Status and Understanding of Groundwater Quality in the Sierra Nevada Regional Study Unit, 2008: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 23rd, 2014

Groundwater quality in the Sierra Nevada Regional (SNR) study unit was investigated as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Groundwater Ambient

Groundwater quality in the Sierra Nevada Regional (SNR) study unit was investigated as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project. The study was designed to provide statistically unbiased assessments of the quality of untreated groundwater within the primary aquifer system of the Sierra Nevada. The primary aquifer system for the SNR study unit was delineated by the depth intervals over which wells in the State of California’s database of public drinking-water supply wells are open or screened. Two types of assessments were made: (1) a status assessment that described the current quality of the groundwater resource, and (2) an evaluation of relations between groundwater quality and potential explanatory factors that represent characteristics of the primary aquifer system. The assessments characterize untreated groundwater quality, rather than the quality of treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water distributors. The status assessment was based on water-quality data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey from 83 wells in the SNR study unit in 2008 and from 117 wells in 3 small study units within the SNR study unit in 2006–07 and on water-quality data compiled in the State’s database for 1,066 wells sampled in 2006–08. To provide some context for the results, water-quality data were converted to relative-concentrations (RCs), which are the sample concentrations divided by the concentrations of Federal or California regulatory and non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. RCs for inorganic constituents (major ions, trace elements, nutrients, and radioactive constituents) were classified as “high” (RC > 1.0, indicating that concentration is above the benchmark), “moderate” (1.0 ? RC > 0.5), or “low” (RC ? 0.5). For organic constituents (volatile organic compounds and pesticides) and special-interest constituents (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]), the boundary between moderate and low RCs was set at 0.1. All benchmarks used for organic constituents were health-based, whereas health-based and aesthetic-based benchmarks were used for inorganic constituents. The primary metric used for quantifying regional-scale groundwater quality was “aquifer-scale proportion.” Aquifer-scale proportions were calculated as the areal percentages of the primary aquifer system having high, moderate, and low RCs for a given constituent or class of constituents. The SNR study unit area was classified into four aquifer lithologic types—granitic rocks, metamorphic rocks, sedimentary deposits, and volcanic rocks—and aquifer-scale proportions were calculated on an area-weighted basis for each of the four aquifer lithologies and for the study unit as a whole (aggregated system).

Status and Understanding of Groundwater Quality in the South Coast Interior Groundwater Basins, 2008: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | May 14th, 2014

Groundwater quality in the approximately 653-square-mile (1,691-square-kilometer) South Coast Interior Basins (SCI) study unit was investigated as part of the Priority Ba

Groundwater quality in the approximately 653-square-mile (1,691-square-kilometer) South Coast Interior Basins (SCI) study unit was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The South Coast Interior Basins study unit contains eight priority groundwater basins grouped into three study areas, Livermore, Gilroy, and Cuyama, in the Southern Coast Ranges hydrogeologic province. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA South Coast Interior Basins study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated (raw) groundwater quality within the primary aquifer system, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality between basins. The assessment was based on water-quality and ancillary data collected by the USGS from 50 wells in 2008 and on water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. The primary aquifer system was defined by the depth intervals of the wells listed in the CDPH database for the SCI study unit. The quality of groundwater in the primary aquifer system may be different from that in the shallower or deeper water-bearing zones; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. The first component of this study, the status of the current quality of the groundwater resource, was assessed by using data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as trace elements and minor ions. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources within the primary aquifer system of the SCI study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the health- or aesthetic-based benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal or California regulatory or non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. A relative-concentration greater than 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than a benchmark, and a relative-concentration less than or equal to 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or less than a benchmark. Relative-concentrations of organic constituents and special-interest constituents were classified as “high” (relative-concentration greater than 1.0), “moderate” (relative-concentration greater than 0.1 and less than or equal to 1.0), or “low” (relative-concentration less than or equal to 0.1). Relative-concentrations of inorganic constituents were classified as “high” (relative-concentration greater than 1.0), “moderate” (relative-concentration greater than 0.5 and less than or equal to 1.0), or “low” (relative-concentration less than or equal to 0.5). Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric in the status assessment for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifer system with a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; percentage is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the areal percentage of the primary aquifer system with moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in the SCI study unit (within 90-percent confidence intervals). Inorganic constituents (one or more) with health-based benchmarks were detected at high relative-concentrations in 29 percent of the primary aquifer system, at moderate relative-concentrations in 37 percent, and at low relative-concentrations in 34 percent. High aquifer-scale proportions of inorganic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of nitrate (14 percent), boron (8.6 percent), molybdenum (8.6 percent), and arsenic (5.7 percent). In contrast, the relative-concentrations of organic constituents (one or more) were high in 1.6 percent, moderate in 2.0 percent, and low or not detected in 96 percent of the primary aquifer system. Of the 207 organic and special-interest constituents analyzed for, 15 constituents were detected. Perchlorate was found at moderate relative-concentrations in 34 percent of the aquifer. Two organic constituents were frequently detected (in greater than 10 percent of samples): the trihalomethane chloroform and the herbicide simazine. The second component of this study, the understanding assessment, identified natural and human factors that may have affected groundwater quality by evaluating land use, physical characteristics of the wells, and geochemical conditions of the aquifer. This evaluation was done by using statistical tests of correlations between these potential explanatory factors and water-quality data. Concentrations of arsenic, molybdenum, and manganese were generally greater in anoxic and pre-modern groundwater than other groundwater. In contrast, concentrations of nitrate and perchlorate were significantly higher in oxic and modern groundwater. Concentrations of simazine were greater in modern than pre-modern groundwater. Chloroform detections were positively correlated with greater urban land use. Boron concentrations and chloroform detections were higher in the Livermore study area than in the other study areas of the SCI; total dissolved solids and sulfate concentrations were greater in the Cuyama study area.

