SECTIONS 12645-12670.23

12645.  The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) In 1911, the Legislature adopted a flood control plan for theSacramento Valley, as proposed by the federal California DebrisCommission, and created the Reclamation Board to regulate levees andother encroachments, and to review and approve flood control plansfor the Sacramento River and its tributaries. The state's adoption ofa valleywide flood management plan was intended to create a unifiedplan of flood control and to reclaim lands from overflow. Six yearslater, California gained congressional authorization for the UnitedStates Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to collaborate with the statein building and maintaining the Sacramento River Flood ControlProject. The federal government transferred completed portions of theSacramento River Flood Control Project to the state as portions werecompleted, and the state, in turn, passed responsibility foroperation and maintenance to local districts organized to provideflood control within their boundaries. (b) The state and federal governments have built or rebuiltlevees, weirs, and bypasses to increase conveyance of flood watersdownstream. The Sacramento River Flood Control Project and thefederal-state flood control project in the San Joaquin Valley includeapproximately 1,600 miles of levees and other facilities to reducecentral valley flood risk, now defined as the State Plan of FloodControl in subdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the PublicResources Code. The Corps often constructed federal "project levees"in both the Sacramento and San Joaquin River watersheds by modifyingexisting levees. The federal government transferred completedportions of the Sacramento River Flood Control Project to the state,as portions were completed, which in turn passed responsibility foroperation and maintenance to local reclamation districts. (c) In 2003, a state Court of Appeal in Paterno v. State ofCalifornia (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 998 (Paterno), held the stateliable, in a claim for inverse condemnation, for failure of a leveethat was operated and maintained by a local levee maintenancedistrict. In settlement of that litigation, the state's liability wassubstantial because homes and a shopping center were built behindthe levee and suffered from the resulting flood. (d) The Legislature has authorized funding for numerous floodcontrol projects throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin Riverwatersheds. These statutory authorizations included varyingprovisions regarding responsibility and liability for operation andmaintenance of the flood control facilities, and may or may not haveincorporated the specified facilities into the federal-stateSacramento River or San Joaquin River flood control projects. Afterthe court ruling in Paterno, the status of each flood facility becamecritically important to determining liability, and legal ambiguitiesled to questions about whether particular facilities wereincorporated into a federal-state flood control project. In somecases, despite a location between two project levees, certain leveesremain outside the jurisdiction of a federal-state flood controlproject, with local agencies retaining liability. (e) In 2006, California voters approved the Disaster Preparednessand Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006, which authorized the issuanceof general obligation bonds in the amount of $4.9 billion for floodprotection and defined the Sacramento River and San Joaquin Riverfederal-state flood control projects as the "State Plan of FloodControl." The following year, the Legislature passed a package ofbills to reform state flood protection policy in the central valley.These laws required the Department of Water Resources to develop, andthe Central Valley Flood Protection Board to adopt, a Central ValleyFlood Protection Plan, which is broader than the State Plan of FloodControl, affecting the entire watersheds of the Sacramento and SanJoaquin Valley. These laws included provisions intended to limitstate liability to facilities identified in the State Plan of FloodControl. These laws did not specifically address the facilitiesdescribed in this article.12646.  Unless the context requires otherwise, the definitions setforth 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 facilitiesof the State Plan of Flood Control. (d) "Public safety infrastructure" means public safetyinfrastructure necessary to respond to a flood emergency, including,but not limited to, street and highway evacuation routes, medicalcare facilities, and public utilities necessary for public health andsafety, including drinking water and wastewater treatmentfacilities. (e) "Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley" means any lands in the bed oralong or near the banks of the Sacramento River or San Joaquin River,or any of their tributaries or connected therewith, or upon any landadjacent thereto, or within any of the overflow basins thereof, orupon any land susceptible to overflow therefrom. The Sacramento-SanJoaquin Valley does not include lands lying within the Tulare Lakebasin, including the Kings River. (f) "State Plan of Flood Control" has the meaning set forth insubdivision (j) of Section 5096.805 of the Public Resources Code.12647.  (a) The state shall not have responsibility or liability forthe construction, operation, and maintenance of central valley floodcontrol facilities identified in this article unless all of thefollowing apply: (1) The department identifies the facility as part of the StatePlan of Flood Control. (2) The state has expressly accepted the transfer of liability forthe facility from the federal government. (3) The board incorporates the facility into the State Plan ofFlood Control pursuant to Section 9611. (b) Unless otherwise specifically provided, nothing in thisarticle shall be construed to expand the responsibility of the statefor the operation or maintenance of any flood management facilityoutside the scope of the State Plan of Flood Control, except asspecifically determined by the board pursuant to Section 9611. (c) Use of the phrase "adopted and authorized" in this articledoes not, by itself, reflect incorporation of the specified facilityinto the State Plan of Flood Control or assumption of liability bythe 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, andliabilities set forth in Sections 8370, 12642, and 12828.12648.  The projects for the control of floods and other purposes onthe Sacramento River adopted by the acts of Congress approved March1, 1917, May 15, 1928, August 26, 1937, and August 18, 1941, andadopted and authorized by the Legislature by Chapter 25, Statutes of1911, First Extra Session, Chapter 170, Statutes of 1913, Chapter686, Statutes of 1915, and Chapter 176, Statutes of 1925, are adoptedand authorized as modified substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered649, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, except as provided inSection 12649, at an estimated additional cost to the State of threemillion three hundred twenty-six thousand dollars ($3,326,000), orsuch other project as shall finally be decided upon which willaccomplish the same flood control purposes as proposed by the TableMountain Dam or any other dam across the Sacramento River in the samegeneral vicinity, subject to modification that may hereafter be madeby Congress.12648.1.  