Status of Water Quality in Groundwater Resources Used for Drinking-Water Supply in the Southeastern San Joaquin Valley, 2013–15: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | April 25th, 2024

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) investigated water quality of groundwater resources used for drinki

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) investigated water quality of groundwater resources used for drinking-water supplies in the Madera-Chowchilla, Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Tulare Lake groundwater subbasins of the southeastern San Joaquin Valley during 2013–15. The study focused primarily on groundwater resources used for domestic-supply wells in the southeastern San Joaquin Valley (SESJV-D), which correspond mostly to shallower parts of aquifer systems, compared to the groundwater resources used for public-supply wells in the southeastern San Joaquin Valley (SESJV-P). The investigation had three components: (1) characterization of the status of water quality in the SESJV-D, (2) comparison between water quality in the SESJV-D and SESJV-P, and (3) identification of natural and anthropogenic factors that potentially could affect water quality in these resources.

Status of Water-Quality Conditions in the United States, 2010–20, Chapter C of U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 15th, 2025

Key findings related to groundwater and surface water quality problems that affect water availability include the following: Drinking-water use is affected by geogen

Key findings related to groundwater and surface water quality problems that affect water availability include the following: Drinking-water use is affected by geogenic and anthropogenic contaminants. Elevated concentrations of arsenic, manganese, strontium, radium, adjusted gross alpha, and nitrate are common in drinking water aquifers serving more than 30 million people in the United States. About one-third of stream miles assessed as surface-water sourced drinking-water supply are impaired with respect to drinking-water use, most commonly because of non-mercury metals and salinity. Health-based drinking-water violations at public water systems may disproportionately affect socially vulnerable communities. People with domestic wells as their drinking-water source are more prone to exposure to contaminants compared to people served by public water systems. Ecological water uses are predominantly limited by nutrients, sediment, temperature, pathogens, salinity, and pesticides. Contaminants without or historically without regulatory thresholds (for example, polyfluoroalkyl substances [PFAS]) have been underrepresented in previous assessments and also likely contribute to ecological degradation and human exposure. Water availability for human and ecological use is limited by elevated constituent concentrations in surface water and groundwater because of human activities. Human activities include sources (for example, inorganic and organic chemicals), processes (for example, dredging), or permanent landscape modifications (for example, dams, urbanization). Interactions between groundwater and surface water can influence water quality. Surface-water recharge can be a source of contaminants to aquifers, whereas groundwater discharge, with slow transport times, results in long-term, lagged delivery of pollutants to surface waters (especially nitrate, chloride, PFAS, and other constituents). Little information exists regarding human-health exposure risks from mixtures of geogenic and anthropogenic drinking-water contaminants. Co-occurrence and mixtures of multiple water-quality constituents, taken together, can cause compounding negative effects on water availability but mixtures are rarely measured in standard monitoring protocols. Alternative water resources could increase water availability by providing additional supply from non-traditional sources such as reclaimed wastewater, brackish and saline water, and produced water from oil and gas development. Companion chapters: U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20, Chapter A Water Supply in the Conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter B Water Use Across the Conterminous United States, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter D  Climate Change and Future Water Availability in the United States, Chapter E  Integrated Water Availability in the Conterminous United States, 2010–20, Chapter F 

Stopping the Drain on Household Budgets: Addressing Tap Water Mistrust through Affordable Premise Plumbing Investments

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) | August 7th, 2019

This report focuses on the issue of tap water mistrust in the City of Los Angeles. While recent research into water quality of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power�

This report focuses on the issue of tap water mistrust in the City of Los Angeles. While recent research into water quality of Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) indicates that water at the tap for their customers is safe to drink, the Los Angeles metropolitan region has one of the highest rates of household mistrust in tap water in the nation.

Striving for Equity in Public Investments in Water in California: An Analysis of Prop 1 Implementation

University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) | August 21st, 2019

 In 2014, California voters approved a $7.5 billion bond measure to fund water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvements. Prop 1 included significant provisions t

 In 2014, California voters approved a $7.5 billion bond measure to fund water quality, supply, and infrastructure improvements. Prop 1 included significant provisions to prioritize investments in disadvantaged communities.  For this report, looking at Prop 1 spending midstream, we analyzed the $2.5 billion that had been assigned to projects as of April 2019 out of $7 billion of the bond funding that has been committed so far through budget appropriations. We analyzed how much of that funding is going to projects benefiting disadvantaged communities and technical assistance efforts to increase the capacity of those communities to secure funds and manage projects. The executive summary of this report with our topline findings and recommendations below also serves as an index to the rest of the detailed report that follows. 

Subsidized or subsidizing? Municipal drinking water service funds in California

Utilities Policy (Elsevier) | September 29th, 2022

In the longstanding debate over efficiency and effectiveness in drinking water provision between public versus privately governed systems, one of the main contention poin

In the longstanding debate over efficiency and effectiveness in drinking water provision between public versus privately governed systems, one of the main contention points is the reasons for different bill levels imposed by city-run as compared to privately owned water systems. In this study, we examine one potential explanation for disparities in bills: whether cities use their general funds to subsidize their drinking water fund operations or vice versa. Either practice goes against “user pays” principles, as pointed out by critics of municipal operation. However, the claims have not been tested empirically at scale. We extract and analyze city water enterprise fund financial data from the California State Controller Cities Raw Data of Financial Transaction Reports to empirically assess the extent to which and reasons why interfund transfers occur in California's 267 municipally owned water utilities. We find very little evidence that substantial interfund transfers, in either direction, occur between water enterprise funds and general funds within California cities, indicating that enterprise fund control measures are generally successful. These findings suggest that with proper regulation, the municipal fund subsidy debate is essentially a distraction from the real reasons why municipal and other water provider rates differ substantially.

Summary of Climate Change Impacts to Water and Sanitation for Frontline Communities in the United States: Water, Sanitation, and Climate Change in the United States Part 1

Pacific Institute | December 6th, 2023

Climate change is among the most urgent, wide-ranging crises we face. It poses significant challenges and is already resulting in severe impacts to drinking water and san

Climate change is among the most urgent, wide-ranging crises we face. It poses significant challenges and is already resulting in severe impacts to drinking water and sanitation access—both for those currently living without access and for communities where forces like drought, flooding, sea-level rise, wildfires, and intensifying storms threaten to degrade or strip basic services from the people. Access to sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible, and affordable water and sanitation is essential for human health and wellbeing, as well as economic prosperity—and climate change will inevitably make ensuring all have access more challenging. Without water and sanitation access, people do not have water to drink, cannot clean, shower, or wash their hands, and cannot safely dispose of human waste. They may have to travel long distances to purchase and haul water back to their homes. Without access to water, they also have less ability to cool their homes, protect themselves from wildfires, and work or go to school. An economic assessment by DigDeep found that for every household in the United States without access to water and sanitation, the domestic economy loses $15,800 annually in extra health care costs, time and money spent on bottled water, lost educational or work opportunities, and premature death (DigDeep 2022). (Click here for Part 2)

Tap Water Affordability in Arizona

Arizona State University (ASU) | February 20th, 2025

In this report, the Kyl Center for Water Policy presents a comprehensive set of tap water affordability data for community water systems (CWS) in Arizona. Communities can

In this report, the Kyl Center for Water Policy presents a comprehensive set of tap water affordability data for community water systems (CWS) in Arizona. Communities can use this study to better assess how their current and future charges for water impact low- and median-income households. Water access can be improved when water charges are designed with affordability in mind so that fewer families face the risk of disconnection due to non-payment. On the other hand, most water providers rely on fees to pay for replacing aging infrastructure and water system improvements to ensure reliability.

The case for state-level drinking water affordability programs: Conceptual and empirical evidence from California

Utilities Policy (Elsevier) | April 1st, 2020

Informed by the design of a program in California, we make a three-part argument for why state-level governments might consider implementing direct bill-assistance progra

Informed by the design of a program in California, we make a three-part argument for why state-level governments might consider implementing direct bill-assistance programs for drinking water service to address growing affordability concerns for low-income households. State-level operation of bill-assistance programs represents a departure from the global trend of allowing water utilities to operate bill-assistance programs at their own discretion. We first explain the motivation for enhanced public sector support to help households pay for drinking water service. In state-level contexts such as California, we find that the basic household affordability equation has worsened due to an increase in the numerator of residential retail bills and a stagnation in the denominator of household incomes. We next demonstrate why direct bill assistance to households is necessary even with the presence of other system-level financial support or retail rate structure policies. Finally, we make the case that direct bill-assistance programs are best situated at the state level, due to substantial variation in systems’ capacity and demonstrated willingness to run their own robust affordability programs for vulnerable customers.

The challenge of closing the climate adaptation gap for water supply utilities

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 29th, 2024

The Human Right to Water

Pacific Institute | May 1st, 2007

More than a billion people lack access to safe drinking water. Two and a half billion people live without access to adequate sanitation systems necessary to reduce exposu

More than a billion people lack access to safe drinking water. Two and a half billion people live without access to adequate sanitation systems necessary to reduce exposure to water-related diseases. The failure of the international aid community, nations, and local organizations to satisfy these basic human needs has led to substantial, unnecessary, and preventable human suffering. Tens of thousand of people, mostly young children and the elderly, die every day from water-related diseases. In this analysis, Peter Gleick address three critical questions: 1. Is there a human right to water? 2. If there is a human right to water, what is the advantage and implications of acknowledging such a right? 3. What are the obligations of states, regional governments, organizations, and individuals in achieving these rights? […]