TACTICAL APPROACHES
Following are specific tactical approaches that may be utilized to deliver the activities, messages, and recommendations of the previous chapters. These approaches are based on best communication practices and grounded in the public participation philosophy of the International Association for Public Participation, Public Participation Spectrum as illustrated in Table 7.
The Spectrum represents a philosophy that outreach should match the desired level of input from both the stakeholder and the organizational entity.
Table 7. IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum
Based on the assessment findings for the GSP(s) development, most stakeholders would simply like to be INFORMED unless there is a potential for significant changes that may include that stakeholder. Tactics for this group will include fact sheets, websites, open houses, briefings, and informational items placed in publications they already read.
The next largest group of stakeholders, primarily groundwater pumpers and disadvantaged communities, wish to be CONSULTED. This group will have access to all the materials 808
prepared as part of the informational phase. In addition they should be invited to provide comments on written materials and planning concepts and participate in focused workshops and/or briefings. They should also be invited to attend larger public meetings.
The development of some GSP features may require a higher degree of INVOLVEMENT.
This would focus on engagement of a subset of stakeholders that may experience significant impacts associated with SGMA.
COLLABORATION opportunities have also been identified; however, they are of a different character than defined in the Spectrum. Collaboration in this GSP(s) development process will focus on working with partners that have mutual goals to achieve those goals together.
This will more resemble a partnership than a public engagement activity.
6.1. Communications Coordination.
Each GSA is required to perform legally mandated outreach activities and the GSP submission guidelines require a minimum level of engagement.
The subbasin GSAs should coordinate outreach activities even if there is a decision to move forward with multiple GSPs. In addition to efficiency and cost savings (the GSAs can share resources) this strategy will allow for consistency in messaging and reduce confusion for stakeholders that may not know what GSA jurisdiction they are in, and/or are in multiple GSA jurisdictions. Following are suggested options for communications coordination.
1. Website
2. Meeting calendar
3. Branded informational Flyers, Templates, PowerPoint Presentations, etc.
4. Periodic newsletter
5. GSP related mailing lists
6. Descriptions of interested parties
7. Issues and interest statements for legally mandatory interested parties
8. Public workshops
9. Message calendar
10. Press releases and guest editorials
11. Speakers Bureau
12. Existing group venues
13. Outreach documentation
6.2. Tactics
6.2.1. Website
As part of the communications plan
development, a list of website
concepts and draft website content
was prepared. The following
describes the proposed approach:
809
a. Centralized – Establish a centralized website for the entire subbasin. b. Individual GSAs – Posting of material to a website is part of the SGMA requirements. Those GSAs with their own webpages can link to and from the centralized site if they wish to provide their own customized information. For those GSAs without their own website, courtesy pages would be provided as an added feature of the main site. The courtesy pages would all use a single template with the same information to facilitate easy management and updates. Individual GSAs choosing to take advantage of the courtesy pages would be responsible for ensuring that information is current. The page should include a “Last Updated” box to indicate the timeliness of the information.
c. Basic features – A basic website framework has already been developed along with introductory information that has prepopulated each page.
Figure 10 illustrates the basic content of the site and includes:
1. Background information
2. Information about getting involved, including meeting information
3. A separate link for Spanish Language materials
4. Frequently asked questions
5. Links to GSAs
6. Contact information
Should a GSA decide to not participate in the Central website, a similar structure could be utilized.
Figure 10. Website Structure
6.2.2. Meeting Calendar
810
A shared meeting calendar will provide a one-stop shop for stakeholders and assist in preventing meeting conflicts while creating more potential for shared activities. This calendar should include current and scheduled meetings and workshops as well as serve as the repository for agendas and meeting notes, along with copies of meeting materials and presentation.
An integrated project calendar should also be developed that links planning project milestones with communications milestones.
6.2.3. Branded Informational Flyers,
Templates, PowerPoint
Presentations, etc.
Subbasin level materials should have a
single look and feel to create on-going
consistency and visual recognition by
stakeholders. Use of templates, shared
presentations and flyers will create
efficiencies and reinforce messaging. This
communications plan incorporates some
of this type of branding.
6.2.4. Periodic Newsletter
The need for regular communications cannot be overstated. One option is production of a periodic newsletter. Given the relatively short GSP(s) development process timeframe and the GSP development requirements for periodic outreach to identified stakeholders, a quarterly schedule would be realistic and achieve compliance with SGMA requirements for periodic updates to stakeholders. The newsletter should be designed so that individual GSAs can add tailored information if they choose to. For Portable Document Format (PDF) versions of the newsletter, a GSA could add a simple one or two page insert and the edition could be used as a handout or mailer. For a professional looking, email version of the newsletter, we recommend free or low cost services such as Mail Chimp or Constant Comment, which can be integrated with mailing lists.
Adding GSA specific information to an email newsletter can be done with web-links in the email to the very same PDF page prepared for the hardcopy mailer. An alternative is emailing the entire newsletter PDF as an attachment (although this format is less likely to be read than the mailer services).
6.2.5. GSP related mailing lists
Each GSA is required to develop notification lists. A central list may be utilized for GSP(s) related notifications.
6.2.6. Descriptions of Interested Parties
811
Each GSA is required to develop descriptions of interested parties. These lists should be updated and merged for use in the GSP(s) submittal(s). These can also be provided as background information on the website as part of constructing an administrative record. The SA in Chapter 4 provides an initial start for this documentation.
6.2.7. Issues and Interest Statements for Legally Mandatory Interested Parties A GSP submission must include a statement of interests for listed stakeholders. As suggested earlier, this can also be included on the website.
6.2.8. Coordinated Public Workshops
SGMA requires a series of public hearings and some public workshops. Such workshops should be coordinated with other subbasin entities.
During the GSA formation process the County of Merced and a forming GSA body conducted a joint workshop to explain more about SGMA and the proposed GSA formation. Distribution of meeting flyers and notices was done concurrently, and DWR attended the event to answer questions. The GSP development process will offer similar opportunities, not only within the subbasin, but with adjacent subbasins.
6.2.9. Message Calendar
Basic messages should be associated
with the planning schedule and each
stage of GSP(s) development and
serve as the theme for the
communications materials being
generated. For example, during the
GSA formation period there was a
need to communicate the basics of
SGMA and groundwater
management. During the GSP(s)
initiation phase messages should
focus on the basics of groundwater sustainability and the current state of the subbasin.
As the GSP(s) begins to take form the specifics of the GSP(s) and what it means for each stakeholder would be the focus.
6.2.10. Press Releases and Guest Editorials
At some point in the GSP development and implementation process, it is likely that stakeholders will be asked to make changes and/or financially support a sustainability effort. It will be more productive for the GSAs and their GSP collaboration partners to frame discussions about these changes than to have others, perhaps with less knowledge, do so on their behalf. For that reason there is a need for press releases and/or guest editorials to offer the media and stakeholders accurate information offered in the context of SGMA. This type of outreach should be closely coordinated as consistency in messages is critical to stakeholder acceptance. 812
6.2.11. Speakers Bureau
Efforts should be made to conduct outreach at events and meetings that already occur (e.g. Farm Bureau meetings, Rotary Club, etc.). A list of knowledgeable presenters should be developed in the event an organization or other entity would like a presentation. Speakers Bureau engagements should be recorded on the planning project meeting calendar.
6.2.12. Existing Group Venues
Fully leverage the activities of existing groups.
o Maintain a roster of existing groups and typical meeting schedules with a nexus to GSP(s) development. Add the dates to the messaging calendar. o The list of audiences, messages and existing groups should be referenced when there is a need to deploy information.
o Conduct informal outreach with the leaders of such groups to determine the best way to interact.
o Determine what communications channels these groups are using and equally leverage these, for example by placement of articles in newsletters.
6.2.13. Outreach Documentation
A central point of contact should be identified on the website and an outreach statistics inventory should be established that identifies dates, times, audiences and attendance.
This information will be also be useful in conducting follow up with stakeholders as well as documenting outreach as part of GSP submittal guidelines.
6.3. Procedural and Legally Mandated Outreach
A discussion of SGMA outreach requirements was provided in Chapter 1 and a full list of requirements is contained in Appendix 1. One major feature of the requirements is a submission to DWR of the opportunities that interested parties will be given to participate in the GSP deliberations. The Situation Assessment provides an initial description that can be added to with additional outreach.
Following are the Required Interested Parties for the purpose of mandated outreach:
Table 9 provides a list of the mandated outreach and the timeframe in which is required.
Table 8. Mandated Outreach
Timeframe Item
Prior to initiating plan
development
1. Statement of how interested parties may contact
the Agency and participate in development and
implementation of the plan submitted to DWR.
813
Timeframe Item
2. Web posting of same information.
Prior to plan development 1. Must establish and maintain an interested persons list.
2. Must prepare a written statement describing the
manner in which interested parties may participate
in GSP development and implementation.
Statement must be provided to:
a. Legislative body of any city and/or county within
the geographic area of the plan
b. Public Utilities Commission if the geographic
area includes a regulated public water system
regulated by that Commission
c. DWR
d. Interested parties (see Section 10927)
e. The public
Prior to and with GSP
submission
1. Statements of issues and interests of beneficial users of basin groundwater, including types of parties
representing the interests and consultation process
2. Lists of public meetings
3. Inventory of comments and summary of responses
4. Communication section in plan that includes:
Agency decision making process
ID of public engagement opportunities and
response process
Description of process for inclusion
Method for public information related to
progress in implementing the plan (status,
projects, actions)
90 days prior to GSP
Adoption Hearing
1. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or amendment
of the GSP, the GSP entities must notify cities and/or
counties of geographic area 90 days in advance.
90 days or less prior to GSP
Adoption Hearing
2. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or amendment
of the GSP, the GSP entities must:
a. Consider and review comments
b. Conduct consultation within 30 days of receipt
with cities or counties so requesting
GSP Adoption or
Amendment
1. GSP must be adopted or amended at Public Hearing.
60 days after plan
submission
1. 60-day comment period for plans under submission
to DWR. Comments will be used to evaluate the
submission.
Prior to adoption of fees 1. Public meeting required prior to adoption of, or increase to fees. Oral or written presentations may
be made as part of the meeting.
2. Public notice shall include:
a. Time and place of meeting
b. General explanation of matter to be considered
814
Timeframe Item
c. Statement of availability for data required to
initiate or amend such fees
d. Public posting on Agency Website and provision
by mail to interested parties of supporting data
(at least 20 days in advance)
3. Mailing lists for interested parties are valid for 1 year from date of request and may be renewed by written
request of the parties on or before April 1 of each
year.
4. Includes procedural requirements per Government
Code, Section 6066.
Prior to conducting a fee
adoption hearing.
1. Must publish notices in a newspaper of general
circulation as prescribed.
2. Publication shall be once a week for two successive
weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published
once a week or oftener, with at least five days
intervening between the respective publication
dates not counting such publication dates, are
sufficient.
3. The period of notice begins the first day of
publication and terminates at the end of the
fourteenth day, (which includes the first day.)
6.4. Items for Future Consideration
This GSP(s) Coms Plan outlines an outreach effort based on project and stakeholder needs and preferences. This document has been prepared as a working draft living document and should be updated as new information and the GSP(s) development process needs are developed.
.
815
MEASUREMENTS & EVALUATION
A guiding principle for evaluation and measurement of the Coms Plan’s success is to provide regular, unbiased reporting of progress toward achieving goals. Success may be evaluated in several ways, including process measures, outcome measures, and an annual evaluation of accomplishments. Optional evaluation measures are described below.
As part of each outreach effort debrief the following process and outcome measures will be discussed and recorded in a check sheet. The check sheets will be prepared with the goal of continuous improvement rather than criticisms.
7.2. Process Measures
Process measures track progress toward meeting the goals of the Coms Plan. These include:
Level of attendance at outreach meetings
Shared understanding of the overarching aims, activities, and opportunities presented by different planning approaches and project activities Productive dialogue among participants at meetings and events Sense of authentic engagement; people understand why they have been asked to participate, and feel that they can contribute meaningfully Timely and accurate public reporting of planning milestones Feedback from Coordinating Body and GSA members, regulators, stakeholders, and interested parties about the quality and availability of information materials
Level of stakeholder interest in the GSP(s) development process information
7.3. Outcome Measures
Outcome measures track the level of success of the Coms Plan in meeting its overall goals.
Some outcome measures considered for the GSP(s) development process include the following:
Consistent participation by key stakeholders and interested parties in essential activities. Participants should have no difficulty locating the meetings, and should be informed as to when and where they will be held.
Response from meeting participants that the engagement methods provided for a fair and balanced exchange of information.
Feedback from interested parties that they understand how their input is used, where to track data, and what results to expect.
The project receives quality media coverage that is accurate, complete and fair. 816
7.4. Mid-cycle Evaluation of Accomplishments
A mid-cycle evaluation provides an opportunity to examine the current effectiveness of the Coms Plan and provides a chance to reevaluate strategies to meet the GSP(s) development process objectives. The evaluation tasks may include:
Preparation of an executive-level summary detailing high-level initiatives and accomplishments of the previous cycle. This evaluation should also include positive news, best practices, goals and objectives, notable changes, timelines, and priorities. Identifying gaps and areas for improvement.
Highlighting how gaps and areas for improvement in the cycle has been addressed. Outlining process and outcome measures and their current results. 817
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The GSP(s) development Coms Plan outlines numerous strategies, activities and tactics. While none are highly complex, there is a requirement for coordination and clarity regarding who will be responsible for executing the tasks.
After the planning team evaluates the timelines and priorities for each of the communications activities a recommended next step is completion of a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed (RACI) Chart. This Chart, as displayed in Table 10, outlines key tasks and the assignment of roles and responsibilities for accomplishing them.
Responsible
Those who do the work to achieve the task. There is at least one person with a role of responsible, although others can be delegated to assist in the work required.
Accountable (also approver or final approving authority) This is the person ultimately answerable for the correct and thorough completion of the deliverable or task, and the one who delegates the work to those responsible. There may only be only one accountable specified for each task or deliverable.
Table 9. Sample RACI Chart
818
Consulted
Those whose opinions are sought, typically subject matter experts were people that are impacted by the activity; and with whom there is two-way communication.
Informed
Those who are kept up-to-date on progress, typically on the launch and completion of the task or deliverable. This is one way communication.
Role distinction
There is a distinction between a role and the individual assigned the task. Role is a descriptor of an associated set of tasks that could be performed by just one or many people.
In the case of the RACI Chart, the team may list as many people as is logical except for the Accountable role.
Scope of Work
Completion of the RACI Chart will also support development of any future scopes of work for consultant provided communication and outreach services. 819
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1-Public Outreach Requirements under SGMA
Appendix 2-Communications Governance
820
821
Appendix 1. Public Outreach Requirements under SGMA
GSP Regulations
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
§ 353.6. Initial Notification
(a) Each Agency shall notify the Department, in writing, prior to initiating development of a Plan. The notification shall provide general information about the Agency’s process for developing the Plan, including the manner in which interested parties may contact the Agency and participate in the development and
implementation of the Plan. The Agency shall make the
information publicly available by posting relevant information on the Agency’s website.
1. Statement of how interested parties
may contact the Agency and
participate in development and
implementation of the plan submitted
to DWR.
2. Web posting of same information.
Timing: Prior to initiating development of a
plan.
§ 353.8. Comments
(a) Any person may provide comments to the Department
regarding a proposed or adopted Plan.
(b) Pursuant to Water Code Section 10733.4, the Department shall establish a comment period of no less than 60 days for an adopted Plan that has been accepted by the Department for evaluation pursuant to Section 355.2.
(c) In addition to the comment period required by Water Code Section 10733.4, the Department shall accept comments on an Agency’s decision to develop a Plan as described in Section 353.6, including comments on elements of a proposed Plan under consideration by the Agency.
1. 60-day comment period for plans under
submission to DWR. Comments will be
used to evaluate the submission.
2. Parties may also comment on a GSA’s
(or GSAs’) statements submitted under
section 353.6
Timing: For GSP Submittal - 60 days after
submission to DWR
§ 354.10. Notice and Communication
Each Plan shall include a summary of information relating to notification and communication by the Agency with other agencies and interested parties including the following:
(a) A description of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin, including the land uses and property interests potentially affected by the use of groundwater in the basin, the types of parties representing those interests, and the nature of consultation with those parties.
(b) A list of public meetings at which the Plan was discussed or considered by the Agency.
(c) Comments regarding the Plan received by the Agency and a summary of any responses by the Agency.
(d) A communication section of the Plan that includes the following:
(1) An explanation of the Agency’s decision-making process. (2) Identification of opportunities for public engagement and a discussion of how public input and response will be used.
5. Statements of issues and interests of
beneficial users of basin groundwater,
including types of parties representing
the interests and consultation process
6. Lists of public meetings
7. Inventory of comments and summary
of responses
8. Communication section in plan that
includes:
Agency decision making process
ID of public engagement
opportunities and response process
Description of process for inclusion
Method for public information
related to progress in implementing
the plan (status, projects, actions)
Timing: For GSP Submittal – with plan
For GSP Development – continuous.
[Note: activities should be included
822
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
(3) A description of how the Agency encourages the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic
elements of the population within the basin.
(4) The method the Agency shall follow to inform the public about progress implementing the Plan, including the status of projects and actions.
in the project schedule and
information posted on web.]
§ 355.2. (c) Department Review of Adopted Plan
(c) The Department (DWR) shall establish a period of no less than 60 days to receive public comments on the adopted Plan, as described in Section 353.8.
1. 60 day public review period for public
comment on submitted plan.
Timing: After GSP Submittal to DWR – 60
days
§ 355.4. & 355.10 Criteria for Plan Evaluation
The basin shall be sustainably managed within 20 years of the applicable statutory deadline consistent with the objectives of the Act. The Department shall evaluate an adopted Plan for
compliance with this requirement as follows:
(b) (4) Whether the interests of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin, and the land uses and property interests potentially affected by the use of groundwater in the basin, have been considered.
…
(10) Whether the Agency has adequately responded to
comments that raise credible technical or policy issues with the Plan.
1. Required public outreach and
stakeholder information is submitted,
including statement of issues and interests
of beneficial users.
2. Public and stakeholder comments and
questions adequately addressed during
planning process.
Timing: For GSP Submittal – with plan
For resubmittal related to corrective action
– with submittal
California Water Code
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
10720. This part shall be known, and may be cited, as the “Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.”
10720.3
(a) This part applies to all groundwater basins in the state. …
(c) The federal government or any federally recognized Indian tribe, appreciating the shared interest in assuring the sustainability of groundwater resources, may voluntarily agree to participate in the preparation or administration of a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan under this part through a joint powers authority or other agreement with local agencies in the basin. A participating tribe shall be eligible to participate fully in planning, financing, and management under this part, including eligibility for grants and technical assistance, if any exercise of regulatory authority, enforcement, or imposition and collection of fees is pursuant to
1. Tribes and the federal government may
voluntarily participate in GSA
governance and GSP development.
Timing: Prior to initiating development of a
plan.
823
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
the tribe’s independent authority and not pursuant to authority granted to a groundwater sustainability agency under this part.
CHAPTER 4. Establishing Groundwater Sustainability Agencies [10723 - 10724]
10723.
a) Except as provided in subdivision (c), any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin may decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin.
(b) Before deciding to become a groundwater sustainability agency, and after publication of notice pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code, the local agency or agencies shall hold a public hearing in the county or counties overlying the basin.
1. Must hold public hearing in the county
or counties overlying the basin, prior to
becoming a GSA
Timing: Prior to becoming a GSA.
10723.2
The groundwater sustainability agency shall consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater, as well as those responsible for implementing groundwater sustainability plans. These interests include, but are not limited to, all of the following:
(a) Holders of overlying groundwater rights, including:
(1) Agricultural users.
(2) Domestic well owners.
(b) Municipal well operators.
(c) Public water systems.
(d) Local land use planning agencies.
(e) Environmental users of groundwater.
(f) Surface water users, if there is a hydrologic connection between surface and groundwater bodies.
(g) The federal government, including, but not limited to, the military and managers of federal lands.
(h) California Native American tribes.
(i) Disadvantaged communities, including, but not limited to, those served by private domestic wells or small community water systems.
(j) Entities listed in Section 10927 that are monitoring and reporting groundwater elevations in all or a part of a
groundwater basin managed by the groundwater sustainability agency.
1. Must consider interest of all beneficial
uses and users of groundwater.
2. Includes specific stakeholders as listed.
Timing: During development of a GSP.
10723.4.
The groundwater sustainability agency shall establish and maintain a list of persons interested in receiving notices regarding plan preparation, meeting announcements, and availability of draft plans, maps, and other relevant documents. Any person may request, in writing, to be placed on the list of interested persons.
3. Must establish and maintain an
interested persons list.
4. Any person may ask to be added to the
list
Timing: On forming a GSA.
10723.8.
(a) Within 30 days of deciding to become or form a groundwater sustainability agency, the local agency or combination of local agencies shall inform the department of its decision and its intent to undertake sustainable groundwater management. The
1. Creates notification requirements that
include:
a. A list of interested parties
b. An explanation of how interests will
be considered
824
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
notification shall include the following information, as applicable:
…
(4) A list of interested parties developed pursuant to Section 10723.2 and an explanation of how their interests will be considered in the development and operation of the
groundwater sustainability agency and the development and implementation of the agency’s sustainability plan.
Timing: On forming a GSA & with submittal
of GSP
10727.8
(a) Prior to initiating the development of a groundwater sustainability plan, the groundwater sustainability agency shall make available to the public and the department a written statement describing the manner in which interested parties may participate in the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. The groundwater sustainability agency shall provide the written statement to the legislative body of any city, county, or city and county located within the geographic area to be covered by the plan. The groundwater sustainability agency may appoint and consult with an advisory committee consisting of interested parties for the purposes of developing and implementing a groundwater sustainability plan.
The groundwater sustainability agency shall encourage the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the groundwater basin prior to and during the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. If the geographic area to be covered by the plan includes a public water system regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, the groundwater sustainability agency shall provide the written statement to the commission. (b) For purposes of this section, interested parties include entities listed in Section 10927 that are monitoring and reporting groundwater elevations in all or a part of a groundwater basin managed by the groundwater sustainability agency.
2. Agencies preparing a GSP must prepare
a written statement describing the
manner in which interested parties may
participate in its development and
implementation.
3. Statement must be provided to:
a. Legislative body of any city and/or
county within the geographic area
of the plan
b. Public Utilities Commission if the
geographic area includes a
regulated public water system
regulated by that Commission
c. DWR
d. Interested parties (see Section
10927)
e. The public
4. GSP entities may form an advisory
committee for the GSP preparation and
implementation.
5. The GSP entities are to encourage
active involvement of diverse social,
cultural and economic elements of the
affected populations.
Timing: On initiating GSP
10728.4 Public Notice of Proposed Adoption, GSP Adoption Pubic Hearing
A groundwater sustainability agency may adopt or amend a groundwater sustainability plan after a public hearing, held at least 90 days after providing notice to a city or county within the area of the proposed plan or amendment. The groundwater sustainability agency shall review and consider comments from any city or county that receives notice pursuant to this section and shall consult with a city or county that requests consultation within 30 days of receipt of the notice. Nothing in this section is intended to
3. GSP must be adopted or amended at
Public Hearing.
4. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or
amendment of the GSP, the GSP
entities must:
a. Notify cities and/or counties of
geographic area 90 days in
advance.
b. Consider and review comments
825
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
preclude an agency and a city or county from otherwise consulting or commenting regarding the adoption or amendment of a plan. c. Conduct consultation within 30
days of receipt with cities or
counties so requesting
10730 Fees.
(a) A groundwater sustainability agency may impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on
groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, including, but not limited to, preparation, adoption, and amendment of a
groundwater sustainability plan, and investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program
administration, including a prudent reserve. A groundwater sustainability agency shall not impose a fee pursuant to this subdivision on a de minimis extractor unless the agency has regulated the users pursuant to this part.
(b) (1) Prior to imposing or increasing a fee, a groundwater sustainability agency shall hold at least one public meeting, at which oral or written presentations may be made as part of the meeting.
(2) Notice of the time and place of the meeting shall include a general explanation of the matter to be considered and a statement that the data required by this section is available.
The notice shall be provided by publication pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code, by posting notice on the
Internet Web site of the groundwater sustainability agency, and by mail to any interested party who files a written request with the agency for mailed notice of the meeting on new or increased fees. A written request for mailed notices shall be valid for one year from the date that the request is made and may be renewed by making a written request on or before April 1 of each year.
(3) At least 20 days prior to the meeting, the groundwater sustainability agency shall make available to the public data upon which the proposed fee is based.
(c) Any action by a groundwater sustainability agency to impose or increase a fee shall be taken only by ordinance or resolution. (d) (1) As an alternative method for the collection of fees imposed pursuant to this section, a groundwater sustainability agency may adopt a resolution requesting collection of the fees in the same manner as ordinary municipal ad valorem taxes.
(2) A resolution described in paragraph (1) shall be adopted and furnished to the county auditor-controller and board of supervisors on or before August 1 of each year that the alternative collection of the fees is being requested. The resolution shall include a list of parcels and the amount to be collected for each parcel.
(e) The power granted by this section is in addition to any powers a groundwater sustainability agency has under any other law.
Related to GSAs
5. Public meeting required prior to
adoption of, or increase to fees. Oral or
written presentations may be made as
part of the meeting.
6. Public notice shall include:
a. Time and place of meeting
b. General explanation of matter to be
considered
c. Statement of availability for data
required to initiate or amend such
fees
d. Public posting on Agency Website
and provision by mail to interested
parties of supporting data (at least
20 days in advance)
7. Mailing lists for interested parties are
valid for 1 year from date of request and
may be renewed by written request of
the parties on or before April 1 of each
year.
8. Includes procedural requirements per
Government Code, Section 6066.
Timing: Prior to adopting fees.
826
California Government Code
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
6060
Whenever any law provides that publication of notice shall be made pursuant to a designated section of this article, such notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation for the period prescribed, the number of times, and in the manner provided in that section. As used in this article, “notice” includes official advertising, resolutions, orders, or other matter of any nature whatsoever that are required by law to be published in a newspaper of general circulation.
6066
Publication of notice pursuant to this section shall be once a week for two successive weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published once a week or oftener, with at least five days intervening between the respective publication dates not counting such publication dates, are sufficient. The period of notice commences upon the first day of publication and terminates at the end of the fourteenth day, including therein the first day.
4. Must publish notices in a newspaper of
general circulation as prescribed.
5. Publication shall be once a week for
two successive weeks. Two publications
in a newspaper published once a week
or oftener, with at least five days
intervening between the respective
publication dates not counting such
publication dates, are sufficient.
6. The period of notice begins the first day
of publication and terminates at the
end of the fourteenth day, (which
includes the first day.)
Timing: Prior to adopting fees
827
Appendix 2. Communications Governance
Given the relatively large number of stakeholders, a recommendation for coordinated efforts, and the legal requirements for outreach13 some form of communications governance is recommended.
Execution of communications activities can be accomplished by an individual or multiple individuals, and/or include or be solely managed by project consultants. The actual form of the governance is less important than a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of those responsible for ensuring required communication. Also essential is a clear chain of command that ensures the elected representatives of GSAs are able to retain communications leadership and guidance.
A driving consideration for establishing a communications governance structure is the level of effort associated with required activities and the fact that communications are highly time dependent. That means that communications activities should be occurring that may happen outside of regularly scheduled GSA meetings.
In this case delegation with guidance to a communications team is efficient and effective.
Several governance options for consideration are offered below.
Communications Option 1
Communications Option 1 is based on an overall GSP(s) development structure that includes a GSA member based leadership function that is guiding the Technical Consultants. A communications working group which might include staff, consultants and GSA elected officials, or some combination of those roles could be formed to serve as a communications working group that would ultimately report to the larger GSP coordinating body.
Communications Governance Option 1
Communications Option 2
13 See Appendix 1
828
Communications Option 1 is based on an overall GSP(s) development structure that includes a GSA member based subcommittee guiding the Technical Consultants. A communications working group which might include staff, consultants and GSA elected officials, or some combination of those roles could be formed to serve as a communications team that is affiliated with a subcommittee and would ultimately report to the larger GSP coordinating body
Communications Governance Option 2
829
Common Chapter for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Appendix F - Summaries of
Coordinated Workshops
Appendix F
830
DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDATER MANAGEMENT ACT
SPRING 2018 COORDINATED WORKSHOPS
Monday, May 14, 2018, Los Banos
Wednesday, May 16, 2018, Patterson
Thursday, May 17, 2018, Mendota
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
• Three workshops were held in the northern, central, and southern parts of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. The purpose of the workshops was to educate stakeholders and members about the public about the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) and introduce participants to their local Groundwater Sustainability Agency representatives. Topics covered during the workshop included what is SGMA, the Delta-Mendota Subbasin, and opportunities for public engagement. • Workshop participants’ questions and feedback are summarized as follows:
• Are the local groundwater regulations going to be re-set on an annual basis based on the water year, snowpack, etc.?
• Who is the governing board that will make these decisions? • If this is a state-wide initiative, who is the decision-making body? • Will the California Department of Fish and Wildlife be involved? • Has the State provided criteria to what is considered a “chronic loss” of groundwater? • Are natural springs included under SGMA?
• What criteria will you use to measure whether or not springs are overused? • What is the ultimate goal of SGMA? What does it mean to us? • How is the water budget going to be developed?
• The Irrigated Lands Program already has a lot of requirements for growers. Is this going to be the same level of detail and effort?
• What is the goal SGMA is trying to achieve? How are we going to get to sustainability? • What will happen when the State and districts do not receive their full surface water allocation and cities keep expanding?
• It seems to me that the biggest problem is that the State wants to export water to Southern California. How can we come up with a solution if there are factors out of our control? 831
• How will you know how much I am pumping?
832
DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDATER MANAGEMENT ACT
FALL 2018 COORDINATED WORKSHOPS
Monday, October 22, Firebaugh
5:00 – 7:00 PM
Firebaugh Middle School MPR
Wednesday, October 24, Los Banos
4:00 – 6:00 PM
College Greens Building
Thursday, October 25, Patterson
4:00 – 6:00 PM
Patterson Senior Center
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
• Three workshops were held in the northern, central, and southern parts of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. The purpose of the workshops was to educate stakeholders and members about the public about key Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) topics in preparation for Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) development workshops in 2019.
• The format and content of each workshop was the same. The workshops began with a 45-minute presentation, followed by an open house period for participants to talk with their Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) representative. Spanish interpretation was provided at each workshop. • In total, approximately 45 individuals (not including GSA representatives and supporting staff) participated in the workshops. Attendance by location was as follows: Firebaugh – 5 participants; Los Banos – 23 participants; Patterson – 17 participants. Three participants requested Spanish interpretation. • Most participants heard about the workshops through emails from their local water or irrigation district, or direct flyers and bill inserts sent to them by their water/irrigation district or municipality. • Presentation topics included: Overview of SGMA, GSP development and implementation process, data management, hydrogeologic conceptual model, numerical and analytical models, and the water budget. • Workshop participants’ questions and feedback are summarized as follows:
Data
o How much historical data are the GSAs using to make their assumptions? o Will data from counties be used?
833
o Is the numerical data available on the Delta-Mendota website? o How big will the GSAs’ monitoring network be? Do the GSAs anticipate drilling new monitoring wells?
o How will the GSAs monitor water quality and subsidence? Do the GSAs already have subsidence monitoring wells and data?
o How much data have the GSAs gathered? When will the GSAs stop gathering data? o How much data will the GSAs be collecting from individual landowners? Models
o Will the models take into account availability of surface water supplies? o Will the models take into account changing crops?
o Will the models take into account agricultural areas that are being converted to commercial or urban areas?
Water Budget and Sustainable Yield
o What is the sustainable yield for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin? o It sounds like the sustainable yield will be a number that oscillates around a baseline. What is this baseline?
o How will the GSAs determine the minimum threshold for the subbasin? o How will the water budgets account for existing and new wells? o What are the years for the historic water budget? How was this period set? Projects and Management Actions
o Based on what is currently known, will the GSAs be able to limit groundwater pumping in the future?
o When the GSAs come up with groundwater management policies, will the policies impact groundwater pumping on an individual level, regional level, or basin-wide level? o Will the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) or the GSAs be the ones to limit pumping?
o Could a potential management action be limiting pumping? o Will the GSAs be the agencies to determine if new wells can or cannot be drilled? Integration with Other Programs/Organizations
o How much are the GSAs integrating with the Irrigated Lands Program? o How closely do GSAs work with local farm bureaus?
Other
o Will there be an administrative fee for the GSAs to oversee GSP implementation? o How will the costs for GSP development and implementation be covered? o Do the GSAs know what DWR’s GSP review and certification process will consist of? 834
o Will the GSAs in the region have influence over how surface water resources are managed on a state-wide level?
o How many GSAs were formed after SGMA passed in 2014?
835
DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDATER MANAGEMENT ACT
WINTER 2019 COORDINATED WORKSHOPS
Tuesday, February 19, 2019, Los Banos
4:00 – 6:00 PM
College Greens Building
Wednesday, February 20, 2019, Patterson
4:00 – 6:00 pm
City of Patterson City Hall
Monday, March 4, 2019, Santa Nella
6:00 – 8:00 PM
Romero Elementary School
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
• Three workshops were held in the northern, central, and southern parts of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin during February and March 2019. The purpose of the workshops was to educate stakeholders and members about the public about topics covered in the draft Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP) being developed for the subbasin. Topics covered during the workshop included historic and current water budgets, sustainability criteria, undesirable results, and projects and management actions. • Workshops were promoted via emails sent to each GSA’s interested parties database, flyers and utility bill inserts, and social media posts.
• The format and content of each workshop was the same. The workshops began with a short presentation, followed by an open house period for participants to talk with their Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) representative. Spanish interpretation was provided at each workshop. • In total, approximately 30 individuals (not including GSA representatives and supporting staff) participated in the workshops. Attendance by location was as follows: Patterson – 14, Los Banos – 4, and Santa Nella – 12.
Participants represented a range of beneficial users in the subbasin, including domestic well owners, agricultural water users, public water systems, and disadvantaged communities. 836
• Workshop participants’ questions and feedback are summarized as follows:
Water Budgets
o Does the land surface budget include inflows from precipitation and applied water to crops? o Who provides the information about the inflows and outflows of the aquifer? o How is the aquifer recharged?
o Do reservoirs lose water?
o What happened between 1985 – now [regarding the historic water budget]? o What affect does precipitation have on the aquifer?
Projects and Management Actions
o Who will make the decision on who can drill wells and how much can well owners can pump? o Will GSAs in the subbasin be able to restrict selling of groundwater outside of the subbasin? o Projects and management actions should emphasize flood and stormwater capture and increased stormwater storage.
o Will use of recycled water in new developments be considered a source of water to balance the water budget?
o Are there percolation ponds by golf course?
Sustainability Criteria and Undesirable Results
o Is it the GSAs’ responsibility to set the sustainability criteria for the subbasin? o Could this region experience seawater intrusion?
o What’s going to happen in areas like Dos Palos that have poor groundwater quality? Other
o Does the GSP only cover of agricultural uses of groundwater or does it also cover residential and commercial uses of groundwater?
o Who is doing the work to prepare the GSP?
o How much does it cost to prepare a GSP?
o Are there any agencies currently monitoring groundwater pumping and levels? o How is groundwater currently being removed from the groundwater basin? o How many monitoring stations have been identified? Have GSAs already identified where these monitoring pumps are?
o Does the California Aqueduct affect the water table in the subbasin? o What is the rationale for the North-Central GSP group’s boundaries? The north and south areas of the North-Central GSP group are very different.
o Do water agencies in the subbasin send water to the Santa Clara Valley Water District? o Where are the coordinated meetings are held? What time are these meetings? o Will this raise our water rates?
o The community of Tranquillity is currently experiencing land subsidence. 837
DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDATER MANAGEMENT ACT
SPRING 2019 COORDINATED WORKSHOPS
Monday, May 20, 2019, Patterson
4:00 – 6:00 pm
City of Patterson City Hall
Tuesday, May 21, 2019, Los Banos
4:00 – 6:00 PM
College Greens Building
Wednesday, May 22, 2019, Santa Nella
6:30 – 8:30 PM
Romero Elementary School
Thursday, May 23, 2019, Mendota
6:00 – 8:00 PM
Mendota Library
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
• Four workshops were held in the northern, central, and southern parts of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. The purpose of the workshops was to educate stakeholders and members about the public about topics covered in the draft Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP) being developed for the subbasin. Topics covered during the workshop included water budgets, sustainable yield, projects and management actions, and groundwater monitoring networks.
• Workshops were promoted via emails sent to each GSA’s interested parties database, flyers and utility bill inserts, social media posts, and direct outreach to community stakeholders. • The format and content of each workshop was the same. The workshops began with a short presentation, followed by an open house period for participants to talk with their Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) representative. Spanish interpretation was provided at each workshop. • In total, approximately 30 individuals participated in the workshops. Attendance by location was as follows:
Patterson – 7, Los Banos – 10, Santa Nella – 4, and Mendota – 9. Participants represented a range of beneficial users in the subbasin, including domestic well owners, agricultural water users, public water systems, and disadvantaged communities.
838
• Workshop participants’ questions and feedback are summarized as follows:
Water Budgets
o Why is there a difference between the water budgets for the upper and lower aquifers? o Why is the change in storage negative?
o Is there a water budget for each aquifer?
o When the projected water budgets are finalized, will they include specific projects and management actions?
o How was the data for the climate change factors developed? o Historically, California goes through periodic droughts. Do the projected water budgets account for future droughts?
o Do the projected water budgets account for future population growth and new developments? o Do the water budgets account for percolation from water applied to crops? Projects and Management Actions
o Will management actions include a charge for water pumping? o Will pumping restrictions be implemented during dry periods or drought? o Will the GSPs identify specific projects and management actions? o Will GSAs in the subbasin form a water bank?
o If pumping restrictions are enacted, GSPs should include a provision that allows private well owners to demonstrate that they aren’t overpumping or causing undesirable results. o The region needs more surface water storage to supplement groundwater pumping. o There should be restrictions on development in the region.
Sustainable Yield
o Does increases in groundwater demand relate to the cost of surface water supplies? Groundwater Monitoring
o When local agencies monitor for groundwater, how far down do they monitor? GSP Adoption, Implementation and Enforcement
o What agency approves the GSPs?
o Will the California Department of Water Resources be the lead agency for providing oversight after the GSP is submitted?
o Could the State Water Resources Control Board mandate pumping restrictions? o Will the state be looking at the drawdown of individual, private wells? o Where does the funding to implement GSPs come from?
o How much will GSP implementation cost?
o Who has to submit the annual report?
Other
o GSAs should be divided into even smaller units to manage projects and management actions locally.
839
Common Chapter for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Appendix G - Examples of
Promotional Materials
Appendix G
840
Collaborating local agencies are hosting a series of public workshops about the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Come learn how this landmark legislation may impact our community, what we are doing about it, and how you can get involved.
Representatives from local groundwater sustainability agencies will be available to answer questions. You have three opportunities to attend:
The content of each workshop will be the same. The first thirty minutes of each workshop will consist of an informational presentation, followed by an open house until 6:00 PM. For more information, please visit our website at: www.deltamendota.org.
We look forward to seeing you there!
Los Banos
Monday, May 14
4:00 - 6:00 PM
San Luis & Delta-Mendota
Water Authority Office
842 6th St, Los Banos
Patterson
Wednesday, May 16
4:00 - 6:00 PM
Hammon Senior Center
1033 W Las Palmas Ave, Patterson
Mendota
Thursday, May 17
4:00 - 6:00 PM
Mendota Branch Library
Mendota Meeting Room
1246 Belmont Ave, Mendota
Groundwater management in our
community is changing.
Learn more about how this may
impact you.
841
Las agencias locales colaboradoras están organizando una serie de talleres públicos sobre la Ley de gestión sostenible del agua subterránea. Venga y aprenda como esta histórica legislación puede afectar a nuestra comunidad, que estamos haciendo al respecto y como puede participar. Los representantes de las agencias locales de sostenibilidad del agua subterránea estarán disponibles para responder preguntas.
Tienes tres oportunidades para asistir:
El contenido de cada taller será el mismo. Los primeros treinta minutos de cada taller serán consisten de una presentación informativa, seguida de una jornada de puertas abiertas hasta las 6:00 P.M. Para obtener más información, visite nuestro sitio web en:
www.deltamendota.org.
Los Baños
Martes, 14 de Mayo
4:00 - 6:00 PM
San Luis & Delta-Mendota
Water Authority Office
842 6th St, Los Baños
Patterson
Miércoles, 16 de Mayo
4:00 - 6:00 PM
Hammon Senior Center
1033 W Las Palmas Ave, Patterson
Mendota
Jueves, 17 de Mayo
4:00 - 6:00 PM
Mendota Branch Library
Mendota Meeting Room
1246 Belmont Ave, Mendota
El manejo del agua subterránea en
nuestra comunidad está cambiando.
Obtenga más información sobre
como esto puede afectarlo.
842
Public Notice
Public Groundwater Meeting
Santa Nella County Water District and other local water agencies are developing plans for the future of our groundwater resources. We want to hear from you! Come to an upcoming public workshop to learn more:
Santa Nella
Monday, March 4, 6:000 - 8:00 PM
Romero Elementary School MPR
13500 Luis Ave, Gustine, CA 95322
The first forty minutes of the workshop will consist of a bilingual informational presentation. The presentation will be followed by an interactive discussion on the region’s groundwater “budget” and how to define “sustainability” for our groundwater resources. This workshop is open to people with all level of knowledge about water.
Spanish-language interpreters and materials will be available.
For more information, please visit our website at www.deltamendota.org and www.sncwd.com.
For questions or comments, email [email protected] or contact Amy Montgomery, Santa Nella County Water District, at [email protected].
We look forward to seeing you there!
843
Engage in the Future of Our Water Resources!
Week of May 20th
Delta-Mendota SGMA invite you to learn why your local agencies are developing groundwater sustainability plans for the future of our groundwater. Please come to one of following workshops:
For more information please visit www.deltamendota.org, To register visit: tinyurl.com/y3bxw3yv #DeltaMendotaSGMA | #SLDMWA | #SGMA2020
• Patterson: Mon., May 20, 4:00 – 6:00pm Patterson City Hall 1 Plaza Circle • Los Banos: Tue., May 21, 4:00 – 6:00pm College Greens Building 1815 Scripps Drive • Santa Nella: Wed., May 22, 6:30 – 8:30pm Romero Elem. School 13500 Luis Ave. • Mendota: Thu., May 23, 6:00 – 8:00pm Mendota Library 1246 Belmont Ave. 844
Participe en una serie de talleres
sobre el futuro de sus recursos hídricos!
Semana del 20 de mayo
Agencias locales están desarrollando planes de sostenibilidad para el futuro de los recursos hídricos del agua subterránea en la región y necesitan su opinión.
Acompáñenos en uno de los siguientes talleres:
Para más información visite:
www.deltamendota.org
Tel: 916-418-8288
#DeltaMendotaSGMA | #SLDMWA
- Patterson: Lun.,20 de Mayo , 4–6pm Ayuntamiento de Patterson 1 Plaza Circle -Los Banos: Mar., 21 de May, 4–6pm College Greens Building 1815 Scripps Dr. -Santa Nella: Mie., 22 de Mayo, 6:30–8:30pm Escuela Pri. Romero 13500 Luis Ave. -Mendota: Jue., 23 de Mayo, 6–8pm Biblioteca de Mendota 1246 Belmont Ave.
Su Opinión es Importante!
845
Contact: Kirsten Pringle, Delta-Mendota Subbasin, Stantec (916) 418-8243, [email protected]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 19, 2018
MEDIA ADVISORY
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Public Workshops What: Collaborating local agencies are hosting a series of public workshops about the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Learn how this landmark legislation may impact our communities, the planning process, and how people can get involved.
Spanish translation will be provided.
Format: There are three workshop opportunities to attend; the content of each workshop will be the same. The first 45 minutes of each workshop will consist of an informational presentation, followed by an open house.
When: Firebaugh – Monday, October 22, 2018
5:00 - 7:00 PM
Firebaugh Middle School MPR
1600 16th Street, Firebaugh, CA
Los Banos – Wednesday, October 24, 2018
4:00 – 6:00 PM
College Greens Building
1815 Scripps Drive, Los Banos, CA
Patterson – Thursday, October 25, 2018
4:00 – 6:00 PM
Hammon Senior Center
1033 W. Las Palmas Avenue, Patterson, CA
Who: Representatives from local groundwater sustainability agencies will be available to answer questions.