The plan of flood control on the American River is herebyauthorized and adopted substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers, House Document Numbered367, Eighty-first Congress, and adopted and authorized by the act ofCongress approved August 17, 1954, at an estimated state cost of fivehundred thousand dollars ($500,000). Said project shall beconsidered as extending and supplementing the projects authorizedpursuant to Section 12648. Section 12828 shall not be applicable tothe project.12648.2.  The project for flood protection on the Sacramento Riverfrom Chico Landing to Red Bluff, California, is adopted andauthorized substantially in accordance with the recommendations ofthe Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered 272, Eighty-fourthCongress, Second Session, and adopted and authorized by the act ofCongress approved July 3, 1958, at an estimated state cost ofthirty-one thousand dollars ($31,000).12648.3.  The project for Hidden Reservoir and channel improvementon the Fresno River is adopted and authorized substantially inaccordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers inSenate Document Numbered 37, 87th Congress, and adopted andauthorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962, (PublicLaw 87-874) at an estimated state cost of two hundred twenty thousanddollars ($220,000).12648.4.  The project for Buchanan Reservoir and channel improvementon Chowchilla River is adopted and authorized substantially inaccordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers inSenate Document Numbered 98, 87th Congress, and adopted andauthorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962, (PublicLaw 87-874) at an estimated state cost of one hundred fifty thousanddollars ($150,000).12648.5.  The project for New Melones Reservoir and channelimprovement on Stanislaus River is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers in House Document Numbered 453, 87th Congress, and adoptedand authorized by the Act of Congress approved October 23, 1962,(Public Law 87-874) at an estimated state cost of one hundred eightythousand dollars ($180,000).12648.6.  The Mormon Slough channel improvement project on CalaverasRiver is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with therecommendation of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered576, 87th Congress, and adopted and authorized by the act of Congressapproved October 23, 1962 (Public Law 87-874) at an estimated statecost of two million two hundred sixty thousand dollars ($2,260,000).12648.7.  The project for flood protection on the North Fork of theFeather River near Chester, Plumas County, is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers in House Document No. 314, 90th Congress, and adopted andauthorized by the Act of Congress approved August 13, 1968 (PublicLaw 90-483) at an estimated cost to the state of such sums as may beappropriated for state participation by the Legislature upon therecommendation and advice of the Reclamation Board. Thisauthorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on thisproject over the needs of other statewide programs in appropriationsof available funds.12649.  It is the intention of the Legislature that, if a feasibleplan can be found which will provide adequate flood control in theupper Sacramento Valley without the necessity of constructing a damacross the Sacramento River at the Table Mountain site, or any othersite in the same general vicinity and thereby prevent the necessityof flooding valuable agricultural land and at the same time preventdamage to the fishing resources of the Sacramento River, suchalternate plan should be adopted.12649.1.  The project for flood protection on the Sacramento Riveris further adopted and authorized substantially in accordance withthe recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Senate DocumentNumbered 103, 86th Congress, and as modified by the act of Congress,Public Law 86-645, 86th Congress, approved July 14, 1960, forcooperation by the Reclamation Board as provided in Section 8617.1 atan estimated cost to the state of such sums as may be appropriatedfor state participation by the Legislature upon recommendation andadvice of the Reclamation Board. This authorization shall not bedeemed to confer preference on this project over the needs of otherstatewide programs in appropriations of available funds.12650.  The plan of improvement for flood protection on variousstreams in the Merced County Stream Group in the San Joaquin Valleyis adopted and authorized substantially in accordance withrecommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered473, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, at an estimated cost tothe State of sixty-one thousand three hundred dollars ($61,300). Notwithstanding any estimated cost to the State contained in thissection, local cooperation which shall be furnished by the State inconnection with the plan of improvement for flood protection onvarious streams in the Merced County Stream Group in the San JoaquinValley, 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 extentindicated on Inclosure 3 of House Document Numbered 473,Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session. (b) Acquisition of lands, easements and rights of way necessaryfor construction of the following diversions to the capacitiesindicated: (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 variouscreeks: (1) Burns Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second on Burns Creek fromits confluence with Bear Creek upstream to the section line common toSections 3 and 10, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M. (2) Bear Creek: 2,000 cubic feet per second from its confluencewith Burns Creek upstream to the section line common to Sections 11and 12, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M.; 4,000 cubic feet per secondfrom its confluence with Black Rascal Creek Diversion upstream toits confluence with Burns Creek; 7,000 cubic feet per second from itsconfluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough to the Black RascalCreek Diversion; not less than 3,100 cubic feet per second from itsconfluence with the lower end of Black Rascal Slough to theconfluence with the head of Black Rascal Slough, so that the combinedcapacity of Bear Creek and Black Rascal Slough is not less than7,000 cubic feet per second; 7,000 cubic feet per second from thesection 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 ofBlack Rascal Slough. (3) Black Rascal Slough: Not less than 3,900 cubic feet per secondand so that the combined capacity of Black Rascal Slough and BearCreek is not less than 7,000 cubic feet per second. (4) Miles Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from the Merced-ElNido Highway upstream to the section line common to Sections 25 and26, T. 7 S., R. 15 E., M. D. B. & M. (5) Owens Creek: 400 cubic feet per second from Owens CreekDiversion to the bridge crossing at the section line common toSections 29 and 30, T. 7 S., R. 16 E., M. D. B. & M. (6) Mariposa Creek: 1,000 cubic feet per second from Owens CreekDiversion 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 ElNido Highway upstream to Owens Creek Diversion.12651.  