The URL can be used to link to this page

CC SR 20210406 G - Assembly Bill (AB) 377 Letter of Opposition (Stormwater) CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 04/06/2021 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar AGENDA TITLE: Consideration and possible action to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of opposition to AB 377. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Authorize the Mayor to sign both a joint Peninsula Cities and a City letter of opposition to AB 377. FISCAL IMPACT: None Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. Draft City letter opposing AB 377 (page A-1) B. Joint Peninsula cities letter opposing AB 377 (page B-1) C. Text of AB 377 (as amended March 8, 2021) (page C-1) BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: At the start of the current legislative session, Assemblymember Rivas introduced AB 377, which would require all California surface waters to be fishable, swimmable, and drinkable by January 1, 2050 and would prohibit State and Regional Water Boards from issuing certain discharge waivers. This bill would prohibit an NPDES permit, waste discharge requirement, or waiver of a waste discharge requirement from being renewed, reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations or conditions that are less stringent than those in the previous permit, requirement, or waiver. AB 377 would overhaul the current Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) and regulatory stormwater permitting structure, limiting local land use authority related to stormwater management. 1 While the City strongly supports the bill’s intent to conserve and enhance California waters, it cannot come at the expense of stormwater management. Water pollution and ocean/beach pollution were listed as top environmental concerns in the Citizen Satisfaction Survey, and local oversight is essential to enhancing the conservation of our waters. The bill proposes a new prescriptive enforcement program with statutorily defined time limits that eliminate State and Regional Water Board discretionary authority for permitting and enforcement of water quality objectives. Under the hallmark Porter- Cologne Act which predates the federal Clean Water Act, local discretionary authority for permitting is tantamount to the design and structure of state and regional board oversight and regulation of water quality in the State of California. To instead have the Legislature set prescriptive permitting terms and compliance requirements for every single discharge permit throughout the State, as this bill does, would be a significant policy departure with severe adverse consequences and contrary to the goals of the State and these programs. Regional boards and permitted entities consider a multitude of dynamic local factors for meeting water quality objectives through very detailed and rigorous processes. Additionally, the current process ensures that infrastructure and other programmatic investments are fiscally responsible and scientifically sound and public funds are being expended for proven treatment and control projects that will meet compliance objectives as they are intended. This bill has been opposed by the League of California Cities and a coalition of organizations representing the vast majority of water, wastewater, and municipal stormwater permittees in the state. The City Councils of the three other Peninsula cities are discussing this matter and have expressed interest in jointly signing a letter of opposition due to the potentially severe and adverse consequences for stormwater compliance. The City Council has strongly opposed legislation that seeks to limit local land use authority. While the City appreciates the goal of the bill to protect California’s waters, given the bill’s widespread impact on the City’s ability to apply for stormwater management permits, Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign both a joint Peninsula Cities and a City letter to Assemblymember Rivas opposing AB 377 as drafted or with revisions. ALTERNATIVES: In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the City Council’s consideration: 1. Identify revised language to add to the letter. 2. Do not authorize the Mayor to sign the letter. 3. Take other action, as deemed appropriate. 2 April 6, 2021 Via Email The Honorable Robert Rivas California State Assembly State Capitol, Room 5158 Sacramento, CA 95814 SUBJECT: Notice of Opposition to AB 377 Dear Assemblymember Rivas: The City of Rancho Palos Verdes opposes AB 377, which would limit local stormwater management. While the City strongly supports the bill’s intent to conserve and enhance California waters, it cannot come at the expense of local stormwater management. The bill proposes a new prescriptive enforcement program with statutorily defined time limits that eliminate State and Regional Water Board discretionary authority for permitting and enforcement of water quality objectives. Under the hallmark Porter-Cologne Act, local discretionary authority for permitting is tantamount to the design and structure of state and regional board oversight and regulation of water quality in the State of California. To instead have the Legislature set prescriptive permitting terms and compliance requirements for every single discharge permit throughout the State, as this bill does, would be a significant policy departure with severe adverse consequences and contrary