State of California

:

Division.Chiefs and Above"0 Dote : November 4, 1986

/

()

Randele ChiefOffice of/Legislative and Public Affairs

From: STATE WArtR RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD

LEGISLATIVE SUI~I.IARY FOR SEC(~tJD HALF OF 1985-86 SESSIONSubject:

The 1985-86 Session of the Le~,islature has been completed and the Legislaturewi 11 convene fo,' the 1987-88 ~~ession in January.

The attached sumlnary identifies legislation enacted during the 1986 portion ofthe 1985-86 Session. It also summarizes bills which were either vetoed by theGovernor or denied passage by the Legislature in 1986. The legis1ation ispt'~s(nt~d undEr the following categories:

Agricultural DrainageHazardous Waste

f'.1i sce 11 aneou sReorganizatiort

Sewage TreatmentSolid Waste Disposal Sites

Surfdce ImpoundmentsUnderground Tanks

Water QualityWcter Rights and Supply

Within each cat~gory, 1egis1a1ion is separated in Enacted, Vetoed and FailedPassage sections. Bills in tte Enacted section marked with an asterisk areurglncy measures whictl b{;came: effective upon signature of the Governor. Allother statutes take eff~ct on January 1,1987.

If you need flJrther inforrilati(~n concerning this legislation or need copies ofthe statutes or bills, pleasellet me know.

Attachment

INDEXLEGISLATIVE SUr'1~1ARY

$ectiOIIS

Agricultural Drainage 1Hazardous Waste 3~'iscellaneous. 9R~organizati on 11Sewage Treatment 12Solid Waste Disposal Sites 15Surface Impoundments 16Underground Tanks 17Wat~r Quality 20h'atet' Rights and Supply 26

Legi sl ati O!I

AB 15(Stir1ing)AS 22( ~~. Brown)AB 348(Frizze11e)AB 459(Bat~s)AB 538(Carnpbel1)AB 568(Pt!ace)AB 650(Tanner)AB 79,-(Costt:)AB 84o(Campbel1)AB 853(Sher)AB 859( Shel~)AB 902(Lancaster)

Water facilities 28Heal tho 11Wat~r contamina"cion 1Water resources developr:lent: Delta Plan 28San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Drdin 1Water conservation: Imperial Valley 28Hazardous waste facilities: endang~rment 11Ground water management. 28Wa-ter: small hydroelectric projects 2BUnderground storage tanks: cleanup authority 18\.1 'Jr"dter... .'..""""' c;.'Public. facilities: local governl!Ents:

privatization 13AB lU12lW.Brown} \/astewa't;<;r and toxics cleanup: international

border 13AS lO48(Costa) Regional Wdtcr Quality Contt'ul Boards:

membership: vacancies 10Au 1161(Vasconcellos) Water quality; enforcen~nt 22AB 1287(Hannigan) Conservation retrofit devices 13AB 14~2(Rogers) wdter wells: reports 22AB 1618(Farr) San Lorenzo Valley Water District 12Ad 1625(N.ioJaters) Incorne tax: bank and corporation taxes; deductions;

soil and water conservation 10AS 1657(Isenbery) Water resources: s~ate facilities 28AB 1658(Isenberg) Agricultural wdter management planning 26AB li'24(Haus~r) Fish waste management. 22AB 1764(Bradley) Underground storage tanks: monitoring 18AS 1845li~at'golin) River recreational areas 29AS 19H2lCosta) Ground water recharge and drainage projects: state

bonds 1Central Valley Project: task force 26AS 2010(Isenberg)

-;-

Legislgtion ~

AB 2029(Bradley) Underground storage tanks: penalties 18AD 2031(Bradl~y) Hazardous substances: underground tanks 18AB 2032lBradley) Hazardous substances: underground stordge tanks 18Aa 2041(Tanner) Hazardous waste: financing 5AB 2095(Areias) Safe drinking water grants 23AB 21~3(Jones) Water standards 23AB 2228(Sher) San Francisco Bay: protection 23AB 2233(Rogers) Sol-id waste: standdras 15AB 2249(Costa) Surface ilnpoundments: restricted wastes 16AB 2267(Connelly) Tahoe Conservancy 23AB 2269(Hayden) Coastal resources: Santa Monica Bay 23A82408(Filante) Hazardous waste: substances and waste; solid waste. 11AB 2473(Wright) Underground storage tanks: detecting

unautt1orized releases 18AB 2498(Costd) Hazardous waste: disposal 5AB 250J(Roos) Wdter: state project entitlements 29AB 2515(Sebastiani)Surface impoundment: restricted hazardous wastes... 16AB 2631(Costd) Fish and Wildlife Pollution Cleanup and Abate~lent

Account. 2CJAB 2657(Eldcr} '-klteriais management training program 5AB 2702(LaFollette)Hazardous substances: incident response training... 3AS 2705(t~olina) Hazardous waste facilities: closure 6AB 2746(Katz) Water transfer: conveyance facility use 26AB 2810(N.W~ters) water rights fees 29AB 2888(Costa) Water rights permits 26A82906(Fer"guson) Residential development: water and sewer capacity.. 13AB 2920(Sner) Underground Tanks Program: state surcharge fees 17AB 2928(Corlne:l'ly) Hazardous waste: injection wells 3AB 2935(Johnston) Hazdrdous material data: release sites 6A~ 294~(Tanfler) Hazardous \~aste: management plans and facility.. d ., sltlng proce ures oJ

Ground r/ater quality: statewide plan 24Income tax credit: underground tanks 18Water: small hydro~lectric pl~ojects 26

) Solid waste disposal sites: assessn~nt reports 1bWild and Scenic Rivers 26Toxic Pits Cleanup Control Act: technical changes.. 16Ground water quality: local well ordinance. 20Wastewat~r construction loan: Humboldt Bay 12Bond guarantees 13Office of Water Marketing 29Solid waste disposal sites: air monitoring 15Water rights: transfer... 27Water rights: diversions 29

I Water rights: fees 29t~ater quality: California ocean plan 20Marine pollution risk assessment ~ 22Ocean pollution research 2~Hazardous substances: releases ~

{'

AD

.?95~(JoncsjAB 2984(Bradley)AB 3U83(Costa)AB 3U88(O'ConnellAS 31iJl(Sner}AB

3121(Kdtz)AB j127(Areias)At3 3286(Hauser)Ai3 3296(BaderjAB 3351(Isenberg)AB j374(C~laeron)AB 3427(Kelley)AB 3428(Kelley)AB 3493(N.Waters]AS 3500( Hayd(;rl)AB 3501(Hayden)AB 3bO3(Haydcn)Ai3 3504(Hayden)

-;;-

Legislation ~

AB 3506(Hayden) Water quality enforcement 20AD 3570(llute) Hazardous substances: underground storage 17AB 3598(N.Waters) Water quality: recreational resources 24AB 3621(Johllston) Water: Regional Board budgets 10AB 3654(Hayden) Water quality: ocean discharger 13AB 3663(Vasconcellos) Sdnta Clara Valley model hazardous substance

cleanup program 19AB 3670(Hayden) Hazardous substance: industrial establishment

clednup 6Aa 36~1(N.Wdters) Toxic Pits Cleanup Act: exemption 16AB 3718(Costa) Water projects: wildlife habitat preservation and

enhanccment. 29AB 3721(Costd) Hazardous waste loans: small business 6AB 3722(Co5ta) Wat~r transfers 27AB 3750(Cortese) Hazardous waste release sites: list of site

locations 3Monterey Bay: sewage impact study 14Regional agencies 9Outer Conti nenta-' Shel f Lands Act revenues 9Forest practices: timber resource plans 24Hazardous substance liability: arbitration JHazardous waste facilities: pretreatment 6water quality: San Diego Bay study 24Interndtional Border Pollution Control

II Authority 12Toxic Pits Cl~anup Act: partial exemption 16Wdter resources development 30

, Joint Committee on Drainage of AgriculturalIi Lands 1

Aquatic Habitat Inst;tut~ 21Kest~rson Res~rvoir: irrigation 1

II

AS 3805(Farr)AB 3823(Leonard)AB 3973(Sher)AB 40JJ(Sher)Ab 4095(Bradley)AB 4096(bradley)AS 4155(Killea)AB 4309(Peace)

AB 4325t tJ. Wa ters)ACA 16(Bates)ACR 25(Costaj

ACR 121(liarris)AJR 40(Costa)

$8 126( GaralllendiSB 186(Garamendi$8210(Ayi11a)S8 228(GaramendiS8 2",j3(Maddy)S8 318(Marks)S8 712(~1organ)

S8 lO48(Torres)

S8 1066(I~ielsen)

Bond guarantees 14Water quality: research 21Water quality enhancement bonds 30Infrastructure Co~lmission 14San Luis Drain: task force 2Water quality: San Joaquin River 2Hazardous waste: Toxics Control, Cieanup and

