San Joaquin River

Source area management practices as remediation tool to address groundwater nitrate pollution in drinking supply wells

Journal of Contaminant Hydrology (Elsevier) | July 19th, 2019

Nitrate in drinking water may cause serious health problems for consumers. Agricultural activities are known to be the main source of groundwater nitrate contaminating ru

Nitrate in drinking water may cause serious health problems for consumers. Agricultural activities are known to be the main source of groundwater nitrate contaminating rural domestic and urban public water supply wells in farming regions. Management practices have been proposed to reduce the amount of nitrate in groundwater, including improved nutrient management practices and “pump and fertilize” with nitrate-affected irrigation wells. Here, we evaluate the feasibility and long-term impacts of agricultural managed aquifer recharge (Ag-MAR) in the source area of public water supply wells. A numerical model of nitrate fate and transport was developed for the Modesto basin, part of California's Central Valley aquifer system. The basin is representative of semi-arid agricultural regions around the world with a diversity of crop types, overlying an unconsolidated sedimentary aquifer system. A local public supply well in an economically disadvantaged community surrounded by farmland was the focus of this study. Model scenarios implemented include business as usual, alternative low-impact crops, and Ag-MAR in the source area of the public supply well. Alternative nutrient management and recharge practices act as remediation tools in the area between farmland and the public supply well. Improved agricultural source area management practices are shown to be an effective tool to maintain or even enhance groundwater quality in the targeted supply well while remediating ambient groundwater.

Source, distribution, and management of arsenic in water from wells, Eastern San Joaquin Ground-Water Subbasin, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | October 15th, 2008

Sources of high-chloride water and managed aquifer recharge in an alluvial aquifer in California, USA

Hydrogeology Journal (Springer) | July 3rd, 2015

Spring 2017 Groundwater Level Data Summary

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | October 3rd, 2022

This document presents a summary of fall 2017 groundwater level data available in the DWR groundwater level database as of February 21, 2018 and includes a discussion of

This document presents a summary of fall 2017 groundwater level data available in the DWR groundwater level database as of February 21, 2018 and includes a discussion of fall 2017, data coverage and groundwater level trends. Statewide precipitation data come from the U.S. Climate Divisional Database, which has data from January 1895 to the present.

SSALTS Final Phase 3 Report: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | October 31st, 2016

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to

The purpose of the Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) is to identify the range of viable Central Valley alternatives for salt disposal to provide input for consideration during development of the Salt and Nitrate Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley Water Board). The findings have been used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley Water Board Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans) to facilitate salt disposal in a manner that is most beneficial to the region and consistent with the State Water Resources Control Board’s (State Water Board) Recycled Water Policy. This work is being conducted under the direction of the Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) initiative, which is developing the SNMP for the Central Valley. The SSALTS project has been conducted in three phases (Figure 1-1): Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas – The selection of representative study areas served as archetype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these study areas was characterized to establish baseline information that was subsequently used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in Phases 2 and 3. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies – Phase 2 of SSALTS developed potential long-term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) in-valley alternatives; (2) out-of-valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combined in-valley and out-of valley salt disposal options. Phase 3: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation – Alternatives developed under Phase 2 were evaluated in this report using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation was the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. The Phase 1 and Phase 2 SSALTS final reports were submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in December 2013 and September 2014, respectively (CDM Smith 2013; CDM Smith 2014). The Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was submitted to the CV-SALTS Executive Committee in March 2015. Comments were received and incorporated into the Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Executive Committee recommended postponing the finalization of the Phase 3 SSALTS report until a draft of the Nitrate Implementation Measures Study (NIMS) report was completed, so that salt and nitrate implementation measures and mitigation strategies could be coordinated. While based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the March 2015 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report – and thus including the changes based on the original comments, the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report had major changes in terms of content and structure. The September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report was sent to the Project Committee on September 20, 2016 and comments were received on October 5, 2016. The second set of comments were addressed and incorporated into this October 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS final report. Appendix E. provides the comments and responses on the September 2016 Phase 3 SSALTS draft report. The Phase 3 SSALTS report provides a path forward, based on the foundation of Phases 1 and 2 and CV-SALTS Executive Committee discussions.