to the goals of the State and these programs. Regional boards and permitted entities consider a multitude of dynamic local factors for meeting water quality objectives through very detailed and rigorous processes. Additionally, the current process ensures that infrastructure and other programmatic investments are fiscally responsible and scientifically sound and public funds are being expended for proven treatment and control projects that will meet compliance objectives as they are intended. While the City appreciates the goal of the bill to protect California’s waters, given the bill’s widespread impact on stormwater management, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes opposes AB 377. A-1 Assemblymember Rivas April 6, 2021 Page 2 Sincerely, Eric Alegria Mayor cc: Ben Allen, Senator, 26th State Senate District Al Muratsuchi, Assembly Member, 66th Assembly District Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities Meg Desmond, League of California Cities Marcel Rodarte, California Contract Cities Association Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Ara Mihranian, City Manager Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager A-2 March 23, 2021 The Honorable Bill Quirk, Chair Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee Legislative Office Building, Room 171 Sacramento, CA 95814 SUBJECT: AB 377 (Rivas): Oppose Dear Assembly Member Quirk; The four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, firmly joined together by a common cause, are writing to you today to respectfully oppose AB 377 (Rivas), which would fundamentally detrimentally alter the State of California’s existing water quality programs without providing any solutions that will result in the attainment of water quality objectives. While the four cities are united in our commitment to water quality, AB 377 is untenable, unfair and unreasonable. AB 377 removes all flexibility to consider local conditions, alternative approaches to creatively solve our problems, and creates a massive unfunded mandate, requiring municipalities to fix all urban runoff pollution issues, including legacy and ongoing aerial deposition pollutant issues by 2050. While we would all aspire to such goals, it is unreasonable to mandate such lofty expectations with no flexibility, no funding, and no ability to obtain funding, and discrediting the considerable actions, efforts and expenses municipalities have incurred to date. We believe that better solutions can be achieved by working collaboratively with local governments, to make existing efforts more effective. Imposing unrealistic and absolute mandates will not result in better outcomes. The improvements desired by all are largely constrained by limited finances; the legislature can help by providing funding and support to cities where it is needed most. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns. We respectfully request that AB 377 not move forward when it is heard in the Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee. Sincerely, Eric Alegria Michael Kemps Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor, City of Palos Verdes Estates B-1 Honorable Bill Quirk, Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee March 23, 2021 Page 2 Jeff Pieper Steven Zuckerman Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Estates cc: Ben Allen, Senator, 26th State Senate District Al Muratsuchi, Assembly Member, 66th Assembly District Robert Rivas, Assembly Member, 30th Assembly District Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Palos Verdes Estates City Council Rolling Hills City Council Rolling Hills Estates City Council Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities Jacki Bacharach, South Bay Cities Council of Governments B-2 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 8, 2021 california legislature—2021–22 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 377 Introduced by Assembly Member Robert Rivas (Principal coauthor: Senator Hertzberg) (Coauthor: Assembly Member Lee) February 1, 2021 An act to add Chapter Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 13150) to Chapter 3 of Division 7 of the Water Code, relating to water quality. legislative counsel’s digest AB 377, as amended, Robert Rivas. Water quality: impaired waters. (1) Under existing law, the State Water Resources Control Board and the 9 California regional water quality control boards regulate water quality and prescribe waste discharge requirements in accordance with the federal national pollutant discharge elimination system (NPDES) permit program established by the federal Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Existing law requires each regional board to formulate and adopt water quality control plans for all areas within the region, as provided. This bill would require all California surface waters to be fishable, swimmable, and drinkable by January 1, 2050, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit the state board and regional boards from authorizing an NPDES discharge, or a waste discharge requirement, requirement or waiver of a waste discharge requirement for a discharge, to surface water that causes or contributes to an exceedance of a an applicable water quality standard, standard in receiving waters, or from authorizing a best management practice permit term to authorize a discharge to surface water that causes or contributes to an exceedance of a an 98 C-1 applicable