Status of Groundwater Quality in the California Desert Region, 2006–2008: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 9th, 2013

Groundwater quality in six areas in the California Desert Region (Owens, Antelope, Mojave, Coachella, Colorado River, and Indian Wells) was investigated as part

Groundwater quality in six areas in the California Desert Region (Owens, Antelope, Mojave, Coachella, Colorado River, and Indian Wells) was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The six Desert studies were designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated groundwater in parts of the Desert and the Basin and Range hydrogeologic provinces, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing groundwater quality to other areas in California and across the Nation. Samples were collected by the USGS from September 2006 through April 2008 from 253 wells in Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Two-hundred wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide a spatially unbiased representation of the study areas (grid wells), and ffty-three wells were sampled to provide additional insight into groundwater conditions (additional wells). The status of the current quality of the groundwater resource was assessed based on data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and inorganic constituents such as major ions and trace elements. Water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database also were incorporated in the assessment. The status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of untreated groundwater resources within the primary aquifer systems of the Desert Region, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter, primary aquifers) in the six Desert areas are defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation intervals of wells listed in the CDPH database.

Status of Groundwater Quality in the Santa Barbara Study Unit, 2011: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | September 30th, 2016

Groundwater quality in the 48-square-mile Santa Barbara study unit was investigated in 2011 as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Groundwater

Groundwater quality in the 48-square-mile Santa Barbara study unit was investigated in 2011 as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board’s Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program Priority Basin Project. The study unit is mostly in Santa Barbara County and is in the Transverse and Selected Peninsular Ranges hydrogeologic province. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is carried out by the U.S. Geological Survey in collaboration with the California State Water Resources Control Board and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA Priority Basin Project was designed to provide a statistically unbiased, spatially distributed assessment of the quality of untreated groundwater in the primary aquifer system of California. The primary aquifer system is defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation interval of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health database for the Santa Barbara study unit. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources in the primary aquifer system of the Santa Barbara study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. The status assessment for the Santa Barbara study unit was based on water-quality and ancillary data collected in 2011 by the U.S. Geological Survey from 23 sites and on water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health database for January 24, 2008–January 23, 2011. The data used for the assessment included volatile organic compounds; pesticides; pharmaceutical compounds; two constituents of special interest, perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA); and naturally present inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the health- or aesthetic-based benchmark concentration) were used to evaluate groundwater quality for those constituents that have federal or California regulatory and non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. For inorganic, organic, and special-interest constituents, a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than the benchmark and is classified as high. Inorganic constituents are classified as moderate if relative-concentrations are greater than 0.5 and less than or equal to 1.0 and are classified as low if relative-concentrations are less than or equal to 0.5. For organic and special-interest constituents, the boundary between moderate and low relative-concentrations was set at 0.1. Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the areal percentage of the primary aquifer system with a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the areal percentage of the primary aquifer system that had moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid based and spatially weighted—were used to calculate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and constituent classes. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in this the study (within 90-percent confidence intervals). Grid-based results were selected for use in the status assessment unless, as was observed in a few cases, a grid-based result was zero and the spatially weighted result was not zero, in which case, the spatially weighted result was used. Inorganic constituents that have human-health benchmarks were present at high relative-concentrations in 5.3 percent of the primary aquifer system and at moderate concentrations in 32 percent. High aquifer-scale proportions of inorganic constituents primarily were a result of high aquifer-scale proportions of boron (5.3 percent) and fluoride (5.3 percent). Inorganic constituents that have aesthetic-based benchmarks, referred to as secondary maximum contaminant levels, were present at high relative-concentrations in 58 percent of the primary aquifer system and at moderate concentrations in 37 percent. Iron, manganese, sulfate, and total dissolved solids were the inorganic constituents with secondary maximum contaminant levels present at high relative-concentrations.

