Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts on Municipal Water Demand

Pacific Institute | July 2nd, 2020

Water and the Future of the San Joaquin Valley

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | February 14th, 2019

The San Joaquin Valley—California’s largest agricultural region and an important contributor to the nation’s food supply—is in a time of great change. The valle

The San Joaquin Valley—California’s largest agricultural region and an important contributor to the nation’s food supply—is in a time of great change. The valley is ground zero for many of California’s most difficult water management problems—including groundwater overdraft, drinking water contamination, and declines in habitat and native species. Local water supplies are limited, particularly in the southern half of the region. To irrigate their crops, many farmers use water imported from the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. But in many places farmers have also relied on groundwater overdraft—pumping groundwater in excess of the rate at which it is replenished. Worsening droughts, increasing regulations to protect endangered native fishes, and growing demand by Southern California for Delta imports have compounded surface water scarcity. The state’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires local water users to bring groundwater use to sustainable levels by the early 2040s. This will have a broad impact on valley agriculture and the regional economy in coming years—likely including some permanent idling of farmland. This report explores three key challenges facing the San Joaquin Valley and reviews the most promising approaches to address them:  Balancing water supplies and demands. To close the groundwater deficit, groundwater sustainability agencies in the valley’s overdrafted basins will have to augment supplies, reduce demands, or use some combination of these two approaches. A range of options are under consideration but they are not equally effective or practical.  Addressing groundwater quality challenges. Poor groundwater quality impairs drinking water supplies in disadvantaged rural communities, reduces long-term agricultural prosperity, and degrades ecosystems. Providing safe drinking water is an urgent priority. Over the longer term, parties will also need to manage water quantity and quality together, to take advantage of synergies and avoid unintended consequences. The necessary coordination will be challenging because the various programs addressing valley water quality issues are carried out by numerous local and regional entities, whose lines of responsibility and geographic boundaries do not neatly align.  Fostering beneficial water and land use transitions. Effectively addressing water scarcity and the resulting land use changes in the San Joaquin Valley offers opportunities to put lands coming out of production to good use—and gain “more pop per drop” from limited water resources. Multiple-benefit approaches to water and land management can enhance groundwater recharge and improve air and water quality. They can also promote healthier soils, new recreational opportunities, additional flood protection, improved habitat, and new revenue streams for private landowners engaging in conservation-oriented management. Addressing these complex and intertwined issues requires significant changes in water and land management and a major ramp-up in cooperation and coordination among a wide circle of stakeholders. Pursuing solutions that deliver multiple benefits will boost the chances of success overall. The entire region—and California as a whole—will benefit if solutions to these challenges are cost-effective and support the valley’s economy while improving public health and the natural environment.

Water Column Selenium Concentrations in the San Francisco Bay-Delta: Recent Data and Recommendations for Future Monitoring

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | August 1st, 2017

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board developed a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and implementation plan for selenium in North San Francisco Bay (NSFB) in 2015.1 T

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Board developed a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and implementation plan for selenium in North San Francisco Bay (NSFB) in 2015.1 The TMDL is based on attainment of water column and fish tissue target concentrations protective of human health, aquatic life, and wildlife, and was approved by the US Environmental Protection Agency in August, 2016. Analyses in support of the TMDL synthesized the results of different monitoring efforts to characterize selenium concentrations in water and biota in the Estuary. For water quality evaluation in the TMDL, the sources of observational data included studies of selenium speciation across the estuarine salinity gradient, performed in 1999-2000 and again in 2010 and 2012 (Cutter and Cutter 2004, Doblin et al. 2006, Tetra Tech, 2012), as well as samples collected by the San Francisco Bay Regional Monitoring Program (RMP). Changes in wastewater treatment from the five major refineries in NSFB were implemented in the late 1990s, leading to significant reductions in selenium loads. Data at Estuary center-line locations showed small changes for dissolved selenium in the mid-salinity range and no trends in particulate selenium (Baginska, 2015). As part of the TMDL, water quality modeling analyses were performed to characterize NSFB selenium concentrations under a range of hydrologic conditions and changing point-source loads (Baginska, 2015). Water column selenium concentration data in the NSFB and Delta continue to be collected at selected locations, although these data have not been systematically evaluated following the analyses presented in the TMDL reports. In the near term, possible changes that may cause selenium concentrations to change in the NSFB and Delta include concentration changes in the inflow from the San Joaquin River basin, changes in refinery inputs, changes in stormwater and tributary loads from the Bay margin, and changes in overall Central Valley hydrological conditions, such as the extreme wet and dry periods that occurred between 2012 and 2017. Other drivers, such as nutrient concentrations and algal levels, may also play a role, especially on the concentrations of selenium on particulates.