water quality standard in receiving waters. The bill would prohibit, on or after January 1, 2030, a regional water quality control plan from including a schedule for implementation for achieving a water quality standard that was adopted as of January 1, 2021, and would prohibit a regional water quality control plan from including a schedule for implementation of a water quality standard that is adopted after January 1, 2021, unless specified conditions are met. The bill would prohibit an NPDES permit, waste discharge requirement, or waiver of a waste discharge requirement from being renewed, reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations or conditions that are less stringent than those in the previous permit, requirement, or waiver. waiver, except as specified. (2) Existing law authorizes the imposition of civil penalties for violations of certain waste discharge requirements and requires that penalties imposed pursuant to these provisions be deposited into the Waste Discharge Permit Fund, to be expended by the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for specified purposes related to water quality. For violations of certain other waste discharge requirements, including the violation of a waste discharge requirement effluent limitation, existing law imposes specified civil penalties, the proceeds of which are deposited into the continuously appropriated State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account, which is established in the State Water Quality Control Fund. This bill would require, by January 1, 2030, the state board and regional boards to develop an Impaired Waterways Enforcement Program to enforce all remaining water quality standard violations that are causing or contributing to an exceedance of a water quality standard. To ensure any water segments impaired by ongoing pollutants are brought into attainment with water quality standards, the bill would require the state board and regional boards, by January 1, 2040, to evaluate the state’s remaining impaired waters using a specified report. The bill would require, by January 1, 2040, the state board and regional boards to report to the Legislature a plan to bring the final impaired water segments into attainment by January 1, 2050. The bill would create the Waterway Attainment Account in the Waste Discharge Permit Fund and would make moneys in the Waterway Attainment Account available for the state board to expend, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to bring remaining impaired water segments into attainment in accordance with the plan. The bill would create in the Waterway Attainment Account the Waterway Attainment Penalty Subaccount, 98 — 2 — AB 377 C-2 composed of penalties obtained pursuant to the Impaired Waterways Enforcement Program, and would make moneys in the subaccount available for the state board to expend, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of the program. The bill would require, by January 1, 2040, and subject to a future legislative act, 50% of the annual proceeds of the State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account to be annually transferred to the Waterway Attainment Account. The bill would require the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to expend 5% of the annual proceeds of the State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account to fund a specified state board program. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: line 1 SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the line 2 following: line 3 (1) Water is a necessity of human life, and every Californian line 4 deserves access to clean and safe water. Yet climate change line 5 jeopardizes the quality and safety of our water. Climate change is line 6 impacting the state’s hydrology to create water resource line 7 vulnerabilities that include, but are not limited to, changes to water line 8 supplies, subsidence, increased amounts of water pollution, erosion, line 9 flooding, and related risks to water and wastewater infrastructure line 10 and operations, degradation of watersheds, alteration of aquatic line 11 ecosystems and loss of habitat, multiple impacts in coastal areas, line 12 and ocean acidification. line 13 (2) Many aspects of climate change and associated impacts will line 14 continue for centuries, even if anthropogenic emissions of line 15 greenhouse gases are reduced or stopped. Given the magnitude of line 16 climate change impacts on California’s hydrology and water line 17 systems, the state’s climate change response should include line 18 attainment of water quality standards to allow the state’s line 19 watersheds to resiliently adapt to forthcoming and inevitable line 20 climate change stressors. line 21 (3) The federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.) line 22 was enacted on October 18, 1972, to establish the basic structure line 23 for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United line 24 States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The 98 AB 377 — 3 — C-3 line 1 objective of the federal Clean Water Act is to restore and maintain line 2 the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s line 3 waters. To achieve that objective, Congress declared a national line 4 goal that the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters be line 5 eliminated by 1985. line 6 (4) California has long been a national and international