Additional Resources: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, www.deltamendota.org/, Background: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is a package of three bills (AB 1739, SB 1168, and SB 1319) that provides local agencies with a framework for managing groundwater basins in a sustainable manner. Recognizing that groundwater is most effectively managed at the local level, the SGMA empowers local agencies to achieve sustainability within 20 years. 846
Common Chapter for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Appendix H - List of Stakeholders
and Community Organizations
Contacted
Appendix H
847
Stakeholder and Community Organizations Contacted Regarding Coordinated SGMA Workshops Organization Name Organization Type
Fresno County Farm Bureau Agriculture
Merced County Farm Bureau Agriculture
North Grassland Wildlife Foundation Agriculture
Patterson Apricot Fiesta Agriculture
Stanislaus County Farm Bureau Agriculture
Asociación de Charros La Internacional del Valle de Patterson Business Adobe Valley Ranch Business
Gustine Chamber of Commerce Business
Los Banos Chamber of Commerce Business
Patterson-Westley Chamber of Commerce Business
Santa Nella Chamber of Commerce Business
American Association of University Women Civic
Gustine Rotary Club Civic
International Association of Lions Clubs - Patterson Civic League of United Latin American Citizens Civic
Los Banos Lions Club Civic
Los Banos Rotary Club Civic
Mendota Community Corporation Civic
Newman Lions Club Civic
Newman Rotary Club Civic
Newman Women's Club Civic
Patterson Lions Club Civic
International Association of Lions Clubs - Mendota Civic International Association of the Lions Clubs - Los Banos Civic Italian Catholic Federation of CA Inc. Civic
Kiwanis International Civic
Rotary International - Los Banos Civic
Rotary International - Patterson Civic
Firebaugh Rotary Club Inc. Community General Public
Casa Mobile Home Park Community/General Public
Center for Environmental Science Accuracy & Reliability Community/General Public Firebaugh Senior Center Community/General Public
Friends of Green Valley Charter Community/General Public Friends of the Public Library Community/General Public
Habitat for Humanity International Community/General Public Los Banos Senior Center Community/General Public
Mendota Community Center Community/General Public
Mendota Senior Center Community/General Public
Merced County Library - Dos Palos Community/General Public Merced County Library - Gustine Community/General Public Merced County Library - Los Banos Community/General Public Merced County Library - Santa Nella Community/General Public San Joaquin River Resource Mgmt. Coalition Community/General Public 848
Santa Nella RV Park Community/General Public
Stanislaus County Library - Newman Community/General Public Stanislaus County Library - Patterson Community/General Public Dos Palos Oro Loma Joint Unified School District Education Firebaugh-Las Deltas Unified School District Education
Gustine Unified School District Education
Los Banos Unified School District Education
Mendota Unified School District Education
Merced College Education
Creekside Parent Club Education
Academy West Insurance Other
Academy West Insurance Firebaugh Other
Amaral & Associates Realty Other
American Legion Other
American Legion Auxiliary Elijah B Hayes Other
Andrea Brandt State Farm Insurance Other
Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks Other
Borelli Real Estate Services Other
California Garden Clubs Inc. Other
Century 21 M&M & Assoc - Los Banos Other
Century 21 M&M & Assoc - Patterson Other
Coldwell Banker Kaljian & Assoc Other
Eric Rodriguez - Patterson Other
Farmers Insurance Antonio Gonzales Other
First Prioirty of the Central Valley Other
Greg Nunes Real Estate Other
Joe G. Gutierez State Farm Insurance Other
Mendota Land Co Other
Noah’s Ark Foundation of Tracy Inc. Other
PMZ Real Estate - Patterson Other
PMZ Real Estate - Los Banos Other
Rafael Ruiz - Patterson Other
Shane P. Donion Ranch Broker Other
The Boyd Company Other
Valley West Properties Other
Adventure Christian Church of Patterson Religious
Agape Baptist Church Religious
Bethel Community Church Religious
Church of Christ of Patterson Religious
Church of God of Prophecy Religious
Connections Christian Church Religious
Evangelical Church of Los Banos Religious
Family Christian Center Religious
First Baptist Church Religious
Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International Religious Harvest Samoan Assembly of God Religious
849
Mountain House Foursquare Church Religious
Movimiento Familiar Cristiano Catolico Religious
Patterson Covenant Church Religious
Patterson Christian Fellowship Religious
Patterson Seventh Day Adventist Church Religious
850
1545 River Park Dr., Suite 425
Sacramento, CA 95815
916.999.8700
Prepared by: In association with:
851
Appendix C. Cost Sharing Agreement –
Delta-Mendota Subbasin Coordination
852
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 1 of 11
COST SHARING AGREEMENT
Delta-Mendota Subbasin Coordination
This Cost Sharing Agreement (“Agreement”) is made effective as of ____________, 2018 by and among the groundwater sustainability agencies within the Delta-Mendota Subbasin and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority (“SLDMWA”). The entities listed above may be referred to herein individually as a “Party” or jointly as “Parties.” For purposes of this Agreement, the “Effective Date” shall be the date the last Party executes this Agreement.
RECITALS
A. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (“SGMA”) requires all groundwater subbasins designated as high or medium priority to manage groundwater in a sustainable manner.
B. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Basin Number 5-22.07, DWR Bulletin 118) within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin (“Subbasin”), has been designated as a high-priority basin by the California Department of Water Resources (“DWR”).
C. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin includes multiple groundwater sustainability agencies (“GSAs”) that intend to manage the Subbasin through the development and implementation of multiple different groundwater sustainability plans (“GSPs”).
D. The GSA parties to this Agreement (“GSA Parties”) have organized into groundwater sustainability plan (“GSP”) groups (“GSP Groups”) and have agreed to be represented by “GSP Group Representatives,” on terms to be developed and implemented by separate agreements between each GSP Group and the parties within such GSP Group.
E. SGMA allows local agencies to engage in the sustainable management of groundwater, but requires GSAs in all basins that are managed by more than one GSP to enter into a Coordination Agreement to coordinate the multiple GSPs to sustainably manage the Subbasin pursuant to SGMA.
F. The GSP Groups desire to dictate terms describing the mechanisms for the sharing of the costs associated with the coordination activities described in below and in a Delta-Mendota Subbasin Coordination Agreement (“Coordination Agreement”) that the Parties plan to execute. The Coordination Agreement will establish a Coordination Committee (“Coordination Committee”) to provide the forum for the parties to accomplish the coordination obligation of SGMA and will enumerate the Coordination Committee’s responsibilities. The Coordination Agreement will also establish the roles of Secretary and Plan Manager and enumerate their respective responsibilities.
G. The SLDMWA has been assisting the GSP Groups with SGMA compliance, and will act as the initial Secretary of the Coordination Committee (“Secretary”) and the initial Plan Manager with respect to the Coordination Agreement (“Plan Manager”). As part of that effort, the SLDMWA and/or its agents agrees to undertake all activities required of it under the December 12
853
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 2 of 11
Coordination Agreement, so long as each GSP Group reimburses the SLDMWA for that GSP Group’s apportioned share of the “Coordinated Plan Expenses,” described in Section 2 below.
H. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement to refine the Parties’ informal agreements prior to the date of execution and to accomplish all of the foregoing matters on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the Recitals set forth above and on the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Administrative Coordination. For so long as desired by the Coordination Committee, the SLDMWA will be responsible for undertaking all activities required of it under the Coordination Agreement including, but not limited to: intrabasin coordination; activities required in its role as Secretary; activities required in its role as Plan Manager; and entering into professional services agreement(s) and any supplemental agreements required for the consultant work necessary to meet the objectives of the Coordination Agreement.
2. Coordinated Plan Expenses. The Parties agree that Coordinated Plan Expenses incurred under the Coordination Agreement shall mean any expenses incurred by the Secretary and Plan Manager at the direction of the Coordination Committee within approved annual cost estimates pursuant to Section 5 of this Cost Sharing Agreement for purposes of developing and implementing the Coordination Agreement, including actual expenses incurred in executing obligations under the Coordination Agreement for intrabasin and interbasin coordination beginning in August 2017. The GSA Parties agree to make payments for Coordinated Plan Expenses through their GSP Groups, described in Section 6 below.
3. Participation Percentages. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the participation percentages in Exhibit “A” (“Participation Percentages”) shall be utilized to determine the share of Coordinated Plan Expenses allocated to each GSP Group. a. Initial Participation Percentages. Coordinated Plan Expenses will be paid proportionally by each GSP Group through the Responsible Agency to Invoice (“Responsible Agency”) identified on Exhibit “A,” pursuant to each GSP Group’s respective Participation Percentage, which is initially set in equal percentages, as indicated in Exhibit “A.”
b. Updated Participation Percentages. Participation Percentages may be evaluated by the Coordination Committee from time to time, including to consider new information concerning the relative contribution or responsibility of each GSP Group towards achieving the Subbasin-wide sustainability goal of their coordinated GSPs. c. Ongoing Documentation of Participation Percentages. The most current Participation Percentages of each GSP Group shall be dated and attached as Exhibit “A” to this Agreement, effective upon the date approved by the Parties under delegated authority 854
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 3 of 11
by their respective GSP Groups, without any further Amendment to this Agreement being required.
4. Obligations Outside of Cost Sharing Agreement. It is the responsibility and obligation of each GSA Party under this Agreement that is part of a multi-party GSP Group to provide documentation to the Secretary and the Coordination Committee establishing that such GSP Group has a binding agreement or mechanism assuring that the GSP Group will pay its Participation Percentage set forth on Exhibit “A,” as said Exhibit “A” may be modified or amended from time to time (pursuant to a modification or amendment of this Agreement under Section 14, below), including documentation of provisions regarding the default or withdrawal of any GSA Party within such GSP Group. Provided, that the Secretary shall not be obligated to evaluate or provide an opinion on the legal sufficiency of the documentation.
5. Cost Estimates. The SLDMWA will obtain and provide the GSP Groups, through the GSP Group Representatives on the Coordination Committee, with a written estimate (“Estimate”) of the cost of each task required for executing its obligations under the Coordination Agreement prior to March 1 each year, and as new tasks arise. Each Estimate will be subject to approval by the Coordination Committee, pursuant to the Coordination Agreement. The SLDMWA shall account for Coordinated Plan Expenses in accordance with standard public agency accounting procedures and shall invoice amounts to be collected from the GSP Groups in accordance with Section 6 below. All costs related to workgroups shall be the responsibility of each Party providing the workgroup participant.
6. Invoicing and Payment. The SLDMWA shall bill the GSP Groups, through the Responsible Agency identified on Exhibit “A,” for all Coordinated Plan Expenses based upon their respective Participation Percentages, upon receipt of each individual invoice. Payment is due from each Responsible Agency thirty (30) days following receipt of the invoice by the Responsible Agency. Amounts in arrears for more than thirty (30) days shall earn interest at the applicable legal rate. Each Responsible Agency is responsible to collect payment from members of its GSP Group, if any.
7. Reporting. The SLDMWA shall present a cumulative Coordinated Plan Expense report to the GSP Groups on a monthly basis, through the Responsible Agency identified on Exhibit “A.” Each Invoice, described in Section 6 above, shall be accompanied by a Coordinated Plan Expenses report (“Report”). The Report shall consist of a cumulative itemized statement of all costs and expenses incurred pursuant to the Coordination Agreement and any disbursement of funds received by the SLDMWA under this Agreement.
8. Records. The SLDMWA shall maintain separate records regarding Coordinated Plan Expenses, including records of billing and payment and other documents related to the execution of its obligations under the Coordination Agreement. The Parties and their designated agents shall have the right to inspect all records maintained by the SLDMWA associated with this Cost Sharing Agreement at any time within normal business hours, with fifteen (15) business days’ advance notice to the SLDMWA in writing. 855
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 4 of 11
9. Notice. Whenever notice is required to be in writing, it shall be provided to the GSP Groups, through the Responsible Agency identified on Exhibit “A.” Notice shall be provided to the SLDMWA at the following address:
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority
P.O. Box 2157
Los Banos, CA 93635
Attn: Andrew Garcia
E-mail: [email protected]
If sent by United States Mail, notice will be considered to have been given forty-eight (48) hours after it has been deposited in the United States Mail, addressed as set forth above, with postage prepaid. If sent by overnight delivery service, notice will be considered to have been given twentyfour (24) hours after it has been deposited with the overnight delivery service. Any GSP Group may change the Responsible Agency for notice or that Responsible Agency’s address for these purposes by giving written notice of the change to all other Parties. The SLDMWA may also change its address or contact by giving written notice of the change to all other Parties.
10. Law Governing. This Agreement is made in the State of California under the constitution and laws of the State of California and is to be so construed.
11. Section Headings. All section headings in this Agreement are for convenience of reference only and are not to be construed as modifying or governing this language in the section referred to or to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement.
12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement (including the preamble and Recitals) constitutes the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes prior agreements or discussions relating to the matters set forth herein, if any, both written and oral.
13. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
14. Modification or Amendment. The Parties hereby agree that, this Agreement may be supplemented, amended, or modified only by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. No supplement, amendment, or modification of this Agreement shall be binding unless it is in writing and signed by all Parties.
15. Withdrawal.
a. Withdrawal by a GSA Party. A GSA Party may withdraw from this Agreement without causing or requiring termination of this Agreement, effective upon thirty (30) days written notice to all other Parties. Any GSA Party who withdraws shall remain obligated to pay its share of all Coordinated Plan Expenses accrued prior to the effective date of such withdrawal. The SLDMWA will notify DWR within thirty (30) days of any GSA Party’s withdrawal from this Agreement. 856
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 5 of 11
b. Withdrawal by the SLDMWA. The SLDMWA may withdraw from this Agreement effective: (1) upon notification by the Coordination Committee that the SLDMWA’s services are no longer required as Secretary and Plan Manager; or (2) upon sixty (60) days written notice by the SLDMWA to the GSA Parties. In the event the SLDMWA withdraws from this Agreement, such withdrawal shall terminate this Agreement, unless the Coordination Committee names a successor Secretary and Plan Manager pursuant to the Coordination Agreement, and the Parties and such successor entity or entities agree to continue the Agreement with the successor Secretary and Plan Manager agreeing to assume the role of the SLDMWA. If the Agreement continues between the GSA Parties and a successor to the SLDMWA, the SLDMWA agrees to reasonably cooperate in the transition to its successor; provided, the SLDMWA shall not be liable for performance of duties under this Agreement following the Coordination Committee’s notice or the sixty (60)-day notice period set forth in this subsection, whichever is applicable.
16. Term. As modified pursuant to Section 14, this Agreement shall continue for a term coterminous with the requirements of SGMA.
17. Indemnification. The Parties agree that the GSA Parties shall, in proportion to the respective Participation Percentages of their GSP Groups, hold the SLDMWA free and harmless from and indemnify the SLDMWA against any and all costs, losses, damages, claims, and liabilities arising from this Agreement, unless such costs, losses, damages, claims, or liabilities are attributable to the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the SLDMWA. The Parties acknowledge that each GSP Group intends to pay only its share of Coordinated Plan Expenses, but acknowledge that the GSP Group may be required to pay an adjusted Participation Percentage (pursuant to a modification or amendment of this Agreement under Section 14, above) to meet its obligation to the SLDMWA and seek its remedy against any defaulting GSP Group.
18. Construction of Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that each has informed and able counsel to advise it concerning the terms of this Agreement, and agree that no Party shall be deemed the drafting Party in any dispute involving construction of the terms of the Agreement.
19. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.
20. No Partnership. The Parties hereto do not intend to create a partnership for federal income tax purposes or state law purposes, and nothing herein shall be construed to create such a partnership. The provisions set forth in this Agreement, and the respective obligations of each Party hereto, shall be construed consistently with such intent.
21. Procedures for Resolving Conflicts. In the event of any dispute arising from or relating to this Agreement, the disputing Party shall, within thirty (30) calendar days of discovery of the events giving rise to the dispute, notify all Parties to this Agreement in writing of the basis for the dispute. Within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of said notice, all interested Parties shall meet and confer in a good-faith attempt to informally resolve the dispute. All disputes that are not resolved informally shall be settled by non-binding arbitration. Within ten (10) days 857
following the failed informal proceedings, each interested Party shall nominate and circulate to all other interested Patties the name of one arbitrator. Within ten (10) days following the nominations, the interested Parties shall rank their top three among all nominated arbitrators, awarding 3 points to the top choice, 2 points to the second choice, 1 point to the third choice, and zero points to all others. Each interested Party shall forward its tally to the SLDMWA, who shall tabulate the points and notify the interested Parties of the name of the arbitrator with the highest cumulative score, who shall be the selected arbitrator. The SLDMW A may also develop procedures for approval by the Parties, for selection in the case of tie votes or in order to replace the selected arbitrator in the event such arbitrator declines or ceases to act. The arbitration shall be administered in accordance with the procedures set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1280, et seq., and of any state or local rules then in effect for arbitration pursuant to said section. Upon completion of arbitration, if the controversy has not been resolved, any Party may exercise all rights to bring a legal action relating to the controversy. Any dispute resolution or arbitration under this Section, however, will not terminate the Patties' obligations under Sections 2, 4, and 6 nor the Patties' obligations under Section 16.
22. Authorized Signature. Each Patty represents that the individual signing this Agreement on its behalf is duly authorized to execute this Agreement and will legally bind that Patty to the terms of this Agreement. '
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement.
PATTERSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA Patterson Irrigation District I Date: ()c-f fo?./?Alt;.. s~
Name of Representative:
WEST STANISLAUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA 1
West Stanislaus Irrigation I Date:
District
Signature
Name of Representative:
DMIIGSA
Del Puerto Water District I Date: Oak Flat Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CITY OF PATTERSON GSA
City of Patterson I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 6 of 11 858
following the failed informal proceedings, each interested Party shall nominate and circulate to all other interested Parties the name of one arbitrator. Within ten (I 0) clays following the nominations, the interested Parties shall rank their top three among all nominated arbitrators, awarding 3 points to the top choice, 2 points to the second choice, I point to the third choice, and zero points to all others. Each interested Party shall forward its tally to the SLDMWA, who shall tabulate the points and notify the interested Parties of the name of the arbitrator with the highest cumulative score, who shall be the selected arbitrator. The SLDMW A may also develop procedures for approval by the Parties, for selection in the case of tie votes or in order to replace the selected arbitrator in the event such arbitrator clecl ines or ceases to act. The arbitration shall be administered in accordance with the procedures set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1280, et seq., and of any state or local rules then in effect for arbitration pursuant to said section. Upon completion of arbitration, if the controversy has not been resolved, any Party may exercise all rights to bring a legal action relating to the controversy. Any dispute resolution or arbitration under this Section, however, will not terminate the Parties' obligations under Sections 2, 4, and 6 nor the Parties' obligations under Section 16.
22. Authorized Signature. Each Party represents that the individual signing this Agreement on its behalf is duly authorized to execute this Agreement and will legally bind that Patty to the terms of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement.
PATTERSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA
Patterson Inigation District I Date: ,
Signature
Name of Representative:
WEST STANISLAUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA 1 West Stanislaus Irrigation I Date:
District S/11/t'J
Signature £ ;f-"A ,
,,. ,,,.,._
-~n
Name of Representative: P-ch e.t't P, erc.e- G- VA.( /l1~4'D.r' DMIIGSA Del Puerto Water District I Date: Oak Flat Water District l Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Renresentative:
CITY OF PATTERSON GSA
City of Patterson I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 6 of I I 859
following the failed infom1al proceedings, each interested Party shall nominate and circulate to all other interested Pa1iies the name of one arbitrator. Within ten ( 10) days following the nominations, the interested Paiiies shall rank their top three among all nominated arbitrators, awarding 3 points to the top choice, 2 points to the second choice, 1 point to the third choice, and zero points to all others. Each interested Party shall forward its tally to the SLDMWA, who shall tabulate the points and notify the interested Parties of the name of the arbitrator with the highest cumulative score, who shall be the selected arbitrator. The SLDMW A may also develop procedures for approval by the Patiies, for selection in the case of tie votes or in order to replace the selected arbitrator in the event such arbitrator declines or ceases to act. The arbitration shall be administered in accordance with the procedures set fo tih in the California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1280, et seq., and of any state or local rules then in effect for arbitration pursuant to said section. Upon completion of arbitration, if the controversy has not been resolved, any Paiiy may exercise all rights to bring a legal action relating to the controversy. Any dispute resolution or arbitration under this Section, however, will not tenninate the Parties' obligations under Sections 2, 4, and 6 nor the Paiiies' obligations under Section 16.
22. Authorized Signature. Each Party represents that the individual signing this Agreement on its behalf is duly authorized to execute this Agreement and will legally bind that Party to the tenns of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement.
PATTERSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA
Patterson Irrioation District Date: Twin Oaks Irri0 ation Com an Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Re resentative: Name of Re resentative:
WEST STANISLAUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA 1
West Stanislaus Irrigation Date:
District
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
DMIIGSA
Del Puerto Water District Date
CITY OF PATTERSON GSA
Ci of Patterson Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 6 of 11 860
following the failed informal proceedings, each interested Party shall nominate and circulate to all other interested Parties the name of one arbitrator. Within ten ( 10) days following the nominations, the interested Parties shall rank their top three among all nominated arbitrators, awarding 3 points to the top choice, 2 points to the second choice, 1 point to the third choice, and zero points to all others. Each interested Party shall forward its tally to the SLDMW A, who shall tabulate the points and notify the interested Parties of the name of the arbitrator with the highest cumulative score, who shall be the selected arbitrator. The SLDMW A may also develop procedures for approval by the Parties, for selection in the case of tie votes or in order to replace the selected arbitrator in the event such arbitrator declines or ceases to act. The arbitration shall be administered in accordance with the procedures set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1280, et seq., and of any state or local rules then in effect for arbitration pursuant to said ection. Upon completion of arbitration, if the controversy has not been re olved any Party may exercise all rights to bring a legal action relating to the controversy. Any di pute resolution or arbitration under this Section, however, will not terminate the Partie obligations under Sections 2, 4, and 6 nor the Parties' obligations under Section 16.
22. Authorized ignature. Each Party represents that the individual signing this Agreement on its behalf is duly authorized to execute this Agreement and will legally bind that Party to the terms of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement.
PATTERSON IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA
Patterson Irrigation District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WEST STANISLAUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT GSA 1
West Stanislaus Irrigation I Date:
District
Signature
Name of Representative:
DMIIGSA
Del Puerto Water District I Date: Oak Flat Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CITY OF PATTERSON GSA I I - City of Patterson __, I Date: 7 /·~,?///"ff Sign~/ '7/ I /
~ 'l"'
Name of Representative: I-(~\(\ ,~J. )\[\
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 6 of 11 861
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced -C'\ I Date:7/?.1/11 County of Stanislaus I Date:
s~j ~ P fl /) 1'.! -_ I Signature - - Naihe ol Repiesehtative;Joolf. /)'PJIJJ'l.iof\. Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Reoresentative: Name of Reoresentative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District j Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Renresentative:
Ea2le Field Water District I Date: Pacheco ·water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Reoresentative: Name of Reoresentative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: . Name of Reoresentative:
County of Merced r,,. I Date:,f31/lf County of Fresno I Date:
~ ro :. f, fil- Signature
- Nai'Qe ot Representative;--ienJt k'. ()'P.Mi~ Name of Reoresentative:
ORO"l:i>MA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 862
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
Coon of Merced Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
Date: lo ;j)
Water District Date:
eotative:
reed
Name ofll.e resentative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
WIDRENWATERDISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
an Joaquin River ◄ change Date:
Contractors GSA
ignature
Name of Re resentative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Sub basin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 863
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
Count of Merced Date: Coun of Stanislaus Date:
Signature Signature
Name of .. ,,. ·•: ,-~-. ;.-• ,., , . . ,. • ,, . . ,., , '••·•:•. ,. ' .. , .. , .. ... ,. c:· ; ,.· . .. · . ... , •, ~ • . , . , . ,, •· / ~- ·• ,.,.\h ' •-' ·.,·•,: 1,.···•·•:• •. . , .,,;. ,1,.-, ..• , •·,::,' ·'.··•,• ,.,; · ..', r .. . • • , • , : . . i> , ~,-: · . ,,-_ . . · .·. : . - : , .•:·c •..• _.-.. ,·, • . _. :,_., . _;,.,•.-•;'.\-'.',, /i,.';7~;.:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
WIDRENWATERDISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 864
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water Distr~t I Date:
Signature s~ ~_1,P 07/11/Ji
Name of Representative: N;nne 6f Rfirrestfntative: I 'I Tranquillity Irrigation I Date:
1 ~ resno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Eagle Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Dnte:
Signature Signa~S/ __}_ g/-; ??
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water l Date: Mercy Springs Water I Dat/1 /t District District 7 sr (! Signature Signatur~~
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
County of Merced I Date: County of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAOUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 865
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tran~gatiof'\
Distri I
I o r e= ,... ,,/U 1 t3
Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
Signa~ef £ -
1 \c}l~r 0- Signature
~ \,{,\llL
Name of! ttfpr1 ~sentative: - Name of Representative:
Easde Field.Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
County of Merced I Date: County of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 ofll 866
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation
District
I Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
~-t,-t~
Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative: ~
Eagle Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water
District
Signature
Name of Representative:
County of Merced
Signature
Name of Representative:
I Date:
I Date:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Mercy Springs Water
District
Signature
Name of Representative:
County of Fresno
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement-Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL I Date:
I Date:
867
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
Countv of Merced I Date: Countv of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Reoresentative: Name ofReoresentative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Reoresentative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Reoresentative: Name of Reoresentative:
Ea2le Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Sign.817 ~N~-~?-Jr' Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Reoresentative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Countv of Merced I Date: Countv of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Reoresentative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement-Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 ofll 868
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Ea!!le Field Water District Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: ~"10V"t"aomevl.f Name of Representative:
Santa Nella/County Water Date: .J Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District q/ 1L1-/1p_, District
Signature (/;J~ Signature
Name of Repres"-ntati~ : Name of Representative:
County of Merced Date: County of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11 -2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 869
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
Countv of Merced- I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Eal!le Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
County of Merced I Date: County of Fresno I Date:<i{\11119 Signature Signature ('r '\.. '-+r- (T ·- Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 870
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District l Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Reuresentative: Name of Representative:
Eagle Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name ofRetH'esentative: Name of Representative:
County of Merced I Date: County of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature~
. - ~1/
//. ~
-~-._ - Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Wiclren Water Dish'ict I Date:
Signature
Name of Reuresentative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Sub basin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 871
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Ea~le Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
County of Merced I Date: County of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren ~r District j I Date: c;,. ,;J(i./~
Signaft.6re AA J~n/~ , r-., //'-//h,r/= I "-
Name oj;,Representative: I - II ----·
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTitACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement~ Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 872
NORTHWESTERN DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date: County of Stanislaus I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
CENTRAL DELTA-MENDOTA REGION MULTI-AGENCY GSA
San Luis Water District I Date: Panoche Water District I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Tranquillity Irrigation I Date: Fresno Slough Water District I Date:
District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
EaeJe Field Water District I Date: Pacheco Water District I I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Santa Nella County Water I Date: Mercy Springs Water I Date:
District District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
Countv of Merced I Date: Countv of Fresno I Date:
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
ORO LOMA WATER DISTRICT GSA
Oro Loma Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
WIDREN WATER DISTRICT GSA
Widren Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange I Date:
Contractors GSA 9/1/1r
Sig•~ ~ ,/~k !~ ,,,, e:::,...,
Nante of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5- 11-201 8 REV FINAL Page 7 of 11 873
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date: 8/6/2018
S~ture -'~~ ' • -/4::.;L/-
Name of Representative: DONALD SKINNER, President
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebaneh I Date:
Signature
Name of Renresentative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
Citv of Los Banos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA Citv of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name ofRepreseutative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
Citv of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name ofRenresentative:
COUNTY OF MADERA-3 GSA
Countv of Madera I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 ofll 874
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date: 01/)-lftff
s~~/P ~
Name of R°epresentative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebaugh I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
City of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
County of Madera I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Sub basin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of 11 875
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebaue:h I Date: 'i- i.s -,J
S~ J!w<_
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
City of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
County of Madera I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of 11 876
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Reoresentative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
Citv of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
Citv of Firebau2h I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
CityofLosBanov"' , ' I Date: November 14. 2018
Signature (Ol. _./AJ\A -- Name of Representative:'"" Alex Terrazas, City Manager
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
City of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
County of Madera I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GSA
County of Merced I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page8ofll 877
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Re resentative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
Ci of Mendota Date:
Signature
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
Ci of Los Banos Date:
Signature
Ci of Gustine Date:
Signature
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
Coun of Madera Date:
Signature
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of11 878
~AN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange 'Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
fURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
rurner Island Water District Date:
Signature
i-.'a1uc or Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebaugh Date:
(..;ignnture
Name of Representative:
CfTY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos Date:
Signature
.\ ame of Re presentative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos Date:
Signature
Name of Rep resentative: DTV111 D,,"'_,-:-~
CITY OF GUSTINE CSA ,J
Ciq' of Gustiue/1 Date: ti llsd~
Sig1rnture tMYJU
IN ame of Rc/prc~,{tative: / '--
CITY OF NEv"\fiVIAN GSA
City of Newman Date:
Signature
Name of Renresentative:
Cost Slwring Agn.:eme111 - l)el la-Mendola Subbasin 5-1 1-2018 REV l)INAL 2885900014\3 I 351908 I
879
Name of Representative:
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange Date:
Contractors GSA
Signature
Name of Representative:
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebaugh I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos \ Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
City of Newman I Date: l ~~t;J~
S~ eIv ~o
..
Name of Representative: Michael E. Holland
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of12 880
TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebau!!h I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
Citv of Dos Palos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
Citv of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
Citv of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
County of Madya I Date: Ir, - n =1. - f;J.078 -- - / .---:;? q .-/ /-, g Sign~ 1~a A /J.. ---
¥
~ --~ " -,, ,·
N.ifute ol-Representative: /If /ty.t.4£L. / .hvt1'71.,,r 1/,tft:~ .. Ct?l/v'T'r C,. ~
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GSA , '
County of Merced I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement-Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of ll 881
TURNER ISLAND WATER DIS TRI CT -2 GSA
Turner Island Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF MENDOTA GSA
City of Mendota I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF FIREBAUGH GSA
City of Firebau2h I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
City of Los Banos I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF DOS PALOS GSA
City of Dos Palos T Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF GUSTINE GSA
City of Gustine I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
CITY OF NEWMAN GSA
City of Newman I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
COUNTY OF MADERA -3 GSA
County of Madera I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
MERCED COUNTY DELTA-MENDOTA GS4
Countv of Merced, l Date: ,/:31 t, f
~W~fJ f, ~ ~ - - N-® of Representative: '-- JtnJJ.,, (<.. O'(IJuvD"-' Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Sub basin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 8 of 11 882
GRASSLAND GSA
Grassland Watn t ~ e: Grassland Resource I Date: ·/ . -lU-2018 Conservation District 7-10-2018 Signature ~ "/ / .--
/1 ~ Sign~~
Name of Represen dive: Name of Representative:
FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA
Farmers Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A+B GSAs
County of Fresno I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
ALISO WATER DISTRICT GSA
Aliso Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY
San Luis & Delta-Mendota I Date:
Water Authority
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Sub basin 5-1 1-2018 REV FINAL Page 9 of 11 883
GRASSLAND GSA
Grassland Water District I Date: Grassland Resource I Date:
Conservation District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name ofReoresentative:
FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA
Farmers Water District .-. I Date: 9-JI-/-IY
Signa~ J _1
-r ,,-,; _...,,~A~ // ~ . Name of,Representative: .:::r)7P s ·,--,,; 2.feJ':i:..LL.
FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A+B GSAs
County of Fresno I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
ALISO WATER DISTRICT GSA
Aliso Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY
San Luis & Delta-Mendota I Date:
Water Authority
Signature
Name of Reoresentative:
Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 9 of 11 884
GRASSLAND GSA
Grassland Water District I Date: Grassland Resource I Date:
Conservation District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA
Farmers Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A+B GSAs ATTEST:
County of Fresno I Date: D...Qt~, -11 ~~ BERNICE E. SEIDEL Signature }..._ 'P , V I Clerk of the Board of Supervisors a.~ . \11.- County of Fresno, State of California
Narne~ f f epr~ entative: By ~~ ucf= Depu
AL'l86' na1.J!,R DISTRICT GSA
ty
Aliso Water District I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY
San Luis & Delta-Mendota I Date:
Water Authority
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement-Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 9 ofll 885
GRASSLAND GSA
Grassland Water District I Date: Grassland Resource I Date:
Conservation District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA
Farmers Water District I Date:
Signature I
Name of Representative:
FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A+B GSAs
Fresno County I Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
ALISO WATER DISTRICT GSA
Aliso Water District I Date: ID-~ "'f - ) '(?'
~ ture /4 // _ - ,, r
~,d --.1·# ~--~
Name--Of Repres{ntative: f2o\J U,'6~~ , e,ob(Z,D 'PflZ~~
SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY
San Luis & Delta-Mendota I Date:
Water Authority
Signature
Name of Representative:
Cost Sharing Agreement- Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 9 of 11 886
GRASSLAND GSA
Grassland Water District Date: Grassland Resource I Date:
Conservation District
Signature Signature
Name of Representative: Name of Representative:
FARMERS WATER DISTRICT GSA
Farmers Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
FRESNO COUNTY MANAGEMENT AREA A+B GSAs
County of Fresno Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
ALISO WATER DISTRICT GSA
Aliso Water District Date:
Signature
Name of Representative:
SAN LUIS & DELTA-MENDOTA WATER AUTHORITY
San Luis & Delta-Mendota Date:
Water Authvrity ~lt~f'
Signatu~ -\. 14.A~~k (= YJ/~ r_ Name'11f ~ epresentative: /, 0 Cost Sharing Agreement - Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 9 of 11 887
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 10 of 11
EXHIBIT A – GSP Groups and Responsible Agencies to Invoice Groundwater Sustainability Plan Group Responsible Agency to Invoice / Address
Participation
Percentage
1 Northern / Central Delta-Mendota Region – 2
Representatives
San Luis & DeltaMendota Water Authority
(for invoices)
P.O. Box 2157
Los Banos, CA 93635
Attn: Andrew Garcia
West Stanislaus Irrigation
District (for other notices)
116 E Street
P.O. Box 37
Westley, CA 95387
Attn: Robert Pierce
16.7%
Central DM Subgroup – 1 Member representing
the following:
Central Delta-Mendota Multi-Agency GSA
Oro Loma Water District GSA
Widren Water District GSA
Northern DM Subgroup – 1 Member
representing the following:
City of Patterson GSA
DM-II GSA
Northwestern Delta-Mendota GSA
Patterson Irrigation District GSA
West Stanislaus Irrigation District-GSA 1
2 San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors – 2
Representatives
San Joaquin River
Exchange Contractors
541 H Street
P.O. Box 2115
Los Banos, CA 95363
Attn: Steve Chedester
16.7%
City of Dos Palos GSA
City of Firebaugh GSA
City of Gustine GSA
City of Los Banos GSA
City of Mendota GSA
City of Newman GSA
Madera County GSA
Merced County Delta-Mendota GSA
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSA
Turner Island Water District-2 GSA
3 Farmers Water District – 1 Representative
Farmers Water District GSA
Farmers Water District
4460 W. Shaw Ave., #219
Fresno, CA 93722
Attn: Jim Stillwell
16.7%
4 Aliso Water District – 1 Representative
Aliso Water District GSA
Aliso Water District
10302 Avenue 7-1/2
Firebaugh, CA 93622
Attn: Roy Catania
16.7%
5 Grassland Water District – 1 Representative Grassland Water District 200 W. Willmont Ave.
Los Banos, CA 93635
Attn: Ricardo Ortega
16.7%
Grassland Water District GSA
Grassland WD and Grassland Resource
Conservation District
Merced County Delta-Mendota GSA
888
Cost Sharing Agreement – Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-11-2018 REV FINAL Page 11 of 11
6 Fresno County Management Area A & B – 1
Representative
County of Fresno
Department of Public
Works and Planning
2220 Tulare St., 6th Floor
Fresno, CA 93721
Attn: Division of Water
and Natural Resources
16.7%
Fresno County Management Area A GSA
Fresno County Management Area B GSA
889
Appendix D. Notice of Intent to Develop
a GSP
890
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE CONTRACTORS
GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY
541 H Street/Post Office Box 2115
Via E-mail and U.S. Mail
Trevor Joseph, Section Chief
Department of Water Resources
PO Box 942836
Sacramento, CA 94236
Los Banos, CA 93635
(209) 827-8616
November 6, 2017
RE: Notice of Intent to Develop a Groundwater Sustainability Plan Dear Mr. Joseph:
The San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Groundwater Sustainability Agency (Exchange Contractors GSA), pursuant to California Water Code Section I 0727.8, 353.6, hereby gives notice to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) that it will initiate development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the portion of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin 5-
22.07 within the boundaries of the Exchange Contractors GSA.
Interested parties may participate in the planning and development of the GSP by attending the Exchange Contractors GSA monthly board meetings held on the first Friday of the month beginning at 8:00am. The meetings are held at the Exchange Contractors' office located at 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635. For more information or questions, please refer to the SJRECW A website at www.sjrenva.net/groundwater.
The Exchange Contractors GSA has engaged each city and county located within the geographic area to be covered by the plan and intends to jointly develop a GSP with the following GSA's:
City of Newman, City of Gustine, City of Los Banos, City of Dos Palos, City of Firebaugh, City of Mendota, Turner Island Water District-2, County of Madera-3, portion of Merced County - Delta-Mendota, and a po1tion of Fresno County Management Area B.
The Exchange Contractors GSA looks forward to working with DWR to develop and implement a GSP. Should DWR have any questions about this notice, please contact Steve Chedester by email at schcclcstcr(cv,sjrccwa.nct or by phone at (209) 827-8616.
Sincerely
~ Che es,,te.,r.,-,.,, .,.....,,,_,.,. . ....-
Executive Director
891
Appendix E. List of Public Meetings
892
DATE MEETING DESCRIPTION MEETING LOCATION
1/27/2015 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 3/10/2015 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 11/13/2015 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/18/2015 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/12/2016 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/23/2016 Newman City Council Meeting 938 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360 3/15/2016 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 8/24/2016 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/2/2016 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/28/2016 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/7/2016 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/27/2016 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/2/2016 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/8/2016 Newman City Council Meeting 938 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360 11/16/2016 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/22/2016 City of Mendota City Council 643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA 93640 12/9/2016 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/15/2016 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/6/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/10/2017 City of Mendota City Council 643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA 93640 1/18/2017 Los Banos City Council Meeting 520 J Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/23/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/24/2017 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 2/3/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/8/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/3/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/7/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/21/2017 Dos Palos City Council Meeting 1554 Golden Gate Avenue, Dos Palos, CA 93620 3/22/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/23/2017 SLCC Annual Grower Meeting 11704 W. Henry Miller Road, Dos Palos, CA 3/27/2017 CCID Annual Grower Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/31/2017 Merced County Board of Supervisor 2222 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 4/3/2017 Firebaugh City Council Meeting 1655 13th Street, Firebaugh, CA 93622 4/7/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/12/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/12/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/2/2017 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 5/5/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/8/2017 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/24/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/2/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/24/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/28/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/10/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/18/2017 Dos Palos City Council Meeting 1554 Golden Gate Avenue, Dos Palos, CA 93620 7/18/2017 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 7/26/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/27/2017 SLCC Board Meeting 11704 W. Henry Miller Road, Dos Palos, CA 8/4/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/23/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/29/2017 Merced County Board of Supervisor 2222 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 893
DATE MEETING DESCRIPTION MEETING LOCATION
9/1/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/11/2017 DM Technical Subcommittee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/13/2017 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 9/25/2017 DM Technical Subcommittee 843 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/27/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/29/2017
Self-Help Enterprises - Fresno County School
Roundtable 1117 Van Ness Avenue, Fresno, CA 93721
10/6/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/10/2017 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/25/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/3/2017 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/13/2017 DM Technical Subcommittee 844 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/16/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/21/2017 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 12/8/2017 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/12/2017 DM Technical Subcommittee 845 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/12/2017 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 12/13/2017 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/5/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/8/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/10/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/22/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 846 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/24/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/25/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/2/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/14/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/16/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/20/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 847 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/21/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 2/22/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/28/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 858 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/1/2018 Fresno County Public Meeting 2220 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 3/1/2018 Merced County Farm Bureau – Water Symposium 2145 Wardrobe Ave, Merced, CA 95341 3/2/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/13/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/21/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 3/22/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/22/2018 SLCC Annual Grower Meeting 11704 W. Henry Miller Road, Dos Palos, CA 3/27/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 859 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/28/2018 CCID Annual Grower Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/28/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/6/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/11/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/17/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 848 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/18/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 4/24/2018 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 4/26/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/4/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/8/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/14/2018 DM Public Workshop 867 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/15/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 849 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 894
DATE MEETING DESCRIPTION MEETING LOCATION
5/16/2018 Public Workshop 1033 W Las Palmas Ave, Patterson 95363 5/17/2018 Public Workshop 1246 Belmont Ave, Mendota 93640 5/22/2018 CCC Annual Grower Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 5/23/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/24/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/28/2018 CCC Annual Shareholder's Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 5/29/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 860 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/29/2018 Dos Palos City Council Meeting 1554 Golden Gate Avenue, Dos Palos, CA 93620 5/30/2018 Madera County GSA Advisory Committee 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 6/1/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/4/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 850 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/11/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/11/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 851 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/13/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/19/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 852 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/20/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 6/22/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/26/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 861 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/28/2018 Dos Palos City Council Meeting 1554 Golden Gate Avenue, Dos Palos, CA 93620 7/6/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/14/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 862 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/17/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 853 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/18/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 7/24/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/26/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/31/2018 Merced County Board of Supervisor 2222 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 7/31/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/3/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/13/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/14/2018 Newman City Council Meeting 938 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360 8/15/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 8/19/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/21/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 854 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/21/2018 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 8/24/2018
GDE Workshop with CDFW, The Nature Conservancy
and Audobon Society 867 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/29/2018 Madera County GSA Advisory Committee 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 9/5/2018 Firebaugh City Council Meeting 1655 13th Street, Firebaugh, CA 93622 9/7/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/10/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/11/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 863 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/18/2018 City of Gustine City Council 352 Fifth Street, Gustine, CA 95322 9/18/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 855 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/19/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 9/26/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/1/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 864 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/2/2018 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 10/5/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/16/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 856 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/17/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 10/19/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 865 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 895
DATE MEETING DESCRIPTION MEETING LOCATION
10/22/2018 Public Workshop 1600 16th Street, Firebaugh, CA 93622 10/24/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/24/2018 Madera County GSA Advisory Committee 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 10/24/2018 Public Workshop 1815 Scripps Drive, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/25/2018 Public Workshop 1033 W Las Palmas Ave, Patterson 95363 10/25/2018 SLCC Board Meeting 11704 W. Henry Miller Road, Dos Palos, CA 10/30/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 866 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/2/2018 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/7/2018 Los Banos City Council Meeting 520 J Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/13/2018 City of Mendota City Council 643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA 93640 11/13/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/14/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/19/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/21/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 11/27/2018 DM Communications Subcommittee 867 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/4/2018 DM Technical Subcommittee 857 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/4/2018 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 12/4/2018 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/7/2018 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/10/2018 DM Coordination Committee 842 6th Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/11/2018 City of Mendota City Council 643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA 93640 12/19/2018 CCC Board Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 12/19/2018 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/4/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/8/2019 Madera County GSA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 1/8/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 1/15/2019 TIWD GSA Meeting 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/15/2019 TIWD Special Meeting GSA-2 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/16/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 1/29/2019 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 2/1/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 2/12/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 2/13/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/1/2019 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/5/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 3/13/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/25/2019 CCID Annual Grower Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 3/28/2019 SLCC Annual Grower Meeting 11704 W. Henry Miller Road, Dos Palos, CA 4/2/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 4/12/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 4/23/2019 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 4/24/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/3/2019 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/7/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 5/14/2019 Fresno County Board of Supervisors 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 5/15/2019 Los Banos City Council Meeting 520 J Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/22/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 5/28/2019 CCC Annual Grower Meeting 6770 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh, CA 93622 5/30/2019 TIWD Special Meeting GSA-2 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/4/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 6/7/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 896
DATE MEETING DESCRIPTION MEETING LOCATION
6/24/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 6/30/2019 TIWD Special Meeting GSA-2 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/2/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 7/12/2019 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 7/24/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/2/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 8/5/2019 Firebaugh City Council Meeting 1655 13th Street, Firebaugh, CA 93622 8/6/2019 Gustine City Council Meeting 352 5th Street, Gustine, CA 95322 8/6/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 8/28/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/3/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 9/4/2019 Los Banos City Council Meeting/GSP Update 520 J Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/6/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 9/25/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/4/2019 SJREC GSA Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 10/8/2019 Madera County SGMA Meeting 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 10/23/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/1/2019 SJRECWA Board Meeting 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/19/2019 FCWD Annual Grower Meeting 2412 Dos Palos Road, Mendota, CA 93640 11/19/2019 TIWD-2 Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 1269 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 11/25/2019 CCID Board Meeting 1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/2/2019 City of Firebaugh Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 1655 13th Street, Firebaugh, CA 93622 12/3/2019 City of Gustine Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 352 5th Street, Gustine, CA 95322 12/4/2019 City of Los Banos Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 520 J Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/10/2019 City of Mendota Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA 93640 12/10/2019 County of Merced Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 2222 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 12/10/2019 City of Newman Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 938 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360 12/10/2019 County of Fresno Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 2281 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA 93721 12/13/2019 SJREC GSA Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 541 H Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 12/17/2019 City of Dos Palos Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 1554 Golden Gate Avenue, Dos Palos, CA 93620 12/17/2019 County of Madera Public Hearing and GSP Adoption 200 West 4th Street, Madera, CA 93637 897
Appendix F. List of Interested Parties
898
Agency/Affiliation Contact Address Email
Madera County Farm Bureau Christina Beckstead
1102 S. Pine Street,
Madera, CA 93637 [email protected]
Mayer Brown LLP, Litigation Paralegal David West
350 S. Grand Avenue,
25th Floor, Los
Angeles, CA 90071 [email protected]
CDFW, Water Branch Briana 'Bri' Seapy
830 S Street,
Sacramento, CA
95811 [email protected]
Grower in FCWD Sal Fuentes [email protected]
The Nature Conservancy Sandi Matsumoto
555 Capitol Mall,
Suite 1290
Sacramento, CA
95814
King Ranch Inc Lisa Ford
Three Riverway
Suite 1600
Houston, TX 77056-
1967 [email protected]
Morningstar Company Jayne Gonsalves [email protected] Westlands Water District Kitty Campbell [email protected] Morningstar Company Ron Dalforno [email protected] Self Help Enterprises Sal Alhomedi [email protected] County of Madera Stephanie Anagnoson [email protected]
INTERESTED PARTIES FOR THE SJREC GSP GROUP
899
Agency Contact Address Email
Darrell Fonseca
2174 Blossom Street, Dos Palos,
CA 93620 [email protected]
Garth Pecchenino [email protected]
City of Gustine Doug Dunford
352 Fifth Street, PO Box 16,
Gustine, CA 95322 [email protected]
DM-II (Del Puerto WD) Anthea Hansen PO Box 1596, Patterson, CA 95363 [email protected] Ora Loma Water District Steve Sloan 264 I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 [email protected] Fresno County - Management Area B Bernard Jimenez
2220 Tulare Street, 6th Floor,
Fresno, CA 93721 [email protected]
Fresno County - Management Area A Bernard Jimenez
2220 Tulare Street, 6th Floor,
Fresno, CA 93721 [email protected]
Mario Gouveia
456 Sixth Street, Gustine, CA
95322 [email protected]
Ben Gallegos
1133 P Street, Firebaugh, CA
93622 [email protected]
Central Delta-Mendota Region Multi-Agency GSA Andrew Garcia 15990 Kelso Road, Byron, CA
94514 [email protected]
Widren Water District GSA Damian Aragona 259 I Street, Los Banos, CA 93635 [email protected] Merced County - Delta Mendota Lacey Kiriakou 2222 M Street, Merced, CA 95340 [email protected] Turner Island Water District - 2 Donald Skinner
1269 W. I Street, Los Banos, CA
93635 [email protected]
Northwestern Delta-Mendota GGSA Walter Ward
3800 Cornucopia Way, Suite C,
Modesto, CA 95358 [email protected]
City of Patterson Ken Irwin
1 Plaza, PO Box 667, Patterson, CA
95363 [email protected]
County of Madera - 3 Stephanie Anagnoson
200 W. Fourth Street, Suite 3100,
Madera, CA 93637 [email protected]
City of Los Banos Mark Fachin
411 Madison Avenue, Los Banos,
CA 93635 [email protected]
City of Mendota Cristian Gonzalez
643 Quince Street, Mendota, CA
93640 [email protected]
Grasslands GSA Ricardo Ortega
200 W. Willmott Avenue, Los
Banos, CA 93635 [email protected]
City of Newman Michael Holland
1162 Main Street, PO Box 1162,
Newman, CA 95360 [email protected]
Farmers Water District Jim Stilwell
4460 W. Shaw Avenue, #219,
Fresno, CA 93722 [email protected]
Aliso Water District Roy Catania
10302 Avenue 7-1/2, Firebaugh,
CA 93622 [email protected]
Patterson Irrigation District Vince Lucchesi PO Box 685, Patterson, CA 95363 [email protected] West Stanislaus Irrigation District Robert Pierce
1800 E. West Stanislaus Road,
Westley, CA 95387 [email protected]
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Jarrett Martin
1335 West I Street, Los Banos, CA
93635 [email protected]
City of Dos Palos GSA
City of Firebaugh
GSA'S IN THE DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
900
Appendix G. Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Communications Plan
901
June 2017
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
Communications Plan
Prepared by:
Lisa Beutler, MWH/Stantec,
Via CA Dept. of Water Resources,
Facilitation Services Technical Assistance
902
Forward: How to use this Plan
This Communication Plan provides a high-level overview of near and long-term outreach and engagement strategies, tactics and tools. Its purpose is to assist the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) of the Delta Mendota Subbasin with stakeholder outreach and other related actions as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014. It is presented as a working public draft, and should be considered a living document that is continuously refined and updated as circumstances suggest.
