Jurris.COM
Article 2. Projects In The Sacramento-san Joaquin Watersheds of California Water Code >> Division 6. >> Part 6. >> Chapter 2. >> Article 2.
The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) In 1911, the Legislature adopted a flood control plan for the Sacramento Valley, as proposed by the federal California Debris Commission, and created the Reclamation Board to regulate levees and other encroachments, and to review and approve flood control plans for the Sacramento River and its tributaries. The state's adoption of a valleywide flood management plan was intended to create a unified plan of flood control and to reclaim lands from overflow. Six years later, California gained congressional authorization for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to collaborate with the state in building and maintaining the Sacramento River Flood Control Project. The federal government transferred completed portions of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project to the state as portions were completed, and the state, in turn, passed responsibility for operation and maintenance to local districts organized to provide flood control within their boundaries.
(b) The state and federal governments have built or rebuilt levees, weirs, and bypasses to increase conveyance of flood waters downstream. The Sacramento River Flood Control Project and the federal-state flood control project in the San Joaquin Valley include approximately 1,600 miles of levees and other facilities to reduce central valley flood risk, now defined as the State Plan of Flood Control in subdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the Public Resources Code. The Corps often constructed federal "project levees" in both the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds by modifying existing levees. The federal government transferred completed portions of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project to the state, as portions were completed, which in turn passed responsibility for operation and maintenance to local reclamation districts.
(c) In 2003, a state Court of Appeal in Paterno v. State of California (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 998 (Paterno), held the state liable, in a claim for inverse condemnation, for failure of a levee that was operated and maintained by a local levee maintenance district. In settlement of that litigation, the state's liability was substantial because homes and a shopping center were built behind the levee and suffered from the resulting flood.
(d) The Legislature has authorized funding for numerous flood control projects throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds. These statutory authorizations included varying provisions regarding responsibility and liability for operation and maintenance of the flood control facilities, and may or may not have incorporated the specified facilities into the federal-state Sacramento River or San Joaquin River flood control projects. After the court ruling in Paterno, the status of each flood facility became critically important to determining liability, and legal ambiguities led to questions about whether particular facilities were incorporated into a federal-state flood control project. In some cases, despite a location between two project levees, certain levees remain outside the jurisdiction of a federal-state flood control project, with local agencies retaining liability.
(e) In 2006, California voters approved the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, which authorized the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $4.9 billion for flood protection and defined the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River federal-state flood control projects as the "State Plan of Flood Control." The following year, the Legislature passed a package of bills to reform state flood protection policy in the central valley. These laws required the Department of Water Resources to develop, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board to adopt, a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, which is broader than the State Plan of Flood Control, affecting the entire watersheds of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley. These laws included provisions intended to limit state liability to facilities identified in the State Plan of Flood Control. These laws did not specifically address the facilities described in this article.
(a) In 1911, the Legislature adopted a flood control plan for the Sacramento Valley, as proposed by the federal California Debris Commission, and created the Reclamation Board to regulate levees and other encroachments, and to review and approve flood control plans for the Sacramento River and its tributaries. The state's adoption of a valleywide flood management plan was intended to create a unified plan of flood control and to reclaim lands from overflow. Six years later, California gained congressional authorization for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to collaborate with the state in building and maintaining the Sacramento River Flood Control Project. The federal government transferred completed portions of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project to the state as portions were completed, and the state, in turn, passed responsibility for operation and maintenance to local districts organized to provide flood control within their boundaries.
(b) The state and federal governments have built or rebuilt levees, weirs, and bypasses to increase conveyance of flood waters downstream. The Sacramento River Flood Control Project and the federal-state flood control project in the San Joaquin Valley include approximately 1,600 miles of levees and other facilities to reduce central valley flood risk, now defined as the State Plan of Flood Control in subdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the Public Resources Code. The Corps often constructed federal "project levees" in both the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds by modifying existing levees. The federal government transferred completed portions of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project to the state, as portions were completed, which in turn passed responsibility for operation and maintenance to local reclamation districts.
(c) In 2003, a state Court of Appeal in Paterno v. State of California (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 998 (Paterno), held the state liable, in a claim for inverse condemnation, for failure of a levee that was operated and maintained by a local levee maintenance district. In settlement of that litigation, the state's liability was substantial because homes and a shopping center were built behind the levee and suffered from the resulting flood.
(d) The Legislature has authorized funding for numerous flood control projects throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds. These statutory authorizations included varying provisions regarding responsibility and liability for operation and maintenance of the flood control facilities, and may or may not have incorporated the specified facilities into the federal-state Sacramento River or San Joaquin River flood control projects. After the court ruling in Paterno, the status of each flood facility became critically important to determining liability, and legal ambiguities led to questions about whether particular facilities were incorporated into a federal-state flood control project. In some cases, despite a location between two project levees, certain levees remain outside the jurisdiction of a federal-state flood control project, with local agencies retaining liability.
(e) In 2006, California voters approved the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, which authorized the issuance of general obligation bonds in the amount of $4.9 billion for flood protection and defined the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River federal-state flood control projects as the "State Plan of Flood Control." The following year, the Legislature passed a package of bills to reform state flood protection policy in the central valley. These laws required the Department of Water Resources to develop, and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board to adopt, a Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, which is broader than the State Plan of Flood Control, affecting the entire watersheds of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley. These laws included provisions intended to limit state liability to facilities identified in the State Plan of Flood Control. These laws did not specifically address the facilities described in this article.
Unless the context requires otherwise, the definitions set
forth in this section govern the construction of this chapter.
(a) "Board" means the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
(b) "Plan" means the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan.
(c) "Project levee" means any levee that is part of the facilities of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(d) "Public safety infrastructure" means public safety infrastructure necessary to respond to a flood emergency, including, but not limited to, street and highway evacuation routes, medical care facilities, and public utilities necessary for public health and safety, including drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.
(e) "Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley" means any lands in the bed or along or near the banks of the Sacramento River or San Joaquin River, or any of their tributaries or connected therewith, or upon any land adjacent thereto, or within any of the overflow basins thereof, or upon any land susceptible to overflow therefrom. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley does not include lands lying within the Tulare Lake basin, including the Kings River.
(f) "State Plan of Flood Control" has the meaning set forth in subdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the Public Resources Code.
(a) "Board" means the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
(b) "Plan" means the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan.
(c) "Project levee" means any levee that is part of the facilities of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(d) "Public safety infrastructure" means public safety infrastructure necessary to respond to a flood emergency, including, but not limited to, street and highway evacuation routes, medical care facilities, and public utilities necessary for public health and safety, including drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities.