leader line 7 on environmental stewardship efforts, including the areas of air line 8 quality protections, energy efficiency requirements, renewable line 9 energy standards, and greenhouse gas emission standards for line 10 passenger vehicles. The program established by this act will line 11 continue this tradition of environmental leadership by placing line 12 California at the forefront of achieving the nation’s goal of making line 13 all waterways swimmable, fishable, and drinkable. line 14 (5) The State Water Resources Control Board, along with the line 15 nine California regional water quality control boards, protect and line 16 enhance the quality of California’s water resources through line 17 implementing the federal Clean Water Act, as amended, and line 18 California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Division line 19 7 (commencing with Section 13000) of the Water Code). line 20 (6) The State Water Resources Control Board’s mission is to line 21 “preserve, enhance, and restore the quality of California’s water line 22 resources and drinking water for the protection of the environment, line 23 public health, and all beneficial uses, and to ensure proper water line 24 resource allocation and efficient use, for the benefit of present and line 25 future generations.” line 26 (7) Under Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (33 line 27 U.S.C. Sec. 1313(d)), California is required to review, make line 28 changes as necessary, and submit to the United States line 29 Environmental Protection Agency a list identifying water bodies line 30 not meeting water quality standards (303(d) list). California is line 31 required to include a priority ranking of those waters, taking into line 32 account the severity of the pollution and the uses to be made of line 33 those waters, including waters targeted for the development of line 34 total maximum daily loads (TMDLs). line 35 (8) As of the most recent 2018 303(d) list, nearly 95 percent of line 36 all fresh waters assessed in California, and over 1,400 water bodies, line 37 are listed as impaired, with only 114 TMDLs have having been line 38 approved since 2009 in California. Of 164,741 assessed miles of line 39 rivers and streams, 82 percent were impaired. Of 929,318 assessed line 40 acres of lakes, reservoirs, and ponds, 93 percent were impaired. 98 — 4 — AB 377 C-4 line 1 Of 575,000 assessed acres of bays, harbors, and estuaries, 99 line 2 percent were impaired. Of 2,180 assessed miles of coastal line 3 shoreline, 93 percent were impaired. Of 130,084 assessed acres line 4 of wetlands, 99 percent were impaired. line 5 (b) (1) In honor of the federal Clean Water Act’s 50-year line 6 anniversary, it is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act line 7 to recommit California to achieve the national goal to restore and line 8 maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the line 9 state’s waters by eliminating the discharge of pollutants into line 10 impaired waterways. line 11 (2) It is further the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act line 12 to require that the State Water Resources Control Board and the line 13 California regional water quality control boards meet the national line 14 goal of achieving swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters by line 15 no later than January 1, 2050. line 16 SEC. 2. Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 13150) is added line 17 to Chapter 3 of Division 7 of the Water Code, to read: line 18 line 19 Chapter 3.5. State Waters Impairment line 20 line 21 SEC. 2. Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 13150) is added line 22 to Chapter 3 of Division 7 of the Water Code, to read: line 23 line 24 Article 3.5. State Waters Impairment line 25 line 26 13150. All California surface waters shall be fishable, line 27 swimmable, and drinkable by January 1, 2050. To bring all water line 28 segments into attainment with this requirement, the state board line 29 and regional boards shall comply with the requirements of this line 30 chapter. article. line 31 13151. (a) (1) The state board and regional boards shall not line 32 do either of the following: line 33 (1) line 34 (A) Authorize an NPDES discharge to a surface water of the line 35 United States that causes or contributes to an exceedance of a an line 36 applicable water quality standard. standard in receiving waters. line 37 (2) line 38 (B) Authorize an NPDES permit that uses an alternative line 39 compliance determination, safe harbor “deemed in compliance” line 40 term, or any other best management practice permit term to 98 AB 377 — 5 — C-5 line 1 authorize a discharge to a surface water of the United States that line 2 causes or contributes to an exceedance of a an applicable water line 3 quality standard in receiving waters. line 4 (2) (A) Paragraph (1) does not prohibit enhanced watershed line 5 management programs or watershed management programs from line 6 being used as a planning tool for achieving compliance with line 7 applicable water quality standards in receiving waters. line 8 (B) Paragraph (1) does not prevent NPDES permittees from line 9 using best management practices to meet applicable water quality line 10 standards in receiving waters. line 11 (C) Paragraph (1) does not apply to salt and nutrient line 12 management plans approved as of January 1, 2021, that include line 13 alternative compliance options. line 14 (b) The