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background provides text and information about SGMA and the Delta Mendota Subbasin that can be repurposed directly into websites or printed materials by agencies and/or entities with an interest in SGMA and how it will affect the subbasin. This section also describes the communications activities mandated by SGMA.
Chapter 2: Communications Plan Overview provides communications planning goals and objectives as well as the scope. This section can be used in support of project management activities.
Chapter 3: Situation Assessment provides some of the context for communications activities. This section can be used in developing required assessments of stakeholder issues and interests. It also informs project management activities.
Chapter 4: Audiences and Messages identifies key subbasin audiences and message points for specific audience segments. The goal of this chapter is to provide information that can be used by the subbasin GSAs in preparing to work with key stakeholders.
Chapter 5: Risk Management is the summary of a communications risk assessment that considers subbasin communications strengths and weakness and proposes on-going adjustments based on best communication management practices. This section informs project management activities and provides a context for some of the recommended communications tactics.
Chapter 6: Tactical Approaches offers a communications to do list with specific communications activities relevant for project phases and subbasin audiences.
Chapter 7: Measurements and Evaluation outlines methods to determine the effectiveness of outreach and engagement.
Chapter 8: Roles and Responsibilities provides a sample list of tasks and illustrates the types of communications roles and responsibilities which might be assigned. This section should be incorporated into project management plans.
Subbasin GSAs should feel free to repurpose any or all parts of the document that will assist them in meeting SGMA requirements.
This document was developed with technical support provided by the California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) SGMA Facilitation Support Services Program and completed by the Communication and Engagement Group of MWH/Stantec.
903
Delta Mendota Subbasin
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
Communications Plan
Working Draft
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................... 5
2. COMMUNICATIONS PLAN OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................11
2.1. Purpose .......................................................................................................................................11
2.2. Importance ..................................................................................................................................11
2.3. Scope ...........................................................................................................................................12
2.4. Communications Goal .................................................................................................................12
2.5. Communications Objectives .......................................................................................................12
2.6. Strategic Approach ......................................................................................................................12
2.7. Communications Governance, Communications Team ..............................................................13
2.8. Constraints ..................................................................................................................................13
3. SITUATION ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................14 Introduction ................................................................................................................................14 Situation Assessments ................................................................................................................14 Background Research..................................................................................................................14 Interviews and Consultations ......................................................................................................14 Summary of key findings .............................................................................................................15 Promising messages and methods ..............................................................................................24
4. AUDIENCES AND MESSAGES ................................................................................................................25
4.1. Two Core Audience Segments ....................................................................................................25
4.2. Communications and Change Management ...............................................................................25
4.3. Tied to Decision Making ..............................................................................................................26
4.4. GSA Boards ..................................................................................................................................27
4.5. Primary Audiences ......................................................................................................................27
5. RISK MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................................................31
5.1. Technical, quality, or performance .............................................................................................31 904
5.2. Project management ...................................................................................................................32
5.3. Organizational / Internal .............................................................................................................32
5.4. External .......................................................................................................................................32
5.5. Historical .....................................................................................................................................32
6. TACTICAL APPROACHES ........................................................................................................................33
6.1. Communications Coordination. ..................................................................................................34
6.2. Tactics .........................................................................................................................................34
6.2.1. Website ...............................................................................................................................34
6.2.2. Meeting Calendar ................................................................................................................35
6.2.3. Branded Informational Flyers, Templates, PowerPoint Presentations, etc. .......................36
6.2.4. Periodic Newsletter .............................................................................................................36
6.2.5. GSP related mailing lists ......................................................................................................36
6.2.6. Descriptions of Interested Parties.......................................................................................36
6.2.7. Issues and Interest Statements for Legally Mandatory Interested Parties.........................37
6.2.8. Coordinated Public Workshops ...........................................................................................37
6.2.9. Message Calendar ...............................................................................................................37
6.2.10. Press Releases and Guest Editorials ....................................................................................37
6.2.11. Speakers Bureau .................................................................................................................38
6.2.12. Existing Group Venues ........................................................................................................38
6.2.13. Outreach Documentation ...................................................................................................38
6.3. Procedural and Legally Mandated Outreach ..............................................................................38
6.4. Items for Future Consideration ...................................................................................................40
7. MEASUREMENTS & EVALUATION ........................................................................................................41
7.2. Process Measures .......................................................................................................................41
7.3. Outcome Measures .....................................................................................................................41
7.4. Mid-cycle Evaluation of Accomplishments .................................................................................42
8. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ..............................................................................................................43
9. LIST OF APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................45
10. Appendix 1. Public Outreach Requirements under SGMA ................................................................. - 1 -
11. Appendix 2. Communications Governance ........................................................................................ - 1 - 905
List of Figures
Figure 1. Stakeholder Engagement Requirements 7
Figure 2. San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. Elements of a Communications Plan 11
Figure 4. Interview and Consultation Quick Facts 15
Figure 5. USGS Illustration of the DMC and Subsidence 17 Figure 6. Integrated Regional Water Management Groups 19 Figure 7. Irrigated Lands Coalitions 19
Figure 8. CV-Salts Initiative 19
Figure 9. Two Core Audience Segments 25
Figure 10. Website Structure 35
List of Tables
Table 1. Revision History ............................................................................................................................. iv Table 2. GSP Submittal Requirements .......................................................................................................... 6 Table 3. Number of Subbasin Public Water Agencies .................................................................................18 Table 4. Sample – Early Phase Message Elements for Subbasin Stakeholders...........................................26 Table 5. Communications Planning Questions ...........................................................................................27 Table 6. Risk Factors ....................................................................................................................................31 Table 7. IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum ...............................................................................................33 Table 9. Mandated Outreach ......................................................................................................................38 Table 10. Sample RACI Chart .......................................................................................................................43 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Item Description
Basin Groundwater Basin or Subbasin
Coms Plan Delta Mendota Subbasin, Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, Working Draft Communications Plan
CSD Community Service District(s):
CV‐SALTS Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability DAC Disadvantaged Communities
DMC Delta-Mendota Canal
DWR California Department of Water Resources
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
IRWMP Integrated Resource Water Management Plan
PDF Portable Document Format
RCD Resource Conservation District(s)
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SLDMWA San Luis Delta- Mendota Water Authority
State Board State Water Resources Control Board
906
Item Description
SA Situation Assessment
USGS United States Geological Survey
Revision History
Table 1. Revision History
Revision History
Revision/Dock Title # Date of Release Author Summary of Changes 907
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The purpose of this Communication Plan is to assist the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) of the Delta Mendota Subbasin with stakeholder outreach and other related actions as required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) of 2014. Its chapters identify key stakeholders and provide a high-level overview of near and long-term outreach and engagement strategies, tactics and tools. The plan was developed with technical support provided by the California Department of Water Resources’ (DWR) SGMA Facilitation Support Services Program.
1.1. SGMA Basics1
After decades of debate, in 2014 California lawmakers adopted SGMA. This far-reaching law seeks to bring the State’s critically important groundwater basins into a sustainable regime of pumping and recharge. The change in water management laws has created new obligations for residents and water managers in the Delta-Mendota Groundwater Subbasin.
The San Luis Delta- Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) is assisting its members in implementation of this law.
SGMA requires, by June 30, 2017, the formation of locallycontrolled GSAs in many of the State’s groundwater basins and subbasins (basins). A GSA is responsible for developing and implementing a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP).
These plans assist the basins in meeting sustainability goals.
The primary goal is to maintain sustainable yields without causing undesirable results.
1.1.1. GSAs & GSPs
Any local public agency that has water supply, water
management, or land use responsibilities in a basin can decide to become a GSA. A single local agency can decide to become a GSA, or a combination of local agencies can decide to form a GSA by using either a Joint Power Authority (JPA), a memorandum of agreement (MOA), or other legal agreement. If no agency assumes this role the GSA responsibility defaults to the County; however, the County may decline.
A GSP may be any of the following (Water Code § 10727(b)):
A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by one GSA. A single plan covering the entire basin developed and implemented by multiple GSAs.
1 Sections on SGMA are largely drawn, in whole or in part, from publicly available materials from the Department of Water Resources. For more see: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm 908
Subject to Water Code Section 10727.6, multiple plans implemented by multiple GSAs and coordinated pursuant to a single coordination agreement that covers the entire basin.
If local agencies are unable to form an approved GSA and/or prepare an approved GSP in the required timeframe, then the basin or subbasin would be considered unmanaged.
Unmanaged groundwater basins and subbasins are subject to State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) oversight. This is true even if the vast majority of the subbasin is covered by a plan. Should intervention occur, the State Board is authorized to recover its costs from the GSAs.
1.2. SGMA Communications and Engagement Requirements
SGMA includes specific requirements for communications and engagement by each planning phase. Figure 1 (next page) illustrates the requirements and provides water code references. The GSP submittal guidelines also describe the outreach and engagement documentation to be submitted with the plan. Table 2 describes the submittal requirements. A full list of codes and requirements is also provided in Appendix 1.
Table 2. GSP Submittal Requirements2
1.3. Planning Approach
While the SLDMWA is assisting with the coordination of GSP(s) development, this Communications Plan (Coms Plan) is offered for the voluntary use of all of the GSAs of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. A full Coms Plan schedule should be developed in conjunction with the overall GSP(s) development schedule. One additional option is for the Coordination Committee of GSAs to provide overall communications guidance. This could potentially be included in a section of the Coordination Agreement. 2 Guidance Document for the Sustainable Management of Groundwater, Preparation Checklist for GSP Submittal, Department of Water Resources, December 2016 GSP Regulations
Section
Requirement Description
Article 5. Plan Contents, Sub-article 1. Administrative Information 354.10 Notice and
Communication
• Description of beneficial uses and users
• List of public meetings with dates
• GSP comments and responses
• Decision-making process
• Public engagement process
• Method(s) to encouraging active
involvement
• Steps to inform the public on GSP
implementation progress
909
Figure 1. Stakeholder Engagement Requirements
Source: Guidance Document for Groundwater Sustainability Plan Stakeholder Communication and Engagement Department of Water Resources, June 2017
910
An important additional step will be establishing, in conjunction with the multiple GSAs, the roles and responsibilities for implementing the Coms Plan.
1.4. SGMA and the Delta Mendota Subbasin3
The Delta-Mendota Subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley
Groundwater Basin is a long, relatively narrow
groundwater basin that covers portions of five counties, from north to south, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced,
Madera and Fresno Counties (see Figure 2). The DeltaMendota sub-basin is bounded on the west by the Tertiary and older marine sediments of the Coast
Ranges. The northern boundary (from west to east)
begins on the west by following the Stanislaus/San
Joaquin County line, then deviates to the north to
encapsulate all of the Del Puerto Water District before returning back to the Stanislaus/San Joaquin County
line. The boundary continues east then deviates north
again to encapsulate all of the West Stanislaus Irrigation District before returning back to the Stanislaus/San
Joaquin County line. The boundary continues to follow
the Stanislaus/San Joaquin County line east until it
intersects with the San Joaquin River.
The eastern boundary (from north to south) follows the San Joaquin River to within Township 11S, where it jogs eastward along the northern boundary of Columbia Canal Company and then follows the eastern boundary of Columbia Canal company until intersecting the northern boundary of the Aliso Water District. The boundary then heads east following the northern and then eastern boundary of the Aliso Water District until intersecting the Madera/Fresno County line. The boundary then heads westerly following the Madera/Fresno County line to the eastern boundary of the Farmers Water District. The boundary then heads southerly along the eastern boundary of the Farmers Water District, and continues southerly along the section line to the intersection with the northern rightof-way of the railroad. The boundary then heads east along the northern right-of-way of the railroad until intersecting with the western boundary of the Mid-Valley Water District.
The boundary then heads south along the western boundary of the Mid-Valley Water District to the intersection with the northern boundary of Reclamation District 1606. The boundary then heads west and then south following the boundary of Reclamation District 1606 and James Irrigation District until its intersection with the Westlands Water District boundary.
The southern boundary (from east to west) matches the northerly boundaries of Westlands Water District legal jurisdictional boundary last revised in 2006. The boundary then 3 Information related to the Delta Mendota subbasin is drawn directly from http://sgma.water.ca.gov/basinmod/basinrequest/preview/23.
Figure 2. Delta Mendota Subbasin
911
proceeds west along the southernmost boundary of the San Luis Water District. The boundary then projects westward from this alignment until intersecting the Delta-Mendota sub-basin Western boundary described above.
1.5. Delta-Mendota Subbasin GSP Planning
The GSAs of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin intend to work together to meet Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements and prepare a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) or coordinated Sustainability Plans by June 31, 2020. The San Luis Delta- Mendota Water Authority (SLDMWA) is assisting its members and non-members in planning and implementation of this law and has been directly assisting a subset of the local GSA eligible agencies in organizing to accomplish required SGMA tasks. The SLDMWA has also hosted informal, information meetings with all of the subbasin GSAs.
While SLDMWA coordinated GSAs are confident in their ability to prepare a GSP for the areas under their jurisdiction, SGMA requires that an approved GSP or multiple coordinated GSPs are in place to provide sustainable management for the entire subbasin. The identified GSAs have been asked to determine how they wish to proceed in individual GSP development or a coordinated single GSP by July 2017 and whether or not they wish to participate in the Prop 1 Sustainable Groundwater Planning Grant as a joint request.
1.6. Delta Mendota Subbasin GSAs
Following are the DWR identified agencies (as of June 15, 2017).4
1. Aliso Water District
2. Central Delta-Mendota Region Multi-Agency GSA
3. City of Dos Palos
4. City of Firebaugh
5. City of Gustine
6. City of Los Baños
7. City of Mendota
8. City of Newman
9. City of Patterson
10. County of Madera—3
11. DM-II
12. Farmers Water District
13. Fresno County—Management Area ‘A’
14. Fresno County—Management Area ‘B’
15. Grasslands Groundwater Sustainability Agency
16. Merced County—Delta-Mendota
4 See: http://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/
912
17. Northwestern Delta-Mendota GSA
18. Ora Loma Water District
19. Patterson Irrigation District
20. San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority
21. Turner Island Water District-2
22. West Stanislaus Irrigation District GSA
23. Widren Water District GSA
913
COMMUNICATIONS PLAN OVERVIEW
Communication is the process of transmitting ideas and information. According to the Project Management Institute, 75%-90% of a project manager’s time is spent communicating. A Coms Plan provides the purpose, method, messages, timing, intensity, and audience of the communication, then describes who will do the communicating, and the frequency of the communication (see Figure 3.)
2.1. Purpose
The purpose of the Delta-Mendota Subbasin, Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, Coms Plan is to outline the information and communications needs of the project stakeholders and provide a roadmap to meet them. The Coms Plan then identifies how communications activities, processes, and procedures will be managed throughout the project life cycle.
2.2. Importance
While communications are important in every project, a well-executed communications strategy will be essential to the success of the GSP(s) development and adoption process.
The financial and regulatory stakes are high and communication missteps can create project risks. Further, development of a viable GSP(s) will require an on-going collaboration among all the stakeholders, both organizational and external. The plan will be comprehensive and consider multiple variables, a range of system elements and project costs and benefits. Stakeholder input will be needed to refine GSP requirements and fully Figure 3. Elements of a Communications Plan
914
define the water management system, and potential impacts, costs and benefits that may result in managing for sustainability.
2.3. Scope
The plan focuses on formal communication elements. Other communication channels exist on informal levels and enhance those discussed within this plan. This plan is not intended to limit, but to enhance communication practices. Open, ongoing communication between stakeholders is critical to the success of the project.
2.4. Communications Goal
Development, adoption and implementation of the GSP(s) will require basin external stakeholders, other agencies, staff, managers, and the multiple GSA Boards to evaluate choices, make decisions and commit resources.
The core communications goal is to plan for and efficiently deliver clear and succinct information:
At the right time
To the right people
With a resonating message
This is done to facilitate quality decision making and build accompanying public support
2.5. Communications Objectives
The Coms Plan Objectives are to present strategies and actions that are:
Realistic and action-oriented
Specific and measurable
Minimal in number (a few well delivered are better than many mediocre efforts)
Audience relevant
2.6. Strategic Approach
Three primary communications strategies have been identified for the GSP(s) development. 1) Fully leverage the activities of existing groups. This practical approach is cost effective and respectful of the limited time that stakeholders have to participate in collaborative processes.
2) Provide targeted, communications and outreach to opinion leaders in key stakeholder segments.
3) Provide user friendly information and intermittent opportunities through existing communication channels and open houses or workshops to allow interested stakeholders (internal and external) to engage commensurate with their degree of interest.
915
2.7. Communications Governance, Communications Team
Given the relatively large number of stakeholders, a recommendation for coordinated efforts, and the legal requirements for outreach5, some form of communications governance is recommended. Several governance options for consideration are offered in Appendix 2. The actual form of the governance is less important than a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of those responsible for ensuring required communication. For the purpose of this document, an assumption is made that some form of governance will be identified and a communications team (which may be an individual or multiple individuals, and/or include the project consultants) is designated.
A driving consideration for this recommendation is the level of effort associated with required activities and the fact that communications are highly time dependent. That means that communications activities should be occurring that may happen outside of regularly scheduled GSA meetings. In this case delegation with guidance is efficient and effective.
2.8. Constraints
All projects are subject to limitations and constraints as they must be within scope and adhere to budget, scheduling, and resource requirements. These constraints can be even more challenging in projects with multiple agencies as will be the case with the development and coordination of multiple GSPs.
There are also legislative, regulatory, technology, and other organizational policy requirements which must be followed as part of communications management. These limitations must be clearly understood and communicated where appropriate. While communications management is arguably one of the most important aspects of project management, it must be done in an effective and strategic manner recognizing and balancing the multiple constraints.
All project communication activities should occur within the project’s approved budget, schedule, and resource allocations. The GSP(s) project managers and the leadership of the participating GSAs should have identified roles in ensuring that communication activities are performed.
To the extent possible, to support collaboration and reduce costs, GSP(s) partners should utilize standardized formats and templates as well as project file management and collaboration tools.
5 See Appendix 1
916
SITUATION ASSESSMENT
Introduction
The challenges of asking a community to make changes in how things are done, or forging an agreement among multiple parties are often large. Prior to preparing a Coms Plan, a neutral, 3rd party facilitator conducted a stakeholder Situation Assessment (SA).
The facilitator’s role was to provide an independent evaluation of potential stakeholder’s interest in coordination and governance for GSA formation and GSP development and identify any barriers or concerns that would need to be addressed for the GSA formation process and GSP(s) development to be successful.
Situation Assessments
An SA is an information-gathering process that informs outreach, engagement and collaboration. As part of preparing the basin communication’s process, it was important to know more about:
Stakeholder Categories
Opinion leaders
Regulatory and political context
Advocates and detractors
Attitudes and knowledge
Other elements useful to the crafting of decisions
An assessment is also a low risk approach to education and signaling a future relationship.
It facilitates the community’s appraisal of its needs, wants and values. A well-crafted assessment sets the stage for the parties to better understand and interpret their situation so that they can make informed decisions for actions, in the short term and for the future.
The Delta-Mendota subbasin SA included background research and interviews. Interviews were usually with individuals but in a few cases a very small group was convened. To encourage candor, the results of the input process were bundled so those interviewed were not individually identified unless they explicitly indicated they wished to share their individual response.
Background Research
The facilitator worked closely with the SLDMWA and DWR to identify useful documents, plans and activities that might inform the overall communications planning process.
Interviews and Consultations
Using information gathered during the background research and similar GSA formation efforts throughout the state, the facilitator worked with the SLDMWA to craft interview questions. The facilitator also provided some selection criteria to the SLDWMA to help identify a representative group of interview candidates. Once selected, the SLDMWA staff and facilitation team invited the interviewees to participate. In addition to full interviews, 917
additional calls and in person communications were conducted to acquire amplifying information. Figure 4 provides a quick overview.
Figure 4. Interview and Consultation Quick Facts
Selected participants were all engaged or otherwise stakeholders in some aspect of the basin GSA development process.
A project background sheet was provided in advance of each formal interview and used again during the interviewee discussions with the facilitator. Each interview followed the same format and included 16-18 questions (depending on whether or not a follow-up question was needed).
The questions covered the following topics pertaining to the GSA formations and GSP(s) development:
1. Overarching perspectives from each key stakeholder on general groundwater conditions, GSA governance; subbasin management and associated SGMA compliance
2. Preferred methods to achieve groundwater sustainability consistent with SGMA requirements
3. The level of agreement/conflict around groundwater governance across the range of stakeholder perspectives
4. Experience with facilitated processes, outreach and engagement, and the goals for such support
5. Potential configurations of governance and formations of GSAs and GSP development
Summary of key findings
Interview results indicate an overall positive environment for the project and project communications; however, the effort will require interactions of a large number of parties and planning for an extremely complex system. Following are the reflections, ideas and suggestions of those contacted.
3.5.1. Related to Groundwater Sources and Trends
• Significant observed impacts associated with Weather, Water Project Deliveries and Cropping Patterns – Participants observed a declining Average Length: 1 hr.
(Shortest = 20 mins., Longest = 1.5 hrs)
Dates of Calls and Interviews Conducted:
February to May 2017
Number of Contacts: 30
918
groundwater situation and were able to attribute it to drought and weather (particularly timing of seasonal rainfall and periods of prolonged, higher temperatures), conversion to permanent crops, and significant changes in access to surface water.
• Surface & Groundwater Nexus – As noted in comments related to access to surface water, there was a clear understanding of the surface/groundwater nexus. Many believed that any realistic solution would have to include a full assessment of the region’s surface water future.
• Extremely Complex Systems – Many of those interviewed reported that parts of the subbasin were doing fine and could, with good management, be sustainable. They described problems as being primarily in pockets of the subbasin. They also characterized some parts of the subbasin as not being managed sustainably and indicated that they believe this would have continued had SGMA not passed. While it was generally agreed that it would have been better if SGMA was not driving the change, they felt change would not occur without something like SGMA. Several of the participants were able to describe specific locations and situations that illustrated this.
Issues related to operations of the Bureau of Reclamation, the DeltaMendota Canal (DMC), the Mendota Pool and restoration activities are of keen interest to all the stakeholders. Everyone was familiar with issues of subsidence and with the facts and figures represented in graphics like those in Figure 5, prepared by the United States Geological Survey (USGS).6 Many perceived that groundwater supplies for municipal uses in some parts of the basin were at risk.
• Historic Rights and Arrangements – Access to surface water is based on numerous historic rights and agreements as well as more contemporary agreements. As such there is no single description of the status of surface water availability among the many subbasin GSAs,7
although there is a
strong understanding of the rights and arrangements that do exist.8 6 U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey:
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/projects/central-valley/delta-mendota-canal.html, Page Last Modified:
Monday, 20-Mar-2017 22:39:47 EDT
7 A full inventory of water rights and arrangements for the subbasin GSAs is recommended to be prepared as part of the GSP planning process.
8 In 2010 there were 1,403 water rights claimed in the San Joaquin Delta watershed, the largest number of any watershed in the State. [Source: Associated Press: Original data source is State Water Resources Control Board eWRIMS, Database
919
The hierarchy of water rights as well as laws related to groundwater rights will be a significant factor in GSP negotiations.
Another historical factor related to sustainability is the character of land ownership. There was a perceived difference in the values placed on sustainability by multi-generational family farms versus investor driven agriculture and/or water development.
3.5.2. Related to GSA Governance; Subbasin Management and SGMA Compliance
• Numbers - The subbasin includes numerous Water Agencies (35) and other potential GSA eligible agencies including Cities and Counties (such as Dos Palos, Firebaugh, Gustine, Los Baños, Mendota, Newman, Patterson, Fresno, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus) and Community Service Districts (CSDs) including among others Grayson, Westley, and Volta, as well as multiple Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs) that for the most part were within the general boundaries of other GSA eligible authorities (Panoche, Poso and Grasslands as an example).
By the June 30, 2017 filing deadline, 23 eligible entities had formally filed GSA formations and met SGMA requirements for subbasin coverage.
Figure 5. USGS Illustration of the DMC and Subsidence
920
Even with this large number of GSA entities, during the SA interviews and in a follow-up survey, most agencies indicated a preference for a reduced number of GSPs and potentially just one or two.
At the time of this assessment there was not a full understanding of all of the potential requirements of being a GSA and ultimately what might be required to prepare a compliant GSP.
Table 3. Number of Subbasin Public Water Agencies
At the time of this assessment participants did not fully recognize the potential number of stakeholders and/or the requirements to conduct outreach. • Subbasin Governance Structures – Many individuals and entities within the subbasin have experience working in cooperative governance and related structures. For example, the SLDMWA provides leadership for an Integrated Resource Water Management Plan (IRWMP) illustrated in Figure 69 on the
following page. Many of the stakeholders are also involved with Irrigated Lands Coalitions (see Figure 7).10
Likewise, many are also involved in efforts related to the Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV‐SALTS) initiative (see Figure 8). 9 Source : San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, Westside-San Joaquin Integrated Water Resources Plan, July 2014
10 Source: Central Valley Regional Water Resources Control Board 921
I Figure 8. CV-Salts Initiative
Existing Cooperative / Collaborative Governance Structures with Delta Mendota Subbasin Stakeholders Figure 6. Integrated Regional Water Management
Groups
Figure 7. Irrigated Lands Coalitions
922
CV-Salts was launched to develop sustainable salinity and nitrate management planning for the Central Valley. (See Figure 8.
11)
Finally, there are multiple arrangements in place related to surface water transfers and other previous groundwater management planning efforts.
Experience with these programs has created a capacity for collaborative planning that will be essential for GSP development. It also creates opportunities to access and leverage existing stakeholder meetings and events rather than needing to convene multiple new stakeholder processes.
3.5.3. Issues to be Addressed in Creating a Sustainability Plan Some of the participants indicated they had an extremely good understanding of their section of the subbasin, with exact and extensive records to support their perspective. They found that making projections using historical data had been more reliable than some of the groundwater models that were in use.
In thinking about development of a GSP they felt there could be some difficulty in developing water balances due to lack of quality data for some locations.
Another mild concern was the potential for disagreements about the selection of a groundwater model(s) or reconciling differences among methods.
Still another concern was the capacity of the GSAs and/or GSA members to fully participate. Some of these agencies are very lightly staffed and have varying levels of knowledge related to groundwater management. All of the participants had significant other duties prior to the passage of SGMA.
One concern, expressed after completion of the assessment, was the potential for some agencies to simply opt out of participating in the development of a GSP but still receive the benefits of the region having an approved plan without having contributed to the larger good of the subbasin.
3.5.4. Representation
The State Board lists the following as Required Interested Parties for the purpose of SGMA outreach:
All Groundwater Users
Holders of Overlying Rights (agriculture and domestic) Municipal Well Operators and Public Water Systems
Tribes
Counties
Planning Departments /Land Use
Local Landowners
Disadvantaged communities
Business
11 Ibid
923
Federal Government
Environmental Uses
Surface Water Users (if connection between surface and ground water) All of these stakeholder categories were contacted in the interview process excepting tribes. In the case of tribes, there are no classified tribal lands in the Delta-Mendota subbasin, therefore no planning, outreach or communication needs are currently anticipated for tribes.
Due to subbasin characteristics, a primary focus of the assessment was on agricultural,
disadvantaged
communities (DACs) and
municipal groundwater
users.
• Related to Agricultural
Representation - most
respondents believed that
the elected leadership of
the GSA agencies would do
a good job in representing
agriculture and noted that
many of them were growers
themselves. It was also
noted that farmers were
busy and would be far more interested in any specifics of a GSP that would impact operations or the degree of certainty about water availability than the particulars of GSA governance.
• Regarding DACs - Much of the subbasin and its counties (San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, and Fresno) have communities that meet the DAC definition and the region is generally considered disadvantaged. The ability of DACs to participate in GSP development was considered limited and it was thought that there would be a need for specific and direct outreach to DACs through elected leadership and via use of trusted community advocates. As part of the SA, several of those interviewed identified themselves as being able to represent a DAC perspective and one in particular was particularly concerned about the availability of Spanish language materials. As a result, Spanish language materials were included in the meeting materials of the public GSA adoption meetings and the SLDMWA provided a fluent Spanish speaker to assist with meetings.
In the past, to promote DAC identification and involvement, the Westside-San Joaquin IRWM previously conducted an extensive survey of private and public community representatives to educate and encourage understanding of the IRWM process, to help understand the issues confronted by DACs, and to 924
better address the needs of minority and/or low-income communities. This effort resulted in identification of DACs in the Region and an initial list of 22 projects that would benefit DACs and low-income communities. Given known constraints on this community it is recommended that more focused DAC outreach should be coordinated with the IRWM. This effort is now in progress. • Regarding Municipals - The SA outreach also included interviewing Municipal Stakeholders. A significant number of the Cities are fully dependent on wells for water supply and issues related groundwater management are of grave concern. These representatives all felt that even while it would be difficult to make time to participate in GSAs and GSP development, that they must make the time. Many had also determined that they wished to form their own GSA to reflect their specific interests in any kind of broader GSP negotiation. • Regarding Environmental Interests - There appeared to be a less defined stakeholder segment representing traditional, environmentally focused issues.
Outreach was made to subbasin government agencies that often serve as a surrogate for these interests and an informal consultation occurred with a representative of the Planning and Conservation League to identify any known, active stakeholders. However, no specific entity or individual was identified by those contacted. A general perception was that this community would desire engagement and would designate representatives if the GSP development was thought to potentially impact existing restoration or other environmental concerns but the formation of GSAs per-se, was of less interest. The next phase of communications should include outreach to organizations such as Audubon, the Nature Conservancy and Ducks Unlimited just to ensure due diligence. These connections will be important going forward, particularly if environmental issues are identified.
• Regarding Industrial Users – The region
includes some industrial water users.
This sector has a relatively lower
percent of water use compared to
other subbasins users; however,
representatives of the sector pointed
out how essential access to water was
to their industry. The interviewees also
emphasized how important these
industries were to the local economies.
There was a stated concern about
representation since there didn’t
appear to be a direct way to engage,
particularly with multiple GSAs being formed.
925
•Regarding Counties & Planning Agencies – All of the subbasin counties have designated representatives and all are assisting with GSA coverage for areas not otherwise covered by a GSA. All of the city and county representatives had direct engagement with the planning arms of their jurisdictions, or were staff to the planning departments. These representatives, like the municipal representatives, viewed this as critical issue even as it creates new workload for the already busy entities.
3.5.5. Communications and Facilitation Preferences
Participants were asked to describe their communications preferences. Several offered specific suggestions on written materials. Most did not believe there would be a need for a high frequency of communications directly with non-GSA stakeholders.
Several suggested using regularly scheduled activities of existing groups and gatherings to share information rather than creating stand-alone events. They listed annual meetings of the water agencies as one good venue as well as meetings related to the IRWM and Irrigated Lands. Several also thought that it would be good to go to places like Farmers Markets, particularly for the disadvantaged communities, and County Fairs.
Farm Bureau representatives also indicated a willingness to support outreach efforts. The Merced Farm Bureau, in particular, has already helped to advertise public meetings related to GSA formations.
Related to facilitation there was not a broad exposure to professional facilitators among many of the stakeholders. Even so, participants consistently listed qualities such as fairness and transparency, a good understanding of the issues, and confidence as helpful facilitator strengths. There was a sense that the GSAs would not need hand holding but that facilitation could be useful for helping the stakeholders forge decisions and making what many believed would need to be compromises.
3.5.6. Success Factors, Barriers to Success
The participants were asked to describe their view on the odds for success as well as any barriers that would prevent successful completion of a GSP.
Overall, most participants expressed a medium to high likelihood for success. They noted that the carrot (grants and technical support) and stick (significant regulatory intervention) by the State creates a dynamic that is supportive to success.
Participants stated barriers related to the capacity of the GSAs to participate and ultimately agree to, and implement changes. The much diffused governance structure of multiple GSAs amplifies this dilemma as do actions beyond the control of the subbasin entities (such as climate and water deliveries).
In addition to perceived barriers, participants outlined their thoughts on opportunities and success strategies.
926
Drought – While the drought was unwelcome it increased awareness of the need for changes. Many felt it would be easier to move forward while the topic is prominent in everyone’s minds.
Short and Long Game – Several suggested it will be important to have a plan that includes long and short term strategies and activities. Integrated Planning – Many of the participants emphasized the importance of integrated planning.
3.5.7. Other Comments and Advice
Many participants expressed appreciation for being contacted and invited the facilitator to contact them again if there were questions.
Promising messages and methods
Three primary communications strategies have already been identified for the GSP(s) development:
Leveraging the activities of existing groups
Providing targeted, communications and outreach to opinion leaders in key stakeholder segments
Providing user friendly information and intermittent opportunities for a broader range of stakeholders
The same strategies aligned with the recommendations of the SA participants. These methods will allow stakeholders to engage commensurate with their degree of interest while providing sufficient information to ensure long-term success for plan development and implementation.
927
AUDIENCES AND MESSAGES
GSA formation and GSP(s) development, like most large planning efforts, consists of a broad range of stakeholders with differing interests and influence.
4.1. Two Core Audience Segments
This Coms Plan Anticipates two core audience segments. First is the subbasin GSA Boards and the communications among and between themselves. This audience segment is significant in size given that 23 GSAs will be working to develop a GSP(s) and each GSA has its own Board and audiences.
The second audience is the subbasin stakeholders as identified in SGMA. This audience is also large. Many of the stakeholders are shared by the GSA Boards and some of the larger stakeholder segments are also represented on the GSA Boards (see Figure 9).
Nearly all of the communications strategies apply to both segments; however, some strategies apply to one or the other specifically and are so identified.
4.2. Communications and Change Management
The process of adopting and implementing a GSP will require significant change management. Communications planning should encompass basic change management approaches. Messages should also evolve over time and be tied to the planning process and key decision points. Then, for each audience and each major planning step, communications must do the following:
1. Describe what the actual proposed plan (change) is
2. Articulate how the change will directly impact the category of stakeholder involved
3. Outline the methods that will be used to implement the plan (change)
4. Define the costs and benefits of changing and not changing, and what future conditions will be if change does not occur
5. Consider unintended consequences and others that may also be impacted by the same change then develop a strategy to engage them
6. Offer opportunities for input and for stakeholders and others to improve the approach
The communications requirements for large changes are often underestimated. Some experts indicate that messages may need to be delivered up to 8 different times to be fully absorbed. Communications needs will also evolve as the GSP planning progresses. Table 4 provides a sample of early communications that focus on SGMA and groundwater basics.
GSA
Boards
Subbasin
Stakeholders
Figure 9. Two Core Audience Segments
928
Table 4. Sample – Early Phase Message Elements for Subbasin Stakeholders Element What the
Change Is
How it will affect the
Stakeholder
How the
change will be
Implemented
Why it is a good idea
Early Phase
GSP
Development
Locally
governed GSAs
will work
together to
sustainably
manage
ground water.
The Subbasin
/Basin is
required to
ensure
Sustainable
Groundwater
Management
by submitting
a sustainability
plan by 2020.
The plan must
be
implemented
and found to
result in
sustainable
management
by 2040.
(Unique to audience
type)
Changes in the
current
methods of
acquiring and
utilizing
groundwater
may occur.
May affect
future
decisions
related to crop
types and
decisions
related to
conjunctively
using surface
water.
May provide
additional
project
resources to
the DAC
communities.
A collaborative
approach is
being
undertaken to
prepare the
plan with
multiple GSAs
coordinating
with the
SLDMWA as
the planning
organizer.
Sustainable
and wise use
of
groundwater
allows for the
success of
future
generations
and creates
greater
certainty for
today’s
beneficial
users.
Failure to act
may result in
negative
regulatory
consequences.
As part of the GSP planning process, the next phase of communications will also need to communicate the requirements for sustainability and how they are achieved in the context of the Delta-Mendota subbasin. Then, communications related to GSP specifics and adoption will require additional outreach, targeted to specific audiences.
4.3. Tied to Decision Making
Communications should also be tightly linked to decision making. For each anticipated decision, stakeholders for that decision should be identified and the following addressed.
1. Who (Is the stakeholder)
a. An impacted party?
b. A potential planning partner?
c. A potential provider of services or resources?
d. A regulator of the activity?
(Note: Maybe more than one category.)
929
2. What (What is the interest of the stakeholder? How will the stakeholder be affected? What are the stakeholders’ needs?)
3. Who (Who is the right messenger for the information)
4. How (How should the information be delivered? What are the best methods?)
5. When (What is the appropriate timing for the messages?)
6. Engagement and Knowledge Transfer (How do we create two-way communications?))
Table 5 illustrates some of these ideas.
Table 5. Communications Planning Questions
4.4. GSA Boards
Due to the multiple subbasin GSAs, specific focus is needed on communications to keep them informed, provide consistent updates and information that the Boards can use in their own outreach, and support their decision making. Primary objectives for communications with the subbasin GSA Boards are to ensure:
Consistent understanding of the requirements for a GSP and/or GSP coordination On-going access to current information
Timely notice of any significant developments or decision points that may require changes to policies and/or require some other board action Confidence that the GSP(s) will be accepted by the GSA’s stakeholders Key communications activities involving the Board include;
1. Providing short and digestible pieces of information to ensure each Board member can quickly articulate to his/her constituents on key matters and remain sufficiently informed so that no decision points are surprises.
2. Provide user-friendly informational materials to be used with public audiences, and will support the Board with their own constituent outreach.
3. Utilize regular Board communications for routine updates and reserve specific Board agenda items for highly significant discussion items.
4.5. Primary Audiences
There are several core stakeholder groups that will require ongoing communications and tailored messaging throughout the planning process. They are:
930
Agriculture
Disadvantaged Communities
Municipals
Other stakeholders requiring special consideration include:
Industrial Users/ Business
Regulators (State and Federal)
Potential Partners
Environmental Organizations
Federal Agencies
While all of the stakeholder types are important to engage for development of a GSP, the first three will be most affected by any changes that might be proposed as a result of the GSP(s).
The following provides an outline of key messages and activities in support of each of the audience types.
4.2.1. Agricultural
Messages about the GSP(s) development should feature the overall desirability of a sustainable management approach how the plan will contribute to management certainty and protect against regulatory oversight.
In thinking about irrigation users it is also important to remember that one size does not fit all.
4.2.2. Disadvantaged Communities
Messages developed for this sector should be tailored and specific to the community. This type of outreach is often best served by use of surrogates and trusted messengers. As identified in the SA, these messages should be aligned with activities of the IRWM, especially given the high, current dependence of many on unsustainable water sources.
Messages about ways to access the increased availability of resources due to grant incentives should also be considered.
A specific outreach method to consider relates to the predominance of cells phones within the communities. According to the Pew Research Center, “over 50 percent of low-income households own a smartphone. Smartphone penetration in this demographic creates substantial opportunities for utilities to reach disadvantaged communities with software solutions like customer self-service platforms and targeted digital communications.”12
4.2.3. Municipals
12 Secondary Source: Water Smart. https://www.watersmart.com/rethinking-disadvantagedcommunity-engagement/ (accessed June 1, 2017) 931
Some care will be needed to address tensions related to the relative percentages of use by Municipal agencies and what constitutes highest and best beneficial uses within an agricultural region. A promising interaction with this community would involve collaboration on messaging to achieve mutually beneficial goals.
Some thought it might be possible for the municipal agencies to provide in-kind support to the GSP development process through support for project websites and mailing lists, production of meeting notices, assistance to the planning process from in-house public information professionals and offering access to physical meeting spaces.
Municipals may need assistance in making the case for the need to think at a Basin scale rather than more local terms.
4.2.4. Business and Industry Interests
Business and industry interests seek assurances about the availability of water for operations and the viability of the farming industry in the region. Messages for these audiences should focus on how the GSP(s) development will contribute to sustainability and how these audiences can participate in discussion specific to their interests.
4.2.5. Regional/Statewide Interests and Regulators
Some degree of uncertainty remains in the overall legal, legislative and regulatory environment as it relates to SGMA implementation.
It is in the interest of the subbasin stakeholders to engage state and federal agencies and regulators throughout the process. These parties may have resources to assist the subbasin and a cooperative attitude will build good will in the event that adjustments are needed to achieve SGMA compliance.
4.2.6. Potential Agency Partners
A variety of collaborations to achieve GSP(s) development goals may be possible. The GSAs should consider the potential for collaboration with non-GSA members and inter-basin (adjacent subbasin) partners, as part of plan deliberations.
4.2.7. GSP Coordinators Planning Forum
A planning forum for subbasin GSP coordinators should be established to further inform a coordination strategy. This forum would include agency representatives as well as the consultant teams and be used for the sole purpose of coordination and mutual support. It is anticipated that this body might meet on a quarterly or as needed basis. This forum would also provide a central point of contact for adjacent subbasin coordinators.
4.2.8. Environmental Community
As noted in the SA, this community will be interested in a GSP features. The focus of messaging for this group being on how the GSP(s) development will contribute to a sustainable regional water portfolio. Special effort should be made to identify specific 932
topics of interest. For example, as part of GSP development, a list of groundwater dependent species may be created, or impacts to wetlands may be identified. These types of lists would highlight where input from the environmental community might be needed.
4.2.9. Federal Government
Federal representatives interviewed for the assessment asked to be kept informed of subbasin SGMA activities. These agencies have a direct interest in surface water integration as well as SGMA activities that could impact wetlands restoration efforts or groundwater dependent ecosystems and species.
933
RISK MANAGEMENT
Risk management is the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks (defined as the effect of uncertainty on achieving objectives) followed by coordinated, efficient and economical strategies and actions to minimize, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of negative events. Strategies and actions may also be used to avert risk by leveraging strengths and opportunities.
Risks can come from uncertainty in economic factors, threats from project failures (at any phase), regulatory and legal uncertainties, natural causes and disasters (drought, flood, etc.), as well as dissention from adversaries, or events of uncertain or unpredictable circumstances. Several risk management standards have been developed. This analysis utilizes those from the Project Management Institute.
Table 6 outlines standardized risk categories and translates them to outreach risks.
