BOARD AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Government Code § 84308 Applies: Yes ☐ No ☒
(If “YES” Complete Attachment A - Gov. Code § 84308)
SUBJECT: Title
*Adopt Recommended Positions on Federal Legislation: S. 322 (Padilla) - Improving Atmospheric River Forecasting Act; H.R. 1267 (Gluesenkamp Perez) - Water Systems PFAS Liability Protection Act; H.R. 403 (Swalwell) - Preventing Our Next Natural Disaster Act; H.R. 1382 (Huffman) - San Francisco Bay Restoration Program Technical Correction Act; H.R. 605 (Costa) - Headwaters Protection Act of 2025; *H.R. 1871 (Huffman)/S. 857 (Curtis) - Water Conservation Rebate Tax Parity Act of 2025; H.R. 1894 (Calvert) - Federally Integrated Species Health (FISH) Act; and Other Legislation Which May Require Urgent Consideration for a Position by the Board.
End
RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation
A. Adopt a Position of “Support” on S. 322 (Padilla) - Improving Atmospheric River Forecasting Act;
B. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 1267 (Gluesenkamp Perez) - Water Systems PFAS Liability Protection Act;
C. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 403 (Swalwell) - Preventing Our Next Natural Disaster Act;
D. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 1382 (Huffman) - San Francisco Bay Restoration Program Technical Correction Act; and
E. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 605 (Costa) - Headwaters Protection Act of 2025.
*F. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 1871 (Huffman)/S. 857 (Curtis) - Water Conservation Rebate Tax Parity Act of 2025; and
*G. Adopt a Position of “Support” on H.R. 1894 (Calvert) - Federally Integrated Species Health (FISH) Act.
Body
SUMMARY:
A. S. 322 (Padilla) - Improving Atmospheric River Forecasting Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 3
This bipartisan bill would establish a standalone atmospheric river forecast improvement program at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The program would:
• Establish metrics through a quantitative 1-5 scale for atmospheric river storms similar to hurricane categorizations.
• Improve data collection through crewed and uncrewed reconnaissance; novel airborne and satellite-based snowpack measurements; ground-based radar systems; data from ocean buoys, soil moisture monitoring systems, reservoir storage data, observations from mesonets, or other emerging technologies.
• Allow NOAA to purchase aircrafts, personnel, and equipment needed to monitor atmospheric river events on the West coast throughout the entire winter season (November-March).
The Board voted to support a draft of this bill in July 2024, yet it was not formally introduced until this year. The legislation builds upon a bill that Senator Padilla introduced in 2023, the Atmospheric Rivers Reconnaissance, Observation, and Warning (ARROW) Act, which the Board voted to support in August 2023. This bill includes a provision from the ARROW Act to require increased ocean reconnaissance to help inform forecasting.
Status:
The bill was introduced in the Senate on January 29, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Importance to Valley Water:
Atmospheric rivers have wrought havoc on our region in recent years, bringing significant precipitation to Santa Clara County and often resulting in localized flooding. Atmospheric rivers account for up to 50 percent of annual precipitation and more than 90 percent of major flood events in some western regions. Scientists predict that atmospheric rivers will become increasingly intense with climate change, resulting in exponentially larger economic damages over time. By 2090, annual damages from these storms are expected to roughly triple, from $1 billion to $2.9-3.2 billion.
A 2021 report of NOAA’s Science Advisory Board recommended greater investment in atmospheric river observation to improve forecasting - information that water supply managers could then use to make better science-based operations decisions. This bill would invest in that forecasting, helping to inform Valley Water’s emergency response efforts and reservoir operations during these storms, helping to better safeguard public health and safety in Santa Clara County.
The bill also includes language prioritizing smaller gap-filling radars utilized in the Advanced Quantitative Precipitation Information (AQPI) Bay Area Project, a regional collaboration between NOAA collaborating partners that include Valley Water. The AQPI system consists of improved weather data, monitoring, and modeling to improve lead time on precipitation and inundation from extreme storms, particularly atmospheric rivers.
