How can we support the development of robust groundwater sustainability plans?

California Agriculture (UCANR) | March 13th, 2018

Three years after California passed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SMGA), groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) are now preparing to develop their groun

Three years after California passed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SMGA), groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) are now preparing to develop their groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs), the blueprints that will outline each basin’s road to sustainability. Successful GSPs will require an effective participatory decision-making process. We tested a participatory process with the Yolo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, a water-limited irrigation district in the Central Valley. First, we worked with district stakeholders to outline the parts of the plan and set measureable objectives for sustainability. The district defined seven management strategies, which the research team evaluated against climate, land use and regulatory uncertainties using a water resources model. Together, we explored model results using customized interactive graphics. We found that the business-as-usual strategy was the most unlikely to meet sustainability objectives; and that a conjunctive use strategy, with winter groundwater recharge and periphery ponds storage, achieved acceptable measures of sustainability under multiple uncertainties, including a hypothetical pumping curtailment. The process developed a shared understanding of the vulnerabilities of the local groundwater situation and proved valuable in evaluating strategies to overcome them.

Hydrogeologic characterization of the San Antonio Creek Valley watershed, Santa Barbara County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 31st, 2022

Hydrogeology and Simulation of Groundwater Flow in the Lucerne Valley Groundwater Basin, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | June 28th, 2022

The Lucerne Valley is in the southwestern part of the Mojave Desert and is about 75 miles northeast of Los Angeles, California. The Lucerne Valley groundwater basin encom

The Lucerne Valley is in the southwestern part of the Mojave Desert and is about 75 miles northeast of Los Angeles, California. The Lucerne Valley groundwater basin encompasses about 230 square miles and is separated from the Upper Mojave Valley groundwater basin by splays of the Helendale Fault. Since its settlement, groundwater has been the primary source of water for agricultural, industrial, municipal, and domestic uses. Groundwater withdrawal from pumping has exceeded the amount of water recharged to the basin, causing groundwater declines of more than 100 feet between 1917 and 2016 in the center of the basin. The continued withdrawal has resulted in an increase in pumping costs, reduced well efficiency, and land subsidence near Lucerne Lake. Although the volume of pumping has declined in recent years, there is concern that new agricultural growth and limits on imported water will continue to strain the sustainability of the groundwater system.

Hydrologic and geochemical characterization of the Petaluma River watershed, Sonoma County, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 31st, 2022

Principal water agencies in the Petaluma Valley groundwater basin seek to understand the availability of groundwater to meet increasing regional water supply demand cause

Principal water agencies in the Petaluma Valley groundwater basin seek to understand the availability of groundwater to meet increasing regional water supply demand caused by increasing agricultural and urban water demands. Surface water from the Russian River is the primary water supply in the basin, but the future availability of this surface-water supply is uncertain. Groundwater is an important supplemental source of water for the City of Petaluma and the primary supply for agriculture and domestic use by rural property owners. Furthermore, supplies of recycled water are becoming more available. Water managers face the challenge of meeting increasing water demand with a combination of surface water, local groundwater resources, and use of recycled wastewater. In 2014, California adopted legislation to manage groundwater: the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The SGMA requires the development and implementation of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) in 127 medium- or high-priority groundwater basins, and the Petaluma Valley groundwater basin was designated as a high-priority basin. Sustainability is defined within the SGMA in terms of avoiding undesirable results: significant and unreasonable groundwater-level declines, reduction in groundwater storage, seawater intrusion, water-quality degradation, land subsidence, and surface-water depletion. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) and the City of Petaluma, characterized the hydrology of the Petaluma valley watershed (PVW) and developed an integrated hydrologic model that can be used to improve understanding and management of the groundwater system and develop a GSP. The objectives of the study are to (1) develop an updated assessment of the hydrogeology and geochemistry of the PVW and (2) develop an integrated hydrologic model for the PVW. The purpose of this report is to describe the conceptual model of the hydrologic, hydrogeologic, and water-quality characteristics of the PVW and a numerical groundwater-flow model of PVW.

Implementing SGMA: Results from a Stakeholder Survey

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | August 26th, 2019

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 represents a historic transition to collective groundwater resource management and has the potential to signif

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014 represents a historic transition to collective groundwater resource management and has the potential to significantly reduce groundwater overdraft in California. A total of 260 groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) recently formed to collectively manage groundwater resources in the 127 high and medium priority groundwater basins of the state. The simultaneous formation of hundreds of new governing agencies is an unprecedented institutional effort with very few examples to learn from. As GSAs move towards the design and deliberation of their groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs), assessments on the process up until now can directly inform development processes that are still taking place. This report summarizes the results from a state-wide survey that targeted SGMA participants.