Table 6. Risk Factors
RISK CATEGORY Outreach RISK FACTORS
Technical, quality, or performance • Realistic performance goals, scope and objectives
Project management • Quality of outreach design
• Outreach deployment and change
management
• Appropriate allocation of time and
resources
• Adequate support for Outreach in project
management plans
Organizational / Internal • Executive Sponsorship
• Proper prioritization of efforts
• Conflicts with other functions
• Distribution of workload between
organizational and consultant teams
Historical • Past experiences with similar projects
• Organizational relations with stakeholders
• Policy and data adequacy
• Media and stakeholder fatigue*
External • Legal and regulatory environment
• Changing priorities
• Risks related to political dynamics
5.1. Technical, quality, or performance
The subbasin is fortunate to have a high level of water knowledge and skilled personnel available to assist with GSP planning. In general, stakeholder expectations for outreach and performance goals, scope and objectives are attainable. The larger concern in this category is properly communicating the scope of the GSP(s) development and the need for extensive coordination and outreach among a number of parties. Communication of SGMA 934
requirements for outreach as a planning requirement should be an ongoing consideration and appears to be underestimated in emphasis.
5.2. Project management
A number of positive project management factors are present for the GSP(s) development outreach. Project managers view outreach as an important planning element. The outreach design is based on best management practices and industry standards. It is not overly complicated and with technical services support from DWR and other sources, sufficient resources should be available to properly execute it. Procedures and practices are already in place that can be leveraged to achieve communication goals.
The primary concern in this category relates to GSP coordination. This type of outreach will require additional assessment as the individual GSAs will determine their own protocols for representation.
5.3. Organizational / Internal
Conflicts with other GSA member functions and/or conflicts with outreach activities by efforts that include the same stakeholders (e.g. Irrigated Lands, IRWM, and CV-Salts) should be monitored.
One additional consideration will be the distribution of workload between GSA, organizational and consultant teams. Clear roles and responsibilities must be defined and continuous interaction in place to ensure successful execution.
The GSP(s) development process will also need identified, high level spokespersons or champions. These individuals should be able to discuss subbasin planning with the media, in discussions with regulators and potentially at professional conferences.
5.4. External
The legal and regulatory environment of the GSP(s) development process is complex and evolving. Ongoing issues with surface water deliveries and changing agricultural market conditions are outside of the control of the parties. It will be important for mechanisms to be in place that allow for relatively rapid responses to changing conditions.
5.5. Historical
The primary stakeholders in this process generally view interactions and meetings as productive. There is a history of cooperation and a willingness to work together to save costs and achieve better outcomes.
935
TACTICAL APPROACHES
Following are specific tactical approaches that may be utilized to deliver the activities, messages, and recommendations of the previous chapters. These approaches are based on best communication practices and grounded in the public participation philosophy of the International Association for Public Participation, Public Participation Spectrum as illustrated in Table 7.
The Spectrum represents a philosophy that outreach should match the desired level of input from both the stakeholder and the organizational entity.
Table 7. IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum
Based on the assessment findings for the GSP(s) development, most stakeholders would simply like to be INFORMED unless there is a potential for significant changes that may include that stakeholder. Tactics for this group will include fact sheets, websites, open houses, briefings, and informational items placed in publications they already read.
The next largest group of stakeholders, primarily groundwater pumpers and disadvantaged communities, wish to be CONSULTED. This group will have access to all the materials 936
prepared as part of the informational phase. In addition they should be invited to provide comments on written materials and planning concepts and participate in focused workshops and/or briefings. They should also be invited to attend larger public meetings.
The development of some GSP features may require a higher degree of INVOLVEMENT.
This would focus on engagement of a subset of stakeholders that may experience significant impacts associated with SGMA.
COLLABORATION opportunities have also been identified; however, they are of a different character than defined in the Spectrum. Collaboration in this GSP(s) development process will focus on working with partners that have mutual goals to achieve those goals together.
This will more resemble a partnership than a public engagement activity.
6.1. Communications Coordination.
Each GSA is required to perform legally mandated outreach activities and the GSP submission guidelines require a minimum level of engagement.
The subbasin GSAs should coordinate outreach activities even if there is a decision to move forward with multiple GSPs. In addition to efficiency and cost savings (the GSAs can share resources) this strategy will allow for consistency in messaging and reduce confusion for stakeholders that may not know what GSA jurisdiction they are in, and/or are in multiple GSA jurisdictions. Following are suggested options for communications coordination.
1. Website
2. Meeting calendar
3. Branded informational Flyers, Templates, PowerPoint Presentations, etc.
4. Periodic newsletter
5. GSP related mailing lists
6. Descriptions of interested parties
7. Issues and interest statements for legally mandatory interested parties
8. Public workshops
9. Message calendar
10. Press releases and guest editorials
11. Speakers Bureau
12. Existing group venues
13. Outreach documentation
6.2. Tactics
6.2.1. Website
As part of the communications plan
development, a list of website
concepts and draft website content
was prepared. The following
describes the proposed approach:
937
a. Centralized – Establish a centralized website for the entire subbasin. b. Individual GSAs – Posting of material to a website is part of the SGMA requirements. Those GSAs with their own webpages can link to and from the centralized site if they wish to provide their own customized information. For those GSAs without their own website, courtesy pages would be provided as an added feature of the main site. The courtesy pages would all use a single template with the same information to facilitate easy management and updates. Individual GSAs choosing to take advantage of the courtesy pages would be responsible for ensuring that information is current. The page should include a “Last Updated” box to indicate the timeliness of the information.
c. Basic features – A basic website framework has already been developed along with introductory information that has prepopulated each page.
Figure 10 illustrates the basic content of the site and includes:
1. Background information
2. Information about getting involved, including meeting information
3. A separate link for Spanish Language materials
4. Frequently asked questions
5. Links to GSAs
6. Contact information
Should a GSA decide to not participate in the Central website, a similar structure could be utilized.
Figure 10. Website Structure
6.2.2. Meeting Calendar
938
A shared meeting calendar will provide a one-stop shop for stakeholders and assist in preventing meeting conflicts while creating more potential for shared activities. This calendar should include current and scheduled meetings and workshops as well as serve as the repository for agendas and meeting notes, along with copies of meeting materials and presentation.
An integrated project calendar should also be developed that links planning project milestones with communications milestones.
6.2.3. Branded Informational Flyers,
Templates, PowerPoint
Presentations, etc.
Subbasin level materials should have a
single look and feel to create on-going
consistency and visual recognition by
stakeholders. Use of templates, shared
presentations and flyers will create
efficiencies and reinforce messaging. This
communications plan incorporates some
of this type of branding.
6.2.4. Periodic Newsletter
The need for regular communications cannot be overstated. One option is production of a periodic newsletter. Given the relatively short GSP(s) development process timeframe and the GSP development requirements for periodic outreach to identified stakeholders, a quarterly schedule would be realistic and achieve compliance with SGMA requirements for periodic updates to stakeholders. The newsletter should be designed so that individual GSAs can add tailored information if they choose to. For Portable Document Format (PDF) versions of the newsletter, a GSA could add a simple one or two page insert and the edition could be used as a handout or mailer. For a professional looking, email version of the newsletter, we recommend free or low cost services such as Mail Chimp or Constant Comment, which can be integrated with mailing lists.
Adding GSA specific information to an email newsletter can be done with web-links in the email to the very same PDF page prepared for the hardcopy mailer. An alternative is emailing the entire newsletter PDF as an attachment (although this format is less likely to be read than the mailer services).
6.2.5. GSP related mailing lists
Each GSA is required to develop notification lists. A central list may be utilized for GSP(s) related notifications.
6.2.6. Descriptions of Interested Parties
939
Each GSA is required to develop descriptions of interested parties. These lists should be updated and merged for use in the GSP(s) submittal(s). These can also be provided as background information on the website as part of constructing an administrative record. The SA in Chapter 4 provides an initial start for this documentation.
6.2.7. Issues and Interest Statements for Legally Mandatory Interested Parties A GSP submission must include a statement of interests for listed stakeholders. As suggested earlier, this can also be included on the website.
6.2.8. Coordinated Public Workshops
SGMA requires a series of public hearings and some public workshops. Such workshops should be coordinated with other subbasin entities.
During the GSA formation process the County of Merced and a forming GSA body conducted a joint workshop to explain more about SGMA and the proposed GSA formation. Distribution of meeting flyers and notices was done concurrently, and DWR attended the event to answer questions. The GSP development process will offer similar opportunities, not only within the subbasin, but with adjacent subbasins.
6.2.9. Message Calendar
Basic messages should be associated
with the planning schedule and each
stage of GSP(s) development and
serve as the theme for the
communications materials being
generated. For example, during the
GSA formation period there was a
need to communicate the basics of
SGMA and groundwater
management. During the GSP(s)
initiation phase messages should
focus on the basics of groundwater sustainability and the current state of the subbasin.
As the GSP(s) begins to take form the specifics of the GSP(s) and what it means for each stakeholder would be the focus.
6.2.10. Press Releases and Guest Editorials
At some point in the GSP development and implementation process, it is likely that stakeholders will be asked to make changes and/or financially support a sustainability effort. It will be more productive for the GSAs and their GSP collaboration partners to frame discussions about these changes than to have others, perhaps with less knowledge, do so on their behalf. For that reason there is a need for press releases and/or guest editorials to offer the media and stakeholders accurate information offered in the context of SGMA. This type of outreach should be closely coordinated as consistency in messages is critical to stakeholder acceptance. 940
6.2.11. Speakers Bureau
Efforts should be made to conduct outreach at events and meetings that already occur (e.g. Farm Bureau meetings, Rotary Club, etc.). A list of knowledgeable presenters should be developed in the event an organization or other entity would like a presentation. Speakers Bureau engagements should be recorded on the planning project meeting calendar.
6.2.12. Existing Group Venues
Fully leverage the activities of existing groups.
o Maintain a roster of existing groups and typical meeting schedules with a nexus to GSP(s) development. Add the dates to the messaging calendar. o The list of audiences, messages and existing groups should be referenced when there is a need to deploy information.
o Conduct informal outreach with the leaders of such groups to determine the best way to interact.
o Determine what communications channels these groups are using and equally leverage these, for example by placement of articles in newsletters.
6.2.13. Outreach Documentation
A central point of contact should be identified on the website and an outreach statistics inventory should be established that identifies dates, times, audiences and attendance.
This information will be also be useful in conducting follow up with stakeholders as well as documenting outreach as part of GSP submittal guidelines.
6.3. Procedural and Legally Mandated Outreach
A discussion of SGMA outreach requirements was provided in Chapter 1 and a full list of requirements is contained in Appendix 1. One major feature of the requirements is a submission to DWR of the opportunities that interested parties will be given to participate in the GSP deliberations. The Situation Assessment provides an initial description that can be added to with additional outreach.
Following are the Required Interested Parties for the purpose of mandated outreach:
Table 9 provides a list of the mandated outreach and the timeframe in which is required.
Table 8. Mandated Outreach
Timeframe Item
Prior to initiating plan
development
1. Statement of how interested parties may contact
the Agency and participate in development and
implementation of the plan submitted to DWR.
941
Timeframe Item
2. Web posting of same information.
Prior to plan development 1. Must establish and maintain an interested persons list.
2. Must prepare a written statement describing the
manner in which interested parties may participate
in GSP development and implementation.
Statement must be provided to:
a. Legislative body of any city and/or county within
the geographic area of the plan
b. Public Utilities Commission if the geographic
area includes a regulated public water system
regulated by that Commission
c. DWR
d. Interested parties (see Section 10927)
e. The public
Prior to and with GSP
submission
1. Statements of issues and interests of beneficial users of basin groundwater, including types of parties
representing the interests and consultation process
2. Lists of public meetings
3. Inventory of comments and summary of responses
4. Communication section in plan that includes:
Agency decision making process
ID of public engagement opportunities and
response process
Description of process for inclusion
Method for public information related to
progress in implementing the plan (status,
projects, actions)
90 days prior to GSP
Adoption Hearing
1. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or amendment
of the GSP, the GSP entities must notify cities and/or
counties of geographic area 90 days in advance.
90 days or less prior to GSP
Adoption Hearing
2. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or amendment
of the GSP, the GSP entities must:
a. Consider and review comments
b. Conduct consultation within 30 days of receipt
with cities or counties so requesting
GSP Adoption or
Amendment
1. GSP must be adopted or amended at Public Hearing.
60 days after plan
submission
1. 60-day comment period for plans under submission
to DWR. Comments will be used to evaluate the
submission.
Prior to adoption of fees 1. Public meeting required prior to adoption of, or increase to fees. Oral or written presentations may
be made as part of the meeting.
2. Public notice shall include:
a. Time and place of meeting
b. General explanation of matter to be considered
942
Timeframe Item
c. Statement of availability for data required to
initiate or amend such fees
d. Public posting on Agency Website and provision
by mail to interested parties of supporting data
(at least 20 days in advance)
3. Mailing lists for interested parties are valid for 1 year from date of request and may be renewed by written
request of the parties on or before April 1 of each
year.
4. Includes procedural requirements per Government
Code, Section 6066.
Prior to conducting a fee
adoption hearing.
1. Must publish notices in a newspaper of general
circulation as prescribed.
2. Publication shall be once a week for two successive
weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published
once a week or oftener, with at least five days
intervening between the respective publication
dates not counting such publication dates, are
sufficient.
3. The period of notice begins the first day of
publication and terminates at the end of the
fourteenth day, (which includes the first day.)
6.4. Items for Future Consideration
This GSP(s) Coms Plan outlines an outreach effort based on project and stakeholder needs and preferences. This document has been prepared as a working draft living document and should be updated as new information and the GSP(s) development process needs are developed.
.
943
MEASUREMENTS & EVALUATION
A guiding principle for evaluation and measurement of the Coms Plan’s success is to provide regular, unbiased reporting of progress toward achieving goals. Success may be evaluated in several ways, including process measures, outcome measures, and an annual evaluation of accomplishments. Optional evaluation measures are described below.
As part of each outreach effort debrief the following process and outcome measures will be discussed and recorded in a check sheet. The check sheets will be prepared with the goal of continuous improvement rather than criticisms.
7.2. Process Measures
Process measures track progress toward meeting the goals of the Coms Plan. These include:
Level of attendance at outreach meetings
Shared understanding of the overarching aims, activities, and opportunities presented by different planning approaches and project activities Productive dialogue among participants at meetings and events Sense of authentic engagement; people understand why they have been asked to participate, and feel that they can contribute meaningfully Timely and accurate public reporting of planning milestones Feedback from Coordinating Body and GSA members, regulators, stakeholders, and interested parties about the quality and availability of information materials
Level of stakeholder interest in the GSP(s) development process information
7.3. Outcome Measures
Outcome measures track the level of success of the Coms Plan in meeting its overall goals.
Some outcome measures considered for the GSP(s) development process include the following:
Consistent participation by key stakeholders and interested parties in essential activities. Participants should have no difficulty locating the meetings, and should be informed as to when and where they will be held.
Response from meeting participants that the engagement methods provided for a fair and balanced exchange of information.
Feedback from interested parties that they understand how their input is used, where to track data, and what results to expect.
The project receives quality media coverage that is accurate, complete and fair. 944
7.4. Mid-cycle Evaluation of Accomplishments
A mid-cycle evaluation provides an opportunity to examine the current effectiveness of the Coms Plan and provides a chance to reevaluate strategies to meet the GSP(s) development process objectives. The evaluation tasks may include:
Preparation of an executive-level summary detailing high-level initiatives and accomplishments of the previous cycle. This evaluation should also include positive news, best practices, goals and objectives, notable changes, timelines, and priorities. Identifying gaps and areas for improvement.
Highlighting how gaps and areas for improvement in the cycle has been addressed. Outlining process and outcome measures and their current results. 945
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The GSP(s) development Coms Plan outlines numerous strategies, activities and tactics. While none are highly complex, there is a requirement for coordination and clarity regarding who will be responsible for executing the tasks.
After the planning team evaluates the timelines and priorities for each of the communications activities a recommended next step is completion of a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed (RACI) Chart. This Chart, as displayed in Table 10, outlines key tasks and the assignment of roles and responsibilities for accomplishing them.
Responsible
Those who do the work to achieve the task. There is at least one person with a role of responsible, although others can be delegated to assist in the work required.
Accountable (also approver or final approving authority) This is the person ultimately answerable for the correct and thorough completion of the deliverable or task, and the one who delegates the work to those responsible. There may only be only one accountable specified for each task or deliverable.
Table 9. Sample RACI Chart
946
Consulted
Those whose opinions are sought, typically subject matter experts were people that are impacted by the activity; and with whom there is two-way communication.
Informed
Those who are kept up-to-date on progress, typically on the launch and completion of the task or deliverable. This is one way communication.
Role distinction
There is a distinction between a role and the individual assigned the task. Role is a descriptor of an associated set of tasks that could be performed by just one or many people.
In the case of the RACI Chart, the team may list as many people as is logical except for the Accountable role.
Scope of Work
Completion of the RACI Chart will also support development of any future scopes of work for consultant provided communication and outreach services. 947
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1-Public Outreach Requirements under SGMA
Appendix 2-Communications Governance
948
949
Appendix 1. Public Outreach Requirements under SGMA
GSP Regulations
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
§ 353.6. Initial Notification
(a) Each Agency shall notify the Department, in writing, prior to initiating development of a Plan. The notification shall provide general information about the Agency’s process for developing the Plan, including the manner in which interested parties may contact the Agency and participate in the development and
implementation of the Plan. The Agency shall make the
information publicly available by posting relevant information on the Agency’s website.
1. Statement of how interested parties
may contact the Agency and
participate in development and
implementation of the plan submitted
to DWR.
2. Web posting of same information.
Timing: Prior to initiating development of a
plan.
§ 353.8. Comments
(a) Any person may provide comments to the Department
regarding a proposed or adopted Plan.
(b) Pursuant to Water Code Section 10733.4, the Department shall establish a comment period of no less than 60 days for an adopted Plan that has been accepted by the Department for evaluation pursuant to Section 355.2.
(c) In addition to the comment period required by Water Code Section 10733.4, the Department shall accept comments on an Agency’s decision to develop a Plan as described in Section 353.6, including comments on elements of a proposed Plan under consideration by the Agency.
1. 60-day comment period for plans under
submission to DWR. Comments will be
used to evaluate the submission.
2. Parties may also comment on a GSA’s
(or GSAs’) statements submitted under
section 353.6
Timing: For GSP Submittal - 60 days after
submission to DWR
§ 354.10. Notice and Communication
Each Plan shall include a summary of information relating to notification and communication by the Agency with other agencies and interested parties including the following:
(a) A description of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin, including the land uses and property interests potentially affected by the use of groundwater in the basin, the types of parties representing those interests, and the nature of consultation with those parties.
(b) A list of public meetings at which the Plan was discussed or considered by the Agency.
(c) Comments regarding the Plan received by the Agency and a summary of any responses by the Agency.
(d) A communication section of the Plan that includes the following:
(1) An explanation of the Agency’s decision-making process. (2) Identification of opportunities for public engagement and a discussion of how public input and response will be used.
5. Statements of issues and interests of
beneficial users of basin groundwater,
including types of parties representing
the interests and consultation process
6. Lists of public meetings
7. Inventory of comments and summary
of responses
8. Communication section in plan that
includes:
Agency decision making process
ID of public engagement
opportunities and response process
Description of process for inclusion
Method for public information
related to progress in implementing
the plan (status, projects, actions)
Timing: For GSP Submittal – with plan
For GSP Development – continuous.
[Note: activities should be included
950
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
(3) A description of how the Agency encourages the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic
elements of the population within the basin.
(4) The method the Agency shall follow to inform the public about progress implementing the Plan, including the status of projects and actions.
in the project schedule and
information posted on web.]
§ 355.2. (c) Department Review of Adopted Plan
(c) The Department (DWR) shall establish a period of no less than 60 days to receive public comments on the adopted Plan, as described in Section 353.8.
1. 60 day public review period for public
comment on submitted plan.
Timing: After GSP Submittal to DWR – 60
days
§ 355.4. & 355.10 Criteria for Plan Evaluation
The basin shall be sustainably managed within 20 years of the applicable statutory deadline consistent with the objectives of the Act. The Department shall evaluate an adopted Plan for
compliance with this requirement as follows:
(b) (4) Whether the interests of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin, and the land uses and property interests potentially affected by the use of groundwater in the basin, have been considered.
…
(10) Whether the Agency has adequately responded to
comments that raise credible technical or policy issues with the Plan.
1. Required public outreach and
stakeholder information is submitted,
including statement of issues and interests
of beneficial users.
2. Public and stakeholder comments and
questions adequately addressed during
planning process.
Timing: For GSP Submittal – with plan
For resubmittal related to corrective action
– with submittal
California Water Code
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
10720. This part shall be known, and may be cited, as the “Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.”
10720.3
(a) This part applies to all groundwater basins in the state. …
(c) The federal government or any federally recognized Indian tribe, appreciating the shared interest in assuring the sustainability of groundwater resources, may voluntarily agree to participate in the preparation or administration of a groundwater sustainability plan or groundwater management plan under this part through a joint powers authority or other agreement with local agencies in the basin. A participating tribe shall be eligible to participate fully in planning, financing, and management under this part, including eligibility for grants and technical assistance, if any exercise of regulatory authority, enforcement, or imposition and collection of fees is pursuant to
1. Tribes and the federal government may
voluntarily participate in GSA
governance and GSP development.
Timing: Prior to initiating development of a
plan.
951
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
the tribe’s independent authority and not pursuant to authority granted to a groundwater sustainability agency under this part.
CHAPTER 4. Establishing Groundwater Sustainability Agencies [10723 - 10724]
10723.
a) Except as provided in subdivision (c), any local agency or combination of local agencies overlying a groundwater basin may decide to become a groundwater sustainability agency for that basin.
(b) Before deciding to become a groundwater sustainability agency, and after publication of notice pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code, the local agency or agencies shall hold a public hearing in the county or counties overlying the basin.
1. Must hold public hearing in the county
or counties overlying the basin, prior to
becoming a GSA
Timing: Prior to becoming a GSA.
10723.2
The groundwater sustainability agency shall consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater, as well as those responsible for implementing groundwater sustainability plans. These interests include, but are not limited to, all of the following:
(a) Holders of overlying groundwater rights, including:
(1) Agricultural users.
(2) Domestic well owners.
(b) Municipal well operators.
(c) Public water systems.
(d) Local land use planning agencies.
(e) Environmental users of groundwater.
(f) Surface water users, if there is a hydrologic connection between surface and groundwater bodies.
(g) The federal government, including, but not limited to, the military and managers of federal lands.
(h) California Native American tribes.
(i) Disadvantaged communities, including, but not limited to, those served by private domestic wells or small community water systems.
(j) Entities listed in Section 10927 that are monitoring and reporting groundwater elevations in all or a part of a
groundwater basin managed by the groundwater sustainability agency.
1. Must consider interest of all beneficial
uses and users of groundwater.
2. Includes specific stakeholders as listed.
Timing: During development of a GSP.
10723.4.
The groundwater sustainability agency shall establish and maintain a list of persons interested in receiving notices regarding plan preparation, meeting announcements, and availability of draft plans, maps, and other relevant documents. Any person may request, in writing, to be placed on the list of interested persons.
3. Must establish and maintain an
interested persons list.
4. Any person may ask to be added to the
list
Timing: On forming a GSA.
10723.8.
(a) Within 30 days of deciding to become or form a groundwater sustainability agency, the local agency or combination of local agencies shall inform the department of its decision and its intent to undertake sustainable groundwater management. The
1. Creates notification requirements that
include:
a. A list of interested parties
b. An explanation of how interests will
be considered
952
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
notification shall include the following information, as applicable:
…
(4) A list of interested parties developed pursuant to Section 10723.2 and an explanation of how their interests will be considered in the development and operation of the
groundwater sustainability agency and the development and implementation of the agency’s sustainability plan.
Timing: On forming a GSA & with submittal
of GSP
10727.8
(a) Prior to initiating the development of a groundwater sustainability plan, the groundwater sustainability agency shall make available to the public and the department a written statement describing the manner in which interested parties may participate in the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. The groundwater sustainability agency shall provide the written statement to the legislative body of any city, county, or city and county located within the geographic area to be covered by the plan. The groundwater sustainability agency may appoint and consult with an advisory committee consisting of interested parties for the purposes of developing and implementing a groundwater sustainability plan.
The groundwater sustainability agency shall encourage the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the groundwater basin prior to and during the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. If the geographic area to be covered by the plan includes a public water system regulated by the Public Utilities Commission, the groundwater sustainability agency shall provide the written statement to the commission. (b) For purposes of this section, interested parties include entities listed in Section 10927 that are monitoring and reporting groundwater elevations in all or a part of a groundwater basin managed by the groundwater sustainability agency.
2. Agencies preparing a GSP must prepare
a written statement describing the
manner in which interested parties may
participate in its development and
implementation.
3. Statement must be provided to:
a. Legislative body of any city and/or
county within the geographic area
of the plan
b. Public Utilities Commission if the
geographic area includes a
regulated public water system
regulated by that Commission
c. DWR
d. Interested parties (see Section
10927)
e. The public
4. GSP entities may form an advisory
committee for the GSP preparation and
implementation.
5. The GSP entities are to encourage
active involvement of diverse social,
cultural and economic elements of the
affected populations.
Timing: On initiating GSP
10728.4 Public Notice of Proposed Adoption, GSP Adoption Pubic Hearing
A groundwater sustainability agency may adopt or amend a groundwater sustainability plan after a public hearing, held at least 90 days after providing notice to a city or county within the area of the proposed plan or amendment. The groundwater sustainability agency shall review and consider comments from any city or county that receives notice pursuant to this section and shall consult with a city or county that requests consultation within 30 days of receipt of the notice. Nothing in this section is intended to
3. GSP must be adopted or amended at
Public Hearing.
4. Prior to Public Hearing for adoption or
amendment of the GSP, the GSP
entities must:
a. Notify cities and/or counties of
geographic area 90 days in
advance.
b. Consider and review comments
953
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
preclude an agency and a city or county from otherwise consulting or commenting regarding the adoption or amendment of a plan. c. Conduct consultation within 30
days of receipt with cities or
counties so requesting
10730 Fees.
(a) A groundwater sustainability agency may impose fees, including, but not limited to, permit fees and fees on
groundwater extraction or other regulated activity, to fund the costs of a groundwater sustainability program, including, but not limited to, preparation, adoption, and amendment of a
groundwater sustainability plan, and investigations, inspections, compliance assistance, enforcement, and program
administration, including a prudent reserve. A groundwater sustainability agency shall not impose a fee pursuant to this subdivision on a de minimis extractor unless the agency has regulated the users pursuant to this part.
(b) (1) Prior to imposing or increasing a fee, a groundwater sustainability agency shall hold at least one public meeting, at which oral or written presentations may be made as part of the meeting.
(2) Notice of the time and place of the meeting shall include a general explanation of the matter to be considered and a statement that the data required by this section is available.
The notice shall be provided by publication pursuant to Section 6066 of the Government Code, by posting notice on the
Internet Web site of the groundwater sustainability agency, and by mail to any interested party who files a written request with the agency for mailed notice of the meeting on new or increased fees. A written request for mailed notices shall be valid for one year from the date that the request is made and may be renewed by making a written request on or before April 1 of each year.
(3) At least 20 days prior to the meeting, the groundwater sustainability agency shall make available to the public data upon which the proposed fee is based.
(c) Any action by a groundwater sustainability agency to impose or increase a fee shall be taken only by ordinance or resolution. (d) (1) As an alternative method for the collection of fees imposed pursuant to this section, a groundwater sustainability agency may adopt a resolution requesting collection of the fees in the same manner as ordinary municipal ad valorem taxes.
(2) A resolution described in paragraph (1) shall be adopted and furnished to the county auditor-controller and board of supervisors on or before August 1 of each year that the alternative collection of the fees is being requested. The resolution shall include a list of parcels and the amount to be collected for each parcel.
(e) The power granted by this section is in addition to any powers a groundwater sustainability agency has under any other law.
Related to GSAs
5. Public meeting required prior to
adoption of, or increase to fees. Oral or
written presentations may be made as
part of the meeting.
6. Public notice shall include:
a. Time and place of meeting
b. General explanation of matter to be
considered
c. Statement of availability for data
required to initiate or amend such
fees
d. Public posting on Agency Website
and provision by mail to interested
parties of supporting data (at least
20 days in advance)
7. Mailing lists for interested parties are
valid for 1 year from date of request and
may be renewed by written request of
the parties on or before April 1 of each
year.
8. Includes procedural requirements per
Government Code, Section 6066.
Timing: Prior to adopting fees.
954
California Government Code
CODE PUBLIC OUTREACH REQUIREMENT
6060
Whenever any law provides that publication of notice shall be made pursuant to a designated section of this article, such notice shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation for the period prescribed, the number of times, and in the manner provided in that section. As used in this article, “notice” includes official advertising, resolutions, orders, or other matter of any nature whatsoever that are required by law to be published in a newspaper of general circulation.
6066
Publication of notice pursuant to this section shall be once a week for two successive weeks. Two publications in a newspaper published once a week or oftener, with at least five days intervening between the respective publication dates not counting such publication dates, are sufficient. The period of notice commences upon the first day of publication and terminates at the end of the fourteenth day, including therein the first day.
4. Must publish notices in a newspaper of
general circulation as prescribed.
5. Publication shall be once a week for
two successive weeks. Two publications
in a newspaper published once a week
or oftener, with at least five days
intervening between the respective
publication dates not counting such
publication dates, are sufficient.
6. The period of notice begins the first day
of publication and terminates at the
end of the fourteenth day, (which
includes the first day.)
Timing: Prior to adopting fees
955
Appendix 2. Communications Governance
Given the relatively large number of stakeholders, a recommendation for coordinated efforts, and the legal requirements for outreach13 some form of communications governance is recommended.
Execution of communications activities can be accomplished by an individual or multiple individuals, and/or include or be solely managed by project consultants. The actual form of the governance is less important than a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of those responsible for ensuring required communication. Also essential is a clear chain of command that ensures the elected representatives of GSAs are able to retain communications leadership and guidance.
A driving consideration for establishing a communications governance structure is the level of effort associated with required activities and the fact that communications are highly time dependent. That means that communications activities should be occurring that may happen outside of regularly scheduled GSA meetings.
In this case delegation with guidance to a communications team is efficient and effective.
Several governance options for consideration are offered below.
Communications Option 1
Communications Option 1 is based on an overall GSP(s) development structure that includes a GSA member based leadership function that is guiding the Technical Consultants. A communications working group which might include staff, consultants and GSA elected officials, or some combination of those roles could be formed to serve as a communications working group that would ultimately report to the larger GSP coordinating body.
Communications Governance Option 1
Communications Option 2
13 See Appendix 1
956
Communications Option 1 is based on an overall GSP(s) development structure that includes a GSA member based subcommittee guiding the Technical Consultants. A communications working group which might include staff, consultants and GSA elected officials, or some combination of those roles could be formed to serve as a communications team that is affiliated with a subcommittee and would ultimately report to the larger GSP coordinating body
Communications Governance Option 2
957
Appendix H. Comments Received
958
4640 SPYRES WAY, SUITE 4 I MODESTO, CA 95356 I PHONE: (209) 576-6355 I FAX: (209) 576-6119 I WWW.CPIF.ORG VIA E-MAIL ([email protected])
December 12, 2019
Members of the San Joaquin River
Exchange Contractors GSP Group
c/o San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors Water Authority
541 H Street
Box 2115
Los Banos, California 93 63 5
Re: SJREC Group GSP Dear Members of the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors GSP Group:
The California Poultry Federation ("CPF") appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft Groundwater Sustainability Plan (the "GSP") for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors ("SJREC") GSP Group. CPF is the trade association for California's diverse and dynamic poultry industry. Our members include growers, hatchers, breeders, and processors that work with chickens, turkeys, ducks, game birds, and squab. Water is essential for all of them- both for nutrition and for maintaining sanitary conditions. CPF therefore supports effective measures to assure reliable water supplies.
In this regard, CPF commends the draft GSP for emphasizing projects to increase recharge and utilize surface waters. Such measures-which are essential for maintaining an economically viable groundwater source for all beneficial users-should be the top priority for each SJREC GSP Member Groundwater Sustainability Agency ("GSA"). We encourage all the Member GSAs to continue identifying and implementing projects that increase water supplies. In addition, we recommend the adoption of incentives such as additional extraction rights to build support for augmentation from private parties.
One other point deserves mention. It is essential that the public have meaningful opportunities to participate in the implementation of the GSP, which means that there must be sufficient time to review drafts, evaluate supporting information, and submit written comments. But it was difficult here to ascertain when the draft GSP became available and when written comments were due. Member GSAs should employ electronic mail to give interested persons timely notice of developments in the Delta-Mendota Subbasin such as document availability and deadlines for participation. And they should utilize one central clearinghouse available through the Internet for disseminating documents and for receiving written comments.
Please contact me if you need any further information about these comments. yours,
Bill Mattos President
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND OFFICERS
TOM BOWER, FOSTER FARMS - CHAIRMAN I MATT JUNKEL, PETALUMA POULTRY - VICE CHAIRMAN
DALTON RASMUSSEN, SQUAB PRODUCERS OF CALIFORNIA - SECRETARY /TREASURER I DAVID RUBENSTEIN , PITMAN FAMILY FARMS
BILL MATTOS, CALIFORNIA POULTRY FEDERATION - PRESIDENT
959
(
\
State of California - Natural Resources Agency
DEP.ARTMENJ OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Central Region
1234 ~ast Shaw Avenue
Fresno, California 9371 0
(559) 243-4005
www.wildlife.ca.gov
December 9, 2019
Via Mail and Electronic Mail
Chris White
Executive Director
GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director
. RECEIVED
DEC 13 2019
S.J.R.E.C.W.A.
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP 541 H Street
Post Office Box 2115
Los Banos, California 93635
Email: [email protected].
Subject: Comments on the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority Groundwater Sustainability Plan
Dear Mr. White:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) Central Region is providing comments on the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors (SJREC) Water Authority Draft Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) prepared by San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). As trustee agency for the State's fish and wildlife resources, the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and the habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of such species (Fish & Game Code§§ 711.7 an_d~~~~~-r. 1802).
Development and implementation of Groundwater Sustainability Plans under SGMA . represents a new era of California groundwater management. The Department has an interest in the sustainable management of groundwater, as many sensitive ecosystems and species depend on groundwater and interconnected surface waters. SGMA and its implementing regulations afford ecosystems and species specific statutory and regulatory consideration, including the following as pertinent to Groundwater Sustainability Plans:
• Groundwater Sustainability Plans shall identify and consider impacts to groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs) pursuant to 23 California Code of Regulations (CCR)§ 354.16(9) and Water Code§ 10727.4(1); • Groundwater Sustainability Agencies shall consider all beneficial uses and users of groundwater, including environmental users of groundwater pursuant to Water Code §10723.2 (e); and Groundwater Sustainability Plans shall identify and Conserving Ca[ifornia 's WiU[ife Since 18 70 .
960
(
. Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
Page2
consider potential effects on all beneficial uses and users of groundwater pursuant to 23 CCR§§ 354.10(a), 354.26(b)(3), 354.28(b)(4), 354.34(b)(2), and 354.34(f)(3);
• Groundwater Sustainability Plans shall establish sustainable management criteria (SMC) that avoid undesirable results within 20 years of the applicable statutory deadline, including depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water pursuant to 23 CCR§ 354.22 et seq. and Water Code§§ 10721 (x)(6) and 10727.2(b) and describe monitoring networks that can identify adverse impacts to beneficial uses of interconnected surface waters pursuant to 23 CCR § 354.34(c)(6)(D); and
• Groundwat_er Sustainability Plans shall account for groundwater extraction for all Water Use Sectors including managed wetlands, managed recharge, and native vegetation pursuant to 23 CCR§§ 351 (al) and 354.18(b)(3).
Accordingly, the Department values SGMA groundwater planning that carefully considers and protects groundwater dependent ecosystems and fish and wildlife beneficial uses and users of groundwater and interconnected surface waters.
COMMENT OVERVIEW
The Department supports ecosystem preservation in compliance with SGMA and its implementing regulations based on Department expertise and best available information and science.
The Department recommends that the GSP provide additional information and analysis that considers all environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater in its sustainability management criteria and better characterize or consider surface watergroundwater connectivity. In addition, the Department is providing additional comments and recommendations below.
GSP COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Comment #1 Plan Area. Section 2.0 Plan Area and Basin Setting. Subsection
2.1.1 Description of Jurisdictional Areas and Other Features, Subsection 2.1.4 Additional GSP Elements (pages 27 to 28 and Figure 3).
This section mentions Department-owned lands within the Delta-Mendota Subbasin. There are four small parcels on Los Banos Wildlife Area and two additional parcels on Mud Slough Unit of the Los Banos Wildlife Area that are within the GSP area. None of these parcels have any wells present. 961
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
( Page 3
a. Issue: Pursuant to 23 C,CR § 354.8 ·(a)(3), GSPs are to identify "Jurisdictional boundaries of federal or state land (including the identity of the agency with jurisdiction over that land)." The GSP states, "the California Department of Fish and Wildlife own[s] and operate[s] lands [including] California Protected Areas and Wildlife Areas" (page 27), but the GSP does not specify which la_nds fall within the GSP area. b. Recommendation: The Department recommends identifying the specific Department-owned and -managed lands in the GSP narrative as identified above. The Department further recommends the label in the Explanation Key be changed from "State Wildlife Areas" to "California Department of Fish and Wildlife".
2. Comment #2 Environmental Beneficial Users of Groundwater. Section 2.1 Description of the Plan Area. Subsection 2.1.5 Notice and Communication (page 49).
The GSP lists environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin but does not describe these users or their relationship to groundwater. a. Issue: Pursuant to 23 CCR § 354.1 0(a), GSPs are to include in the Notice and Communication Section a "description of the beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the basin." The GSP identifiel? environmental uses among beneficial users and specifies GDEs and managed duck clubs as types of beneficial users (pages 46 and 49) but does not describe how environmental uses and users benefit from or rely on groundwater.
b. Recommendations: The Department recommends elaborating on environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the Notice and Communication Section by identifying specific beneficial users (see Appendix B, Table CC-7, page 8133) and including a detailed description on how these users, such as GDEs and the species therein, may rely on groundwater and may be impacted by SMC pursuant to 23 CCR§§ 354.10(a), 354.26(b)(3), 354.28(b)(4), 354.34(b)(2), and 354.34(f)(3). The Critical Species LookBook (TNC 2019) is a resource to help identify threatened and endangered species in any basin subject to SGMAand to help understand species relationships to groundwater. The LookBook also offers narrative ·on species and habitat groundwater dependence that can be a model for describing environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the GSP. ·
3. Comment #3 Subsidence. Chapter 2.0 Plan Area and Basin Setting. Section
2.2 Basin Setting (starting page-52). Proposed SMC for subsidence within the Plan area do not correspond with current or proposed groundwater extraction practices for the lower confined aquifer.
962
(
Chris White; GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
Page4
a. Issues:
i. CDWR has classified the Delta-Mendota Subbasin as a 'Critically Overdrafted' subbasin due to subsidence issues. The GSP acknowledges that land subsidence is a current issue within the .Delta-Mendota Subbasin and that historically, up to 16 feet of subsidence has been reported in areas within its southern portion. While the GSP acknowledges the presence of subsidence within the basin, it also repeatedly indicates that the causes of subsidence originate outside of the GSP area due to excessive groundwater extraction practices within the lower confined aquifer system by neighboring entities (page 104). The GSP indicates that most of the wells within the GSP area are completed above the Corcoran Clay within the unconfined aquifer; however, the GSP also notes that there are some production wells within the GSP area completed below the Corcoran Clay where a majority of subsidence within the San Joaquin Valley occurs. The GSP proposes SMC for the subsidence sustainability indicator, including a Measurable Objective for inelastic land subsidence of less than 0.005 ft/year and a Minimum Threshold of "that which doesn't reduce [SJREC's] conveyance capacity without appropriate mitigation" (page 104). In other words, the GSP has no tolerance for subsidence without mitigation.
ii. Based on the current and historic data sets for subsidence (NASA JPL lnSAR and SJV CDWR), the SJREC GSA is experiencing subsidence due to groundwater extraction practices. The GSP acknowledges subsidence in the GSP a·rea, but indicates a majority of land subsidence is attributed to the extraction of water in aquifers beneath the Corcoran Clay outside of plan area; however, the SJREC has wells completed in the lower confined aquifer and extracts water from the lower confined aquifer. The GSP approach to manage subsidence moving forward is to limit groundwater extractions to 0.25 acre-foot (AF)/acre (page· 97). This proposed approach is more than double the amount of the maximum extraction (0.10 AF/acre) observed from historic, current, and projected water budgets. Presumably, the potential doubling of water extractions from the lower aquifer would compound existing over-draft conditions and contribute to continued subsidence. The GSP indicates that overdraft in the lower aquifer has the potential to instantly trigger inelastic land subsidence (page 97). The lower aquifer sustainable yield must be managed annually and, more importantly, site-specifically to ensure significant and/or unreasonable land subsidence does not result from the overdraft. As previously stated, the Delta-Mendota Subbasin is characterized by CDWR as 'Critically Overdrafted,' meaning "continuation of present water management practices [in the basin] would probably result in significant adverse overdraft-related environmental, social, or economic impacts" (CDWR "Critically Overdrafted"). Increasing the 963
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
( Page 5
amount of allowable water to be extracted from the lower aquifer does not promote sustainability nor demonstrate a likelihood of achieving Measurable Objectives, and instead reflects the conditions that merited the subbasin's Critically Overdrafted status.
iii. The GSP repeatedly indicates that the upper aquifer is stable and that subsidence within the upper aquifer is unlikely to occur. Within the Appendix I (KSDA Report), the report provides a description of the geologic materials encountered at depth and provides a number of geologic cross sections depicting the hydrogeologic framework beneath the GSP area. Within these cross sections, the GSP identifies a number of confining layers (A and C clay layers) above the Corcoran Clay. The GSP describes these clays as acting as semi-confining layers; and in one location (Management Area G), the GSP indicates that based on pumping test data, the aquifer is more than likely confined. These clay layers act as confining beds and restrict the movement of groundwater.
The lowering of groundwater levels within the upper aquifer provides the potential to create groundwater-level-induced stresses which can promote subsidence. Nearby records for an Extensometer station (Yearout) located in the Farmers Water District (east of the SJ REC) indicates total compaction between the years of 1999 to 2017 at approximately 0.30 ft.
Additional historic extensometer data for the Yearout Extensometer station is provided by the USGS online database
(https:llwww.usgs.gov/centerslca-water-lslscience/extensometers-andcompaction?qt-science_ center_ objects=O#qt-science_ center_ objects).
These records indicate that between the years of 1966 and 1983, approximately 0.30 feet of compaction in the upper aquifer was recorded.
When pumping induces groundwater level drop below critical head, preconsolidation stresses are surpassed and compaction of fine-grained materials occur, resulting in subsidence. The GSP describes groundwater levels within the upper aquifer currently as being stable; however, compaction within the upper aquifer is a realistic potential for the GSP area and should be considered in future planning.
'
b. Recommendation: The Department recommends that the SJREC re-evaluate its threshold for allowable groundwater extraction practices within the lower confined aquifer to mitigate subsidence-related undesirable results.
4. Comment #4. Interconnected Surface Waters. Section 2.2 Basin Setting.
Subsection 2.2.2 Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions (page 53).
The GSP does not explicitly identify interconnected surface waters within the GSP area or estimate depletions from those systems.
964
...
(
Chris ,White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
a. Issue: Pursuant to 23 CCR § 354.16(f), a GSP shall identify "interconnected surface water systems within the basin and an estimate of the quantity and timing of depletions of those systems" within the Groundwater Sustainability Plan's 'Groundwater Conditions' section. The GSP does not explicitly meet this requirement, despite the likely presence of interconnected surface water reaches along the San Joaquin River. The GSP cites Figure 52 in Appendix I as showing potential locations of interconnectivity and suggests that the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies will continue to monitor groundwater levels near the San Joaquin River and expand the understanding of shallow groundwater (page 106). However, the GSP does not identify interconnected surface waters as a data gap (page 112), despite its intent to expand understanding of shallow groundwater and despite the Delta-Mendota Subbasin Common Chapter demonstrating significant unknowns for San Joaquin River Interconnectivity (Appendix B, page B128-129). Finally, SMC for interconnected surface waters are non-specific for each management area, and instead refer to vague, unquantified narrative metrics that do not meet GSP regulatory requirements (see Comment #6).
b. Recommendations: The Department recommends that the GSA identify interconnected surface waters in the Plan area in Section 2.2.2; characterize the relationship between groundwater and interconnected surface waters; identify the estimated quantity and timing of streamflow depletions in the subbasin attributable to groundwater pumping; and develop quantifiable SMC for interconnected surface waters accordingly. If this information is not available, the Department recommends identifying an expeditious and . specific path to expanding the shallow groundwater monitoring system to gather the necessary data (see Comment #7).
5. Comment #5 Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems. Section 2.0 Plan Area and Basin Setting. Subsection 2.1.4 Additional GSP Elements (page 46, Figures 8 and 9).