Pros:
• The new NOAA program would develop accurate, effective, and actionable storm forecasts to help reduce loss of life and economic impact from atmospheric rivers.
• The program would mirror the way we communicate hurricane intensity for atmospheric rivers, improving how forecasts are communicated to the public and emergency managers across the nation.
• The program would ensure coordination across federal observation systems (airborne, ocean, and satellite) for improved accuracy of atmospheric river forecasts.
• The program would prioritize smaller gap-filling radars utilized in the Advanced Quantitative Precipitation Information Bay Area Project.
• The bill would provide NOAA with authority to purchase reconnaissance equipment throughout the winter season to ensure uninterrupted monitoring. Currently, personnel, equipment, and aircraft funds in past years have run out partially through the winter season.
• The bill would require increased ocean reconnaissance from the Air Force and NOAA to help inform atmospheric river forecasting.
Cons:
• None identified at this time.
B. H.R. 1267 (Gluesenkamp Perez) - Water Systems PFAS Liability Protection Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 2
This bipartisan bill would provide an exemption from liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), also known as the Superfund law, for water and wastewater systems (including special districts) that release materials laden with covered per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) into the environment. Covered PFAS would be those listed as hazardous substances under CERCLA, which the Environmental Protection Agency has now proposed to do for two of those substances, PFOA and PFOS. This exemption would prohibit any individual or government entity from recovering costs arising from a water or wastewater system’s transport, treatment, or disposal of covered PFAS substances, including through the water recycling process and for purposes of conserving or reclaiming water for water supply. The bill would preclude from liability protection any action by an entity deemed grossly negligent or willful.
The Board has voted to support this bill in previous Congresses, most recently in 2023. This version is identical to previous versions that the Board supported.
Status:
The bill was introduced in the House on February 12, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Importance to Valley Water:
While CERCLA is appropriately intended to target polluters who released these chemicals into the environment, water systems may face liability from Potentially Responsible Parties who seek to recover damages to reduce their own costs. The American Water Works Association, of which Valley Water is a member, has found several hundred cases of municipalities and counties facing these third-party suits over the release of other hazardous substances, making this a very real threat for water and wastewater agencies for PFAS treatment and disposal. Such a lawsuit would be very unfair and harmful to Valley Water and other public water agencies, as any costs incurred from this litigation would ultimately have to be passed on to our ratepayers.
Pros:
• This legislation is a high priority for the American Water Works Association, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, WateReuse, and other associations to which Valley Water belongs.
• The bill would help protect Valley Water and other public water agencies from lawsuits seeking to recover costs associated with treatment or discharge of PFAS-laden materials. Ultimately this will protect the public and our ratepayers from absorbing these litigation costs.
Cons:
• Carving out a liability exemption from CERCLA could set a precedent for other industries to seek and receive similar protection, including industries that could bear larger responsibility than the water sector for PFAS discharge into the environment.
C. H.R. 403 (Swalwell) - Preventing Our Next Natural Disaster Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 2
This bill would support communities in their disaster preparedness efforts by increasing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant funding for pre-disaster mitigation activities. The bill would help ensure that communities most at risk access these funds, particularly those with high hazard risk and environmental justice impacts.
Specifically, the bill would increase FEMA’s set-aside for pre-disaster mitigation assistance from six percent to 15 percent and provide for a two percent set-aside for capacity building assistance. In addition to prioritizing disadvantaged communities and those with the greatest hazard risk, the bill would create a new community outreach program to help ensure that the funds are getting to the communities most in need. The FEMA Administrator would also be empowered to develop guidance on how to incorporate climate change into risk indices and cost-benefit analyses, as well as how to ensure that funds are used on projects that include future projections of climate change and are built to withstand future flooding.
The bill is endorsed by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the League of Conservation Voters, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Habitat for Humanity, and the National Wildlife Federation. The Board voted to support an identical version of this bill in 2023.