state board and regional boards shall not do either of line 15 the following: line 16 (1) Authorize a permit that does not include monitoring line 17 sufficient to demonstrate compliance with water quality standards line 18 and, unless infeasible, that does not include end-of-discharge pipe line 19 monitoring. line 20 (2) Authorize a permit unless it establishes criteria for, and line 21 requires, monitoring to evaluate compliance with water quality line 22 standards. line 23 (c) (1) The state board and regional boards shall not do either line 24 of the following: line 25 (1) line 26 (A) Authorize a waste discharge requirement or waiver of a line 27 waste discharge requirement for a discharge to a surface water of line 28 the state that causes or contributes to an exceedance of a an line 29 applicable water quality standard. standard in receiving waters. line 30 (2) line 31 (B) Authorize a waste discharge requirement or waiver of a line 32 waste discharge requirement that uses an alternative compliance line 33 determination, safe harbor “deemed in compliance” term, or any line 34 other best management practice permit term to authorize a line 35 discharge to a surface water of the state that causes or contributes line 36 to an exceedance of a an applicable water quality standard in line 37 receiving waters. line 38 (d) The state board and regional boards shall not issue an line 39 enforcement order pursuant to Chapter 12 (commencing with line 40 Section 1825) of Part 2 of Division 2 or Article 1 (commencing 98 — 6 — AB 377 C-6 line 1 with Section 13300) of Chapter 5 that includes a compliance line 2 schedule deadline that extends beyond January 1, 2030, to a line 3 discharger for a discharge that is causing or contributing to an line 4 exceedance of a water quality standard. line 5 (2) (A) Paragraph (1) does not prevent a waste discharge line 6 requirement or waiver of a waste discharge requirement from line 7 using best management practices to meet applicable water quality line 8 standards in receiving waters. line 9 (B) Paragraph (1) does not apply to salt and nutrient line 10 management plans approved as of January 1, 2021, that include line 11 alternative compliance options. line 12 13152. (a) (1) Notwithstanding Section 13242, on and after line 13 January 1, 2030, a regional water quality control plan, including line 14 the program of implementation, shall not include a schedule for line 15 implementation for achieving a water quality standard that was line 16 adopted in an approved regional water quality control plan as of line 17 January 1, 2021. It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this line 18 requirement to ensure that all water quality standards in effect as line 19 of January 1, 2021, are fully implemented and achieved by January line 20 1, 2030. line 21 (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to salt and nutrient line 22 management plans approved as of January 1, 2021, that include line 23 a time schedule for compliance. line 24 (b) The state board and regional boards shall only include in a line 25 regional water quality control plan a schedule for implementation line 26 of a water quality standard that is adopted after January 1, 2021, line 27 if all of the following conditions are met: line 28 (1) The schedule for implementation of the water quality line 29 standard is the shortest time necessary, and in no instance exceeds line 30 five years. line 31 (2) The schedule for implementation is necessary for the line 32 permittee to undertake physical construction that is necessary to line 33 achieve compliance with the water quality standard. line 34 (3) The water quality standard is not substantially similar to a line 35 water quality standard that was in effect as of January 1, 2021. line 36 (c) (1) An NPDES permit, waste discharge requirement, or line 37 waiver of a waste discharge requirement shall not be renewed, line 38 reissued, or modified to contain effluent limitations or conditions line 39 that are less stringent than the comparable effluent limitations or line 40 conditions in the previous permit, requirement, or waiver. waiver, 98 AB 377 — 7 — C-7 line 1 including, but not limited to, if the implementation of the less line 2 stringent effluent limitation or condition would result in a violation line 3 of an applicable water quality standard in receiving waters. line 4 (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), an NPDES permit, waste line 5 discharge requirement, or waiver of a waste discharge requirement line 6 may be renewed, reissued, or modified to contain a less stringent line 7 effluent limitation or condition applicable to a pollutant if any of line 8 the following apply: line 9 (A) Material and substantial alterations or additions to the line 10 permitted facility occurred after permit issuance that justify the line 11 application of the less stringent effluent limitation or condition. line 12 (B) Information, other than revised regulations, guidance, or line 13 test methods, is available that was not available at the time of line 14 permit issuance that would have justified the application of the line 15 less stringent effluent limitation or condition at the time of permit line 16 issuance. line 17 (C) The permit issuer determines that technical mistakes or line 18 mistaken interpretations of law were made in issuing the permit line 19 in accordance with Section 402(a)(1)(B) of the federal