AB 1390 aims in unprecedented fashion to expedite procedures and processes for groundwater adjudications, which, in California, are known to take one or two decades before reaching a final judgment. The bill would add various provisions to the California Code of Civil Procedure that would be codified as Sections 830 through 849. AB 1390 was
California DWR’s New Groundwater Basin Regulations for SGMA
With the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) taking effect on January 1, 2015, the California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”) is in full swing of holding public workshops and information sessions to solicit input from stakeholders and other members of the public as well as to answer questions regarding SGMA’s various milestone requirements.
On July
California SB 4 Compliance Handbook: New Third Edition Now Available!
New Third Edition Reflects July 1 Permanent Regulations of Hydraulic Fracturing
We have prepared an update to the firm’s SB 4 Compliance Handbook to aid operators in their efforts to comply with SB 4 and its new permitting scheme. Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”) regulates well stimulation treatments in California, including hydraulic fracturing and acid
Water Board Signs Off on New Fracking Requirements
Yesterday, July 7, the State Water Resources Control Board (“Water Board”) adopted new requirements (“Model Criteria”) for groundwater monitoring in areas where oil and gas stimulation activities occur, such as hydraulic fracturing. The Water Board was required to develop these requirements pursuant to Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”).
The requirements cover a wide
To Curtail Or Not To Curtail…That Is the Question
On June 12, the State Water Board issued a notice of “unavailability of water” and the “need for immediate curtailment” from various water users holding pre-1914 water rights. Less than two weeks later on June 23, lawyers for the State Water Board reportedly stated in court this curtailment notice is advisory only, which would seem
State Water Board Receives Groundwater Monitoring Recommendations from Experts
The State Water Resources Control Board (“Water Board”) has recently released recommendations from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (“LLNL”) on Model Criteria for Groundwater Monitoring. Pursuant to Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”), the Water Board is required to develop regulations for sampling, testing, and monitoring groundwater during hydraulic fracturing operations. The bill requires groundwater monitoring at scales from single well monitoring to regional monitoring.
The recommendations are designed to assist the Water Board in taking a scientifically credible approach in developing groundwater monitoring regulations. The authors acknowledge the immense challenge of developing a set of regulations to govern well stimulation in California due to the unique and dynamic nature of each oil field.
The report recommends a tiered approach to groundwater monitoring where higher quality water is monitored more intensively than lower quality water. The monitoring would be conducted through one upgradient and two downgradient wells within a one-half to one-mile radius of the stimulated oil well.
Continue Reading State Water Board Receives Groundwater Monitoring Recommendations from Experts
Fish & Game Code Section 1602 Is Unambiguous, Now Requiring More Water Users To Provide “1602 Notification” To “Substantially Divert” Water
On June 4, 2015, the Court of Appeal ruled that California Fish and Game Code section 1602 (“Section 1602”) unambiguously requires notification to the Department of Fish and Wildlife (“Department”) if an entity or individual plans to “substantially divert” water, even when the legal right to use the water was previously established. (Siskiyou
Update on California Water Legislation Regarding Groundwater, Recycled Water and More
June 5, 2015 marked the deadline for lawmakers to pass bills out of their house to the opposite house. Bills that did not pass in their house of origin by that date have effectively died (unless such a bill has been identified as a 2-year bill). Stoel Rives’ Water Law Team has been monitoring water-related legislation, especially given California’s historic drought. Our Water Law Team will continue to monitor these bills, among many others, including environmental-related legislation, throughout the 2015-2016 Legislative Session. We will provide periodic updates as these bills move through the legislative process. Below is the status and summary of some of the bills Stoel Rives is monitoring.
SUPPLY AND GROUNDWATER
AB-307 (Mathis): Graywater: groundwater recharge
STATUS: This bill is a 2-year bill and currently pending referral in the Assembly.
If passed by the legislature and signed into law, AB-307 would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to explicitly permit the usage of residential, commercial and industrial graywater for the recharge of a groundwater basin or aquifer.
AB-453 (Bigelow): Groundwater Management
STATUS: AB-453 passed the Assembly on April 16, 2015 and currently is scheduled for hearing on June 23, 2015 before the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water.
If passed by the legislature and chaptered, this bill would authorize, until a groundwater sustainability plan is adopted, a local agency to amend an existing groundwater management plan in furtherance of, and consistent with, the groundwater management plan’s objectives.
Continue Reading Update on California Water Legislation Regarding Groundwater, Recycled Water and More
New Clean Water Rule Unlikely To Significantly Change Regulatory Status Quo…At Least For Now
The wait for the new rule is now over! The EPA and Corps of Engineers have jointly issued the rule defining which waters are protected by the federal Clean Water Act, with the new rule largely reflecting historical interpretations arising from SCOTUS decisions.
Please click on this link for more in-depth information and analysis prepared
High-Speed Rail Authority Under Fire for Disrupting San Joaquin Kit Fox Habitat
On January 26, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) issued a letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority (the “Authority”) that found that the Authority’s contractors are not in compliance with the Authority’s original environmental commitments to the USFWS in performing the preliminary work on the first segment of the high-speed rail project (the