The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5-19-21_TACPresentationUkiah Valley Groundwater Sustainability Plan Development Update May 19, 2021 Ukiah Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency Technical Advisory Committee Draft State of GSP Topics and Decisions Draft GSP Chapters A GSP has five chapters: 1.Introduction 2.Plan Area and Basin Setting 3.Sustainable Management Criteria 4.Projects and Management Actions 5.Plan Implementation Draft Introduction 4 •In Progress (June 2021)•In Progress (June 2021) Purpose of GSP •Developed in Ch 3•Developed in Ch 3 Sustainability Goal •In Progress (June 2021)•In Progress (June 2021) Agency Information •In Progress (June 2021)•In Progress (June 2021) GSP Organization Plan Area and Basin Setting •Reviewed by TAC & Board•Reviewed by TAC & Board Description of Plan Area •Reviewed by TAC & Board•Reviewed by TAC & Board Basin Setting: HCM •In Progress (June 2021)•In Progress (June 2021) Basin Setting: Water Budget Draft Sustainable Management Criteria review Guiding principle: preparation to effectively read and review draft Section 3 of the GSP. Section 3 structure Conceptual pitfalls Getting unstuck Draft Section 3 structure 1. Sustainability Goal 2. Undesirable Results 3. Minimum Thresholds 4. Measurable Objectives & Interim Milestones 5. Monitoring network Draft Disclaimer Draft Section 3 represents a writeup based on SMC set by few historically observed groundwater levels. We have high confidence these SMC will address shallow well users, ISW, and GDEs; and that they will pass environmental review. Draft Sustainable Management Criteria 8 •Established•Established Sustainability Goal •GW Levels (Developed) •Water Quality (Developed) •Storage (Developed) •Subsidence (Developed) •Surface Water Depletion (In Discussion) •GW Levels (Developed) •Water Quality (Developed) •Storage (Developed) •Subsidence (Developed) •Surface Water Depletion (In Discussion) Undesirable Results •GW Levels (In Discussion) •Water Quality (Developed) •Storage (Developed) •Subsidence (Developed) •Surface Water Depletion (In Discussion) •GW Levels (In Discussion) •Water Quality (Developed) •Storage (Developed) •Subsidence (Developed) •Surface Water Depletion (In Discussion) SMC (Minimum Threshold, Measurable Objective, Interim Milestones) •GW Levels (Designed and in Implementation) •Water Quality (Designed and in Implementation) •Surface Water Depletion (Designed and in Implementation) •GW Levels (Designed and in Implementation) •Water Quality (Designed and in Implementation) •Surface Water Depletion (Designed and in Implementation) Monitoring Networks In c r e a s e i n S p e c i f i c i t y Narrative Description Qualitative Measure Specific Numerical Setting Detailed Setting Draft Sustainability Goal: example The Sustainability Goal of the Basin is to protect and ensure the long-term viability of groundwater resources for urban,domestic,agricultural,industrial,and environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater.The Sustainability Goal will be achieved by managing groundwater within the Basin’s sustainable yield and in a manner that avoids significant and unreasonable impacts to any of the six Sustainability Indicators. 1. Sustainability Goal 2. Undesirable Results 3. Minimum Thresholds 4. Measurable Objectives & Interim Milestones 5. Monitoring network Draft 10 The overall sustainability goal of groundwater management in the Basin is to maintain ground-water resources in ways that best support the continued and long-term health of the people, the environment, and the economy in Ukiah Valley, for generations to come. This includes managing groundwater conditions for each of the applicable sustainability indicators in the Basin so that: ◼Groundwater elevations and groundwater storage do not significantly decline below their historically measured range, protect the existing well infrastructure from outages, protect groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and avoid significant additional streamflow depletion due to groundwater pumping. ◼Groundwater quality is suitable for the beneficial uses in the Basin and is not significantly or unreasonably degraded. ◼Significant and unreasonable land subsidence is prevented in the Basin. Infrastructure and agricultural production in Ukiah Valley remain safe from permanent subsidence of land surface elevations. ◼Significant and undesirable streamflow depletions due to groundwater pumping are avoided through projects and management actions consistent with existing regulatory requirements. ◼The GSA’s groundwater management is efficiently and effectively integrated with other water -shed and land use planning activities through collaborations and partnerships with local, state, and federal agencies, private landowners, and other organizations, to achieve the broader “watershed goal” of sufficient surface water flows that sustain healthy