Clean Water line 20 Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1342(a)(1)(B)). line 21 (D) The less stringent effluent limitation or condition is line 22 necessary because of events over which the permittee has no line 23 control and for which there is no reasonably available remedy. line 24 (E) The permittee has received a permit modification pursuant line 25 to Section 301(c), 301(g), 301(h), 301(i), 301(k), 301(n), or 316(a) line 26 of the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Secs. 1311(c), 1311(g), line 27 1311(h), 1311(i), 1311(k), 1311(n), and 1326(a)). line 28 (F) The permittee has installed the treatment facilities required line 29 to meet the effluent limitations or conditions in the previous permit line 30 and has properly operated and maintained the facilities but has line 31 nevertheless been unable to achieve the previous effluent line 32 limitations or conditions, in which case the limitations or line 33 conditions in the renewed, reissued, or modified permit may reflect line 34 the level of pollutant control actually achieved, but shall not be line 35 less stringent than required by effluent limitation guidelines line 36 promulgated under Section 304(b) of the federal Clean Water Act line 37 (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1314(b)) in effect at the time of permit renewal, line 38 reissuance, or modification. line 39 (3) Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) do not apply line 40 to a revised waste load allocation or an alternative grounds for 98 — 8 — AB 377 C-8 line 1 translating water quality standards into effluent limitations or line 2 conditions unless both of the following are satisfied: line 3 (A) The cumulative effect of the revised allocation or alternative line 4 grounds results in a decrease in the amount of pollutants line 5 discharged into receiving waters. line 6 (B) The revised allocation or alternative grounds is not the line 7 result of a discharger eliminating or substantially reducing its line 8 discharge of pollutants due to complying with the requirements of line 9 the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.) or for line 10 reasons otherwise unrelated to water quality. line 11 (d) The state board and regional boards shall not authorize an line 12 NPDES permit, waste discharge requirement, or waiver of a waste line 13 discharge requirement that does not include a complete line 14 antidegradation analysis as set out in State Water Resources line 15 Control Board Resolution No. 68-16 and Administrative Procedures line 16 Update 90-004. line 17 13153. (a) (1) By January 1, 2030, the state board and regional line 18 boards shall develop an Impaired Waterways Enforcement Program line 19 to enforce all remaining water quality standard violations pursuant line 20 to Chapter 12 (commencing with Section 1825) of Part 2 of line 21 Division 2 and Article 1 (commencing with Section 13300) of line 22 Chapter 5 that are causing or contributing to an exceedance of a line 23 water quality standard. line 24 (2) An enforcement action taken pursuant to the program shall line 25 result in sufficient penalties, conditions, and orders to ensure the line 26 person subject to the enforcement action is no longer causing or line 27 contributing to an exceedance of a water quality standard. line 28 (3) A discharger shall remain liable for a violation of a water line 29 quality standard until sampling at the point of discharge line 30 demonstrates that the discharge is no longer causing or contributing line 31 to the exceedance. line 32 (4) Penalties obtained pursuant to the program shall be deposited line 33 into the Waterway Attainment Penalty Subaccount, which is hereby line 34 created in the Waterway Attainment Account. Moneys in the line 35 subaccount shall be available for the state board to expend, upon line 36 appropriation by the Legislature, for purposes of the program. line 37 (5) The state board and regional boards may issue an line 38 enforcement order pursuant to Chapter 12 (commencing with line 39 Section 1825) of Part 2 of Division 2 or Article 1 (commencing line 40 with Section 13300) of Chapter 5 that includes a compliance 98 AB 377 — 9 — C-9 line 1 schedule deadline that extends beyond January 1, 2030, to a line 2 discharger for a discharge that is causing or contributing to an line 3 exceedance of a water quality standard. line 4 (b) (1) By January 1, 2040, to ensure any water segments line 5 impaired by ongoing legacy pollutants and nonpoint source line 6 pollution are brought into attainment with water quality standards, line 7 the state board and regional boards shall evaluate the state’s line 8 remaining impaired waters using the most current integrated report. line 9 (2) The state board and regional boards shall, by January 1, line 10 2040, report to the Legislature in compliance with Section 9795 line 11 of the Government Code a plan to bring the final impaired water line 12 segments into attainment by January 1, 2050. line 13 (3) The requirement for submitting a report imposed under line 14 paragraph (2) is inoperative on January 1, 2044, pursuant to Section line 15 10231.5 of the Government Code. line 16 (c) (1) The Waterway Attainment Account is hereby created line 17 in the Waste Discharge Permit Fund. Moneys in the Waterway line 18 Attainment Account shall be available for the state board to expend, line 19 upon appropriation by the Legislature, to bring