(e) "Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley" means any lands in the bed or along or near the banks of the Sacramento River or San Joaquin River, or any of their tributaries or connected therewith, or upon any land adjacent thereto, or within any of the overflow basins thereof, or upon any land susceptible to overflow therefrom. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley does not include lands lying within the Tulare Lake basin, including the Kings River.
(f) "State Plan of Flood Control" has the meaning set forth in subdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the Public Resources Code.
(a) The state shall not have responsibility or liability for
the construction, operation, and maintenance of central valley flood
control facilities identified in this article unless all of the
following apply:
(1) The department identifies the facility as part of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(2) The state has expressly accepted the transfer of liability for the facility from the federal government.
(3) The board incorporates the facility into the State Plan of Flood Control pursuant to Section 9611.
(b) Unless otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this article shall be construed to expand the responsibility of the state for the operation or maintenance of any flood management facility outside the scope of the State Plan of Flood Control, except as specifically determined by the board pursuant to Section 9611.
(c) Use of the phrase "adopted and authorized" in this article does not, by itself, reflect incorporation of the specified facility into the State Plan of Flood Control or assumption of liability by the state, unless one of the conditions described in subdivision (a) applies to the facility.
(d) Nothing in this section abrogates or modifies any duty, responsibility, or liability of any federal, state, or local agency, including, but not limited to, those duties, responsibilities, and liabilities set forth in Sections 8370, 12642, and 12828.
(1) The department identifies the facility as part of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(2) The state has expressly accepted the transfer of liability for the facility from the federal government.
(3) The board incorporates the facility into the State Plan of Flood Control pursuant to Section 9611.
(b) Unless otherwise specifically provided, nothing in this article shall be construed to expand the responsibility of the state for the operation or maintenance of any flood management facility outside the scope of the State Plan of Flood Control, except as specifically determined by the board pursuant to Section 9611.
(c) Use of the phrase "adopted and authorized" in this article does not, by itself, reflect incorporation of the specified facility into the State Plan of Flood Control or assumption of liability by the state, unless one of the conditions described in subdivision (a) applies to the facility.
(d) Nothing in this section abrogates or modifies any duty, responsibility, or liability of any federal, state, or local agency, including, but not limited to, those duties, responsibilities, and liabilities set forth in Sections 8370, 12642, and 12828.
The projects for the control of floods and other purposes on
the Sacramento River adopted by the acts of Congress approved March
1, 1917, May 15, 1928, August 26, 1937, and August 18, 1941, and
adopted and authorized by the Legislature by Chapter 25, Statutes of
1911, First Extra Session, Chapter 170, Statutes of 1913, Chapter
686, Statutes of 1915, and Chapter 176, Statutes of 1925, are adopted
and authorized as modified substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered
649, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, except as provided in
Section 12649, at an estimated additional cost to the State of three
million three hundred twenty-six thousand dollars ($3,326,000), or
such other project as shall finally be decided upon which will
accomplish the same flood control purposes as proposed by the Table
Mountain Dam or any other dam across the Sacramento River in the same
general vicinity, subject to modification that may hereafter be made
by Congress.
The plan of flood control on the American River is hereby
authorized and adopted substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers, House Document Numbered
367, Eighty-first Congress, and adopted and authorized by the act of
Congress approved August 17, 1954, at an estimated state cost of five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). Said project shall be
considered as extending and supplementing the projects authorized
pursuant to Section 12648. Section 12828 shall not be applicable to
the project.
The project for flood protection on the Sacramento River
from Chico Landing to Red Bluff, California, is adopted and
authorized substantially in accordance with the recommendations of
the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered 272, Eighty-fourth
Congress, Second Session, and adopted and authorized by the act of
Congress approved July 3, 1958, at an estimated state cost of
thirty-one thousand dollars ($31,000).
The project for Hidden Reservoir and channel improvement
on the Fresno River is adopted and authorized substantially in
accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in
Senate Document Numbered 37, 87th Congress, and adopted and
authorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962, (Public
Law 87-874) at an estimated state cost of two hundred twenty thousand
dollars ($220,000).
The project for Buchanan Reservoir and channel improvement
on Chowchilla River is adopted and authorized substantially in
accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in
Senate Document Numbered 98, 87th Congress, and adopted and
authorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962, (Public
Law 87-874) at an estimated state cost of one hundred fifty thousand
dollars ($150,000).
The project for New Melones Reservoir and channel
improvement on Stanislaus River is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers in House Document Numbered 453, 87th Congress, and adopted
and authorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962,
(Public Law 87-874) at an estimated state cost of one hundred eighty
thousand dollars ($180,000).
The Mormon Slough channel improvement project on Calaveras
River is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the
recommendation of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered
576, 87th Congress, and adopted and authorized by the act of Congress
approved October 23, 1962 (Public Law 87-874) at an estimated state
cost of two million two hundred sixty thousand dollars ($2,260,000).
The project for flood protection on the North Fork of the
Feather River near Chester, Plumas County, is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers in House Document No. 314, 90th Congress, and adopted and
authorized by the Act of Congress approved August 13, 1968 (Public
Law 90-483) at an estimated cost to the state of such sums as may be
appropriated for state participation by the Legislature upon the
recommendation and advice of the Reclamation Board. This
authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on this
project over the needs of other statewide programs in appropriations
of available funds.
It is the intention of the Legislature that, if a feasible
plan can be found which will provide adequate flood control in the
upper Sacramento Valley without the necessity of constructing a dam
across the Sacramento River at the Table Mountain site, or any other
site in the same general vicinity and thereby prevent the necessity
of flooding valuable agricultural land and at the same time prevent
damage to the fishing resources of the Sacramento River, such
alternate plan should be adopted.
The project for flood protection on the Sacramento River
is further adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with
the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Senate Document
Numbered 103, 86th Congress, and as modified by the act of Congress,
Public Law 86-645, 86th Congress, approved July 14, 1960, for
cooperation by the Reclamation Board as provided in Section 8617.1 at
an estimated cost to the state of such sums as may be appropriated
for state participation by the Legislature upon recommendation and
advice of the Reclamation Board. This authorization shall not be
deemed to confer preference on this project over the needs of other
statewide programs in appropriations of available funds.
The plan of improvement for flood protection on various
streams in the Merced County Stream Group in the San Joaquin Valley
is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered
473, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, at an estimated cost to
the State of sixty-one thousand three hundred dollars ($61,300).
Notwithstanding any estimated cost to the State contained in this
section, local cooperation which shall be furnished by the State in
connection with the plan of improvement for flood protection on
various streams in the Merced County Stream Group in the San Joaquin
Valley, adopted and authorized under this section shall include,
without limitation as to the generality thereof:
(a) Enlargement of the channel of Miles Creek to the extent indicated on Inclosure 3 of House Document Numbered 473, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session.