Reduction Bond Act of 1986 6Environmental Affairs Agency: Department of

Waste Management 11Upper Sacramento River: fisheries and rip~ridn

habitat 27Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act of 1986' bonds 7Toxic Cleanup Act of 1986: bonds 7Hazardous \"laste: restrictions on land disposal 4Water \~ells: well reports 24Drinking water standards 24

SB 1376(t-1organ)S8 1451(Torres)Si:!. lS00(RoLerti)S8 1548lAyald)SB lo63(Rosenthal

-;;;-

Legislation ~

S8 1700(Torres) Ceniral Valley Project: entitlement transfers 27sa i714(aerg~son) Hazardous waste: shredder waste 15SB 1734(Horgan) Water wells: well reports 24S6 1745(Bergeson) \~ater quaiity: New River 21SB 1802(Presley) Wastewater treatment plants 12SB 1815(E.Davis) State Water Quality Control Fund: interest rate 12SB 1817(~1organ) Water wells 21SB lS18(Morgan) Underground storage tanks: pressurized pipe

exemptions 17SB 1832(Maddy) Waste discharges: state subventions 5SB 1843(Bergeson) Water rights: temporary permits: urgency

changes 27SB 1853(McCorquodale) Underground tanks: local agencies 19SB 1361(t'iarks) Water pollution: environmental mitigation 24SB 1875(Craven) Environmental quality assessments 4sa 18g1(Presl~y) Hazardous substances: removal and remedial action.. 4SB 1903(McCorquodale) Water treatment: County of Santa Clara 25S8 1905(AYala) Water facilities: water quality standards 30SB 1959(Roberti) Hazardous substances: information, education and

training 7Publ ic meetings 9

) Ocean incin~ration of hazardous waste 5Hazardous substances: remedial action plans 7Underground storage tan.:s: state owned tanks 19Hazardous substances: above-ground tanks 7Water quality: ~round water protection 22Public contracts: use of securities 9Forest practices: timber harvesting plans 25

) Pollution abatement: nonoperating industriallocation 25

S8 2423(Torres) Hdzdrdous waste facilities: compliance 7SB 2424(Torr~s) Hazardous waste enforcement 4SB 2427(Foran) Hazardous waste: landfills 15S8 2458(L.Green~) Wci°ter facilities 30SB 2500(Keene) Hazardous waste disposal: r~siduals repositories... 85B 2554(Keene) Forest practices: timber harvesting plans 25SB 2562(Presley) Vessels: marine sanitaotion 21SB 2590(Craven) State Boards and Commissions 9SB 2612(Carpenter) Water facil ities 25SCA 1i(Nielsen} Water resources devciopment 30SCA 31(Torres) Toxic substances: Toxic Bill of Rights 8SCR 17(i,jontoya) Underground tanks: motor vehicle fuels 19SCR 92(Ayala) Ground water basins: state acquisition 27SR 13(t:iontoya) Underground tanks: motor vehicle fuels 19

5B 2173(Robertisa 2190( Rosenti1al5B 2267(Keene)SB 2273(Robbins)St3 2317(RobertiS6 2319(Roberti)S8 2374(Oi11s)SB 2394(KeenE:)SB 2401(Seymour

(

-;v-

AGRICUL TUf,AL DRAINAGE

EnJcted

Erlacts -the Water Conservation and Water Quality Bond Law of 1986 to provide a$75 million appropriation to the State Water Board for low interest loans topublic <1gerlcies fol~ dgricuitural drainage projects and an additional $75million to the Department of Water Resources for low interest loans to publicayen<.:;es for wat~r conservation and ground wat~r rechargl: projt:cts approved bythe voters at the June 1986 election.

Vetoed

None

Failed Pass~ge

Af> 348 (Frizzeilc Water contamindtion.

~ojoul <i ilav~ rt;'qui red thE.: Stc.te BoJrd to report to the Legi sl ature by January 1,1~87 on the major sources of contamination in the San Joaquin River and forany other riv~r that it deerils to have a major contami nation probl em, ana tocoordinate with other specified departments in the development of water qualitys~;;indQi"ds fOi" tile ~rott;cti on of vcri ous wa t'i:!r uses from contar:ii nati on.

wouid 'id~~ proilibited allY discharg~ froln the San Joaquin Vdlie:y Agricul turd-IDrain to the Sdn Joaquin-Sacramento Delta, Suisun Bay, Carquinez Straits, SanPablo I3dY, San Francisco l3dY or Irlorro l1dY, or tributaries thereof, as weil asto ttlonterey BdY dnd its tributaries. Would have prohibited any discharge fromsucn ~ drdi n un'ti 1 spt::ci fi eo carla; ti CJns concerni ny treatmen ~ of the dra illwater have been lix:t.

wou"lci r.dVf;: crcdt;;:d in the Legislature the Joint Committ~e on Drainage ofAgricultural Lands with specified membership, powers and duties. Would haveau"i.horized tile joint comlnittee to study various issues related to drainage ofagricultural lands, including the impact of irrigation return flows on theben~ficial us~ of state water and methods fot' draining sdl~ and removing toxicsubstances from agricultural lands.

AJR 40 (Costa) KE:stE:rson Reser\oo.ir: irrigation.-l~ou1J have T.lemcridlized th~ Secrt.'tary of tht Interior, the Presidl'nt andCongress of the United States to continue the delivery of wat~r to the affected4~ ,OUI) a~rE:S of furf.11 and wnich ~'oul C1 otherwi sc be taken out of production uponthe closure of Kesterson Reservoir. In addition, woula hdve requ~sted thern totc:.i..:; relatt:u ac.i;.ions concerning till: clearlup of Kesterson and "che dcv'eio\Jment ofirrigatiun PI'act;ces, drainage Cilterna-cives, construction of evaporation pondsdrld tile treatment of a~ri,-ul tural drainage water.

-1-

sa ij,3 (~iaddy) San Lu;s Drain: task force.

Woul <i h~vc c.:t'edted a task force to undertake a cornprehi:!ns; ve study concern; ngthe location of the San Luis interceptor drain of the federal Centrul ValleyProjec'c arid ae",erm; ne tht:! most advdntageous pl ace for; ts term; nus 1 OCdt ;011.

S8 318 lrlarks) Water quaiity; San Joaquin River.-

Would have requir~d the State Board to study the water quality of the SanJoaquin River from Friant Dam to Vernalis and submit a report to theLegi sl a'cure by January 3D, 1~87.

(

-2-

HAi.ARDOUS ~i!,.,STE

Enacted

A3 270.':: ,La Fo"llette} Hazardous substances: incident response training(St~tutes of lYt3b, Chapter 15iJ3). -

Establishes the Caiifcrnia Hazardous Substances Incident Response Training anaEducation Program within th~ Office of Emergency Services. The DES will (1)develop curriculum for training classes, (2) train and certify investors, (3)approve classes meeting the program's requirements and (4) certify studentswho have cor;tpleted approved training. A representative from th~ State WaterBoard will sit on the curriculum development committee, which is composed of 23-~mbers representing state, local and federal agencies and industryassociations.

AS 2926 (Connelly) Hazardous was"te: injec"i:ion wclls (Statutes of 1986,CFiaptel' 1013).

~Iakes technical dmendr.lents to the Toxic Injection Wl::ll Coritrol Act, includingchanges requested by the Department of Health Services, the Department ofConset'vation's Division of Oil and Gas and the State Water Board.

AB 1948 (Tdnner) Hdzardous waste; lildrlagerllcrlt plalls arid facility sitingprocedures (Stdtutes of 1986, Chdpter 1504).

(;rE:ate5 a county tlazardolJs waste ri1dnagcment pl anning process patterlled afterexisting general county planning procedures. Also creates procedures for thcsiting of all nc~~ hazdrdous wa5te treatment, storage and dis~osal fdcilities.Prohibits disposal of any untreated hazdrdous waste to a landfill afterJanuCiry 1, 1~9~.

A[:' 375(; lCor " .a rci "a .'E; relcase sites: list of site locations

(Stc.:tutt:s 0 .

Requir~s the Stdte Wat~r BOdrd to submit an dnnual list to th~ Office ofPlannin~ and Research contdining hazardous substance release and enforcementi rlfol'mati on. The lis'C wi11 contdin locations of th~ following: undergroundtank unauthorized releases, leaking solid waste disposal sites dnO sitesreceivitlg cleanup and abatemen"c. orocrs or cease and desist ord~rs. These listswill be provided by OPR to cities and counties. Applicants for developmentprojt:cts \-nll b£; required to consult these iists dS part of the CEQAreview process.

AB 4095 (BI~adley) Hazardous substance liability: arbitration (Statutes of1986, C)~~~t~.r3JJJ~

Existing law authorizes the Hazat'dous Substance Cleanup Arbitratioll Panel toapportion liability among responsible parties for the clednup costs ofhazardous substance rcleases specified in a remedial action plan. Tlli5 measureallows eitner th~ Department of Hedltn Services or a Regional Board to selectone of the punel lilembers. Additionally, it modifies prior law to allow'Regional Boards to identify certdin potentially responsible parties ancipetitior: thE; pan~l to rlloClify an appor'(.ionm~rlt dc<.;isiorl. It also providcs forjuoicidl revie~J of a Regional Board aecision to modify C1 rel:ledial action pldn.

-3-

S6 lS0u (Roberti) HazdrJuus wast~: restrictions on land disposal (S~atutesof 198~, Chaj)ter 1:SO9i. .

Proilibits dis~osdi of liquid hazardous wastes into hazdrdous waste lCtndfills,except as specified, and requires the Department of Health Services to adoptcri"teria for the disposal of non-liquid hCizardous wastes into landfills.Additionally prohibits, after May 8, 1990, the land disposal of any i1azdrdouswas';~e unless 'the wast~ is treated or is a sol id waste generated from a cl~anupaction.

SB 1875 (Craven) Environmental quality assessments (Statutes of 1986, Chapter15U7) ---

R~quircs thl' Secretary of Environmental Affairs to adopt criteria andexamination requirements for the voluntary registration of environmentalassessors in consultation with the Department of Health Services, Air ResourcesBodrd, Division of Occupational Safety and Health and the State Water Board.After Octob~r 1, 1987, p~rsons could apply for registration as an environmentalassessor.

SB 1891 (Presley) Hazardous substances: removal and remedial action(Stdtute~ of 1986, Chaptcr 1508).

Re~ises the criteri~ for ranking hazardous waste cleanup sites on the priorityranking list to include a minimum hazard threshold below which the site is notrequired to be listed. This is consistent with the ranking criteria used bythe federal Superfund program. Sites ~Jhich meet specified requirem~ntsconcerning r~s~onsible parties will be exempt from the annual priority rankingpublishing requirement. Also requires that DHS or the Regional Board consider,when dete,'mining the cost eff~ctiveness of alternative rel;1edial action measuresin a remedial action plan, whether deferral of a remedial action will result inincreased cost or a public health hazard.

5B 2424 (Torres) Hazardous waste enforcement (Statutes of 1986, Chapter1187) ..

Revises the hazardous wastE erlforcement provisions of the Health and SafetyCode and vests the Department of Health Services with essentially the san~E:rlforc~r:lent tool s currenotly used by the Regional Bodrds to protect ~/aterquality. This enhances the enforcement capabilities of the Departmentby allo~/ing for the issuance of cleanup orders prior to a hearing and givingDHS the power to impose civil liabilities adrllinistrati'/ely. Additionally,loCdl prosecutors will be allowed to seek remedial action, civil or criminalpenalties or injunctions agains~ violators of hazardous wdste laws.

-4-

Vetoed

Ab 3504 (Hayden) Hdzardous substances: releases.

would have rcquired any d~signat~d employee who obtains information revealingthe unauthorized release or threatened release of a hazardous substance likelyto cause substantiJl injury to public h~alth or safety to inform the affectedboard of supervisors and local health officer within 10 days. The disclosurerequirenlent would not apply if notification is prohibited by law, would harm anongoing investigation or is already general public knowledge. Would haverequired the Department of Health Servic~s to adopt regulations definingsubstantial injury to the public health and safety. Designated employees arethose required to file yearly financial disclosure statements.

5B 1832 (Maddy) Wast~ discharges: state subventions.

Woul d have appropri dted $135,OUO frol1l the Hazardous Waste Col1trol Account inthe Gen~ral Fund to Fresno County to fund monitoring of ground water at theBlue Hills Ciass I disposal site.

58 2190 (Rosenthal) Ocean incineration of hazardou_s waste.

would hQv~ required tne Depar"t.inent of Health Services to coordinatt! anintera9~ncy study concerning the ocean incineration of hazardous wastes toidentify furth~r r~sedrch needs and environmental safeguards. Would haverequired the Departm~nt to report its findings to the Governor and Legislatureby July 1, 1!:J88. Would have also required a coastal development per~it to beobtained from the Coastal Commission prior to siting dnd operating anyactivities related to ocean incineration.

Failed Passage

Tdnner) Hazardous substance loan proQram: small businesses.A82041

Would havc cstdblisheG a low-interest loan program for small businesses to fundprojects necessary to comply with the underground tank la\~ and the Toxic PitsCleanup Control Act. Loans could also have been used by responsible parties tocleanup hazardous substance release sites.

AB 2498 (Cost.:1) Hazardous WdStt;: dispoSJ1.

Would have sta"ted legisldtive intent conc~rning used chemical containers andthe need for creating statewide county facilities for the safe and efficientcollection of such corltain~rs.

AB 2657 (Elder) Materidls management training proyram.

would have estdblished, within the Department of Health Services, theCommission on Hazardous Materials Management Training with membership from25 stdte and 10Cdl ayet1cit:s, including the State Water Board. Would haverequired the commissiorl to develop a certification program for local and stat~officials concerning enforcement of hazardous waste laws.

-5-

AB 2705 {Molinct} Hazardous waste facilities: closur~.

Would have prohibited the Department of Health Services from approving afacility closure plan until the local air quality district, county and cityIlave dpproved the closure report and a public hearing has been held. Tnismeasure would have allowed the above mentioned local agencies to approve ac1osure plan in disregard uf existing Regional Board determinations or orders.

AB 2935 (Johnston) Hazardous material data: release sites.

Wouid have required the Department of Health Services to establish a pilotcomputer data base in two counties to collect and organize inforrnation onreleases of hazardous waste. This information would have been available topublic agencies or the general public upon request. It would have required theState and Regionul Boards to provide sp~cified information to the Department.

A~ 3670 (Hayden) Hazardous substance: industrial establishment cleanup.

Wou-ld hdve: enacted the Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act to requireowners and operators of industrial establishments to submit cleanup pldns tothe enforc~rll~nt agency hdvi ng juri sdi ction over the industri al establ i shmentwhenever the property is closed, sold or transferred. The Regional Boards mustoccasionally issue an order concerning a condition of pollution caused byhazardous waste to a discharger who claims to have not known of the existingcondition of pollution at the time the proj)crty \'/aS acquir~d.

Slndll businesses.AB 3721 (Katz) Hazardous waste loans:

Would have ~stablished a low-interest loan prograliJ for small businesses tofinance projects necessary to comply with the underground tank law and theToxic Pits Cl~anup Act.

(

Ao 4096 (Bradley) Hazardous waste facilities: pretreatment.

Would have exempted specified hazarduus waste generators participating in thefederal Clean Water Act pretreatment program from the requirement that theyobtain a h~zardous waste faci1ity permit from the Dt'partment of Healtil Services

5B 712 (Morgan) HazardOUS ~/aste: Toxics Control, Cleanup and Reduction BondAct of 198b:

Would have enacted the Toxics Control, Cleanup arid Reduction Bond Act of 1986to provide for the issuance and sale of general obligdtion bonds in an amountnot to exceed $150 million. $55 million of the bond sal~s would have beenreserved for the cleanup of leaking underground storage tanks. Anottler $10million would have been used by the State Board to establish a low-interestloan program for small businesses to finance projects necessary to comply withthe Toxic Pits Clednup Act and the underground tdnk law.

-6-

SB 137& (r-1ul'gan) Hazardous Substance Cl eanup Act of 1986: bonds.

Would h~v~ enacted tlie Hazardous Substance Cleanup Bond Act of 1986, whichwould be subject to the same provisions as the Johnston-Filante HazardousSubs"i.ance Cl earlup Bond Act of 1984 (Cali forni a Superfund Program), except thatit would have provided for the issuance and sale of general obligation bonds inan amount noi to exceed $200 million for ren~dial and removal actions athazardous substance release sites and for site characterization.

Scl 1451 (To\1res) Toxic Cleanup Act of 1986: bonds..~

Would have endcted the Toxic Cleanup Act of 1986 for the issuance andsale of general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $200 million,subject to the same provisions as the Johnston-Filante Hazardous SubstanceCleanup Bond Act of 1984 (California Superfund Program). Would have revisedthe formula used to detcrmine the taxes imposed on the disposal of hazardouswastes, by prohibiting the maximum amount of these taxes which can be collectedannually from exceedin~ the "revenue target" as defined.

Woula have re4uired the Department of Health Services, in consultation \vith theState Board and other agencies, to develop public information, education dndtraining plans as part of these agencies' regulatory programs for hdzardoussubstances.

SB 2267 (Keene) Hazardous subs~ances: relTiCdial action plans.

Would havc: autho,"ized a potentially responsible party to request the Departmentof Health Services or a Regional Board to prepare a remedial action plan for asite on th~ state Sup~rfund Priority Ranking List. The Depurt~nt or Regionaltioard would have been required to respond to such a request witnin 90 days ofreceipt. The bill wouid have also re4uired tnt: Regional Board to respond to arequest to prepare a remedial action plan for an unlisted site.

