Comments on and Protest of Temporary Urgency Change Petition Regarding Delta Water Quality

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | February 17th, 2023

Comments on the Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | March 15th, 2023

Comments on the Draft Pyrethroid Control Program and Research Plan

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | September 18th, 2023

Comments on the Scientific Basis for Implementation of Voluntary Agreements for the Sacramento River, Delta, and Tributaries

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | March 8th, 2023

Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Task Force Water Use Best Management Practices Report to the Legislature

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | October 21st, 2013

This report to Legislature, Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Task Force Water Use Best Management Practices, identifies specific practices to improve water use e

This report to Legislature, Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional Task Force Water Use Best Management Practices, identifies specific practices to improve water use efficiency and support California’s water supply sustainability. It is intended to provide the CII sectors with information on water-saving technologies and BMPs applicable in the CII sectors. The report is also intended for use as a resource for: • Existing and new businesses, facilities, and institutions • Developers, consultants, and designers • Water service providers • Planning agencies • Policy makers This two-part document is linked below.  The Executive Summary is also linked in the display window. Executive Summary Volume 1 - A Summary Volume 2 - Technical Information

Committee for Delta Resources Improvement Working Paper Regarding the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta/San Francisco Bay Estuary

Committee for Delta Resources Improvement | December 1st, 1986

Communities that rely on a contaminated groundwater source for drinking water

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | January 1st, 2013

AB 2222 (Caballero, Chapter 670, Statutes of 2008) requires the State Water Resources Control Board to submit a report to the Legislature that identifies: 1) communities

AB 2222 (Caballero, Chapter 670, Statutes of 2008) requires the State Water Resources Control Board to submit a report to the Legislature that identifies: 1) communities in California that rely on contaminated groundwater as a primary source of drinking water; 2) the principal contaminants and other constituents of concern; and 3) potential solutions and funding sources to clean up or treat groundwater or provide alternative water supplies. A “community,” for the purposes of this report, is defined as a Community Public Water System (Health and Safety Code Section 116395). When this report refers to communities that rely on a contaminated groundwater source, it is referring to community public water systems that draw water from a contaminated groundwater source prior to any treatment. Over 95 percent of the 38 million Californians get their drinking water from a public water system. The findings in this report do not reflect private domestic wells or other unregulated water systems since the state does not require these groundwater users to sample their wells, and consequently a comprehensive database for these groundwater sources does not exist. This report identifies 680 community water systems that, prior to any treatment, relied on a contaminated groundwater source during the most recent California Department of Public Health (CDPH) compliance cycle (2002-2010). It is important to note that, according to CDPH, over 98% of Californians on public water supply are served safe drinking water. Although many water suppliers draw from contaminated groundwater sources, most suppliers are able to treat the water or blend it with cleaner supplies before serving it to the public. Consequently, when this report refers to communities that rely on contaminated groundwater, it is referring to community public water systems that draw water from one or more contaminated groundwater wells prior to any treatment or blending. Some community water systems, however, cannot afford treatment or lack alternative water sources, and have served water that exceeds a public drinking water standard. Of the 680 community water systems that rely on a contaminated groundwater source, 265 have served water that exceeded a public drinking water standard during the most recent CDPH compliance cycle (2002-2010).

Community and Grower Engagement in Multibenefit Land Repurposing

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) | June 10th, 2022

Community estimate of global glacier mass changes from 2000 to 2023

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | February 19th, 2025

Glaciers are indicators of ongoing anthropogenic climate change1. Their melting leads to increased local geohazards2, and impacts marine3 and terrestrial4,5 ecosystems, r

Glaciers are indicators of ongoing anthropogenic climate change1. Their melting leads to increased local geohazards2, and impacts marine3 and terrestrial4,5 ecosystems, regional freshwater resources6, and both global water and energy cycles7,8. Together with the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, glaciers are essential drivers of present9,10 and future11,12,13 sea-level rise. Previous assessments of global glacier mass changes have been hampered by spatial and temporal limitations and the heterogeneity of existing data series14,15,16. Here we show in an intercomparison exercise that glaciers worldwide lost 273 ± 16 gigatonnes in mass annually from 2000 to 2023, with an increase of 36 ± 10% from the first (2000–2011) to the second (2012–2023) half of the period. Since 2000, glaciers have lost between 2% and 39% of their ice regionally and about 5% globally. Glacier mass loss is about 18% larger than the loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet and more than twice that from the Antarctic Ice Sheet17. Our results arise from a scientific community effort to collect, homogenize, combine and analyse glacier mass changes from in situ and remote-sensing observations. Although our estimates are in agreement with findings from previous assessments14,15,16 at a global scale, we found some large regional deviations owing to systematic differences among observation methods. Our results provide a refined baseline for better understanding observational differences and for calibrating model ensembles12,16,18, which will help to narrow projection uncertainty for the twenty-first century11,12,18. Click here for more about the Glacier Mass Balance Intercomparison Exercise 