(b) Acquisition of lands, easements and rights of way necessary for construction of the following diversions to the capacities indicated:
(1) Owens Creek Diversion, 400 cubic feet per second.
(2) Black Rascal Diversion, 3,000 cubic feet per second.
(c) Providing the following channel capacities of the various creeks:
(1) Burns Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second on Burns Creek from its confluence with Bear Creek upstream to the section line common to Sections 3 and 10, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.
(2) Bear Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with Burns Creek upstream to the section line common to Sections 11 and 12, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.; 4,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with Black Rascal Creek Diversion upstream to its confluence with Burns Creek; 7,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough to the Black Rascal Creek Diversion; not less than 3,100 cubic feet per second from its confluence with the lower end of Black Rascal Slough to the confluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough, so that the combined capacity of Bear Creek and Black Rascal Slough is not less than 7,000 cubic feet per second; 7,000 cubic feet per second from the section line common to Sections 2 and 3, T. 8 S., R. 12 E., M. D. B. & M., upstream to the confluence of Bear Creek with the lower end of Black Rascal Slough.
(3) Black Rascal Slough: Not less than 3,900 cubic feet per second and so that the combined capacity of Black Rascal Slough and Bear Creek is not less than 7,000 cubic feet per second.
(4) Miles Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from the Merced-El Nido Highway upstream to the section line common to Sections 25 and 26, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.
(5) Owens Creek: 400 cubic feet per second from Owens Creek Diversion to the bridge crossing at the section line common to Sections 29 and 30, T. 7 S., R. 16 E., M. D. B. & M.
(6) Mariposa Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from Owens Creek Diversion upstream to the bridge located in SW. 1/4 of Section 10, T. 8 S., R. 16 E., M. D. B. & M.; 1,250 cubic feet per second from El Nido Highway upstream to Owens Creek Diversion.
(a) Enlargement of the channel of Miles Creek to the extent indicated on Inclosure 3 of House Document Numbered 473, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session.
(b) Acquisition of lands, easements and rights of way necessary for construction of the following diversions to the capacities indicated:
(1) Owens Creek Diversion, 400 cubic feet per second.
(2) Black Rascal Diversion, 3,000 cubic feet per second.
(c) Providing the following channel capacities of the various creeks:
(1) Burns Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second on Burns Creek from its confluence with Bear Creek upstream to the section line common to Sections 3 and 10, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.
(2) Bear Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with Burns Creek upstream to the section line common to Sections 11 and 12, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.; 4,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with Black Rascal Creek Diversion upstream to its confluence with Burns Creek; 7,000 cubic feet per second from its confluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough to the Black Rascal Creek Diversion; not less than 3,100 cubic feet per second from its confluence with the lower end of Black Rascal Slough to the confluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough, so that the combined capacity of Bear Creek and Black Rascal Slough is not less than 7,000 cubic feet per second; 7,000 cubic feet per second from the section line common to Sections 2 and 3, T. 8 S., R. 12 E., M. D. B. & M., upstream to the confluence of Bear Creek with the lower end of Black Rascal Slough.
(3) Black Rascal Slough: Not less than 3,900 cubic feet per second and so that the combined capacity of Black Rascal Slough and Bear Creek is not less than 7,000 cubic feet per second.
(4) Miles Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from the Merced-El Nido Highway upstream to the section line common to Sections 25 and 26, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.
(5) Owens Creek: 400 cubic feet per second from Owens Creek Diversion to the bridge crossing at the section line common to Sections 29 and 30, T. 7 S., R. 16 E., M. D. B. & M.
(6) Mariposa Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from Owens Creek Diversion upstream to the bridge located in SW. 1/4 of Section 10, T. 8 S., R. 16 E., M. D. B. & M.; 1,250 cubic feet per second from El Nido Highway upstream to Owens Creek Diversion.
The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposes
on the Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries, including Tuolumne
and Stanislaus Rivers, is adopted and authorized in accordance with
the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Flood Control
Committee Document Numbered 2, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second
Session, at an estimated cost to the State of eight hundred
ninety-four thousand dollars ($894,000).
The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposes
on the Calaveras River and Littlejohn Creek and tributaries is
adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered
545, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, at an estimated cost to
the State of two hundred four thousand dollars ($204,000).
The plan of improvement on the Calaveras River and
Littlejohn Creek includes the enlargement of channels of Littlejohn
Creek below the Farmington Dam as subsequently approved by letter of
the Chief of Engineers dated November 12, 1951, at an additional
estimated cost to the State of such sum as may be available for state
cooperation for that purpose in the Flood Control Emergency Fund,
pursuant to written authorization of the Department of Finance for
Flood Control projects, payable from the Flood Control Fund of 1946,
upon approval of the general plan for such channel enlargements by,
and the recommendation of, the department, or as may be otherwise
appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature, payable from
the Flood Control Fund of 1946, upon approval of the general plan for
such channel enlargements by, and with the recommendation of, the
department.
The project for the Fresno County Stream Group for flood
control is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with
the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document
Numbered 845, Seventy-sixth Congress, Third Session, at an estimated
cost to the State of one hundred seventy-nine thousand five hundred
dollars ($179,500).
The City and County of San Francisco, the Modesto Irrigation
District, and the Turlock Irrigation District shall give assurances
satisfactory to the Secretary of War that the local cooperation
required by Section 3 of the act of Congress approved December 22,
1944 (Public, Numbered 534, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session),
will be furnished by the City and County of San Francisco, the
Modesto Irrigation District, and the Turlock Irrigation District in
connection with the flood control projects within the watershed of
the Tuolumne River, adopted and authorized in Section 12651, except
insofar as the projects include channel improvement works and levees.
The City and County of San Francisco, the Modesto Irrigation
District, and the Turlock Irrigation District, in conjunction with
the War Department, shall execute the plans and projects within the
watershed of the Tuolumne River, referred to in Section 12651, except
insofar as the plans and projects relate to channel improvement
works and levees, and may make such modifications to the plans as may
be necessary to execute them for the purposes of Chapters 1 and 2 of
this part.
The project for flood protection on Middle Creek,
California, is hereby authorized and adopted substantially in
accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers in House
Document numbered 367, Eighty-first Congress, and adopted and
authorized by the act of Congress approved August 17, 1954, at an
estimated state cost of seven hundred ninety thousand dollars
($790,000).
