Dams: sedimentation studies.
Summary
Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to make or cause to be made investigations and gather or cause to be gathered data as needed for a proper review and study of the various features of the design and construction of dams, reservoirs, and appurtenances. This bill would require the department, in collaboration with specified entities, to make or cause to be made investigations and to gather or cause to be gathered data for a proper review and study of the loss of storage capacity behind dams resulting from sedimentation and would authorize the department to limit the study to certain reservoirs. The bill would require results of the study to be reflected in the quinquennial update of The California Water Plan and be provided to the appropriate policy committees of the Senate and the Assembly. The bill would require the department to identify high-priority reservoirs for additional evaluation, for which the department would be required to evaluate and characterize the sediment for mercury and sediment size and to identify and evaluate cost-effective strategies for sediment removal, relative to the costs of alternative methods of flood protection and water supply. Existing law requires the Department of Water Resources to update The California Water Plan, which is a plan for the conservation, development, and use of the water resources of the state, every 5 years. Existing law requires the department, as part of the update, to conduct a study to determine the amount of water needed to meet the state's future needs. The department is required, one year prior to issuing each update to the California Water Plan, to release a draft of assumptions and estimates upon which the study will be based. Existing law prescribes a list of subjects for which the department is required to release those assumptions and estimates. This bill would add estimated loss of storage capacity behind dams resulting from sedimentation to that list.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2014
Committee Review
Aug 2014
Senate Passage
May 2014
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 21, 2014
Last action Nov 30, 2014
Floor votes · Senate May 29, 2014
How they voted
35–1
Passed · 4 other
Total votes 40
May 29, 2014
D
Democratic28
89% Yea
R
Republican12
83% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
24
Key actions
6
Committee
9
Aug 6, 2014
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Jun 17, 2014
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 14. Noes 0.) (June 17). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 5, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on W.,P. & W.
lower
May 29, 2014
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (35-1-4)
senate
May 27, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3713.) (May 23).
upper
May 5, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 29, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 3296.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 10, 2014
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on N.R. & W.
upper
Apr 3, 2014
Upper · Passed
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Mar 6, 2014
Committee
Referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Feb 21, 2014
Introduced
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 2 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Fran Pavley
DDemocratic
Co
Anthony Cannella
RRepublican
Co
Lois Wolk
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1259
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1259. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline