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

Hydrogeology Journal (Springer) | July 3rd, 2015

South American Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan

Sacramento County | October 29th, 2021

Groundwater management in the South American Subbasin (SASb) has been occurring for decades. Stable groundwater conditions in terms of groundwater levels, storage volume

Groundwater management in the South American Subbasin (SASb) has been occurring for decades. Stable groundwater conditions in terms of groundwater levels, storage volume, and interconnected surface waters have been achieved due to a variety of historically implemented projects and management actions. To ensure continued sustainable conditions allowing for future groundwater use to the benefit of all users in the SASb over the next 50-years, with climate change considered, a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) has been developed and will be implemented to achieve the sustainability goal for the basin in the next 20 years. Due to size, this file has been divided into eight parts. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8

South Coast Hydrologic Region Groundwater Update

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | April 1st, 2015

The primary goal of the South Coast Hydrologic Region (South Coast region) groundwater update is to expand information about region-specific groundwater conditions for Ca

The primary goal of the South Coast Hydrologic Region (South Coast region) groundwater update is to expand information about region-specific groundwater conditions for California Water Plan Update 2013 and to guide more informed groundwater management actions and policies. A second goal is to steadily improve the quality of groundwater information in future California Water Plan (CWP) updates to a level that will enable regional water management groups (RWMGs) to accurately evaluate their groundwater resources and implement management strategies that can meet local and regional water resource objectives within the context of broader statewide objectives. The final goal is to identify data gaps and groundwater management challenges that will guide prioritizing of future data collection and funding opportunities relevant to the region. This regional groundwater update is not intended to provide a comprehensive and detailed examination of local groundwater conditions, or be a substitute for local studies and analysis. Nonetheless, where information is readily available, this update does report some aspects of the regional groundwater conditions in greater detail.

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency | December 19th, 2019

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Revised)

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency | July 13th, 2022

South of Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for Certain Lands Overlying the Kern County Subbasin

South of the Kern River Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (SoKR GSAs) | July 27th, 2022

Southeast California Regional Basin Study

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

The United States Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow) Basin Study Program is a 21st Century approach to help

The United States Department of the Interior’s WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage America’s Resources for Tomorrow) Basin Study Program is a 21st Century approach to help address water supply challenges. The Southeast California Regional Basin Study (Study) takes a collaborative approach to solve local water supply and regional conveyance and storage issues. As part of this Study, the Bureau of Reclamation’s Southern California Area Office cooperated with the Borrego Water District (BWD), Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD), Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and other interested regional stakeholders to assess water supply and demand challenges in the Southeast California region. This Study’s report is comprised of seven chapters; they are: introduction, supply, demand, alternative strategies, alternative analysis, findings, and references. Three appendices provide additional details regarding climate change modeling results, engineering design and economic analysis. The Study focuses on a regional area encompassing the Coachella, Borrego and Imperial Valleys. The Study addresses current and future supply and demand imbalances, provides an assessment of existing infrastructure resources, and develops options and alternatives to solve identified issues and help plan for an uncertain water supply future. The local stakeholders provided substantial informational resources on historical and projected supply and demand, and existing infrastructure. The water districts’ background information includes numerous groundwater, urban water and integrated regional planning studies, all of which were produced and/or updated between 2010 and 2012. Extensive supply and demand studies for the Colorado River Basin and California’s Central Valley – the two imported water supply sources for the Study area – also contributed data to this Study. Reclamation’s Colorado River Basin Water Supply and Demand Study (Colorado River Basin Study) (Reclamation, 2012) and the California Department of Water Resources biennial State Water Project (SWP) report (State of California, 2012 a and b) were both completed in 2012. Reclamation’s Colorado River Basin Study included several technical analyses related to optimal water utilization, conveyance and storage alternatives relative to climate change and future water supply uncertainty. Because the Southeast California Basin Study region is dependent on both Colorado River and SWP imports, several sections of the Study reference and/or summarize both reports extensively. Existing data was used to develop structural and non-structural options to resolve supply-demand imbalances and future uncertainty. Non-structural options included governance, and regulatory or operational changes that could facilitate stakeholder processes to better conserve water or improve the use of existing facilities to convey and store water. Non-structural options were addressed qualitatively due to the complexity of interagency negotiations that would likely be involved. The structural options involved an appraisal level design effort to evaluate pipeline alignments to convey water supplies between the Study stakeholders. Both the structural and non-structural options were assessed in their capability to resolve regional water supply and demand relative to future climate uncertainties. Climate change scenarios analyzed the potential impacts increasing temperatures and changes in precipitation may have on supply and demand across the Study area. The analysis addressed both local and imported supply sources. Climate change is expected to result in increasing temperatures across the Study area and in the Colorado River and SWP basins over time. As temperatures continue to increase, annual precipitation will become more variable. Precipitation changes may affect recharge of the Study area’s local groundwater aquifers and the Colorado River and SWP snowpacks. The climate effects on imported supply have been extensively discussed in the Colorado River Basin Study and the biennial SWP report. Increasing temperatures will increase both supply and demand uncertainty. CVWD could see an increase in SWP supply deliveries under average or greater precipitation-snowpack conditions. Dry years or extended droughts could substantially decrease SWP deliveries. However, CVWD and IID receive the majority of their supply from the Colorado River. Future climate scenarios indicate an increased potential for lower basin shortages. As senior water right holders and under the Secretary of the Interior’s Colorado River Interim Guidelines for Lower Basin Shortages and Coordinated Operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead, IID and CVWD would not be impacted by short-term shortage issues. The Colorado River Basin Study analysis indicates these shortage vulnerabilities could be mitigated by up to 50% through a variety of management actions and operational changes. Each Study option was assessed as an adaptive strategy to climate change. The structural options to convey and store water in the Borrego Valley groundwater basin are not viable at the present time. A non-structural option may be more cost-effective for the Study region, have the potential to meet the Study objectives, and may offset climate change uncertainty that is impacting available imported water supplies. Further study effort could include fostering groundwater sustainability in the Borrego Valley and promoting opportunities for additional groundwater banking between IID and CVWD in the Coachella Valley, per an October 2003 agreement. Other water and related resource options generated from discussions during the course of this Study include increasing storage opportunities at Lake Henshaw Dam, implementing best practices for flood control basins, and brackish desalination. These options may all play a greater role in diversifying the region’s water supply in the future. However, additional study is required to assess these water resource options.

