Welcome! GSP WORKSHOP August 15, 2019 | Online Webinar SESSION 1 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Welcome!

GSP WORKSHOP

August 15, 2019 | Online Webinar

SESSION 1

Chapter 2 - Plan Area

SGMA Overview

Date: August 13, 2019 Presented by: Randy Hopkins and Lynn Groundwater

LIVE POLL

What is the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)?

• Comprehensive legislation to manage groundwater to sustainable

levels

– Adopted in 2014 – Gives local public agencies ability to form Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to comply with SGMA – Local public agencies mean those with water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within the groundwater basin – Water Code §10721(n) – Counties are backstop to local agencies – State will intervene if locals and counties fail

• Establishment of GSAs by 2017
• GSP Development by 2020
• Annual Reports
• 5-Year GSP Updates
• Groundwater Sustainability by 2040

SGMA Recap

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Process

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Present to TAC Collect Data, Reports,& Information Develop Documents Kings Subbasin Coordination Present to Board

What the GSP Does

• Documents historic and current conditions

– Groundwater Levels – Groundwater Quality – Water Budgets

• Defines Path Forward

– Identifies Measurable Objectives & Minimum Thresholds – Defines potential Projects and Management Actions

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

What the GSP Does NOT Do

• Require immediate pumping restrictions
• Require changes to crops
• Require land use changes
• Require mandatory fallowing

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Kings Subbasin

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

MAGSA

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

GSP Requirements

GSP Outline

• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Plan Area
• Basin Setting
• Sustainable Management Criteria
• Monitoring Network
• Projects and Management Actions to

Achieve Sustainability

• Plan Implementation
• References and Technical Studies
• Appendices

SESSION 2

Chapter 3 – Basin Setting

Historic Water Conditions- Spring 1997

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Current Water Conditions- Spring 2017

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Water Level Change

Water Level Change

Water Level Change

Water Level Change

Overdraft Mitigation Target

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Storage Change 16,000 AF/yr GW Inflow 91,700 AF/yr Historic GW Inflows (16,600) AF/yr Overdraft Mitigation Target 91,100 AF/yr

Current Water Budget

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Description Supply Average Year Wet Year Dry Year 1) Surface Water for Irrigation 1,900 6,200 2) Surface Water for M&I 3) Groundwater Pumping for Irrigation (Private Wells, calculated/estimated) 4) Groundwater Pumping for Irrigation (Private Wells, unknown) 290,200 243,600 320,800 5) Groundwater Pumping for M&I (Agency Wells) 6) Groundwater Pumping for M&I (Private Wells) 2,600 2,600 2,600 7) Precipitation 92,700 131,098 65,901 8) Spill Inflows 2,000 3,500 9) Other Supply: Total Supply 389,400 386,998 389,301 Volume (AF)

Current Water Budget

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

pp y , , , Demand Consumptive Use 10) Evapotranspiration met by Applied Water 232,000 199,800 253,100 11) Evapotranspiration met by Effective Precipitation 52,000 84,200 30,900 12) Evapotranspiration of M&I 1,300 1,300 1,300 13) Other Consumptive Use: Consumptive Subtotal 285,300 285,300 285,300

Current Water Budget

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

p Groundwater Recharge 14) Groundwater Inflow 153,000 153,000 153,000 15) Deep Percolation of Irrigation Water 61,700 53,111 67,280 16) Deep Percolation of Precipitation 8,800 22,400 17) Deep Percolation of M&I Water 1,300 1,300 1,300 18) Seepage of Channels & Pipelines 19) Seepage - Reservoirs 400 400 400 20) Urban Stormwater - Recharge 21) Local Streams/Rivers - Recharge 16,700 12,000 25,000 22) Groundwater - Intentional Recharge 23) Other Recharge: GW Recharge Subtotal 241,900 242,211 246,980