The Reclamation Board is authorized to provide any
assurances to the Secretary of the Army which may be required in
connection with the accomplishment of emergency repair work under
Public Law 99, 84th Congress, 1st Session, approved June 28, 1955, or
any acts amending or adding to the same, now or hereafter adopted,
for projects which the Reclamation Board is authorized to provide
assurances under Section 12657. The Reclamation Board is also
authorized to utilize any available appropriation it may have for the
purpose of acquiring any lands, easements and rights of way
necessary to the execution of any such repair work for which
assurances have been required by the Secretary of the Army.
The Reclamation Board is authorized to provide any
assurances to the Secretary of the Army which may be required in
connection with the accomplishment of flood control or clearing work
on the channel of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their
tributaries, pursuant to Section 208 of Public Law 780, 83rd
Congress, 2nd Session, approved September 3, 1954, or any acts
amending or adding to the same now or hereafter adopted, or with the
accomplishment of any federal emergency flood control work on
state-owned property. This authorization is subject to the provisions
of Section 12828.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in Chapter 1 (commencing
with Section 12570) and this chapter, the Reclamation Board shall
give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the
local cooperation, required by Section 3 of the act of Congress
approved December 22, 1944 (P.L. 534, 78th Congress, Second Session),
Section 2 of the act of Congress approved August 18, 1941 (P.L. 228,
78th Congress, First Session), and Section 103 of the act of
Congress approved November 17, 1986 (P.L. 99-662, 99th Congress,
Second Session) will be furnished by the state in connection with the
flood control projects authorized and adopted in Sections 12648,
12648.1, 12648.2, 12648.3, 12648.4, 12648.5, 12648.6, 12648.7,
12649.1, 12650, 12651, 12652, 12654, 12656.5, 12661.2, 12661.5,
12666, 12667, 12670.2, 12670.7, 12670.10, 12670.14, and 12670.20 and
on any flood control projects on any stream flowing into or in the
Sacramento Valley or the San Joaquin Valley heretofore or hereafter
approved and authorized by Congress.
(b) Assurances provided pursuant to subdivision (a) shall not be made until the local agency, by binding agreement with the Reclamation Board, has agreed to assume all obligations under Sections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive.
(b) Assurances provided pursuant to subdivision (a) shall not be made until the local agency, by binding agreement with the Reclamation Board, has agreed to assume all obligations under Sections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive.
Except as otherwise provided in Chapters 1 and 2 of this
part, the Reclamation Board, in conjunction with the War Department,
shall execute the plans and projects referred to in Section 12657 and
exercise all powers granted to it in Part 4, Division 5, of this
code. The Reclamation Board may make such modifications and
amendments to the plans as may be necessary to execute them for the
purposes stated in Chapters 1 and 2 of this part.
The project for the Folsom Reservoir on the American River
is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the plans
contained in House Document Numbered 649, Seventy-eighth Congress,
Second Session, with such modifications as in the discretion of the
Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers may be advisable, and
without cost to the State.
The project for the Isabella Reservoir on the Kern River for
flood control and other purposes in the San Joaquin Valley is
adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in his report dated January
26, 1944, contained in House Document Numbered 513, Seventy-eighth
Congress, Second Session, without cost to the State.
The plan for the Terminus and Success Reservoirs on the
Kaweah and Tule Rivers for flood control and other purposes in the
San Joaquin Valley is adopted and authorized in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Flood Control Committee
Document Numbered 1, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session.
(a) The project for flood control on the Tule River,
Success Reservoir Enlargement Project, is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, in the report
"Tule River Basin Investigation, California, Feasibility Report,"
dated April 1999, at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that
may be appropriated by the Legislature for state cooperation, upon
the recommendation and advice of the Reclamation Board.
(b) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River Improvement Joint Powers Agreement may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the nonfederal cooperation required by federal law will be furnished in connection with the project for flood control adopted and authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River Improvement Joint Powers Agreement, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, carry out the design and construction of the Success Reservoir Enlargement Project and may make modifications and amendments as necessary to carry out the project for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(b) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River Improvement Joint Powers Agreement may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the nonfederal cooperation required by federal law will be furnished in connection with the project for flood control adopted and authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River Improvement Joint Powers Agreement, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, carry out the design and construction of the Success Reservoir Enlargement Project and may make modifications and amendments as necessary to carry out the project for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(a) The project for flood control on the Kaweah River,
Terminus Dam, is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers, in the report
"Kaweah River Basin Investigation Feasibility Study, California,"
dated December 23, 1996, and as adopted and authorized by the Water
Resources Development Act of 1996 as approved by Congress on October
12, 1996 (Public Law 104-303), at an estimated cost to the state of
the sum that may be appropriated by the Legislature for state
participation, upon the recommendation and advice of the Reclamation
Board. The Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent of the nonfederal
capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement
features of the project.
(b) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by federal law, including the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, will be furnished in connection with the project.
(c) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments of the plans as necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(d) Authorization of the project shall be contingent upon the recommendation, advice, and approval of the Reclamation Board and upon the expenditure of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) by the department for local assistance for the project.
(b) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by federal law, including the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, will be furnished in connection with the project.
(c) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments of the plans as necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(d) Authorization of the project shall be contingent upon the recommendation, advice, and approval of the Reclamation Board and upon the expenditure of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) by the department for local assistance for the project.
The project for flood control and other purposes for the
Kings River and Tulare Lake Basin is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers in House Document Number 630, Seventy-sixth Congress, Third
Session, as adopted and authorized by the act of Congress approved
December 22, 1944 (Public Law 78-534, the "Flood Control Act of 1944"
), as modified by data in the Design Memorandum No. 3, Kings River
and Tulare Lake, California, Kings River Channel Improvement, General
Design, dated April 20, 1959, and by Letter Supplement No. 1 to such
Design Memorandum No. 3, by the District Engineer, Sacramento
District, Corps of Engineers, at no cost to the state prior to July
1, 1967, and thereafter at an estimated cost to the state of such
sums as may be appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature
upon the recommendation and advice of the department. This
authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on this
project over the needs of other statewide programs in appropriations
of available funds.
It is the intent of the Legislature that the state shall share
only in costs for work done in accordance with Letter Supplement No.
1 to such Design Memorandum No. 3.
The Kings River Conservation District shall give
assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local
cooperation, required by the act of Congress approved December 22,
1944 (Public Law 78-534, the "Flood Control Act of 1944"), as
modified by Design Memorandum No. 3, Kings River and Tulare Lake,
California, Kings River Channel Improvement, General Design, dated
April 20, 1959, and by Letter Supplement No. 1 to such Design
Memorandum No. 3, will be furnished by the district in connection
with the plan of improvement for flood control adopted and authorized
in Section 12662.