The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposeson the Lower San Joaquin River and tributaries, including Tuolumneand Stanislaus Rivers, is adopted and authorized in accordance withthe recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Flood ControlCommittee Document Numbered 2, Seventy-eighth Congress, SecondSession, at an estimated cost to the State of eight hundredninety-four thousand dollars ($894,000).12652.  The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposeson the Calaveras River and Littlejohn Creek and tributaries isadopted and authorized substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House Document Numbered545, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session, at an estimated cost tothe State of two hundred four thousand dollars ($204,000).12653.  The plan of improvement on the Calaveras River andLittlejohn Creek includes the enlargement of channels of LittlejohnCreek below the Farmington Dam as subsequently approved by letter ofthe Chief of Engineers dated November 12, 1951, at an additionalestimated cost to the State of such sum as may be available for statecooperation for that purpose in the Flood Control Emergency Fund,pursuant to written authorization of the Department of Finance forFlood 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 otherwiseappropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature, payable fromthe Flood Control Fund of 1946, upon approval of the general plan forsuch channel enlargements by, and with the recommendation of, thedepartment.12654.  The project for the Fresno County Stream Group for floodcontrol is adopted and authorized substantially in accordance withthe recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House DocumentNumbered 845, Seventy-sixth Congress, Third Session, at an estimatedcost to the State of one hundred seventy-nine thousand five hundreddollars ($179,500).12655.  The City and County of San Francisco, the Modesto IrrigationDistrict, and the Turlock Irrigation District shall give assurancessatisfactory to the Secretary of War that the local cooperationrequired 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, theModesto Irrigation District, and the Turlock Irrigation District inconnection with the flood control projects within the watershed ofthe Tuolumne River, adopted and authorized in Section 12651, exceptinsofar as the projects include channel improvement works and levees.12656.  The City and County of San Francisco, the Modesto IrrigationDistrict, and the Turlock Irrigation District, in conjunction withthe War Department, shall execute the plans and projects within thewatershed of the Tuolumne River, referred to in Section 12651, exceptinsofar as the plans and projects relate to channel improvementworks and levees, and may make such modifications to the plans as maybe necessary to execute them for the purposes of Chapters 1 and 2 ofthis part.12656.5.  The project for flood protection on Middle Creek,California, is hereby authorized and adopted substantially inaccordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Engineers in HouseDocument numbered 367, Eighty-first Congress, and adopted andauthorized by the act of Congress approved August 17, 1954, at anestimated state cost of seven hundred ninety thousand dollars($790,000).12656.6.  The Reclamation Board is authorized to provide anyassurances to the Secretary of the Army which may be required inconnection with the accomplishment of emergency repair work underPublic Law 99, 84th Congress, 1st Session, approved June 28, 1955, orany acts amending or adding to the same, now or hereafter adopted,for projects which the Reclamation Board is authorized to provideassurances under Section 12657. The Reclamation Board is alsoauthorized to utilize any available appropriation it may have for thepurpose of acquiring any lands, easements and rights of waynecessary to the execution of any such repair work for whichassurances have been required by the Secretary of the Army.12656.7.  The Reclamation Board is authorized to provide anyassurances to the Secretary of the Army which may be required inconnection with the accomplishment of flood control or clearing workon the channel of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and theirtributaries, pursuant to Section 208 of Public Law 780, 83rdCongress, 2nd Session, approved September 3, 1954, or any actsamending or adding to the same now or hereafter adopted, or with theaccomplishment of any federal emergency flood control work onstate-owned property. This authorization is subject to the provisionsof Section 12828.12657.  (a) Except as otherwise provided in Chapter 1 (commencingwith Section 12570) and this chapter, the Reclamation Board shallgive assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that thelocal cooperation, required by Section 3 of the act of Congressapproved 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 ofCongress approved November 17, 1986 (P.L. 99-662, 99th Congress,Second Session) will be furnished by the state in connection with theflood 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 andon any flood control projects on any stream flowing into or in theSacramento Valley or the San Joaquin Valley heretofore or hereafterapproved and authorized by Congress. (b) Assurances provided pursuant to subdivision (a) shall not bemade until the local agency, by binding agreement with theReclamation Board, has agreed to assume all obligations underSections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive.12658.  Except as otherwise provided in Chapters 1 and 2 of thispart, the Reclamation Board, in conjunction with the War Department,shall execute the plans and projects referred to in Section 12657 andexercise all powers granted to it in Part 4, Division 5, of thiscode. The Reclamation Board may make such modifications andamendments to the plans as may be necessary to execute them for thepurposes stated in Chapters 1 and 2 of this part.12659.  The project for the Folsom Reservoir on the American Riveris adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with the planscontained in House Document Numbered 649, Seventy-eighth Congress,Second Session, with such modifications as in the discretion of theSecretary of War and the Chief of Engineers may be advisable, andwithout cost to the State.12660.  The project for the Isabella Reservoir on the Kern River forflood control and other purposes in the San Joaquin Valley isadopted and authorized substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers in his report dated January26, 1944, contained in House Document Numbered 513, Seventy-eighthCongress, Second Session, without cost to the State.12661.  