Current Water Budget

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Nonrecoverable Losses 24) Groundwater - Outflow 25) Evaporation - Channels 26) Evaporation - Reservoirs & Recharge Basins 27) Precipitation - Evaporation and Runoff 31,900 24,500 35,000 28) Operational Spills 29) Groundwater - Export 18,500 1,497 27,598 30) Other Losses: Nonrecoverable Subtotal 50,400 25,997 62,598

Sustainable Yield

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

MAGSA Pumping 292,800 AF/yr GW Export 18,500 AF/yr Total GW Demand 311,300 AF/yr Overdraft Mitigation Target 91,100 AF/yr MAGSA Sustainable Yield 220,300 AF/yr

Sustainability Approach

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Year Overdraft Mitigation % Overdraft Mitigation (AF) Cumulative Mitigation (AF) 2025 10% 9,110 9,110 2030 20% 18,220 27,330 2035 30% 27,330 54,660 2040 40% 36,440 91,100

LIVE POLL

SESSION 3

Chapter 4 – Sustainable Management Criteria Chapter 5 – Monitoring Network

Sustainable Management Criteria

Groundwater Levels Groundwater Storage Water Quality Land Subsidence

Depletion of Interconnected Surface Water Seawater Intrusion

• Sustainability Indicators
• Significant & Unreasonable – We define using the following:

Must be agreed to by, and consistent in the GSPs of all GSAs within basin

• Minimum Thresholds
• Undesirable Results
• Measurable Objectives
• Sustainability Goal

Addressed in this

• rder

Sustainable Management Criteria Terms

This is what is monitored

Reduction

• f GW

Storage Seawater Intrusion Degraded Water Quality, Migration of Contamination Plumes Subsidence that interferes with surface land uses Depletions that impact beneficial uses of surface water Undesirable Result (Significant & Unreasonable) Chronic Lowering indicating significant & unreasonable depletion

Sustainable Indicators and Metrics

All Undesirable Results Based on Exceeding Minimum Threshold

Water Level SMC

• 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.

• MAGSA defined undesirable results when 1/3 (8 wells) of the indicator

wells in the monitoring network drop below the minimum threshold for two consecutive years at the same wells.

Water Level SMC

Water Level SMC

MAGSA Well ID Distance from 2017 Water Level to Measurable Objective (ft) Distance from 2017 Water Level to Minimum Threshold (ft) 13‐1 31.3 100.4 13‐2 18.7 66.8 13‐3 27.0 102.7 14‐1 21.9 41.6 14‐2 25.0 83.7 14‐3 18.1 40.7 14‐4 30.7 67.5 14‐5 18.6 36.1 14‐6 24.5 72.5 15‐1 23.0 48.6 15‐2 35.9 72.2 15‐3 20.9 65.8 15‐4 14.5 47.0 15‐5 65.2 110.2 15‐6 49.5 83.7 15‐7 22.5 54.1 15‐8 19.9 100.7 15‐9 57.5 97.1 15‐10 22.4 46.7 16‐1 36.1 75.3 16‐2 57.6 120.1 16‐3 32.3 72.6 16‐4 35.3 73.6

• Estimated storage change for the Kings Subbasin -1.8 MAF
• From spring 1997 to spring 2012
• An average of about -122,000 AF/yr
• An undesirable result would occur if the total amount of water in

storage was less than the estimated amount of groundwater in storage below the Minimum Thresholds.

Storage Change SMC

Water Level and Storage Change Monitoring Network

• Undesirable results determinations will be based on the aggerated effect of:

– 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 groundwater degradation where concentrations of chemicals of concern were recent historically above MCLs.

• The occurrence of an undesirable result will be defined as 6 of the 12

representative monitoring wells having reached either of these two criteria for two consecutive years at the same wells.