Status:
The bill was introduced in the House on January 14, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Importance to Valley Water:
Pre-disaster planning is essential to mitigating future damages. This bill would more than double the current amount of funding available for this pre-disaster mitigation assistance, as well as provide an additional set-aside for capacity building assistance. Valley Water serves several disadvantaged and at-risk communities throughout Santa Clara County and having this additional pre-disaster assistance available could help further critical flood risk management projects in these communities. Incorporating climate change into FEMA’s benefit-cost analysis would also be an important development, as FEMA’s current benefit-cost analysis methodology does not adequately capture the cost of climate change to future generations.
Pros:
• The bill would help mitigate future disasters through increased pre-disaster assistance and planning.
• The bill would prioritize assistance to vulnerable and at-risk communities, including through a new community outreach program to increase awareness.
• The bill would empower the FEMA administrator to prioritize funds to projects that incorporate projections about climate change and are built to withstand flooding.
Cons:
• None identified at this time.
D. H.R. 1382 (Huffman) - San Francisco Bay Restoration Program Technical Correction Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 2
This bill would make technical corrections to the San Francisco Bay Restoration Program Act, which created the San Francisco Bay Restoration Program to create the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) San Francisco Bay Program Office. The intention in creating that office was to provide grants to projects that improve local water quality, protect vulnerable species, and help address sea level rise in San Francisco Bay. Since the office’s creation, however, EPA Headquarters interpreted the law in a way that limited the office’s ability to issue interagency agreements, contracts, and other funding mechanisms that other EPA geographical programs (e.g., Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, Puget Sound) are authorized to issue. This bill would make technical corrections to clarify congressional intent and bring the San Francisco Bay Program Office’s authorities in line with those of other EPA geographic programs.
Status:
The bill was introduced in the House on February 14, 2025, and was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. On February 26, the Committee reported the bill favorably by a vote of 40-13. Representatives Jimmy Panetta (CA-19) and Ro Khanna (CA-17) are cosponsors.
Importance to Valley Water:
This bill would help ensure that the San Francisco Bay Restoration Program can sufficiently fund Bay restoration and habitat improvement projects. In recent years, Valley Water has successfully secured other EPA grant funding to improve water quality in San Francisco Bay, such as grants for the Creek Cleanup Initiative at Nine Creeks; however, funding is limited and always competitive. Broadening the new grant program’s authority will help provide more access to federal support for restoration activities throughout the Bay Area.
Pros:
• The bill would meet the intent of Congress of putting San Francisco Bay on par with other federally authorized EPA geographic programs, ensuring that federal funds are used to implement restoration, habitat improvement, and sea level rise adaptation in the Bay Area.
Cons:
• None identified at this time.
E. H.R. 605 (Costa) - Headwaters Protection Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 3
This bipartisan bill would make several changes to current law aimed at protecting the health of our watersheds and the headwaters that support them. The bill would amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 to reauthorize and improve the U.S. Forest Service’s (USFS) Water Source Protection Program (WSPP), which invests in projects that prevent water pollution at the source by encouraging farmers and ranchers, water utilities, Tribes, local governments, and the federal government to work in partnership to restore forest health and impaired watersheds. This legislation would reauthorize $30 million for the WSPP for each of fiscal years 2024 through 2028, and it would expand the list of eligible projects and partner entities to include small ditch companies, wastewater treatment providers, and community land grants, among others. Additionally, H.R. 4018 would lower the threshold for smaller private-sector companies to engage in public-private partnerships by reducing the non-federal match requirement from 50 percent to 20 percent, among other provisions.
The Board voted to support an identical version of this bill in 2024.
Status:
H.R. 605 was introduced in the House on January 22, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Natural Resources.
Importance to Valley Water:
Investing in watershed health leads to improved access to safe, clean drinking water and greater water availability downstream. Much of our water supply originates in the headwaters of the Sierra Nevada, where it flows through the natural filtration process of the forest before it reaches downstream communities. This bill will make it easier for utilities, cities, agricultural producers, and the U.S. Forest Service to protect our water supply at the source by investing in efforts that limit water pollution and promote watershed management, helping to ensure clean water for the livelihood of our communities and habitats.
Pros:
• The bill would reauthorize the WSPP and authorize increased appropriations from $10 million per year to $30 million per year.
