is "developing clear standards to guide water use during protracted dry periods" and that coastal watersheds are especially susceptible to the extreme dry conditions that are common under the current climate regime.

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has the following fiscal impact:

1. The Water Board estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
2. DFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with the Water Board and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with the Water Board.

VOTES

ASM WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE: 12-2-1

YES: Bauer-Kahan, Alanis, Bennett, Friedman, Hart, Wood, Pellerin, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Villapudua, Ward, Weber

NO: Mathis, Megan Dahle

ABS, ABST OR NV: Davies

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-4-1

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 64-12-4

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon

NO: Chen, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Davies, Essayli, Lackey

SENATE FLOOR: 29-9-2

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener

NO: Alvarado-Gil, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero, Hurtado

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 63-12-5

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NO: Chen, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Davies, Essayli, Lackey, Waldron

UPDATED

VERSION: July 3, 2024

CONSULTANT: Stephanie Mitchell / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096 FN: 0003735

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 1272

Author:(Wood)

As Enrolled Ver:July 3, 2024

2/3 vote

SUMMARY

Requires, upon appropriation, the State Water Resources Control Board (Water Board), in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in applicable coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

1. Requires that the principles and guidelines allow for the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water and authorizes the Water Board and DFW to participate in the development of locally generated plans.
2. Authorizes the Water Board to adopt these principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control.
3. Authorizes the Water Board and DFW to identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience, which may include monetary incentives and improved permitting pathways.
4. Requires the Water Board to allow for at least 60 days for public comment and hold a hearing before adopting the principles and guidelines.
5. Authorizes the Water Board and DFW, to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water uses transition to more sustainable water management and authorizes the Water Board and DFW, in consultation with other agencies, to administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
6. Specifies the characteristics of applicable coastal watershed.
7. Specifies watersheds and diversion that are exempt from the provisions of this bill.
8. Provides that the Water Board may use its existing authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
9. Deems an action of the Water Board or DFW to implement this bill to be within a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided that the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
10. Makes findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

Governor's Veto Message

"The bill would require the [Water Board], in consultation with the [DFW], to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in certain coastal watersheds during times of water shortage for drought preparedness and climate resiliency.

While I support efforts to protect coastal watersheds from the extreme dry conditions exacerbated by climate change, this bill creates significant, ongoing costs in the millions of dollars that should be considered in the annual budget process.

In partnership with the Legislature, we enacted a budget that closes a $46.8 billion deficit in 2024-25 and a projected deficit of $27.3 billion in 2025-26 through balanced solutions that avoided deep program cuts to vital services and protected investments in education, health care, climate, public safety, housing, and social service programs that millions of Californians rely on. It is important to remain disciplined when considering bills with significant fiscal implications that are not included in the budget, such as this measure.

For this reason, I cannot sign this bill."

COMMENTS

Until the series of atmospheric river-fed storms of January 2023, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent going forward. In addition, research published in February 2022 indicates that Southwestern North America is currently experiencing the worst "megadrought" in the last 1200 years. The recent storms and flooding experienced in the beginning of 2023 have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

Which Watersheds? Applicable water sheds include those which drain into the Pacific Ocean, are identified in recovery plans for endangered anadromous fish, and are located wholly within regional water quality control board regions 1, 2, and 3, Regions 1, 2, and 3 cover the north coast, San Francisco Bay, and central coast regions.

Watersheds that meet all the criteria for the principles and guidelines include, for example:

1. Navarro, Eel, and Ten Mile Rivers in Mendocino County
2. Sonoma Creek in Sonoma County
3. San Gregorio and Pescadero Creeks and similar streams in San Mateo County
4. Big Sur River in Monterey County

Watersheds with reservoirs that provide instream flows, and therefore would be excluded from the provisions of principles and guidelines, include Trinity River, Klamath River, and Russian River watersheds.

According to the Author

"In 2021, California experience the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state's water management system deals with drought. We can't wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change."

Arguments in Support

Environmental groups, including The Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited, and Planning and Conservation League, among others, write in support of this bill pointing out that "California water managers can no longer afford to treat these extreme weather patterns as temporary or 'emergency' events" and rather the state must plan for them. They advocate that a "key component of this planning" is "developing clear standards to guide water use during protracted dry periods" and that coastal watersheds are especially susceptible to the extreme dry conditions that are common under the current climate regime.

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has the following fiscal impact:

1. The Water Board estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
2. DFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with the Water Board and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with the Water Board.

