Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. State Water Resources Control Board

Second Appellate District, Court of Appeal of the State of California | February 27th, 2023

Making Conservation a California Way of Life - Revised

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | March 12th, 2024

Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life Proposed Regulation Review of the Water Board’s Standardized Regulatory Impact Analysis (SRIA)

Mesa Water District | September 28th, 2023

Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life: Implementing Executive Order B-37-16

State of California | April 7th, 2017

In May of 2016 Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed Executive Order (B?37?16) that instructed State agencies to help Californians adopt permanent changes to use water more

In May of 2016 Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed Executive Order (B?37?16) that instructed State agencies to help Californians adopt permanent changes to use water more wisely. The Executive Order laid out a framework for moving the state from temporary, emergency water conservation measures to a more durable approach customized to the unique conditions of each local water agency. This report builds upon the Executive Order and provides recommendations for how to implement long?term improvements to water supply management that support water conservation.

Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life: Primer of 2018 Legislation on Water Conservation and Drought Planning Senate Bill 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill 1668 (Friedman)

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | November 30th, 2018

In 2018, the California State Legislature (Legislature) enacted two policy bills, (Senate Bill (SB) 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 (Friedman)), to establish

In 2018, the California State Legislature (Legislature) enacted two policy bills, (Senate Bill (SB) 606 (Hertzberg) and Assembly Bill (AB) 1668 (Friedman)), to establish a new foundation for long-term improvements in water conservation and drought planning to adapt to climate change and the resulting longer and more intense droughts in California. These two bills amend existing law to provide expanded and new authorities and requirements to enable permanent changes and actions for those purposes, improving the state's water future for generations to come.

Managing Drought: Learning from Australia

Pacific Institute | February 1st, 2016

Overall, Australia survived the Millennium Drought, demonstrating world leading innovation and exceptional examples of water planning and management driven by crisis. Yet

Overall, Australia survived the Millennium Drought, demonstrating world leading innovation and exceptional examples of water planning and management driven by crisis. Yet there are also examples of missed opportunities, as well as initiatives and decisions that did not work well. The research presented here reflects on some of the key lessons from the Australian Millennium Drought experience in order to assess the opportunities for California. This report serves as a powerful resource for Californian water planners and managers as it grapples with drought and seeks to build resilient and sustainable water systems. It provides a one-stop shop overview of the key events and initiatives implemented in Australia’s four largest cities – Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane (and the surrounding south east Queensland region), and Perth. The work represents one interpretation of the drought and responses, informed by significant engagement with utilities and governments throughout that period, and a close working knowledge of the water systems and the policy environment. Specific attention is given to the role of demand-side measures in reducing the impact of drought. In Australia, urban water efficiency was the quiet achiever – saving more water at lower cost and greater speed than supply options. California can benefit from long-term structural water savings by implementing water efficiency measures at a similar breadth and scale.

Memorandum of Understanding by and among Colorado River Basin Municipal and Public Water Providers

Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) | November 15th, 2022

Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and Compliance Urban Per Capita Water Use (For the Consistent Implementation of the Water Conservation Act of 2009)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | April 26th, 2016

In November 2009, SBX7-7, The Water Conservation Act of 2009, was signed into law as part of a comprehensive water legislation package. The Water Conservation Act address

In November 2009, SBX7-7, The Water Conservation Act of 2009, was signed into law as part of a comprehensive water legislation package. The Water Conservation Act addresses both urban and agricultural water conservation. The urban provisions reflect the approach taken in the 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. The legislation sets a goal of achieving a 20-percent statewide reduction in urban per capita water use and directs urban retail water suppliers to set 2020 urban water use targets. The Water Conservation Act of 2009 directs DWR to develop technical methodologies and criteria to ensure the consistent implementation of the Act and to provide guidance to urban retail water suppliers in developing baseline and compliance water use. To meet the legislative directives for consistent implementation, DWR has developed and published Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and Compliance Year Per Capita Water Use. This is the third revision of the Methodologies for Calculating Baseline and Compliance Urban per Capita Water Use. The document was first released in October 2010 and then revised in February 2011 with the addition of the Provisional Method 4 for Determining Water Use Targets as Appendix C. This revision includes Methodology 8: Criteria for Adjustments for Compliance Daily per Capita Water Use and removes the former Appendix A: Alternative Methodology for Service Area Population. Methodology 8 was not included in the earlier versions of the Methodologies as it was not required for the completion of the 2010 urban water management plans and more time was needed to thoroughly develop the methodology. The former Appendix A provided instructions for using the Census Bureau’s website to calculate service area population using a person per connection approach. The Census Bureau has revised its website and the links in the former document are no longer valid. Additionally, as part of its guidance for the 2015 UWMPs, DWR has included a population mapping tool as part of the on-line urban water management plan data submittal website. The population mapping tool provides a simpler and streamlined approach to estimating service area population.

Metropolitan Water Management

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | January 1st, 1981

Published by the American Geophysical Union as part of the Water Resources Monograph Series, Volume 6. This monograph is intended to inform interested and capable pers

Published by the American Geophysical Union as part of the Water Resources Monograph Series, Volume 6. This monograph is intended to inform interested and capable persons, who happen not to be specialists in water resources planning, of the issues and alternative strategies related to metropolitan water supply. This involves learning something about the alternative strategies—some ancient and others not yet operational—for increasing water supplies and/or modifying demand so a supply/demand balance is maintained. This also requires an awareness of the complex economic, environmental, and social issues that increasingly compound what once was considered a purely technological problem, to be left to water resource specialists to solve.

Modeling Cost, Energy, and Total Organic Carbon Trade-Offs for Stormwater Spreading Basin Systems Receiving Recycled Water Produced Using Membrane-Based, Ozone-Based, and Hybrid Advanced Treatment Trains

American Chemical Society (ACS) | January 31st, 2019

To address water scarcity, cities are pursuing options for augmenting groundwater recharge with recycled water. Ozone-based treatment trains comprising ozone and biologic

To address water scarcity, cities are pursuing options for augmenting groundwater recharge with recycled water. Ozone-based treatment trains comprising ozone and biologically activated carbon potentially offer cost-effective alternatives to membrane-based treatment, the standard process for potable reuse in numerous countries. However, regulations in multiple states effectively limit the extent to which ozone-based treatment alone can produce recycled water for groundwater recharge. To investigate the trade-offs between treatment costs and regulatory constraints, this study presents methods for modeling and optimizing designs for (1) producing recycled water using membrane-based treatment, ozone-based treatment, and hybrid treatment trains comprising ozone-based treatment with a membrane sidestream, and (2) delivering that water to stormwater spreading basins. We present a case study of Los Angeles, CA, to demonstrate the model’s application under realistic conditions, including regulations that limit spreading recycled water based on its concentration of total organic carbon and the extent of dilution. While the membrane-based treatment train exhibits economies of scale, we demonstrate how regulatory constraints create a diseconomies of scale effect for hybrid treatment systems because larger scales necessitate a higher proportion of recycled water undergo membrane treatment. Nevertheless, relative to membrane-based treatment, we identify opportunities for ozone-based or hybrid treatment trains to reduce treatment costs and energy use by up to 62% and 59%, respectively, for systems with up to 1 m3/s (23 million gallons per day) mean water recycling rate, potentially lowering the barrier for decentralized water recycling systems. This modeling approach could inform planning and policy regarding recycled water projects for groundwater recharge through spreading basins and, with additional modification, other potable reuse applications.