ecosystem functions. Sustainability Goal: extended Draft 11 Chronic lowering of groundwater levels is considered significant and unreasonable when such lowering threatens the long-term viability of domestic, agricultural, municipal, or environmental users of groundwater. Undesirable Results ▪Causes ▪Criteria to Define Undesirable Results ▪Potential effects of Undesirable Results on Beneficial Uses and Users of Groundwater ▪Relationship to other Sustainability Indicators Significant and unreasonable degradation of groundwater quality is the degradation of water quality that would impair beneficial uses of groundwater within the Basin or result in failure to comply with groundwater regulatory thresholds. An undesirable result occurs when subsidence substantially interferes with beneficial uses of groundwater and land uses. Depletion of surface water due to groundwater extraction is considered significant and unreasonable when such lowering threatens the long-term viability of domestic, agricultural, municipal, or environmental users of groundwater. Draft Questions? Draft Minimum Thresholds ◼Development: specific to sustainability indicator ◼3 technical memo appendices: ⚫Shallow well protection analysis ⚫ISW impact analysis ⚫GDE impact analysis 1. Sustainability Goal 2. Undesirable Results 3. Minimum Thresholds 4. Measurable Objectives & Interim Milestones 5. Monitoring network Draft 14 Sustainable Management Criteria Minimum Thresholds Proposed: Discussion ongoing 𝐿𝐿𝐺𝑊𝐸/𝑆𝑟𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒=𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑟𝑙𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑙𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑎𝑙𝐴𝑎𝑙𝑟ℎ𝑟𝑙𝐹𝑉 +𝐴𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑟ቐ 1)10%𝑖𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑟ℎ𝐿𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙 𝐿𝑟,2)20%𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑟ℎ𝐿𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙 𝐿𝑟,𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑟𝑙10 𝑎𝑟 Established 𝐿𝐿𝑊𝑄=𝐿𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑟𝑟𝑉𝐿𝐿𝑎𝑖𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑟𝑎ቊ 𝐿𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑎=10 𝑙𝑎/𝐿 𝐿𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑎𝑖𝑎𝐴𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑟𝑖𝑟𝑟=900 µ𝐿/𝑎𝑙 Proposed: Discussing ongoing 𝐿𝐿𝐼𝑆𝑊=𝐴𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑖𝑟𝑎ቐ 1𝑟𝑟𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑟:𝐿𝐿𝐺𝑊𝐸 𝐴𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑟:𝑉𝑙𝑙𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑙𝑎𝐴𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑟𝐹𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑟 Draft 15 Sustainable Management Criteria Measurable Objective and Interim Milestones Proposed: Discussing ongoing 𝐿𝐿𝐺𝑊𝐸/𝑆𝑟𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒=75𝑟ℎ𝐿𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑎𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑙𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑎𝑙𝐴𝑎𝑙𝑟ℎ𝑟𝑙𝑉𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑟 Established 𝐿𝐿𝑊𝑄=𝐿𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑙75%𝑙𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑟𝑙𝑟𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑟𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑟75%𝑙𝑎𝐿𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑙𝑟𝑟𝐿𝑎𝑖𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑟𝑎 Proposed: Discussing ongoing 𝐿𝐿𝐼𝑆𝑊=𝑉𝑖𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑟𝑟ℎ𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑙𝑟𝑙𝑎𝑎𝑉𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑟𝑟ℎ𝑎𝑎𝐹𝑙𝑎𝑙 MO MT IM 2027 IM 2032 IM 2037 implementation horizon Draft Questions? Draft Future Scenarios Draft Scenario What we are required to have What we have now or plan to have for GSP Submittal in Jan 2020 Future Baseline A 50-year representation 50-year repeat of historical baseline (could be changed to two 25-year) Climate Change Capture impacts of climate change using best available science and knowledge 2 DWR provided climate period analyses 2030 & 2070 CVD Releases Best available science and information: forecast appropriate releases for each scenario Historical and future baseline using hard input measured by gages/ Future changes taken directly from Sonoma Water ResSim outputs PVP PVP outputs based on reasonable possibilities to assist with setting SMCs and developing management actions Historical/future baseline input to basin from gages/ Scenarios taken directly from Sonoma Water ResSim outputs Overall for other future scenarios Best available science and accurate representation of basin and possibilities to develop SMCs and MAs We are reliant on historical inputs and ResSim