The Kings River Conservation District, in conjunction with
the Department of the Army, shall execute the plan of improvement
for flood control referred to in Section 12662 and exercise all
powers granted to it in the Kings River Conservation District Act
(Chapter 931, Statutes of 1951), and the district may make such
modifications or amendments to the plans as may be necessary to
execute them for the purposes of Chapters 1 (commencing with Section
12570) and 2 (commencing with Section 12639) of this part. The
department shall have authority and is hereby authorized to enter
into an agreement with the local agency pursuant to Section 12585.4.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 12585.2 and 12585.3 the
local agency may receive credit against its share of the costs of
lands, easements, and rights-of-way required for the project which
were acquired by the local agency after July 1, 1967.
The plan of improvement for flood control and water
conservation on Cache Creek, including Clear Lake, in Yolo and Lake
Counties, is hereby adopted and authorized generally in accordance
with the recommendations relating thereto contained in the interim
report of the Department of Water Resources entitled "Comparison of
Alternative Wilson Valley and Guinda Projects on Cache Creek," dated
April, 1958, at an estimated cost to the State of such sum as may be
appropriated for state co-operation by the Legislature upon the
recommendation and advice of the department.
The project for the Beach-Stone Lake Unit of the Morrison
Creek Stream Group Flood Control Project is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the plans developed by the County of
Sacramento at such estimated cost to the state as may be
appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon the
recommendation and advice of the department. This authorization shall
not be deemed to confer preference on this project over the needs of
other statewide programs in appropriation of available funds.
With respect to the project authorized in Section 12664, the
County of Sacramento shall acquire the lands, easements, and
rights-of-way, even though the project report has not been submitted
by the Secretary of the Army or other authorized official to the
Congress for project authorization, and may make application to the
department for reimbursement pursuant to Section 12829 upon inclusion
of the Beach-Stone Lake Unit of the Morrison Creek Stream Group
Flood Control Project as part of a flood control project authorized
by Congress. Prior to the acquisition of any lands, easements, or
rights-of-way for the project, the County of Sacramento shall execute
an agreement with the department under which it agrees to hold the
state harmless from damages due to the construction, operation, or
maintenance of the project.
The project for flood protection on the streams in the
vicinity of Fairfield, California, is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers in House Document No. 91-159, 91st Congress, First Session,
and adopted and authorized by the act of Congress approved December
31, 1970 (Public Law 91-611) at an estimated cost to the state of
such sums as may be appropriated for state participation by the
Legislature upon the recommendation and advice of the Reclamation
Board. This authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on
this project over the needs of other statewide programs in
appropriations of available funds. No state funds shall be
appropriated until federal advanced engineering and design funds are
available.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12585.4, the Reclamation
Board shall have the authority and is hereby authorized to enter
into a loan agreement with the local agency pursuant to Section
12585.4. The state is authorized to pay 50 percent of the nonfederal
capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement
features of the project pursuant to Section 12847.
The project for flood control known as the Merced County
Streams Project is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in his report
dated November 25, 1970, and adopted and authorized by the Act of
Congress approved December 31, 1970 (Public Law 91-611) at an
estimated cost to the state of such sums as may be appropriated for
state participation by the Legislature upon the recommendation and
advice of the Reclamation Board. This authorization shall not be
deemed to confer preference on this project over the needs of other
statewide programs in appropriations of available funds. No state
funds shall be appropriated until federal construction funds are
available, and no state funds shall be appropriated for any portion
or unit of the project until the responsible local agency has
provided assurances of financial capability to complete the
recreational acquisition and development program for that portion or
unit, as detailed in the project report.
The Legislature affirms the topographical and hydrologic
characteristics of the Merced County Stream Group for which provision
for participation in reservoirs has been made in Section 12826 and
determines that the Merced County Streams Project is a project of the
Merced County Stream Group, as defined and excepted in Section
12826. The Reclamation Board may loan the local agency the funds
necessary to pay the local portion of the costs of the lands,
easements, and rights-of-way. The rate of interest on the loan shall
be the current rate for the Pooled Money Investment Account. All
other provisions of Section 12585.4 shall be applicable to a loan to
the local agency under this section.
Any money previously appropriated to the department for the Merced
Stream Channel Improvement shall be available for the purposes of
this section, including that reappropriated from the Special Account
for Capital Outlay in Item 3860-490-036(2) of the Budget Act of 1986
(Chapter 186 of the Statutes of 1986).
(a) The project for flood control on the San Joaquin River
is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with P.L.
98-63, at a federal cost of approximately eight million dollars
($8,000,000), for the accomplishment of selective clearing and
snagging work in the San Joaquin Channel, from Friant Dam to the
Stockton Deep Water Channel, and in that area of the North Fork of
the Kings River and Mendota Pool from the southerly boundary of the
James Reclamation District No. 1606 to Mendota Dam. Because of the
unique situation presented by this project, the department shall
maintain and operate, on behalf of the state, the work performed by
the Corps of Engineers on this project, and the cost of that
maintenance and operation shall be borne by the state.
(b) Any assurance agreement entered into between the Secretary of the Army and the Reclamation Board for this project shall provide for mitigation of the impact of the project with the objective of providing a net long-term enhancement of the riparian habitat and fishery in the project area.
(c) It is the intent of the Legislature, in reviewing future projects, to improve the capacity of the San Joaquin River to provide for mitigation of the impact of the project and net long-term enhancement of the riparian habitats and fisheries in the project area.
(d) The Legislature finds and declares that the local responsibility of maintenance of this and future federal projects in and along the San Joaquin River may be better, more efficiently, and more fairly fulfilled by geographically larger, or regional, local public entities. The Legislature, therefore, directs the Reclamation Board, in coordination with the department, to study the possibility of creating, by a joint powers agreement or by special act of the Legislature, one or more regional districts to undertake at a future time local maintenance responsibility for this project. The Reclamation Board shall report its findings to the Legislature not later than December 31, 1985.
(b) Any assurance agreement entered into between the Secretary of the Army and the Reclamation Board for this project shall provide for mitigation of the impact of the project with the objective of providing a net long-term enhancement of the riparian habitat and fishery in the project area.
(c) It is the intent of the Legislature, in reviewing future projects, to improve the capacity of the San Joaquin River to provide for mitigation of the impact of the project and net long-term enhancement of the riparian habitats and fisheries in the project area.
(d) The Legislature finds and declares that the local responsibility of maintenance of this and future federal projects in and along the San Joaquin River may be better, more efficiently, and more fairly fulfilled by geographically larger, or regional, local public entities. The Legislature, therefore, directs the Reclamation Board, in coordination with the department, to study the possibility of creating, by a joint powers agreement or by special act of the Legislature, one or more regional districts to undertake at a future time local maintenance responsibility for this project. The Reclamation Board shall report its findings to the Legislature not later than December 31, 1985.