53 2317 (Roberti) Hazardous substances: above-ground storage tanks.--WOUld have creat~d a progrdr:1 for registra"tion of above-ground tanks containinghazardous substances. This measure was modeled in part after the registrationprogram urJdertaken by the Board in 1984 for inventorying underground tanks.

S8 2423 (Torres) Huzardous waste facilities: compliance..

~ould have r~quired the Department of Health Services, State Air ResourcesBoard arId the Regional Water Boards, by December 31,1986, to inspect alloperati ng cor.l!lerci al hazardous waste 1 and trt?atment faci 1 i ti es. Each agencywould have been required to determine if a facility is in compliance with allapplicablt- ldws and regulations. By July 1,19137 each agency would have beenrequired to issue results of the inspection, including all violations. Thefacility would ildve been given until f~arch 1, 1988 to comply with allapplicable laws and rcgulations or cease operations.

-7-

S8 2500 (Keene) HCizaraous wdste disposal: residuals r~positories.

After Jdnuary 1,1994, would have r~stricted any hazardous waste facility whichis a landfill from accepting liquid wastes. Would have ~stablished legislativefindings corlcerning the advisability of residual repositories. Would haverequired the Department of Health Services and the State Water Board tojointly revise existing regulations to allow r~sidual repositories be sitedand identify regions in the state most likely to meet siting criteria.

SCA 31 (Torres) Toxic substances: Toxic Bill of Rights.

Would have enacted the Toxic Bill of Rights to require public agencies whichregulate use of toxic substances to interpret laws so as to maintain theexisting air, water and land quality. Would have prohibited anyone fromselling or offering for sale specified food or water if it contains a toxicsubstance above a specified level.

(,

-8-

MI SCELLA~JEOUS

Enacted

Codifies existing State Board policy requiring all Regional Board guidelinesbe approved by the State Board before becoming effective.

Extends the January 1,1987 sunset date to January 1,1992 for existing lawwhich perrnits public agency contractors to substitute securities for any moneywithheld by the public agency to ensure performance und~r the contract.Also establishes a uniform escrow agreement when substitution of securities isused. "iakes permanent the proYi sion which exempts projects funded by thefederal Farmers Home Administration from the substitution of securities law.Tnis legislation continues to help contractors participate in the Board'sprogram for assisting local agencies, and construct sewage treatment facilities.

SB 2590 (Crdven) State Boards and Commissions Statutes of 1986 Chapter

S~ecifiE:s that the perriiem salary of d member of a board or coliJllission createdby executive order or statute shall be $1.00 per day unless a higher rate isprovided by statute. This raises t~le perdiem of Regional Water Board Iilembersfrom $75 to $1.00.

Vetoed

AB J973 (Sher) Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Revenues.---

would have specified that $200,000 shall be appropriated annually to the StateWater Board for monitoring dnd enforcement of wa"ter diversion perlilits. The.appropriation would hdve ta~~C'n effect only if over $375 million was rec.;~ived byCalifornia from any f~deral Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Revenues.

Sb 2173 (Roberti) Public meetings.-

Would havE revised the Bagley-Keene Open ~1eetiny Act to make all advisorybodies, regardless of size, subject to the open meetings law by deleting thethree-person rl1inililurIl requirement and specifically adding "task force."Would have required public bodies to provide notice of all meetings to theState Library which would maintain a State Meeting Calendar. Would havesubstantially narrowed the circumstances under which a state body may holdexecutive session to discuss litigation. Would have required the legal counselof the state body to prepare a memorandum stating specific reasons and legalauthority for the closed session.

-9-

Failed Passdge

AB 1048 (Costa) Region,)l Water Quality Contrul Boards: ITlemberstlip:.-

vaCdnCles.

'Would have provided that a rnernber of a Regional Board who fails to attend atleast one-half of all regular and special meetings and hearings of the Board ina calender year autornatically ceases to be a member of the Board on December31st of that calendar year and the position would become vacant.

AB 1625 (~~. Waters) Income tax: bank and corporation taxes; deductions; soiland water conservation.

would have permittea taxpayers under both the Personal Income Tdx Law and Bankand Corporation Tax Law to deduct 50 percent of expenditures (up to a $3,000deduction) in each tax year for projects to treat, move or cultivate land forsoil and water conservation and erosion prevention. Would have required theprojects be in designdted sensitive areas as determined by the State andRegional Water Boards, the Coastal Commission and the Tahoe Regional PlanningAgency.

AB 3621 (Johnston) Water: Regional Board budgets.~

Would have required th~ annual budget prepared by the State Board to include adetailed plan of ~xpenditures for each Regional Board. Before adopting aproposed budget for submission to the State Board, each rt!gion would havebeen required to assess its projected workload and hold at least one publichearing on the subje(;t.

-10-

REORGAtJIZATION

Enacted

AB 650 (Tonner) Hazardous waste facilities: endangerment (Statutes of 1986,~hapter 1502). -.

As sign~d into law, requires the Director of the Department of Health Servicesto conduct a special hearing to determine whether the operdtion of an existinghazardous waste facility may present an imminent and substantial enddngerment"1:0 the public or the environment. Specifically, a special hearing is requiredin cases where a hazardous ~'iaste management facility has been responsible forevacuations of surrounding areas.

An earlier version of AB 650 proposed an agency reorganization. It would havecreated the Department of Waste Management which would have been overseen by a13-member commission. Also, would have transferred specified regulatoryauthority regarding hazardous waste and hazardous substances from theDepartll1ent of Health Services, Waste Management Board, Air ResourcesBoard, and State and Regional Boards to the newly created Department.

Vetoed

Sb 104~ (Torres) Environmental Affairs Agency: Department of Wastet.'lanagernt:nt. -.

Woul d nave createci thc Depdrtment of waste f.1anagement and transferred certainresponsibilities relating to hazardous waste from the Cdlifornid Wastet~andgel;1ent Board, the Department of Heal th Servi ces and the State and RegionalWdter Col1trol Boards to the Department of Waste Mdnagement. Would haveabulishcJ the California Waste Nandgement Board. Would have creat~d theEnvironmental Affairs Agency in state government and placed \~ithin the agency'\.he State Air Resourc~s aoard, the State ~Jater Resources Control Board and thenine Regional Boards and the Department of Waste Management.

Failed Passage

AB 22 (\oj. Bru\'in) Heal to.

Would hdve transferred, on July 1,1986, specified regulatory authorityregarding hazardous waste and hazardous substances from the Department ofHe.:tlth Services to the Stdte and R~gional Water Bodrds. Would have created, onJuly 1,1986, the Environmental Affairs Agency in state government andplaced within the agenl.;y all environmental boards. Would have abolished theState Department of Health Services and transferred specified responsibilitiesto the Department of Public and Environmental Healtli and the Department of Medi-Cal Services. created by this bill.

"82408 (Filantc) Hazardous waste; substanct.'s and waste; solid waste.

Would have transferred responsibility from the California Waste r\1dnagementBoard, tile Department of Health Services, thc State Water Board and theR~giondl ~Jater Boards to a new Department of Wastc Managelnent. Waul d have alsocreated a 13-~mbt'r California Waste Commission with three regional commissionsund~r the riaste Co~r,li ssion.

-11-

SEWAGE TREA T~1EI~T

Enacted

AB 1618 (Fdrr) Water Quality Control Fund loan: SarI Lorenzo Valley WaterDistrict (Statutes of 1986, Chapter 962).

Authorizes the State Water Bodrd to loan, if it makes specified findings sctforth in the legislation, the San Lorenzo Valley Wdter District up to $1.5million to re):>ay debts associated with constrlJctioll of a sewage treatrnentfacility. Requires repayment of the loan under terms and conditions to beestablish~d by the State Board.

AB 3286 (Hauser) Wastewater construction loan: Humboldt Bay (Statutes of1986, Chapter 1J6j).

Restructures dn existing loan from the State Water Control Board to theHumboldt Bay Wastewater Authority by forgiving approximately $144,705 ininter~st and delaying repayment of any of thc remaining principal of $455,047until January 1,1989.

SB 1802 (Presley) Wastewater treatment plants (Statutes of 1986, Chapter~) .-' -.

Corrects dn inadvertent deletion made by 1985 legislation by restoring therequ;r~ment that operators of federal wastewater treatment facilities becel4tified by the State Water Board. "

tSB 1815 (Davis) State Wat~r Quality Control Fund: interest rate (Statutesof f~86,'ChajJter978). .-

LO.i~rs the interest rate for "hal~dshi p" loans to corl111uni ti es from the StateWater Quality Control Fund. These loans will be used for constructing waterreclamation, water conservation and wastewater treatment projects.

Vetoed

AS 4309 (Peace) International Border Pollution Con~rol Authority.

Would have cr~ated a new agency, the International Border Pollution ControlAuthority, to study sources of pollution from Mexico into the Tijuana, Ne~1 andAlamo Rivers, prepare management strategies and undertake pollution control andcleanup. Would have established d 19-member board to operate the agency,comprised of 11 voting representatives of local governments, the Legislatureand the public. Eight ex-officio, nonvotin9 members would represent RegionalWater Boards, the Environi~ental Protection Agency and the InternationalBoundary and Water Commission.

t

-12-

Failed Passage

AB 902 (Lancaster) Public facilities: local governments: privatization.-.