outputs for combination of scenarios assuming no major discrepancies between their flow and diversion calculations and our model Can be fit in our current budget Will be done unless evaluation of input files hints at inconsistencies Future Scenario: To be run for GSP Submittal Draft 19 PVP and CVD Scenarios: Foreword ◼We represent the combination of PVP and CVD through East Fork releases. ◼There are considerable uncertainties imposed on these simulations: ⚫Climate data used for Sonoma ResSim Scenarios cover the same historical period but are not necessarily the same as what we use. ⚫Sonoma ResSim Scenarios use leakage and diversion amounts that are different from what our model produces. ◼We acknowledge these uncertainties and are aware how we run these scenarios are scientifically imperfect. ◼We see more benefit in running them in this mode rather than not running them at all due to budget and time limitations for a perfect pairing of models. ◼While we use the ResSim results that Sonoma Water provided, it does not indicate that Sonoma Water endorses this approach. We share the same technical and project understanding as mentioned above. ◼A dynamic pairing of models or harmonizing their inputs can be considered for the 5-year review or implemented in the USGS watershed GSFLOW. Draft PVP and CVD Scenarios RW (Baseline with RW) FFEIR_PVPDecom (Decommission + FIRO) FFEIR_PVPRoR (Run of River + FIRO) FFEIR_PVPMod (Modified RPA+FIRO) Reference: POTTER VALLEY PROJECT HUFFMAN AD-HOC COMMITTEE Water Supply Working Group, “Results Of Initial Water Supply Modeling For Potter Valley Project And Russian River Alternatives”. Sonoma Water, Feb 2020 Draft PVP and CVD Scenarios ◼East Fork Flow will always be lower than historical values. ◼Impacts of RoR and Mod may be sensed more during dry season. Wet season is close to historical. ◼Decom scenario will be felt year- round. Wet season impacts may be more noticeable than dry season. ◼Combination of Decom and Dry/Critical year will be very tough to manage with regards to streamflows. ◼Sonoma Water provides comprehensive comparison in their scenario report. Draft GW Elevation Difference from RW 22 FFEIR_PVPDecom -RW Critical WY Type 2066 (2014) -Fall (September) Difference in meters (~3ft) FFEIR_RoR -RW FFEIRMod –RW PLACEHOLDER Draft GW Elevation Difference from RW 23 FFEIR_PVPDecom -RW Critical WY Type 2068 (2016) -Fall (September) Difference in meters (~3ft) FFEIR_RoR -RW FFEIRMod –RW PLACEHOLDER Draft Results for scenarios FFEIR_Decom and FFEIR_Mod are placeholders They will be added and sent to members prior to meeting Draft River Leakage Dry Season (May -Sep) 25 Draft River Leakage Wet Season (Oct -Apr) 26 Draft Satisfied Diversions Dry Season (May -Sep) 27 Draft Satisfied Diversions Wet Season (Oct -Apr) 28 Draft Hopland Flow 29 Draft Talmage Flow 30 Draft GWE at RMPs 31 PL A C E H O L D E R PL A C E H O L D E R PL A C E H O L D E R Draft GWE at RMPs 32 PL A C E H O L D E R PL A C E H O L D E R PL A C E H O L D E R PL A C E H O L D E R Draft Gaining Losing Conditions of River 33 FFEIR-Mod Below Normal WY Type 2064 (2012) Change of River Gaining/Losing Conditions Through Scenarios in August RW FFEIR-DecomFFEIR-RoR River Losing to Aquifer Dry River Segment River Gaining from Aquifer Draft Gaining Losing Conditions of River 34 FFEIR-Mod Below Normal WY Type 2064 (2012) Change of River Gaining/Losing Conditions Through Scenarios in March RW FFEIR-DecomFFEIR-RoR River Losing to Aquifer Dry River Segment River Gaining from Aquifer Draft Gaining Losing Conditions of River 35 FFEIR-Mod Below Normal WY Type 2068 (2016) Change of River Gaining/Losing Conditions Through Scenarios in August RW FFEIR-DecomFFEIR-RoR River Losing to Aquifer Dry River Segment River Gaining from Aquifer Draft Gaining Losing Conditions of River 36 FFEIR-Mod Below Normal WY Type 2068 (2016) Change of River Gaining/Losing Conditions Through Scenarios in March RW FFEIR-DecomFFEIR-RoR River Losing to Aquifer Dry River Segment River Gaining from Aquifer Draft Questions? Draft PMAs and Drought Draft 39 Projects and Management Actions Supply Augmentation •Recycled Water (Phase I-III) Water Conservation •Water Main and Meter Replacement •Water System Upgrade (Redwood Empire) •Rainwater Catchment •Irrigation Upgrades •Landscape Conversion Water Quality Enhancement •Forsythe Floodplain Restoration Supply Augmentation •Recycled Water (Phase IV) •Well Rehabilitation •Western Hills Source Water Protection •Reduce Evaporative Losses •Off-stream Reservoirs (Construction and Rehabilitation) Conjunctive Use •Recharge Projects: Spreading Grounds Water Conservation •Upgrades to Potable Water Intertie •Conservation Easements •Conservation Programs and Green Infrastructure •Irrigation Efficiency Improvements •Voluntary Land Repurposing & Alternative, Lower ET Crops Existing (Tier I)Proposed/Planned (Tier II) Draft 40 Projects and Management Actions ◼In