Shop – California Water Library

Page

Showing
41-51 of 68

Per Page

Sort By

Measuring Progress Toward Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California Defining Goals, Indicators, and Performance Measures

Pacific Institute | September 13th, 2018

Summary

Most people in California take for granted the water and sanitation in their homes. They turn the tap and clean, relatively inexpensive, abundant water flows out.

Most people in California take for granted the water and sanitation in their homes. They turn the tap and clean, relatively inexpensive, abundant water flows out. They flush the toilet, and waste vanishes. Yet there are communities in California who do not have these basic necessities in their homes. In January 2018, over half a million Californians were served by water utilities that were out of compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The worst outbreak of Hepatitis A in recent memory occurred in 2016-2018 due to open defecation and lack of handwashing facilities for persons experiencing homelessness. California’s tribes continue to face problems of poor housing and water and sanitation service, with two-thirds of tribal communities reporting inadequate home plumbing in 2015. And the cost of water has increased for many, particularly among small and medium size systems, with 39 community water systems in the state charging more than $100 a month for 12 CCF of water. In response to the problem, California enacted the Human Right to Water in 2012, declaring that “Every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” The California State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) further recognized the need to address water and sanitation for disadvantaged communities when it adopted a resolution directing staff to “develop performance measures for the evaluation of the board’s progress towards the realization of the human right to water, evaluate that progress, and explore ways to make that information more readily available to the public,” and to “work with... stakeholders to develop new or enhance existing systems to collect the data needed to identify and track communities that do not have, or are at risk of not having, safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” This report offers a unified framework on how to measure progress toward universal access to water and sanitation in California.

View Document Download Now Email

Measuring Progress Toward Universal Access to Water and Sanitation in California: Defining Goals, Indicators, and Performance Measures

Pacific Institute | September 15th, 2018

Summary

In January 2018, over half a million Californians were served by water utilities that were out of compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The worst outbreak o

In January 2018, over half a million Californians were served by water utilities that were out of compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The worst outbreak of Hepatitis A in recent memory occurred in 2016-2018 due to open defecation and lack of handwashing facilities for persons experiencing homelessness. California’s tribes continue to face problems of poor housing and water and sanitation service, with two-thirds of tribal communities reporting inadequate home plumbing in 2015.1 And the cost of water has increased for many, particularly among small and medium size systems, with 39 community water systems in the state charging more than $100 a month for 12 CCF of water. In response to the problem, California enacted the Human Right to Water in 2012, declaring that “Every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.”

View Document Download Now Email

National trends in drinking water quality violations

National Academy of Sciences (NAS) | February 27th, 2018

Summary

Ensuring safe water supply for communities across the United States is a growing challenge in the face of aging infrastructure, impaired source water, and straine

Ensuring safe water supply for communities across the United States is a growing challenge in the face of aging infrastructure, impaired source water, and strained community finances. In the aftermath of the Flint lead crisis, there is an urgent need to assess the current state of US drinking water. However, no nationwide assessment has yet been conducted on trends in drinking water quality violations across several decades. Efforts to reduce viola- tions are of national concern given that, in 2015, nearly 21 million people relied on community water systems that violated health- based quality standards. In this paper, we evaluate spatial and temporal patterns in health-related violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act using a panel dataset of 17,900 community water systems over the period 1982–2015. We also identify vulnerability factors of communities and water systems through probit regres- sion. Increasing time trends and violation hot spots are detected in several states, particularly in the Southwest region. Repeat viola- tions are prevalent in locations of violation hot spots, indicating that water systems in these regions struggle with recurring issues. In terms of vulnerability factors, we find that violation incidence in rural areas is substantially higher than in urbanized areas. Meanwhile, private ownership and purchased water source are associated with compliance. These findings indicate the types of underperforming systems that might benefit from assistance in achieving consistent compliance. We discuss why certain violations might be clustered in some regions and strategies for improving national drinking water quality.