• The bill would broaden the range of water users, including historically disadvantaged communities, who can participate in and benefit from the WSPP.
• The bill would reduce financial barriers for water users to participate in the WSPP.
• The bill would authorize the WSPP to prioritize projects that benefit drinking water quality and improve resilience to wildfire and climate change.
Cons:
• None identified at this time.
*F. H.R. 1871 (Huffman)/S. 857 (Curtis) - Water Conservation Rebate Tax Parity Act
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 2
This bipartisan bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to define individual water conservation, water efficiency, and stormwater management efforts as exempt from federal taxable income. Under current law, any rebate issued by Valley Water or any other water utility above the amount of $600 is considered taxable income. This bill would clarify that these rebates are not taxable income but rather incentives to defray consumer costs for the overall, long-term public good.
The Board has voted to support this bill in several previous Congresses, most recently in 2024.
Status:
H.R. 1871 was introduced in the House on March 5, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. S. 857 was introduced in the Senate on March 5, 2025, and it was referred to the Committee on Finance. Senator Alex Padilla (CA) is an original cosponsor.
Importance to Valley Water:
Valley Water currently offers customer rebates to promote water conservation and efficiency. Under California law, a qualified water use efficiency rebate issued by a water agency is not reportable as state income. However, the federal government does not provide a similar exemption. This bill would allow Valley Water rebates to qualify for federal income tax exemptions, thereby further encouraging water conservation and efficiency. This bill would also promote stormwater management by excluding the rebates for installation of those measures from reportable federal income.
This bill aligns directly with the Board’s 2025 Legislative Guiding Principles, which states, “Support tax-exempt status for water conservation rebates.” (Principle I.A.8.)
Pros:
• Encourages water conservation, efficiency, and stormwater management by removing tax liabilities on rebates received.
• Saves Valley Water the costs of preparing and sending out 1099 federal tax forms currently required for rebates issued over $600.
Cons:
• None identified at this time.
*G. H.R. 1894 (Calvert) - Federally Integrated Species Health (FISH) Act.
Recommended Position: Support
Priority Recommendation: 3
This bill would amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) to vest within the Department of the Interior the responsibilities under the ESA of managing anadromous and catadromous species of fish - those that spawn in fresh or estuarine waters and migrate to ocean waters, and those that spawn in ocean waters and migrate to fresh or estuarine waters, respectively - rather than within the Department of Commerce, where that authority currently resides. Effectively, this bill would transfer personnel and ESA regulatory authority of these species from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), part of the Department of Commerce, to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), part of the Department of the Interior. The Department of Commerce would still pay for those personnel, but they would be housed within USFWS.
Status:
The bill was introduced in the House on March 6, 2025 and it was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Importance to Valley Water:
Transferring the personnel who execute these duties under the ESA from NMFS to USFWS would help better align and streamline ESA review and enforcement between the two agencies. This would allow Valley Water personnel to deal with one agency when trying to resolve ESA issues on projects involving anadromous and catadromous species.
The Board has voted to support this bill in several previous Congresses, most recently in 2023.
Pros:
• Consolidates ESA review and enforcement under one federal agency.
• Would allow Valley Water personnel to deal with one agency when ESA issues arise.
• Could help streamline permit review and processing by consolidating those responsibilities under one agency rather than two.
Cons:
The transfer of responsibilities from NMFS to USFWS may result in an initial transition period during which USFWS will have to adjust to new functions and duties, which could create a delay in permit review and processing.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY IMPACT:
There are no direct Environmental Justice impacts associated with this item, as the Board’s position does not enact the legislation discussed above. However, if these bills were to be enacted, it would further environmental justice goals nationwide and could benefit overburdened and disadvantaged communities in Santa Clara County.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with this item.
CEQA:
The recommended action does not constitute a project under CEQA because it does not have the potential for resulting in direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
ATTACHMENTS:
*Original Board Agenda Memo
*Supplemental Board Agenda Memo
UNCLASSIFIED MANAGER: Manager
Marta Lugo, 408-630-2237