The plan for the Terminus and Success Reservoirs on theKaweah and Tule Rivers for flood control and other purposes in theSan Joaquin Valley is adopted and authorized in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers in Flood Control CommitteeDocument Numbered 1, Seventy-eighth Congress, Second Session.12661.2.  (a) The project for flood control on the Tule River,Success Reservoir Enlargement Project, is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers 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 thatmay be appropriated by the Legislature for state cooperation, uponthe recommendation and advice of the Reclamation Board. (b) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River ImprovementJoint Powers Agreement may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, giveassurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that thenonfederal cooperation required by federal law will be furnished inconnection with the project for flood control adopted and authorizedin subdivision (a). (c) The agencies that are parties to the Tule River ImprovementJoint Powers Agreement, in conjunction with the Department of theArmy, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, carry out the design andconstruction of the Success Reservoir Enlargement Project and maymake modifications and amendments as necessary to carry out theproject for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570)and this chapter.12661.5.  (a) The project for flood control on the Kaweah River,Terminus Dam, is adopted and authorized substantially in accordancewith 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 WaterResources Development Act of 1996 as approved by Congress on October12, 1996 (Public Law 104-303), at an estimated cost to the state ofthe sum that may be appropriated by the Legislature for stateparticipation, upon the recommendation and advice of the ReclamationBoard. The Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent of the nonfederalcapital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancementfeatures of the project. (b) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District may, in lieu ofthe Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to the Secretaryof the Army that the local cooperation required by federal law,including the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, will befurnished in connection with the project. (c) The Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District, in conjunctionwith the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of the ReclamationBoard, carry out the plans and project and may make modifications andamendments of the plans as necessary to carry out the plans for thepurposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and thischapter. (d) Authorization of the project shall be contingent upon therecommendation, advice, and approval of the Reclamation Board andupon the expenditure of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) bythe department for local assistance for the project.12662.  The project for flood control and other purposes for theKings River and Tulare Lake Basin is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers in House Document Number 630, Seventy-sixth Congress, ThirdSession, as adopted and authorized by the act of Congress approvedDecember 22, 1944 (Public Law 78-534, the "Flood Control Act of 1944"), as modified by data in the Design Memorandum No. 3, Kings Riverand Tulare Lake, California, Kings River Channel Improvement, GeneralDesign, dated April 20, 1959, and by Letter Supplement No. 1 to suchDesign Memorandum No. 3, by the District Engineer, SacramentoDistrict, Corps of Engineers, at no cost to the state prior to July1, 1967, and thereafter at an estimated cost to the state of suchsums as may be appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislatureupon the recommendation and advice of the department. Thisauthorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on thisproject over the needs of other statewide programs in appropriationsof available funds. It is the intent of the Legislature that the state shall shareonly in costs for work done in accordance with Letter Supplement No.1 to such Design Memorandum No. 3.12662.1.  The Kings River Conservation District shall giveassurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the localcooperation, required by the act of Congress approved December 22,1944 (Public Law 78-534, the "Flood Control Act of 1944"), asmodified by Design Memorandum No. 3, Kings River and Tulare Lake,California, Kings River Channel Improvement, General Design, datedApril 20, 1959, and by Letter Supplement No. 1 to such DesignMemorandum No. 3, will be furnished by the district in connectionwith the plan of improvement for flood control adopted and authorizedin Section 12662.12662.2.  The Kings River Conservation District, in conjunction withthe Department of the Army, shall execute the plan of improvementfor flood control referred to in Section 12662 and exercise allpowers granted to it in the Kings River Conservation District Act(Chapter 931, Statutes of 1951), and the district may make suchmodifications or amendments to the plans as may be necessary toexecute them for the purposes of Chapters 1 (commencing with Section12570) and 2 (commencing with Section 12639) of this part. Thedepartment shall have authority and is hereby authorized to enterinto an agreement with the local agency pursuant to Section 12585.4.Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 12585.2 and 12585.3 thelocal agency may receive credit against its share of the costs oflands, easements, and rights-of-way required for the project whichwere acquired by the local agency after July 1, 1967.12663.  The plan of improvement for flood control and waterconservation on Cache Creek, including Clear Lake, in Yolo and LakeCounties, is hereby adopted and authorized generally in accordancewith the recommendations relating thereto contained in the interimreport of the Department of Water Resources entitled "Comparison ofAlternative Wilson Valley and Guinda Projects on Cache Creek," datedApril, 1958, at an estimated cost to the State of such sum as may beappropriated for state co-operation by the Legislature upon therecommendation and advice of the department.12664.  The project for the Beach-Stone Lake Unit of the MorrisonCreek Stream Group Flood Control Project is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the plans developed by the County ofSacramento at such estimated cost to the state as may beappropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon therecommendation and advice of the department. This authorization shallnot be deemed to confer preference on this project over the needs ofother statewide programs in appropriation of available funds.12665.  