Draft Ch 4 we included all the PMAs that have been discussed in GSA meetings and included the information that we have for each of them. We left placeholders for information that is needed based on regulation and we do not yet have. Generally, what we still need for PMAs and Chapter 4 are: ⚫More details for PMAs that it is warranted with respect to design, implementation, cost, and benefits to the basin ⚫Information regarding permits and prerequisites needed to implement any of the projects ⚫Information regarding the coordination needed and outside agencies and entities involved in any of the PMAs, including the lead agency(ies) (if not the GSA) that will be responsible for implementation. ⚫Status of the PMA: Concept, Planned, Designed, in Construction, Implemented. Draft Final questions? Thank You! Draft EXTRA SLIDES ◼Next Slides are for informational purposes and background and will not be presented 42 Draft 43 The overall sustainability goal of groundwater management in the Basin is to maintain ground-water resources in ways that best support the continued and long-term health of the people, the environment, and the economy in Ukiah Valley, for generations to come. This includes managing groundwater conditions for each of the applicable sustainability indicators in the Basin so that: ◼Groundwater elevations and groundwater storage do not significantly decline below their historically measured range, protect the existing well infrastructure from outages, protect groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and avoid significant additional streamflow depletion due to groundwater pumping. ◼Groundwater quality is suitable for the beneficial uses in the Basin and is not significantly or unreasonably degraded. ◼Significant and unreasonable land subsidence is prevented in the Basin. Infrastructure and agricultural production in Ukiah Valley remain safe from permanent subsidence of land surface elevations. ◼Significant and undesirable streamflow depletions due to groundwater pumping are avoided through projects and management actions consistent with existing regulatory requirements. ◼The GSA’s groundwater management is efficiently and effectively integrated with other water -shed and land use planning activities through collaborations and partnerships with local, state, and federal agencies, private landowners, and other organizations, to achieve the broader “watershed goal” of sufficient surface water flows that sustain healthy ecosystem functions. Sustainable Management Criteria Sustainability Goal Draft 44 Sustainable Management Criteria Foreword ◼SMC will change based on your input ◼Setting them is an iterative process ◼We believe what we are proposing is protective of beneficial uses, provides operational flexibility, and is a good starting point ◼We are using the model to see how these settings will fit in the future ◼SMC can differ based on location of well, area, or hydrogeology. They are not one size fits all. ◼They can be changed as more data becomes available at 5-year reviews. ◼Crossing MTs does not necessarily mean non-compliance. Meeting undesirable result conditions does. ◼We have 20 years + a possible 5-year extension to reach MOs sustainably. SMC Measurable Objective (MO) Minimum Threshold (MT) Trigger (Not Mandatory) Operational Flexibility Draft 45 Sustainable Management Criteria Monitoring Networks ◼A set of CASGEM wells and TSS Wells are used for all networks to measure GWE. ◼A set of streamflow gages are used for ISW. ◼TSS Wells and a few of CASGEM instrumentations are still being coordinated and implemented. ◼1 Streamflow gage installed, 1 is planned, 4 USGS gages are available. ◼Continuous measurements will be reported monthly, CASGEM frequency reported twice per year, and streamflow measurements will be reported daily. Draft 46 Sustainable Management Criteria Monitoring Networks ◼A set of public supply wells already monitored for DDW + 4 TSS wells ◼DDW wells are monitored by the agencies –TSS by the GSA ◼We follow the same schedule as the DDW ◼Boron will be sampled at the request of GSA by agencies ◼Monitoring will be done by tracking DWR published data Draft 47 ◼To achieve the sustainability goal and Measurable Objectives ◼GSA can coordinate its efforts and PMAs with the current efforts for draught management to better serve the community ◼Projects ⚫Can be done in phases: Feasibility, Design, Pilot, Implementation ⚫Can be existing or planned, short-term (2022-2027) and long-term (2027-2042). ◼Management actions ⚫Do not need capital investments and may have triggers for implementation. ⚫May also be existing or planned, short-term (2022-2027) and long-term (2027-2042). ◼Categorized into: ⚫Conjunctive Use ⚫Supply Augmentation ⚫Water Conservation ⚫Water Quality Enhancement ◼Current list of PMAs are in discussion and investigation process and presented for informational purposed only. Projects and Management Actions