Would have authorized any city, county, city and county or special district toprovid~ for the establishment of "privdtization projects". Privatization isdefined to mean the construction or operation of facilities or the provision ofservices by a private or public corporation or a natural person pursuant to afranchise, license or service agreement, as specified.

AB 1012 (w. Brown) Wastewater and toxics cleanup: international border.

Would have authorized, subject to voter approval, the sale of $100 million ingeneral obligation bonds to correct pollution problems associated with the New,Alamo and Tijuana Rivers in Mexico. Also, would have appropriated $2 millionfrom the General Fund, apart from the bond issue, to the State Board to conductwork in Imperial County related to Mexican pollution and to finance start-upcosts on border control facilities.

AB 1287 (Hannigdn) Conservation t'etrofit devices.

Would Ilave required the installdtion of low-flow shower heads and water closetconservation devices when older properties are sold. It would have alsocreat~d an exemption process for those local agencies \~hich operate awdstewater tredtment facility which may be impaired by the reduced flowcaused by installdtion of such devices. The Regional Boards would have beenrequired to hold public hearings to determine if a wastewater treatmentfd\;ility would be so impaired.

AB 2908 (Ferguson) Residential development: water and sewer capacity.

would have prohiDited any city, county or special district fro!n denying aresidentiai development perlnit solely on the basis of insufficient water orSe\ierage capacity; except that the lOcality could deny the permit if it findsthat the sewerage or water facilities are insufficient to serve the housingn~eds identified in the general plan and identifit:s mitigation measures torelileay the 1 tick of capaci ty.

Ail 32~6 (odder) l3ond guarantee~.

Would have auttlorized the State Board to provide a specified guarantee for allor part of a proposed local agency bond issue for wastewater treatment orreclamation facilities. would have specified conditions and limitationsapplicable to any such guarantee. Identical to SB 126.

AS 3654 (Hayden) Water quality: ocean discharger.

Would have required the State and Regional Water Boards to require fullsecondary treatment of all municipal and industrial waste discharges into theocean wa~ers of Santa t;ionica Bay, San Pedro Bay and waters off the Palos VerdesPeninsula.

-13-

Would hdV~ required the Central Coast Regional Water Board to conduct studiesand investigate the cumulative impact of sewage disposal on the Monterey "Bayecosystem ana to determine the potential impact of Cidditiona"i sewage outfallsystems from the Gi 1 roy-tfiorgan Hi 11 area.

SB 126 (Garamendi) Bond guarante~s.-~

~Jould have authorized the State Board to provide a specified guarantee for allor part of a proposed local agency bond issue for wastewater treatment orreclamation facilities. Would hdve specified conditions dnd limitationsapplicable to any such guarantee. Identical to AB 3296.

Would have established a coTiI"llission charged with preparing a plan to ~et thestate's infrastructure needs, and would have required the commission to reportannually its recommendations for expenditures frOtll the Special Furld forInfrastructure, which the bill would also have created.

(

-14-

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITES

Erlacted

At! 3U38 ((J'Connell) Solid lIaste disposal sites: asseosment r"ports (Statutesat l~!J", cnapter ~/"1. ~~~ ~~~~~ ,..OOU"..

Shifts the deadline for submission of solid wastewater quality assessmentreports (SWAT) to the Regional Boards back by six months by changing the duedate from Jdnuary 1st to July 1st. Regional Boards n1Jst now also considerother site-specific engineering data, along with SWATs, when revising wastedischdrge requirements for solid waste dispooal sites.

Shifts the deadline for submission of thre~ reports to the Legislature(summarizing the extent of hazardous waste in solid waste disposal sites andtheir poten~;al effect on water quality) back six month from January 1st toJuly 1st. This change has been made for consistency with the deddline shift inAB JO88. This ~asure also revises the air quality portions of this law, butleaves the water quality portions alone.

SB 1714 (Bergeson) Hazardous waste: shredder wastes (Statutes of 1986,Chtlpter 520): i

Specifies that. although SOffle Class III landfills have been designated by theRegional 8odrds as acceptable for the disposal of metal shredder wastes. theClass III landfilllfacility is not required to accept such wdstes by virtue ofthis designation. IAlso allows operators of these Class III facilities tochargt: a disposal rate propurtionate to the cost of modifying the landfill tomeet water quality objectives.

Would have required the State and Regional Boards to consider topographical andclimatological variations in annual precipitation when i~posing constructiondrill prescriptivc standaras for Class 11.1 landfills under Subchapter 15.

Vetoed

~Jone

F~ i 1 ec! P~s~~ge

AB 2233 (Rogers) Sdlid waste: standards.

Would have required th~ California Waste Management Board to forrl1ulate andadopt a state policy, including minimurn comprehensive standards, for solidwaste facilities by January 1, 1937 in consultation with specified boards,districts and depdrtments. Also provided that the Wastt! ttianagement Board wouldbe the only state agency autliorized to develop, adopt and l:1~intdin thesestandards. Would have repealed specified provisions of current law regdrdingthe powers of certain state agencies ",itrl regards to solid waste matters.

-15-

SURFACE It~POUND~ENTS

Enacted

AG 3121 (Katz) Toxics Pits Cleanup Control Act: technical changes (StatutesOf 19B6, Chapter 26U). ~

Corrects a drafting error in the Toxic Pits Cleanup Control Act whichreferenced nonexistent regulations adopted by the United States GeologicalSurvey.

AB 4325 (ti. Waters) Toxic Pits Cleanup Act: partial exemption (Statutes of1985, Chapter 1449).

Allows pesticide control operators and vector control districts which closetheir surface impoundments by.January 1,1988, to file for an exemption fromthe tlydrogeological assessment report (HAR) requirements of the Toxic PitsCleanup Act. In lieu of an HAR, these owners could instead submit ahydrogeological site assessment report (HSAI~). The HSAR is essentially a'Ishort form'l version of the HAR which requires a less extensive hydrogeologicalanalysis. Applications for exemption are due to the Regional Board by February1,1987, after which the Regional Boards have one year to analyze the HSAR todeterr:line if ledkage hds occurred. If leakage hd5 occurred, owners mustco~plete an HAR within an additional six months.

Vetoed

None

(Failed Passage

Au 224~ (COStd) Surfdce impounrifl~nt: restri cted wastes.

Would have revised the specified information required of an owner of a surfaceimpoundment that has been used to manage extremely hazardous wastes whenrequesting a Regional Board exemption from the June 30,1983 closurerequirement, and from the double-lining/leachate collection system/ground watermoni tori n9 systel:1 requi rements.

Aa 2515 (Sebastiani) SurfCice impoundment: restricted hdzardous wastes.

Would have deleted the mining wastes exemption continued in the Toxic PitsCleanup Act and would have instead authorized the Department of HealthSt;rvices to gl"ant a variance from specified requirements for a particularcombination or category of restricted hazardous wastes if the Departmentdeterrili ned that sufficient recycl i ng or treatment capaci ty for that combi nati onor category of wastes is not availabl~ in the state.

AB 3691 (Waters) Toxic Pits Cleanup Act: exemption.

Would have allowed the University of California to apply by July 1, 1987 to theRegional Bodrd for an exemption from the hydrogeological assessment report, f,eeand discharye requirements of the Toxic Pits Cleanup Act. The University wouldhave been required to maintain a monitoring plan for the ponds ana in the eventof ~ontamina~ion of a drinking water source, the ex~mptions provided und~r thisbill would have been cancelled.

-16-

UNDERGROUtJD TANKS

Enacted

*AD 2920 (Sher) Underground Tank Program: state surcharge fees (Statut~sof 198G, Chapter 1390). -

Makes tlte foll owi ng changes to the underground tank low: (1) pl act:srestrictions on local agencies to assure the collection and remittance ofsurcharge monies to the State Board; (2) requires the State Board to conduct afinancial analysis of the Board's own data base system and the StatewideEnvironmental Evaluation and Planning System (SWEEPS) to choose the most cost-efficient system for administering the underground tank permit data base; (3)allows specified tank owners of motor vehicle fuel tanks to delay theinstallation of equipment required by an interim permit until January 1,1989and (4) also n~kes changes to strengthen the enforcement abilities of localgovernments and the state. This urgency measure became effective September 29,1986.

AB 3570 (Clute) Underground storage tank: farm fuel exemption (Statutes of19d~, Chapter 935).

Restructures the exemption offered to underground tanks located on farms.Previous law exempted farm tanks used to propel motor vehicles from therequir~ments of the unaerground tallk law regardl~ss of tdnk size. Deletes therequirement that farm tanks must be used exclusively to propel vehicles so thatfarrll equipoent can also be eligible for exemption. ~wever, farl" tdnks witha capacity of less than 1,100 gallons will now be exempt from the undergroundtank law. Farm tanks between 1,100 and 5,000 gallons will be subject tolimited testing and monitoring requireff~nts and farm tanks over 5,000 gallonscapacity are subjt?ct to all requiremellts of the underground tank law.