View Document Download Now Email

Nationwide geospatial analysis of county racial and ethnic composition and public drinking water arsenic and uranium

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | December 3rd, 2022

Summary

There is no safe level of exposure to inorganic arsenic or uranium, yet recent studies identified sociodemographic and regional inequalities in concentrations of these fr

There is no safe level of exposure to inorganic arsenic or uranium, yet recent studies identified sociodemographic and regional inequalities in concentrations of these frequently detected contaminants in public water systems across the US. We analyze the county-level association between racial/ethnic composition and public water arsenic and uranium concentrations from 2000–2011 using geospatial models. We find that higher proportions of Hispanic/Latino and American Indian/Alaskan Native residents are associated with significantly higher arsenic and uranium concentrations. These associations differ in magnitude and direction across regions; higher proportions of non-Hispanic Black residents are associated with higher arsenic and uranium in regions where concentrations of these contaminants are high. The findings from this nationwide geospatial analysis identifying racial/ethnic inequalities in arsenic and uranium concentrations in public drinking water across the US can advance environmental justice initiatives by informing regulatory action and financial and technical support to protect communities of color.

View Document Download Now Email

Nearly a Million Californians Lack Access to Safe Drinking Water

State of California | July 26th, 2022

Summary

Our audit of the State Water Board’s efforts to help provide Californians with safe drinking water highlighted the following: More than 370 of the State’s water

Our audit of the State Water Board’s efforts to help provide Californians with safe drinking water highlighted the following: More than 370 of the State’s water systems, serving nearly a million Californians, exceed the maximum contaminant levels for substances that are harmful to human health. More than 150 of these systems have been failing for at least five years. Hundreds of additional water systems are currently at risk of failing. The State Water Board has not prioritized the processing of water systems’ funding applications so that the systems can improve their water quality. Over the past five years, the average length of time for water systems to complete their applications and receive funding nearly doubled, from 17 months to 33 months. The State Water Board has not established performance goals or metrics related to its cumbersome application process. Although the State Water Board provides water systems with technical assistance to plan their improvements and apply for funds, it has not adequately monitored the performance of the technical assistance providers with which it contracts. The State Water Board needs to better ensure that its staff and its contracted providers do not duplicate each other’s outreach efforts.

View Document Download Now Email

Open data and stormwater systems in Los Angeles: applications for equitable green infrastructure

Local Environment (Taylor & Francis) | February 6th, 2018

Summary

Urban stormwater systems traditionally used “grey” infrastructure to manage runoff. Contemporary designs now incorporate “green” infrastructure, which offers addi

Urban stormwater systems traditionally used “grey” infrastructure to manage runoff. Contemporary designs now incorporate “green” infrastructure, which offers additional potential benefits such as urban amenities and health. Understanding how green and grey infrastructure investments are distributed across urban areas is important for new goals of promoting environmental justice in planning. In California, for instance, public investments increasingly require a percentage of funds to be spent in disadvantaged communities. Recent advancements in the availability of high-detail geographic data in cities can support prioritising investments to fulfil these multiple benefits. This paper analyses the distribution of stormwater infrastructure in Los Angeles (LA) County in relation to design criteria, urban structure and sociodemographic information. It demonstrates an approach for identifying projects that simultaneously address engineering needs and promote equity. Statistical analysis of high-detail sewer locations reveals geographic correlations with key local design parameters, urban characteristics and sociodemographic indicators. Watershed areas in LA County were identified that support multi-benefit projects, meeting dual criteria for infrastructure improvements and disadvantaged community status. As stormwater systems are increasingly designed for multi-benefit outcomes, new design frameworks can emphasise both performance and social equity.

