SUSTAINABLEFOR LA LOS GRAND ANGELES CHALLENGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2019 AUTHORS | EDITORS: FELICIA FEDERICO ANNE YOUNGDAHL SAGARIKA SUBRAMANIAN CASANDRA RAUSER MARK GOLD CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS: SONALI ABRAHAM MELANIE GARCIA JAMIE LIU STEPHANIE MANZO MARK NGUYEN 2019 SUSTAINABLE LA ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATER UCLA Sustainable LA Grand Challenge TABLE OF CONTENTS 05 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 09 INTRODUCTION 10 METHODOLOGY CATEGORIES 1 1 WATER SUPPLY AND CONSUMPTION 32 DRINKING WATER QUALITY 43 LOCAL WATER INFRASTRUCTURE 60 GROUNDWATER 11 75 SURFACE WATER QUALITY 86 INDUSTRIAL AND SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT DISCHARGES 99 WATER-ENERGY NEXUS 107 BEACH WATER QUALITY 1 UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE • 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY OVERALL CONCLUSIONS 115 ABOUT THE UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE 117 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 118 INDEX OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND MAPS 119 REFERENCES 122 Report Design by Miré Molnar Funding for the development of this report was generously provided from the Anthony and Jeanne Pritzker Family Foundation and the UCLA Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research. 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY • UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY LOCAL WATER SUMMARY OF INFRASTRUCTURE INDICATORS • DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WATER GRADES LOSS AUDITS • LARGE-SCALE STORMWATER CAPTURE • IRWMP INVESTMENTS IN LOCAL WATER SUPPLY & WATER INFRASTRUCTURE CONSUMPTION • SEWAGE SPILLS INDICATORS • WATER SOURCES HIGHLIGHT • WASTE WATER REUSE • CITY OF LOS ANGELES • WATER CONSUMPTION PROPOSITION O PROJECTS HIGHLIGHTS C • DROUGHT INDEX • WATER CONSERVATION TECHNOLOGIES • WATER PRICING • WATER USE FOR SEAWATER BARRIERS GROUNDWATER • TURF-REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS INDICATORS • GROUNDWATER SUPPLY C • GROUNDWATER QUALITY • GROUNDWATER THREATS HIGHLIGHT DRINKING WATER QUALITY • SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT INDICATORS • EXCEEDANCES OF PRIMARY MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS (MCLS) • COMMUNICATION OF WATER QUALITY THROUGH CONSUMER CONFIDENCE REPORTS HIGHLIGHTS C • TAP WATER QUALITY PERCEPTION • WATER STORES • MONITORING LEAD IN SCHOOL TAP WATER B INCOMPLETE 3 UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE • 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WATER-ENERGY NEXUS INDICATOR • ENERGY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS OF WATER SUPPLY HIGHLIGHTS • ENERGY USED IN WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT • WATER USE ASSOCIATED WITH C ENERGY PRODUCTION SURFACE WATER QUALITY BEACH WATER QUALITY INDICATORS INDICATORS • EXTENT OF IMPAIRED WATER BODIES • BEACH REPORT CARD SCORES • EXCEEDANCES OF WATER QUALITY • BEACH CLOSURES OBJECTIVES IN RECEIVING WATER D INCOMPLETE B INDUSTRIAL & SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT DISCHARGES INDICATORS • INDUSTRIAL NPDES VIOLATIONS • PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS MASS DISCHARGES • HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILLS DISCHARGED INTO WATER B 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY • UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Sustainable LA Grand Challenge (SLA GC) Environmental Report Card (ERC) for Los Angeles County (L.A. County) is the only comprehensive environmental report card for a megacity in the world. This 2019 ERC on Water provides an in-depth look at the region’s efforts in moving toward a more resilient local water supply, which requires maximizing high- quality local water supplies, improving water conveyance and treatment infrastructure, reducing water consumption, and implementing innovative technology and policy solutions. Twenty indicators were assessed across eight categories. Many of these indicators are new areas of assessment for the ERC and will provide a more comprehensive picture of current conditions compared to the 2015 ERC that last assessed L.A. County’s water. Grades were assigned in each category based on compliance with environmental laws or numeric standards where applicable, on our best professional judgment, and on historical improvements and context. This year’s grades range from D/ Incomplete to B+, and although there has been great progress in some areas, others still require significant improvement to raise the county’s C+ average. SUMMARY EXECUTIVE 5 UCLA SUSTAINABLE LA GRAND CHALLENGE • 2019 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CARD FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY and drought charges brought cost 3,850 and 2,909 people in the per connections per day real water above the affordability threshold intervening years. This variation losses in 2016, the first year of for low-income households. in the