VOTES

ASM WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE: 12-2-1

YES: Bauer-Kahan, Alanis, Bennett, Friedman, Hart, Wood, Pellerin, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Villapudua, Ward, Weber

NO: Mathis, Megan Dahle

ABS, ABST OR NV: Davies

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-4-1

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 64-12-4

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon

NO: Chen, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Davies, Essayli, Lackey

SENATE FLOOR: 29-9-2

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener

NO: Alvarado-Gil, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero, Hurtado

UPDATED

VERSION: July 3, 2024

CONSULTANT: Stephanie Mitchell / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096 FN: 0003735

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1272

Author:(Wood)

As Amended Ver:September 1, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Establishes a drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and requires SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

Senate Amendments

1. Make the bill contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Legislature.
2. Include the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) in the development of the principles and guidelines, locally generated watershed-level plans, and incentives to improve drought resilience.
3. Clarify that diversions from rivers or streams that are downstream of reservoirs that have a storage capacity of greater than 100,000 acre-feet are exempt from the adopted principles and guidelines.
4. Make technical and clarifying changes, including correcting chaptering conflicts.

COMMENTS

Until the series of atmospheric river-fed storms fell in January 2023, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent going forward. In addition, research published in February 2022 indicates that Southwestern North America is currently experiencing the worst "megadrought" in the last 1200 years. The recent storms and flooding experienced in the beginning of 2023 have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

Water Rights Drought Effort Review Report. A February 2021 draft of this report was prepared by the State Water Board and consisted of interviews of more than 20 stakeholders (e.g., individuals, water agencies, irrigation districts, non-governmental organizations, and tribal governments). The goal was to gather input on the Water Rights Division's actions during the 2012–16 drought and to solicit recommendations for actions that might be taken in a future drought. Some recommendations from this report specifically align with this bill, including:

1. Communication: provide earlier and more frequent communication on water availability and watershed conditions; provide opportunity for input when protocols and analyses are developed;
2. Legal and policy: establish clear drought protocols regarding voluntary or mandatory response actions far in advance of implementation; streamline review and approval of water transfers; integrate surface water and groundwater management; create incentives for permitting; set a goal to manage watersheds like adjudicated systems;
3. Data: improve data systems to collect, manage, and share water right and reporting data that will benefit watershed and drought management; develop methods for available water on a watershed basis; and
4. Collaboration: work with sister agencies, such as DFW, to begin planning an interagency drought protocol so that all agencies are better prepared for a future drought; include hydrologists and hydrogeologists who understand watersheds and developing water accounting and water balances.

Which watersheds? Regional water quality control board regions 1, 2, and 3 cover the north coast, San Francisco Bay, and central coast regions. Watersheds that meet all the criteria for the principles and guidelines include, for example:

1. Navarro, Eel, and Ten Mile Rivers in Mendocino County
2. Sonoma Creek in Sonoma County
3. San Gregorio and Pescadero Creeks and similar streams in San Mateo County
4. Big Sur River in Monterey County

According to the Author

The author asserts that the state must improve drought planning in response to climate change, "In 2021, California experienced the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state's water management system deals with drought. We can't wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change."

Arguments in Support

Numerous organizations write in support stressing the need to plan for drought and develop clear standards to guide water usage during drought, further adapt to a changing climate, and to move away from "treat[ing] these extreme weather patterns as temporary or 'emergency' events". These organizations assert that this bill will enable "local water users … to develop local plans that anticipate how their business or communities will be impacted, therefore providing an incentive to invest in solutions that increase drought preparedness."

Arguments in Opposition

No opposition on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations, this bill has the following fiscal impact:

1. SWRCB estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
2. DFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with SWRCB and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with SWRCB.

VOTES:

ASM WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE: 12-2-1

YES: Bauer-Kahan, Alanis, Bennett, Friedman, Hart, Wood, Pellerin, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Villapudua, Ward, Weber

NO: Mathis, Megan Dahle

ABS, ABST OR NV: Davies

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-4-1

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 64-12-4

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon

NO: Chen, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta

ABS, ABST OR NV: Bains, Davies, Essayli, Lackey

SENATE FLOOR: 29-9-2

YES: Allen, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Cortese, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener

NO: Alvarado-Gil, Dahle, Grove, Jones, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Seyarto, Wilk

ABS, ABST OR NV: Caballero, Hurtado

UPDATED

VERSION: September 1, 2023

CONSULTANT: Stephanie Mitchell / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096 FN: 0002355

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1272

Author: Wood (D)

Amended: 9/1/23 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE NATURAL RES. & WATER COMMITTEE: 8-0, 6/22/23

AYES: Min, Allen, Hurtado, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Padilla, Stern

NO VOTE RECORDED: Seyarto, Dahle, Grove

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 9/1/23

AYES: Portantino, Ashby, Bradford, Wahab, Wiener

NOES: Jones, Seyarto

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 64-12, 5/30/23 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: State Water Resources Control Board: drought planning

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill establishes a drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and requires SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes SWRCB to oversee the water rights, water quality, and safe drinking water functions of state government and provides that it shall consist of five members appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the State Senate (Water Code (Wat. C.§ 175).
2. Provides that the work of SWRCB shall be divided into at least two divisions: the Division of Water Rights (WR Division) and the Division of Water Quality. Requires SWRCB to appoint a deputy director for each division to supervise the work of the division and act as a technical advisor to the State Water Board (Wat. C.§ 185).
3. Grants SWRCB the authority to issue a cease and desist order to any person for specified violations and outlines the process the State Water Board must adhere to when issuing a cease and desist order (Wat. C.§§ 1831, 1834).
4. Grants SWRCB the authority to assess civil penalties for violations of water rights or regulations of the State Water Board. Specifies that the amount of the civil penalty shall not exceed $500 per day that the violation occurs (Wat. C.§ 1846).