View Document Download Now Email

Overview of Disadvantaged Communities and Native American Tribes in the Santa Ana River Watershed

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | December 19th, 2003

Summary

This report provides a brief description of Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) and Native American Indian Tribes (Tribes) located in or near the Santa Ana River Watershed (

This report provides a brief description of Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) and Native American Indian Tribes (Tribes) located in or near the Santa Ana River Watershed (SARW), and a summary of water and related resource opportunities and challenges facing these entities. The information was gathered from several sources including personal interviews, web research, documentation review, and publicly available information. This report addresses DACs and Tribes separately, as they each have very different and distinctive demographics and economic bases. This document is not meant to be an exhaustive analysis of their unique factors, but rather an introduction and, in some cases, an overview of these populations and their unique water resources requirements. There are legitimate water quality issues that impact low income and Tribal communities throughout the SARW, but some perceptions of unsafe water where water supplies are clearly safe for public consumption identify another problem. The solution to these issues is to ensure that all communities have the information, financial and technical resources, and administrative and regulatory policies they need to make informed decisions that can result in benefits to all members of communities within the Watershed. One of the key provisions found through this research that could assist DACs is the 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments and the 2006 Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) program. Through the DWSRF, states can provide below-market interest rate loans to publicly and privately owned community water systems and nonprofit non-community water systems for necessary infrastructure improvements. States may also establish separate eligibility criteria and special funding options for economically disadvantaged communities through this program. Section 1452 of the SDWA defines a disadvantaged community as “the service area of a public water system that meets affordability criteria established after public review and comment by the State in which the public water system is located.” Under this section, states may provide additional subsidies (including forgiveness of principal) to communities that meet the established criteria, or that are expected to meet these criteria as a result of a proposed project. Though no special provision was found related to Tribes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports “Tribal Assumption of Federal Environmental Laws” under federal statutes, stating, among other things, that “[t]he Agency will recognize tribal governments as the primary parties for setting standards, making environmental policy decisions, and managing programs for reservations, consistent with Agency standards and regulations.” Three Federal environmental statutes - the SDWA, the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act - explicitly authorize EPA to “treat tribes in the same manner as states” for purposes of implementing various EPA environmental programs that may be of benefit to these communities.

View Document Download Now Email

Plumbing the Depths: Californians Without Toilets and Running Water

Pacific Institute | July 15th, 2019

Summary

California’s Human Right to Water law states that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption

California’s Human Right to Water law states that “every human being has the right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary purposes.” To date, the policy discussion on meeting California’s Human Right to Water has focused largely on expanding and improving drinking water utility services in the state, and improving the quality and reliability of drinking water for rural households using domestic wells. Sanitation and wastewater have received less attention. There also has been less attention paid to individuals and households in communities served by functional water and wastewater utilities but lacking the plumbing necessary to access those services. To partially remedy these gaps, we set out to better understand the number of Californians with inadequate access to toilets and hot and cold running water.

View Document Download Now Email

PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and the Environment

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | July 28th, 2022

Summary

With California facing a severe drought and wildfire season, public awareness has risen of the impact of climate change as well as state policies to reduce greenhouse gas

With California facing a severe drought and wildfire season, public awareness has risen of the impact of climate change as well as state policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A sharp increase in petroleum prices has led to discussions about expanding oil production and renewable energy sources. These are among the key findings of a statewide survey on environmental issues conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California from July 8 to 15, 2022.

View Document Download Now Email

Proposed Drinking Water Cost Assessment Model Assumptions on Physical Consolidation

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | July 14th, 2023

Summary

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is proposing an updated methodology for estimating potential modeled physical consolidation costs for Failing

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is proposing an updated methodology for estimating potential modeled physical consolidation costs for Failing public water systems, At-Risk public water systems, state small water systems, and domestic wells. Non-consolidation options will be covered in detail in subsequent white papers.