With respect to the project authorized in Section 12664, theCounty of Sacramento shall acquire the lands, easements, andrights-of-way, even though the project report has not been submittedby the Secretary of the Army or other authorized official to theCongress for project authorization, and may make application to thedepartment for reimbursement pursuant to Section 12829 upon inclusionof the Beach-Stone Lake Unit of the Morrison Creek Stream GroupFlood Control Project as part of a flood control project authorizedby Congress. Prior to the acquisition of any lands, easements, orrights-of-way for the project, the County of Sacramento shall executean agreement with the department under which it agrees to hold thestate harmless from damages due to the construction, operation, ormaintenance of the project.12666.  The project for flood protection on the streams in thevicinity of Fairfield, California, is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers in House Document No. 91-159, 91st Congress, First Session,and adopted and authorized by the act of Congress approved December31, 1970 (Public Law 91-611) at an estimated cost to the state ofsuch sums as may be appropriated for state participation by theLegislature upon the recommendation and advice of the ReclamationBoard. This authorization shall not be deemed to confer preference onthis project over the needs of other statewide programs inappropriations of available funds. No state funds shall beappropriated until federal advanced engineering and design funds areavailable. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12585.4, the ReclamationBoard shall have the authority and is hereby authorized to enterinto a loan agreement with the local agency pursuant to Section12585.4. The state is authorized to pay 50 percent of the nonfederalcapital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlife enhancementfeatures of the project pursuant to Section 12847.12667.  The project for flood control known as the Merced CountyStreams Project is adopted and authorized substantially in accordancewith the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in his reportdated November 25, 1970, and adopted and authorized by the Act ofCongress approved December 31, 1970 (Public Law 91-611) at anestimated cost to the state of such sums as may be appropriated forstate participation by the Legislature upon the recommendation andadvice of the Reclamation Board. This authorization shall not bedeemed to confer preference on this project over the needs of otherstatewide programs in appropriations of available funds. No statefunds shall be appropriated until federal construction funds areavailable, and no state funds shall be appropriated for any portionor unit of the project until the responsible local agency hasprovided assurances of financial capability to complete therecreational acquisition and development program for that portion orunit, as detailed in the project report. The Legislature affirms the topographical and hydrologiccharacteristics of the Merced County Stream Group for which provisionfor participation in reservoirs has been made in Section 12826 anddetermines that the Merced County Streams Project is a project of theMerced County Stream Group, as defined and excepted in Section12826. The Reclamation Board may loan the local agency the fundsnecessary to pay the local portion of the costs of the lands,easements, and rights-of-way. The rate of interest on the loan shallbe the current rate for the Pooled Money Investment Account. Allother provisions of Section 12585.4 shall be applicable to a loan tothe local agency under this section. Any money previously appropriated to the department for the MercedStream Channel Improvement shall be available for the purposes ofthis section, including that reappropriated from the Special Accountfor Capital Outlay in Item 3860-490-036(2) of the Budget Act of 1986(Chapter 186 of the Statutes of 1986).12668.  (a) The project for flood control on the San Joaquin Riveris 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 andsnagging work in the San Joaquin Channel, from Friant Dam to theStockton Deep Water Channel, and in that area of the North Fork ofthe Kings River and Mendota Pool from the southerly boundary of theJames Reclamation District No. 1606 to Mendota Dam. Because of theunique situation presented by this project, the department shallmaintain and operate, on behalf of the state, the work performed bythe Corps of Engineers on this project, and the cost of thatmaintenance and operation shall be borne by the state. (b) Any assurance agreement entered into between the Secretary ofthe Army and the Reclamation Board for this project shall provide formitigation of the impact of the project with the objective ofproviding a net long-term enhancement of the riparian habitat andfishery in the project area. (c) It is the intent of the Legislature, in reviewing futureprojects, to improve the capacity of the San Joaquin River to providefor mitigation of the impact of the project and net long-termenhancement of the riparian habitats and fisheries in the projectarea. (d) The Legislature finds and declares that the localresponsibility of maintenance of this and future federal projects inand along the San Joaquin River may be better, more efficiently, andmore fairly fulfilled by geographically larger, or regional, localpublic entities. The Legislature, therefore, directs the ReclamationBoard, in coordination with the department, to study the possibilityof creating, by a joint powers agreement or by special act of theLegislature, one or more regional districts to undertake at a futuretime local maintenance responsibility for this project. TheReclamation Board shall report its findings to the Legislature notlater than December 31, 1985.12669.  The plan of improvement for flood control and other purposeson the Fresno County Stream Group identified as the Redbank-FancherCreeks Flood Control Project, including the Redbank Creek DetentionBasin, is hereby adopted and authorized substantially in accordancewith the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers in House DocumentNumbered 98-147, at an estimated cost to the state of such sum as maybe appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature uponrecommendation and advice of the department or Reclamation Board,except that no nonflood control application of water may occur withinthe Redbank Creek Detention Basin except for landscape irrigation ordust control. The preconstruction environmental assessment by theUnited States Army Corp of Engineers shall include the conduct offield permeability tests and consideration of the recommendations setforth in the "Evaluation Of Impacts On The THAN Site By The ProposedRedbank Creek Flood Detention Basin," 1988, of the State Departmentof Health Services, Toxic Substances Control Division. Basin designcriteria and operational procedures shall include, but not be limitedto, the detailed post excavation soils mapping, installation andmonitoring of observation wells, and creation of a contingency fund,as indicated by the environmental assessment and as required forcompliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13(commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code). Ifstate