Cal. Code Regs. tit. 23 § 2921
On May 4, 2010, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted Resolution No. 2010-0021, adopting the Water Quality Control Policy for Maintaining Instream Flows in Northern California Coastal Streams (North Coast Instream Flow Policy) in accordance with California Water Code section 1259.4. On October 16, 2012, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted Resolution No. 2012-0058, setting aside Resolution No. 2010-0021, thereby vacating the Board's adoption of the Policy, as required by the Alameda County Superior Court in Living Rivers Council v. State Water Resources Control Board (Sup. Ct. Alameda County, 2012, No. RG10-543923). On October 22, 2013, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted Resolution No. 2013-0035, readopting the North Coast Instream Flow Policy without any significant changes.
The North Coast Instream Flow Policy establishes principles and guidelines for maintaining instream flows for the protection of fishery resources, while minimizing water supply impacts on other beneficial uses of water, such as irrigation, municipal use, and domestic use. The geographic scope of the North Coast Instream Flow Policy encompasses coastal streams from the Mattole River to San Francisco and coastal streams entering northern San Pablo Bay, and extends to five counties: Marin, Sonoma, and portions of Napa, Mendocino, and Humboldt Counties. The North Coast Instream Flow Policy applies to applications to appropriate water, small domestic use, small irrigation use, and livestock stockpond registrations, and water right petitions.
The North Coast Instream Flow Policy does not establish specific instream flow requirements for particular rivers or streams. Nor does the North Coast Instream Flow Policy approve any particular water diversion projects, or specify the terms and conditions that will be incorporated into water right permits, licenses, or registrations. Instead, the North Coast Instream Flow Policy establishes guidelines for evaluating the potential impacts of water diversion projects on stream hydrology and biological resources. The North Coast Instream Flow Policy includes principles to ensure that new water appropriations and changes to existing water right permits and licenses will not affect the instream flows needed for fish spawning, migration and rearing, or the flows needed to maintain natural flow variability, which protects the various biological functions that are dependent on that variability. The North Coast Instream Flow Policy also contains principles to ensure that migration paths to spawning and rearing habitats are not blocked.
The North Coast Instream Flow Policy includes the following elements:
* Measures designed to be protective of fishery resources throughout the policy area, including a season during which diversions may occur, a formula for establishing minimum bypass flows past a diversion, and limits on the maximum cumulative water diversion rate in a watershed.
* Guidance for site-specific studies to evaluate whether alternative measures would be protective of fishery resources.
* Guidance regarding the analysis of water availability required in order for the State Water Board to determine whether unappropriated water is available to supply a proposed water diversion project. (See Wat. Code, § 1375, subd. (d).) The guidance includes procedures for evaluating whether a proposed water diversion, in combination with existing diversions in a watershed, may affect instream flows needed for the protection of fishery resources.
* Limits on the construction of new onstream dams and measures to ensure that approvals of onstream dams do not adversely affect habitat needs of fishery resources.
* Review procedures for pending water right applications and petitions.
* Options for watershed-based approaches that allow cost sharing among diverters to evaluate environmental impacts of diversions on a watershed basis rather than individually, and to allow coordination of diversions.
* Water right enforcement provisions, including compliance assurance provisions, criteria for establishing enforcement priorities, factors to consider in setting administrative civil liability amounts, and descriptions of enforcement actions that could be taken.
* Provisions for case-by-case exceptions from policy provisions.
* Provisions for monitoring and reporting of diversions and streamflows, and policy effectiveness review.
Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 23, § 2921
2. Readopted section, as amended, summarizing Policy for Maintaining Instream Flows in Northern California Coastal Streams, Resolution No. 2013-0035, adopted 10-22-2013 by the State Water Resources Control Board; approved by OAL and effective 2-4-2014 pursuant to Government Code section 11353; filed with the Secretary of State 2-4-2014 (Register 2014, No. 6). The Policy was ordered vacated by the Superior Court in Living Rivers Council v. State Water Resources Control Board (Sup. Ct. Alameda County, 2012, No. RG10-543923) and was vacated under Resolution 2012-0058, adopted 10-16-2012 by the State Water Resources Control Board.
2. Readopted section, as amended, summarizing Policy for Maintaining Instream Flows in Northern California Coastal Streams, Resolution No. 2013-0035, adopted 10-22-2013 by the State Water Resources Control Board; approved by OAL and effective 2-4-2014 pursuant to Government Code section 11353; filed with the Secretary of State 2-4-2014 (Register 2014, No. 6). The Policy was ordered vacated by the Superior Court in Living Rivers Council v . State Water Resources Control Board (Sup. Ct. Alameda County, 2012, No. RG10-543923) and was vacated under Resolution 2012-0058, adopted 10-16-2012 by the State Water Resources Control Board.