S8 1818 (~1organ) Under~round storage tanks: pressurized pipe exemptions(Statutes of 1986, Chapter 1025).

f'Jakes pressurized motor vehicle fuel piping, previously exempt, subject tothe requirements of the underground tank law. Secondary containment of allValo/es, connections, pumping units, fabricated assemblies and any associdtedmetering and delivery systems connected to the pressurized pipelines is dlsorequired by this ~asure. Delivery hoses, vapor recovery hoses and nozzlessituated above-ground are specifically exempted from the double-containmentrequirements.

Tile State Board must review tank regul atioll~ by July 1, 1987 and whereappropriate, revise them by April 1,1988 to prescribe performance standardsfor pipes connected to und~rground storage tanks. The Board is also directedto assess existing regulations relating to standards for the construction,design, installation and leak detection of pipes.

-17

Vetoed

AS 853 (Sht:r) Underyruund storage tdnks: cleanup authority.

Would have required the State and Regional Boards to assume responsibility forthe cleanup of hazardous substance releases from underground tanks. Also,would tiav~ required the State Board to adopt regulations governing tank cleanupand to establish a procedure whereby local agencies could assume cleanupresponsibility for rllinor leaks limited to soil contamination.

Failed Passage

AB 1764 (Bradley) Underground storage tanks: monitoring.

Would have authorized the operator of certain Ilazaruous storage facilities tomonitor an underground storage tank installed after January 1,1984 by usingthe dipstick method, as defined.

AB 2029 (Bradley) Underground storage tanks: penalties.

would have delayed the effectiv~ date for the imposition of civil and criminalpenalties upon operators and owners of underground storage tanks containinghazardous substdn(;es who violate various provisions concerning the operation,monitoring and maintenance of these tanks until January 1,1986 and statedlegislative inten1.: to bar the irnposition of these penalties before tnat date.

AB 2031 (Bradiey) Hazardous substances: underground tanks.

Would hdve required that monitoring system alternatives specified in StateWater Board regulations for tanks storing motor vehicle fuels installed on orbefore January 1, 1984, contain a 7-year phase-in period for compliance withsecondary containment standards.

AB ,032 (Bradley) Hazardous substances: underground stordge tanks.

Would have created the Hazardous Substance Insurance Fund to continuouslyappropriate all money in the fund to the Department of Health Services for aninsurdnce program for owners C.)f undcrground storage tanks storing motor vehiclefuel.

AB 2473 (Wright) Underground storage tanks: detecting unauthorizedreleases: ---

Would have revised one of the alternative methods of monitoring motor vehiclefuel tanks to require daily inventory gauging (rather than daily gauging)and inventory reconciliation by the operator.

AB 2984 (Bradley) Income tax credit: underground tanks.-

Would have allowed metal finishers to obtain tax credits to acquire equipmentnecessary to comply with the underground tank law.

-18-

Program.

Would have appropriated $1.15 million to the San Francisco Regional Water Board(Re;Jion 2) from the General Fund to be used to fund a contract with the SdntaClard Valley Wdter District. The contract would have given responsibility forsupervising cleanup of leaking underground fuel tanks to the water district.Would have required the district upon completion of the contract to evaluatethe success of the program and make recommendations concerning its applicationto other locdl jurisdictions.

~

SCR 17 (r-1oritoya) Underground tanks: motor vehicle fuei s.--~--- w This conl.:urr~nt resolution wouid have reqtJested the State Board to repeal a

specified section of its underground tank regulations concerning vacuum t~stingof under9roufld tanks used to store motor vehicle fuels.

This one-house resolution would hav~ requested the State Board to r~pedl aspecified section of its underground tank regulations concerning vacuum testingof underyround tanks used to store motor vehicle fuels. Identical to SCR 17).

-19-

WATER QUALITY

Enacted

AB 2631 (Costa) Fish and Wildlife Pollutiorl Cleanup and Abatement Account(Statutes of 1986, Chapter 977). ..-

Revises provisions governing the Fish and Wildlife Pollution Cleanup andAbatement Account in the Fish and Game Preservation Fund by placing any moneyreceived from the State Water Board from the State Water Pollution Cleanup andAbatement Account into the Fish and Game Abatement Account. Provides that anyfunas in excess of $500,000 in the account as of June 30th of each year will beexpended for projects to preserve California plants, wildlife and fisheries.

AB 3127 (Areias) Ground water quality: local water well ordinance (Statutesof 1986, Chapter 1152).

Requires the State Board, by Septerilber 1, 1989, to adopt a model water well,cathodic protection well and ground water monitoring well ordinance. Furtherrequires local governments to adopt an ordinance protective of watel~ qualitythdt meets or exceeds the standards contained in DWR Bulletin 74-81, no laterthan January 15,1990. If local agencies fail to adopt an ordinance byFebruary 15,1990, the State Board's model ordinance will take effect.

(~

AB 3500 (Hayden) Water quality: Califorl1ia ocean plan. (Statutes of 1986,Chapter 1470.

Establishes legis-lative findings regarding the harmful effects of discharges tothe ocean and the need to implement monitoring programs to determine compliancewith wat~r quality standards. Requires the State Water Board to formulate andadopt an ocean plan, and requires it to be reviewed at least every threeye.:ti~S. Also adds an uncoaified provision to law stating thdt, if the Boarddeems it appropriate, the Bodrd will adopt a multispecies toxicity testingprogram using represelltative rnarine species to monitor complex oceandischarges.

Adds the Stat~ Wat~r Boaru, in addition to the Regional Boards, to the list ofagencies which must be notifiea of a discharge of hazardous material to water.Requires the notified board to list all such reports in the minutes of thenext business meeting and provide a copy of the minutes to the appropriatelocal health officials. Establishes, as interim reportable quantity levels forhazardous materials, standards adopted by the federal Environmental ProtectionAgency under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation andLiability Act (CERCLA).

-20-

Encourdges state agencies to develop a close working relationship with the SanFrancisco Bay Aquatic Habitat Institute, a non-profit organization. Recognizesthe institute as the coordinator of research and long-term archives of data forthe Bay, provided the institute maintains a board of directors representingdiverse interests and secures necessary operating funds.

Creates within the University of California a Water Quality Task Force todevelop a research agenda to identify cost-effective methods for providing safedrinking water. Specifies membership shall include representatives from theState Water Board, Department of Health Services and municipal waterdistricts. The task force, creation of which requires approvdl by the UC Boardof Regents, must report to the Legislature by April 15,1987.

SB "45 IS"y""" ,.t" ,,'ity We" Rm, '"' ""0 'm, ISt,wt" 0'C, 'P "

'PP";""',$150,000""'th,',""" '"0' t, 'io,o',,",,'P"" '0',b"i"g po",t"o i" th, "," '"" ",'" Ri"', ,o,io, fro, ""',' OJ"",'h, 5'", Bo,,' '0 "'0"'0 tho" ,""d, to th, Co'o,,'o 'm, B"i" R'g""",,','

",,' IR""o 7) fo' '" " ,o,,'o'i"9 0' "t,"o, i"'o , ,oot",t "ith

" "w" fi" to ,o,p"" ,h, p"o

58 1817 (Morgan) Water wells (Statutes of 1986, Chapter 1373).; r Defines monitoring well in statute and specifies requirements for well drillers

to report drilling activities on a well drilling log. Also, restates anobligation found in previous law requirirl!:j the Regional Boards to adopt wellstandards for a locality which has failed to adopt well standards protective ofwat~r quality.

Revises existing law to require marine vessel terminals to provide vesselpu@pout facilities in accordance with requirements imposed by Regional WaterBoards. Areas designated as federal no discharye areas must be givenpriority. Subsequently, areas to be regulated shall be dependent on thefundins level provided in the annual Budget Act.

Violations are subject to all penalties and remedies of the Porter-CologneWat~r Quality Act, including the issuance of cleanup and abatement orders andimposition of administrative fines. Authorizes the Department of Boating andWaterways to issue loans to public and private marina owners for constructionof pumpout facilities. Effective on September 24,1986.

-21-

Vetoed

AB 3501 (Hayden) t4arine poliution risk assessment.-, v.

Would have created a marine pollution risk assessment program in the Departmentof Health Services to determine the threat posed to human health from theconsumption of contaminated marine fish. would have required the Director ofthe Department of Health Services to submit an assessment plan to theLegislature and Governor by January 1,1988.

SB 2319 (Robcrti) Water quality: ground water protection..v ,..-v__w.~...

Would have required the State Board, in cooperation with the Department ofWater Resources, to develop a ground water strategy plan for the state. Thismeasure would have required the State Board to expand the scope of the Board'scurrent Ground Water Strategy planning activities to include certain issues notbeing examined as part of the Strategy.