bond act moneys are available for flood control purposes, theLegislature may appropriate those moneys for this project. Thisauthorization shall not be deemed to confer preference on thisproject over the needs of other statewide programs in theappropriation of available funds. Funds shall be appropriatedpursuant to this authorization only upon the act of Congress adoptingand authorizing the project as substantially described in HouseDocument Numbered 98-147. The Legislature affirms the topographicaland hydrological characteristics of the Fresno County Stream Groupfor which provision for participation in reservoirs has been made inSection 12868 and determines that the Redbank-Fancher Creeks FloodControl Project is a project on the Fresno County Stream Group, asdefined and excepted in Section 12826. The department or ReclamationBoard may loan the local agency the funds necessary to pay the localportion of the costs of the lands, easements, and rights-of-way, lessthe credit provided by Section 12585.3. The rate of interest on theloan shall be the current rate for the Pooled Money InvestmentAccount. The department or Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent ofthe nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlifeenhancement features of the project.12669.1.  The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District may, inlieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurances satisfactory to theSecretary of the Army that the local cooperation required by HouseDocument Numbered 98-147 will be furnished in connection with theproject for flood control adopted and authorized in Section 12669.12669.2.  The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, inconjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieu of theReclamation Board, execute the plans and project referred to inSection 12669 and may make modifications and amendments to the plansas may be necessary to execute the plans for the purposes of Chapter1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this part.12670.  The Cache Creek Settling Basin Unit of the plan ofimprovement for flood control and other purposes on Cache Creek ishereby adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers, in the report dated April27, 1981, and adopted and authorized by the Act of Congress approvedNovember 17, 1986 (Public Law 99-662), at an estimated cost to thestate of such sums as may be appropriated for state participation bythe Legislature upon the recommendation and advice of the ReclamationBoard. This authorization shall not be deemed to confer preferenceon this project over the needs of other statewide programs inappropriation of available funds. Notwithstanding Section 12585.5,the state shall pay all of the nonfederal costs required by PublicLaw 99-662. Notwithstanding Sections 12642 and 12828, the state shallmaintain and operate the unit and, through the Reclamation Board,shall hold the United States harmless from damages due to theconstruction of the works. Notwithstanding Section 12847, the statemay pay all of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation andfish and wildlife enhancement features of the unit.12670.2.  (a) The project for flood protection on the SacramentoRiver for the City of West Sacramento is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers, in the report "Sacramento Metro Area, California" datedJune 29, 1992, and as adopted and authorized by the act of Congressapproved October 31, 1992 (Public Law 102-580), at an estimated costto the state of the sum that may be appropriated by the Legislaturefor state participation, upon the recommendation and advice of thedepartment or the Reclamation Board. (b) The department or the Reclamation Board may pay 50 percent ofthe nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fish and wildlifeenhancement features of the project.12670.3.  The City of West Sacramento, or a joint power authorityformed by the City of West Sacramento and Reclamation Districts 537and 900, may, in lieu of the Reclamation Board, give assurancessatisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperationrequired by the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (Public Law102-580) will be furnished in connection with the project for floodcontrol adopted and authorized in Section 12670.2.12670.4.  The City of West Sacramento, or joint power authorityformed by the City of West Sacramento and Reclamation Districts 537and 900, in conjunction with the Department of the Army, may, in lieuof the Reclamation Board, carry out the plans and project referredto in Section 12670.2 and may make modification and amendments to theplans as may be necessary to carry out the plans for the purposes ofChapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) and this chapter.12670.7.  (a) The project for flood protection along the FeatherRiver and Yuba River is adopted and authorized substantially inaccordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers of theUnited States Army Corps of Engineers, in the report entitled "YubaRiver Basin Investigation, California Feasibility Report." (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (e) of Section 12585.5, thenonfederal engineering costs and the nonfederal design costs requiredby Section 2215 (b) and (c) of Title 33 of the United States Code,with regard to the project described in subdivision (a), are eligiblefor reimbursement by the state before federal and stateauthorization and before the appropriation of construction funds byCongress. (c) Funds shall be appropriated for the project in the annualBudget Act.12670.8.  (a) The project for flood protection measures on the UpperGuadalupe River in Santa Clara County is adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief ofEngineers of the United States Army Corps of Engineers in a reportdated August 19, 1998, or as that report may be subsequentlymodified, at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may beappropriated by the Legislature for state cooperation, upon therecommendation and advice of the department. The department may pay50 percent of the nonfederal capital costs of the recreation and fishand wildlife enhancement features of the project. (b) The Santa Clara Valley Water District shall give assurancessatisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that local cooperationrequired by the final report of the Chief of Engineers of the UnitedStates Army Corps of Engineers will be furnished by the district inconnection with the project for flood control adopted and authorizedin subdivision (a). (c) The Santa Clara Valley Water District, in conjunction with theDepartment of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project andmay make modifications and amendments to the plans as necessary tocarry out the plans for the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing withSection 12570) and this chapter.12670.10.  