The GOE identification section, pursuant to 23 CCR§ 354.16 (g), is based on limited information to identify ecosystems that may depend on groundwater. a. Issue: The GSP does not provide a narrative on the methodology used to screen.and remove potential GDEs from the Natural Communities Commonly Associated with Groundwater (NCCAG) dataset, even though Figures 8 and 9 suggest that potential NCCAG GDEs were removed from the dataset for specific reasons (pages 46-48). Also, the GOE maps provided in Figures 8 and 9 are difficult to decipher (pages 46-48). Presumably the GDEs included in the GSP correspond with Appendix B GOE maps on pages B130-B132, which identify basin-wide GDEs. If this is the case, the GOE maps provided in the GSP reflect an initial assessment of GDEs that may be further refined (Appendix B page B142), as none of the GDEs have been field verified (page 965
Chris ,White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
( Page 7 \
(
46). The GDE section also includes a list of potential groundwater dependent vegetation, citing that none of the species are threatened or endangered, but it does not identify species that may rely on this groundwater dependent vegetation (see Appendix B starting page B133 for a list of potential· Freshwater Species). Finally, the GSP offers that in the event the GSA notices impacts to GDEs, "an in-depth review to mitigate those impacts will be initiated" (page 46). The GSP, however, offers no details as to how impacts to GDEs will be 'noticed,' nor what those impacts might look like. b. Recommendations: The Department recommends that the GSP consider the following for information· gathering related to GD Es:
i. The Department recommends refining the identification of GDEs through field verification, improving readability of GOE maps, identifying groundwater dependent fish and wildlife species in the basin, and identifying and implementing appropriate monitoring approaches to track environmental beneficial users over time capable of capturing early signs of adverse impacts to GDEs (e.g., stressed phreatophyte vegetation or increased surface water temperatures [see Comm~nt #2]) to encourage actionable responses to observed impacts to GDEs.
ii. Additionally, the Department recognizes that NCCAG (Klausmeyer et al. 2018) provided by California Department of Water Resources (CDWR) i~ a good starting reference for GDEs; however, the Depa'rtment recommends the GSP include additional resources for evaluating GDE locations. The Department recommends consulting other references, including but not limited to the following tools and other resources: the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Vegetation 1 Classification and Mapping Program (VegCAMP) (CDFW 2019A); the CDFW California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (2019B); the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2019A); the CNPS California Protected Areas Database (CNPS 2019B); the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (2018); the USFWS online mapping tool for listed species critical habitat (2019); the U.S. Forest Service CALVEG ecological grouping classification and assessment system (2019); and other publications by Klausmeyer et al. (2019), Rohde et al. (2018), The Nature Conservancy (TNC) (2014, 2019), Naumburg et al. (2005), and Witham et aL (2014).
6. Comment #6 Sustainable Management Criteria. Section 3.0 Sustainable Manpgement Criteria (starting on page 96).
SMC demonstrate limited consideration of undesirable results for environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater, interconnected surface water SMC fail 966
Chris.White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
( Page 8 ·
(
\
to meet GSP regulatory standards, and SMC do not reflect a 'Critically Overdrafted' Basin status.·
a. Issues:
i. SMC do not discuss potential impacts to environmental beneficial users of groundwater and may risk significant and unreasonable impacts to GDEs.
There are no analyses on effects of undesirable results to environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater pursuant to 23 CCR § 354.26(b)(3). For example, for chronic lowering of groundwater levels, the proposed measurable objective is to "manage to avoid shallow groundwater while maintaining groundwater levels above the minimum threshold" (page 97). While it is not clear what 'avoid shallow groundwater' means, in theory minimizing shallow groundwater depletions will benefit environmental beneficial uses and users of groundwater.
However, the GSP does not provide this explanation via an analysis of effects of Undesirable Results (UR) on beneficial uses nor does the GSP offer an actionable basis for how SMC will be designed and implemented to mitigate these potential adverse effects.
ii. Interconnected Surface Water (ISW) SMC are confusing and inconsistent.
In the Executive Summary, the GSP does not propose to develop Measurable Objectives (MO) and Interim Milestones for ISW (page v), but later suggests that MO for ISW will equate to Minimum Thresholds (MT) (page 98) and depletions of surface water attributable to groundwater pumping will be managed through well siting and screening requirements for wells in close proximity to the San Joaquin River (page 106). ISW SMC for each management area (starting page 131) either dismiss the likelihood of interconnected surface waters and do not provide SMC for ISW, or; cite plans to work with SJREC to sustainably manage ISWand refer to Subsections 3.2.6, 3.3.6, and 3.4.6 for more details. These sections identify ISW MOs, MTs, and URs) respectively. However, each section fails to provide quantified, specific, and justified SMC that meet SMC criteria pursuant to 23 CCR§§ 354.20(b)(2), ,354.26(b), 354.28(b), 354.28(c)(6), 354.30(a-c):
1. [Subsection 3.2.6] ISW MOs are set as the same as MTs; interim milestones are to "collect and analyze additional data to ensure Undesirable Result for depleted surface water does not occur" (page 98). Effectively, no quantifiable interim milestones are provided and there is no room for operational flexibility when MOs equal MTs.
2. [Subsection 3.3.6] ISW MTs are described as "the rate or volume of surface water depletions caused by groundwater use that has adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water and may lead to 967
(
(
Chris .White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
undesirable results" (page 106). The GSP also says the MTs , established shall support the location, quantity, and timing of potential depletions. Despite this narrative on MTs, no quantified MTs,are established for ISW in the GSP area. Instead, the GSP claims that a management technique for the siting and screening of new wells near the San Joaquin River will ensure that significant and unreasonable depletions of ISW are avoided, and this management technique will avoid impacts to GDEs and other beneficial uses and users of surface water (page 106). No hydrogeologic analysis is provided to substantiate this statement, and this management technique offers nothing to manage existing wells, nor does the management technique appear in the Project and Management Actions section (starting page 113). Finally, the GSP vaguely states, "Depletions of interconnected surface water will be monitored and managed consistent with the other sustainability indicators and the more restrictive management will be implemented to ensure this plan area is absent of any undesirable . results" (page 106). There is no evident consistency between the monitoring and management of other sustainability indicators and ISW; and, because no specific MTs are established for ISW, resultantly, there are also no quantified MOs (see Comment #6.ii.1 above).
3. [Subsection 3.4.6] ISW URs are described as "significant and unreasonable depletion of interconnected surface water [occurring] when groundwater extraction from the SJREC GSP Group decreases streamflow to a significant and unreasonable level for beneficial users in a stretch of the San Joaquin River that was historically losing (seeping from the river)" (page 109). This UR description does not identify specific criteria based on a quantitative description of MT exceedances that cause significant and unreasonable effects [23 CCR § 354.26(b)(2)], nor does the description identify potential effects on beneficial. uses and users in the basin [23 CCR§ 354.26(b)(3)], in part because no quantified MTs are established. lnexpljcably, this UR is also only applied to 'historically losing' streams, even though both losing streams and gaining streams can be interconnected with groundwater. Not only does the GSP not thoroughly identify ISW and depletions (see Comment #4), it also does not establish quantifiable ISW SMC that meet GSP regulatory standards and that reflect a firm gr~sp on local surface water-groundwater interactions.
iii. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin is designated as 'Critically Overdrafted,' but in contrast to its designated Critically Overdrafted status, the GSP generally touts a sustainable groundwater management legacy and occasionally suggests that local adverse impacts are attributable to neighboring Groundwater Sustainability Agencies and basins (pages iv, v, 6, 40, 46, and 97). The GSP establishes MTs that are a 25% increase in 968
(
(
C
Chris.White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
depth to water beyond pre-established trigger elevations that represent three-year water level trends extrapolated to an additional drought year beyond the observed historic low (page 100, Table 39). Similar to ISW SMC, no interim milestones are provided for groundwater levels (page 100). No figures are provided to comml!nicate clearly the relationship between historic groundwater elevation, triggers, and MTs for representative monitoring wells. Based on the narrative and table provided, these groundwater level MT suggest that groundwater elevations at representative wells can continue to decrease for the next 20 years, dropping further from historically low drought groundwater elevations, without witnessing undesirable results. However, based on subsidence alone, it appears that undesirable results are already occurring; and, given the semi- and unconfined nature of the upper aquifer, adverse impacts to shallow groundwater supporting GDEs are feasible under declining groundwater conditions. Therefore, the GSP's MTs that allow for continued groundwater table decline, mirroring the historical trends that led to the subbasin's Critically Overdrafted status, are unlikely to protect against URs. Conceptually, there is a disconnect between the subbasin's 'Critically Overdrafted' designation and · sustainable management criteria the allow for continued groundwater level decline.
b. Recommendations: The Department recommends that the GSA reevaluate SMC with the following suggestions:
i. Clarify how species and habitat groundwater needs were considered in the identificatior;, of SMC and identify specific potential adverse impacts on environmental beneficial users of groundwater and causal relationships with groundwater pumping (e.g., terrestrial GOE stress/loss, increased instream temperatures, etc.).
ii. Identify ISW and establish quantifiable ISW SMC (s~e Comment #6). iii. Revise SMC to reflect a 'Critically Overdrafted' subbasin designation by seeking to improve current groundwater conditions rather than allowing for continued aquifer depletions over the next two decades. Provide context for SMC using figures that show historic water elevations in comparison to MTs and MOs.
7. Comment #7 Monitoring Network. Section 3.5 Monitoring Network (Figure 22).
The number and distribution of shallow groundwater monitoring wells in the GSP area and along the San Joaquin River are insufficient for analysis of shallow groundwater trends and groundwater-surface water interconnectivity. 969
(
(
l
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
a. Issue: Existing shallow groundwater monitoring wells are insufficient to characterize shallow groundwater and surface water-groundwater interactions along the course of the main waterway (i.e., San Joaquin River) in the GSP area or to monitor impacts to environmental beneficial uses and users of shallow groundwater and interconnected surface waters [23 CCR § 354.34(2)]. The GSP provides a table in Appendix B: Estimated Quantity of Gains/Depletions for Interconnected Stream Reaches, San Joaquin River (Table CC-6); this table indicates the presence of data gaps and the need for additional data to clarify the interconnected surface water relationship within the GSP area along the San Joaquin River. Additionally, few representative monitoring wells capture shallow groundwater trends and few are located along interconnected surface waters throughout the GSP area. Therefore, there is limited data on shallow groundwater level trends as they relate to environmental users of groundwater. These data are critical to understanding groundwater management impacts on fish and wildlife beneficial uses and users of groundwater, including GDEs and interconnected surface water habitats, which are impacted disproportionately by shallow groundwater trends.
b. Recommendation: The Department recommends installing additional shallow groundwater monitoring wells near potential GDEs in the basin and along interconnected surface waters, potentially pairing multiple-completion wells with streamflow gages for improved unde·rstanding of surface watergroundwater interconnectivity.
OTHER COMMENTS: Implementation of Future Project Actions Related to SGMA SGMA exempts the preparation and adoption of GSPs from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (WC §10728.6); however, SGMA specifically states that implementation of project actions taken pursuant to SGMA are not exempt from CEQA (WC §10728.6). The Departmen.t is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711. 7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines§ 15386, subd. (a)). The Department, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id.,§ 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, the Department is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.
The Department is also a Responsible Agency under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines,§ 15381), and the Department expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code for implementation of projects related to the GSP that are also subject to CEQA. These 970
·(
(
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
projects may be subject to the Department's lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority (i.e., Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.). Notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code § 1602 is warranted if a project will (a) substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of any river, stream, or lake; (b) substantially change or use any material from the bed, bank, or channel of any river, stream, or lake (including the removal of riparian vegetation); and/or (c) deposit debris, waste or other materials that could pass into any river, stream, or lake. Likewise, to the extent that implementation of any project may result in "take" as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), related authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code will be required. The Department is required to comply with CEQA in its issuance of a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement or an Incidental Take Permit. ·
The implementation of SGMA does not alter or determine surface or groundwater rights (WC §10720.5). It is the intent of SGMA to respect overlying and other proprietary rights to groundwater, consistent with section 1200 of the Water Code-(Section 1(b)(4) of AB 1739). The capture of unallocated stream flows to artificially recharge groundwater aquifers are subject to appropriation and approval by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) pursuant to Water Code§ 1200 et seq. The Department, as Trustee Agency, is consulted by SWRCB during the water rights process to provide terms and conditions designed to protect fish and wildlife prior to appropriation of the State's water resources. Certain fish and wildlif~ are reliant upon aquatic and riparian ecosystems, which in turn are reliant upon adequate flows of water. The Department therefore has a material interest in assuring that adequate water flows within streams for the protection, maintenance and proper stewardship of those resources. The Department provides, as available, biological expertise to review and comment on environmental documents and impacts arising from project activities.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the GSP needs to address all SGMA statutes and regulations, a·nd the Department recommends that the GSA seriously consider fish and wildlife beneficial uses and interconnected surface waters. The Department recommends that the GSA consider the above comments before the GSP is submitted to CDWR. The Department appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the GSP. If you have any further questions, please contact Dr. Andrew Gordus, staff toxicologist, at [email protected] or (559) 243-4014 extension 239.
Sincerely,
(~::fa~~
Julie A. Vance
( Regional Manager, Central Reg_ion
971
(
(
Chris White, GSA Contact ·
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
Enclosures (Literature Cited)
ec: San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority Joann White
[email protected]
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Joshua Grover, Branch Chief
. Water Branch
[email protected]
Robert Holmes, Environmental Program Manager
Statewide Water Planning Program
Robert. [email protected]
Briana Seapy, Statewide SGMA Coordinator
Groundwater Program
[email protected]
Annee Ferranti, Environmental Program Manager
Central Region
[email protected]
Andy Gordus, Staff Toxicologist
Central Region
[email protected]
Annette Tenneboe, Senior Environmental Scientist Specialist Central Region
[email protected]
John Battistoni, Senior Environmental Scientist Supervisor Central Region
[email protected]
Sean Allen, Senior Fish and Wildlife Habitat Supervisor Central Region ·
[email protected]
Steve Miyamoto, Wildlife Habitat Supervisor II
Central Region
[email protected]
972
Chris White, GSA Contact
.San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
Steve Brueggemann, Senior Fish and Wildlife Habitat Supervisor Central Region
[email protected]
California Department of Water Resources
Craig Altare, Supervising Engineering Geologist
Sustainable Groundwater Management Program
[email protected]
Chris Olvera, SGMA Point of Contact
South Central Region Office
[email protected]
State Water Resources Control Board
Natalie Stork, Chief
Groundwater Management Program
[email protected]
973
(
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
Literature Cited
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2019A. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program. Available from https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/DataNegCAMP CDFW. 2019B. CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database). Rarefind Version 5.
Internet Application. CDFW, Sacramento, California.
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data
California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). 2019. Critically Overdrafted Basins. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Bulletin118/Critically-Overdrafted-Basins California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2019A. A Manual of California Vegetation, online edition. http://www.cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/
CNPS. 2019B. California Protected Areas Database. (CPAD). Sacramento, California. https://www.calands.org/cpad/
Fendorf, S., A. Sherris, A. Hamann, and A. Wells. 2019. Groundwater quality in the ' Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA): Scientific Factsheet on Arsenic, Uranium, and Chromium.". Community Water Center. Sacramento, California. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/communitywatercenter/pages/293/attachment s/original/1560371896/CWC FS GrndwtrQual 06.03.19a.pdf?1560371896 Klausmeyer, K., J. Howard, T. Keeler'"Wolf, K. Davis-Fadtke, R. Hull, and A. Lyoris. 201.8. Mapping indicators of groundwater dependent ecosystems in California. https://data.ca.gov/dataset/natural-communities-commonly-associated-groundwater Klausmeyer, K. R., T. Biswas, M. M. Rohde, F. Schuetzenmeister, N. Rindlaub, and J. K. Howard. 2019. GOE pulse: taking the pulse of groundwater dependent ecosystems with satellite data. San Francisco, California. Available at https://gde.codefornature.org. (Same as:TNC. 2019. GOE pulse. Interactive map.
Website. https://gde.codefornature.org/#/home
Naumburg E, R. Mata-Gonzalez, R.G. Hunter, T. Mclendon, and D. Martin. 2005.
Phreatophy1;ic vegetation and groundwater fluctuations: a review of current research and application of ecosystem response modeling with an emphasis on great basin vegetation. Environmental Management. 35(6):726-40
Rohde, M. M., S. Matsumoto, J. Howard, S. Liu, L. Riege, and E. J. Remson. 2018.
Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: Guidance for Preparing Groundwater Sustainability Plans. The l _ Nature Conservancy, San Francisco, California.
974
(
Chris White, GSA Contact
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority GSP December 9, 2019
The Nature Conservancy (TNC). 2014. Groundwater and stream interaction in California's Central Valley: insights for sustainable groundwater management.
Prepared by RMC Water and Environment.
TNC. 2019. The Critical Species LookBook. Groundwater Resource Hub. https://groundwaterresourcehub.org/sgma-tools/the-critical-species-lookbook/ U.S. Forest Service. 2019. Landsat-based classification and assessment of visible ecological groupings, USDA Forest Service (March 2007). https ://www. fs. fed. us/r5/rsl/projects/classification/system .shtm I U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. National Wetlands Inventory website.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/
USFWS. 2019. Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report:
online mapping tool.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe 09893cf75b8dbfb 77
Witham, C. W., R. F. Holland, and J.E. Vollmar. 2014. Changes in the Distribution of .
Great Valley Vernal Pool Habitats from 2005 to 2012. Prepared for CVPIA Habitat Restoration Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento, CA. USFWS Grant Agreement No.F11AP00169 with Vollmar Natural Lands Consulting. October 14. 975
Appendix I. Hydrogeologic Conceptual
Model and Groundwater Conditions for
the San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors Service Area GSP
976
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND GROUNDWATER
CONDITIONS FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE
CONTRACTORS SERVICE AREA GSP
prepared for
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA
Los Banos, California
by
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates
Groundwater Quality Consultants
Fresno, California
June 2019
977
KENNETH D. SCHMIDT AND ASSOCIATES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY CONSULTANTS
600 WEST SHAW AVE., SUITE 250
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93704
TELEPHONE (559) 224-4412
June 14, 2019
Mr. Chris White, Executive Director
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA
P. o. Box 2115
Los Banos, CA 93635
Re: Service Area GSP
Dear Chris:
Submitted herewith is our report on groundwater conditions in the SJREC Service Area GSP. We appreciate the cooperation of SJREC and CCID in providing data for this report.
Sincerely Yours,
-//~/;d ~ ' J,J.i... . t L-v,-f'L'\J
Kenne D. Schmidt
Geologist No. 1578
Certified Hydrogeologist 176
978
Mr. Chris White, Executive Director
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA
P. 0. Box 2115
Los Banos, CA 93635
Re: Service Area GSP
Dear Chris:
June 14, 2019
Submitted herewith is our report on groundwater conditions in the SJREC Service Area GSP. We appreciate the cooperation of SJREC and CCID in providing data for this report.
Sincerely Yours,
Kenneth D. Schmidt
Geologist No. 1578
Certified Hydrogeologist 176
979
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
INTRODUCTION
SURFICIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN
Topography
Surficial Geology
Topsoils
Surface Water Bodies
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Regional Geologic and Structural Setting
Lateral Basin Boundaries
Definable Bottom of the Basin
Sub-area A
Sub-area B
Sub-area C
Sub-area D
Sub-area E
Sub-area F
Sub-area G
Sub-area H
Sub-area I
Sub-area J
Sub-area K
Formation Names
Confining Beds
Subsurface Geologic Cross Sections
Regional
DMC Pumping Area
Mendota Pool Area
Sack Dam-Red Top Area
GROUNDWATER USE AND WELL DATA
Primary Uses of Each Aquifer
Depths of Water Supply Wells
WATER LEVELS
i
iv
V
1 1
1 3
5 8
10 10
11 11
13 13
13 13
14 14
14 14
14 15
15 15
16 20
23 31
34 38
48 48
48 50
Continued:
980
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued:
Water-Level Elevations and Direction
of Groundwater Flow
Above the A-Clay Near Mendota
Upper Aquifer
Lower Aquifer
Water-Level Trends
Sub-Area A
Sub-Area B
Sub-Area C
Sub-Areas D & E
Sub-Areas F, I, & K
Sub-Area G
Sub-Area H
Sub-Area J
Vertical Head Differences
SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Aquifer Tests for Prior to 1996
Results of 1996-97 Aquifer Tests
Twenty-four Hour Tests
Leaky Aquifer Test
Specific Yields
CHANGES IN GROUNDWATER IN STORAGE
LAND SURFACE SUBSIDENCE
Highway 152 Transect
Sack Dam-Red Top Area
ii
50 50
52 54
58 61
62 64
68 69
72 74
76 80
81 83
83 85
90 90
94 96
97 100
107
107
Continued:
981
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Upper Aquifer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Continued:
Electrical Conductivity
Time Trends
Boron
Lower Aquifer
Groundwater Quality Degradation
Sustainable Management Criteria for Degraded
Groundwater Quality
INTERCONNECTED SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS
IN THE SJREC GSP
KNOWN GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SITES
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A UPDATED WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS
iii
Page
112
115
116
124
125
126
127
129
131
137
137
982
No.
1 2
3 4
LIST OF TABLES
Title
Specific Capacities
Results of Aquifer Tests Prior to 1996
Results of 1996-97 Aquifer Tests
Specific Yields for Upper Aquifer in Management
Subareas of SJREC GSA
iv
Page
87 89
92 98
983
No.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Title
Topographic Map of SJREC GSP Group
Surficial Geologic Map
Topsoils
Surface Water Bodies
Definable Bottom of Basin
Extent and Depth to Top of A-Clay near Mendota
Depth to Top of Corcoran Clay
Thickness of the Corcoran Clay
Location of Subsurface Geologic Cross Sections
Regional Subsurface Geologic Cross Section A-A'
Regional Subsurface Geologic Cross Section B-B'
Regional Subsurface Geologic Cross Section C-C'
Regional Subsurface Geologic Cross Section D-D'
Regional Subsurface Geologic Cross Section E-E'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section F-F'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section G-G'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section H-H'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section I-I'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section J-J'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section K-K'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section L-L'
V
Page
2 4
7 9
12 17
19 21
22 24
26 27
29 30
32 33
35 37
40 42
44 Continued:
984
No.
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
(Continued: )
Title
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section M-M'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section N-N'
Local Subsurface Geologic Cross Section 0-0'
Water-Level Elevations and Direction of Groundwater
Flow Above the A-Clay (December 2012-January 2013)
Water-Level Elevations and Direction of Groundwater
Flow for Upper Aquifer (Spring 2015)
Water-Level Elevations and Direction of Groundwater
Flow for Lower Aquifer (Spring 2015)
Locations of Wells with Long-Term Water-Level
Hydrographs
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area A
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area B
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area C
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area D
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area E
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area F, I, and K
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area G
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area H
vi
Page
45 47
49 51
53 57
59 63
65 67
70 71
73 75
77 Continued:
985
No.
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
(Continued:)
Title
Representative Water-Level Hydrograph for Upper
Aquifer in Sub-Area J
Potential Groundwater Recharge Areas
Potential Groundwater Discharge Areas
Distribution of Specific Capacities (2012)
Changes in Groundwater Storage
Land Subsidence Monitoring Locations
Benchmark Elevations Along Outside Canal (1972-96)
Rates of Compaction and Water-Level Changes for
Russell Avenue Recorder
Land Subsidence Along Delta-Mendota Canal (2014-16)
46 Historical Land Subsidence Along Highway 152
Transect
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 Land Subsidence in Red Top-El Nido Area (2008-10)
Changes in Ground Surface Elevations (feet) for
12/13-12/17
Electrical Conductivities for Wells Tapping the
Upper Aquifer in 1990's
Electrical Conductivities for Wells Tapping the
Upper Aquifer in 2012
Electrical Conductivity of Water from Wells Tapping
Upper Aquifer in Firebaugh Area
Locations of Interconnected Groundwater and Surface
Water
Known Groundwater Contamination Sites
vii
79 82
84 86
101
103
104
106
108
109
110
113
117
122
123
136
138
986
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL AND GROUNDWATER
CONDITIONS FOR THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE
CONTRACTORS SERVICE AREA GSP
INTRODUCTION
This report is intended to satisfy Sections 354.14 (Hydrologic Conceptual Model) and Section 354.16 (Groundwater Conditions) of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors (SJREC) Water Authority service area. The service area has previously been divided into ten management sub-areas.
Management Sub-areas A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and K are in the Central California Irrigation District (CCID) . These sub-areas extend from north to south fran near Crows Landing to :Mendota . Sub-area I is the Firebaugh Canal Water District, Sub-area H is the San Luis Canal Co. service area, and Sub-area J is the Columbia Canal Co. service area. Also covered by this report are a number of white areas in :Merced County, Madera County, and Fresno County that generally adjoin the SJREC'WA service area.
SURFICIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIN
Topography
Figure 1 shows topographic conditions in the basin. Overall, the land west of the San Joaquin River generally slopes to the northeast towards the San Joaquin River. The land in the Columbia Canal Co. service area slopes to the southwest, also toward the river.
Major streams that pass through the area are the San Joaquin River, Los Banos Creek, San Luis Creek, and Orestimba Creek.
987
K
J
I
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
A
I
J Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los Banos
Merced
Winton Chowchilla
Chowchilla
120 160
150
150
60 60 60
60 60
80 110
80 180
220
160
80 200
50 120
120
80 160
80 160
180
100
150
100
100
70 100 100
80 130
160
80 80
90 120
240
120
240
240
240
320
240
180
140
120
160
100
100
180
110
160
130
180
190
50 50
120
130
160
140
120
180
60 50
120
320
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 1 - TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF SJREC GSP GROUP
"A
"E
"D
"C
"B
"
G
"J
"I
"I
"
H
"F
"K
EXPLANATION:
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Monitoring Zones
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
Main Surface Water Point of Delivery
2 988
Land surface elevations range from about 160 to 250 feet above mean sea level near the west edge of Sub-areas Band C to about 55 feet above mean sea level near the San Joaquin River and the north end of Sub-area A.
Surficial Geology
Hotchkiss and Balding (1971, Plate 1) mapped the surficial geology of the Tracy-Dos Palos Area, which includes the north part of the SJREC service area. Figure 2 shows the part of their map that covers lands in the service area. Much of the surficial deposits were mapped as flood basin deposits. These are unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and gravel deposits on the floodplain of the San Joaquin River. Alluvial deposits are present along the southwest edge of the area, primarily along the Orestimba Creek, San Luis Creek, Los Banos Creek, and Ortigalita Creek alluvial fans. These are unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and gravel.
Mitten, LeBlanc, and Bertoldi (1970) mapped the geomorphic features of the Madera area, which includes Sub-area J. Surficial materials in most of this sub-area (the Columbia Canal Co. service area) were mapped as flood basin deposits. However, in the east part of the area the surficial deposits were mapped as the younger alluvium.
3 989
Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Ma
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
a
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
OAQUIN
IVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUT
FORK LO
C
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10 9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16
17 15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27 28 29
8 K
J
I
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
A
I
Firebaugh J
Mendota
Newman
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 2 - SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAP
EXPLANATION:
Pleistocene nonmarine
Great Valley stream channel deposits
Great Valley fan deposits
Great Valley basin deposits
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qb
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qf
Qsc
QC
QC
QC
QC
Qsc
4 990
Topsoils
Harradine, et al (1956) mapped topsoils in the Mendota area, which extends southeasterly from the Merced County-Madera County line to south of Tranquillity. Soils in the northwest part (Red Top area) were mapped as "Soils of the Valley Basin". These include the Merced, Temple, Rossi, and Traver soils series. The Merced, Tempe, and Rossi soils are fine textured and poorly drained, whereas the Traver soils are coarse textured. Soils farther to the southwest, including near Dos Palos, west of Firebaugh, and west of Mendota were mapped as "Soils of the Valley Basin". These include the Williams, Oxalis, Lethen, and Levis soil series. These soils are fine-textured with moderate to strong amounts of alkali and usually have high amounts of gypsum.
Most of the rest of the topsoils, except for alluvial fans of the major westside streams, were classified as "Soils of the Recent Alluvial Fans and River Flood Plains". These include Panoche, Panhill, and Columbia Soils. The Panoche and Panhill soils have a wide range of texture and calcareous profiles. The Columbia soils occupy the recent floodplain along or near the San Joaquin River and are more permeable than the other two soils.
Ulrich and Stromberg (1962) provided a soil survey for the Madera Area, which includes Sub-area J. Topsoils of the Traver-Chino Association are predominant in this sub-area, except near the San 5 991
6 Joaquin River, north of Mendota, where soils of the ColumbiaTemple Association are predominant. The Traver soils are medium to coarse textured. They have slightly more clay in the subsoil than in the surface soil and are generally strongly affected by salts and alkali. The Chino soils have slightly more clay in a moderately calcareous subsoil. Concentrations of salts and alkali vary fran slight to strong. Soils of the Columbia-Temple Association have imperfect to poor natural drainage. The Columbia soils are non-calcareous and coarse textured. The Temple soils are farther fran the river and have a medium to fine texture, and a strongly calcareous subsoil. In many places they are slightly saline.
Figure 3 shows the major types of topsoils in the SJREC GSP Group Area. For the part of the area on the west side of the San Joaquin River, U.S. Soils Conservation Service reports on soils in the Newman, Los Banos, and Mendota areas were used. For Subarea J, the report on soils in the Madera area was used.
For this evaluation, KDSA grouped the soil textures into three groups: Coarse-grained (generally sand or loamy sand, clay or silty clay, and intermediate (i.e. sandy clay). This map indicates that the coarsest topsoils are either to the east near the San Joaquin River, or to the west along alluvial fans such as along Los Banos Creek. The finest grained topsoils were 992
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10 9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Mader
Mer
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
ant
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
E CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BA
CREE
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8 E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12 E
R.11 E
R.12 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7 S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7 S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10 S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
son
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Merced
Winton Chowchilla
Chowchilla
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 3 - TOPSOILS
EXPLANATION:
TOP SOILS
Clay and Silty Clay
Coarse Grained
Intermediate
SOIL SURVEYS
Stromberg (1962)
Harradine (1956)
Cole (1952)
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
7 993
along much of the rest of the area, except Stanislaus County, where intermediate materials are more extensive.
Surface Water Bodies
8 Figure 4 shows the location of surface water bodies in the SJREC GSP Group Area. Major streams on the west side are Orestimba Creek, San Luis Creek, Los Banos Creek, and Garzas Creek. Dams have been built in San Luis Creek and Los Banos Creek. Los Banos Creek joins the San Joaquin River near or north of the north boundary of the San Luis National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). The San Joaquin River passes through the area, and divides Madera County from Fresno County. Major reservoirs are the San Luis Reservoir and O'Neill Forebay and Los Banos Creek Detention Reservoir. Major canals in the area include the California Aqueduct, the DeltaMendota Canal (DMC), Arroyo Canal, and the CCID's Main, Outside, and Poso Canals. The San Luis Drain, located east of Los Banos, was designed to carry subsurface drainage flows, which formerly were discharged to the Kesterson Reservoir. The main canals in the Columbia Canal Co. service area are the Columbia Canal, the Ridge Ditch, and Lone Willow Slough. The Mendota Pool extends both east along the San Joaquin River and south along the Fresno Slough. The Chowchilla Bypass extends to the north from the river upstream of the pool.
Figure 4 also shows locations of a number of regulating res994 33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10 9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16
17 15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Merced
Fresno
Merced Santa Clara
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
O
C
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
A
SL
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
OCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11 E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
Turlock
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Central Reservoir
Island Reservoir
Laguna Reservoir
Gustine Reservoir
Ingomar Reservoir
Colony Reservoir
East Ditch Reservoir
Poso Reservoir
OUTSIDE CANAL
OUTSIDE CA N AL
OU TSIDE CANAL
OUTSIDE CANAL
OUTSIDE CANAL
MAIN CANAL
MAIN CANAL
MAIN CANAL
MAIN CANAL
MAIN CANAL
PO SO CANAL
THIRD LIFT CANAL
COLUMBIA
CANAL
FIRST LIFT CANAL
SECOND LIFT CANAL
THIRD LIFT CANAL
COLUMBIA
CANAL
SECOND LIFT CANAL
ARROYO CANAL
ARROYO CANAL
ARROYO CANAL
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
SUBBASIN
DELTA-MENDOTA
FIGURE 4 - SURFACE WATER BODIES
EXPLANATION:
Regulating Reservoirs
Major Canals
Minor Canals
State/Federal Facility
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
SJREC GSP Group Area
9 995
10 ervoirs in the SJREC GSP Group Area.
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Hotchkiss and Balding (1971) described the geology, hydrology, and water quality of the Tracy-Dos Palos Area, which includes the north part of the SJREC GSP Group Area that is west of the San Joaquin River. Davis and Poland (1957) described groundwater conditions in the Mendota-Huron Area, which includes the rest of the area west of the San Joaquin River and south of Dos Palos. Mitten, LeBlanc, and Bertoldi (1970) described these features in the Madera area, which includes Sub-area J. In addition, Kenneth D.
Schmidt & Associates (KDSA, 1997a) provided a report for the CCID on groundwater conditions in the area between Mendota and Crows Landing. KDSA (1997b) provided another report focusing on groundwater flows in the SJREC service area. These reports provide significant information on subsurface geologic conditions that was used in this report.
Regional Geologic and Structural Setting
The SJREC GSP Group Area is within the San Joaquin Valley, which is a topographic and structural trough bounded on the east by the Sierra Nevada fault block and on the west by the folded and faulted Coast Ranges. Both mountain blocks have contributed to marine 996
11 and continental deposits in the Valley. In the west-central part of the valley, more than 12,000 feet of sediments are present. Groundwater is present in alluvial deposits that dip slightly toward the trough of the valley (the San Joaquin River), from both the west and east sides.
Lateral Basin Boundaries
Figure 1 shows the boundaries of the relevant parts of the Delta-Mendota Sub-basin and the SJREC GSP Group Area. The SJREC GSP Group boundaries include the north end of the CCID service area on the north side, the San Joaquin River and the east edge of the Columbia Canal Co. service area on the east side. The west and south edges of the CCID service area comprise the west and south boundaries.
Definable Bottom of the Basin
Figure 5 shows the definable bottom of the basin beneath the SJREC GSP Group Area. Historically, the U.S. Geological Survey (Page, 1973) used an electrical conductivity of 3,000 micromhos per centimeter at 25°C to delineate the regional base of the fresh groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley. The underlying groundwater is termed "connate water" and is of higher salinity. Page indicated that the base of the fresh groundwater ranged fran about 600 to 1,200 feet deep in most of the SJREC GSA service area. As part of this 997
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Stan si laus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
ito
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12 S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
VALERIA
AVE
S FAITH HOM E RD
W BELMONT
AVE
M ST
W
H ST
L
A
OC UST
VE
L ST W
I-5
POMELO
AVE
E LAS PA LMAS AVE
MC CLINTO CK RD
BYSTRUM
RD
V OLTA RD
S
N ST
W
ALMON D
AVE
EUCALYPTUS RD W
HWY 33
POPLAR AVE
MERRILL AVE
BRANNON AVE
S DEL
PUERTO AVE
N DOS PA LOS RD
I
ST
SYCAM ORE AVE
S DERRICK AV E
ELG
AV
IN
E
W NEES AV E
PALM AVE S
W M ERRILL AV E
N FAIRFAX AVE
CENTE R AVE
S
PIONEE R RD W
HWY 165 S
MERCE Y SPRINGS RD S
HWY 33
SANTA NELLA BLVD S
SNYDER RD
W
OLLE R ST
P S T W
4TH
ST
N ST
INGOMAR RD S
ORESTIMBA
RD
FRONTIER ST
W
HENRY M ILLE R AVE W
HUNT RD S
N SAN DIEGO AV E
N D OUGLAS
AVE
W ASHLAN AV E
SUNSE T AVE W
BA RTCH
AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
HUNT RD S
COTTON GIN RD W
SHAIN AVE
VILLA
FOLS OM AVE
L
ST
BASS
AVE
CENTER AV E S
S PRAIRIE FLOWER RD
ELM AVE
FIALHO AVE W
SANTA FE GRD
ORANGE AV E
SHIELLS RD
W S HAIN AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
ARMSTRONG RD
BADGE R FLAT RD S
CAPRI AVE
W
W HERNDON AV E
MOFFETT RD
N CAMBRIA AVE
FAHEY RD W
W BULLARD AVE
N FAIRFAX
AVE
S MITCHELL RD
HO YER
RD
W M INT AVE
HWY 152 W
S CENTRAL AVE
GRAND AVE W
JOHNSON RD
S
I-5
I-5
I-5
DRAP ER RD
N LYON AVE
LINDE N AVE W
SANTA LUCIA
AVE S
W M CKINLEY AV E
HOLSTEIN RD W
HWY 140 W
BELL RD
INGOMAR GRD W
KNIEBES R
S
D
REY NOLDS AVE S
ANDE RS ON RD
COPA DE ORA AV E W
N ORLE ANS AVE
UPP ER RD
W SILAXO AVE
MIDDLE RD
W
CO ZZI R
S
D
N WASHOE AVE
W LI NWOOD
AVE HICKORY
AVE
JENSEN RD S
W HARDING RD
E
ST
S MORGAN RD
LEXIN GTO N AVE
S
N DO UGLAS
AVE
FIG
LN
N OXFORD AVE
NO BLE RD
W
HOBART
AVE
EASTIN
RD
W ALTHEA AVE
N FAIRFAX AVE
ASH AVE
W BEHYMER
AVE
CANAL
HWY 152 S
SAN MATEO AVE
MINT RD W
JULIP R
S
D
HOLLY
AVE
PACHECO BLVD W
N NEWCOM B AVE
HENRY MILLER
AVE W
N LYON AVE
I-5 W
TE RCEIRA RD S
H ST W
AUGUS T RD
W SAN
JOSE AVE
PIONEE R RD W
SHY ST
S
ELFERS RD
ESTHER AVE
S
ELGIN
AVE
EMORY AVE
W
HWY 33 S
E MARSHALL RD
W GETTYSBURG
AVE
KILBURN RD
CANAL SCHOOL RD S
W S HIELDS AVE
S BLAKE R RD
W M ARSHALL RD
LO DI RD
S
W LINWOOD AVE
S OHIO
AVE
MORRIS
RD
LUNDY
RD
SIMMO NS
RD
W VALERIA AVE
BRADBURY
RD
PUMP
RD
CHERRY
AVE
N CUSTE R
AVE
CUSTER
AVE
TULIP AV
HWY 140 W
PRINCE R
S
D
EHRLICH RD
SULLIVAN
RD
WARD R
S
D
HUTCHINS RD W
PARADISE AVE
W CARM ELLIA AV E
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W M ILLE R AVE
ROXBURY RD W
DIEHL
RD
SHAIN
AVE
SIMMONS RD
CARM ELLIA AVE W
AUBREY AVE
S
CYPRESS RD
W
W HARDING R D
ACACIA
AV E
ELAINE RD
WEST MAIN ST
EUCALYPTUS RD
W
W S IM MONS RD
CHE RRY
AVE
G UN CLUB RD W
TAGLIO RD W
ARROYA AVE S
RUBLE RD
WALNUT AVE
N S AN
BERNARDINO AVE
ORTIGALITA RD
S
LUX
AVE
N ELGIN AVE
N DAVIDS ON AVE
HO YER
RD
MILLS RD
S
N EVANS
AVE
ALMOND DR W
N BRANNON RD
MOFFETT RD
PHILLIPS RD W
MOFFATT RD S
CHINA CAMP RD W
FE NTEM RD W
GAY ST
W
DIANA RD S
WEST
RD
N NEWCOM B AVE
N SAN
DIEGO AVE
INDIANA AVE S
N JE RROLD AVE
N HUDS ON
AVE
LE WIS RD
BRYANT
AVE
CLAUSEN
RD
N MILLUX RD
MAS ONRD W
PUMP RD W
WILLIS RD S
E STUHR
RD
N HUDSON AV E
CARLUCCI RD
S
PFITZE R RD W
N JERR OLD AVE
ISLAND
AVE
S DERRICK AV E
DODDS
EHRLICH RD
JENNINGS RD
WANGENHEIM
RD TAGLIO RD
W
RAMOS RD W
W KEY AVE
PRESTON RD W
APRICOT AVE
HWY 152 S
HALE RD
BATTEN RDW
VOLTA R
S
D
N FAIRFAX AVE
AZEVE DO
RD
W BRADBURY
RD
LEOTA ST
S
BRAZO RD W
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W CO PPER
AVE
W OX ALIS AVE
W CALIFORNIA
AVE
SANTA RITA GRD W
RO MERO RD W
PFITZE R RD W
S S AN
BERNARDINO AVE
W SAN JOSE AVE
PALM AVE S
DOS PALOS
RD
S CARPENTER RD
N RUSS ELL AV E
AZEV EDO RD S
ORCHARD RD S
HUSMAN RD
W
MILLUX
AVE
MERVEL AVE W
CACTUS DR
W
LAGUNA RD
W
JERSEY RD S
NANTE S AV E S
N MILLUX RD
N JERRO
AV
LD
E
APPLE
AVE
HILMAR RD
HARV EY RD
VENICE
RD
JORGENSEN RD
W
CANY ON RD S
N OHIO AVE
RAMOS RD S
N HUDSON AV E
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
WORTHING TON RD
W
GUN CLUB RD W
WILSON RD S
BORBA RD
W
W OLIVE AVE
ROSE GAR DEN
RD W
NEWSOM RD
S
HALEY RD W
LOCKE AVE
CLEM ENT AVE S
ALMOND DR W
CREE K RD S
JOHNS ON RD S
I-5 S
MADE RA
RD
N BRANNON
RD
FINK RD
ORCHARD RD S
W IKE CROW RD
W HARDING RD
HOGIN
HEARSTRD W
HELM CANAL RD
POLE LI NERD S
W ORMS BY AVE
RIVER RD
SANTA FE GRD W
S SAN BE NITO AVE
WARD RD
S
CATRINA ST W
HWY 152
WOO RD S
CHE ROKEE RD
W PANOCHE RD
MO RAGA AVE S
INGOMAR GRD W
WASHINGTON RD W
WARD AVE
SANTA FE GRD W
MEDLIN RD
AUGUS T RD
JORGENSEN RD
SWIFT AVE S
WILD DUCK RD S
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
HUSMAN RD W
SANTA FE G RD
SANTA CRUZ GUN CLUB RD S
CAMP 13 R D W
POLE LINE RD W
I-5 S
SANTA FE GRD W
CROW S LAND NI G RD
POMEGRANATE AVE
PEAR AVE
FIG
AVE
HWY 152 W
HWY 33 S
DAV IS RD
W HERNDON
AVE
MORAN RD MORAN RD
W S TUHR RD
PETE MILLER RD
HILLS FERRY RD
INDIANA RD
A
S
LFALFA
RD
OLD LAS
PALM AS AVE
N D OUGLAS
AVE
P RUNE
AV E
FREITAS RD
J T CROW RD
HWY 140 W
HWY 140 W
BLUE HILL
HELM DITCH RD
FINK R D
W S HAW AVE
SCHMIDT RD S
PETE MILLER RD
COTTON RD W
BUNKER RD
W
ORESTIMBA RD
C OTTONWOOD RD
W
CHARLESTON RD W
OAK FLAT RD
WHITWORTH RD S
HALLOWELL RD
NETHERTON RD W
N RUSS ELL AV E
N GALVEZ AVE
MANUCHA RD
DODDS RD
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
CRE
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
800
500
500
300
800
800
800
800
800
500
500
800
500
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 5 - DEFINABLE BOTTOM OF BASIN
EXPLANATION:
800 Depth to Base of
Fresh Groundwater (ft)
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
12 998
evaluation, electric logs for a number of deep holes were obtained from the California Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources and interpreted, to determine in more detail the bottom of the basin.
Sub-area A
13 The bottom of the basin ranges from about 800 to 1,160 feet deep in the area between Crows Landing and Newman, and deepens to the south. The under-lying deposits are either predominantly clay or contain brackish groundwater.
Sub-area B
The bottom of the basin ranges from less than 500 to about 800 feet deep in the area between Newman and Santa Nella. The shallowest bottom is generally to the west near I-5.
Sub-area C
The bottom of the basin between Santa Nella and the boundary between TllS and 12S ranges from about 550 to 800 feet deep and generally is deeper to the east.
Sub-area D
The bottom of the basin near Dos Palos ranges from about 750 to 970 feet deep and is deeper to the southeast.
999
14 Sub-area E
The bottom of the basin in the area generally between Dos Palos and Firebaugh ranges from about 650 to 1,000 feet deep, and is generally deepest in the area northeast and southeast of Dos Palos.
Sub-area F
The bottom of the basin ranges from less than 500 to about 800 feet deep in this sub-area. The shallowest bottom is near Firebaugh and the northwest corner of the sub-area.
Sub-area G
The bottom of the basin ranges from 600 to 700 feet deep in the CCID Headgate area, between Firebaugh and Mendota on the west side of the San Joaquin River.
Sub-area H
The bottom of the basin in the San Luis Canal Co. service area ranges from about 750 to 1,040 feet deep and generally is the deepest to the northeast.
Sub-area I
For the area in the FCWD service area, the bottom of the basin ranges from about 700 feet near Firebaugh and Mendota to about 730 feet near the southwest edge of the sub-area. 1000
15 Sub-area J
The bottom of the basin in the Columbia Canal Co, service area ranges from about 680 feet deep near Mendota to about 1,150 feet deep near the north end of the sub-area. The bottom of the basin generally exceeds 1,000 feet in depth north of Firebaugh.
Sub-area K
The bottom of the basin ranges from about 700 to 800 feet deep in this sub-area.
Formation Names
Hotchkiss and Balding (1971) divided the unconsolidated deposits in the Tracy-Dos Palos area (west of the San Joaquin River) into flood basin deposits (normally less than 50 feet thick), Quaternary alluvium (usually less than 200 feet thick), and the Tulare Formation (up to almost 1,000 feet thick). The Tulare Formation has an upper, thinner section which is above the Corcoran Clay, and a thicker, lower section below the clay.