Water Quality Assessment of the State Water Project, 1998-99

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | August 10th, 2000

This report describes water quality in the State Water Project during 1998 and 1999. The Executive Summary covers important drinking water parameters such as salinity and

This report describes water quality in the State Water Project during 1998 and 1999. The Executive Summary covers important drinking water parameters such as salinity and trihalomethane precursors. The rest of the report assesses all parameters including metals and pesticides.

Water Quality Challenges in the San Francisco Bay/ Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary: EPA’s Action Plan

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) | August 22nd, 2012

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed this Action Plan after assessing the effectiveness of current regulatory mechanisms designed to protect water qua

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed this Action Plan after assessing the effectiveness of current regulatory mechanisms designed to protect water quality in the San Francisco Bay Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay Delta Estuary) and its tributaries. EPA’s assessment concludes that Clean Water Act (CWA) programs currently are not adequately protecting aquatic resources of the Bay Delta Estuary. In this document, EPA recommends actions to restore water quality for aquatic species protection using existing EPA authorities and resources, as well as actions EPA believes are important and appropriate for the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). EPA is one of more than 25 state and federal governmental agencies with responsibilities in the Bay Delta Estuary. EPA’s major statutory mission in the Estuary is to implement the CWA. EPA has delegated many CWA program authorities to the State Water Board while providing financial support,1 technical assistance, and oversight (including, in some cases, review and approval of State actions). Much of EPA's work in this Action Plan (as well as elsewhere in California) is done in support of and in partnership with the State. For example, water quality standards, which define water quality goals for our waterbodies, are typically developed and adopted by the State with EPA assistance, review, and ultimately, approval or disapproval. In the Bay Delta Estuary, EPA focuses on assuring that the many designated uses of the Estuary’s aquatic resources are protected. EPA emphasizes the CWA goals of maintaining and improving water quality – the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the water – to ensure the Bay Delta Estuary can function as a vibrant, healthy estuary. About 90 species of fish are found in the Delta. The Delta’s channels serve as a migratory route and nursery area for Chinook salmon, striped bass, white and green sturgeon, American shad, and steelhead trout. These anadromous fish spend most of their adult lives either in the lower bays of the Estuary or in the ocean. Resident fish in the Estuary include delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, catfish, largemouth bass, black bass, crappie, and bluegill. All Bay Delta Estuary waters are impaired by one or more contaminants. In addition, the reduction in the quantity and quality of estuarine habitat limits the Estuary’s ability to support aquatic species. EPA’s Action Plan describes a suite of activities to: 1. Strengthen water quality standards to protect estuarine habitat 2. Advance regional water quality monitoring and assessment 3. Accelerate water quality restoration through Total Maximum Daily Loads 4. Strengthen selenium water quality criteria 5. Prevent pesticide pollution 6. Restore aquatic habitats while managing methylmercury 7. Support the Bay Delta Conservation Plan Collectively, these activities will contribute to the restoration of the Bay Delta Estuary. Even if they are all successfully implemented, however, they are not sufficient to resolve the complex problems that have stressed the ecosystem to the point of collapse. Any solution to the ecological problems of the Bay Delta Estuary must be multi-faceted, including providing sufficient flows, physical habitat which is sufficiently large, connected, diverse, and self-sustaining, as well as a reduction of many types of stressors, such as contaminants, invasive species, and predation.

