Los Angeles Basin Stormwater Conservation Study: Task 4 Existing Infrastructure Response & Operations Guidelines Analysis

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | September 1st, 2014

The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) partnered with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to collaborate on the Los A

The Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) partnered with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to collaborate on the Los Angeles Basin Stormwater Conservation Study (LA Basin Study). The purpose of the LA Basin Study is to investigate long-range water conservation and flood risk impacts caused by projected changes in climate conditions and population in the Los Angeles region. The LA Basin Study will recommend potential modifications or changes in the operation of the existing stormwater capture systems as well as the development of new facilities that could help resolve future water supply and flood risk issues. These recommendations will be developed by identifying alternatives and conducting trade-off analyses.  For Task 4, Existing Infrastructure Response and Operations Guidelines Analysis of the LA Basin Study, Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the LACFCD jointly analyzed the major components of the water conservation and flood risk mitigation system. For the analysis, Reclamation assessed the 14 major LACFCD dams and reservoirs, USACE analyzed their 4 major flood control dams in the region, and LACFCD assessed the 26 major spreading grounds interconnected to the water conservation system. The LACFCD also evaluated 5 major channel outlets. This report summarizes the data, methods, and results of the existing infrastructure response to the historic climate and future projections.  The purpose of Task 4 is to assess the response of existing infrastructure and analyze the operation guidelines under both the current and future climate conditions. It is important to recognize that this effort relies upon the existing configuration of the water conservation and flood risk mitigation network as the baseline condition.  This evaluation includes a ranking assessment of the current and future stormwater volumes conserved or discharged, and other impacts to the water conservation and flood risk mitigation system. The following sub-tasks were identified to conduct this assessment:  Response to Current Climate (Water Year 1987 through 2000)  Analyze stormwater volumes conserved or discharged Analyze infrastructure response and operations guidelines  Response to Future Climate (Water Year 2012 through 2095) Analyze stormwater volumes conserved or discharged Analyze infrastructure response and operations guidelines The response to the current climate provided a representation of the existing situation and revealed how the existing infrastructure could reasonably be expected to perform under a historical climate to which the region has become accustomed. However, this may not be the case in the future. The response to future climate assessed the existing infrastructure under varying climate conditions to understand if it would function satisfactorily. This analysis of the existing infrastructure served as a status quo assessment of historical conditions as well as a “no action” evaluation of the future.  After the analysis of the historic and future climate conditions, an assessment was conducted for the system of dams and spreading ground facilities. A water conservation ranking—or performance level—was developed to assess the overall efficiency and resilience of the facilities to both the historic and projected future climate. Although results are assigned to the individual 18 dams/reservoirs and 26 spreading grounds, each facility was analyzed within the entire system. The dams and spreading grounds were ranked according to their performance with respect to one another; these rankings were used to develop the Task 4 performance levels.  Generally, facilities that were the least efficient resulted in being the least resilient to climate change and were assigned Performance Level III which has a high potential for enhancements. Facilities that were generally more efficient were more resilient to climate change and were assigned Performance Level II. Finally, facilities that were the most efficient tended to be the most resilient to climate change and were assigned to Performance Level I.  For the channel outlet analysis, assessment levels were developed to determine which of the five major channel outlets have the highest potential for increasing stormwater capture and reducing runoff to the Pacific Ocean. The ability to reduce the stormwater runoff that is lost to the ocean and capture it would greatly boost the potential stormwater supply in this region. The Task 4 analysis assigned assessment levels to the 5 major channel outlets and their respective watersheds.  The Los Angeles River ranked into Assessment Level III indicating that this watershed has the greatest potential for increasing stormwater supplies and should be targeted for future enhancements. For the remaining outlets, although these locations were found to have lower discharge volumes, additional capture efforts should still be targeted within these watersheds to further increase stormwater capture and improve local water supplies. 

Los Angeles Basin Stormwater Conservation Study: Task 5 Infrastructure & Operations Concepts Report

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | December 1st, 2015

The Los Angeles Basin Stormwater Conservation Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the