Stacked Incentives: Co-Funding Water Customer Incentive Programs

Pacific Institute | June 1st, 2021

Water utilities throughout the United States offer customer incentives to motivate action and foster engagement. Incentive programs can take many forms, such as rebate

Water utilities throughout the United States offer customer incentives to motivate action and foster engagement. Incentive programs can take many forms, such as rebates for high-efficiency fixtures and appliances, technical assistance for installing cisterns and rain gardens, and educational programs about water reuse. In addition to providing water-related benefits, many of these programs generate additional co-benefits, including reductions in energy use for heating or treating water and wastewater, increased carbon sequestration in landscapes, enhancements to local biodiversity, and more. These co-benefits present water utilities with an opportunity to build collaborative partnerships and co-funding for customer incentive programs through “stacked incentives.”

Standardized Regulatory Impact Assessment of Proposed Making Conservation a California Way of Life Regulation

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | June 21st, 2024

Water conservation in California overall, due to the proposed regulation and other conservation efforts by water suppliers and Californians generally, plus passive conser

Water conservation in California overall, due to the proposed regulation and other conservation efforts by water suppliers and Californians generally, plus passive conservation from prior conservation efforts, is estimated to save levels of water consistent with the goal mentioned in the Water Supply Strategy of the reduction of the water demand of towns and cities by half a million acre-feet per year. The proposed regulation serves as a backstop that is expected to cause new savings and “lock in” these other savings. As shown in the graph below, staff estimated that the proposed regulation would save approximately 30,000 acre-feet of water in 2027 (compared to the assumed 2027 baseline water use) and increased amounts in subsequent years, reaching almost 235,000 acre-feet of water in 2050 (compared to the assumed 2050 baseline water use). The total cumulative amount of water savings in the 2025-2050 period would be approximately 3.9 million acre-feet. More than half of the estimated water savings (approximately 52 percent) would come from the assumed residential water conservation measures, and the remainder (approximately 48 percent) from CII (Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional) performance measures.

State Investments in Delta Levees

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | January 1st, 2015

This 43-page Issue Paper, authored by Dustin Jones, the Council's Integrated Regional Water Management Supervising Engineer, is entitled State Investments in Delta Levees

This 43-page Issue Paper, authored by Dustin Jones, the Council's Integrated Regional Water Management Supervising Engineer, is entitled State Investments in Delta Levees, Key Issues for Updating Priorities. The Delta Reform Act requires that the Delta Plan promote strategic levee investments that attempt to reduce risks to people, property, and state interests in the Delta (Water Code section 85305) and recommend priorities for state investment in levee operation, maintenance, and improvements in the Delta (Water Code section 85306). In addition, the Delta Plan may identify actions to be taken outside of the Delta, if those actions are determined to significantly reduce flood risks in the Delta and may include local plans of flood protection (Water Code section 85307(a-b)). This paper outlines 15 issues that will need to be considered as the Council updates the Delta Plan’s provisions regarding State investment in the Delta’s levees. It summarizes background information about these issues, provides references for further information, and highlights key points to be addressed through the development of the Delta Levees Investment Strategy.

State Investments in Delta Levees: Key Issues For Updating Priorities

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | January 9th, 2015

This paper outlines 15 issues that will need to be considered as the Council updates the Delta Plan’s 36 provisions regarding State investment in the Delta’s levees.

This paper outlines 15 issues that will need to be considered as the Council updates the Delta Plan’s 36 provisions regarding State investment in the Delta’s levees. It summarizes background information 37 about these issues, provides references for further information, and highlights key points that will need 38 to be addressed over the coming months.

State of California Department of Natural Resources Division of Fish and Game Thirtieth Biennial Report 1926-1928

State of California | September 30th, 1928