Code Section Group

Water Code - WAT

DIVISION 6. CONSERVATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND UTILIZATION OF STATE WATER RESOURCES [10000 - 12999]

  ( Heading of Division 6 amended by Stats. 1957, Ch. 1932. )

PART 6. WATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS [12570 - 12949.6]

  ( Part 6 added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196. )

CHAPTER 2. Approved Projects [12639 - 12751]

  ( Chapter 2 added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196. )

ARTICLE 2. Projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Watersheds [12645 - 12670.23]
  ( Article 2 heading repealed (by Sec. 24) and added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 275, Sec. 20. )

12645.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 328, Sec. 238. (SB 1330) Effective January 1, 2011.)

12646.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 275, Sec. 22. (AB 1165) Effective January 1, 2010.)

12647.
  

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 328, Sec. 239. (SB 1330) Effective January 1, 2011.)

12648.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12648.1.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1955, Ch. 321.)

12648.2.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1959, Ch. 1912.)

12648.3.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 1202.)

12648.4.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 1203.)

12648.5.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 918.)

12648.6.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 915.)

12648.7.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1969, Ch. 1443.)

12649.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12649.1.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1967, Ch. 1596.)

12650.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1953, Ch. 1118.)

12651.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12652.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12653.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1957, Ch. 1932.)

12654.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12655.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12656.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12656.5.
  

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).

(Added by Stats. 1955, Ch. 1959.)

12656.6.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1961, Ch. 1715.)

12656.7.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1969, Ch. 1284.)

12657.
  

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 2000, Ch. 1071, Sec. 8. Effective January 1, 2001.)

12658.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12659.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12660.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12661.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 196.)

12661.2.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2000, Ch. 1071, Sec. 9. Effective January 1, 2001.)

12661.5.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 1997, Ch. 189, Sec. 2. Effective January 1, 1998.)

12662.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 704.)

12662.1.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 704.)

12662.2.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 704.)

12663.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1959, Ch. 2056.)

12664.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1967, Ch. 1569.)

12665.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1967, Ch. 1569.)

12666.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 183.)

12667.
  

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).

(Amended by Stats. 1986, Ch. 819, Sec. 1. Effective September 15, 1986.)

12668.
  

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1488, Sec. 3.)

12669.
  

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.

(Amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1211, Sec. 1. Effective September 22, 1988.)

12669.1.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1985, Ch. 1229, Sec. 2. Effective September 30, 1985.)

12669.2.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1985, Ch. 1229, Sec. 3. Effective September 30, 1985.)

12670.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 935, Sec. 1. Effective September 27, 1989.)

12670.2.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 1993, Ch. 1107, Sec. 2. Effective January 1, 1994.)

12670.3.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1993, Ch. 1107, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 1994.)

12670.4.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1993, Ch. 1107, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 1994.)

12670.7.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2000, Ch. 1071, Sec. 10. Effective January 1, 2001.)

12670.8.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2000, Ch. 1071, Sec. 11. Effective January 1, 2001.)

12670.10.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1997, Ch. 297, Sec. 2. Effective August 18, 1997.)

12670.11.
  

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 2005, Ch. 584, Sec. 1. Effective January 1, 2006.)

12670.12.
  

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.

(Added by Stats. 1997, Ch. 297, Sec. 3. Effective August 18, 1997.)

12670.14.
  

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, 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), and as modified by the American River Watershed Common Features General Reevaluation Report adopted by Congress in Section 1401 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act of 2016 (Public Law 114-322).

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 309, Sec. 2. (SB 580) Effective January 1, 2018.)

12670.16.
  

(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.

(Amended by Stats. 2007, Ch. 641, Sec. 3. Effective January 1, 2008.)

12670.20.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2000, Ch. 1071, Sec. 14. Effective January 1, 2001.)

12670.22.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 216, Sec. 1. (AB 74) Effective January 1, 2010.)

12670.23.
  

(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.

(Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 216, Sec. 2. (AB 74) Effective January 1, 2010.)

WATWater Code - WAT2