This bill:

1. Requires SWRCB, upon appropriation, to develop a program in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The purpose of the principles and guidelines shall be to enhance drought preparedness and climate resiliency and to allow the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water.
   1. Authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to participate in the development of locally generated plans.
   2. Authorizes SWRCB to adopt these principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control.
   3. When developing the principles and guidelines, authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience, which may include monetary incentives and improved permitting pathways.
   4. Requires SWRCB to allow for public comment and hearing before adopting these principles and guidelines, requiring the opportunity for public comment and review be for at least 60 days.
2. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds that:
   1. Drain to the Pacific Ocean;
   2. Are located entirely within the North Coast (region one), San Francisco Bay (region two), or Central Coast (region three) water quality control board regions; and
   3. Are priorities for the recovery of native anadromous fish protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), as identified in any state or federal recovery plan.
3. Provides that the principles and guidelines do not apply to any of the following:
   1. Watersheds for which SWRCB determines there is low potential for diversions to affect fish survival or human health and safety in times of low streamflow.
   2. Diversions located on any mainstream river or stream downstream of reservoirs that have a storage capacity of greater than 100,000 acre-feet, and that are subject to requirements to make scheduled releases to meet minimum instream flow requirements.
   3. Watersheds that drain into the San Francisco Bay at a location south of Pinole Point.
4. Allows SWRCB and CDFW to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water users transition to more sustainable water management practices. Authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to consult with other agencies, including the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB), that administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
5. Provides that the SWRCB may use its existing authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
6. Deems an action of SWRCB or CDFW to implement this bill to be within a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided that the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
7. Makes findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

Comments

1. Need for bill. According to the author, “In 2021, California experienced the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state’s water management system deals with drought. We can’t wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change.”
2. Which Watersheds Are We Talking About? The criteria for which watersheds would be covered may be a bit cryptic. Regional water quality control board regions 1, 2, and 3 cover the north coast, San Francisco Bay, and central coast regions.

Watersheds that meet all the criteria for the principles and guidelines include, for example:

• Navarro, Eel, and Ten Mile Rivers in Mendocino County
• Sonoma Creek in Sonoma County
• San Gregorio and Pescadero Creeks and similar streams in San Mateo County
• Big Sur River in Monterey County

Examples of watersheds with reservoirs that provide instream flows, and therefore would be excluded from the provisions of principles and guidelines include:

• Trinity
• Klamath
• Russian

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2451 (Wood, 2022) would have established a permanent Drought Section within SWRCB for purposes of improving drought planning, drought response, and climate resiliency and would have required SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of drought. AB 2451 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• SWRCB estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
• CDFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with SWRCB and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with SWRCB.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/1/23)

California Trout

Defenders of Wildlife

Environmental Defense Fund

Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks

Friends of the Eel River

Karuk Tribe

Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations

Planning and Conservation League

The Nature Conservancy

Trout Unlimited

Wholly H2O

Yurok Tribe

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/1/23)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Environmental groups, including The Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited, and Planning and Conservation League, among others, write in support of this bill pointing out that “California water managers can no longer afford to treat these extreme weather patterns as temporary or ‘emergency’ events” and rather the state must plan for them. They advocate that a “key component of this planning” is “developing clear standards to guide water use during protracted dry periods” and that coastal watersheds are especially susceptible to the extreme dry conditions that are common under the current climate regime.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 64-12, 5/30/23

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Cervantes, Connolly, Mike Fong, Friedman, Gabriel, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Holden, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Luz Rivas, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Rendon

NOES: Chen, Megan Dahle, Dixon, Flora, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Hoover, Mathis, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Sanchez, Ta

NO VOTE RECORDED: Bains, Davies, Essayli, Lackey

Prepared by: Genevieve Wong / N.R. & W. / (916) 651-4116

9/4/23 9:28:12

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 1272 (Wood) - State Water Resources Control Board: drought planning

Bill Summary:

This bill would establish, upon an appropriation, a drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) with consultation from Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), and it would require that SWRCB adopt principles and guidelines applicable to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on September 1, 2023

Fiscal Impact:

• SWRCB estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
• DFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with SWRCB and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with SWRCB.