The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposes
on the Fresno County Stream Group identified as the Redbank-Fancher
Creeks Flood Control Project, including the Redbank Creek Detention
Basin, is hereby adopted and authorized substantially in accordance
with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document
Numbered 98-147, at an estimated cost to the state of such sum as may
be appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon
recommendation and advice of the department or Reclamation Board,
except that no nonflood control application of water may occur within
the Redbank Creek Detention Basin except for landscape irrigation or
dust control. The preconstruction environmental assessment by the
United States Army Corp of Engineers shall include the conduct of
field permeability tests and consideration of the recommendations set
forth in the "Evaluation Of Impacts On The THAN Site By The Proposed
Redbank Creek Flood Detention Basin," 1988, of the State Department
of Health Services, Toxic Substances Control Division. Basin design
criteria and operational procedures shall include, but not be limited
to, the detailed post excavation soils mapping, installation and
monitoring of observation wells, and creation of a contingency fund,
as indicated by the environmental assessment and as required for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13
(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). If
state bond act moneys are available for flood control purposes, the
Legislature may appropriate those moneys for this project. This
authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on this
project over the needs of other statewide programs in the
appropriation of available funds. Funds shall be appropriated
pursuant to this authorization only upon the act of Congress adopting
and authorizing the project as substantially described in House
Document Numbered 98-147. The Legislature affirms the topographical
and hydrological characteristics of the Fresno County Stream Group
for which provision for participation in reservoirs has been made in
Section 12868 and determines that the Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood
Control Project is a project on the Fresno County Stream Group, as
defined and excepted in Section 12826. The department or Reclamation
Board may loan the local agency the funds necessary to pay the local
portion of the costs of the lands, easements, and rights-of-way, less
the credit provided by Section 12585.3. The rate of interest on the
loan shall be the current rate for the Pooled Money Investment
Account. The department or Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent of
the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife
enhancement features of the project.
The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District may, in
lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the
Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by House
Document Numbered 98-147 will be furnished in connection with the
project for flood control adopted and authorized in Section 12669.
The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, in
conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the
Reclamation Board, execute the plans and project referred to in
Section 12669 and may make modifications and amendments to the plans
as may be necessary to execute the plans for the purposes of Chapter
1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this part.
The Cache Creek Settling Basin Unit of the plan of
improvement for flood control and other purposes on Cache Creek is
hereby adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers, in the report dated April
27, 1981, and adopted and authorized by the Act of Congress approved
November 17, 1986 (Public Law 99-662), at an estimated cost to the
state of such sums as may be appropriated for state participation by
the Legislature upon the recommendation and advice of the Reclamation
Board. This authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference
on this project over the needs of other statewide programs in
appropriation of available funds. Notwithstanding Section 12585.5,
the state shall pay all of the nonfederal costs required by Public
Law 99-662. Notwithstanding Sections 12642 and 12828, the state shall
maintain and operate the unit and, through the Reclamation Board,
shall hold the United States harmless from damages due to the
construction of the works. Notwithstanding Section 12847, the state
may pay all of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and
fish and wildlife enhancement features of the unit.
(a) The project for flood protection on the Sacramento
River for the City of West Sacramento is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers, in the report "Sacramento Metro Area, California" dated
June 29, 1992, and as adopted and authorized by the act of Congress
approved October 31, 1992 (Public Law 102-580), at an estimated cost
to the state of the sum that may be appropriated by the Legislature
for state participation, upon the recommendation and advice of the
department or the Reclamation Board.
(b) The department or the Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement features of the project.
(b) The department or the Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement features of the project.
The City of West Sacramento, or a joint power authority
formed by the City of West Sacramento and Reclamation Districts 537
and 900, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances
satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation
required by the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law
102-580) will be furnished in connection with the project for flood
control adopted and authorized in Section 12670.2.
The City of West Sacramento, or joint power authority
formed by the City of West Sacramento and Reclamation Districts 537
and 900, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu
of the Reclamation Board, carry out the plans and project referred
to in Section 12670.2 and may make modification and amendments to the
plans as may be necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes of
Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(a) The project for flood protection along the Feather
River and Yuba River is adopted and authorized substantially in
accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers of the
United States Army Corps of Engineers, in the report entitled "Yuba
River Basin Investigation, California Feasibility Report."
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (e) of Section 12585.5, the nonfederal engineering costs and the nonfederal design costs required by Section 2215 (b) and (c) of Title 33 of the United States Code, with regard to the project described in subdivision (a), are eligible for reimbursement by the state before federal and state authorization and before the appropriation of construction funds by Congress.
(c) Funds shall be appropriated for the project in the annual Budget Act.
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (e) of Section 12585.5, the nonfederal engineering costs and the nonfederal design costs required by Section 2215 (b) and (c) of Title 33 of the United States Code, with regard to the project described in subdivision (a), are eligible for reimbursement by the state before federal and state authorization and before the appropriation of construction funds by Congress.
(c) Funds shall be appropriated for the project in the annual Budget Act.
(a) The project for flood protection measures on the Upper
Guadalupe River in Santa Clara County is adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of
Engineers of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in a report
dated August 19, 1998, or as that report may be subsequently
modified, at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may be
appropriated by the Legislature for state cooperation, upon the
recommendation and advice of the department. The department may pay
50 percent of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish
and wildlife enhancement features of the project.
(b) The Santa Clara Valley Water District shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that local cooperation required by the final report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps of Engineers will be furnished by the district in connection with the project for flood control adopted and authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) The Santa Clara Valley Water District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
(b) The Santa Clara Valley Water District shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that local cooperation required by the final report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps of Engineers will be furnished by the district in connection with the project for flood control adopted and authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) The Santa Clara Valley Water District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.
The project for flood protection along the American River
is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the
recommendations of the Chief of Engineers, in the report entitled
"American River Watershed, California" dated June 27, 1996, and as
adopted and authorized by Congress on October 12, 1996, in Section
101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303), at
an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may be appropriated
by the Legislature for state participation, upon the recommendation
and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board.
(a) (1) The project for flood damage reduction and
environmental restoration in the American River watershed in
Sacramento County is adopted and authorized substantially in
accordance with Congressional approval and the final report of the
Chief of Engineers dated November 5, 2002, as authorized by Section
128 of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2004
(P.L. 108-137), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may
be appropriated for state cooperation by statute, upon the
recommendation and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board.
(2) The project includes the construction of a new bridge with an estimated cost of sixty-six million dollars ($66,000,000), of which thirty-six million dollars ($36,000,000) is allocated to flood damage reduction and dam safety.