Stipulated Agreement: Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles vs. Board of Supervisors of the County of Inyo et al

Superior Court of California, County of Inyo | October 21st, 1991

Stockton East Water District - Groundwater Recharge Basin, Southeast Recharge Basin

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | February 15th, 2018

Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500 - 1508), and Department of the Interior Regulations (43 CFR Part 46), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this env

Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500 - 1508), and Department of the Interior Regulations (43 CFR Part 46), the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this environmental assessment to evaluate and disclose potential environmental impacts associated with providing funds to the Stockton East Water District (SEWD) in San Joaquin County, California to construct a new 73-acre groundwater recharge basin . Reclamation would provide $300,000 through the Drought Response Program to SEWD for the development of a groundwater recharge basin. The Drought Response Program is a program designed to help water users develop drought contingency plans and build long-term drought resilience.

Stony Creek Fan Conjunctive Water Management Plan Feasibility Investigation

Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District | February 15th, 2004

Stormwater Funding Options Providing Sustainable Water Quality Funding in Los Angeles County

California Contract Cities Association (CCCA) | May 21st, 2014

The Los Angeles region faces critical, very costly, and seriously underfunded stormwater and urban runoff water quality challenges. The Los Angeles County Flood Control D

The Los Angeles region faces critical, very costly, and seriously underfunded stormwater and urban runoff water quality challenges. The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) led a multi-year effort to develop a sustainable revenue source for municipalities to manage stormwater programs and implement water quality improvement projects. This effort included special legislation and development of a proposed parcel fee, the “Clean Water, Clean Beaches Measure,” to fund clean water programs. At extended protest hearings on a proposed parcel fee in January and March of 2013, the Board of Supervisors heard concerns about the fee and the fee program from public schools, the business community, other stakeholders and the public. The Board moved to close the public hearing and determined to “not proceed at this time with the Clean Water, Clean Beaches measure as proposed.” In June 2013, the Board adopted a motion requesting collaborative participation with the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) and other wastewater management agencies to evaluate methods, assess the a potential model governance structure, and to help identify and secure other sources of funding. In response to the Board’s actions, the City Managers Committees of the California Contract Cities Association (CCCA) and the League of California Cities, Los Angeles County Division (League) convened a City Managers meeting with representatives from public schools, environmental organizations, and the business community on June 27, 2013 to hear stakeholders’ concerns and suggestions directly. The City Managers attending the meeting authorized a Work Group to review stormwater funding options after the County’s proposed Clean Water, Clean Beaches funding initiative failed to move forward. The City Managers Work Group actively sought the input of key stakeholders from the environmental, public education, and business communities, and prepared this report to assist the Board, local decision makers, stakeholders, and the public in reaching a common understanding of the issues at hand and the potential solutions. The Managers found that to fully understand the issues, improved communication and education is necessary. This report describes the stormwater regulatory requirements speci c to the greater Los Angeles area, the complexities of funding stormwater programs, and the LACFCD’s funding initiative. It examines the regulatory framework for stormwater management, including the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 permit (stormwater permit) and the total maximum daily load (TMDL) programs. The report also summarizes the impacts of the federal TMDL Consent Decree for the Los Angeles Region signed in 1999, which has indirectly regulated the LACFCD, 85 cities, and the unincorporated County since that time. Further, it reviews estimated stormwater program compliance costs, the “pros and cons” of various funding options, and evolving opportunities. The report concludes with a series of recommendations agreed upon by the City Managers. Suggestions from an Elected Officials Committee and individual City Attorneys are also included in this report. The Work Group found that funding urban runoff programs is so complex and dynamic, and the solutions so costly, that the County and the Cities cannot follow a single funding strategy at this time. One option, for example, is to examine institutional roles to determine whether other agencies, such as the County Sanitation Districts, either provide a useful governance model or could play a new or different role in managing stormwater in the future. During the report development process, the Sixth Appellate Court clarified the application of Proposition 218 regarding the imposition of fees