The project for flood protection along the American Riveris adopted and authorized substantially in accordance with therecommendations of the Chief of Engineers, in the report entitled"American River Watershed, California" dated June 27, 1996, and asadopted and authorized by Congress on October 12, 1996, in Section101 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303), atan estimated cost to the state of the sum that may be appropriatedby the Legislature for state participation, upon the recommendationand advice of the department or the Reclamation Board.12670.11.  (a) (1) The project for flood damage reduction andenvironmental restoration in the American River watershed inSacramento County is adopted and authorized substantially inaccordance with Congressional approval and the final report of theChief of Engineers dated November 5, 2002, as authorized by Section128 of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2004(P.L. 108-137), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that maybe appropriated for state cooperation by statute, upon therecommendation and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board. (2) The project includes the construction of a new bridge with anestimated cost of sixty-six million dollars ($66,000,000), of whichthirty-six million dollars ($36,000,000) is allocated to flood damagereduction and dam safety. (3) The state's share of the bridge project cost shall be at leastfive million, two hundred thousand dollars ($5,200,000), but notmore than nine million dollars ($9,000,000), of the project amountthat is allocated to flood damage reduction. (4) The calculation of the state's share of the funding pursuantto paragraph (3) shall be determined by the federal government'sallocation of the costs of the bridge to the dam safety features ofthe project. (b) The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency shall enter into anagreement with the department pursuant to which the agency agrees toindemnify and hold and save harmless the state, its officers, agents,and employees for any and all liability for damages that may ariseout of the planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance,repair, and rehabilitation of the project. (c) The City of Folsom shall serve as the nonfederal sponsor ofthe bridge authorized as part of the project and shall enter into anagreement with the department to receive the state's proportionateshare of the cost of the bridge and to indemnify and hold and saveharmless the state, its officers, agents, and employees for any andall liability for damages that may arise out of the planning, design,construction, operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation ofthe bridge.12670.12.  With regard to the project for flood control authorizedin Section 12670.10, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency mayjoin the department or the Reclamation Board in providing theSecretary of the Army with the assurances of nonfederal cooperationrequired by the Water Resources Development Act of 1996, and may, inconjunction with the Department of the Army, carry out the projectwith the modifications and amendments that may be necessary tofulfill the purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570) andthis chapter. The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency shall bereimbursed pursuant to Section 12585.5 for any project costs that theagency advances on behalf of the department or the ReclamationBoard, provided that prior to any such reimbursement, the agencyshall execute an agreement with the department under which it agreesto indemnify and hold the state harmless from damages due to theconstruction, operation, or maintenance of the project and agrees tooperate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate the project.12670.14.  The following projects in areas within the City ofSacramento and the Counties of Sacramento and Sutter are adopted andauthorized at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may beappropriated by the Legislature for state participation upon therecommendation and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board: (a) The project for flood control in the Natomas and NorthSacramento areas adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 9159of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1993 (Public Law102-396) substantially in accordance with the recommendations of theChief of Engineers in the report entitled "American River WatershedInvestigation" dated July 1, 1992. (b) The project for flood control along the American andSacramento Rivers adopted and authorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 substantiallyin accordance with the recommendations of the Chief of Engineers inthe report entitled "American River Watershed Project, California"dated June 27, 1996, as modified by Congress in Section 366 of theWater Resources Development Act of 1999, and as further modified toinclude the project features necessary to provide a 200-year level offlood protection along the American and Sacramento Rivers and withinthe Natomas Basin as described in the final engineer's report datedApril 19, 2007, adopted by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency. (c) The project to modify Folsom Dam adopted and authorized byCongress in Section 101(a)(6) of the Water Resources Development Actof 1999, as described in the United States Army Corps of EngineersSupplemental Information Report for the American River WatershedProject, California, dated March 1996, as modified by the reportentitled "Folsom Dam Modification Report, New Outlets Plan," datedMarch 1998, prepared by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, andas further modified by the Post-Authorization Change Report,American River Watershed Project (Folsom Dam Modification and FolsomDam Raise Projects), dated March 2007, adopted by Congress in Section3023 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. (d) (1) The project for flood control, environmental restoration,and recreation along south Sacramento County streams adopted andauthorized by Congress in Section 101(a)(7) of the Water ResourcesDevelopment Act of 1999 as described in the report of the Chief ofEngineers entitled "South Sacramento County Streams, California"dated October 6, 1998. (2) Notwithstanding Section 12657, at the discretion of theReclamation Board, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency mayprovide, for the project described in paragraph (1), the assurancesof local cooperation satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army, inaccordance with Section 12657, in lieu of assurances by theReclamation Board.12670.16.  (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, theSacramento Area Flood Control Agency's share of the nonfederalcapital costs of the projects for flood control authorized in Section12670.14 shall be calculated in accordance with Section 12585.5, andthe agency shall be reimbursed pursuant to Section 12585.5 for anycosts of project features that the agency advances on behalf of thedepartment or Reclamation Board if either of the followingrequirements is met: (1) The advances are made in response to a federal request forpayment of the nonfederal share of the cost of the project. (2) If the advances are made for project features that have notyet been authorized by Congress, the Reclamation Board has received awritten determination by the federal government that the projectfeatures will likely be authorized by Congress and, if so authorized,the advances will be eligible for credit toward the nonfederal shareof the cost of these features. (b) Prior to any reimbursement pursuant to subdivision (a), theagency shall execute an agreement with the department under which itagrees to indemnify and hold the state harmless from damages due tothe construction, operation, or maintenance of those projects andagrees to operate, maintain, repair, replace, and rehabilitate thoseprojects, or provide the agreement of its appropriate member agencyto do so.12670.20.  (a) The projects for flood protection and integratedresource management in the Colusa Basin are adopted and authorizedsubstantially in accordance with the "Colusa Basin Water ManagementProgram" dated February 1995 and its final environmentaldocumentation, at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that maybe appropriated by the Legislature for state participation, upon therecommendation and advice of the department or the Reclamation Board. (b) The state, any local public agency, or other entity maycooperate with any federal agency with regard to the planning,design, environmental compliance, financing, and construction ofprojects authorized in subdivision (a). (c) No state funds shall be expended for the projects described insubdivision (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 WaterManagement Program and the projects described in subdivision (a). (d) Except as specified in subdivision (c), for projectsauthorized in subdivision (a), the state shall pay both of thefollowing: (1) That portion of nonfederal capital costs attributable to floodcontrol required by Section 12585.5, or that may be required byamendment to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 12570). (2) That portion of nonfederal costs for fish, wildlife, andrecreational enhancement features established by Chapter 3.5(commencing with Section 12840). (e) If required by the Secretary of the Interior, the ReclamationBoard may give assurances satisfactory to the Secretary of theInterior that the local cooperation authorized in subdivision (b)will be furnished by the state in connection with the flood controland fish, wildlife, and recreational enhancement features of theprojects described in subdivision (a). Assurances provided pursuantto this subdivision may not be made until the local agency, bybinding agreement with the Reclamation Board, has agreed to assumeall obligations under Sections 12585 to 12585.5, inclusive, andSection 12642, or that may be required by amendment to Chapter 1(commencing with Section 12570). (f) The Colusa Basin Drainage District, or other appropriate localagency, shall establish and maintain a coordinated land use planningand decisionmaking process within the watershed to avoid unmitigatedhydraulic impacts.12670.22.  (a) The state may provide funds for the Middle CreekFlood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project in LakeCounty substantially in accordance with the Flood Damage Reductionand Environmental Restoration, Middle Creek, Lake County, California:Report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps ofEngineers dated November 29, 2004, and as authorized by Section 1001(11) of the federal Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (PublicLaw 110-114), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that maybe appropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon therecommendations and advice of the Central Valley Flood ProtectionBoard, including payment for any fish and wildlife enhancementfeatures as provided in Section 12847. (b) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall giveassurances satisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the localcooperation required by state or federal law will be furnished by thedistrict in connection with the project. (c) Lake County Watershed Protection District, in conjunction withthe Department of the Army, shall carry out the plans and projectand may make modifications and amendments to the plans as may berequired by state or federal law. (d) Lake County Watershed Protection District shall enter into anagreement with the department pursuant to which the district agreesto indemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers,agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages thatmay 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 anyeligibility of Lake County Watershed Protection District to receivestate funding made available pursuant to provisions of law other thanthis part if the receipt of those funds does not result inoverpayment for any feature of the project. (f) The Legislature finds and declares that the project describedin subdivision (a) modifies and replaces portions of the projectdescribed in Section 12656.5. The project described in subdivision(a) shall constitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control andthe portion of the project described in Section 12656.5 that isreplaced by the project described in subdivision (a) shall notconstitute a part of the State Plan of Flood Control.12670.23.  (a) The state may provide funds for the Hamilton CityFlood Damage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project in GlennCounty substantially in accordance with the Hamilton City FloodDamage Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration, Glenn County, California:Report of the Chief of Engineers of the United States Army Corps ofEngineers dated December 22, 2004, and authorized by Section 1001 (8)of the federal Water Resources Development Act of 2007 (Public Law110-114), at an estimated cost to the state of the sum that may beappropriated for state cooperation by the Legislature upon therecommendations and advice of the Central Valley Flood ProtectionBoard, including payment for any fish and wildlife enhancementfeatures as provided in Section 12847. (b) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall give assurancessatisfactory to the Secretary of the Army that the local cooperationrequired by state or federal law will be furnished by the district inconnection with the project. (c) Reclamation District No. 2140, in conjunction with theDepartment of the Army, shall carry out the plans and project and maymake modifications and amendments to the plans as may be required byfederal or state law. (d) Reclamation District No. 2140 shall enter into an agreementwith the department pursuant to which the district agrees toindemnify and hold harmless and save the state, and its officers,agents, and employees, from any and all liability for damages thatmay 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 anyeligibility of Reclamation District No. 2140 to receive state fundingmade available pursuant to provisions of law other than this part ifthe receipt of those state funds does not result in overpayment forany feature of the project.