Central Coast

Volatile organic compounds in groundwater used for public supply across the United States: Occurrence, explanatory factors, and human-health context

Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier) | March 11th, 2022

This systematic assessment of occurrence for 85 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in raw (untreated) groundwater used for public supply across the United States (U.S.), w

This systematic assessment of occurrence for 85 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in raw (untreated) groundwater used for public supply across the United States (U.S.), which includes 43 compounds not previously monitored by national studies, relates VOC occurrence to explanatory factors and assesses VOC detections in a human-health context. Samples were collected in 2013 through 2019 from 1537 public-supply wells in aquifers representing 78% of the volume pumped for public drinking-water supply. Laboratory detection limits for VOCs generally were less than 0.1 μg/L. Detections were reported for 36% of the sampled principal-aquifer area (38% of sampled wells) and were most common in wells in shallow, unconfined aquifers in urban areas that produce high proportions of modern-age and oxic groundwater. The disinfection by-product trichloromethane (chloroform) was the most commonly detected VOC associated primarily with anthropogenic sources (24% of the sampled area, 25% of sampled wells), followed by the gasoline oxygenate methyl tert-butyl ether (8.4% of area, 11% of wells). Carbon disulfide (12% of area, 14% of wells) was examined separately because of likely substantial contributions from natural sources. Newly monitored VOCs were each detected in

Water Accounting in Western US, Australia, and Spain: Comparative Analysis

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) | January 10th, 2020

Water Allocation in California - Legal Rights and Reform Needs

Golden Gate University (GSU) | March 31st, 1982

FOREWARD: Water supply, allocation, use and conservation are constantly debated in California, often appearing as highly charged political issues in candidates' races and

FOREWARD: Water supply, allocation, use and conservation are constantly debated in California, often appearing as highly charged political issues in candidates' races and on election ballots. This year is no exception, with major ballot propositions already scheduled for the June primary election and being circulated to qualify for the November general election. Accordingly this Research Paper on legal aspects of water allocation is being published for the valuable background it affords readers wishing to learn more about the subject. The author draws on his legal expertise, as well as his experience as Staff Director of the Governor's Commission to Review California Water Rights Law. The paper emphasizes the crucial role of water rights in California water management, and it points to the need for and present lack of a political consensus on water law reform. The author concludes by suggesting forces that could bring about interest-group realignments and other developments favorable to achieving the needed consensus on water law and management reform that so far has eluded Californians. Stanley Scott Assistant Director Institute of Governmental Studies March 1982

Water and Energy in California

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | December 6th, 2022

Water Available for Replenishment 2018

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | April 12th, 2018

Water Demand Projection Accuracy and Demand Management Trends in California Cities

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | November 21st, 2025

This study investigates the accuracy of long-term water demand projections and tracks the evolution of water demand management incentives across 61 California water suppl

This study investigates the accuracy of long-term water demand projections and tracks the evolution of water demand management incentives across 61 California water suppliers from 2000 to 2020. Through a systematic analysis of Urban Water Management Plans, we find that water suppliers consistently overestimated future demand by an average of 25% for 5-year projections and 74% for 20-year projections. This overestimation stems primarily from assumptions about per capita water demand rather than population growth estimates. While suppliers generally projected stable or increasing per capita demand, actual water demand per capita declined by 1.9% annually between 2000 and 2020, leading to a decoupling of water demand from population growth. Concurrently, we document a substantial increase in water demand management incentives, with non-voluntary regulations emerging as the dominant demand management approach by 2020, largely driven by state policies like the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and California Green Building Standards. Demand management efforts have evolved from primarily indoor and educational initiatives toward outdoor-focused non-voluntary regulations and rebates. This shift appears closely linked to the reduction in per capita demand that suppliers failed to fully capture in their water demand projections. Our findings underscore the importance of incorporating dynamic conservation trends into demand projections and suggest that suppliers should develop more sophisticated forecasting methods that account for the continuing evolution of water efficiency incentives. This research provides valuable insights for water resource planners seeking to improve the accuracy of water demand projections in an era of increasing conservation and climate uncertainty.

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) | March 1st, 2016

The objective of this Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin, or Basin Plan, is to show how the quality of the surface and ground waters in the Central

The objective of this Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin, or Basin Plan, is to show how the quality of the surface and ground waters in the Central Coast Region should be managed to provide the highest water quality reasonably possible. Water uses and water benefits vary. Water quality is an important factor in determining use and benefit. For example, drinking water has to be of higher quality than the water used to irrigate pastures. Both are legitimate uses, but the quality requirements for irrigation are different from those for domestic use. The plan recognizes such variations. This Basin Plan lists the various water uses (Beneficial Uses, Chapter Two). Second, it describes the water quality which must be maintained to allow those uses (Water Quality Objectives, Chapter Three). Federal terminology is somewhat different, in that beneficial uses and water quality objectives are combined and the combination is called Water Quality Standards. Chapter Four, the Implementation Plan, then describes the programs, projects, and other actions which are necessary to achieve the standards established in this plan. Chapter Five, Plans and Policies, summarizes State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) plans and policies to protect water quality. Chapter Six describes statewide surveillance and monitoring programs as well as regional surveillance and monitoring programs. The Regional Board implements the Basin Plan by issuing and enforcing waste discharge requirements to individuals, communities, or businesses whose waste discharges can affect water quality. These requirements can be either State Waste Discharge Requirements for discharges to land, or federally delegated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for discharges to surface water. Methods of treatment are not specified. When such discharges are managed so that: 1) they meet these requirements; 2) water quality objectives are met; and, 3) beneficial uses are protected, water quality is controlled. The Basin Plan is also implemented by encouraging water users to improve the quality of their water supplies, particularly where the wastewater they discharge is likely to be reused. Public works or other projects which can affect water quality are reviewed and their impacts identified. Proposals which implement or help achieve the goals of the Basin Plan are supported; the Regional Board makes water quality control recommendations for other projects. To check for any updates or amendments since this document was loaded into the library, please visit the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Board's basin plan page.

Water quality for agriculture

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) | July 15th, 1985

Water Quality in Basin-Fill Aquifers of the Southwestern United States: Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah, 1993–2009

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 15th, 2014

Water Quality in California

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | February 23rd, 2026