Water Quality SMC

Water Quality SMC

Chemical of Concern California Primary MCL (mg/L unless otherwise shown) Arsenic 0.01 Chloride 500** Manganese 0.5* Sodium 50 Uranium 20 (pCi/L) Nitrate as NO3 45 Dibromo-Chloropropane (DBCP) 0.0002 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (TCP) 5x10-6 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 1,000**

Water Quality Monitoring Network

Minimum Threshold Parameter Minimum Threshold Quantity Annual Land Subsidence Rate 12 inches/year over an area of 36 square miles Maximum Cumulative Land Subsidence 5 feet over 20 years Measurable Objective Parameter Measurable Objective Quantity Annual Land Subsidence Rate 6 inches/year over an area of 36 square miles Maximum Cumulative Land Subsidence 3 feet over 20 years

Land Subsidence SMC

The criteria for an Undesirable Result related to land subsidence will be the significant loss of functionality of a structure or a facility to the point that, due to subsidence, the feature cannot be operated as designed requiring either retrofitting or replacement.

Land Subsidence Monitoring Network

Land Subsidence Monitoring Network

Surface Water Groundwater Interconnections Monitoring Network

LIVE POLL

Chapter 6 – Projects and Management Actions Chapter 7 – Plan Implementation

SESSION 4

Projects

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Rank Projects Capital Cost Annual Capital Payment Average Annual Yield (AF) Annualized Cost Per AF 1 Fresno City Wastewater Treatment Plant Recharge Basins, FID Houghton Canal System $3,537,000 $230,000 6,745 $41 2 Fresno City Wastewater Treatment Plant Recharge Basins, Lower Dry Creek System $2,223,000 $145,000 4,385 $41 3 Southwest Groundwater Banking $6,221,000 $405,000 2,625 $154 4 Lassen Avenue Reverse Flow & Recharge $3,263,000 $212,000 3,000 $71 5 James Bypass Surface Water Supply & Recharge $38,017,000 $2,473,000 29,760 $83 6 McMullin On-Farm Flood Capture, Phase 2 and 3 $29,795,000 $1,938,000 27,120 $71 7 Houghton Wasteway Expansion $4,922,000 $320,000 2,190 $146 8 South Sandridge Canal Water Supply & Recharge $8,736,000 $568,000 4,800 $119 9 Stinson North Canal Phase 2 $110,245,000 $7,172,000 59,400 $121 10 Stinson North Canal Phase 1 $61,114,000 $3,976,000 39,670 $100 11 Grantland Area Recharge $22,043,000 $1,434,000 7,920 $181 12 Consolidated ID Wristen Ditch Intertie $13,420,000 $873,000 3,175 $275

Projects

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Projects

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Management Actions

• Education and Outreach
• Well Head Requirements
• Groundwater Allocation Per Acre
• Groundwater Marketing/Trading
• Fees & Incentives
• Groundwater Pumping Restrictions

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Implementation

• First Priority

–Develop Supplies –Fill Data Gaps

• Second Priority

–Pumping Reduction

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Implementation

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Year Overdraft Mitigation % Overdraft Mitigation (AF) Cumulative Mitigation (AF) 2025 10% 9,110 9,110 2030 20% 18,220 27,330 2035 30% 27,330 54,660 2040 40% 36,440 91,100

Cumulative Mitigation of Overdraft

91,100 81,990 63,770 36,440 ‐ ‐ 9,110 22,775 36,440 45,550 ‐ ‐ 4,555 18,220 45,550

‐ 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Reduction in Acre Feet Overdraft Project Management Actions

Moving Forward

• Download GSP and provide comments
• Public Workshops
• Public Hearing October 16th

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Upcoming Events

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group

Office Hours Chat Wednesday, September 18 11:00 am- 1:00 pm MAGSA office: 275 S Madera Ave., Suite 301, Kerman 93630 Online chat info to come Public Hearing First Wednesday of the month at 2:00 pm Kerman Community Center Board Meeting Wednesday, October 16 at 2:10 pm Kerman Community Center

Questions?

Matt Hurley, General Manager

mhurley@mcmullinarea.org (559) 515-3339 Download the GSP: www.mcmullinarea.org/gspcomment Comment on the GSP:

• Online form www.mcmullinarea.org/gspcommentform
• Email to comments@mcmullinarea.org