California Assembly Bill AB588

California 2021-2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/11/21
• Refer: 3/25/21
• Report Pass: 3/25/21
• Refer: 3/26/21
• Report Pass: 3/30/21
• Refer: 4/5/21
• Failed: 2/1/22

Caption

California Safe Drinking Water Act: compliance.

Impact

The introduction of AB 588 is expected to have a significant effect on how California manages drinking water standards. By offering a clear period for compliance, the bill aims to aid public water systems, particularly small and economically disadvantaged communities, in adapting to new regulations. This change could alleviate some of the burdens placed on smaller water systems that struggle to meet stringent regulations due to limited financial resources. Moreover, it opens avenues for flexibility in compliance, allowing the state board to grant extensions on a case-by-case basis, promoting a more tailored approach to water quality management.

Summary

Assembly Bill 588, introduced by Assembly Member Eduardo Garcia, seeks to amend the California Safe Drinking Water Act by revising the compliance periods for primary drinking water standards. It mandates that the State Water Resources Control Board (state board) must identify a compliance period of no less than 30 days and no more than three years when adopting new drinking water standards. The bill also stipulates that if compliance with a drinking water standard is not economically feasible for at least 10% of specified water systems, the state board must delineate support actions for those affected systems to achieve compliance within the established timeframe.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 588 appears to reflect supportive views from advocates focused on public health and environmental justice. Proponents argue that the bill will better facilitate compliance with drinking water standards while considering economic realities faced by various communities. However, there may be contention from critics who are concerned about the possibility of extended deadlines leading to inadequate water safety practices, ultimately jeopardizing public health if rigorous standards are not enforced promptly. The discussion surrounding the bill suggests a need to balance operational feasibility for water systems with the imperative of maintaining high public health protections.

Contention

Notable points of contention pertain to the economic feasibility criteria outlined in the bill, as evaluating compliance capability among diverse water systems is complex. Stakeholders may argue over what constitutes 'economic feasibility' and whether the provisions for additional time to comply could inadvertently allow for delays in addressing public health risks associated with water contamination. The exemptions for administrative rulemaking requirements when addressing compliance with potential contamination also raise questions about oversight and accountability, ensuring that health standards remain uncompromised throughout the enforcement of these new regulations.