Author Amendments:

These amendments would clarify covered river sections and make technical changes.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anthony Portantino, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 1272 (Wood) - State Water Resources Control Board: drought planning

Bill Summary:

This bill would establish, upon an appropriation, a drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) with consultation from Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), and it would require that SWRCB adopt principles and guidelines applicable to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

Fiscal Impact:

• SWRCB estimates one-time costs of about $10 million (General Fund, Cannabis Tax Fund, or other special fund) for contracts as well as ongoing costs of roughly $1.1 million annually (Water Rights Fund or General Fund) to create and administer the new regulatory program, including developing the principles and guidelines and then implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to them.
• DFW estimates ongoing costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year 2023-24 and $1.2 million annually thereafter (General Fund or special fund) for five new positions to consult with SWRCB and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks would include, but not be limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with SWRCB.

Background:

Until the recent series of atmospheric river-fed storms hit the state, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent in the future. In addition, research published in the journal Nature Climate Change in February 2022 indicates that the American West has been experiencing a “megadrought” over the last 1,200 years and estimates, based on climate models, that human-caused climate change accounts for 42% of this megadrought’s severity. The recent storms and flooding in the state have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

A 2021 report released by the State Water Board’s Office of Public Participation and Division of Water Rights identified data needs, opportunities, and potential approaches for an effective water rights response to climate change. Some of the recommendations in the report align with the requirements in this bill.

Proposed Law:

This bill would establish, upon an appropriation, a drought program at SWRCB with consultation from DFW, as well as require that SWRCB adopt principles and guidelines applicable to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. Specifically, this bill would:

1. Require SWRCB, upon appropriation, to develop a program in consultation with DFW, to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The purpose of the principles and guidelines would be to enhance drought preparedness and climate resiliency and to allow the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water.
2. Authorize SWRCB and DFW to participate in the development of locally generated plans.
3. Authorize SWRCB to adopt these principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control.
4. When developing the principles and guidelines, authorize SWRCB and DFW to identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience, which may include monetary incentives and improved permitting pathways.
5. Require SWRCB to allow for public comment and hearing before adopting these principles and guidelines, requiring the opportunity for public comment and review be for at least 60 days.
6. Provide that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds that:
   1. Drain to the Pacific Ocean;
   2. Are located entirely within the North Coast (region one), San Francisco Bay (region two), or Central Coast (region three) water quality control board regions; and
   3. Are priorities for the recovery of native anadromous fish protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), as identified in any state or federal recovery plan.
7. Specify that the principles and guidelines do not apply to any of the following:
   1. Watersheds for which SWRCB determines there is low potential for diversions to affect fish survival or human health and safety in times of low streamflow.
   2. Diversions located on any mainstream river or stream downstream of reservoirs from which releases are made to meet minimum instream flow requirements.
   3. Watersheds that drain into the San Francisco Bay at a location south of Pinole Point.
8. Allow SWRCB and DFW to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water users transition to more sustainable water management practices. Authorize SWRCB and DFW to consult with other agencies, including the Department of Water Resources and the Wildlife Conservation Board, that administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
9. Provide that the SWRCB may use its existing authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
10. Deem an action of SWRCB or DFW to implement this bill to be within a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided that the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
11. Make findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

Related Legislation:

AB 2451 (Wood, 2022) was similar to this bill and would have established a Drought Section at SWRCB as well as required SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified watersheds. AB 2451 was held in this Committee on Suspense.

Staff Comments:

Last year’s AB 2451 is very similar to this bill, with one main difference being that this bill does not create the Drought Section within SWRCB, which would have been responsible for improving drought planning, drought response, and climate resiliency. This Committee held AB 2451 on Suspense.

The Legislature has made significant funding available in recent years to address drought and water supply issues. The 2022-23 budget provided $2.9 billion across three years from the General Fund—including roughly $1 billion through the California Emergency Relief Fund—to respond to that year’s drought conditions, as well as for activities to prepare for future droughts. This included $2.3 billion—$1.9 billion in 2021‑22 and about $400 million in 2022‑23—for activities to improve water conservation, drinking water supplies and projects, grants for repairs to community water systems, and steps to protect fish and wildlife from drought impacts. These funds were in addition to $880 million provided in the same year for grants supporting drought and water‑related activities, consistent with a multiyear agreement that was part of the 2021‑22 budget package.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER

Senator Dave Min, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: AB Hearing Date: June 22, 2023

Subject: State Water Resources Control Board: drought planning

BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW

Existing law:

1. Establishes the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to oversee the water rights, water quality, and safe drinking water functions of state government and provides that it shall consist of five members appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the State Senate (Water Code (Wat. C.§ 175).
   
2. Provides that the work of SWRCB shall be divided into at least two divisions: the Division of Water Rights (WR Division) and the Division of Water Quality. Requires SWRCB to appoint a deputy director for each division to supervise the work of the division and act as a technical advisor to the State Water Board (Wat. C.§ 185).
   
3. Grants SWRCB the authority to issue a cease and desist order to any person for specified violations and outlines the process the State Water Board must adhere to when issuing a cease and desist order (Wat. C.§§ 1831, 1834).
   