Special Issue: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act

California Agriculture (UCANR) | March 13th, 2018

This special issue of California Agriculture focuses on the implications of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA, the package of bills signed into law by C

This special issue of California Agriculture focuses on the implications of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA, the package of bills signed into law by California Gov. Jerry Brown in September 2014. The legislation puts California on a path to the sustainable management of a resource that accounts for between one-third (in wet years) and two-thirds (in dry years) of the state’s water use. In dry years, statewide overdraft is in the range of 3 to 7 million acre-feet. Some of that is recharged in wet years, but in many basins, including some of the state’s top-producing agricultural regions, the long-term trend has been falling water tables (see groundwater.ucdavis.edu for links to UC video introductions to groundwater in California and SGMA). Sustainable management under the act is defined as the avoidance of “significant and unreasonable” levels of six impacts: (1) lowering of groundwater levels, (2) reduction in groundwater storage, (3) seawater intrusion, (4) water quality degradation, (5) land subsidence and (6) impacts on beneficial uses of interconnected surface waters. Regulation of groundwater in California was long in coming. The state has often been a national leader in environmental policy, for instance on air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. But it was the last state to adopt statewide groundwater regulations (Cannon Leahy 2016). In most basins, groundwater use was unrestricted beyond the basic requirement in the state constitution that all water use be reasonable and beneficial. Of the state’s 515 groundwater basins, SGMA applies to the 127 judged to be high- or medium-priority based on a combination of factors related to current and future groundwater demand and the consequences of overdraft. These 127 basins account for 96% of the state’s groundwater extraction (CASGEM 2018). Twenty-seven of these basins have previously been adjudicated — meaning that they are under a court order to limit overdraft. The act mandated the creation, by June 30, 2017, of a new set of local agencies, groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs), responsible for complying with SGMA’s directives. To date, 266 groundwater sustainability agencies have been formed, accounting for 378 areas in 141 basins statewide (in many cases there is more than one GSA in a basin; also, GSAs may be formed in low-priority basins even though the law does not require it). The next step is the preparation of groundwater sustainability plans. These plans must put the basin on a path that will lead to sustainable management within 20 years, with interim milestones subject to state review every 5 years. Critically overdrafted basins (map) must submit plans by January 31, 2020; other basins must submit by January 31, 2022. Two state agencies have primary responsibility for supporting the implementation of SGMA. The Department of Water Resources acts as facilitator and evaluator, while the State Water Resources Control Board has an enforcement role, ensuring compliance with the law (see article page 18).

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.