Sustainability Agency JPA Board Meeting July 25, 2019 Pledge of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency JPA Board Meeting July 25, 2019

• Pledge of Allegiance
• Review Agenda
• Review of Future Meetings
• Public Presentations
• 3 minutes max/person, 10 minutes max/subject
• Potential Conflicts of Interest

• 1. Administrative Matters
• 1.a – Appointment of Board Chair and Vice-

Chair

• Action Item
• 1.b – Approval of June 27, 2019 Special

Board Meeting Minutes

• Action Item
• 1.c – NKGSA timeline and schedule

• P&P reviewing GSPs for consistency
• P&P completing data management system
• All GSAs anticipate GSPs public Jul-Sep

– McMullin Area GSA released July 10 – North Fork Kings GSA released July 17

• Adoptions planned for Oct-Dec
• Finishing Common Basin Language
• Draft Coordination Agreement final changes

1.d - Kings Basin Coordination Update

• 1. Administrative Matters (cont.)
• 1.e – Advisory Committee Update

i. Technical Subcommittee Update

• Chair: Adam Claes (FID)
• ii. Administration/Fiscal Subcommittee
• Chair: Lisa Koehn (Clovis*)
• iii. Membership, Outreach & Communications

Subcommittee

• Chair: Brandy Swisher (FMFCD)
• Planning September events
• County “white area” east of FID
• Small private well owners within FID

• 1. Administrative Matters (cont.)
• 1.f – Draft Groundwater Sustainability Plan - Update

Draft Groundwater Sustainability Plan Overview

July 25, 2019

• SGMA Enacted in 2014
• Establishment of GSAs by June 2017
• GSP Adoption Required by Jan 2020
• Annual Reports due April 1 starting in 2020
• 5-Year GSP Updates
• Reach Groundwater Sustainability by 2040

SGMA Recap

GSP Development Process

• Prepared by Technical Committee of diverse

group of stakeholders

• Representatives of each agency
• Private Landowners
• Interested Party Representative
• Meeting monthly since 2017
• Reviewed requirements, identified issues,

developed draft language by section, Tech Com reviewed and commented, section revised

• Information Kings Basin Coordination

Efforts incorporated

NKGSA Current GSP Schedule

July 3rd Draft GSP to Tech Com July 31 Tech Com Comments Due Aug 7 Tech Com Mtg to address comments Aug 15 Presentation of GSP at Special Board Mtg Aug 16 Start Public Comment Period, 90-day Notice, GSP on website Aug 19 1st Public Notice for Comment & Hearing Sept 16 2nd Public Notice for Comment & Hearing Oct 18 Deadline for Comments Oct 24 Regularly Scheduled Board Meeting Dec Board Mtg for Adoption (if needed) Nov 21 Public Hearing at Board Mtg, GSP Adoption

Kings Subbasin

NKGSA GSP MAGSA GSP James GSP NFKGSA GSP CKGSA GSP KREGSA GSP SKGSA GSP Coord Agmt

• 7 GSAs
• 7 GSPs
• DWR “Cannot submit

until all GSPs uploaded”

GSP Organization

Executive Summary 1 – Introduction 2 – Plan Area 3 – Basin Setting 4 – Sustainable Management Criteria 5 – Monitoring Network 6 – Projects and Management Actions 7 - Implementation

GSP Organization

• Common outline used

by all GSAs in the Kings

• Regulation Requirement

listed first

• Followed by Response

GSP Sections

Executive Summary

• Brief summary of each

section in the GSP 1 – Introduction

• Purpose of the GSP
• Coordination Agreement
• NKGSA Organization and

Authority

• GSP organization

GSP Sections

Bakman Water Company Biola CSD City of Clovis City of Fresno City of Kerman County of Fresno Fresno ID FMFCD Garfield WD International WD Malaga CWD Pinedale CWD CSUF 2 – Plan Area

• Describes each agency

Section 2 – Plan Area

2 – Plan Area (cont.)

• Existing Water Resource Monitoring
• Relation to General Plan documents
• Additional GSP components
• Notice and Communication
• GSP Development
• Public Engagement

Section 3 – Basin Setting

3 – Basin Setting

• It’s Big. It’s the Background.
• Five sections
• 3.1 Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model
• 3.2 Groundwater Conditions
• 3.3 Water Budget
• 3.4 Water Supply for Augmentation
• 3.5 Management Areas

Section 3 – Basin Setting

• 3.1 Hydrogeologic Conceptual

Model

• Not a surface-groundwater

model

• Description of the general

physical characteristics of the regional hydrology, geology, geologic structure, water quality, principal aquifers, and principal aquitards in the basin setting

• 3.2 GW Conditions
• Level
• Movement
• Quality
• Storage
• Subsidence
• Interconnected