The Los Angeles Basin Stormwater Conservation Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The purpose of the LA Basin Study is to investigate long-range water conservation and flood risk management impacts caused by projected changes in the climate and population in the Los Angeles region. The LA Basin Study provides recommendations for potential modifications and changes to the existing regional stormwater capture system, as well as for the development of new facilities and practices, which could help to resolve future water supply and flood risk management issues. The stormwater capture concepts and alternatives developed within this report will inform the Task 6 – Trade-Off Analysis & Opportunities report of the LA Basin Study.  The objective of Task 5, Infrastructure and Operations Concepts, is to identify and develop both structural and nonstructural (i.e., plans and policies) concepts to manage stormwater under projected climate conditions for the Los Angeles Basin watersheds, which include: Los Angeles River, San Gabriel River, South Santa Monica Bay, North Santa Monica Bay, Ballona Creek, Malibu Creek, and Dominguez Channel/Los Angeles Harbor watersheds (Basin Study Watersheds). The efforts and results previously completed for Task 2 – Water Supply & Water Demand Projections, Task 3 – Downscaled Climate Change & Hydrologic Modeling, and Task 4 – Existing Infrastructure Response & Operations Guidelines Analysis serve as the foundation for Task 5. The major tasks and subtasks of Task 5 include:  Concept Development  - Identify a range of opportunities and options using stakeholder input  - Determine preliminary concepts for further evaluation  Technical Analysis of Concepts  - Assess structural and nonstructural concepts pertaining to dams, spreading grounds, flood control channels, decentralized storage, infiltration, reuse facilities, debris basins, and other concepts  - Develop and apply concept selection criteria  Appraisal-Level Analysis  - Evaluate selected concepts for future system reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness  In addition to any new stormwater conservation concepts that are developed, the existing facilities from the Task 4 analysis were considered for enhancement. The Watershed Management Modeling System (WMMS), which has served as the primary hydrologic model throughout the LA Basin Study, continued to be the preferred tool and was also used for Task 5. Hydrologic simulations were conducted to analyze the potential water conservation and flood risk mitigation benefit for the various project concepts. For the future period, water years 2012 through 2095, four climate projections (Low 1, Low 2, Mid 2, and High 1) from Task 4 were used in the simulations.  Click here for USBR's Task 5 Appendices index: Appendix A - Infrastructure and Operations Concepts (Excel) Appendix B - Local Stormwater Capture (PDF)  Appendix C - Modeling Approach and Solutions (PDF) Appendix D - Local Management Cost (Excel) Appendix D - Regional 1 Cost (Excel) Appendix D - Regional 2 Cost (Excel) Appendix D - Regional 3 Cost (Excel) Appendix D - Storage 3 Cost (Excel) Appendix E - LACFCD Dam Hydrology and Cost Estimates (PDF)

Los Angeles Basin Study Summary Report

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | November 1st, 2016

Changing demographics, climate change, and competing interests for available water supplies all present long-term risks to the stability and reliability of the region’s

Changing demographics, climate change, and competing interests for available water supplies all present long-term risks to the stability and reliability of the region’s imported water.  The region recognizes that today’s challenges require an integrated water resources management approach. For decades, this region has operated and maintained one of the most effective flood control systems in the world that protects millions of people from the impacts of flooding in the region. This system sends much of the stormwater runoff into the ocean, water that historically recharged local groundwater basins, making this region even more dependent on imported water supplies. As regulatory pressure to clean up polluted stormwater runoff continues and imported water resources diminish, this local source of water supply is becoming more and more attractive (GLAC IRWMP 2014). Many of the region’s water management agencies have studied and planned for increasing use of local recycled and graywater supplies, ocean and brackish desalination, developing more groundwater, and implementing improved water conservation initiatives to extend existing supplies. Additionally, social trends and concerns also drive the emphasis on the use of local water supplies. However, the one major local resource that has not been studied in-depth is stormwater and its opportunities to optimize the reliability of local supplies. To enhance the capabilities of the existing stormwater conservation infrastructure within the Los Angeles Basin, the LACFCD began to investigate long-term projected needs and future climate conditions within the region. Given that local groundwater plays such a vital role in the region’s water supply portfolio, detailed scientific, engineering, and economic analyses were conducted to identify strategies for enhancing stormwater capture for groundwater recharge. The LA Basin Study examined the region’s water supplies and demand, and impacts from projected population growth and changing climate in the watersheds of the Los Angeles region. The objectives of the study were to: • Use state-of-the-art climate change analysis to develop projections of future water supply and demands in the Basin. • Analyze how the Basin’s existing water infrastructure and its operations will perform in the face of changing water realities. • Develop and highlight opportunities to adapt to current and future water demands. • Conduct a trade-off analysis of identified opportunities. Concepts ranged from enhancing the existing stormwater capture system and modifying existing facilities (including those capturing runoff for groundwater recharge), to developing new structural and nonstructural concepts that could help resolve future water supply and flood risk issues. This Summary Report presents highlights of the critical tasks associated with this Basin Study and the results and findings produced throughout this collaborative study effort. Full study chapters and appendices: Plan of Study Fact Sheet Task 2: Water Supply and Demand Task 3: Climate Change Analysis Task 3.1: Development of Climate-Adjusted Hydrologic Model Inputs Task 3.1:  Climate Change and Hydrologic Projections Appendices Task 3.2:  Hydrologic Modeling Report Task 3.2: Annual Hydrologic Results Workbook Task 4: Existing Infrastructure Response & Operations Guidelines Analysis Final Report Task 5: Task 5 - Infrastructure & Operations Concept Analysis Final Report Task 6: Trade-off Analysis Final Report Click here for Reclamation's full index  including public outreach and webinars