4. Grants SWRCB the authority to assess civil penalties for violations of water rights or regulations of the State Water Board. Specifies that the amount of the civil penalty shall not exceed $500 per day that the violation occurs (Wat. C.§ 1846).

PROPOSED LAW

Establishes a drought program at SWRCB and requires SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires SWRCB, upon appropriation, to develop a program in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The purpose of the principles and guidelines shall be to enhance drought preparedness and climate resiliency and to allow the development of locally generated watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water.
   
   1. Authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to participate in the development of locally generated plans.
   2. Authorizes SWRCB to adopt these principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control.
   3. When developing the principles and guidelines, authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience, which may include monetary incentives and improved permitting pathways.
   4. Requires SWRCB to allow for public comment and hearing before adopting these principles and guidelines, requiring the opportunity for public comment and review be for at least 60 days.
2. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds that:
   1. Drain to the Pacific Ocean;
   2. Are located entirely within the North Coast (region one), San Francisco Bay (region two), or Central Coast (region three) water quality control board regions; and
   3. Are priorities for the recovery of native anadromous fish protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) or the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), as identified in any state or federal recovery plan.
3. The principles and guidelines do not apply to any of the following:
   1. Watersheds for which SWRCB determines there is low potential for diversions to affect fish survival or human health and safety in times of low streamflow.
   2. Diversions located on any mainstream river or stream downstream of reservoirs from which releases are made to meet minimum instream flow requirements.
   3. Watersheds that drain into the San Francisco Bay at a location south of Pinole Point.
4. Allows SWRCB and CDFW to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water users transition to more sustainable water management practices. Authorizes SWRCB and CDFW to consult with other agencies, including the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Wildlife Conservation Board (WCB), that administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
5. Provides that the SWRCB may use its existing authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
6. Deems an action of SWRCB or CDFW to implement this bill to be within a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided that the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
7. Makes findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT

According to the author, “In 2021, California experienced the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state’s water management system deals with drought. We can’t wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change.”

Environmental groups, including The Nature Conservancy, Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited, and Planning and Conservation League, among others, write in support of this bill pointing out that “California water managers can no longer afford to treat these extreme weather patterns as temporary or ‘emergency’ events” and rather the state must plan for them. They advocate that a “key component of this planning” is “developing clear standards to guide water use during protracted dry periods” and that coastal watersheds are especially susceptible to the extreme dry conditions that are common under the current climate regime.

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION

None received

COMMENTS

Just Which Watersheds Are We Talking About? The criteria for which watersheds would be covered may be a bit cryptic. Regional water quality control board regions 1, 2, and 3 cover the north coast, San Francisco Bay, and central coast regions.

Watersheds that meet all the criteria for the principles and guidelines include, for example:

• Navarro, Eel, and Ten Mile Rivers in Mendocino County
• Sonoma Creek in Sonoma County
• San Gregorio and Pescadero Creeks and similar streams in San Mateo County
• Big Sur River in Monterey County

Examples of watersheds with reservoirs that provide instream flows, and therefore would be excluded from the provisions of principles and guidelines include:

• Trinity
• Klamath
• Russian

Minor, technical changes. AB 1272 would require SWRCB, in consultation with CDFW, to adopt principles and guidelines for diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times for water shortage, as specified. The bill would also permit SWRCB to issue a cease and desist order in response to a violation or threatened violation of any applicable limitation or requirement established by these principles and guidelines and makes a person civilly liable for violation of a principle, guideline, or requirement established by these principles and guidelines. To make the terminology consistent between the various sections, the committee may wish to amend the bill to refer to “principles or guidelines” in these cease and desist and civil liability provisions. (See Amendments 1 & 2).

Take two. Last year the author introduced AB 2451, which is very similar to this bill. The main difference between this bill and AB 2451 is that this bill does not create the Drought Section within SWRCB, which would have been responsible for improving drought planning, drought response, and climate resiliency. AB 2451 was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Related legislation

AB 2451 (Wood, 2022) was similar to this bill and would have established a Drought Section at SWRCB and required SWRCB to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified watersheds. AB 2451 died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS

AMENDMENT 1

Amend Water Code § 1831(d)(7) as follows:

(7) An applicable limitation or requirement principle or guideline established by the board pursuant to Section 13150.

AMENDMENT 2

Amend Water Code § 1846(a)(3) as follows:

(3) A principle, or guideline, or requirement established by the board pursuant to Section 13150.

SUPPORT

California Trout
Defenders of Wildlife
Environmental Defense Fund
Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks
Friends of the Eel River
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
Planning and Conservation League
The Nature Conservancy
Trout Unlimited
Wholly H2O

OPPOSITION

None Received

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 1272

Author:(Wood)

As Introduced Ver:February 16, 2023

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Establishes a permanent drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and requires it to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage.