Incomplete Determination of the 2020 Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 28th, 2022

The Department of Water Resources (Department) has evaluated the groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) submitted for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Subbasin) and has d

The Department of Water Resources (Department) has evaluated the groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) submitted for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Subbasin) and has determined that the GSP is incomplete. The Department based its determination on recommendations from the Staff Report, included as an enclosure to the attached Statement of Findings, which describes that the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin GSP does not satisfy the objectives of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) nor substantially comply with the GSP Regulations. The Staff Report also provides corrective actions which the Department recommends to address the identified deficiencies.

Incomplete Determination of the 2020 Groundwater Sustainability Plans Submitted for the San Joaquin Valley – Kern County Subbasin

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 28th, 2022

Department management has reviewed the enclosed Staff Report, which recommends that the deficiencies identified should preclude approval of the Plan. Based on its review

Department management has reviewed the enclosed Staff Report, which recommends that the deficiencies identified should preclude approval of the Plan. Based on its review of the Staff Report, Department management is satisfied that staff have conducted a thorough evaluation and assessment of the Plan and concurs with, and hereby adopts, staff’s recommendation and all the corrective actions provided. The Department thus deems the Plan incomplete based on the Staff Report and the findings contained herein. A. The GSPs do not establish undesirable results that are consistent for the entire Subbasin. 1. While the Coordination Agreement presents Subbasin-wide undesirable results, the Subbasin’s fragmented approach towards establishing management criteria that define undesirable conditions in various parts of the Subbasin does not satisfy SGMA’s requirement to use same data and methodologies. B. The Subbasin’s chronic lowering of groundwater levels sustainable management criteria do not satisfy the requirements of SGMA and the GSP Regulations. 1. The GSPs relied on disparate methods to develop groundwater level minimum thresholds across the numerous GSPs and management areas. 2. The GSPs do not consistently and sufficiently document the effects of their selected minimum thresholds on beneficial uses and users in the Subbasin, nor explain how the minimum thresholds and measurable objectives that are set below historical lows will impact other applicable sustainability indicators, specifically water quality, land subsidence, and reduction of groundwater storage. C. The Subbasin’s land subsidence sustainable management criteria do not satisfy the requirements of SGMA and the GSP Regulations. 1. The Plan lacks a Subbasin-wide, coordinated approach to establishing land subsidence sustainable management criteria. 2. The GSPs and management areas that use their minimum thresholds for the chronic lowering of groundwater levels as proxy criteria for subsidence do not sufficiently demonstrate that groundwater levels (specifically groundwater levels below historical lows) are a reasonable proxy to avoid land subsidence that would substantially interfere with surface land uses.

Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan

Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority (IWVGA) | January 14th, 2020

Currently, the groundwater resources in the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Basin (IWVGB or Basin) are not being sustainably managed. Overdraft conditions have existed fo

Currently, the groundwater resources in the Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Basin (IWVGB or Basin) are not being sustainably managed. Overdraft conditions have existed for decades as a result of groundwater pumping that exceeds the natural Basin yield (Dutcher and Moyle, 1973). The results of overdraft have manifested themselves through various undesirable results, primarily the chronic lowering of groundwater levels, the degradation of water quality, and the reduction of groundwater in storage throughout the IWVGB. (See Section 3 for a discussion of overdraft conditions in the Basin.) In compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), as set forth in California Water Code (CWC) Section 10720.1, this Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) discusses Basin management strategies that will culminate in the absence of undesirable and unsustainable groundwater conditions in the IWVGB. The GSP recommends management actions and projects, and provides measurable sustainability objectives and milestones that are intended to achieve Basin sustainability while considering the unique geologic and hydrogeologic conditions of the IWVGB. The recommendations of this GSP will provide for long-term sustainable groundwater management in the IWVGB within 20 years of GSP implementation. Due to size, this file has been divided. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7

James Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan

James Groundwater Sustainability Agency (JGSA) | December 12th, 2019

James Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Revised)

James Groundwater Sustainability Agency (JGSA) | July 22nd, 2022

*Submitted to the Department of Water Resources on July 22, 2022. No date or signature accompany the seal from the preparer at Provost and Pritchard.

*Submitted to the Department of Water Resources on July 22, 2022. No date or signature accompany the seal from the preparer at Provost and Pritchard.