Los Angeles Basin Study The Future of Stormwater Conservation: Task 6 – Trade-Off Analysis & Opportunities

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | January 5th, 2016

The Los Angeles Basin Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the U.S. Department of the

The Los Angeles Basin Study (LA Basin Study) is a collaborative partnership between the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The purpose of the LA Basin Study is to investigate long-range water conservation and flood risk impacts caused by projected changes in climate and population in the Los Angeles region. The LA Basin Study highlights opportunities for potential modifications and changes to both the existing regional stormwater capture system as well as for the development of new facilities and practices, which could help to resolve future water supply and flood risk issues. The stormwater capture concepts and alternatives developed in the Task 5 – Infrastructure & Operations Concepts report are evaluated in the trade-off analysis and opportunities highlighted in this report.  The primary purpose of Task 6 – Trade-Off Analysis & Opportunities is to evaluate the quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits and costs of the stormwater concepts identified in the Task 5 report and to provide an analysis of the trade-offs among concepts. In most cases, various project concepts would generate benefits for some impact categories but not others, and would also impose various types of costs. The trade-off analysis provides a methodology for comparing different types of benefits and costs that cannot all be quantified in monetary terms. These trade-offs include economic, financial, environmental, and social effects. Economic effects include the benefits associated with different types of goods and services supported by the concepts, the costs of the different concepts, the impacts of the different concepts on the regional economy through changes in the amount and type of spending, and the cost effectiveness of different project concepts. Financial effects reflect the impacts of paying for a project, such as paying off capital debt and covering operation and maintenance expenses. Environmental effects reflect the type and quality of environmental and natural resources that would be potentially influenced by a concept. Environmental effects include items such as water quality, energy consumption, impacts on habitat, and ecosystem function. Social effects reflect how the concepts may alter the social characteristics of a community or region such as impacts to education, environmental justice, and quality of life.  Benefits are quantified for three categories of resource impacts. The first category is additional stormwater conserved or stored, which is measured in terms of acre-feet per year. The second is recreation, which is measured in miles of new trails. The third is increased habitat acreage and additional acquisition of right-of-way acreage that would provide habitat benefits. Stormwater conservation benefits are valued as improved water supply reliability, recreation is valued as a type of general recreation activity similar to outdoor activities at a local park, and habitat acreage is evaluated as an ecosystem improvement. In the case of the Regional Impact Programs concept, right-of-way acreage also produces some ecosystem benefits. Quantified benefits and costs as well as categories of qualitative benefits are summarized in Table ES-1. All benefits and costs are present valued over a 50-year planning period using the current Fiscal Year 2016 federal water project planning rate of 3.125%.  The economic analysis of quantified benefits can be used to evaluate the magnitude of potential benefits of each project group, recognizing that many additional benefits may exist that are not accounted for in a traditional benefit and cost analysis. It is important to note that quantified benefits could only be developed for a subset of the total beneficial effects associated with the concepts identified in the Task 5 report. There are many potential benefits associated with environmental and social improvements, flood risk mitigation, environmental justice, and other effects that could be large but cannot be evaluated quantitatively for this level of analysis. These unquantified benefits may be larger than quantified benefits in some cases and smaller in other cases. The intent of the qualitative assessment is to provide an indication of the potential magnitude of unquantified benefits. 

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Geologic Guidebook Los Angeles Aqueduct System

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | December 1st, 1977

Los Osos Community Services District v. Golden State Water Company

Superior Court of California, County of San Luis Obispo | October 14th, 2015

This Stipulated Judgment concerns the Los Osos Groundwater Basin, as it is more particularly described in Sections 1.4.2 and 2.1 of this Stipulated Judgment, which underl

This Stipulated Judgment concerns the Los Osos Groundwater Basin, as it is more particularly described in Sections 1.4.2 and 2.1 of this Stipulated Judgment, which underlies the unincorporated communities of Los Osos, Baywood Park and Cuesta-by-the-Sea in San Luis Obispo County, California (“Basin”). The Basin is the only source of water for residential, commercial, institutional and agricul-tural development on properties overlying the Basin. This litigation (the “Action”) relates to efforts by the parties to sustainably manage the water resources of the Basin and to protect and promote the economic, environmental and social health of the community.