Major Provisions

1. Requires the State Water Board to develop a program in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The purpose of the principles and guidelines shall be to enhance drought preparedness and climate resiliency and foster the development of watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water.
2. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds, as described.
3. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall not apply to specified water diversion.
4. Provides that the State Water Board may use its existing regulatory authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
5. Provides that an action of the State Water Board or DFW to implement this bill shall be subject to a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act so long as said action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.

COMMENTS

Until the series of atmospheric river-fed storms fell in January 2023, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent going forward. The recent storms and flooding experienced in the beginning of 2023 have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

The State Water Board released a draft of the Water Rights Drought Effort Review in February 2021 that consisted of interviews of more than 20 stakeholders. The goal was to gather input on the Water Rights Division's actions during the 2012–16 drought and to solicit recommendations for actions the Water Rights Division might take in a future drought. Participants in this effort included individuals, water agencies, irrigation districts, non-governmental organizations, and tribal governments. Recommendations varied given the diversity of participants in this effort, but generally fell into four categories: communication; legal and policy; data; and collaboration. Some of these recommendations align with this bill, including:

1. Communication: provide earlier and more frequent communication on water availability and watershed conditions; provide opportunity for input when protocols and analyses are developed;
2. Legal and policy: establish clear drought protocols regarding voluntary or mandatory response actions far in advance of implementation; streamline review and approval of water transfers; integrate surface water and groundwater management; create incentives for permitting; set a goal to manage watersheds like adjudicated systems;
3. Data: improve data systems to collect, manage, and share water right and reporting data will benefit watershed and drought management; develop methods available water on a watershed basis; and
4. Collaboration: work with sister agencies, such as DFW, to begin planning an interagency drought protocol so that all agencies are better prepared for a future drought; include hydrologists and hydrogeologists who understand watersheds and developing water accounting and water balances.

In August 2022, Governor Newsom released the California's Water Supply Strategy: Adapting to a Hotter, Drier Future, to address a projected 10% decrease in water supply (6 million to 9 million acre-feet of water per year) by 2040 due to climate change. This report indicated the need for increased diversion infrastructure, preventing unauthorized diversion during dry conditions, and nimble diversion management supported by accurate and timely data, while minimizing harm to the environment.

According to the Author

"In 2021, California experience the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state's water management system deals with drought. We can't wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change."

Arguments in Support

Several organizations write in support stressing the need to plan for drought and develop clear standards to guide water usage during drought, further adapt to a changing climate, and to move away from "treat[ing] these extreme weather patterns as temporary or 'emergency' events". These organizations assert that this bill will enable "local water users … to develop local plans that anticipate how their business or communities will be impacted, therefore providing an incentive to invest in solutions that increase drought preparedness."

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this bill has the following fiscal impact:

1) The State Water Board estimates $10 million in one-time contracting costs and ongoing annual costs of approximately $4.1 million to create a new regulatory program (General Fund or special fund). The State Water Board notes this bill involves the highly technical task of developing, implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water for each relevant coastal watershed, although some watersheds may be grouped together if deemed appropriate.

2) DFW estimates costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year (FY) 2023–24 and 1.2 million in FY 2024–25 and ongoing (General Fund) for five new positions to consult with the State Water Board and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks include, but are not limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with the State Water Board.

VOTES

ASM WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE: 12-2-1

YES: Bauer-Kahan, Alanis, Bennett, Friedman, Hart, Wood, Pellerin, Blanca Rubio, Schiavo, Villapudua, Ward, Weber

NO: Mathis, Megan Dahle

ABS, ABST OR NV: Davies

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-4-1

YES: Holden, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Hart, Lowenthal, Papan, Pellerin, Weber, Ortega

NO: Megan Dahle, Dixon, Mathis, Sanchez

ABS, ABST OR NV: Robert Rivas

UPDATED

VERSION: February 16, 2023

CONSULTANT: Stephanie Mitchell / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096 FN: 0000491

Date of Hearing: May 3, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Chris Holden, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1272

Author:(Wood) – As Introduced Ver:February 16, 2023

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill establishes a permanent drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board).

Specifically, this bill, among other things:

1. Requires the State Water Board to develop a program, in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage, for the purpose of enhancing drought preparedness and climate resiliency and for the development of watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water in times of water shortage.
2. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds identified by the State Water Board, in consultation with CDFW, that drain to the Pacific Ocean, are wholly located within California regional water quality control board (Regional Water Board) region 1, 2, or 3, and are a priority for native anadromous fish recovery, as specified. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall not apply to specified watersheds and diversions and shall identify, prioritize, and create incentives to improve drought resilience.
3. Requires the State Water Board to adopt the principles and guidelines as part of state policy for water quality control, as defined, and to allow for public comment and hearing prior to adoption.
4. Allows the State Water Board to consult with other agencies, including the Department of Water Resources (DWR), CDFW, and the Wildlife Conservation Board, to identify opportunities for investment in new infrastructure that helps water users transition to more sustainable water management through specified practices.
5. Provides that the State Water Board may use its existing regulatory authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
6. Provides that an action of the State Water Board or CDFW to implement this bill shall be subject to a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act provided the action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1) The State Water Board estimates $10 million in one-time contracting costs and ongoing annual costs of approximately $4.1 million to create a new regulatory program (General Fund or special fund). The State Water Board notes this bill involves the highly technical task of developing, implementing, monitoring, and making future updates to principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water for each relevant coastal watershed, although some watersheds may be grouped together if deemed appropriate.