Surface Water

• GW Dependent

Ecosystems

Spring 2016

Section 3 – Basin Setting

• 3.3 Water Budget
• Common Approach by all GSAs –

Analytical (spreadsheet) Model

• 4 Water Budgets: Historic (97-11),

Current, Future (2040) and 2070

• Plus Dry, Normal, Wet Years
• 30 factors – 8 measured, remainder or calculated/estimated
• Compared to Storage Change estimations
• Future considers urban growth and climate change

Section 3 – Basin Setting

Organization Future Water Demand Assumptions Bakman Water Company Demands increase from 2,900 AF/year (2016/17) to 6,200 AF/year (2040) Biola Community Services District No anticipated increase in net demands. Water conservation expected to offset any new demands. City of Clovis Demands increase from 21,300 AF/year (2016/17) to 47,800 AF/year (2040) City of Fresno Demands increase from 116,100 AF/year (2016/17) to 195,800 AF/year (2040) City of Kerman Demands increase from 2,800 AF/year (2016/17) to 5,300 AF/year (2040) California State University Fresno Increase student population by 5,500 by 2040 resulting in 240 AF increase in domestic demands. No change in agricultural demands. FID (not including agency

• verlaps)

No changes in cropping patterns. Reduction in demand due to conversion of 8,500 acres to urban use. Fresno County No increase in demand. Combination of annexations by Cities and new land use policies assumed to offset any future demands. Garfield W.D. No changes in cropping patterns. Reduction in demand due to de-annexation of 500 acres by 2040. International WD No changes in cropping patterns. Reduction in demand due to de-annexation of 325 acres by 2040. Malaga County W.D. Increase in demands from 1,600 AF/year (2016/2017) to 1,900 AF/year (2040) Pinedale County W.D. No changes in demands since area is largely built out. Any remaining in-fill will be balanced out by savings from future residential metering.

Section 3 – Basin Setting

Sustainability Indicators

GSP Sections

Groundwater Levels Groundwater Storage Water Quality Land Subsidence Depletion of Interconnected Surface Water Seawater Intrusion

• Section 4 – Sustainable Management

Criteria & Section 5 – Monitoring Network address Sustainability Indicators

• Sustainable Management Criteria
• Defined by GSA, coordinated

within the Basin

• Include:
• Undesirable Results (UR)
• Minimum Thresholds (MT)
• Measurable Objectives (MO)

GSP Sections

The sustainability goal of the Kings Basin and this GSA is to ensure that by 2040 the basin is being operated to maintain a reliable water supply for current and future beneficial uses without experiencing undesirable results. This goal will be met by balancing water demand with available water supply to stabilize declining groundwater levels without significantly and unreasonably impacting water quality, land subsidence, or interconnected surface water. The goal of the basin is to correct and end the long-term trend of a declining water table understanding that water levels will fluctuate based on the season, hydrologic cycle, and changing groundwater demands within the basin and its proximity.

4.1 - Sustainability Goal

Groundwater Levels (4.2 & 5.2)

• Representative

Monitoring Network

• Wells selected

from existing network

• MOs and MTs

set at each well

Groundwater Levels (4.2 & 5.2)

Undesirable Result

• The GSAs within the Kings Basin have defined the Undesirable

Result for groundwater levels to be significant and unreasonable when either the water level has declined to a depth that a new productive well cannot be constructed, or when the water level has declined to a depth that water quality cannot be treated for beneficial use.

Groundwater Levels (4.2 & 5.2)

Base of Aquifer

Period Percent of Overdraft Mitigated Cumulative Mitigation 2020-2025 10% 10% 2025-2030 20% 30% 2030-2035 30% 60% 2035-2040 40% 100%

Basin Mitigation Schedule

Setting MO:

• Hydrograph trendline projected
• Mitigation applied to set MO

Setting MT:

• Drought trendline rate of decline
• Decline rate for 5 years
• Total decline added from MO

UR & MT not necessarily at same level

Groundwater Levels (4.2 & 5.2)

Groundwater Levels (4.2 & 5.2)

Recognition by GSAs:

• Water levels will continue to decline until the overdraft within the basin and the

impact of pumping from neighboring basins has been corrected.

• Water level may decline below the depth of some wells within the basin.
• Well construction has varied and wells have been constructed at varying depths.
• The construction depth of all active wells in the basin is not known at this time.
• Some wells, even recently constructed wells, may have been poorly constructed or

constructed too shallow for long-term operation.

• SGMA does not require the GSA to maintain current water levels or prevent any

wells from going dry.

• GSA is required to stabilize and correct groundwater decline.
• Until water levels have been stabilized, the GSA does not view a well going dry as

an undesirable result.