Lower Mill Creek Watershed Conjunctive Use Project: Tehama County, California

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | November 18th, 2008

In 1920, the Tehama County Superior Court of the State of California adjudicated entitlements to all Mill Creek flow below 203 cubic feet per second (cfs). As such, water

In 1920, the Tehama County Superior Court of the State of California adjudicated entitlements to all Mill Creek flow below 203 cubic feet per second (cfs). As such, water right holders on Mill Creek legally divert a significant portion of the surface water flow for agricultural beneficial use. During certain times of the year, especially during dry or critically dry years, the agricultural demand for surface water can reduce Mill Creek flow and expose in-stream barriers to fish migration. Fishery experts recognize Mill Creek as a high priority stream for the protection and enhancement of Chinook salmon spawning habitat. Mill Creek surface water diverters currently participate in a long-term cooperative management plan to help provide sufficient flow for fish migration while also maintaining irrigation supplies and the recognition of surface water rights. As part of these efforts, Mill Creek water users participate in water lease and groundwater exchange programs designed to increase in-stream flow during critical spring and fall fish migration periods. Along with other entities, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) plans to establish methods of monitoring and studying fish passage, assessing agricultural water use efficiency, and examining the potential for additional use of groundwater as opposed to use of surface water diversions in the Lower Mill Creek watershed. This report provides a background of the geology and hydrogeology in the Lower Mill Creek watershed area, a detailed discussion of the groundwater resources, and an overview of the potential for conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater resources. It also provides recommendations for additional groundwater monitoring and potentially favorable locations for production well installation associated with possible future conjunctive use programs.

Lower Tule River Irrigation District Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan

Lower Tule River Irrigation District Groundwater Sustainability Agency | January 21st, 2020

Machine learning based downscaling of GRACE-estimated groundwater in Central Valley, California

Science of the Total Environment (Elsevier) | January 9th, 2023

California's Central Valley, one of the most agriculturally productive regions, is also one of the most stressed aquifers in the world due to anthropogenic groundwater ov

California's Central Valley, one of the most agriculturally productive regions, is also one of the most stressed aquifers in the world due to anthropogenic groundwater over-extraction primarily for irrigation. Groundwater depletion is further exacerbated by climate-driven droughts. Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite gravimetry has demonstrated the feasibility of quantifying global groundwater storage changes at uniform monthly sampling, though at a coarse resolution and is thus impractical for effective water resources management. Here, we employ the Random Forest machine learning algorithm to establish empirical relationships between GRACE-derived groundwater storage and in situ groundwater level variations over the Central Valley during 2002–2016 and achieved spatial downscaling of GRACE-observed groundwater storage changes from a few hundred km to 5 km. Validations of our modeled groundwater level with in situ groundwater level indicate excellent Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency coefficients ranging from 0.94 to 0.97. In addition, the secular components of modeled groundwater show good agreements with those of vertical displacements observed by GPS, and CryoSat-2 radar altimetry measurements and is perfectly consistent with findings from previous studies. Our estimated groundwater loss is about 30 km3 from 2002 to 2016, which also agrees well with previous studies in Central Valley. We find the maximum groundwater storage loss rates of −5.7 ± 1.2 km3 yr−1 and -9.8 ± 1.7 km3 yr−1 occurred during the extended drought periods of January 2007–December 2009, and October 2011–September 2015, respectively while Central Valley also experienced groundwater recharges during prolonged flood episodes. The 5-km resolution Central Valley-wide groundwater storage trends reveal that groundwater depletion occurs mostly in southern San Joaquin Valley collocated with severe land subsidence due to aquifer compaction from excessive groundwater over withdrawal.

Madera Subbasin Joint Groundwater Sustainability Plan

Madera Subbasin Coordination Committee | January 31st, 2022

The Madera Subbasin is identified by California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as a critically overdrafted basin. Therefore, the Madera Subbasin GSAs must develop,

The Madera Subbasin is identified by California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as a critically overdrafted basin. Therefore, the Madera Subbasin GSAs must develop, adopt, and submit a GSP (or GSPs) to DWR for the entire Madera Subbasin by January 31, 2020. The Madera Subbasin is managed by seven GSAs, of which four (City of Madera GSA, Madera Irrigation District GSA, Madera County GSA, and Madera Water District GSA) have developed a joint GSP (attached here) and three (Gravelly Ford Water District GSA, New Stone Water District GSA, and Root Creek Water District GSA) have developed individual GSPs.