2) CDFW estimates costs of approximately $1.3 million in fiscal year (FY) 2023-24 and 1.2 million in FY 2024-25 and ongoing (General Fund) for five new positions to consult with the State Water Board and assist in developing the required principles and guidelines. Tasks include, but are not limited to, conducting drought instream flow analyses, developing drought flow criteria and requirements for aquatic species, and coordinating the development of watershed-level plans with the State Water Board.

COMMENTS:

1) Purpose. According to the author:

In 2021, California experienced the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state’s water management system deals with drought. We can’t wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change.

2) Background. Until the recent series of atmospheric river-fed storms hit the state, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent in the future. In addition, research published in the journal Nature Climate Change in February 2022 indicates that the American West has been experiencing a “megadrought” over the last 1,200 years and estimates, based on climate models, that human-caused climate change accounts for 42% of this megadrought’s severity. The recent storms and flooding in the state have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

A 2021 report released by the State Water Board’s Office of Public Participation and Division of Water Rights identified data needs, opportunities, and potential approaches for an effective water rights response to climate change. Some of the recommendations in the report align with the requirements in this bill.

3) Support. Writing in support, a coalition of environmental and conservation groups state:

California water managers can no longer afford to treat these extreme weather patterns as temporary or “emergency” events. Rather, we must plan for them. A key component of this planning consists of developing clear standards to guide water use during protracted dry periods, when low precipitation coupled with longer, hotter summers threaten streamflows that sustain native fish and wildlife and provide vital drinking water supplies. With these guidelines local water users will be able to develop local plans that anticipate how their business or communities will be impacted, therefore providing an incentive to invest in solutions that increase drought preparedness.

4) Prior Legislation. AB 2451 (Wood), of the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, was similar to this bill and would have established a Drought Section at the State Water Board and required it to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified watersheds. AB 2451 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee’s suspense file.

Analysis Prepared by: Nikita Koraddi / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: March 28, 2023

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON WATER, PARKS, AND WILDLIFE

Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1272 (

Author:Wood) – As Introduced Ver:February 16, 2023

SUBJECT: State Water Resources Control Board: drought planning

SUMMARY: Establishes a permanent drought program at the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) and requires it to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the State Water Board to develop a program in consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The purpose of the principles and guidelines shall be to enhance drought preparedness and climate resiliency and foster the development of watershed-level plans to protect public trust uses, public health and safety, and the human right to water.
2. Provides that the principles and guidelines shall apply to coastal watersheds that:
   1. Drain to the Pacific Ocean;
   2. Are located entirely within the North Coast (region one), San Francisco Bay (region two), or Central Coast (region three) water quality control board regions; and
   3. Are priorities for native anadromous fish recovery.
3. The principles and guidelines shall not apply to:
   1. Diversions with a low potential to affect fish survival or human health;
   2. Diversion located on any mainstem river or stream that is downstream of a reservoir where releases are made to mean minimum instream flow requirements; and
   3. Watersheds that drain into the San Francisco Bay at a location south of Pinole Point.
4. Allows the State Water Board to consult with other agencies including the Department of Water Resources (DWR), DFW, and the Wildlife Conservation Board to administer grants for improving water management infrastructure or enhancing aquatic habitat.
5. Provides that the State Water Board may use its existing regulatory authority to issue a cease and desist order or assess civil penalties for violations of the provisions of this bill.
6. Provides that an action of the State Water Board or DFW to implement this bill shall be subject to a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act so long as said action does not involve the relaxation of existing streamflow standards.
7. Makes findings and declarations regarding drought and extreme weather.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the State Water Board to oversee the water rights, water quality, and safe drinking water functions of state government and provides that it shall consist of five members appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the State Senate (Water Code § 175).
2. Provides that the work of the State Water Board shall be divided into at least two divisions: the Division of Water Rights (WR Division) and the Division of Water Quality. Requires the State Water Board to appoint a deputy director for each division to supervise the work of the division and act as a technical advisor to the State Water Board (Water Code § 185).
3. Grants the State Water Board the authority to issue a cease and desist order to any person for specified violations and outlines the process the State Water Board must adhere to when issuing a cease and desist order (Water Code § 1831 and 1834).
4. Grants the State Water Board the authority to assess civil penalties for violations of water rights or regulations of the State Water Board. Specifies that the amount of the civil penalty shall not exceed $500 per day that the violation occurs (Water Code § 1846).