(3) The state's share of the bridge project cost shall be at least five million, two hundred thousand dollars ($5,200,000), but not more than nine million dollars ($9,000,000), of the project amount that is allocated to flood damage reduction.
(4) The calculation of the state's share of the funding pursuant to paragraph (3) shall be determined by the federal government's allocation of the costs of the bridge to the dam safety features of the project.
(b) The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the agency agrees to indemnify and hold and save harmless the state, its officers, agents, and employees for any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(c) The City of Folsom shall serve as the nonfederal sponsor of the bridge authorized as part of the project and shall enter into an agreement with the department to receive the state's proportionate share of the cost of the bridge and to indemnify and hold and save harmless the state, its officers, agents, and employees for any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the bridge.
(2) The project includes the construction of a new bridge with an estimated cost of sixty-six million dollars ($66,000,000), of which thirty-six million dollars ($36,000,000) is allocated to flood damage reduction and dam safety.
(3) The state's share of the bridge project cost shall be at least five million, two hundred thousand dollars ($5,200,000), but not more than nine million dollars ($9,000,000), of the project amount that is allocated to flood damage reduction.
(4) The calculation of the state's share of the funding pursuant to paragraph (3) shall be determined by the federal government's allocation of the costs of the bridge to the dam safety features of the project.
(b) The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the agency agrees to indemnify and hold and save harmless the state, its officers, agents, and employees for any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(c) The City of Folsom shall serve as the nonfederal sponsor of the bridge authorized as part of the project and shall enter into an agreement with the department to receive the state's proportionate share of the cost of the bridge and to indemnify and hold and save harmless the state, its officers, agents, and employees for any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the bridge.
With regard to the project for flood control authorized
in Section 12670.10, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency may
join the department or the Reclamation Board in providing the
Secretary of the Army with the assurances of nonfederal cooperation
required by the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, and may, in
conjunction with the Department of the Army, carry out the project
with the modifications and amendments that may be necessary to
fulfill the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and
this chapter. The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency shall be
reimbursed pursuant to Section 12585.5 for any project costs that the
agency advances on behalf of the department or the Reclamation
Board, provided that prior to any such reimbursement, the agency
shall execute an agreement with the department under which it agrees
to indemnify and hold the state harmless from damages due to the
construction, operation, or maintenance of the project and agrees to
operate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate the project.
The following projects in areas within the City of
Sacramento and the Counties of Sacramento and Sutter are adopted and
authorized at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may be
appropriated by the Legislature for state participation upon the
recommendation and advice of the department or the Central Valley
Flood Protection Board:
(a) The project for flood control in the Natomas and North Sacramento areas adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 9159 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1993 (Public Law 102-396) substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in the report entitled "American River Watershed Investigation" dated July 1, 1992.
(b) The project for flood control along the American and Sacramento Rivers adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101 (a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-303) substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in the report entitled "American River Watershed Project, California" dated June 27, 1996, as modified by Congress in Section 366 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53), as further modified to include the project features necessary to provide a 200-year level of flood protection along the American and Sacramento Rivers and within the Natomas Basin as described in the Final Engineer's Report dated April 19, 2007, adopted by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, and as further modified by the 2010 final feasibility study for the American River Watershed, Common Features Project, Natomas Basin, adopted by Congress in Section 7002 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-121).
(c) The project to modify Folsom Dam adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(6) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53), as described in the United States Army Corps of Engineers Supplemental Information Report for the American River Watershed Project, California, dated March 1996, as modified by the report entitled "Folsom Dam Modification Report, New Outlets Plan," dated March 1998, prepared by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, and as further modified by the Post-Authorization Change Report, American River Watershed Project (Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam Raise Projects), dated March 2007, adopted by Congress in Section 3029 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-114).
(d) (1) The project for flood control, environmental restoration, and recreation along south Sacramento County streams adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(8) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53) as described in the report of the Chief of Engineers entitled "South Sacramento County Streams, California" dated October 6, 1998.
(2) Notwithstanding Section 12657, at the discretion of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency may provide, for the project described in paragraph (1), the assurances of local cooperation satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army, in accordance with Section 12657, in lieu of assurances by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
(a) The project for flood control in the Natomas and North Sacramento areas adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 9159 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1993 (Public Law 102-396) substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in the report entitled "American River Watershed Investigation" dated July 1, 1992.
(b) The project for flood control along the American and Sacramento Rivers adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101 (a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-303) substantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in the report entitled "American River Watershed Project, California" dated June 27, 1996, as modified by Congress in Section 366 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53), as further modified to include the project features necessary to provide a 200-year level of flood protection along the American and Sacramento Rivers and within the Natomas Basin as described in the Final Engineer's Report dated April 19, 2007, adopted by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, and as further modified by the 2010 final feasibility study for the American River Watershed, Common Features Project, Natomas Basin, adopted by Congress in Section 7002 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-121).
(c) The project to modify Folsom Dam adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(6) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53), as described in the United States Army Corps of Engineers Supplemental Information Report for the American River Watershed Project, California, dated March 1996, as modified by the report entitled "Folsom Dam Modification Report, New Outlets Plan," dated March 1998, prepared by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, and as further modified by the Post-Authorization Change Report, American River Watershed Project (Folsom Dam Modification and Folsom Dam Raise Projects), dated March 2007, adopted by Congress in Section 3029 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public Law 110-114).
(d) (1) The project for flood control, environmental restoration, and recreation along south Sacramento County streams adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(8) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53) as described in the report of the Chief of Engineers entitled "South Sacramento County Streams, California" dated October 6, 1998.
(2) Notwithstanding Section 12657, at the discretion of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency may provide, for the project described in paragraph (1), the assurances of local cooperation satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army, in accordance with Section 12657, in lieu of assurances by the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency's share of the nonfederal
capital costs of the projects for flood control authorized in Section
12670.14 shall be calculated in accordance with Section 12585.5, and
the agency shall be reimbursed pursuant to Section 12585.5 for any
costs of project features that the agency advances on behalf of the
department or Reclamation Board if either of the following
requirements is met:
(1) The advances are made in response to a federal request for payment of the nonfederal share of the cost of the project.
(2) If the advances are made for project features that have not yet been authorized by Congress, the Reclamation Board has received a written determination by the federal government that the project features will likely be authorized by Congress and, if so authorized, the advances will be eligible for credit toward the nonfederal share of the cost of these features.
(b) Prior to any reimbursement pursuant to subdivision (a), the agency shall execute an agreement with the department under which it agrees to indemnify and hold the state harmless from damages due to the construction, operation, or maintenance of those projects and agrees to operate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate those projects, or provide the agreement of its appropriate member agency to do so.