The Corcoran Clay is a regional confining bed, which divides the groundwater into an upper aquifer and lower aquifer. Deposits in most of the west part of the SJREC GSP Group Area are generally tan in color and are termed the Diablo Range deposits. Deposits to the east are brown, gray, or white in color and are termed the Sierra deposits. These deposits are shown on a number of subsurface 1001
16 geologic cross sections that are presented later in this report.
Mitten, LeBlanc, and Bertoldi (1970) divided the unconsolidated deposits in the Mad.era Area (east of the San Joaquin River) into the younger alluvium (normally less than about 50 feet thick), the Quaternary older alluvium less than 1,000 feet thick, and the Tertiary Quaternary continental deposits (1,000 to 2,000 feet thick). The Corcoran Clay is present beneath Subarea J, and the predominant deposits in this sub-area are generally termed the Sierra deposits.
Confining Beds
There are two confining beds that are important beneath part of the SJREC GSP Group Area. These are the A-Clay and Corcoran Clay (also termed the E-Clay by Croft, 1969). The extent of the A-Clay has only been mapped in the part of the SJREC GSA near Mendota. Figure 6 shows the depth to the top of and the extent of the A-Clay near Mendota, taken from KOSA (2013). This clay is located primarily in a relatively narrow band along the valley trough. The A-Clay is important, as it acts to enable shallow groundwater to develop in the overlying deposits, and also acts as a confining bed for groundwater in this underlying strata. The top of the A-Clay is usually less than 80 feet deep. Groundwater above the A-clay can be in direct hydraulic communication with strearnflow 1002
R.14 E
R.15 E
R.14 E
R.15 E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.14 E
R.15 E
R.15 E
R.16 E
T.11 S
T.12 S
T.11 S
T.12 S
T.12 S
T.13 S
T.12 S
T.13 S
T.12 S
T.13 S
T.12 S
T.13 S
T.12 S
T.13 S
T.13 S
T.14 S
T.13 S
T.14 S
FRESNO
SLOUGH
FRESNO
SLOUGH
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST
BYPASS
SIDE
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
DELTA
MENDOTA
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
JAMES BYPASS
LONE WILLOW SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
NP
NP NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
77 NP NP 76
41 NP
NP
NP
NP NP
NP
NP
NP
NP NP
NP
54 47
NP
NP
NP
NP
NP
45 51
31 39
42 44
52 32
38 34
54 50
47 66
55 61
52 NP71
55 85 86
81 82
62 48
31 32
48 45
53 40
52 42
47 48
39 80
105
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
.
FIGURE 6 - EXTENT AND DEPTH TO TOP OF A-CLAY
A-Clay not present
A-Clay present
A-Clay
NP= A-Clay not present
Number = Depth to top of A-Clay
EXPLANATION:
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
A-CLAY WELLS
17 1003
18 in the San Joaquin River. In the area along the west side of the Fresno Slough branch of the Mendota Pool, the Mendota Pool Group (MPG) operates a series of shallow water supply wells tapping strata above the A-Clay.
The Corcoran Clay is indicated to be the most important confining bed in the Delta-Mendota Sub-basin. Figure 7 shows the depth to the top of the Corcoran Clay, which was mapped by KOSA (1997a). Historically, this clay has been used to divide the groundwater system in the San Joaquin Valley into an upper aquifer (above the clay) and lower aquifer (below the clay). The Corcoran Clay underlies most of the SJREC GSP Group Area, except for a small area along the west boundary of the CCID. The Corcoran Clay has been deformed since its deposition. The top of the clay is shallowest (about 50 feet deep) near Santa Nella. North of Fresno County, the top of the clay is deepest near Newman, Gustine, and Los Banos, where the depth exceeds 250 feet. The depth to the top of the Corcoran Clay is commonly about 200 feet near the San Joaquin River in the area north of Fresno County.
The top of the clay deepens to the south in the SJREC GSP Group Area, and ranges from about 400 to 450 feet deep near Mendota.
In most of the Fresno County, the top of the clay is generally deeper to the south and west.
1004
Stan si laus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
ed
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
TTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
VALERIA
AVE
S FAITH HOM E RD
W BELMONT
AVE
M ST
W
H ST
L
A
OC UST
VE
L ST W
I-5
POMELO
AVE
E LAS PA LMAS AVE
MC CLINTO CK RD
BYSTRUM
RD
V OLTA RD
S
N ST
W
ALMON D
AVE
EUCALYPTUS RD W
HWY 33
POPLAR AVE
MERRILL AVE
BRANNON AVE
S DEL
PUERTO AVE
N DOS PA LOS RD
I
ST
SYCAM ORE AVE
S DERRICK AV E
ELG
AV
IN
E
W NEES AV E
PALM AVE S
W M ERRILL AV E
N FAIRFAX AVE
CENTE R AVE
S
PIONEE R RD W
HWY 165 S
MERCE Y SPRINGS RD S
HWY 33
SANTA NELLA BLVD S
SNYDER RD
W
OLLE R ST
P S T W
4TH
ST
N ST
INGOMAR RD S
ORESTIMBA
RD
FRONTIER ST
W
HENRY M ILLE R AVE W
HUNT RD S
N SAN DIEGO AV E
N D OUGLAS
AVE
W ASHLAN AV E
SUNSE T AVE W
BA RTCH
AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
HUNT RD S
COTTON GIN RD W
SHAIN AVE
VILLA
FOLS OM AVE
L
ST
BASS
AVE
CENTER AV E S
S PRAIRIE FLOWER RD
ELM AVE
FIALHO AVE W
SANTA FE GRD
ORANGE AV E
SHIELLS RD
W S HAIN AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
ARMSTRONG RD
BADGE R FLAT RD S
CAPRI AVE
W
W HERNDON AV E
MOFFETT RD
N CAMBRIA AVE
FAHEY RD W
W BULLARD AVE
N FAIRFAX
AVE
S MITCHELL RD
HO YER
RD
W M INT AVE
HWY 152 W
S CENTRAL AVE
GRAND AVE W
JOHNSON RD
S
I-5
I-5
I-5
DRAP ER RD
N LYON AVE
LINDE N AVE W
SANTA LUCIA
AVE S
W M CKINLEY AV E
HOLSTEIN RD W
HWY 140 W
BELL RD
INGOMAR GRD W
KNIEBES R
S
D
REY NOLDS AVE S
ANDE RS ON RD
COPA DE ORA AV E W
N ORLE ANS AVE
UPP ER RD
W SILAXO AVE
MIDDLE RD
W
CO ZZI R
S
D
N WASHOE AVE
W LI NWOOD
AVE HICKORY
AVE
JENSEN RD S
W HARDING RD
E
ST
S MORGAN RD
LEXIN GTO N AVE
S
N DO UGLAS
AVE
FIG
LN
N OXFORD AVE
NOBLE RD
W
HOBART
AVE
EASTIN
RD
W ALTHEA AVE
N FAIRFAX AVE
ASH AVE
W BEHYMER
AVE
CANAL
HWY 152 S
SAN MATEO AVE
MINT RD W
JULIP R
S
D
HOLLY
AVE
PACHECO BLVD W
N NEWCOM B AVE
HENRY MILLER
AVE W
N LYON AVE
I-5 W
TE RCEIRA RD S
H ST W
AUGUS T RD
W SAN
JOSE AVE
PIONEE R RD W
SHY ST
S
ELFERS RD
ESTHER AVE
S
ELGIN
AVE
EMORY AVE
W
HWY 33 S
E MARSHALL RD
W GETTYSBURG
AVE
KILBURN RD
CANAL SCHOOL RD S
W S HIELDS AVE
S BLAKE R RD
W M ARSHALL RD
LO DI RD
S
W LINWOOD AVE
S OHIO
AVE
MORRIS
RD
LUNDY
RD
SIMMO NS
RD
W VALERIA AVE
BRADBURY
RD
PUMP
RD
CHERRY
AVE
N CUSTE R
AVE
CUSTER
AVE
TULIP AV
HWY 140 W
PRINCE R
S
D
EHRLICH RD
SULLIVAN
RD
WARD R
S
D
HUTCHINS RD W
PARADISE AVE
W CARM ELLIA AV E
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W M ILLE R AVE
ROXBURY RD W
DIEHL
RD
SHAIN
AVE
SIMMONS RD
CARM ELLIA AVE W
AUBREY AVE
S
CYPRESS RD
W
W HARDING R D
ACACIA
AV E
ELAINE RD
WEST MAIN ST
EUCALYPTUS RD
W
W S IM MONS RD
CHE RRY
AVE
G UN CLUB RD W
TAGLIO RD W
ARROYA AVE S
RUBLE RD
WALNUT AVE
N S AN
BERNARDINO AVE
ORTIGALITA RD
S
LUX
AVE
N ELGIN AVE
N DAVIDS ON AVE
HO YER
RD
MILLS RD
S
N EVANS
AVE
ALMOND DR W
N BRANNON RD
MOFFETT RD
PHILLIPS RD W
MOFFATT RD S
CHINA CAMP RD W
FE NTEM RD W
GAY ST
W
DIANA RD S
WEST
RD
N NEWCOM B AVE
N SAN
DIEGO AVE
INDIANA AVE S
N JE RROLD AVE
N HUDS ON
AVE
LE WIS RD
BRYANT
AVE
CLAUSEN
RD
N MILLUX RD
MAS ONRD W
PUMP RD W
WILLIS RD S
E STUHR
RD
N HUDSON AV E
CARLUCCI RD
S
PFITZE R RD W
N JERR OLD AVE
ISLAND
AVE
S DERRICK AV E
DODDS
EHRLICH RD
JENNINGS RD
WANGENHEIM
RD TAGLIO RD
W
RAMOS RD W
W KEY AVE
PRESTON RD W
APRICOT AVE
HWY 152 S
HALE RD
BATTEN RDW
VOLTA R
S
D
N FAIRFAX AVE
AZEVE DO
RD
W BRADBURY
RD
LEOTA ST
S
BRAZO RD W
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W CO PPER
AVE
W OX ALIS AVE
W CALIFORNIA
AVE
SANTA RITA GRD W
RO MERO R D W
PFITZE R RD W
S S AN
BERN ARDINO AVE
W SAN JOSE AVE
PALM AVE S
DOS PALOS
RD
S CARPENTER RD
N RUSS ELL AV E
AZEV EDO RD S
ORCHARD RD S
HUSMAN RD
W
MILLUX
AVE
MERVEL AVE W
CACTUS DR
W
LAGUNA RD
W
JERSEY RD S
NANTE S AV E S
N MILLUX RD
N JERRO
AV
LD
E
APPLE
AVE
HILMAR RD
HARV EY RD
VENICE
RD
JORGENSEN RD
W
CANY ON RD S
N OHIO AVE
RAMOS RD S
N HUDSON AV E
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
WORTHING TON RD
W
GUN CLUB RD W
WILSON RD S
BORBA RD
W
W OLIVE AVE
ROSE GAR DEN
RD W
NEWSOM RD
S
HALEY RD W
LOCKE AVE
CLEM ENT AVE S
ALMOND DR W
CREE K RD S
JOHNS ON RD S
I-5 S
MADE RA
RD
N BRANNON
RD
FINK RD
ORCHARD RD S
W IKE CROW RD
W HARDING RD
HOGIN
HEARSTRD W
HELM CANAL RD
POLE LI NERD S
W ORMS BY AVE
RIVER RD
SANTA FE GRD W
S SAN BE NITO AVE
WARD RD
S
CATRINA ST W
HWY 152
WOO RD S
CHE ROKEE RD
W PANOCHE RD
MO RAGA AVE S
INGOMAR GRD W
WASHINGTON RD W
WARD AVE
SANTA FE GRD W
MEDLIN RD
AUGUS T RD
JORGENSEN RD
SWIFT AVE S
WILD DUCK RD S
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
HUSMAN RD W
SANTA FE G RD
SANTA CRUZ GUN CLUB RD S
CAMP 13 R D W
POLE LINE RD W
I-5 S
SANTA FE GRD W
CROW S LAND NI G RD
POMEGRANATE AVE
PEAR AVE
FIG
AVE
HWY 152 W
HWY 33 S
DAV IS RD
W HERNDON
AVE
MORAN RD MORAN RD
W S TUHR RD
PETE MILLER RD
HILLS FERRY RD
INDIANA RD
A
S
LFALFA
RD
OLD LAS
PALM AS AVE
N D OUGLAS
AVE
P RUNE
AV E
FREITAS RD
J T CROW RD
HWY 140 W
HWY 140 W
BLUE HILL
HELM DITCH RD
FINK R D
W S HAW AVE
SCHMIDT RD S
PETE MILLER RD
COTTON RD W
BUNKER RD
W
ORESTIMBA RD
C OTTONWOOD RD
W
CHARLESTON RD W
OAK FLAT RD
WHITWORTH RD S
HALLOWELL RD
NETHERTON RD W
N RUSS ELL AV E
N GALVEZ AVE
MANUCHA RD
DODDS RD
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12 S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
200
250
150
350
450
500
200
200
200
200
200
250
250
250
150
150
150
350
100
100
100
100
50 50
400
400
400
300
300
300
300
300
300
350
200
250
250
250
150
200
250
250
250
250
200
250
350
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 7 - DEPTH TO TOP OF CORCORAN CLAY
EXPLANATION:
SJREC GSP Group Area
250 Depth to top of Corcoran Clay (ft.)
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
19 1005
20 The depth to the top of the Corcoran Clay in the Red Top-El Nido area was shown in Figure 8 of KOSA (2013). The top of the Corcoran Clay is shallowest in the northeast part of that area and deepest to the south. The depth ranges from about 160 feet near Chamberlain Road and Combs Road, to more than 300 feet near Avenue 10 and Road 6.
Figure 8 shows the thickness of the Corcoran Clay in the SJREC GSP Group Area. The clay is less than 20 feet thick in the area northwest of Newman, and over 80 feet thick northeast of Newman.
The clay averages about 60 feet thick near Mendota and much of the San Joaquin River. The Corcoran Clay is thickest in two areas. The clay is more than 120 feet thick northwest of Volta and south of Dos Palos near the Delta-Mendota Canal.
Subsurface Geologic Cross Sections
Figure 9 shows the locations of subsurface geologic cross sections that are discussed in this report. Some of these sections were reproduced or modified from previous U.S. Geological Survey studies. Regional Cross Sections A-A', C-C', D-D', and E-E' are from Hotchkiss and Balding (1971), and Cross Section B-B' is from Miller, Green, and Davis (1971). KOSA (1997a) developed a number of local cross sections. Two of these (F-F' and G-G') were in one of the major areas of past pumping into the DMC near 1006
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEA
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Merced
Fresno
Merced Santa Clara
rced
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11 E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7 S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8 S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8 S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
n
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
40 20
60 80
40 20
80 80
100
100
60 60
80 80
60 80
80 120
140
80 60
80 60
100
100
80 40
60 120
60 80
100
100
60 80
100
60 60
60 80
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
FIGURE 8 - CONTOURS OF THICKNESS OF THE CORCORAN CLAY
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
EXPLANATION:
80 Corcoran Clay Thickness (ft.)
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
21 1007
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23
23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27 28 29
8 Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
M
Merced
Fresno
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
N JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
O M'
N
M
F'
H'
H
E
E' B'
D
D' F
B
A'
A
O'
J'
I
I'
N'
G'
J
G
C'
C
11 L
2N
27H
1H
11 F
35E
11 P 13M
32J-2
36R
25L
23A
32R-332R-2
20N
29C-2
29F-2
32R-1
5A
29R-2
9C
29R-1
35C
35C
25R
30P
12R 18R
21N
22B
32L
35D
2P
13H 11 G
11 J
30Q
29H
26H
36C
6J 8F
31F 6A
35J
27R
22H-2
22J
33J
8R
36A
36A -1
3E1
36M
21H
18H
6G 31N
31M
18B
16M
8E
10R
15H
33A
25M 6A
25P
35L
28L -2
21F
5N 8L 16D
17B
6J
16C
22L
28B 35F
15M
28L -1
35C
21P
26P
16A 1
19Q
29C-1
29F-1
32H-1
29D
32J-1
34L
2F2
31J
18Q
32H-2
29Q
5A-1
19G
33F
34M
2A
22H-1
17F
28N
29F
36B
33G 34N
34K
34L
25H
25A
25R
21E 1
19N
24K
10G 1
10J1
34R
10D
22R
26C
27B
9R
26P
3M
34N
34Q
15R
22A
10E
15F
4F
22Q
32F
5B 10M
22L
19H
10N
4Q 4K
24 R
30J
32K
4E
24 B
19A
31Q 1
22H1
22A 1
5C
13F 1
28A
31G
15N
6N
30G
17H
17A
7R 17F
21F
22D
16F
35E 1
13N2
22R1
22A 1
23R1
24A
20A 1
17P 1
29B 1
11A
30A 1
29L
21N1
28N
28M
33F
28J 1
27K 1
2Q 1
23R
13Q 3
36A 1
18E 1
19A
12P 1
18L
5A
20D
19G 1
19G 2
17N
17R1
15M 1
21B 1
20J 1
19B 1,2,3
2D1
15 31A 2
30E
25H
31 31A 1
5N1
5C1
5H1
4 26H1,2,3
36C
12L
13( ?),1
18E
8M 2
17D
8J 1
9B
8H
8C1
8A
4H1
8J
9A
28B 1
16Q
13F
34N
23L1
6A
3G 3
26F
3R1
2L1
2G 1
18N1
18M 1
7F 1
18G 1
7K 1
14A
36Q
30L
30F
32R
5L
4L
22F 1
22K 2
10H
12Q
18C
18D
3J
22 22B
25E
35C
25B
26A
35D
13L2
23Q
28G
21F
28D
23E 2
34J
23E
14C
16F
11Q
14B
2D
35E
19M
7B
7A
12D
7N
11K
11H1
21L1,2,3
8P 1
36 3
29 31G
27C
2N1
33R1 29C
22J
25A
7A
17D
8P
8D
32P 31G
32R
4C
4A 11E
10Q 1
8J 1
22D
3M
4G
4Q
3P
4H
10N
10B
10C
10G
10A 3Q
14B
12D1
12J
7E 2
8M
9M 1
9N1
22A
21J 1
22Q 1
2J 1
19R1
27E 2
31N
29P
35R1
2Q 1
2G 1
19R1
12H
12A 1
1A
7D
6H1
7A
8M
32B
9Q
26N1
28A
12P 1
13H
14R
18G
7Q
12B 1
2F
20J
34P 1
13K
16H1
17A
16C
25 35
25J 2
18P
13L
13N
13R
18J
18Q
17M
17L1
30G 1
18A
16N1
35N
2D
23 14H
21C1
2R
7C
25 17P
20K 1
19 26K 1
34D
8L
17D
9A
16P
9P 1
10E
21R1
30N1
26E
27K 1
35K 1
19C
20E
17K
28L 28Q
3R
5P
9G
10L
10K
11N1
11 22A
10R
25G
35A 1
36A 1
36G 1
36R
31M
29L
32 8
9M
33G
9P
11D1,2
13E 1
32N2
19 26Q 1
35A
32 17N1
28N
28A
5 5R
4 28
29P 1
28C
15D1
15 1
36 33R
34M 3
19Q
36A
25C
14N
25C3
25J
19 24
13J
31 32L
31K 5
5Q
32 21L
29A
8E
34K
35E
15A
9M
24E
12D
24H
13J
K
K'
L
L'
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
FIGURE 9 - LOCATION OF SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
EXPLANATION:
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
SJREC GSP Group Area
Well
Local Cross Section
Regional Cross Section
22 1008
23 Russell Avenue, and two others (H-H' and I-I') were in the Mendota Pool area. In addition to these sections, a number of other local cross sections were previously developed by KDSA as part of cooperative studies between the CCID and the Cities of Los Banos, Gustine, and Newman. As part of the Sack Dam-Red Top area subsidence evaluation, KDSA (2013) developed a number of local subsurface geologic cross sections in that area which is east of and adjacent to Sub-area E. Some or parts of these are used in this report. References to reports on these evaluations are provided at the end of this report.
Regional
Cross Section A-A' (Figure 10) extends from near Crows Landing, through Newman, Gustine, and Los Banos, to a point southwest of Dos Palos. This cross section extends along the length of the northern and central parts of the CCID. An average of about 100 feet of alluvial deposits are present above the Tulare Formation along this section. The Tulare Formation comprises the Coast Range derived deposits in both the upper and lower aquifers. The vertical extent of the Corcoran Clay and the base of the Tulare Formation are shown. In general, the Corcoran Clay and the base of the Tulare Formation are deeper to the south along this section. The base of the lower aquifer ranges from 1009
24 SOUTHEAST
- 600-----------
-------------
---------------
------ -
--
---
-----
-------
---
----
-------
-----
- 800-
-1000-
f---
CONTINENTAL DEPOSITS
- 1200-
- 1400--'------------------------------------------------il------~-----__L_.- '
FIGURE 10-REGIONAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONJ~-A'I 5 0 5 10 15 20 \ 25 MILES
EE-3==r==lE-3==~==JF-3===[===============EI ============~==[I ===============E1 ===============[I =====1 t=========:11 11---~------'R=EV-'-"IS=IO=NS-"---_____ __, 0ESIGNEO __ cHEckEO c. WHfTE t------1----------+---+----l-------,IDRAWN J,., lliOMSON DATE MARCH 1997 t-------1----------+---+----l------,IAPPROVED =01Slll=1c=r =ENo'""JNEER=----'-='RCE'""'No,..., 1 t-------1----------+---+----!------,!APPROVED =MANAG =ER--~o=ATECENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT 1335 West I Street - Post Office Box 1231 Los Banos, California 93635 Telephone (209) 826-1421 MODIF ED FROM HOTCHKISS A~D BALDING (1971) 1010
about 700 feet deep near the north end of this section to about 900 to 1,000 feet deep near the south end. The base of the lower aquifer generally corresponds to the base of permeable fresh water-producing deposits in this area. In general, groundwater in the deposits below the Tulare Formation in this area has total dissolved solids concentrations exceeding 2,000 mg/1, and has historically been considered unusable.
Cross Section B-B' (Figure 11) extends from east of Los Banos south to near the southwest corner of the study area, south-southwest of Mendota. This section is based primarily on electric logs, which are shown on the section. The Corcoran Clay clearly deepens to the south along this section. The base of the Tulare Formation (the base of the lower aquifer in this area) ranges from about 900 to 1,000 feet deep near the north end of the section to almost 1,600 feet deep south-southwest of Mendota.
25 Cross Section C-C' (Figure 12) extends from west to east through Crows Landing. The top of the Corcoran Clay averages about 200 feet thick and the clay dips to the east along this section. The Tulare Formation (also termed the Diablo or Coast Range deposits) is about 600 feet thick. Less than 70 feet of alluvial or flood basin deposits are above the Tulare Formation along this section. Some water supply wells tap both the shallow 1011
NORTHWEST
SEA LEVEL
-200 -400 -600
,_..._
Iw
w -800
Lr..
'-"'
z -1000
0 I- -1200 <(
>
w
_j -1400
w
-1600
- 1800
--
----
-2000 --- ---2200 -2400
Pliocene continental
deposits
-
-
----
----
----
---- ----
Miocene marine and continental
formations and deposits
I
I
l
SOUTHEAST
Pliocene continenta I
and
---- marine deposits
I
F:I.GURE 11-REGIONAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION 8-B' i I .
2 1 0
888881
1---~-----R_EV_IS_IO_N_S~--~-~---oESIGNED __ CHECKED c. WHITT:
----+---------+---f---+---loRAWN A THOMSON DATE MARCH 1997 -----------+----+---t----fAPPROVED =01sm=1cr~EN=G=1NE=rn-~R=cE-No.-• ---+-----------+-----+---t-----<APPROVED ~MANA=Grn---~DA=TE~1 2 4 6 8 10 MILES
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1335 West I Street - Post Office Box 1231
Los Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
MODIFlr D FROM MEADE (1968)
26 1012
I
,,.......,
Iw
w
LL..
..._..
z
0 I-
<:(
>
w
...J
w
SOUTHWEST
C
400 -
200
Sea Level
-200 -
·~--
-400 -
. -600 -
-800 -
-1000 -
- 1200 -
·. -1400
-~
----
·
---
...
O!ABLO RANGE DEPOSITS
CONTINENTAL DEPOSITS
I; 1[ 'I l
1----
-
FIGURE 12-REGIONAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS'SECT.ION t>C'\ 2 1 0
RRRRRI
1---~----=RE"-'-Y\S=IO=NS=-----r-~----.------1DESIGNED --CHECKED C, WHITE DRAWN A. lHOMSON DATE MARCH 1g97
1----.i.----------+----+----I
1----.i.---------'--.i.---+----+----IAPPROVED =01s,=R1ci=EN=G1=NEER=---=RC""°'E N,-o,I 1----.i.----------+----+----IAPPROVED =MANAG=-ER ---=DATE~I 2 I
4 I
6 I
8 I
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1335 West, I Street - Post Office Box 1231
Los Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
10 MILES
I
MODIF ED FROM HOTCHKISS
A~D BALDING (1971)
27 1013
28 deposits and the Tulare Formation.
Cross Section D-D' (Figure 13) extends from near the O'Neill Forebay on the southwest to the northeast to a point east-southeast of Gustine. The Corcoran Clay crops out at the land surface and the top of the clay is about 200 feet deep to the east near the San Joaquin River along this section. The Tulare Formation (Diablo Range deposits) is about 600 feet thick along this section. Beneath most of the area along this section east of the Main Canal, coarse-grained deposits derived from the Sierra Nevada are present below the Corcoran Clay. Beneath the east half of the section, the Sierran deposits are present both above and below the Corcoran Clay. The Sierran deposits generally thicken to the east, toward the San Joaquin River. These deposits were formed when the depositional axis of the valley (the valley trough) was much farther west than at present.
Cross Section E-E' (Figure 14) extends from the southwest to the northeast, between Los Banos and Dos Palos. This section clearly illustrates the dip of the Corcoran Clay, from very shallow depth near Interstate 5, to near maximum depth near the Santa Fe Grade. The deposits of the Tulare Formation and the Sierran deposits are also thickest near or southwest of the Santa Fe Grade. Sierran deposits are present both above and below 1014
1015 29
101630
31 the Corcoran Clay beneath most of this section, except west of the Outside Canal. These deposits are thickest to the east near the San Joaquin River.
DMC Pumping Area
Concerns have been expressed about the impacts of pumping from a concentrated group of wells into the Delta-Mendota Canal. Thus KDSA developed two cross sections in this area. Cross Section FF' (Figure 15) extends from a point about one mile northeast of the Dos Amigos Pumping Plant along the Delta-Mendota Canal to the east-southeast, to near Russell Avenue. The Corcoran Clay generally deepens to the southeast along this section. Although the Corcoran Clay is less than 50 feet thick along part of the section, it is usually about 80 to 100 feet thick. The perforated intervals of a number of water supply wells are shown along this section.
Many of the supply wells are perforated exclusively in the lower aquifer and sealed opposite the upper aquifer, and generally range in depth from about 600 to 1,000 feet. The deeper supply wells are generally to the southeast near Russell Avenue.
Cross Section G-G' (Figure 16) extends from near Eagle Field Road and I-5 to the northeast to near the Outside Canal. Wells along this section range from about 300 to 900 feet in depth. 1017
-1
I
NORTHWEST
F
200-
100-
31G
n
32P
..
32R
••
4C 4G
.. ..
10B11E
3M 3P 108 1 0/l
n n ....... .
2Q1 12D1
.. ..
12H
n
8M
n
17A
••
SOUTHEAST
F'
16C 16H1
•• n
SEA LEVEL -----1-------+----+-----4---1---1----+--~-1-+----+---------+------1-------1---1---1----+--+- Q)
> Cl)
....J
0 Q)
{/)
C
0 Cl)
0 -
Cl)
> ·-
-
0 Cl)
O:::'.
-...
-
Cl) Cl)
'+-
.._,
C 0 ·
--
0 > Cl)
w
- 200-
-300-
- 400- _
- 500-
-600-
-700_
-800-
- 900-
-1000-
- 1100-
-1200--1300--1400--1500-
T,D. 580 T.D. 580 T,0, 585
T.D~ ..... 620 T.D. 620 I.::'
T.D, 700
31G
J
T.D. 580
T.D. 724
EXPLANATION
Well or Test Hole
Identification
Perforated Interval
Total Depth (feet)
2000 0 2000 4000 6000
R R F--3 F--3
Horizontal Scale in Feet
T,D. 643 T.D. 665 '-
T,D, 680
-'-
T.D, 754'
1--1--1--
T.D. 764
-'-
T.D. 855 T.O. 860
-~
--
T.D. 1,033 T.D. 1,022 1-- T,D. 1,055
1--
-~
T.D. 1,689 .
-1600----'-------------------------------------------+------'- FIGURE 15-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION F- r
I I
.__-~---~R=EV~IS~IO~N~S ______ _,QESIGNED __ CHECKED c. WHITE t----+---------+---+---1----IDRAWN A THOMSON DATE MARCH 1987 .__ _ _,__ _______ ,.____,.____+----,,APPROVED '""01S1R""'1CT=-=ENG=1NEER=------;;,RCE"'N.:-o,I .__ _ _,__ _______ ,.____,.____+----,1APPR0VE0 =W>NA=G=ER----=DATE..----1 I
CENTR~is 1~f TRICT
Los, Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
D~~C PUMPING AREA
1018
-1 a, > (I)
_J
0 (I)
(./)
i::
0 (I)
2 0
+-
(I)
> :.;::
0 (I)
a:::
,,--...
+-
(I)
(I)
'+-
..._,,
i::
0 +-
0 > (I)
w
SOUTHWEST
G
400-
300 -
SEA
-100 -
- 200 -
- 300-
- 400-
- 500 -
- 600 -
17D
••
8D
T.O. 881
NORTHEAST
G'
4Q
l 4H
----- 11•
33R1
- r----_ __ i.,..•- -1
--
T.O, 600
--
T.O. 725
T,0, 720
-
- 700-'--------------------------~-
I.
17D
1 I
T.i' 580
EXPLANATION
Well or Test Hole
Identification
Perforated Interval
Total Depth in Feet
2000 0 2000 4000 6000
F-3 F-3 I I I I
Horizontal Scale in Feet
FIGURE 16-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION G-G' 1 -~----=RE"-"VIS=IO=NS"--r--~-~~OESIGNED --CHECKED c. WHITE DRAWN --0ATE MARCH 1997
>-----+---------+--------+---+--<
t---+---------+-------i--+----tAPPROVEO =01s111=1cr~EN=G1N=EER~R=CE~No, t---+---------+-------i--+----tAPPROVED =M/lNA=GER~-~o=ATE~ I .
CENTRAL CALllFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1335 West I Street - Post Office Box 1231
Los Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
D~ C PUMPING AREA
I
33 1019
34 This section clearly illustrates the dip and thickening of the Corcoran Clay to the northeast in this area. The top of the clay is about 180 feet deep near the southwest end of the section and over 220 feet deep near the northeast end. The clay thickens significantly, fran about 40 feet to the southwest to 130 feet to the northeast.
Mendota Pool Area
The Mendota Pool Area has been another area of a large amount of pumping from a dense network of wells. KOSA (1997) developed two local subsurface geologic sections in this area. Section HH' (Figure 17) extends from north of the Mendota Dam, south along the Mendota Pool to near Whites Bridge Road. Electric logs are not available for most wells along this section, and thus the section is based primarily on drillers logs. Experience indicates that fine-grained flood-basin deposits are locally more than 100 feet thick in some places in the Mendota-Tranquillity area. Regional maps of another locally important confining bed (the A-clay), which is part of the flood-basin deposits, are available only for the area south of Mendota. Normally this clay is present only near the trough of the valley. The A-clay has been important historically in this area, because much of the land east of the Fresno Slough has been in a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation contract area, where water-supply wells aren't permitted to tap 1020
Qj
>
Q)
_J
C
Q)
(/)
C C
Q)
0 SEA
....
Q)
>
:.=
C
Qj
a::
,-..
....
Q) Q)
..__,
-
C 0
:.=
C
>
Q)
w
0 C 0
u
0 NORTH
H
200
18Q
+' Q) _c 0 0
(.) C ""CJ :::J
+' 0 C C
0 u Q) Q) 2
E C I 0 0 en o3 2 ::!::::'. en I Q) 0
(19G)I 0 m
CCID SA j19oj 20N 29D 29C 29C 29F 29F 29Q
I SIERRAN SANDS
C
100
LEVEL
-100 T.D. 260
T.D. 270
C
SIERRAN SANDS
T.D. 310
I C
T.D. 310 T.D. 310
s
-200 I
T.D. 370
-300
_c
o>
:::J
0 en
0 C
en
LL
-- 32R
29R 29R 32H 32H 32J 32J 32R32R 5A5A
s
S I
C C
S I
T.D. 370
Fresno Slough
(.)
(.) (.)
0 O
0..
E""CJ
Q) 0
_c 0
.µ L
SOUTH
:::J ==
0 0
en a::
I 9C
C
T.D. 126
H'
EXPLANATION
0 Sand
G Sand and Gravel
0 Sandy Clay, Clayey Sand, and Silt
0 Clay
29Q Well or Test Hole
li Identification Perforated Interval
T.0. 370 Total Depth (feet)
-- \l..__ Water Level
1000 0 1000
H H E----3
2000 3000
E----3
Horizontal Scale in Feet
-400~------------------------------------------------------------l------....L. \:,
FIGURE 17-LOCAL·SUBSURFACE ~3EOLOGIC CROSS SECTION H- \ 'I
--------~R=E~V=IS~I0~N=S ________ ___, DESIGNED __ CHECKED C. WHITE ~--1-------------11-----1----I--~ DRAWN
___
DATE MARCH 1997
l----+------------11-----1---+--~ APPROVED =D1sm=1cr~E=N=G1N=EER~-R=CE-N-o. ~--1-------------11-----1----l--~APPROVED "'"'MANAG=ER=---~o=•TE=--
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1335 West I Street - Post Office Box 1231
Los Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
ME DOT A POOL AREA
·35
1021
36 groundwater above the A-clay. The A-clay is continuous beneath much of this section. The two locations where this clay is not shown may be due to a lack of identification of the clay on the drillers logs. The top of the clay is commonly about 80 feet deep along this section. The A-clay is normally from about 10 to 30 feet thick, however beneath the north end of the section the thickness appears to increase substantially. The top of the Corcoran Clay is about 400 to 420 feet deep along this section.
Only one test well was drilled deep enough along this section to apparently reach the bottom of this clay. This section shows some shallow wells in two areas where pumping of groundwater above the A-clay was commenced in the 1990's (Etchengoinberry Ranch and Five Star Ranch). Although not specifically indicated on this map, coarse-grained Sierran deposits predominate between the A-clay and Corcoran Clay, and historically comprised the major aquifer tapped by wells in the Mendota area. Higher salinity groundwater is present below the Corcoran Clay in most of this area. Some Sierran sands are also present above the A-clay and below the Corcoran Clay.
Cross Section I-I' (Figure 18) extends from near the Mendota Airport to the east, through the Mendota Pool, to a point about one-half mile west of San Mateo Avenue. In contrast to the pre1022 (I)
>
Q)
...J
0 (I)
(/j
C: 0
Q)
::!E
0 +-
(I)
> :;:
0 Q)
er::
--.
+-
Q) (I)
'+-
....__,
C:
0 :;:
0 > (I)
w
WEST
I
200-
31J6
••
32L
..
32H 32H
•• i i
SG
s
...c
CJ)
::J
0 Cf)
0 C
(/) (I)
L
LL
33F
••
-- -<----
C
-f---
34M
••
C
=t=s
34L 34L
• ... 11•
34K
••
SG SG SG
EAST
I'
~ elow A- Cl~ .£ - -4---+-- -
_
Lsz -
SIERRAN SANDS s s s
s EA LEVEL ----+--+-"8'-------+-8 --------==+,, - 1 :=!::c=--------F~+§.=------------=i:=--- ~I----J..-.j"-----l---(- = =sc -- SG C C --
SG
--
-100- s
s
-200-
s
-~
I
T.D, 5D0
I _,__ c--C
--
s s
--
I
--
C
--
s
-=~1
T.D. 520
I ->--
_,__ s
s -c
_,.,,,_
----I
_J.._ -,;
C _...!<.
-7 s
- f-- - -
S I
s [
T.D. 370 T:0. 370
==s
C
T.D. 220
-~
_.§_
=& -~C
T.D. 227
T.D, 217
T.D, 255
- I
T.D. 5 10
- 400-'------------------------------------------.J__
I
I
33F
rl
T.D, 520
EXPLANATION
Sand
Sand and Gravel
Sandy Clay, Clayey
Sand , and Si lt
Clay
Well or Test Hole
Identification
Perforat ed Interval
Total Depth in Feet
--'\Z_____ Water Level
1 000 0 1000 2000 3000
F-3 F-3 I I I
Horizontal Scale In Feet
FIGURE 18-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION 1~-- 1' \ -------~R=E~Vl=Sl=ON-'-"'SC.......... _____ ___,0£SIGNED --CHECKED c. WHITE ORAWII ---DA1E MAACH 19!17
,____...._ _______ _..-'------"'----'----'
,____...._ _______ ___,__---" __ .,______,APPROVEO =01s=m=IC'f~EN=G1=NEE=R-=RCE~No. ,____...._ _______ ___,__---"---'----'APPROVED =MANAGER =~--Dl( =JE~I I
I
I
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
1335 West I Street - Post Office Box 1231
Los Banos, California 93635
Telephone (209) 826-1421
ME~DOT A POOL AREA
37 1023
38 vious section, electric logs and/or geologic logs are available for most of the wells along this section. Numerous monitor wells have been drilled at the Spreckels Sugar Co. factory in this area, to tap strata above or below the A-clay. Geologic and electric logs for these wells and geologic logs for several deep soil borings provide substantial information on the location of the A-clay in this area. The A-clay has been identified along much of this section, particularly in the area east of the Fresno Slough. The top of this clay ranges from about 60 to 90 feet deep. Near the east edge of the section, the A-clay bifurcates into two layers, which is a common trend. Three wells or test wells along this section penetrated the Corcoran Clay. The top of the clay is about 420 feet deep along this section, and the clay is about 50 to 60 feet thick.
Sack Dam-Red Top Area
As part of a subsidence evaluation in the Sack Dam-Red Top Area, KDSA developed six local subsurface geologic cross sections, and some or parts of these are reproduced herein. Three of the cross sections (J-J', K-K', and L-L') are oriented from the north-northwest to the south-southeast. The other three cross sections (M-M', N-N', and 0-0') are oriented from the west-southwest to the east-northeast.
1024
Cross Section J-J' (Figure 19) extends from near Roosevelt Road, west of Indiana Road to the southeast to near Avenue 10 39 and Road 6. The part of this section north of Avenue 22 is generally near the Eastside Bypass. The section is generally parallel to the San Joaquin River and an average of about a mile and a half northeast of the river. The Corcoran Clay thickens to the northwest and southeast along this section. The thickness ranges from about 35 feet between Avenues 17 and 18 to about 100 feet near the north end of the section. The top of the clay is about 210 feet deep near the north end and about 305 feet deep near the south end. Fine to intermediate textured deposits are prevalent above the Corcoran Clay along much of the section, except near Jefferson Road near Avenue 17, and south of Avenue 11½. Coarse-grained strata below the water level and above the Corcoran Clay are generally uncommon along this section, except near the south end. Some thick, extensive clay layers are present below the Corcoran Clay along this section, including one below a depth of about 800 to 850 feet. North of Washington Road, such layers are predominant. Another such layer is present beneath the part of this section south of Avenue 16½ at an average depth of about 600 to 650 feet. In terms of land subsidence, both the Corcoran Clay and deeper clays are important because of their aggregate thickness. Coarse-grained strata 1025
1026
are common along the part of this section south of Washington Road, below the Corcoran Clay and above a depth of about 550 to 650 feet.
41 Cross Section K-K' (Figure 20) extends from Chamberlain Road west of Lone Tree Road on the north to near Avenue 12 and Road 7 on the south. This section is an average of about a mile and a half northeast of Cross Section A-A'. The Corcoran Clay ranges from about 60 feet thick to about 100 feet thick along the section. The top of the Corcoran Clay is about 180 feet deep at the north end of the section and 290 feet deep near the south end. Coarse-grained strata below the water level and above the Corcoran Clay are more common south of Jefferson Road than along Cross Section A-A'. These coarse-grained strata are usually present along the part of the section south of Avenue 17½. Within the uppermost 50 feet, sands are common between Avenues 17 and 18, between Avenues 14 and 15, and south of Avenue 13. A relatively thick extensive clay layer is indicated to be present beneath a depth of about 800 to 850 feet along this section. Finegrained deposits are predominant below the Corcoran Clay along the part of the section north of Jefferson Road. Intermediate textured deposits (such as sandy clay) are predominant below the Corcoran Clay along much of rest of the section.
1027
1028
43 Coarse-grained strata in the lower aquifer are primarily above a depth of about 600 650 feet along this section.
Cross Section L-L' (Figure 21) extends from near Roosevelt Road west of Flanagan Road to the south near Avenue 12 and Road 9. The part of this section south of Avenue 20 is generally near the Eastside Bypass, and the section is an average of about two miles northeast of Section B-B'. The Corcoran Clay ranges from about 50 to 80 feet thick and thickness to the north and south along this section. The top of this clay ranges from about 170 feet deep near the north end to about 270 feet deep near the south end of the section. Fine-grained of intermediate textured deposits above the Corcoran Clay are predominant along the parts of the section west of Highway 59 and between Avenues 16 and 18. Clay strata are predominant both above and below the Corcoran clay along much of the part of the section north of Avenue 19. Clay or intermediate textured deposits are predominant in the lower aquifer along much of the section. Sand strata in the lower aquifer are usually present above a depth of about 650 feet.
Cross Section M-M' (Figure 22) extends from near Avenue 16 and the realigned Fresno River to the east-northeast to near Avenue 17½ and Road 9. The Corcoran Clay ranges from about 40 to 60 feet thick along the section. The top of the Corcoran Clay 1029
1030
(I)
LL
-
_.
w
> w
_.
<(
w
Cl)
z
<(
w w
>
!;j:
_.
w
a:
z
0 > w
_.
w
M
WEST
0 0: Cl "' Zw <( IB 0 200- 0: 0: 0:
u.
17B 160 16C. 16A1
100
=::== E
....... ·.:-.: .... ~·-;•.' ··!•:··•.:-::•.•···:.:~•-
-100 - -------
-200 -
T.D. 360
- - -
... ::-:1-1-------------- - -400 - -_-_-_-_-_. ___ ,_ ::-=----_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_;-_-__. -600
10M
,-.
Cl
.:1~-
11L
.::. -~ j.~.;-;:.,._'._;_;>,~-~~:-;;_: :ir~-' ;_'._;~:::: .. :_.:·;: __ : ::.::~-~-=:- . ::~:-;::-.~--~;~; :.;.\:
11F
= ... - .. ...... -------- t-_-:-:-:-·~ -_4~•::-:,.-:::::•::;._.·_:•: :· = I=•
____ ..... ::--·.:-,.-. -.-~.;;}\Yr:t-:,'.,).!;-:'.:·-;:Y::;~-~_.;_L::.,;~.:·:>:;~;:;<,,::;;:.-:. _;;:::-/~- ,:_:.,.:'. ::·-:·:. ~--··· :. :: ....... :i•-:· -.~-.-·.· :•·. · :" ... ·. :i•,,;.;.:•,· : \,•t:.-:-.-·:.-: ... ;.: :=.·= • .• -: :·.·. :-:-.-. ·-:: .: ..• • .. : • - ~= ... - (/) (/) !!! (/)
ct
~>- w"'
. .. . • •. •. •.• .. . ......... · .• · •. ... .. . ...... .. •• :··~ ..... _. .......... .-.... .-.: -: .... -... ··.:·:: = .::: ~:~~-: ... • :::~.--: .. :: :·:::.: :.-..... ,.· .. :-:.:-.-:·• .=··= _. = ;:--::.:..·.·= .... •.:-~•:····.:•: ... :l•;::.• :"::•· :.-::.:-· :.-:•:-: ·· .. =:::· ...... _...,:.:, ~.-:-:-: -:}:-:.!. _-;;;_ ~~..,,. .. . = ~===~=~i.:=:~===========~=======:~===:=:: ~:-:=:-:-:-:-:-:-:=:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-=-===-=-:-:..:.:-=-=~=-=-=-=-=----=----_-_::_..~------=====~===- t- :-:-:-::--: - - - - - - - t-_ - - - - - - - - - = =-=-=-=-=-=-:-:-:-:-. ;i~!:~;;;;;;~::;~:~;;:~!:!:~::::~:!~'.~;:~=~~:.:!~~~!~!'.!~!!!!:::::::~~!!!!~~:!~;;;;;!:~~~~:::=--~ --------~-~~·.:··
·---------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------
-----------------
----------------------------------
----- --------------------------------
·--------------------
----------------------
-~-------------------------------
-------------------------------
----------------------~----------------------------- ·- ---------------------- -------------------------------
E:?d:f~:::E=:=~==========~==:=:~:~~~:_S- ;:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:- -
-
--:-:-:-:-:--:-:-:---- - - --- ·----- -------
T.D. 901
FIGURE 22-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION M-M'
I
§l
g (0
(JJ Cl
<( <(
Cl 0
z 0:
w
co
M'
EAST
0, 0:
,.. 200
1H
-=--
.. ·-. _=-= - 100
_: Y·:·:= ~':·'?'"::'.'.·;·::. :':' t,:U?·'::-,-;·-::_:;;·::: ~-, .(:: u .:::,-;· -~~-~:: ~-, .:.:,-: ;~ ,' -Y. -- ·- --------
=~"'~------------------
__ - -~-~~-=-'~-i ,- 0 ---=----_-_-_:-____ - ________ ·,·!"' !----:_-_-_-_-_-_-__ _ ------- - _;- . .. . ..................... .-.:.•"· :::: .. _::·=::·.-:-:·~.'-::·::_:.:~ f:/Xi-if}/~t(/.:_:i:::\-~::,· :-::::-.:~]·::.::-: --- --: ------------------·· -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
~-_;_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-~-------~ ~---==========~ r--200 ------_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_______ -----_-_-;,_,-_-_ • I- t: .... - - - - - - ..... ::-:-:-:-:---::-:-:-=-=-=-=-:-:-:-=-=-=-=-=-=. f- : :---::--:-:-:-::
-·--------------------- ,-- ---_-_--:-_ -_,:_-_-_-________________________________ .' 1-- I- - - - -------:-:
-~-------------------- 1---------- -:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-:-:-:-:-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= .... : :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: - ...