remaining impaired line 20 water segments into attainment in accordance with the plan line 21 submitted pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), subject to line 22 subdivision (d). line 23 (2) (A) By January 1, 2040, subject to a future legislative act, line 24 50 percent of the annual proceeds of the State Water Pollution line 25 Cleanup and Abatement Account shall be annually transferred to line 26 the Waterway Attainment Account. line 27 (B) This paragraph shall become inoperative January 1, 2051, line 28 or when all water segments are in attainment with water quality line 29 standards, whichever comes first. line 30 (d) Moneys in the Waterway Attainment Account shall be line 31 expended by the state board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, line 32 to bring impaired waterways into attainment with water quality line 33 standards to the maximum extent possible. Moneys expended from line 34 the account shall address or prevent water quality impairments line 35 or address total maximum daily loads under the federal Clean line 36 Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.). Moneys in the account line 37 shall only be expended on the following: line 38 (1) Restoration projects, including supplemental environmental line 39 projects, that improve water quality. 98 — 10 — AB 377 C-10 line 1 (2) Best management practice research innovation and incentives line 2 to encourage innovative best management practice implementation. line 3 (3) Source control programs. line 4 (4) Identifying nonfilers. line 5 (5) Source identification of unknown sources of impairment. line 6 (6) Enforcement actions that recover at least the amount of line 7 funding originally expended, which shall be deposited into the line 8 Waterway Attainment Account. line 9 (7) Competitive grants to fund projects and programs for line 10 municipal separate storm sewer system permit compliance line 11 requirements that would prevent or remediate pollutants, including line 12 zinc, caused by tires in the state. Priority shall be given to line 13 applicants that discharge to receiving waters with zinc levels that line 14 exceed the established total maximum daily loads and to projects line 15 that provide multiple benefits. line 16 (e) The state board shall, upon appropriation by the Legislature, line 17 expend 5 percent of the annual proceeds of the State Water line 18 Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account to fund the state board’s line 19 SWAMP - Clean Water Team Citizen Monitoring Program in line 20 order to inform the integrated report. line 21 13154. This chapter does not affect the process by which line 22 voluntary agreements are entered into to assist in the line 23 implementation of new water quality standards lawfully adopted line 24 by the state board. line 25 13155. line 26 13154. For purposes of this chapter, article, the following line 27 definitions apply: line 28 (a) “Best management practice” means a practice or set of line 29 practices determined by the state board or a regional board for a line 30 designated area to be the most effective feasible means of line 31 preventing or reducing the generation of a specific type of nonpoint line 32 source pollution, given technological, institutional, environmental, line 33 and economic constraints. line 34 (b) “Drinkable” applies to waters subject to a regional water line 35 quality control plan and means that the waters are drinkable to the line 36 extent required by the regional water quality control plan. line 37 (c) “Integrated report” means the state report that includes the line 38 list of impaired waters required pursuant to Section 303(d) of the line 39 federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1313(d)) and the water 98 AB 377 — 11 — C-11 line 1 quality assessment required pursuant to Section 305(b) of the line 2 federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1315(b)). line 3 (d) “NPDES” means the national pollutant discharge elimination line 4 system established in the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.A. line 5 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.). line 6 (e) “Regional board” means a California regional water quality line 7 control board. line 8 (f) “Regional water quality control plan” means a water quality line 9 control plan developed pursuant to Section 13240. line 10 (g) “State board” means the State Water Resources Control line 11 Board. line 12 (h) “State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account” line 13 means the State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account line 14 created pursuant to Section 13440. line 15 (i) “Supplemental environmental project” means an line 16 environmentally beneficial project that a person subject to an line 17 enforcement action voluntarily agrees to undertake in settlement line 18 of the action and to offset a portion of a civil penalty. line 19 (j) “Waste Discharge Permit Fund” means the Waste Discharge line 20 Permit Fund created pursuant to Section 13260. line 21 (k) “Waterway Attainment Account” means the Waterway line 22 Attainment Account created pursuant to paragraph (1) of line 23 subdivision (c) of Section 13153. line 24 (l) “Waterway Attainment Penalty Subaccount” means the line 25 Waterway Attainment Penalty Subaccount created pursuant to line 26 paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 13153. O 98 — 12 — AB 377 C-12