View Document Download Now Email

← Prev

Page : 5

Type

California Water Plan (1)
Case study (2)
Conference proceedings (3)
Essay (2)
Fact sheet (2)
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) review findings (1)
Guidance Document (1)
Issue Paper (3)
Journal Article (12)
Legislation (1)
Letter (1)
NGO Position Paper (1)
Policy Brief (1)
Report (40)
White Paper (1)

Topic

Agriculture (1)
Climate Change (9)
Drinking Water (40)
Drought & Hydrology (8)
Ecosystem & Species Management (2)
Environmental Justice (4)
Federal Water Quality (2)
Flood Management (5)
Geochemistry (1)
Geohydrology (2)
Groundwater (15)
History (1)
Human Right to Water (25)
Infrastructure (14)
Landscape Reform (1)
Modeling (4)
Non Point Pollution Sources (1)
People & Water (18)
Planning & Management (20)
Policy (2)
Pollutants (3)
Sanitation (4)
State Water Quality (2)
Stormwater (3)
Tribal Water Issues (6)
Uncategorized (2)
Water & Energy (1)
Water Quality (19)
Water Quality Monitoring (2)
Water Rights, Water Law (1)
Water Supply (25)
Water Use & Efficiency (4)

Keywords

agriculture (2)
California Water Plan (1)
Central Valley (9)
climate change (10)
Colorado River (1)
disadvantaged communities (DACs) (68)
drinking water (36)
drought (12)
economic analysis (9)
ecosystem management (1)
ecosystem restoration (1)
environmental justice (12)
flood management (3)
floodplain restoration (1)
fugitive dust (1)
funding (2)
Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program (1)
groundwater contamination (3)
Groundwater Exchange (9)
groundwater pumping impacts (4)
groundwater recharge (3)
Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) (3)
human right to water (16)
infrastructure (9)
land use (4)
modeling (4)
nitrates (2)
outreach and engagement (3)
planning and management (10)
pollutants (2)
recycled water (2)
risk assessment (5)
Salton Sea (1)
stormwater (3)
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) (7)
Trading - See Water Markets (1)
tribal water issues (5)
urban water conservation (4)
wastewater (1)
water and energy (1)
water pricing (3)
water quality (17)
water rights (1)
water supply (9)
water supply forecasting (1)
water use efficiency (1)

Publisher

American Geophysical Union (AGU) (1)
California Department of Water Resources (DWR) (8)
California Energy Commission (CEC) (1)
California Law Review (1)
California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (6)
Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment (CLEE) (1)
Clean Water Action (1)
Environmental Integrity Project (1)
Groundwater Leadership Forum (GLF) (1)
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management (Taylor & Francis) (1)
Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (LRWQCB) (1)
Local Environment (Taylor & Francis) (1)
Los Angeles Waterkeeper (LA Waterkeeper) (1)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (1)
Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) (5)
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) (1)
Pacific Institute (16)
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) (1)
Restore the Delta (1)
Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier) (2)
Society and Natural Resources (Routledge) (1)
State of California (2)
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) (1)
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (1)
United States Congress (1)
University of California, Davis (UC Davis) (2)
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (2)
University of Southern California (USC) (1)
Utilities Policy (Elsevier) (1)
Water Foundation (1)
Western Political Science Association (2)

Basin

Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - Central 4-011.04 (1)
Coastal Plain of Los Angeles - West Coast 4-011.03 (1)
San Fernando Valley 4-012 (1)
San Gabriel Valley 4-013 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Chowchilla 5-022.05 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Delta-Mendota 5-022.07 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Eastern San Joaquin 5-022.01 (2)
San Joaquin Valley - Kaweah 5-022.11 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Kern 5-022.14 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Kings 5-022.08 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Madera 5-022.06 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Merced 5-022.04 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Tulare Lake 5-022.12 (1)
San Joaquin Valley - Tule 5-022.13 (1)

Hydrological Region

Central Coast (18)
Colorado River (17)
Lower Basin States and Mexico - Colorado River (4)
National (8)
North Coast (14)
North Lahontan (16)
Sacramento River (21)
San Francisco Bay (15)
San Joaquin River (26)
South Coast (21)
South Lahontan (15)
Tulare Lake (24)
Upper Basin States - Colorado River (1)

Reset

Search for:

CONTACT