Failed Passage

AB a5~ (Sher) Water.

Would have provided that no public water syster:l shall purvey water whichcontains any contaminant in a concentration greater than that established bythe Departnlent of Health Services action levels, unless tht: Department hasadopted a maximum contaminant level which supersedes the action level. Wouldhave provided that, effective January 1,1986, all action l~vels estdb1ishedby the Departn~nt would become Interim Public Health Drinking Water Stdnddrds~,ith applicable enforcement provisions.

,(A~ 1161 (Vasconc~llos) Water quality: enforcement...,- ~ would have redefined "contamination" for the purposes of the Port~r-Cologne

\~ater Quality Control Act as an impairment of the quality of the waters of thestate by waste to a degr~e which creates a hazard or potential hazard to publichealth.

AB 1432 (Rogers) Water wells: reports..Under existing law, every person who digs, bores ur drills a water w~ll orcathodic protection well, or abandons, destroys or deepens any well, isrequired to file with the Department of Water Resources a specified report ofcompletion of the well within 30 days after its destruction or alteration hasbeen completed. This bill would have defined "person" for these purposes asthe owner of a well regardless if the owner has a drilling contractor do theactual work.

AB 1724 (Hauser) Fish waste management.-

Would have appropriated $100,000 from the General Fund to the County oft'lendocino to assist the county in alleviating a fish waste munagelilent crisi sand ~o prepdr~ a report, as specified, to be presented to the Legislature andthe Governor by January 1, 1987.

-22-

AB 2096 (Areias) Sdfe drinking water grants.--

Would 'lave In(1dt: i1 local agency ineligible for a grant under the California SafeDrinking Water bond Law of 1984, unless the county or city where the agency islocated has ddopted a specified water well drilling and abandonment ordirlance.

AB 2133 (Jones) Water standards.

Would have required the Department of Health Services to adopt primary drinkingwater standards specifyin~ the maximum contaminant levels for all substancesfound in drinking water which may adversely affect human health. Would haverequired the Department to establish a list of all contaminants found indrinkin~ water by January 1,1987, and to have established primary drinkingwater standards for the 20 highest priority contaminants on the list by January1, 1988.

AB 2228 (Sher) San Francisco Bay: protection.

Would have required the State Water Board to under~ake a comprehensive reviewof all existing data on San Francisco Bay and identify any gaps ininformation. By December 1,1989, the Board would have been required to adoptnew standards to protect the reasonable and beneficial uses of the Bayincluding restoration of fish and wildlife and improvement in the quality ofwaste discharged into the Bay.

AB 2267 (Connelly) Tdhoe Corlservdncy.

Would have authorized the California Tahoe Conservancy to fllake grants to publicagencies and non-profit groups and to il!lprove and develop acquired lands forreducing or minimizing soil erosion ana disthal'g~ of seaiment into the water ofthe Ldke Tahoe region.

AB 2269 (Haydenj Coastal resources: Santa Monica Bay.

WuUld have created the Santa Monica Bay Deveiopment arid CunservationCommission and included in its charge the preparation of a long-range planfor tne protection, enhoncernent, development and use of Sarlta Monica Bay.

-23-

AB 2952 (Jones) Ground water quality: statewide plan..

Would have required the State Board to adopt a ground water protection strategyfor the state. The measure would have codified an effort currently beingpursued by the Board under its existing authority to develop a ground waterstrategy plan.

AB 3503 (Hayden) Ocean pollution research.-

Would have estdblished an Ocean Pollution Research Progra~ within the StateWater Board to assess the irnpact of and illegal discharges to the ocean.

AB 3598 (I~. Waters) Water quality recreational resource: bonds.

Would have authorized the issuance of State General Obligation Bonds in theamount of $600 million to finance a water quality and recreational resourcesenhancerllent program. The funds would have been available to finance the costof constructing the Auburn Dam.

AB 4003 (Sher) Forest practices: timber resource plans.

Would have permitted a person who owns both timber and land within a timberproduction zone, whose land and timber are under the management of aprofessiondl forester, to file d timber resource production plan (TRPP) in lieuof the timber harvesting plan required by existing law. The TRPP would havebeer! filed with the Departr:1ent of Forestry and contained specifiedinformation. AB 4003 proposed an alternative planning process for timberharvesting to both 58 2394 and 5B 2554. (',Ai) 4155 (Killea) Water quality: San Diego Bay study.

Would have required the San Diego Regional Board (Region 9) to prepare a studyof toxic pollution in San Diego Bay and report to the Legislature by January 1,1983. Would have appropriated $220,000 from the General Fund to be used forthe study.

SB 154B (Aydla) Water wells: well reports.

Would have made water well r~ports available as public inforillation andrequired persons drilling monitoring wells to also file a well report with theDepartment of ~ater Resources.

5B 1663 lRos~nthal) Drinking water standards.

The Department of Health Services would have been required to considerspecified objectives when adopting water policies, guidelines and regulations.Additionally, would have required the Department, when adopting final drinkingwater standards, to set standards as close to health-based levels ast<=chnically possible.

Sb 1734 (Moryan) Water wells: ~ll reports.

Would hav~ made wat~r ';lell reports available as public information. Also,would have allowed an authorized representative of the well owner to sign awell report.

-24-

SB 1861 (Marks) Water pollution: environmental mitigation.

Would have specified that up to 25 percent of the money paid into the WaterPollution Cleanup and Abdtement Account as a result of enforcement actionstCiken \Jitllin a region shall be available for expenditure by that region forcosts of mitigation measures for non-quantifiable damdges to resources. Wouldhave provided that the money would be paid only if the Regional Boarddesignated public and private entities as recipients of the money.

S8 1903 (t-1cCorquodale) Water treatment: County of Santa Clara.

Would have appropriated $2.5 million from the Advanced Drinking Water TreatmentFund to the State Water Board for allocation to the San Francisco Bay RegionalWater Quality Control Board (Region 2). The Regional Board would have awardedthe money to a public water supplier in Santa Clara County to fund a pilotwater treatment program. would tlave been appropriated only upon enactment ofSB 1451 (Torres).

5B 2394 (Keene) Forest practices: timber harvesting plans.

Would have allowed professional foresters to submit timber resource productionplans (TRPP) to the Department of Forestry in lieu of a timber harvestingpldn. Essentially, this measure would have created all alt~rnative review andapproval process for harvesting plans allowing a forester to either choose theplanning process in existing law or the alternative, and less protective,procedure proposed in this bill. Identical to 58 2554.

$8 2401 (Seymour) Pollution abatement: nonoperating industrial location.-

Would have specified that the owner of property on which pollution exists shallnot be liable for costs incurred by a public agency in abating the condition ifthe owner neither knew or should have known of the condition dt thE; time ofpurchdse. If the condition occurred after purchase, the owner would be liableto trle extent of the owner I s degree of responsi bi 1 i ty.

58 2554 (Keene) For~st practices: timber harvesting plans.

Identical bil-1 to 58 2394. Would have allowed professional foresters tosubmit timber resource production plans (TRPP) to the Department of Forestry inlieu of a timber harvesting plan. Essentially, this measure would have createdan alternative review and approval process for harvesting plans allowing afor~ster to either choose the planning process in existing law or thealternative, and less protective, procedure proposed in this bill.

SB 2612 (Carpenter) Water faci_lities.

Would have required the Department of Water Resources to construct specifiedfacilities to be part of the State Water Project. Would have authorized thesefacilities to be operated and financed as joint-use facilities with thefedera 1 governrllen t.

~ould have directed the State Water Board to adopt objectives for th~protection of beneficial uses of San Francisco Bay and would have directed theDepartrnen-c to ent~r into contracts to proviae mitigation of project impacts on

Suisurl Marsh.

-25-

WATER RIGHTS AND SUPPLY

Enacted

~2J6!~ lis,"",,) 'g'iou'tu',' w,t" ""na"m,nt pla"mng iStatut" ,f,9'b"napt" "'J.

"'qui,", a' a,ricultum w,t" ,uppli" supplying ma', than 50,000 ac"-f,,t ,fw,t., an,u,"y di"ctly t, cust,m", f" agricultu,al pu'po"s to p"pa" ,

p',sCrib'd iofo""tion ',po,t "d to p"pa" "d ,dopt, i, acco,d"c, with,p,cifi,d "qui"~nt', ,n agricultu,al wat" ",,'ag'~'t pl',-

~~.~~~g i:~.~~berg) Central Valley Project: task force [Statutes of 1986,""apter .30"'.

Author;zes th" D;rector of Water Resources to enter into negotiations witt. theu.S. Bureau of Reclamation for tt.e state to own or operate part or all of thef(deral Central Valley Project.

~~_1f~~ ,(~~;z) Water transf"r: conveyance facility use (Statutes of 1986,Chapter 918,.