Groundwater Storage (4.3 & 5.3)

• Linked to Groundwater

Level MOs & MTs

• Common Method for

Storage Change calculation

• Undesirable result occurs if

total amount of water in storage is less than the amount below the Minimum Thresholds

Groundwater Quality (4.4 & 5.5)

• GSA authority is

groundwater pumping, but are required to monitor quality impacts/changes

• Will review publicly

available quality data reported by the community and non-community public supply wells

• Representative monitoring

network established

Groundwater Quality (4.4 & 5.5)

• Undesirable results:

1) the degradation of water quality to excess of MCLs (i.e. California potable water standards) where concentrations of chemicals of concern were recent historically below MCLs; and 2) a statistically significant increase in degradation where concentrations of chemicals of concern were above MCLs

• MTs set at the MCL for each chemical
• Measurable Objectives:
• Stay below MCL for wells currently

below MCL

• Maintain or improving trend for wells

already above MCL

Chemical of Concern California Primary MCL * (mg/L unless otherwise shown) Nitrate as NO3 45 Arsenic 0.010 Dibromo-Chloropropane (DBCP) 0.0002 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP) 5X10-6 Methyl Tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE) 0.013 Uranium 20 (pCi/L) Perchloroethylene (PCE) 0.005 Trichloroethylene (TCE) 0.005 Hexavalent Chromium ** * = As of June 2019 ** = California Superior Court invalidated the Hexavalent Chromium MCL in 2017. The State Waterboard is in the process of adopting a new MCL.

Groundwater Quality (4.4 & 5.5)

• If an undesirable result occurs with regard to groundwater

quality, actions may include:

▪ Increased frequency of monitoring well sampling; ▪ Additional data analysis; ▪ Increased groundwater recharge in the area(s) of concern; ▪ Increased use of surface water in the area(s) of concern; and ▪ Working collaboratively with state and local groundwater quality protection agencies and programs.

Land Subsidence (4.5 & 5.6)

• NASA, USBR and

KRCD data reviewed

• Minimal/No

subsidence

• ccurring in the

NKGSA area

• KRCD Network

will be used for monitoring

• NASA INSAR also

to be reviewed

• Undesirable Results considered unlikely, but would be loss of

functionality of canal conveyance capacity or major damage to roads or other facilities.

• MOs and MTs set as precaution

Land Subsidence (4.5 & 5.6)

Interconnected Surface Water and Groundwater

Area of Potential Concern

• Interconnected surface water defined

as surface water that is hydraulically

connected at any point by a continuous saturated zone to the underlying aquifer and the overlying surface water is not completely depleted.

• Potential concern along small portion
• f Kings River
• San Joaquin River not interconnected
• Concern is GW pumping impacting

surface water (losses)

• Undesirable Results to surface water

users not likely, but GSA will still monitor wells near river & concerns from downstream surface water users

Section 6 - Projects and Management Actions

• Basin Coordination Efforts

led to Initial Mitigation Volumes per GSA

• Volumes will be evaluated

as more data gathered

North Kings GSA Storage Change (Spr 97-12) -24,000AF Adjustment for Boundary Flows + 44,800AF Initial Responsibility = 20,800AF

Storage Change

• 24,000AF

Section 6 - Projects and Management Actions

• Each agency responsible own

mitigation (desire to control own destiny)

• Projects implemented by

members not GSA

• Need to quantify target (2040)

impact/volume to be mitigated

• Identified draft GW Impact

methodology that considers positives/negatives by agency

• Tech Com reviewing methodology
• Not required by DWR

• Projects submitted by each agency
• Sustainability is achievable with projects
• GSP does include possible Management

Actions not planned for now, but included for future if necessary:

▪ Well Head Requirements ▪ Groundwater Allocation Per Acre ▪ Fees & Incentives ▪ Groundwater Pumping Restrictions

Section 6 - Projects and Management Actions

Section 7 - Implementation

• Implementation costs:
• Ongoing Administrative Expenses: $750,000-$1,000,000 annually including Exec

Officer & staff, data reporting/collecting, outreach, legal, additional monitoring wells and information

• Project Costs: Paid for and implemented by each member agency
• Funding: Approved Cost Share from June 2019 Board meeting
• Schedule: Project start/completion date including in Chapter 6. Sorted by 5yr blocks
• Data Management System (DMS):
• Coordinated with Basin.
• Limited to required data for DWR.
• Annual Reporting:
• Coordinated with Basin
• First report due April 2020
• Outline/format identified

NKGSA Current GSP Schedule

July 3rd Draft GSP to Tech Com July 31 Tech Com Comments Due Aug 7 Tech Com Mtg to address comments Aug 15 Presentation of GSP at Special Board Mtg Aug 16 Start Public Comment Period, 90-day Notice, GSP on website Aug 19 1st Public Notice for Comment & Hearing Sept 16 2nd Public Notice for Comment & Hearing Oct 18 Deadline for Comments Oct 24 Regularly Scheduled Board Meeting Dec Board Mtg for Adoption (if needed) Nov 21 Public Hearing at Board Mtg, GSP Adoption

• 3. Financial Matters
• 3.a – Expense Report for June 2019
• Action Item
• 3.b – 2018-2019 Audited Financial Statements
• Update

• 4. Executive Officer Report
• a. Executive Officer Replacement - Update
• 5. Directors Report

Closed Session

• 6. Report on Action Taken in Closed Session
• 7. Adjournment