Community Exposure to Tsunami Hazards in California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | February 20th, 2013

Evidence of past events and modeling of potential events suggest that tsunamis are significant threats to low-lying communities on the California coast. To reduce potenti

Evidence of past events and modeling of potential events suggest that tsunamis are significant threats to low-lying communities on the California coast. To reduce potential impacts of future tsunamis, officials need to understand how communities are vulnerable to tsunamis and where targeted outreach, preparedness, and mitigation efforts may be warranted. Although a maximum tsunami-inundation zone based on multiple sources has been developed for the California coast, the populations and businesses in this zone have not been documented in a comprehensive way. To support tsunami preparedness and risk-reduction planning in California, this study documents the variations among coastal communities in the amounts, types, and percentages of developed land, human populations, and businesses in the maximum tsunami-inundation zone.  The tsunami-inundation zone includes land in 94 incorporated cities, 83 unincorporated communities, and 20 counties on the California coast. According to 2010 U.S. Census Bureau data, this tsunami-inundation zone contains 267,347 residents (1 percent of the 20-county resident population), of which 13 percent identify themselves as Hispanic or Latino, 14 percent identify themselves as Asian, 16 percent are more than 65 years in age, 12 percent live in unincorporated areas, and 51 percent of the households are renter occupied. Demographic attributes related to age, race, ethnicity, and household status of residents in tsunami-prone areas demonstrate substantial range among communities that exceed these regional averages. The tsunami-inundation zone in several communities also has high numbers of residents in institutionalized and noninstitutionalized group quarters (for example, correctional facilities and military housing, respectively). Communities with relatively high values in the various demographic categories are identified throughout the report. The tsunami-inundation zone contains significant nonresidential populations based on 2011 economic data from Infogroup (2011), including 168,565 employees (2 percent of the 20-county labor force) at 15,335 businesses that generate approximately $30 billion in annual sales. Although the regional percentage of at-risk employees is low, certain communities, such as Belvedere, Alameda, and Crescent City, have high percentages of their local workforce in the tsunami-inundation zone. Employees in the tsunami-inundation zone are primarily in businesses associated with tourism (for example, accommodations, food services, and retail trade) and shipping (for example, transportation and warehousing, manufacturing, and wholesale trade), although the dominance of these sectors varies substantially among the 94 cities.  Although the number of occupants is not known for each site, the tsunami-inundation zone contains numerous dependent-population facilities, such as schools and child daycare centers, which may have individuals with limited mobility. The tsunami-inundation zone includes a substantial number of facilities that provide community services, such as banks, religious organizations, and grocery stores, where local residents may be unaware of evacuation procedures if previous awareness efforts focused on home preparedness. There are also numerous recreational areas in the tsunami-inundation zone, such as amusement parks, marinas, city and county beaches, and State and national parks, which attract visitors who may not be aware of tsunami hazards or evacuation procedures. During peak summer months, estimated daily attendance at city and county beaches can be approximately six times larger than the total number of residents in the tsunami-inundation zone.  Community exposure to tsunamis in California varies considerably—some communities may experience great losses that reflect only a small part of their community and others may experience relatively small losses that devastate them. Among 94 incorporated communities and the remaining unincorporated areas of the 20 coastal counties, the communities of Alameda, Oakland, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Huntington Beach, and San Diego have the highest number of people and businesses in the tsunami-inundation zone. The communities of Belvedere, Alameda, Crescent City, Emeryville, Seal Beach, and Sausalito have the highest percentages of people and businesses in this zone. On the basis of a composite index, the cities of Alameda, Belvedere, Crescent City, Emeryville, Oakland, and Long Beach have the highest combinations of the number and percentage of people and businesses in tsunami-prone areas.