number of people affected reporting. depended on which water Approximately 60% of water used in systems had violations. • In 2016, all but two retailers L.A. County is imported from outside serving more than 100,000 people the region, and that number rises to • Four public water systems failed achieved an Infrastructure Leakage 90% for the City of L.A. Although to report an MCL violation to Index score within a good range (< the volume of reused water has constituents on their annual 3.0). been increasing, the county has a Consumer Confidence Report long way to go to meet its water between 2012 and 2016. No water • As of 2017, there were 35 spreading needs with local water resources. system failed to report more than ground facilities in L.A. County with The region significantly reduced its once over the five-year period. a combined total of 21,259 acre-feet WATER SUPPLY & water consumption from its 2013 in surface storage capacity. CONSUMPTION: baseline in response to Governor • There are multiple, well doc- Brown’s mandatory conservation umented accounts of discolored, • The average annual volume of C + measures implemented in 2015 due foul-smelling and poor-tasting conserved stormwater from 2004- to the major drought. However, water coming out of taps in largely 2017 was 190,227 acre-feet; the • In 2017, 59% of the Metropolitan water consumption crept up after disadvantaged communities served highest recorded amount was Water District (MWD)-supplied the drought was declared “over” in by publicly-regulated drinking 662,862 acre-feet in 2004-2005, water used in L.A. County was 2017, demonstrating that progress water systems across L.A. County. and the lowest amount was 37,542 sourced from outside the region. was lost due to inattention and acre-feet in 2013-2014. Variation in Local recycled water made up decreased public focus. Recently, Available monitoring data shows annual volumes of water conserved only 9% of the county’s 2017 precipitation patterns have been that L.A. County’s drinking water correlated strongly with annual water supply, while groundwater highly variable – oscillating between is meeting most health-based rainfall. resources provided 32%. drought and extreme precipitation standards and communicating – demonstrating the vulnerability most instances of standards-based • A total of $129 million of state • In 2018, the City of L.A. imported of the state’s water infrastructure contamination to consumers. funds were provided to L.A. an estimated 307,949 acre-feet and the need to maximize local, Primary MCL violations are County for 71 Integrated Regional of water (above average) despite sustainable, and resilient water infrequent and impact a small Water Management projects the fact that the Eastern Sierras supplies. percentage of residents. However, through California bond measures had an average year of snowpack. many people are still receiving Proposition 50 (2002) and Overall, the city imported well smelly, discolored tap water. Proposition 84 (2006). over 90% of its water from distant Without publicly-available data on sources. exceedances of secondary MCLs, it • Grant funds were invested in is difficult to evaluate the scope of projects that improved water supply • The volume of reused water this problem. In addition, drinking and groundwater (76% of projects), in the county increased by water quality monitoring typically water quality (19%), habitat, open approximately 31% from 2006 to occurs just after the water is treated space, and recreation projects (3%), 2016 (ca. 55.8 to 73 billion gallons). rather than after it is delivered to the and flood projects (2%). consumer at the tap, which means • The largest increase in reused that even effectively-treated water is • In 2017 there were 302 reported water in L.A. County occurred vulnerable to contamination such as sewage spills, of which 92 between 2006 and 2007, with more lead that may enter the water supply reached waterbodies. These spills modest year-to-year increases from old pipes on private property. represented nearly 600,000 (and occasional decreases) since DRINKING WATER Fortunately, new monitoring gallons of sewage in total, with then. requirements are at least testing approximately 380,000 gallons of QUALITY: school tap water for lead. However, that volume reaching waterbodies. • The percent of total wastewater B+/ Incomplete there are more areas of responsibility Over half of the 2017 spills reaching treatment effluent reused in the to examine in order to ensure that waterbodies were considered small. county increased from 16.6% in L.A. is living up to California’s new • Overall, nearly everyone in L.A. Human Right to Water bill, promising The County’s water infrastructure 2006 to 28.5% in 2016, the highest County has been provided with value over the 11-year period. every individual the right to safe, is aging, but investments have clean water at the point of delivery clean, and affordable drinking water. been made by the state and local (but, see notes below about • Between 2000 and 2017,