South Coast

Water & Power Rates Request 2016-2020 Frequently Asked Questions

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | January 21st, 2016

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 conservation benefits of urban heat mitigation

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | October 20th, 2017

Many cities globally are seeking strategies to counter the consequences of both a hotter and drier climate. While urban heat mitigation strategies have been sho

Many cities globally are seeking strategies to counter the consequences of both a hotter and drier climate. While urban heat mitigation strategies have been shown to have beneficial effects on health, energy consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions, their implications for water conservation have not been widely examined. Here we use a suite of satellite- supported regional climate simulations in California to show that broad implementation of cool roofs, a heat mitigation strategy, not only results in significant cooling, but can also meaningfully decrease outdoor water consumption by reducing evaporative and irrigation water demands. Irrigation water consumption across the major metropolitan areas is reduced by up to 9% and irrigation water savings per capita range from 1.8 to 15.4 gallons per day across 18 counties examined. Total water savings are found to be the highest in Los Angeles county, reaching about 83 million gallons per day. Cool roofs are a valuable solution for addressing the adaptation and mitigation challenges faced by multiple sectors in California.

Water Distribution System Efficiency: An Essential or Neglected Part of the Water Conservation Strategy for Los Angeles County Water Retailers?

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) | November 2nd, 2015

The water governance system in Los Angeles County is complex and fragmented. Potable water supply in metropolitan Los Angeles County relies on over 100 water retailers, b

The water governance system in Los Angeles County is complex and fragmented. Potable water supply in metropolitan Los Angeles County relies on over 100 water retailers, both public and private. It is unclear how the current system with many small water retailers will succeed in promoting integrated water resource management. Among other changes, there will need to be a shifting of water supply sources from predominantly imported to more local resources through conservation, recycled water usage, stormwater capture and groundwater management. The institutional capacity of water retailers to instigate this transition will depend heavily on their capacity to maintain reliable water deliveries without significant losses from leakage and failing infrastructure. Additionally, with drought conditions prevalent in eleven of the last fourteen years in California, and increasing evidence of climate change impacts on all water resources in California, it is crucial that water retailers minimize water losses through their distribution systems to match the increasingly stringent conservation efforts required of their customers, and to efficiently utilize scarce supplies.  Until this year, existing regulations for water agencies in California only requested information about system losses for potable water systems with more than 3000 connections. These numbers were reported through Urban Water Management Plans every five years. However, loss estimates through breaks and leaks have not been separated out from other non-revenue uses of water. To date, the most effective efforts to monitor water losses in California are voluntary and limited to members of the California Urban Water Conservation Council. To understand water distribution efficiency in urban Los Angeles County, we developed a questionnaire regarding leakage monitoring, system-wide water losses, and the implementation of pre-emptive best management practices. We surveyed 10 of the approximate total of 100 water retailers. The sample was representative of retailers of many types, sizes, and geographical locations in metropolitan Los Angeles and divided into tiers of size (small, mid-sized and large) based on the number of connections served. The survey questionnaire also addressed other metrics including per capita water consumption, leakage volumes, water loss estimation methodology, water loss estimates and infrastructure monitoring and replacement. The survey indicated several findings. First, the percentage of water loss due to breaks and leaks, though possibly misrepresentative, is still a widely used metric to measure water losses. Sixty percent of the agencies sampled still monitor only ‘unaccounted for water’ and not ‘real losses’. Retailers that do measure real losses reported them to be between 3-4% of total water supplied, which is an improbably low compared to international estimates as elaborated in the literature review section. Different water retailers were divided on the efficacy of leak detection technologies, which demands more education on available leak detection technology and their usage.  Larger retailers reported greater use of most of the best management practices addressed by our survey to maintain storage and distribution systems. Most small retailers did not report prioritizing adoption and implementation of best management practices to minimize water loss. Also, small Mutual Water Companies that we contacted did not have information on distribution water losses available publicly. To improve water efficiency, small retailers could pool resources and expertise to better detect, monitor and reduce distribution water losses. Investor-owned utilities and special water districts serve a large customer base, but as a group, they were least responsive of all the sample water retailers we contacted. In summary, California water regulations should aim at recommending crucial best management practices, ensuring accurate and verifiable water loss monitoring and prescribing an effective water loss metric and maximum acceptable standard as a roadmap for water retailers 

Water from the Colorado River

Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) | July 1st, 1931

It is the purpose of this booklet to outline the Boulder Canyon Dam project on the Colorado River and the Metropolitan Aqueduct. Furthermore, it seems pertinent to indica

It is the purpose of this booklet to outline the Boulder Canyon Dam project on the Colorado River and the Metropolitan Aqueduct. Furthermore, it seems pertinent to indicate the extent of the population, industrial and agricultural resources of the Metropolitan area, which stand behind and urgently require Colorado River development.

Water Partnerships between Cities and Farms in Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | October 29th, 2020

The San Joaquin Valley and urban Southern California are worlds apart in many ways. Yet each face growing water challenges and a shared interest in ensuring reliable, aff

The San Joaquin Valley and urban Southern California are worlds apart in many ways. Yet each face growing water challenges and a shared interest in ensuring reliable, affordable water supplies to safeguard their people and economies. Both regions’ water futures could be more secure if they take advantage of shared water infrastructure to jointly develop and manage some water supplies.  Increasing climate volatility is heightening concerns about droughts of the future. And two major shifts in California’s water landscape have generated new opportunities for collaboration between urban and agricultural interests. For urban areas, significant declines in water demand have reduced pressure on supplies during normal and wet years for many agencies, making reliability for future droughts the primary concern. For the overdrafted San Joaquin Valley, the requirement to manage groundwater sustainably has heightened interest in expanding water supplies and underground storage.  Partnerships between Southern California cities and San Joaquin Valley farms could help alleviate groundwater overdraft in the valley while building drought resilience in Southern California. More flexible supplies can help agencies adapt to changing conditions. By coordinating the location of infrastructure investments, agencies can use partnerships to bring the water where and when it is most needed, at least cost.  This report explores a variety of solutions that could benefit both regions. For the San Joaquin Valley, we look for ways to augment water supplies to ease the transition to groundwater sustainability, while for Southern California we explore options that would increase cities’ ability to deal effectively with extended droughts. By diversifying water supplies, building connections to share water more flexibly, and preparing for the extreme events to come, such partnerships would support Governor Newsom’s Water Resilience Portfolio, and pave the way for a shared effort to make the state’s water system more resilient to a changing climate. 

Water Quality Control Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties

Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) | September 11th, 2014

The Los Angeles Regional Board's Basin Plan is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. Specifically, the Ba

The Los Angeles Regional Board's Basin Plan is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. Specifically, the Basin Plan (i) designates beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, (ii) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the state's antidegradation policy, and (iii) describes implementation programs to protect all waters in the Region. In addition, the Basin Plan incorporates (by reference) all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations. Those of other agencies are referenced in appropriate sections throughout the Basin Plan. The Basin Plan is a resource for the Regional Board and others who use water and/or discharge wastewater in the Los Angeles Region. Other agencies and organizations involved in environmental permitting and resource management activities also use the Basin Plan. Finally the Basin Plan provides valuable information to the public about local water quality issues. The Basin Plan is reviewed and updated as necessary. Following adoption by the Regional Board, the Basin Plan and subsequent amendments are subject to approval by the State Board, the State Office of Administrative Law (OAL), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).