--------- - -------- t- -------- ~--=
-.:- -·- - --------------- ---------
• ------- - ----- - - T.D.500 ___ -- -
EXPLANATION
rs-;;, Gravel or Sand and
L.:...:.l Gravel Mixture
j>,,:-'J Sand
i;;;;;;,;i Sandy Clay, Clayey Sand
or Sand and Clay Mixture t-=3 Clay
I:SSJ Corcoran Clay
1 H Well and Identification l Perforated Interval
T.D. 500 Total Depth (feet)
Water Levels (January-February 2013):
Upper Aquifer
- ..:r'
- Lower Aquifer
0 1,000 2,000
I I I
Honzontal Scale (Feet)
-300
e- -400
i--500
,--600
,- -700
~-800
m
r
m
;;...i
0 z JJ
m
r
< m
b
s:
m
)>
z
en
m
)>
r
m
< m
r
..-..
,,
<D
m.
-
103145
46 ranges from about 240 feet deep near the west end of the section to 195 feet deep near the east end. Sand strata are predominant above the Corcoran Clay between Roads 6 and 8 along the section.
A substantial thickness of intermediate textured or clay deposits are present above the Corcoran Clay in the parts of the section west of road 6 and east of Road 8. Clay and intermediate textured deposits are predominant below the Corcoran clay along the section. Some sand strata are usually present in the lower aquifer above a depth from about 800 feet along the section, where logs for deep wells or test holes are available. The thickest sands in the lower aquifer are generally within about 100 feet of the base of the Corcoran Clay.
Cross Section N-N' (Figure 23) extends from near Avenue 12 and Road 6 to the northeast to near Avenue 14 and Road 9. The Corcoran Clay ranges from about 40 feet thick near the east end of the section to almost 70 feet thick near the west end. Sand is predominant in the upper aquifer along this section between Roads 6½ and 8. Productive sands are also present in the upper aquifer between Roads 8 and 9 along this section. Clay and intermediate textured deposits are predominant in the lewer aquifer along this section, particularly below a depth of about 550 feet. Water producing sand or gravel are common in the lower aquifer within about 150 feet of the base of the Corcoran Clay. 1032
N N' WEST
EAST
C\I
co .... I'-- (0 (1) 0 LU Cl Cl Cl LU <( :::, <( <( :::, oz 0 0 z a:: LU a:: a:: a:: LU 200- -200
34N 34Q 34R 35L 35F 35C 26P 25L 25A 19N
------------------ --- -- -- -·- - -- ~.:.::.:-:·.··· ··::•·"-:•:··· ... ,.. ............... ~. 100 - ---~----_ _:-__ ,.:._ --·-: - ----~--- ..... ·i:,: ·~ ...... ; ·~: ..... •.:·.·· ., . ..,,- 100
-
ci5
Q)
LL
-
..J
w
> w
..J
<(
w
Cl)
z <(
w w
>
..J
w
a:
z
0 :::::>
w
..J
w
.::£.· ~-
------_-_-_-:, ::.'·::"~:-:.{·~--=-=--- --- ----- .._-_-_-_-_____ '-- ------- 1,... ____________ --- - 0- :::-:--:--:--:- - = ~·""
------ ----:., _-_-_-_-_-_-:
1--_-____ --- f--_-__ ------------ --~
"' ,.,..
• ' , "'< "< "<""' - .CORCORAN CLAY .
........
--
__ .,.
-200
-300-;'.;~',;::: :·;~~%i!!{ii)jl}!; ; :;g?t,J!m :, 1Jin1~;&it!JlJiW!{Mil}: "'?{,;:;.;~:. - • • •• • • .. .. -. .. .. ......... -, ......... , .... C• - \?','j'.i9.\Ai'·· ~-... ':i!!2,, . .,", /'",a;+>:!'Y/2:t;s,..,"~·;:
-400- //;,:~}?; \~.{t/~t:/{.:(·~·{(i/;/:•;(,:i::~:~:~);ti i;;~~~!- Jt=;=: .---·-.. ~~:- '-·-~- ---- . =-~.:::·: ... : .. : .. • :: .. ·.:::, . ·-:· ·: .•. ·:: .·.·.:· ,. : . ·- \::?::;·:·::::: :;:.:,:;/f::f::~:\::·::·.~!t{f--:.. -_- -------------. - ·::=.: - - ·: ==:-:--:--::·:- ~~-~~-~-~--=~-~5-;J;;)~;;;-~---~· i-~- t- - - --- :
=----------- =-:-=-=-=-=-: :-=-=-:-:---_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ ------: ·::·; .. : :.:·;•} ~--== - -----_-: '---------------------_-_:-_-_-_-__ -_::
~~;... =--&.::. ·- 1-- L..----- ---..
500 -· --·- ------ ----- - -- ... ------==-4.:.:·· .·····. ··.•.·~ ·.· ........... •. ~: -·~·:;· ·;.;,··:;.,;.:·~· .a,;,:~;.;;.;~~:,,.;,;.~.._:..;;..:...,;..:.;...:.:..:..:5,;-:_-_:-_-::...-..::...-:..-...:
- ------------~ --------------------=·=_=_=_=<""========- -_-_-_-_-_-_-__ --·----------- -~--:·:·::::;~: ------ ---------------------- . ------
------
---
-600
____________
-- -- '
-------
~---------
...::
~-... =I="'•·· .. -100-=·-...::.:-:........;;:;=~-=----·--~"S ------ i-________________ :_ ... -_ ---- -- ---~---:
-800-
-900-
~.:._..:~·~.,___-_____ -_-__ -:_ _ _;--__________________ . -_-_-_____________ ----- - ------------ - -- .~;·;,.;- -,______ _ ____________ - ~~~~~~~~--~~----~-~-:-~==-~::=~=-=-=~~~~=-=-=-=-=-=-=====~-- T.D. 910 ·------------- T.D. 912 T.D. 910 T.D. 91Q:.- ·· . -T.Q,~10-- T.D. 907 ----~ ------- -- -- - ·- ------ --
. ------i-----· - -·
·----- ------
----- ------
-~ ,.----
... 1. ..
-------
-
,_-
-1,000- T.D. 4,002
FIGURE 23-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION N-N'
·:;~
.- =
.. === -···= ·z - ~------ ;/~:)?\i; :~. -----_ -~
EXPLANATION
Gravel or Sand and
L..:..;J Gravel Mixture
fX~f;;;j Sand
Sandy Clay, Clayey Sand
or Sand and Clay Mixture t-=3 Clay
Corcoran Clay
19N Well and Identification
IL Perforated Interval
T.D. 322 Total Depth (feet)
Water Level (January-February 2010):
0 I
Upper Aquifer
1,000
I
Horizontal Scale (Feet)
2;000
· 1
--
0 -too
... .,200
---300
i--400
--500
i--600
i- -700
---800
---900
.... -1,000
m
r
m
;....i
0 z
:0
m
<
m
d
s: m
)>
z
en
m
)>
r
m
< m
r
-
""Tl
(l)
-
47 1033
48 Cross Section 0-0' (Figure 24) extends from near Indiana Road and the San Joaquin River to the northeast near Roosevelt Road, west of Flanagan Road. The Corcoran clay generally thickens to the northeast along this section, from about 55 feet to 85 feet.
The top of this clay is about 200 feet deep near the southwest end and about 160 feet deep near the northeast end. Clay layers are predominant both above and below the Corcoran Clay along the part of the section east of Newhall Road. More sand layers are present both above and below the Corcoran Clay along the part of the section west of Newhall Road. Most of the sand layers are indicated to be above a depth of about 600 feet along this section.
GROUNDWATER USE AND WELL DATA
Primary Uses of Each Aquifer
The primary use of the upper and lower aquifers is irrigation and public supply. Secondary uses of these aquifers are for private domestic and industrial.
Depths of Water Supply Wells
Figure 7 is a good indication of the maximum depths of most supply wells in the SJREC GSA, as they tap strata above the Corcoran Clay. The depths of most upper aquifer supply wells generally range from about 100 to 300 feet, although some near the DMC 1034
t'
-' w
> w
-'
<(
w
Cl)
z <(
w
2 w
>
-' w
a:
z
0 1--
w
-' w
lo
SOUTHWEST
z
s
Cl a:
0~ :;!; c§ 200 • cc ~o::
ca
25R 30P
100
.·· .. •, .. :. ·-
===·
-~100 - --
~'--'
=-
.. ··
-:200
1-_-:-_-_-:-_-_
... ·
=""'
-~ . ...::=---= =-=··
--- -
- -- -·
~400 - ;::~==:::_~== ,..-_-_-:.,-_------------
-500-
-eoo -
-700 -
-800--900-
..... -_-__________ -
------- ---------------
EXPLANATION
f!S"'<,I Gravel or Sand and
La.:...:.l Gravel Mixture
[[II Sand
Sandy Clay, Clayey Sand
or Sand and Clay Mixture t-::::3 Clay
l'SSJ Corcoran Clay
25R Well and Identification
l Perforated Interval
T.D. 570 Total Depth (feet)
Water Levels (January-February 2013):
0 Upper Aquifer
Lower Aquifer
1,000
Hortzontal Scale (Feet) ·
2,000
(/j J: (/j (!)
-,: :::,
g: g
CD 00
w..: 98
~f!: :;/t a:
w~
30Q
.-..... : ...
Cl
c§ 0::
w w
a:
Iw
z
g
29F 29H
--------- --- - f---:
- - - - -_
..J ..J Cl
-,: -,:
J: 0
a:
z
21N
-
:-_:-_ --:....-_:-_-_-_-_-_-____ - ----_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_:-_-_-_-:,_-:,.-_- --------------------------- ___________________ -_-_-_-:;-_-_-:_-_-_-_-_- ---------------- _____________ --- 21H
·- ~=-
--= - - - - ·- - - - -
______ ..,._ - ~-..,;..._. .....:--~~- ____ ....._____. ~:--: :'ll!!ill!!!!':--~ ~- ~~-:. - -- - -""""l ----- ------------------ - -
==···
-------- -
-- .:•.=
----_ :-x :.o•::-. - 9 ·;¢?''.cP•~--~ 0'7-,.;.,·• '..;._· ..______ -.- -----
--
I
O'
NORTHEAST
UJ Cl >-,:
~o
0 a:
22B
=
-200
-100
-200
---=--_-___ -;_ _____ :: _______ ---2::. ... ==::·-.... --~ ···•-- 1--------- ,_- - - - - :-_-- --300
------- -- -- - - - -- - -----
·------------ ----_-_-;_-_-_-;--, __ .. ---------------------------- -_-::.;,_-~--------------- - - -- __ -_;
-:_:-_-_-_-_-..... - ---- T.D. 532 _________ _ ---------- -------- --------- ------- - - - --------------- - - .
-- - - - ----
- - - -- - - - --
-
__ -
-- -.... -- - T.D. 605
T.D. 625 . ---------.----------
------------------=-------_- -. --------.... - --------------.----- -------------------- ·---------- -
_____ ,_ __ ---------------------
-----------~--------
- - - - - - - - - - -·-- - - - - - - -
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------
--------------------
----~--------------
+--
....__ -· - ------
--400
-·--- t--·
-500
-_-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:------- ----~ -600
-----------------------_ -_ -_-_ ---_ -_ ------------------------------ - -- -
-- --- ------
T.D. 800 :-::-:-:-::-:-:-::- --700
--_-_- =-=-=-=-=-:-:-:
---------
w _______ _
---------------i
:..=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-: =-=-=-=:: --~============:_
-:::-:-:-:-:-::-:-::-::-:-:-:.:-:-:- :-:-:-:-::-:-:-:-,.... -800 w-------------- -------- -------------- ------- -
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-.... - - _____________ -
---------------------- -
---------------
--------
- ---w - ------
T.D. 990
1 --900
FIGURE 24-LOCAL SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION cb-O' (
m
r
m
0 z
JJ
m
r
< m
d
s:
m
)>
z
CJ)
m
)>
r
m
< m
r
-
"Tl
(I)
(I)
--
49 1035
50 in the south part of the area are more than 400 feet deep. As for maximum depths of wells tapping the lower aquifer, Figure 5 is relevant. Thus the maximum depths of these wells range from about 500 to 800 feet (the bottom of the basin). There are few water supply wells that are more than 600 feet in depth in the SJREC GSP Group Area.
WATER LEVELS
Water-level Elevations and
Direction of Groundwater Flow
Above the A-Clay Near Mendota
In the SJREC GSP Group Area, the only place where water-level maps are available for above the A-clay is near Mendota. Figure 25 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow above the A-clay for December 2012-January 2013, modified from the 2012 MPG pumping program report by Luhdorff & Scalmanini and KOSA (2013). Historical maps indicate that a recharge ridge has been present beneath the San Joaquin River and the easterly branch of the Mendota Pool. Groundwater from the north side of this ridge has moved northward and into Madera County. There is no known pumpage from wells tapping strata above the A-clay north of the San Joaquin River. The water levels above the A-clay are important because they are shallower then water levels in strata 1036
12 7
8 9
7 12
10 11
8 9
10 11
31 34
35 36
6 1 2
3 4
7 8
16 11
12 9
10 18
17 18
17 15
14 13
19 20
19 21
24 20
21 24
22 23
25 30
29 28
27 26
25 30
29 28
27 36
31 32
33 34
35 36
31 32
33 34
1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2
13 18
17 16
15 14
17 16
14 13
13 15
18 20
21 24
19 22
24 23
23 24
19 22
20 21
30 25
30 29
27 26
26 28
27 28
29 8
FRESNO
SLOUGH
FRESNO
SLOUGH
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST
BYPASS
SIDE
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
JOAQ
RIVER
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
COTT
C
JAMES BYPASS
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
5 E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
Firebaugh
Mendota
140
130
110
150
160
100
140
150
120
0 0.5 1 2 3 4
Miles
.
FIGURE 25- WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW ABOVE THE A-CLAY (DECEMBER 2012- JANUARY 2013)
EXPLANATION:
Direction of Groundwater Flow
SJREC GSP Group
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Groundwater Elevation
160 (feet above mean sea level)
51 1037
52 beneath this clay. These shallower water levels limit the amount of storage space for recharging and storing groundwater in areas underlain by the A-clay.
Water-level hydrographs for ~hallow observation wells near the river in the area east of San Mateo Road indicate a significant response to streamflow in the river. During streamflow, water levels in strata above the A-clay rise, and during periods of no streamflow they fall. Because water is normally present in the Mendota Pool, water levels in shallow wells have been more stable in this reach, compared to farther east. In general, water levels in wells tapping strata above the A-clay have been relatively stable over the long-term, rising during and following periods of streamflow in the San Joaquin River, and falling during the intervening periods.
Upper Aquifer
Figure 26 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow for the upper aquifer for February 2015. The coverage for this map has been expanded to the east in the Red Top-El Nido Area, because of concerns about land subsidence in that area. Overall, the directions of groundwater flow in February 2015 were similar to those shown on the previous map for Spring 1986 and 2006, which were representative of periods of 1038
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
OCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12 S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
60 90
70 70
70 60
70 50
40 50
40 30
140
130 130
130
120
120
110
110
110
110
80 80
80 80
80 90
90 90
100
100
100
100
100
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 26 - WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF
GROUNDWATER FLOW FOR UPPER AQUIFER (SPRING 2015)
EXPLANATION:
SJREC GSP Group Area
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Groundwater Elevation
(feet above mean sea level) 100
Direction of Groundwater Flow
53 1039
Monitoring
Zone
54 abundant surface water supplies in most of the area. In 1986 and Spring 2006 there was a groundwater divide east of Dos Palos.
South of Highway 152, groundwater was flowing northeast and into Madera County. North of Highway 152, groundwater was moving northerly and toward the San Joaquin River from both sides of the river. Water levels in Spring 2013 are generally representative of a dry period. South of Chamberlain Road, groundwater in the upper aquifer was flowing into Madera and Merced Counties. North of this road, groundwater was generally flowing toward the San Joaquin River from both sides of the river.
Lower Aquifer
In most parts of the SJREC service area, few wells tap strata only below the Corcoran Clay. However, there are a number of wells that tap strata both above and below the Corcoran Clay, particularly in the area west of Newman and near llaeagemee~ Area J. These wells are termed composite wells. Water levels in these wells generally are significantly lower than those in nearby wells that tap only the upper aquifer. The water levels in these composite wells normally are similar to water levels in wells that tap strata only below the Corcoran Clay, such as in the Panoche and Westlands Water Districts. For 1040
55 this reason, water-level measurements for selected composite wells have been used, in addition to measurements for wells tapping only the lower aquifer, to prepare water-level elevation maps for the lower aquifer. Because of recent concerns about land subsidence in the Red Top-El Nido area, significantly improved water-level maps are available east of the Exchange Contractors service area in this area for Spring 2015.
The Fall 1981 water-level elevation and direction of groundwater flow maps prepared by KOSA (1997) for the lower aquifer indicated a number of features which weren't previously well known. First, a groundwater divide was present in the area between Mendota and a point near the San Joaquin River northeast of Los Banos. The divide extended through Sub-area E. Groundwater northeast of this divide was moving to the northeast and into the Madera area. Southwest of this divide, groundwater was moving southwest and out of the CCID toward the Panoche Water District. The groundwater flow directions in Fall 1981 were primarily toward pumping depressions due to pumping of groundwater from below the Corcoran Clay in the Madera area, and in the Panoche Water District and the Westlands Water District. There has been little pumping of water from the lower aquifer in Subareas E and G, due to high salinity. Beneath and adjacent to the groundwater divide, there has been significant downward flow 1041
56 of groundwater from the upper aquifer through the Corcoran Clay.
This has provided a significant source of recharge to groundwater in the lower aquifer. Northwest of the Stanislaus-Merced County line, groundwater in the lower aquifer was indicated to flow upward into the upper aquifer. This was the only known part of the SJREC service area where there was upward flow of groundwater from the lower to the upper aquifer.
Figure 27 shows water-level elevations and directions of groundwater flow for the lower aquifer in part of the SJREC GSP Group Area in Spring 2015. This map was also extended into the Red Top area because of concerns about land subsidence. The most extensive cover age was for the Westlands W. D. and in the Red Top area. In the Red Top area, water-level elevations ranged fran 14 to 28 feet above mean sea level, and the direction of groundwater flow was to the northeast. In the Westlands W.D. area, water-level elevations ranged from 20 feet to 50 feet below mean sea level and the direction of groundwater flow was to the south. In the Panoche W.D., waterlevel elevations ranged from about 10 to 20 feet below mean sea level and the direction of groundwater flow was to the southwest.
North and west of Newman, water-level elevations ranged fran about 40 to 50 feet above mean sea level. The direction of groundwater flow was primarily to the east. Groundwater flow directions were the same as in Fall 1981 and Spring 1993. That is, groundwater flowed away fran the divide toward pumping depressions in the Madera Area and in the Panoche 1042
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
OCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12 S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
+40
+40
+50
+50
+60
+60
-10
-10
-20
-20
-30
-30
-40
-40
+20
+20
+30
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 27 - WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTIONS OF
GROUNDWATER FLOW FOR LOWER AQUIFER (SPRING 2015)
.
EXPLANATION:
Direction of Groundwater Flow
Groundwater Elevation
! Measured Well
+40
57 1043
and Westlands Water Districts. In general, water-level elevations in the lower aquifer in the Westlands Water District were significantly lower in Spring 2015 than in Fall 1981.
Water-Level Trends
58 KOSA (2014) provided updated water-level hydrographs for the SJREC service are a through early 2013. As part of the present evaluation, a number of these previously prepared water-level hydrographs were updated through early 2017.
Figure 28 shows the locations of wells with updated waterlevel hydrographs, which are provided in Appendix A of this report.
An effort was undertaken to determine the depths and perforated intervals for many of the wells with hydrographs. Such information, where available, is provided on the hydrographs. Measurements for shallow wells (i.e., from about 10 to 20 feet deep) were purposely excluded from this evaluation, so that water-level changes in the water-producing deposits that are tapped by water supply wells could be evaluated. In order to evaluate the long-term water-level changes, a period of average hydrologic conditions is normally used. The period 1962-89 was considered representative for the 1997 evaluation. Subsequently, the period 1962 to 2005 was evaluated by KOSA (2008). For the KOSA 2014 report, the period 1962-2013 was evaluated. The water-level hydrograph evalua1044 Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Mad
M
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18 17 15 14 13 24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
OCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
VALERIA
AVE
S FAITH HOM E RD
W BELMON T
AVE
M S T
W
H ST
LOCUS
A
T
VE
L ST W
I-5
POM ELO
AVE
E LAS PALMA S AVE
MC CLINTOCK RD
BYSTRUM
RD
V OLTA RD
S
N ST
W
ALMON D
AVE
EUCALYPTUS RD W
HWY 33
POPLAR AVE
MERRILL AVE
BRANNON AVE
S DEL
PUERTO AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
I
ST
SYCAM ORE AVE
S DERRICK AV E
ELG
AV
I N
E
W NEES AV E
PALM AVE S
W M ERRILL AV E
N FAIRFAX AVE
CENTE R AVE
S
PIONEE R RD W
HWY 165 S
MERCE Y SPRINGS RD S
HWY 33
SANTA NELLA BLVD S
S NYDER RD
W
OLLE R ST
P S T W
4TH
ST
N ST
INGOM AR RD S
ORESTIMBA
RD
FRONTIER S T
W
HENRY M ILLE R AVE W
HUNT RD S
N SAN DIEGO AV E
N DOUG LAS
AVE
W ASHLAN AV E
SUNSE T AVE W
BAR TCH
AVE
N D OS PALOS RD
HUNT RD S
COTTON GIN RD W
SHAIN AVE
VILLA
FOLS OM AVE
L
ST
BASS
AVE
CENTER AV E S
S P RAIRIE FLOWER RD
ELM AVE
FIALHO AVE W
SANTA FE GRD
ORANGE AV E
SHIELLS RD
W S HAIN AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
ARMSTRONG RD
BADGE R FLAT RD S
CAPRI AVE
W
W HERNDON AV E
MOFFETT RD
N CAMBRIA AVE
FAHEY RD W
W BULLARD AVE
N FA IRFAX
AVE
S MITCHELL RD
HO YER
RD
W M INT AVE
HWY 152 W
S CENTRAL AVE
GRAND AVE W
JOHNSO N RD
S
I-5 I-5
I-5
DRAP ER RD
N LYON AVE
LINDE N AVE W
SANTALUCIA
AVES
W M CKINLEY AV E
HOLSTEIN RD W
HWY 140 W
BELL RD
INGOMAR GRD W
KNIEBES R
S
D
REY NOLDS AVE S
ANDE RS ON RD
COPA DE ORA AV E W
N ORLE ANS AVE
UPP ER RD
W SILAXO AVE
MI DDLE RD
W
COZZI R
S
D
N WASHOE AVE
W LINWOOD
AVE HICKORY
AVE
JENSEN RD S
W HARDING RD
E
ST
S MORGAN RD
LEXINGTON AVE
S
N DOUGLAS
AVE
FIG
LN
N OXFORD AVE
NO BLE RD
W
H OBART
AVE
EASTIN
RD
W ALTHEA AVE
N FAIRFAX AVE
ASH AVE
W BEHYMER
AVE
CANAL
HWY 152 S
SAN MATEO AVE
MINT RD W
JULIP R
S
D
HOLLY
AVE
PACHECO BLVD W
N NEWCOM B AVE
HENRY MILLER
AVE W
N LYON AVE
I-5 W
TE RCEIRA RD S
H ST W
AUGUS T RD
W SAN
JO SE AVE
PIONEE R RD W
SHYST
S
ELFERS RD
ESTHER AVE
S
ELGI N
AVE
E MORY AVE
W
HWY 33 S
E MARSH ALL RD
W GETTYSBURG
AVE
KILBURN RD
CANAL SCHOOL RD S
W S HIELDS AVE
S BLAKE R RD
W M ARSHALL RD
LODI RD
S
W LINWOOD AVE
S OHIO
AVE
MORRIS
RD
LUNDY
RD
SIMMO NS
RD
W VALE RIA AVE
BRADBURY
RD
PUMP
RD
CHE RRY
AVE
N CUSTE R
AVE
CUSTER
AVE
TULIP AV
HWY 140 W
PRI NCE R
S
D
EHRLICH RD
SULLIVAN
RD
WARD R
S
D
HUTCHIN S R D W
PARADISE AVE
W CARM ELLIA AV E
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W M ILLE R AVE
ROXBURY RD W
DIEHL
RD
SHAIN
AVE
SIMMONS RD
CARM ELLIA AVE W
AUBREY AVE
S
CYPRESS RD
W
W HARDING RD
ACACIA
AVE
ELAINE RD
WEST MAIN ST
E UCALYPTUS RD
W
W S IM MONS RD
CHERRY
AVE
G UN CLUB RD W
TAGLIO RD W
ARROYA AVE S
RUBLE RD
WALNUT AVE
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
ORTI GALITA RD
S
LUX
AVE
N ELGIN AVE
N DAVIDS ON AVE
HO YER
RD
MILLS RD
S
N EVANS
AVE
ALMOND DR W
N BRANNON RD
MOFFETT RD
PHILLIPS RD W
MOFFATT RD S
CHINA CAMP RD W
FE NTEM RD W
GAY ST
W
DIANA RD S
WEST
RD
N NEWCOM B AVE
N SAN
DIEGO AVE
INDIANA AVE S
N JE RROLD AVE
N HUDS ON
AVE
LE WIS RD
BRYANT
AVE
CLAUSEN
RD
N MILLUX RD
MASON RD W
PU MPRDW
WILLIS RD S
E STUHR
RD
N HUDSON AV E
CARLUC CI RD
S
PFITZE R RD W
N JERROLD AVE
ISLAND
AVE
S DERRICK AV E
DODDS
EHRLICH RD
JENNINGS RD
WANGENHEIM
RD TAGLIO RD
W
RAMOS RD W
W KEY AVE
PR ESTON RD W
A PRICOT AVE
HWY 152 S
HALE RD
BATTEN RD W
VOLTA R
S
D
N FAIRFAX AVE
AZEVEDO
RD
W BRADBURY
RD
LEOTA ST
S
BRAZO RD W
DENTON & LE AK RD W
W CO PPER
AVE
W OX ALIS AVE
W CALIFO RNIA
AVE
SANTA RITA GRD W
ROMERO RD W
PFITZE R RD W
SSAN
BERNARDINO AVE
W SA N JO SE AVE
PALM AVE S
DOS PALOS
RD
S CA RPENTER RD
N RUSS ELL AV E
AZEV EDO RD S
ORCHARD RD S
HUSMAN RD
W
MILLUX
AVE
MERVEL AVE W
CACTUS DR
W
LAGUNA RD
W
JERSEY RD S
NANTE S AV E S
N MILLUX RD
N JERRO
AV
LD
E
APPLE
AVE
HILMAR RD
HARV EY RD
VENICE
RD
JORGE NSEN RD
W
CANY ON RD S
N OHIO AVE
RAMOS RD S
N HUDSON AV E
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
WORTHINGTON RD
W
GUN CLUB RD W
WILSON RD S
BORBA RD
W
W OLIVE AVE
ROSE GAR DEN
RD W
NEWSOM RD
S
HALEY RD W
LOCKE AVE
CLEM ENT AVE S
ALMOND DR W
CREE K RD S
JOHNS ON RD S
I-5 S
M ADERA
RD
N BRANNON
RD
FINK RD
ORCHARD RD S
W IKE CROW RD
W HARDING RD
HOG IN
HEARSTRD W
HELM CANAL RD
POLE LINERD S
W ORMS BY AVE
RIVER RD
SANTA FE GRD W
S SAN BE NITO AVE
WARD RD
S
CATRINA ST W
HWY 152
WOO RD S
CHER OKEE RD
W PANOCHE RD
MORAGA AVE S
INGOMAR GRD W
WASHINGTON RD W
WARD AVE
SANTA FE GRD W
MEDLIN RD
AUGUS T RD
JORGENSEN RD
SWIFT AVE S
WILD DUCK RD S
W WHITESBR IDGE AVE
HUSMAN RD W
SANTA FE G RD
SANTA CRUZ GUN CLUB RD S
CA MP 13 RD W
POLE LINE RD W
I-5 S
SANTA FE GRD W
CROWS LAND NI G RD
POMEGRANATE AVE
PEAR AVE
FIG
AVE
HWY 152 W
HWY 33 S
DAV IS RD
W HERNDO N
AVE
MORAN RD MORAN RD
W S TUHR RD
PETE MILLER RD
HILLS FERRY RD
INDIANA RD
A
S
LFA LFA
RD
OLD LAS
PALMAS AV E
N DOUG LAS
AVE
PRUNE
AVE
FREITAS RD
J T CROW RD
HWY 140 W
HWY 140 W
BLUE HILL
HELM DITCH RD
FINK RD
W S HAW AVE
SCHMIDT RD S
PETE MILLER RD
COTTON RD W
BUNKER RD
W
ORESTIMBA RD
COTTONWOO D RD
W
CHARLESTON RD W
OAK FLAT RD
WHITWORTH RD S
HALLOWELL RD
NETHERTON RD W
N RUSS ELL AV E
N GALVEZ AVE
MANUCHA RD
DODDS RD
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18 17 15 14 13 24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11 E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8 S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10 S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
1038
1062
1008
1052
1061
1064
1059
1026
1017
1048
1063
1034
1047
1030
1011
1020
1019
1044
1055
1010 1037
1029
1039
1041
1040
1043
1018
1031
1021
1054
1033
1025
1046
1060
1058
1024
1003
1001
1042
1049
1036
1006
1056
1050 1045 1051
1066
1007 1009
1027
1004
1014
1057
1022
1053
1002
1013
1035
1023 1012 1028
1032
1016
1005
1015
2475
2406
2410
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 28 - LOCATIONS OF WELLS WITH LONG-TERM WATER LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS EXPLANATION:
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Well
SJREC GSP Group Area
59 1045
60 tion for the SJREC service area was divided into the sub-areas which had previously been delineated. Most of the water-level hydrographs extend back to at least 1970, and many extend back to at least 1960. In interpreting trends in the hydrographs, individual measurements were not given as much weight as the preponderance of measurements for a particular well. This helps to eliminate errors and other factors that produce atypical results.
The cited trends are considered applicable to most of the wells in each sub-area evaluated, however, they don't apply to every single well. The perforated intervals or total depths of the measured wells and an available map showing the depth to the top of and thickness of the Corcoran Clay (KOSA, 1997b) were used to divide the water-level measurements into the upper aquifer (above this clay) and the lower aquifer (below this clay). A number of measured wells tap both aquifers, and are termed composite wells.
Water-level hydrographs for composite wells are more difficult to interpret, compared to those for other wells. Thus most of the interpretation of water-level trends was based on measurements for wells that are known to tap either the upper or lower aquifer.
Water-level fluctuations in confined aquifers are generally much greater than those in unconfined aquifers. Based on waterlevel depths and fluctuations shown on the hydrographs, the lower 1046
61 aquifer appears to be confined throughout the study area. Although the upper aquifer is generally considered to be unconfined over much of the study area, there is confinement in sane locations.
One example is near the San Joaquin River at Mendota, where finegrained flood-basin deposits (the A-clay) are present at shallow depth. In this area, groundwater in deposits between about 100 and 250 feet in depth is normally confined, whereas the top of the Corcoran Clay is about 450 feet deep, or well below these deposits. The confinement in the upper aquifer is generally most pronounced near the trough of the valley, where shallow confining layers are present and groundwater levels are shallow.
Sub-Area A
This is the northernmost sub-area in the Exchange Contractors service area, comprising the Crows Landing-Newman area. Waterlevel hydrographs for 28 wells with construction records indicated no long-term change in water level in this sub-area through 1995. About 80 percent of these wells tapped strata only above the Corcoran Clay. Hydrographs for 12 wells with construction records indicated long-term water-level rises prior to about 1989. About two-thirds of these wells tapped strata below the Corcoran Clay.
Water-level hydrographs in this sub-area were updated through Spring 2019. An example of a hydrograph for an upper aquifer 1047
62 well (T6S/R8E-22Al) is provided in Figure 29. This is for CCID Well No. 2, or SGMA Well 1002. Since the mid 1960's, depth to water in this well has usually ranged from about 25 to 55 feet.
The water level fell during the 1987-93 drought, and then recovered by the late 1990's. During 2012-16, the water level fell to more than 80 feet deep. However, by early Summer 2019, the water level had recovered to 47 feet deep. The overall long-term trend after the late 1980's has been one of relatively stable water levels in both aquifers in this sub-area. There was little indication of the previous rising water levels for wells tapping the lower aquifer.
Sub-Area B
This area primarily comprises the Gustine area and lands farther south. The Gustine Drainage District formerly operated a number of drainage wells to lower shallow water levels in this sub-area. However, most of these are inactive due to numerous tile drainage systems that have been installed to control shallow groundwater. Water-level hydrographs for 25 wells with construction records that were evaluated in 1997 indicated no long-term change in water level . .About 85 percent of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay. Hydrographs for 11 wells with construction records indicated long-term rises (prior to about 1989) . .About two-thirds of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay.
1048
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0 2/1/19652/1/19662/1/19672/1/19682/1/19692/1/19702/1/19712/1/19722/1/19732/1/19742/1/19752/1/19762/1/19772/1/19782/1/19792/1/19802/1/19812/1/19822/1/19832/1/19842/1/19852/1/19862/1/19872/1/19882/1/19892/1/19902/1/19912/1/19922/1/19932/1/19942/1/19952/1/19962/1/19972/1/19982/1/19992/1/20002/1/20012/1/20022/1/20032/1/20042/1/20052/1/20062/1/20072/1/20082/1/20092/1/20102/1/20112/1/20122/1/20132/1/20142/1/20152/1/20162/1/20172/1/20182/1/2019 Depth to Water (feet)
FIGURE 29 - REPRESENTATIVE WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR UPPER AQUIFER IN SUB-AREA A SGMA ID: 1002
63 1049
Hydrographs for two wells with construction records indicated long-term declines, and both of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay.
64 As part of the KOSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs for 19 wells in this sub-area were updated through 2006. Essentially the same trends were indicated as for the previous evaluation. Water levels in eight of these wells became so shallow during the 1990's, that they couldn't rise any further and began flowing. Most of these wells were in the area east of Gustine, and this situation was apparently exacerbated by the abandonment of the former drainage wells. Figure 30 is considered a representative water-level hydrograph for this sub-area. Well T9S/ R9E-5Rl is CCID Well No. 14, or SGMA Well 1014. From 1965 to 2011, water levels were relatively stable. During 2012-16, water levels temporarily fell to the deepest levels of record (up to 35 feet deep). However, by Spring 2019, the water level had recovered to less than 8 feet deep.
Sub-Area C
This area includes the Volta-Los Banos area and lands to the south. Most wells in this area tap the upper aquifer, due to either limited water production capacity or poor quality groundwater in the lower aquifer. The CCID has one well in the Los Banos area that taps groundwater below the Corcoran Clay. This 1050
SGMA ID: 1014
Depth to Water (feet)
.i,,. w w ,:_, ,:_, ~ .... ' 0 V, 0 V, 0 V, 0 u, 0
~
2/1/1965
""' .....
I 2/1/1966
2/1/1967
./
,,.
' 2/1/1968
2/1/1969
"T1 2/1/1970
G') - j
C / 2/1/1971
:::0 2/1/1972 m
(..) ~ 2/1/1973
0 I /
:::0 ~ 2/1/1974
m . "'tJ
/ 2/1/1975
:::0
m 2/1/1976
V,
m I
z / 2/1/1977
~ 2/1/1978
::I ~ <
" 2/1/1979
m
I ~ 2/1/1980
~ _,/' 2/1/1981
m .
:::0 ~ 2/l/1982
I -IL.
rm
./ 2/1/1983
<
m ........... 2/1/1984
r- ✓
:::c ✓ ..... 2/1/1985
-<
C ~ 2/1/1986
:::0 ~
0 ~ 2/1/1987
G'l .,.,,.
:::0 / 2/1/1988
)>
"'tJ
- . 2/1/1989
:::c \
'Tl V 2/1/1990
0 _-¥
:::0 i---- 2/1/1991
-- C ... &
2/1/1992
"'tJ v "'tJ
m t......--""""
2/1/1993
:::0 ..,.;;;;:
)> -~
~-
2/1/1994
0 2/1/1995
C L -'Tl
~ 2/1/1996
m
:::0 - ...... .........___
2/1/1997
z
V, ~ ... 2/1/1998
C 2/1/1999
Ol
)>
I ✓
L. 2/1/2000
:::0
m
/
- 2/1/2001
)>
Ol
' C- 2/1/2002
~
2/1/2003
'
- 2/1/2004 - 2/1/2005
J
- 2/1/2006
- -~
-
-
- ~
-
-
------ ~ 2/1/2007
__,,,,., 2/1/2008
. 2/1/2009 A ~ ..._ .
-~ 2/1/2010
~
2/1/2011 . . . - 2/1/2012 &
.
- 2/1/2013 &
. . ... 2/1/2014 . . ... - . . - ... 2/1/2015
. 2/1/2016 . ~
& & ... ... ... . A T . & ... 2/1/2017 . ... . ... ""..,..._ 2/1/2018 I & . ,~. - . O' - 2/1/2019 - .... U7 1051
66 well was installed to enable additional pumpage and not influence existing supply wells in the vicinity. Water-level hydrographs for 15 wells with construction records evaluated in 1997 indicated long-term water-levels rises (prior to about 1989). About 70 percent of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay.
Hydrographs for nine wells with construction records indicated no long-term change. Almost all of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay.
As part of the KOSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs for 15 wells in this sub-area were updated through the mid2000's. There was less evidence of rising water levels compared to the previous evaluation, and more evidence of stable water levels through the mid-2000's. Figure 31 is an updated waterlevel hydrograph for Well TllS/Rl0E-24Nl or CCID Well No. SA (SGMA Well 1008), which is considered representative for this sub-area. Over the long-term, water levels have been relatively constant, rising during wet periods and falling during dry periods (1989-94, 2008-09, and 2013-16). Prior to 2008, the deepest water level was less than 40 feet deep. During 2008-10 the water levels temporarily fell to more than 50 feet deep and then fully recovered by Spring 2011. During 2013-16, the water level temporarily fell to more than 65 feet deep. However, by Summer 2017, the water level had recovered to a depth of 30 feet. Several ap1052 "Tl -
Ci')
C
::lCJ
m
w
~
I
::lCJ
m
.,,
::lCJ
m
V,
m
z
;...,t ~
< m
! ;...,t
m
::lCJ I
rm
< m
r-
::r:::
<
C
::lCJ
0 Ci')
::lCJ
)>
.,,
::r:::
"Tl
0 ::lCJ
C
.,,
.,,
m
::lCJ
)>
0 C
"Tl -
m
::lCJ -
z
V,
C
c::,
I
)>
::lCJ
m
)>
n
..'..J CJ) lJ1 0 0 0
-
-
~
~
....
Depth to Water (feet)
.I,. w r-:., 0 0 0
/
l
\
"' ~
\.
/
\
~~
I
/
/
I
\
"\.
\
L
I
V
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
I
I
I
/
~
----r--.-t
/ ~ ......
I
J
L
l .........
~
V
/
7 ~
.,,,
---...
~
~
-
- ~~
~
~
-~ ~ "'------.
f--' '
0 0
V,
G)
s:: - )>
0 -
f--'
g - ex, -
-
2/1/1965
2/1/1966
2/1/1967
2/1/1968
2/1/1969
2/1/1970
2/1/1971
2/1/1972
2/1/1973
2/1/1974
2/1/1975
2/1/1976
2/1/1977
2/1/1978
2/1/1979
2/1/1980
2/1/1981
2/1/1982
2/1/1983
2/1/1984
2/1/1985
2/1/1986
2/1/1987
2/1/1988
2/1/1989
2/1/1990
2/1/1991
2/1/1992
2/1/1993
/1/1994
/1/1995
/1/1996
/1/1997
/1/1998
/1/1999
/1/2000
/1/2001
/1/2002
/1/2003
/1/2004
/1/2005
1/2006
1/2007
1/2008 .
1/2009
1/2010
1/2011
1/2012
1/2013
1/2014
1/2015
1/2016
1/2017
1/2018
1/2019
O'\
-..J
1053
68 parently composite wells in the area south of Los Banos had rising water levels prior to the early 1980's, and declining water levels thereafter. These trends appear to be for the lower aquifer, and may be due to pumping of lower aquifer wells in the Panoche Water District. Although water levels in some wells in the sub-area temporarily declined during the 1976-77, and 1987-93, and 2013-16 droughts, they have been relatively stable over the long term.
Sub-Areas D & E
These sub-areas include the area in and around Dos Palos.
All of the hydrographs originally prepared for these sub-areas are for wells that tap strata above the Corcoran Clay. Groundwater below the Corcoran Clay is indicated to be of poor quality in much of this area, and has seldom been used for water supply.
For the 1997 evaluation, water-level hydrographs for 14 wells with construction records indicated no long-term change in water level through 1995. Hydrographs for four wells with construction records indicated long-term rising water levels through 1995.
As part of the KDSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs for 28 wells were updated through the mid-2000's. Two of those wells appear to tap the lower aquifer. The overall trend was one of constant water levels in both aquifers, and water-level rises were no longer apparent.
1054
69 Figure 32 is an updated water-level hydrograph for CCID Well No. 6 or SGMA Well No. 1006, which is considered representative of Sub-area D. Overall water levels have been stable, and have temporarily fallen during droughts (1976, 2009, and 2014-16). In summer 2017, the water level was about 20 feet deep. However, by Spring 2019, the water level had recovered to a depth of less than five feet. Figure 33 is an updated water-level hydrograph for CCID Well No. 11 or SGMA Well 1011, which is considered representative for Sub-area E. Prior to 2013, no overall long-term water-level change was indicated. There was a temporary waterlevel decline in 1994, but the water level quickly recovered.
Prior to 2013, the deepest water level was about 17 feet deep.
During 2013-16 the water level temporarily fell to more than 27 feet deep. However, by Spring 2019 the water level had recovered to about 8 feet deep.
Sub-Areas F, I, & K
Sub-area I comprises the Firebaugh Canal Water District and Sub-area Fis an adjacent part of the CCID known as the Camp 13 Drainage District. Sub-area K is another similar area. These areas have subsurface drainage problems, and tile drains are extensive. Because of their proximity, overall similarity, and general lack of groundwater pumping, these three sub-areas were combined for evaluation. Water-level hydrographs for six wells 1055
.,, -
G)
C
::a
m
w
N
I
::a
m
"tJ
::a
m
~
m
2 ~ ;..,t
<
m
;..,t ~ m
::a
I
rm
<
m
,-
:I:
-< C
::a
0 G)
::a
)>
"tJ
:I:
.,,
0 ::a
C
"tJ
"tJ
m
::a
)>
0 C -.,,
m
::a -
2 ~
C
O::J I
)>
::a
m
)>
C
N '
lJ1 N
0 ~-
-- --- ·--
,
-
Depth to Water (feet)
~ ~ lJ1 0 u, .
~
I
~ ---------- ~
/
-- ............. ...........
---------------- /
~
"-r--...
"' ---r---___
~
L
/ ~
~
~
/
/
----- r-+-
'\
/
.c
/
J
I
I
I
I
7 V,
G)
I ~ )>
I 0
....
0 I 0
0)
"\ ,___
"\
~
~
'\
' \.
.,
-
--
✓ . --
J,
.
- .
~ .....
~ ----
.
. -
-
0 2/ 1/1:Jb~
2/1/1966
2/1/1967 2/ 1/1968
2/1/1969
2/1/1970 2/ 1/1971
2/1/1972
2/1/1973
2/1/ 1974
2/1/1975
2/1/1976
2/1/1977 .
2/1/1978
2/1/1979 2/ 1/1980
2/1/1981 2/ 1/1982
2/1/1983
2/1/1984
2/1/1985
2/1/1986
2/1/1987
2/1/1988
2/1/1989
2/1/1990
2/1/1991
2/1/1992
2/1/1993
2/1/1994
2/ 1/1995
2/1/1996
2/1/1997
'- 2/1/1998
~ 2/1/1999
~ 2/ 1/2000
I2
/ 1/2001
2/1/2002
2/1/2003 2/1/2004 2/ 1/2005
2/1/2006
2/1/2007
2/1/2008
2/1/2009 2/ 1/2010
2/1/2011
2/1/2012 2/ 1/2013 2/ 1/ 2014
2/1/2015
2/1/2016
2/1/2017
2/1/2018
2/1/2019
-.J
0 1056
----
'Tl
-
C')
C
~
m
w
w
I
~
m
"tJ
~
m
V,
m
2 ~ ;;..,t
-
< m
~
~ m
~ I
rm
<
m
r-
:::c:
-<
C
~
0 C')
~
)>
"tJ
:::c:
'Tl
0 ~
C
"tJ
"tJ
m
~
)>
f:)
C
'Tl
m
~
-
2 V,
C
a:,
I
)>
~
m
)>
m
w N 0 lJ1 N '
0 Depth to Water (feet)
I-' ' I-' ' ' lJ1 0 lJ1 0
~--------.-------r------,----------,--½--------,---------, 2/1/1965 I 2/1/1966
I I I I I '4 I :;:;::::
I I r1 · I '.'.~'.:'.'.