(1) The advances are made in response to a federal request for payment of the nonfederal share of the cost of the project.
(2) If the advances are made for project features that have not yet been authorized by Congress, the Reclamation Board has received a written determination by the federal government that the project features will likely be authorized by Congress and, if so authorized, the advances will be eligible for credit toward the nonfederal share of the cost of these features.
(b) Prior to any reimbursement pursuant to subdivision (a), the agency shall execute an agreement with the department under which it agrees to indemnify and hold the state harmless from damages due to the construction, operation, or maintenance of those projects and agrees to operate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate those projects, or provide the agreement of its appropriate member agency to do so.
(a) The projects for flood protection and integrated
resource management in the Colusa Basin are adopted and authorized
substantially in accordance with the "Colusa Basin Water Management
Program" dated February 1995 and its final environmental
documentation, at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may
be appropriated by the Legislature for state participation, upon the
recommendation and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board.
(b) The state, any local public agency, or other entity may cooperate with any federal agency with regard to the planning, design, environmental compliance, financing, and construction of projects authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) No state funds shall be expended for the projects described in subdivision (a) unless both of the following requirements are met:
(1) Required environmental documentation has been completed.
(2) The Reclamation Board has approved the Colusa Basin Water Management Program and the projects described in subdivision (a).
(d) Except as specified in subdivision (c), for projects authorized in subdivision (a), the state shall pay both of the following:
(1) That portion of nonfederal capital costs attributable to flood control required by Section 12585.5, or that may be required by amendment to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570).
(2) That portion of nonfederal costs for fish, wildlife, and recreational enhancement features established by Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 12840).
(e) If required by the Secretary of the Interior, the Reclamation Board may give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior that the local cooperation authorized in subdivision (b) will be furnished by the state in connection with the flood control and fish, wildlife, and recreational enhancement features of the projects described in subdivision (a). Assurances provided pursuant to this subdivision may not be made until the local agency, by binding agreement with the Reclamation Board, has agreed to assume all obligations under Sections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive, and Section 12642, or that may be required by amendment to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570).
(f) The Colusa Basin Drainage District, or other appropriate local agency, shall establish and maintain a coordinated land use planning and decisionmaking process within the watershed to avoid unmitigated hydraulic impacts.
(b) The state, any local public agency, or other entity may cooperate with any federal agency with regard to the planning, design, environmental compliance, financing, and construction of projects authorized in subdivision (a).
(c) No state funds shall be expended for the projects described in subdivision (a) unless both of the following requirements are met:
(1) Required environmental documentation has been completed.
(2) The Reclamation Board has approved the Colusa Basin Water Management Program and the projects described in subdivision (a).
(d) Except as specified in subdivision (c), for projects authorized in subdivision (a), the state shall pay both of the following:
(1) That portion of nonfederal capital costs attributable to flood control required by Section 12585.5, or that may be required by amendment to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570).
(2) That portion of nonfederal costs for fish, wildlife, and recreational enhancement features established by Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 12840).
(e) If required by the Secretary of the Interior, the Reclamation Board may give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior that the local cooperation authorized in subdivision (b) will be furnished by the state in connection with the flood control and fish, wildlife, and recreational enhancement features of the projects described in subdivision (a). Assurances provided pursuant to this subdivision may not be made until the local agency, by binding agreement with the Reclamation Board, has agreed to assume all obligations under Sections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive, and Section 12642, or that may be required by amendment to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570).
(f) The Colusa Basin Drainage District, or other appropriate local agency, shall establish and maintain a coordinated land use planning and decisionmaking process within the watershed to avoid unmitigated hydraulic impacts.
(a) The state may provide funds for the Middle Creek
Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project in Lake
County substantially in accordance with the Flood Damage Reduction
and Environmental Restoration, Middle Creek, Lake County, California:
Report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers dated November 29, 2004, and as authorized by Section 1001
(11) of the federal Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public
Law 110-114), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may
be appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon the
recommendations and advice of the Central Valley Flood Protection
Board, including payment for any fish and wildlife enhancement
features as provided in Section 12847.
(b) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by state or federal law will be furnished by the district in connection with the project.
(c) Lake County Watershed Protection District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as may be required by state or federal law.
(d) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the district agrees to indemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(e) The authorization granted by this section does not affect any eligibility of Lake County Watershed Protection District to receive state funding made available pursuant to provisions of law other than this part if the receipt of those funds does not result in overpayment for any feature of the project.
(f) The Legislature finds and declares that the project described in subdivision (a) modifies and replaces portions of the project described in Section 12656.5. The project described in subdivision (a) shall constitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control and the portion of the project described in Section 12656.5 that is replaced by the project described in subdivision (a) shall not constitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(b) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by state or federal law will be furnished by the district in connection with the project.
(c) Lake County Watershed Protection District, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as may be required by state or federal law.
(d) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the district agrees to indemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(e) The authorization granted by this section does not affect any eligibility of Lake County Watershed Protection District to receive state funding made available pursuant to provisions of law other than this part if the receipt of those funds does not result in overpayment for any feature of the project.
(f) The Legislature finds and declares that the project described in subdivision (a) modifies and replaces portions of the project described in Section 12656.5. The project described in subdivision (a) shall constitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control and the portion of the project described in Section 12656.5 that is replaced by the project described in subdivision (a) shall not constitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control.
(a) The state may provide funds for the Hamilton City
Flood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project in Glenn
County substantially in accordance with the Hamilton City Flood
Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration, Glenn County, California:
Report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers dated December 22, 2004, and authorized by Section 1001 (8)
of the federal Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public Law
110-114), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may be
appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon the
recommendations and advice of the Central Valley Flood Protection
Board, including payment for any fish and wildlife enhancement
features as provided in Section 12847.
(b) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by state or federal law will be furnished by the district in connection with the project.
(c) Reclamation District No. 2140, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as may be required by federal or state law.
(d) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the district agrees to indemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(e) The authorization granted by this section does not affect any eligibility of Reclamation District No. 2140 to receive state funding made available pursuant to provisions of law other than this part if the receipt of those state funds does not result in overpayment for any feature of the project.
(b) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by state or federal law will be furnished by the district in connection with the project.
(c) Reclamation District No. 2140, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and may make modifications and amendments to the plans as may be required by federal or state law.
(d) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall enter into an agreement with the department pursuant to which the district agrees to indemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of the project.
(e) The authorization granted by this section does not affect any eligibility of Reclamation District No. 2140 to receive state funding made available pursuant to provisions of law other than this part if the receipt of those state funds does not result in overpayment for any feature of the project.
