Download eBook for Free

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 5.9 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.


Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback108 pages $25.00

Focuses on water supply planning in California. Identifies past and current goals and objectives of the water planning programs of California's Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Tracks and compares the planning processes and procedures of these two agencies using as case studies the Bureau's San Felipe Project and the DWR's Peripheral Canal. Finally, the study identifies legal and institutional constraints that can further hamper both agencies' efficient planning procedures. Congress has given the Bureau much more specific goals and objectives than the Legislature has given the DWR. Consequently, the DWR's goals suffer from broad and sometimes divergent interpretations, which have an impact on the DWR's planning process. The Bureau's benefit-cost procedures can lead to accurate assessment of benefits and costs if they choose correct analysis parameters. The DWR does not currently have specific planning guidelines and criteria; they only estimate the costs of new projects.

This report is part of the RAND report series. The report was a product of RAND from 1948 to 1993 that represented the principal publication documenting and transmitting RAND's major research findings and final research.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.