Prohibits the st'te and any r.,;onal or local public agency from denyin9 a bonafide transferor of water the use of a water conveyance facility which hasunused capacity, up to 70 percent of tho usual capacity. Sp.cif;es that anyp"rson with a lon9-term water service contract with the owner of the facilitysi,all have tile right to use the excess capacity prior to any other transferor.Requires any transferor to pay fair compensation for the ose of the facility.

"'"df,

Allows the State Water Board to consider revocation of a water 'rights permitduring an extension hearing if the permittee has not exercised due diligienceirl cor:ipl~ting the proJect.

Revises law added by Chapter 1272, Statutes of 1985 (AB 951 -Jones) byspecifying that applicants for permits for small hydroelectric projects mustdemonstrate that project revenues will exceed project costs over the life ofthe project. Project costs include all mitigation measures, including bypassfl o~/s to protect i nstream use.

AB 3101Sher) Wild and Scenic Rivers (Statutes of 1986, Chapter 894):

Revises the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by designating portions oftht' Carson River, West Walker River, Leavitt Creek, McCloud River and SquawValley Creek dS potential additions to the scenic rivers system, deletingobsolete references and prohibiting construction of a dam, reservoir, diversionor impoundmli:'nt facility on th~se rivers and creeks until January 1, 1990.

-26-

A~ 3722 (Costa) Water transfers (Statutes of 1986, Chapter 970).-.

Requires the Department of Water Resources to establish an ongoing program tofacilitate the voluntary exchange or transfer of water. Requires DWR tomaintain a list of entities involved in water management who could assisttransfers and prepare a water transfer guide listing pertinent laws andresources for further information including resources useful in identifyingpotential third-party impacts and mitigation alternatives. Requires theDepartment to consult and coordinate its activities with interested stateagencies and report to the Legislature by July 1,1987 its recommendationsregarding necessary changes in existing law and state policy to improve watermanagement through voluntary transfers.

SB 1086 (Nielsen) Upper Sacramento River: fisheries and riparian habitat.(Statutes of 1986, CFiapter 885). -

Creates the Upper Sacrame,,-to River Fisheries and Riparian Habitat AdvisoryCouncil with broad representation of federal, state and local agencies andspecial interest groups, including the State Water Board. Requires the councilto approve a plan, including an implementation program, to protect, restore andenhance fish and riparian habita-t and associated wildlife. The plan must besubmitted to the Legislature by January 1, 1989.

SB 17ul) (Torres) Centrdl Valley Project: entitlement transfers (Statutes of1986, Chapti:r 124).

Requires the Director of the Department of Wat~r Resources to continuenegotiations with the Bureau of Reclamation concerning interim rights towater frol!! the Central Vdlley Project for use by State Water Projectcontractors.

56 1843 (Berg~son) Water rights: temporary permits: urgency chdnges{Statutes of 1986, Chapter 455).

Allows any person, whether or not an applicant, permittee or lic~nsee, to applyfor a temporary permit if the person can delilonstrate an urgent need for thewater ana the water can be divertea ~/itnout causin~ injury to any other lawfuluser. The Board must make specific findings regarding the need for the actionand conclude that the request is rlecessary to ensure beneficial use of water tothe fullest extent possible.

SCR 92 (AYala) Ground water basins: state acquisition (Resolution Chapter160) .--

The Depar~ent of Water Resources is request~d to conduct appropriatetechnical, economic and environmental studies concerning the viability of aground ,Jater oasin prior to purchase by the state. It also requestS that plarlsfor conjunctive use of ground water basins with surface wat~r supplies be basedon sound criterid established prior to purchase.

-27-

Permits local and regional agencies to transfer surplus water indefinitely,rather than the existing seven-year limit, if mutually agreed upon by bothparties.

V~toed

AB 792 (Costa) Ground water management.

Would have authorized local agencies of specified ground water basins subjectto critical conditions of overdraft, to establish, by ordinance or byrE:solution if not autilorized to act by ordinance, programs for the managementof ground water resources within the area in which that agency is authorized bylQ\~ to provide water services.

Failed Passage

AB 15 (Stirling) Water facilities.

Would have directed the Department of Water Resources to proceed immediately toconstruct the Delta facilities of the State Water Project and would haveexpressly authorized those facilities to include an isolated canal to transportwater through or around the Delta. Would also have provided for the operationof these facilities and for studies and adoption of water quality protectionmeasures.

AB 459 (Bates) Water resources development: Delta Plan.

Would have placed restrictions on the activities of the State Board concerningwater diversion in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Would have required theState Board to revie\~ and revise the San Francisco Bay water quality controlplan. Would have imposed a ban until June 30,1988 on the issuance of any newdiversion permits from the Delta.

cAB 568 (Peace) Water conservation: Imperial Valley.

would have expressc(j legislative intent in enacting the provision in currentlaw which expressly provides that no forfeiture, diminution or impairment tothe right to us~ certain \/ater conserved within the Imperial IrrigationDistrict shall occur, except as specified.

Ai.) 846 (Campbell) Water; sr:Iall hydroelectric projects; wild trout water..-

Woul d have prolli bi ted tne construction of small hydroel ectri c projects ondesignated wild trout waters, unless the project were approved by the Fish andGame COII1Tni s5i on.

AB 1657 (Isenberg) water resourc~s: state facilities.~

Would have included dS additional facilities of the State Water Project,facilities for water conservation, water reclamation, wastewater reduction,conjunctive use of surface and ground water in specified areas and purchase ofal ready devel oped ~/ater.

-28-

Would have provided for the es.tablishment of river recreational areas,prohibited new construction of any hydroelectric or other water developmentproj~ct which ~/ould inundate or otherwise change the recreational character ofany such designated area and would have designated a specified portion of thef10Kelumne River as a river recreational area.

Would have required the Department of Water Resources to provide its writtenconsent if the Metropolitan Water District requests, in writing, approval tosell any ~art of its share of project water that the district does not need.

AB 2810 (N. Waters) Water rights fees.-

Would have limited to $25,000 the maximum amount of the annual application feecharged water right applicants who delay by more than two years completingtheir application or who requ~st delay in its consioeration by the State WaterBoard.

AB 3351 (Isenberg) Officc of Water Marketing.--

Would have created in the Department of Water Resources an Office of Watert~arketing. Would have charged the office with responsibility for encouraging,promoting and facilitati~g the transfer and exchange of water. Would haverequired the office to prepare a water marketing guide to help persons wishingto engdgE; in such transfers.

AG 3428 (Kelley) Water rights.-

Would have permitted the State Water Board to grant temporary diversions ofwater for up to one year. Existing law allo\'is such diversion for only sixrllunths.

AB 3493 (N. Waters) Water rights fees.-

Would have placed a $100,000 ceiling on the amount which the Stat~ Water Boardcould charge as water right application and permit fees.

AB 3718 (Costa) Water projects: wildlife habit preservation andenhancement.

Would have authorized the Departnlent of Water Resources to transport non-project water and surplus project water through State Water Project facilitiesfor wildlift: Ilabitat preservation and enhancement purposes if this did notinterfere with delivery of water for the State Water Project or the federalCentral Valley Project. The cost of transporting this water would have beenborne by the General Fund or by federal contributions.

-29-

ACA 16 (Bates) Wat~r rcsources development.

Would have specified in the California Constitutiorl that la,'is dealing withcounty and areas of origin, watershed protection, Delta protection and allprovisions containeJ in AB 459 (Bates) could only be revised by the voters.The Legislature would have been permitted to amend these laws by a two-thirdsvote if the chan~es did not reduc~ the existing protection for fish andwildlife.

S8 210 (Ayald) Water quality enhancement bonds.

Would have enacted the Water Quality Bond Act of 1986 which would authorize theissuance of bonds, pursuant to State General Obligation Bond Law provisions, inthe amount of $400,000 for purposes of purchasing rights to stored water fromthe federal Central Valley Project for purposes of meeting specified waterquality standards.

SB 1908 (Ayala) Water facilities: water quality standards..-

Would t'ave specified that if the Director of the Departnlent of Water Resourcesfinds that the State Water Project cannot be operated in conformance with SanFrancisco Bay/Delta water quality standards, he must ask the Attorney Generalto bring suit to determine the standard1s applicability to the project. Wouldhave required the Director to operate the project so that water at the intakeof the Contra Costa Canal meets or exceeds the standards of Water RightDecision 1485. Would have specified that if the Governor declares droughtemergency conditions, however, this requirement is not applicable.

"!58 2458 (L. Greene) Water facilities.,

Would have prohibited the construction of water facilities within or upstreamof the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to transport high quality water through theDeltd in an isolated facility if the water would otherwise improve downstreamwater. Would have permitted such construction if the owner of the facilityfully Itlitigated any adverse quality effects on water us~d by at least 100,000people receiving water from the D~lta or downstream from the intake.

SCA 17 (tJi el sen) Wa t~r resources development.

Would havE: protected "areas of origin" provisions of the Water Code byrequiring a t~'o-thirds vote on any legislation directly or indirectly changingor deletiny these provisions.

-30-