Water Quality Conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun and San Pablo Bays during 2009

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 28th, 2010

This report summarizes the results of water quality monitoring and special  studies conducted by the Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP) within the Sacramento-San Joa

This report summarizes the results of water quality monitoring and special  studies conducted by the Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP) within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) and Suisun and San Pablo bays (the upper San Francisco estuary) during calendar year 2009. This monitoring is mandated by Water Right Decision 1641 (D-1641) and this report is being submitted to fulfill the reporting requirements of this decision. The EMP monitored water quality using a protocol implemented in 1996. Under this monitoring protocol, 13 sampling sites—2 of which were added after 1996—representing 8 regions of the upper San Francisco estuary (estuary) were monitored for 15 physical and chemical water quality parameters. The results gathered from the sampling of these 15 parameters are described in this report. Parameters such as water temperature, Secchi disk depth, dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration, specific conductance, dissolved inorganic nitrogen, orthophosphate, and volatile suspended solids were within their historical range. Measured parameters exhibited seasonal variation as well as changes in response to significant rainfall events and in flow rates. In addition to monitoring physical and chemical water quality parameters, biological sampling was conducted to monitor the productivity and community composition of phytoplankton, zooplankton, and benthic communities.

Water Quality Control Plan for Salinity (draft)

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | October 15th, 1988

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 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).

Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River region (CA)

Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRRWQCB) | August 16th, 2017

This Water Quality Control Plan (herein referred to as the Basin Plan) for the Colorado River Basin Region was prepared by the California Regional Water Quality Control B

This Water Quality Control Plan (herein referred to as the Basin Plan) for the Colorado River Basin Region was prepared by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Colorado River Basin Region, in accordance with criteria contained in the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the Federal Clean Water Act, and other pertinent state and federal rules and regulations. The intent of the Basin Plan is to provide definitive guidelines, and give direction to the full scope of Regional Board activities that serve to optimize the beneficial uses of the state waters within the Colorado River Basin Region of California by preserving and protecting the quality of these waters. 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 of these are beneficial water uses, but the quality requirements for irrigation water are different from those for drinking water. The Basin Plan recognizes the variations of water quality and water uses. This Basin Plan lists and defines the various beneficial water uses  (Chapter 2). It describes the water quality which must be maintained to support such uses (Water Quality Objectives, Chapter 3). The section on implementation (Chapter 4) describes the programs, projects and other actions which are necessary to achieve the standards established in this Plan. Plans, Policies and Issues (Chapter 5), summarize the various plans and policies which protect water quality. This chapter also describes water quality issues which require special attention. Surveillance and Monitoring (Chapter 6), describes activities within the Colorado River Basin Region which are related to surveillance, monitoring, assessment, lab support, quality assurance and quality control. The Regional Board implements the Basin Plan by issuing and enforcing waste discharge requirements to persons; which can include individuals, communities, or businesses whose waste discharges may affect water quality. These requirements can be either state Waste Discharge Requirements for discharge to land, or federally delegated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits for discharges to surface water. Dischargers are required to meet water quality objectives and thus protect beneficial uses. This Basin Plan also encourages water users to improve the quality of their water supplies, particularly where the wastewater they discharge is likely to be reused. Public works and other projects, which can affect water quality, are reviewed and their impacts are identified. Proposals, which implement or help achieve the goals of the Basin Plan, are supported. This Basin Plan is subject to review by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The Basin Plan is, in itself, not a final statement on regional water quality planning, but is subject to continuous review and update as necessary. Updated sections of the plan may appear as periodic amendments, which are also subject to approval by the State Board and USEPA.