for the capture and use of stormwater for groundwater recharge (Griffith v. Pajaro Water Management Agency). This ruling could have major implications on funding options. These are only two examples of the changing nature and complexities in charting a path forward. The City Managers Work Group recommends a “multi-pronged” approach to address urban runoff funding issues, since our communities may encounter several dead-ends. A number of the recommendations require active management and a higher degree of organization by local government. The recommended actions are voluntary. The report is not advocating that any city, group of cities, or the County adopt stormwater fees. The managers are committed to local control; if a regional fee moves forward, each community should make its own decision whether or not to participate in the regional effort. However, there are steps that local governments can take that will assist in funding the new stormwater mandates. For example, cities should organize and be active in the water bond discussions. This report suggests a voluntary framework through Contract Cities and the League to organize those communities that desire to engage in implementing the recommendations found in this report. It should be noted that the recommendations involving California Contract Cities, the Los Angeles County Division of the League of California Cities, and the State League of Cities have not been of cially endorsed by these organizations at this stage of the process. The City Managers Work Group and the Elected Of cials Committee held detailed discussions with staff from both organizations in order to re ect their input and concerns. Recommendations involving these organizations, such as changes in State legislation, would need to be reviewed and approved by each organization.

Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) Final Phase 1 Report – Identification and Characterization of Existing Salt Accumulation Areas

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | December 13th, 2013

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 Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB). The findings will be used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley RWQCB 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 Resource Control Board (SWRCB) 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 is being conducted in three phases: Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas–Selection of representative Study Areas to serve as prototype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these Study Areas is being characterized to establish baseline information that may be used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in subsequent project phases. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies–SSALTS will develop potential long- term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) In-Valley alternatives; (2) Out-of-Valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combine 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 will be evaluated using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation will be the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. This draft report represents the findings of Phase 1. Subsequent phases of SSALTS will be implemented following completion of this phase.  

Strategic Salt Accumulation Land and Transportation Study (SSALTS) Final Phase 2 Report – Development of Potential Salt Management Strategies

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) | October 1st, 2014

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 Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP) for the region under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Central Valley RWQCB). The findings will be used to guide discussions regarding establishment of regional salt management policies and the need for changes to the existing Central Valley RWQCB 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 Resource Control Board (SWRCB) 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 is being conducted in three phases: Phase 1: Identify and Characterize Existing Salt Accumulation Study Areas–Selection of representative Study Areas to serve as prototype situational examples to facilitate discussions regarding salt accumulation and disposal in the Central Valley. Each of these Study Areas is being characterized to establish baseline information that may be used to support development of salt disposal alternatives in subsequent project phases. Phase 2: Develop Potential Salt Management Strategies–SSALTS will develop potential long- term salt disposal alternatives in three parts: (1) In-Valley alternatives; (2) Out-of-Valley alternatives; and (3) hybrid alternatives that combine In-Valley and Out-of-Valley salt disposal options. Phase3: Evaluate Potential Salt Disposal Alternatives to Identify Acceptable Alternatives for Implementation – Alternatives developed under Phase 2 will be evaluated using selected feasibility criteria (e.g., regulatory, institutional, economic, technological, etc.). The outcome of this evaluation will be the identification and prioritization of acceptable salt disposal alternatives for potential incorporation into Central Valley SNMP as salt management implementation measures. The Phase 1 report was finalized in December 2013. This report summarizes the findings of Phase 2. Phase 3 work will begin after the stakeholders have reviewed the Phase 2 report and provided comments.