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed fiscal.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose of this bill. Drought preparedness and climate resiliency are critical for California’s future as drought and extreme weather events becoming more frequent and severe. This bill requires the State Water Board and DFW to adopt principles and guidelines for the diversion and use of water in designated coastal watersheds during times of water shortage. The author asserts that the state must improve drought planning in response to climate change: “In 2021, California experience the driest year in over four decades. This is not a one-off event, it is a harbinger of our future with climate change. The state was caught flat-footed in responding to this catastrophically dry year. Responses came too late and were too small to prevent widespread hardship for people and ecosystems. This illustrated once again the major shortcomings of the current way the state’s water management system deals with drought. We can’t wait until drought conditions have already developed to formulate our responses, because by then it is already too late to respond effectively. The system is broken and needs foundational change.”
2. Background. Until the series of atmospheric river-fed storms fell in January 2023, California was approaching a fourth year of drought with 2021 being the second driest year on record. That drought began less than five years after California experienced its worst drought on record from 2012 through 2016. Climate modeling indicates that droughts will become more severe and frequent going forward. In addition, research published in February 2022 indicates that Southwestern North America is currently experiencing the worst “megadrought” in the last 1200 years. This research estimates (based on climate models) that climate change accounts for 42 percent of this megadrought’s severity and that the current megadrought would not be a ‘megadrought’ but for climate change (Williams, Cook, and Smerdon, 2022). The recent storms and flooding experienced in the beginning of 2023 have also called attention to the ways in which excess water is managed and may be diverted for other beneficial uses to better prepare for future drought.

Water Rights Drought Effort Review Report. A draft of this report which was prepared by the State Water Board was completed in February 2021 and consisted of interviews of more than 20 stakeholders. The goal was to gather input on the WR Division’s actions during the 2012-16 drought and to solicit recommendations for actions the WR Division might take in a future drought. Participants in this effort included individuals, water agencies, irrigation districts, non-governmental organizations, and tribal governments. Recommendations varied given the diversity of participants in this effort, but generally fell into four categories: 1) communication; 2) legal and policy; 3) data; and 4) collaboration.

Specifically, some of which align with this bill, including:

• Communication: provide earlier and more frequent communication on water availability and watershed conditions; provide opportunity for input when protocols and analyses are developed;
• Legal and policy: establish clear drought protocols regarding voluntary or mandatory response actions far in advance of implementation; streamline review and approval of water transfers; integrate surface water and groundwater management; create incentives for permitting; set a goal to manage watersheds like adjudicated systems;
• Data: improve data systems to collect, manage, and share water right and reporting data will benefit watershed and drought management; develop methods available water on a watershed basis; and
• Collaboration: work with sister agencies, such as DFW, to begin planning an interagency drought protocol so that all agencies are better prepared for a future drought; include hydrologists and hydrogeologists who understand watersheds and developing water accounting and water balances.

California’s Water Supply Strategy. In August 2022, Governor Newsom released his strategy (Adapting to a Hotter, Drier Future) to address a projected 10 percent decrease in water supply (6 million to 9 million acre-feet of water per year) by 2040 due to climate change. This report indicated the need for increased diversion infrastructure, preventing unauthorized diversion during dry conditions, and nimble diversion management supported by accurate and timely data, while minimizing harm to the environment.

Regulating principles and guidelines. “Principles and guidelines” is the term used in state plans and policy for water quality control (Water Code § 13142). State policy for water quality control shall consist of principles and guidelines for long range resource planning, other principles and guidelines deemed essential, and objectives for water resource development. Statues requiring the North Coast instream Flow Policy (Water Code § 1259.4) and cannabis policy (Water Code § 13149) reference the State Water Board’s adoption of principles and guidelines. “Requirements” within this Article generally refer to other actions like waste discharge requirements or allowing interim requirements pending the adoption of long-term principles and guidelines. Plans and policies within the Porter-Cologne Act (Division 7 of the Water Code), are not subject to the Administrative Procedure Act procedures for adopting regulations as specified (Government Code § 11353).

1. Policy consideration. While outside this Committee’s jurisdiction, the State Water Board may need additional resources (staffing and contract funding) to conduct this new program.
2. Arguments in support. Several organizations write in support stressing the need to plan for drought and develop clear standards to guide water usage during drought, further adapt to a changing climate, and to move away from “treat[ing] these extreme weather patterns as temporary or ‘emergency’ events”. These organizations assert that this bill will enable “local water users … to develop local plans that anticipate how their business or communities will be impacted, therefore providing an incentive to invest in solutions that increase drought preparedness.”
3. Related Legislation. AB 2451 (Wood), 2021–22 Session, was similar to this bill and would have established a Drought Section at the State Water Board and required it to adopt principles and guidelines that apply to specified watersheds. AB 2451 died in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Trout
Environmental Defense Fund
Friends of Harbors, Beaches and Parks
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
Planning and Conservation League
The Nature Conservancy
Trout Unlimited
Wholly H₂O

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Stephanie Mitchell / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096