I I I I k{ I l_i ___ '.
2/1/1977
L ______ _j__ ______ --l---------+------+-----7 ~ ------ 1 2/1/1978 -4---1-----------! 2/1/1979
- - ~---------! 2/1/1980
+--,,e:::..._--------l 2/1/1981
4('.'. I 2/1/1982
_ ___::~--____.j 2/1/1983
--=--==-------I 2/1/1984
2/1/1985
"""t>---------i 2/1/1986
-=+----------I 2/1/1987
-----------l 2/1/1988
----=-=~ - --____.j 2/1/1989
~ ---------1 2/1/1990
i--------t-------+-------+-------+---~~----1------------1 2/1/1991 2/1/1992
-=--=~:o+----1---------l 2/1/1993
~=
~ =====r======t====~~;~~~~==i=~====1======j 2/1/1994 2/1/1995 _::"'::::::=,!_,...._ ____ ___j 2/1/1996
2/1/1997 l/')
~ H 2/1/1998
►
~ H 2;1;1999
I-' 8 H 2;1;2000 I-'
2/1/2001
2/1/2002
2/1/2003
f----------1-----------l------------+--------l------____:!:===~""""--------I 2/1/2004 - ----~ 2/1/2005
----f----------< 2/1/2006
_ ---1 -- _ 2/j,/2007
......-r- 2/1/2008
I I I · · r: .;:J= I :;:;,:::
2/1/2012
~
~
......__....._ 2/1/2013
2/1/2014
2/1/2015
2/1/2016
2/1/2017
....
__. 2/1/2018
2/1/2019 ,...,. ~
-.J
.....,.
1057
72 with construction records were available for the 1997 evaluation, and all showed long-term rises. The majority of these wells tapped strata above the Corcoran Clay.
Depth to water prior to 2014 was usually between about five and 20 feet. During the recent drought, the water-level fell to more than 75 feet, then recovered. Figure 34 is considered a representation of a hydrograph for an upper aquifer well near the sub-area.
Sub-Area G
This sub-area is generally west of the San Joaquin River and between Mendota and Firebaugh. All of the hydrographs prepared for this area are for wells that tap strata above the Corcoran Clay. Groundwater below the Corcoran Clay is indicated to be of poor quality in most of this area. Water-level hydrographs for about three-fourths of the wells evaluated in 1997 showed longterm rises, whereas the remainder showed no long-term change in water level (prior to about 1989). However, a pronounced trend was that in the early 1990's, water levels in a number of wells were either near the deepest or the deepest of record. For the KDSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs for 10 wells were updated through the mid-2000's. There was little or no evidence of water-level rises after 1989, and overall there was a stability in water levels. The A-clay (a shallow confining bed) in part of this sub-area confines groundwater in the upper aquifer. 1058
fl
"Tl
in
C
,:,
m
w
.I>,
,:,
m
"C
,:,
m
V,
m
z
$! '-I
< m
'-I m
?1
rm
< m
r-::c
-<
C
,:,
0 Ci\
"C
::c
"Tl
0 ,:,
C
"C "C
m
,:,
@
"Tl
m
,:,
2 V,
C
0::,
).>
,:,
m
_.,,
.:-
RO
;,::
m
0 /
t;
Depth to Water (feet)
i;
\
/
~v
/
I
"---...._
I
' '\
'\.
\
l
L
\
/
_I
",
__/
"-.
_/
/ .,,,--
/
/
/
.~
...________
.,.,,.,
\_
/
/
"' ,I _
,,..----
/
<
L
--.,,.
'=
-
---..-..
..
-
-
--
-
-
/ 1/1968 /1/1969 /1/1970 /1/1971
/1/1972 /1/1973
/1/1974 /1/1975 / 1/1976 /1/1977 / 1/1978 /1/1979 /1/1980 /1/1981 /1/1982 /1/1983 /1/1984
2/1/1985 2/1/1986 2/1/1987 2/1/1988 2/1/1989 2/1/1990 2/1/1991 2/1/1992 2/1/1993 2/1/1994 2/1/1995
2/1/1996
2/1/1997
2/1/1998 2/1/1999 2/1/2000 2/1/2001 2/1/2002 2/1/2003 2/1/2004 2/1/2005 2/1/2006 2/1/ 2007 2/1/2008 2/1/2009 2/1/2010 2/1/2011 2/1/2012 2/1/2013 2/1/2014 2/1/2015 2/1/2016
2/1/2017 2/1/2018 2/1/2019
1059
74 There were significant water-level declines during drought periods, such as 1987 to 1993, in many wells. Figure 35 is an updated water-level hydrograph for Well CCID Well No. SA, or SGMA 1005, which is considered representative for this sub-area. The water level in this well temporarily fell to about 55 feet deep during the 1993-94 drought, and then recovered by early 1999.
During 2013-16, the water level again temporarily fell, and was about 55 feet deep in Summer 2015. However, by Spring 2019, the water level had recovered to a depth of about 18 feet. Over the long-term, water levels in this subarea were relatively stable prior to 1991. However, water levels after 1990 were deeper by an average of about 20 to 25 feet. Part of this is attributed to pumping by the Mendota Pool Group and other private wells in the Headgate Area, starting in the early 1990's.
Sub-Area H
This sub-area comprises the San Luis Canal Company (SLCC) service area. Water-level trends in this area weren't evaluated by KOSA (1997). Almost all wells in this area tap the upper aquifer. As part of the KOSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs were prepared by CCID for 17 wells, which records extending from 1959 to the mid-2000's. These hydrographs showed relatively constant water levels during this period. Water levels in some wells temporarily declined during the 1987-93 drought, but subsequently recovered. Updated water-level hydrographs by the 1060
- --
- ---1
"T1
C) -
C
::a
m
w
U1
I
::a
m
"'tJ
::a
m
V,
m
2 ;...i ~
<
m
i ;...i
m
::a I
rm
< m
r-
:c
-< C
::a
0 C)
::a
l>
"'tJ
:c
"T1
0 ::a
C
"'tJ
"'tJ
m
::a
l>
/:)
C -
"T1
m
::a -
2 V,
C
a:,
I
l>
::a
m
l>
C)
en U"1 l, 0 0 0
--
. /
'"'Iii::: -
Depth to Water (feet)
w
0 N 0
_j
.-:::::: .......
~
~
--.-------- ~
------------/
------
- .
-----
- \
\ ---___.. v--
-----
~
-
.:..
0 0
'\.
/
\
\
I
/
~
\
/
"'-
"'> .(
~
_/
~
L
/
/
~
/
L/
Vl
G) s~
)>
0 fI-'
0~
0 V,
~
f-
-- --
2/1/1965
2/1/1966
2/1/1967
2/1/1968
2/1/1969
2/1/1970
2/1/1971
2/1/1972
2/1/1973
2/1/1974
2/1/1975
2/1/1976
2/1/1977
2/1/1978
2/1/1979
2/1/1980
2/1/1981
2/1/1982
2/1/1983
2/1/1984
2/1/1985
2/1/1986
2/1/1987
2/1/1988
2/1/1989
2/1/1990
2/1/1991
/1/1992
/1/1993
/1/1994
/1/1995
/1/1996
/1/1997
/1/1998
/1/1999
/1/2000
/1/2001 .
/1/2002
/1/2003
/1/2004
1/2005
1/2006
1_/2007
1/2008
1/2009
1/2010
1/2011
1/2012
1/2013
1/2014
1/2015
1/2016
1/2017
1/2018
1/2019
-..J
u,
1061
76 SLCC show no indication of groundwater overdraft in this area.
Figure 36 is an updated water-level hydrograph for Well T9S/Rl2E32Nl or SGMA Well 2759, which is considered representative for this sub-area. The water level in this well temporarily fell to a depth of about 32 feet during the 1976-77 drought, then quickly recovered. The water level in this well temporarily fell during 2006 and 2008 to between 20 and 23 feet deep, and then recovered.
Water levels in this well have been stable over the long term through early 2013.
Sub-Area J
This sub-area comprises the Columbia Canal Co. service area.
Irrigation wells in this area primarily tap the upper aquifer, although some deeper wells also tap the upper part of the lower aquifer. Water-level trends in this sub-area were also not evaluated by KDSA (1997). As part of the KDSA (2008) evaluation, water-level hydrographs, extending from the early 1950 1 s to the mid-2000's were prepared for ten wells. Water-level hydrographs, extending from the late 1970's or 1980 to the mid-2000's, were also prepared for 19 other wells. Most of the hydrographs extending back to the 1950 1 s showed water-level declines. Water levels in a number of these wells declined significantly during 1062
LL
.,,
ci
C
:ll:I
m
w
°'
:ll:I
m
,,
:ll:I
m
V,
m
z
'-i
< m
:E
m
,...
m
< m
,...
:::c
-< 0
:ll:I
0 en
,,
:::c
.,,
. 0
:ll:I
C
,,
,,
m
:ll:I
C
.,,
m
:ll:I
z
V,
C
c::,
)>
:ll:I
:::c
w
0 ---
N
Depth to Water (feet)
t,j :;; t;
..-_.,.,..
l
.--
----
---- ..::::
____.
'\
""' "" ' \ \
I
\.
oc::::_
L----
--
-~
7 <-...
.?
/
7 /
I'-.
" I l,_....,--"'
----
.-v--
i-----
---' I'-.
.__.. ....
-----
---
/
7 -
lS
<:
)>
N
:il "
-
1/1960 1/1961 1/1962 1/1963 1/1964 1/1965 1/1966
1/1967
1/1968 1/1969 1/1970
1/ 1971
1/1972 1/1973
'1/1974
/1/1975 / 1/ 1976 /1/1977 /1/1978 / 1/1979 /1/1980 / 1/1981 /1/1982 /1/1983 / 1/1984 / 1/1985 / 1/1986 /1/1987 /1/1988 1/1/1989 1/ 1/ 1990 1/1/1991 1/1/1992 1/1/1993 1/ 1/1994 1/ 1/1995 1/1/1996 1/1/1997 1/1/1998 1/ 1/1999 1/1/2000
1/ 1/ 2001 1/1/2002
1/1/2003
1/ 1/2004 1/1/2005 1/ 1/ 2006 1/1/2007 1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1063
78 the 1970's and during the 1987-93 drought, but then subsequently partially recovered. Water-level hydrographs for wells that extended from the late 1970 1 s or 1980 appeared to indicate more stable water levels, however many indicated slight water-level declines, particularly after about 1989. This was believed to be partly due to increased pumping in areas east of the Columbia Canal Co. service area, and some was due to MPG pumping near the San Joaquin River.
Figure 37 is a water-level hydrograph for SGMA Well 3199, which is considered representative for this sub-area. The water level in this well was relatively stable from 1980 to 1990. The water level temporarily declined during the 1991-94 drought, during 2002-2003, and during 2014-15. The water levels in this well averaged about five feet lower after 1990 and through 2008.
The water level hadn't fully recovered by Spring 2017. Overall, the water level fell about seven feet between Spring 2008 and Spring 2017, or an average of about 0.8 foot per year. In summary, slightly declining water levels have been the predominant trend in Sub-area J, and part of these declines are due to pumping in adjoining areas outside of the sub-area. CCC has completed their canal lining conservation projects, which have substantially reduced pumpage in their service area since 2017. 1064
6L
"Tl
en
C
;:a
m
w
-..i
;:a
m
.,,
;:a
Gl
m
z
j;l '-i
< m
'-i m
;:a
I
....
m
< m
....
::i::
-<
C
;:a
0 G")
.,,
::i::
"Tl
0 ;:a
C
.,, .,,
m
;:a
C
"Tl
m
;:a
z
V,
C
c::,
)> ;:a
....
"'
Depth to Water (feet)
i,; t;:
I
' I I
' _I---'"
----
_ ..
' I)
J
'
"'" /
I...__
N
0 r--...
r
' t
V
«...
-~
6:
~----
/
--
/
/
.........
)>
V
/
~r--
---
/
/
" "
---'
r
I
'\.
\.
' '\.
'\.
' / /
-........
" '
---
----
--
'
---
-
-
-~
____ ....
..
--
I;;
-
-
-
-
i;'.l
;::
w
:,;
'°
1/ 23/ 1980
7/23/1980
1/ 23/ 1981
7/23/1981
1/23/1982
7/ 23/ 1982
1/23/ 1983
7/23/ 1983
1/ 23/ 1984
7/ 23/ 1984
1/23/ 1985
7/ 23/ 1985
1/ 23/ 1986
7/ 23/ 1986
1/23/1987
7/ 23/1987
1/ 23/ 1988
7/ 23/ 1988
1/23/1989
7/23/ 1989
1/ 23/ 1990
7/23/1990
1/ 23/ 1991
7/ 23/ 1991
1/ 23/1992
7/23/1992
1/23/ 1993
7/23/1993
1/ 23/ 1994
7/ 23/ 1994
1/2 3/ 1995
7/ 23/1995
1/ 23/1996
7/2 3/ 1996
1/ 23/ 1997
7/ 23/ 1997
1/23/1998
7/23/ 1998
1/ 23/ 1999
7/23/ 1999
1/ 23/ 2000
7/23/ 2000
1/ 23/2001
7/ 23/2001
1/ 23/2002
7/ 23/2002
1/23/ 2003
7/23/2003
1/ 23/ 2004
7/23/2004
1/ 23/ 2005
7/ 23/2005
1/23/2006
7/ 23/ 2006
1/23/2007
7/ 23/ 2007
1/ 23/ 2008
7/ 23/ 2008
1/23/2009
7/23/2009
1/ 23/2010
7/23/ 2010
1/ 23/ 2011
7/ 23/2011
1/ 23/ 2012
7/23/2012
1/ 23/ 2013
7/23/2013
1/ 23/ 2014
7/23/2014
1/ 23/ 2015
7/ 23/ 2015
1/ 23/ 2016
7/ 23/2016
1/23/ 2017
1065
80 Vertical Head Differences
Vertical head gradients between the upper and lower aquifers can be determined by dividing the difference in water level or hydraulic heads between the aquifers by the thickness of the Corcoran Clay. To determine vertical head differences, water-level elevation maps for the upper and lower aquifers were compared and the differences contoured. Such maps were prepared for Fall 1986 and Spring 1992 and showed similar results. Figure 6 of KDSA (1997b) showed head difference contours for Spring 1992. Water levels in strata below the Corcoran Clay were lower than those in strata above the Corcoran Clay throughout the area, except for a small area northeast of Newman. Head differences ranged from about 20 feet near Newman and the east edge of the north part of the Grassland Water District, north of Highway 152, to about 140 feet near the southwest edge of Area I and in the Hamburg Farms area. The head difference was about 40 feet south of Gustine, near Dos Palos, and in Area J. The head difference was about 80 feet southwest of Los Banos and near the boundary between Areas F and I. Thus overall, the head difference increased toward the southwest in the GSA.
Beneath almost all of the SJREC GSP Area there has been downward flow of groundwater through the Corcoran Clay. Vertical 1066
81 head differences have apparently been relatively the same during wet periods and droughts, except in some local areas, such as the Mendota Pool and Hamburg Farms areas. These head differences can be used along with the map showing the thickness of the Corcoran Clay to determine the vertical head gradients between the upper and lower aquifers in the service areas.
SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
Figure 38 shows potential recharge areas, excluding groundwater flows, in the area. The major sources of recharge to groundwater above the A-Clay are seepage of water from the San Joaquin River and Mendota Pool, and deep percolation from irrigated lands. The major sources of recharge to the upper aquifer are lateral groundwater inflow, seepage from streamflow, seepage from conveyance facilities, deep percolation from irrigated areas not underlain by the A-clay, and downward flow of groundwater through the A-Clay. Lateral groundwater flows are shown on the previous water-level maps. In the area north of Washington Road, there is also recharge from upward flow through the Corcoran Clay. The major sources of recharge to the lower aquifer are downward flow through the Corcoran Clay and lateral ground water inflow. 1067
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25
28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10 9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16
17 15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
n Benito
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
R.7 E
R.8E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
CCC 1
Recharge Site
Frusetta
Recharge Site
Eastside Drive
Recharge Site
CCC 2
Recharge Site
Central Reservoir
Island Reservoir
Southern
Los Banos Creek
Recharge Site
Laguna Reservoir
Gustine Reservoir
Ingomar Reservoir
Stockton Pit
Recharge Site
Colony Reservoir
East Ditch Reservoir
Poso Reservoir
BB Limited
Recharge Site
Farmers Water District
Recharge Site
Orestimba
Recharge Site
Northern
Los Banos Creek
Recharge Site
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
SUBBASIN
DELTA-MENDOTA
FIGURE 38 - POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS
EXPLANATION
Regulating Reservoirs
Major Canals
Minor Canals
SLCC Irrigated Lands
CCID Irrigated Lands
FCWD Irrigated Lands
Intentional Recharge Sites
SJREC GSP Group Area
CCC Irrigated Lands
Other Irrigated Lands .
82 1068
83 Intentional recharge sites are shown in Figure 37. Included are Los Banos Creek sites, the Stockton Pit, the Orestimba Creek site, Columbia Canal Co. 1 and 2 sites, the Frusetta site, the B&B Ltd site, and the Farmers Water District site.
SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE
Figure 39 shows locations of potential sources of discharge.
Locations of active supply wells and drainage wells in and near the SJREC GSA are shown. For groundwater above the A-Clay, the major sources of discharge are pumpage (only in the Mendota area), downward flow of groundwater through the A-Clay, lateral groundwater outflow, flow to tile drainage systems, and direct evaporation. The major sources of groundwater discharge for the upper aquifer are well pumping, lateral groundwater outflow, and downward flow of groundwater through the Corcoran Clay. The major sources of discharge for the lower aquifer are well pumpage and lateral groundwater outflow.
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Specific capacit-ies and aquifer transmissivities for the Exchange Contractors service area were discussed in detail by KOSA (1997a). Figure 25 of KOSA (1997a) showed specific capacities for a number of wells, as of the mid-1990's. Figure 12 of the 1069
Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
San Benito
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 VALER IA
AVE
S FAITH HOM E RD
W BELMON T
AVE
M ST
W
H ST
CUST
AVE
L S T W
POMELO
A VE
M C CLINTOCK RD
VO LTA RD
S
N ST
W
ALMOND
AVE
EUCALYPTUS RD W
HWY 33
MERRILL AV E
BRANNON AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
I
ST
ORE AV E
S DE RRICK AV E
ELG
AV
IN
E
W NE ES AV E
PALM AV E S
W MERRILL AV E
N FAIRFAX AVE
CENTER AVE
S
PIONEER RD W
HWY 165 S
MERCEY S PRINGS RD S
HWY 33
SANTA NELLA BLVD S
SNYDER RD
W
OLLER ST
P ST W
4TH
ST
N ST
INGOM AR RD S
O RESTIMBA
RD
FRONTIE R ST
W
HE NRY MILLE R AV E W
HUNT RD S
N SAN DIE GO AVE
N DOU GLAS
AVE
W ASHLAN AV E
SUNS ET AVE W
N DOS PALOS RD
HUNT RD S
COTTON GIN RD W
SHAIN AVE
V LI LA
FOLSOM AV E
L
ST
BASS
AVE
CE NTE R AV E S
S PRAIRIE FLOWER RD
ELM AV E
FIALHO AVE W
SANTA FE G RD
SHIE LLS RD
W SHAIN AVE
N DO S PA LOS R D
ARMS TRONG RD
BADGER FLAT RD S
CAP RI AVE
W
W HE RNDON AVE
N CAMBRIA AVE
FAHEY RD W
W BULLARD AVE
N FAIRFAX
AVE
S MITCHE LL RD
HOYER
RD
W MINT AV E
HWY 152 W
S CE NTRAL AVE
GRAND AV E W
JOHN SO N RD
S
I- 5 I- 5
I- 5
DRAPER RD
N LY ON AVE
LINDEN AVE W
SANTA LUCI A
AVE S
W MCKINLEY AVE
H OLSTEIN RD W
HWY 140 W
BE LL RD
INGOM AR GRD W
KNIEBES R
S
D
RE YNOLDS AVE S
ANDERSON RD
COPA DE ORA AVE W
N ORLEANS AVE
UP PER RD
W SILAXO AVE
MIDDLE RD
W
COZZI R
S
D
N WASHOE AVE
JE NS EN RD S
W HARDING RD
E
ST
LEXINGTON AVE
S
N DOUG LAS
AVE
FIG
LN
N OX FORD AVE
NO BLE RD
W
HO BART
AVE
E ASTIN
RD
W ALTHE A AVE
N FAIRFAX AVE
W BEHYMER
AVE
CANAL
HWY 152 S
SAN M ATEO AV E
MINT RD W
JULIP R
S
D
PACHECO BLVD W
N NEWCOM B AV E
HE NRY MILLER
AVE W
N LY ON AVE
I- 5 W
TERCE IRA RD S
H ST W
AUGUST RD
W S AN
JOSE AVE
PIONEER RD W
S HY ST
S
ESTHER AVE
S
ELGIN
AVE
EMO RY AVE
W
HWY 33 S
E MARSHALL RD
W GETTYSB URG
AVE
KILBURN RD
CANAL S CHOOL RD S
W SHIE LDS AVE
S BLAKER RD
W MARS HALL RD
LODI RD
S
S OHIO
AVE
MO RRIS
RD
LUNDY
RD
W VALERIA AVE
BRADBURY
RD
P UMP
RD
CHE RRY
AVE
N CUSTE R
AVE
CUSTER
AVE
TULIP AV
HWY 140 W
PRINCE R
S
D
EHRLICH RD
SULLIVAN
RD
WARD R
S
D
HU TCHINS RD W
PARADIS E AVE
W CARME LLIA AVE
DE NTON & LE AK RD W
W MILLER AVE
ROX BURY RD W
DIEHL
RD
SHAIN
AVE
CARME LLIA AVE W
AUB REY AVE
S
CYPRESS RD
W
W HA RDING RD
ELAINE RD
EU CALYPTUS RD
W
CHE RRY
AVE
GUN CLUB RD W
TAGLIO RD W
ARROYA AVE S
N SAN
BERN ARDINO AVE
OR TIG ALITA RD
S
LUX
AVE
N ELGIN AVE
N DAVIDSON AVE
HOYER
RD
MI LLS RD
S
N EVANS
AVE
ALM OND DR W
N BRANNON RD
MOFFETT RD
PHILLIP S RD W
MOFFATT RD S
CHINA CAM P RD W
FENTEM RD W
GAY ST
W
DIANA RD S
WEST
RD
N NEWCOM B AV E
N SAN
DIEGO AVE
INDIANA AV E S
N JERROLD AV E
N HUDSO N
AVE
LEWIS RD
BRYANT
AVE
CLAUSEN
RD
N M ILLUX RD
MAS ON RD W
PUMP RD W
WILLIS RD S
E STUHR
RD
N HUDS ON AV E
CARLUCCI RD
S
PFITZER RD W
N JERR OLD AVE
ISLAND
AVE
S DE RRICK AV E
DODDS
EHRLICH RD
WANG ENHEIM
RD TAGLIO RD
W
RAMO S RD W
W KE Y AVE
PRESTO N RD W
AP RICOT AVE
HWY 152 S
HALE RD
BATTEN RD W
VO LTA R
S
D
N FAIRFAX AVE
AZEVE DO
RD
W B RADBURY
RD
LE OTA ST
S
BRAZO RD W
DE NTON & LE AK RD W
W COPPER
AVE
W OXALIS AVE
W CALIFOR NIA
AVE
SANTA RITA GRD W
ROME RO RD W
PFITZER RD W
S SAN
BERN ARDINO AVE
W SAN JOSE AVE
PALM AV E S
DOS PALOS
RD
S CARPEN TER RD
N RUSSE LL AV E
AZE VEDO RD S
ORCHARD RD S
HUSMAN RD
W
MILLUX
AVE
MERVE L AV E W
CACTUS DR
W
LAGUNA RD
W
JE RS EY RD S
NANTES AV E S
N M ILLUX RD
N JERROL
AV
D
E
A PPLE
AVE
HILM AR RD
HARVEY RD
VENICE
RD
JORG EN SE N RD
W
CANYON RD S
N OHIO AVE
RAMO S RD S
N HUDS ON AV E
W WHITE SBRIDGE AV E
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
WORTHING TO N RD
W
GUN CLUB RD W
WILSON RD S
BO RBA RD
W
W OLIV E AVE
ROSE G ARDE N
RD W
NEWSOM RD
S
HALEY RD W
LOCKE AV E
CLE MENT AVE S
ALM OND DR W
CREEK RD S
JOHNSON RD S
I- 5 S
MADERA
RD
N BRANNON
RD
FIN K RD
ORCHARD RD S
W IKE CROW RD
W HA RDING RD
HO GIN
HE ARS TRD W
HE LM CANAL RD
POLE LINERD S
W ORM SBY AVE
RIVE R RD
SANTA FE G RD W
S SAN BE NITO AVE
WARD RD
S
CATRINA ST W
HWY 152
WOO RD S
CHEROKEE RD
W PANOCHE RD
MORAG A AVE S
INGOM AR GRD W
WASHINGTON RD W
WARD AV E
SANTA FE G RD W
MEDLIN RD
AUGUST RD
JORGENS EN RD
SWIFT AVE S
WILD DUCK RD S
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
HUSM AN RD W
SANTA FE GRD
SANTA CRUZ GUN CLUB RD S
CAMP 13 RD W
POLE LINE RD W
I- 5 S
S ANTA FE GRD W
CROWS LAND NI G RD
POME GRANATE AVE
PEAR AVE
HWY 152 W
HWY 33 S
DAV IS RD
W HERNDO N
AVE
MORAN RD MORAN RD
W STUHR RD
PETE MILLER RD
HILLS FE RRY RD
IND AI NA RD
A
S
LFA LFA
RD
N DO UGLAS
AVE
PR UN E
AVE
FRE ITAS RD
J T CROW RD
HWY 14 0 W
HWY 140 W
BLUE HILL
HELM DITCH RD
FINK R D
W SHAW AVE
SCHM IDT RD S
PETE MILLER RD
COTTON RD W
BUN KE R RD
W
ORESTIM BA RD
COTTONWOOD RD
W
CHARLE STON RD W
WHITWO RTH RD S
HALLOWE LL RD
NE THE RTON RD W
N RUSSE LL AV E
N GALV EZ AVE
MANUCHA RD
DODDS RD
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
SILVER
CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10 S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13S T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
##
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
##
#
#
#
##
#
# ##
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
# #
#
#
# #
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
#
#
#####
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
####
#
#
#
##### #
#
# ###
#
# #
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# ##
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
##
## #
#
#
###
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
#
#
#
#
#
### #
#
##
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
##
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
##
#
#
##
##
#
#
#
#
#
##
## # #
#
#
#
##
##
#
#
##
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
###
##
###
##
##
##
#
#
#
#
# #
##
#
#
#
# ##
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
## #
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
##
#
##
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
##
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
## #
#
#
##
#
##
#
##
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
## #
#
##### #
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
##
#
#
# #
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
##
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
# # #
##
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
###
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
## #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
## #
#
#
#
#
# #
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
###
#
#
###
#
#
#
##
##
#
# #
###
##
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
####
#
##
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
##
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 39 - POTENTIAL GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE AREAS
EXPLANATION:
TILE LINED FIELDS
# WELLS
DRAINAGE WELLS
SJREC GSA BOUNDARY
DELTA-MENDOTA SUBBASIN
84 1070
85 KOSA (2008) report was an updated map of specific capacities for CCID and other wells in the service area. In general, the same pattern was evident as from the previous map. Figure 40 of this report is an updated specific capacity map for 2012, and the same general patterns are evident. Almost all of these values are for wells tapping the upper aquifer, except for the area west of Crows Landing and Newman, where many tests are for composite wells.
The highest specific capacities are in the south part of Sub-area B, and in Sub-areas C, G, and J. Highly permeable Sierran sands are tapped by most large-capacity water supply wells in Sub-areas G and J. High permeable deposits are also present in the Santa Nella-Volta-Los Banos area. Along the west side of the study area, higher specific capacities were common for wells located within major alluvial fans (i.e. San Luis Creek, Los Banos Creek, and Orestimba Creek.
Table 1 shows the range in specific capacities and the average specific capacity in each township and range in the SJREC GSP Group Area. Specific capacities of wells ranged from as low as 10 gpm per foot of drawdown to as high as over 170 gpm per foot.
The average specific capacity of supply wells in the SJREC GSP Group Area for which records are available is about 70 gpm per foot.
Aquifer Tests Prior to 1996
The results of aquifer tests that were available in or near 1071
Stan si laus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Mad
M
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 33
34 35
36 31
6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
OCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
SOUTH
FORK LOS BANOS
CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
on
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla
R.8E
R.9E
R.7 E
R.8 E
R.8 E
R.9 E
R.9 E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.7E
R.8E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13 E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15 E
R.8E
R.9E
R.9E
R.10E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
R.10E
R.11E
R.11E
R.12E
R.11E
R.12E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15 E
R.16 E
R.12E
R.13E
R.13E
R.14E
R.14E
R.15E
R.15E
R.16E
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.5S
T.6S
T.6 S
T.7S T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.6S
T.7S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.7S
T.8S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.8S
T.9S
T.9S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9 S
T.10S T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.9S
T.10S
T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.10S
T.11S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12 S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.11S
T.12S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13 S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.12S
T.13S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.13S
T.14S
T.14S
T.15S
42 59
50 38
38 40
10 18
90 44
55 50 17 26
72 53
53 33
31 50
147 36
23 32
33 62
57 82
116
22 70 41
49 42
46 71
75 40
38 90
69 40
53 78
59 122
30 74
36 64 79
65 76
76 50
27 40 39 52
66 25
52 25 58
73 50
33 41
40 30
39 41
35 26
55 63
70 24
23 48 27
29 41
38 56
35 53 90
65 31
47 51
34 62
28 137
31 22 33
19 10
10 27
52 53
26 41
30 34
56 56
11 67
53 55 12
29 42
33 73 79 15
30 12
87 71
48 58 48
11 10
55 75 61
90 8 13
19 15
8 30
16 23
0 1 2 4 6 8
Miles
.
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
FIGURE 40 - DISTRIBUTION OF SPECIFIC CAPACITIES (2012)
EXPLANATION:
Delta-Mendota Subbasin
Location of Well and Specific Capacity
(GPM per Foot) 76
SJREC GSP Group Area
86 1072
87 TABLE 1- SPECIFIC CAPACITIES
s12ecific ca;eaciti (gpm/ft)
TownshiJ2/Ran2e Ran2e Avera2e
T6S/R8E 61-90 75
T7S/R8E 48-87 64 T9S/R9E 30-56 40
Tl0S/Rl0E 10-176 55
Tl0S/RllE 77 TllS/Rl0E 34-137 84 TllS/RllE 138-171 155
T11S/R12E 58-108 83
T9S/R13E 68
T10S/Rl3E 78-103 90
Tl1S/Rl3E 25-122 63
T12S/R13E 41-79 54 T11S/R14E 22-130 87 T12S/R14E 23-147 59 T13S/R14E 10-77 42 T13S/R15E 18-160 100 City of Gustine 12-67 41
Gustine Drainage District 11-56 41
City of Los Banos 10-53 32
City of Newman 15-79 46
1073
88 the SJREC Area prior to 1996 are summarized in Table 2. Seven aquifer tests had been conducted for wells tapping the upper aquifer. One of these tested wells was between Gustine and Santa Nella. Four wells that were tested near Mendota tapped strata between the C-Clay and the Corcoran Clay. The C-clay is a local confining bed between the A-clay and Corcoran Clay. Leaky aquifer tests were conducted at two sites near Mendota, which allowed determination of the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the Aclay and the storage coefficient for strata confined below the Aclay. Two other aquifer tests were conducted near Mendota on shallow wells tapping unconfined strata above the A-clay (Luhdorff & Scalmanini, 1993).
Transmissivities of strata above the A-clay near Mendota ranged from 140,000 to 280,000 per foot and averaged 210,000 gpd per foot (Luhdorff & Scalmanini, 1993). These values are for highly permeable Sierran sands. Transmissivities of strata below the A-clay and above the Corcoran Clay near Mendota ranged from about 60,000 to 260,000 gpd per foot, and averaged 120,000 gpd per foot.
The two leaky aquifer tests near Mendota both indicated avertical hydraulic conductivity of the A-clay of 0.024 gpd per square foot. Storage coefficients for strata below the A-clay and above the Corcoran Clay ranged from 7x10- 4 to lxlo-3 • Prior 1074
TABLE 2-RESULTS OF AQUIFER TESTS PRIOR TO 1996
Perforated Pumping Static Pumping Specific
IntervaL Rate Level Level Drawdown Capacity Transmissivity Well No. Date (feet) (gpm) (feet) (feet) (feet) (gpd/ft) (gpd/ft) T9S/R9E-5Rl 10/67 - - - - - 58.6 83,000
T13S/R14E-24M 12/88-1/89 112-244 2,210 28.9 84.1 55.2 39 260,000 T13S/R15E-29D 4/93 50-100 630 36.0 56.4 20.4 30.9
Tl3S/R15E-29F 4/93 50-80 297 34.0 53.1 19.1 19.1 139,000 Tl3S/R15E-30B 9/90 180-290 770 71.3 91.9 20.6 37.5 88,000 3/90 170-290 1,025 61.2 81.8 20.6 49.8 108,000
T13S/Rl5E-32M 11/88 140-260 530 37.9 46.9 9.0 59 59,000 Tl3S/R15E-34Jl 4/81 120-216 2,000 - - - - 77,000
T14S/R15E-9B 4/93 50-100 627 - - - - 283,000
Results for 5Rl from Hotchkiss and Balding (1971). Results from 24Ml, 30B, and 32M from files of Kenneth D. Schmidt and Associates. Results for 29D, 29F, and from Luhdorff & Scalmanini (1993) CX)
\0
1075
to the KDSA (1997b) evaluation, no aquifer tests were known to have been conducted to determine the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the Corcoran Clay in or near the SJREC GSA.
Results of 1996-97 Aquifer Tests
90 Because of the lack of previous aquifer tests in large parts of the Exchange Contractors service area, an extensive aquifer testing program was undertaken in late 1996 and early 1997. Fifteen aquifer tests were conducted between October 17, 1996 and February 6, 1997. Eleven of the pumped wells from these tests were CCID wells, and the remainder were private irrigation wells.
Most of these wells were selected to provide data along the western and eastern edges of the service area, for use in groundwater inflow and outflow calculations. In general, 24-hour pumping periods were used, and several other wells in the vicinity were used as observation wells, where possible. In addition to these tests, a one-week long Leaky Aquifer Test was done in January 1997 on a well tapping strata below the Corcoran Clay. Details and graphical plots for these tests were provided by KDSA (1997b).
Twenty-four Hour Tests
The primary purpose of these tests was to provide actual 1076
91 transmissivity values in specific areas and to provide better conversion factors between specific capacities and aquifer transmissivities for use in other areas. In many cases observation wells either didn't tap exactly the same strata as the pumped well, or were too distant to have a drawdown useful for determing aquifer transmissivity. The corrected recovery measurements for the pumped well itself usually provide the most reliable determinations of aquifer transmissivity .
Table 3 summarizes the results of these tests. Nine of these tested wells only tapped the upper aquifer, and six others were composite wells that tapped both aquifers . Specific capacities of the tested wells ranged from 17 to 271 gpm per foot. Aquifer transmissivities ranged from about 32,000 to 500,000 gpd per foot. Transmissivities at three test sites ranged from about 400,000 to 500,000 per foot. One of these was for CCID Well ?lo. 23A, or SG!-!A Well 1023, which taps highly permeable Sierran sands northwest of Mendota. The two others were CCID Wells No. 3 (SGMA Well 1003) and 51 (SGl-!A Well 1051), which are composite wells in the Crows Landing-Newman area. Transmissivities ranged from 37,000 to 59,000 gpd per foot at four sites: CCID Wells No. SA (SGMA Well 1005) and 44 (SGMA Well 1044), north of Mendota, Well Tl2S/R15E-32B (SG!•iA Well 2988) , a composite well east of Firebaugh, and Well T11S/Rl4E-19L (SG!-iA Well 2313), northwest of Firebaugh.
1077
TABLE 3-RESULTS OF 1996-97 AQUIFER TESTS
Perforated
Interval Specific Capacity Transmissivitx {gpd/ft)
Well No. SGMA I.D. Date feet) {feet} Drawdown Recoverx
CCID SA 1005 10/17/96 100-260 23 65,000 54,000
CCID 23A 1023 10/21/96 90-180 140 500,000 446,000
CCID 44 1044 10/23/96 100-280 26 75,000 58,000
CCID 41 1041 10/28/96 86-236 30 - 78,000
CCID SA 1008 11/4/96 75-220 95 - 168,000
CCID 27A 1027 11/4/96 160-280 28 79,000 69,000
CCID 2 1002 11/6/96 90-337 55 193,000 143,000
CCID 3* 1003 11/6/96 85-355 271 400,000
CCID 13* 1013 12/4/96 100-415 50 192,000 172,000
CCID 45 1045 12/11/96 120-270 48 207,000
CCID 51 1051 12/11/96 87-477 44 388,000 440,000
Tl2S/R15E-32B* - 12/17/96 210-510 17 42,000 32,000
Tl3S/R15E-3N* - 1/8/97 190-430 30 97,000 77,000
Tl2S/R15E-10K* - 1/30/97 210-534 54 135,000 112,000
TllS/R14E-19L - 2/6/97 160-320 19 43,000 32,000
*Composite Well
\0
I\)
1078
93 A conversion factor of 1,500 that has been commonly used for unconfined aquifers in the San Joaquin Valley to multiply times the specific capacity to estimate transmissivity. For confined aquifers, a factor of 2,000 has been commonly used. Comparison of the specific capacity and transmissivity values for the 24- hour aquifer tests indicated a range in values from about 1,800 to 4,700, and an average of 2,850 for this factor. This higher value than commonly used is probably partly due to low to moderate well efficiencies. The effect of a lower well efficiency is to make the specific capacity smaller relative to the transmissivity (thus making the conversion factor larger). The commonly used conversion factors for unconfined aquifers were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey based on data for wells in the eastern part of the valley, many of which were open-bottomed wells at that time. Such wells have no gravel pack and often have no perforations, and are highly efficient. Gravel packed wells normally have a lower efficiency than the open-bottomed wells, due to head losses associated with the gravel and perforations. Using the average specific capacity in the SJREC GSP Group Area of about 70 gpm per foot, the average transmissivity would be about 200,000 gpd per foot. This value reflects two major factors. First is the high lateral hydraulic conductivity of the Sierran sands in the east part of the area. Second, many of the wells pump tested, particu1079 94 larly along the west part of the area north of Los Banos, were intentionally drilled in more favorable areas (located in major alluvial fans). These factors must be carefully evaluated when utilizing transmissivity values to determine groundwater flows in other parts of the area.
Leaky Aquifer Test
A one-week long Leaky Aquifer Test was conducted during January 13-20, 1997, along the Delta-Mendota Canal in the Hamburg Farms area. The main purposes of the Leaky Aquifer Test were to determine the transmissivity of the lower aquifer and the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the Corcoran Clay. The test site was located between Hamburg and Bennett Roads, southwest of Dos Palos about two miles northwest of the Fresno-County-Merced County line. This area was selected because drillers logs and electric logs are available for many test holes and wells in this area, and almost all wells were sealed opposite the Corcoran Clay.
Also, numerous wells of relatively similar depth and perforated interval are located in relatively close proximity. The Corcoran Clay is indicated to be about 110 feet thick in this area. The DMC pumpers wells in this area pump water from below the Corcoran Clay. Except for the test, there was no significant pumpage from wells in this vicinity during Winter 1996-97. Because of this, 1080
95 January 1997 was an ideal time to conduct a Leaky Aquifer Test.
The pumped well was perforated from 360 to 680 feet in depth.
Three nearby supply wells were used as observation wells during the test. These wells were perforated opposite similar intervals as the pumped well. A total of 34,056,400 gallons was pumped during the test and the average pumping rate was 3,406 gpm.
Theis (log-log) drawdown plots for the closest observation wells indicated no deviation from the type curve (no leakage) during the test. Based on drawdown measurements for this test, a transmissivity of 160,000 gpd per foot and storage coefficient of 0.001 were indicated to be the best values. The vertical hydraulic conductivity of the Corcoran Clay was indicated to be less than O. 001 gpd per square foot. Corrected recovery plots for these wells indicated an average transmissivity of about 140,000 gpd per foot.
The relatively low value for the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the Corcoran Clay indicated at this test site is not believed to be typical of the entire SJREC GSP Group Area for two reasons.
First the clay is much thicker and more well developed at the test site than in most other parts of the area. Secondly, there were no known carrposite wells in the vicinity of the test site. In some parts of the area where groundwater is pumped from the lower aquifer, composite wells are present that tap both the upper and 1081
96 lower aquifers. Where annular seals are not present opposite the Corcoran Clay, such wells effectively allow more movement of groundwater through the Corcoran Clay.
Specific Yields
Some of the best estimates of specific yield in the SJREC GSA were provided by Davis, et al (1959) in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1469. Four geographic areas considered in that report are covered by the GSP area. The northernmost part (in T7S and T8S) are in the Tracy-Patterson area, generally in Stanislaus County. The southern part is in Group I of the Mendota/Huron Area. Much of the area in Merced County is in Group 1 and 2 of the Los Banos Area. The remaining part o~ the GSP area (Management Area J) is primarily in the San Joaquin River area of Madera County. Specific yields were provided by Davis, et al (1959) for three depth intervals (10 to 50 feet, 50 to 100 feet, and 100 to 200 feet) and for the combined intervals. Considering the depth to the top of the Corcoran Clay, the specific yields for the combined intervals are reasonable to use to evaluate unconfined groundwater in the SJREC GSA.
A combined average specific yield of 13.5 percent was indicated for the part of the GSP in T7S and T8S. The average specific yield in Group 1 of the Los Banos Area (the western part) was
10.5 percent and in Group 2 of the Los Banos area (the eastern part) was 12.0 percent. The average combined specific yield 1082
Monitoring Zone Monitoring Zone
monitoring zones
97 in Group I of the Mendota-Huron area {Fresno County) was 9 percent.
This was the lowest average specific yield in the GSP, and is primarily due to finer grained Coast Range deposits in this part of the GSP. Lastly the average specific yield in the Madera County part of the GSP was 14.7 percent, the highest of all values for the GSP. This reflects the predominance of Sierran sands in the subsurface of this part of the SJREC GSP Area.
Table 4 shows specific yields by management subarea. Values ranged from 9 percent in Subarea I to 14. 7 percent in Sub-area J.
The other values for the rest of the sub-areas range from 10.5 percent in Subarea C to 13. 3 percent in Sub-areas A, B, and G.
CHANGES IN GROUNDWATER IN STORAGE
The most accurate method to estimate changes in groundwater storage is to evaluate water-level trends and specific yields for the upper aquifer {above the Corcoran Clay) . Specific yields were discussed in the previous section of this report. The hydrologic base period used for this evaluation is 2003-12. The water-level trends for this period that were evaluated were for Spring 2004 and Spring 2013. The acreages of the ft,e.ne.lJeflleR4! e.!l!'ee.19 are as follows:
Ue.ne.!! e!IIOh e il!!I!' ee. Acres U l!lillll • !!a. 1119 Ml!ll!lil Acres A 20,227 G 3,734
B 33,486 H 47,336
C 34,508 I 23,794
D 10,392 J 17,062
E 54,633 K 3,578
F 6,740
1083
Monitoring Zones
TABLE 4- SPECIFIC YIELDS FOR UPPER AQUIFER
IN MAMASBUBN'P SUBARBAS OF SJREC GSA
Sub-Area s12ecific Yield (12ercent)
A 13.3
B 13.3
C 10.5
D 12.2
E 12.2
F 11.5
G 13.3
H 12.2
I 9.0
J 14.7
K 11.0
Specific yields were derived from data presented in U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1469 by Davis et al (1959)
98 1084
monitoring zones
Monitoring Zone Monitoring Zone
monitoring zone
Monitoring Zone Monitoring Zone
99 Water-level hydrographs covering this base period have been prepared for a number of CCID wells in Management: hreae A, B, D, E and G and were presented in the 2017 CCID pumping program report by KOSA (2018). In Area A, records were available for six wells, in Area B records were available for three wells, in Area D records were available for 15 wells, and in Area G records were available for eight wells. In the remaining areas, representative water-level hydrographs presented earlier in this report were used.
Based on this information, the following average water-level changes occurred between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013.
Water-Level Water-Level
Manag:emen1: ls:ree: Chang:e(ft/~r) !!e:ne:g:ement: Area Chang:e (ft/~r) A -0.6 G -0.3
B -0.1 H 0
C -0.8 I 0
D -0.7 J -0.5
E -0.7 K -0 . 6
F 0
Following are the average annual groundwater storage changes by maaa~emea~ a~oa between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013.
Change in Change in
Storage Storage
Ue:ne:g:emen1: Area (AF/~r) ! !anag:emen t: Area (AF/~r) A -1,600 G -150
B -450 H 0
C -3,050 I 0
D -850 J -1,300
E -4,600 K 0
F 0
1085
monitoring zones
100
The combined average decrease in storage, or the groundwater overdraft, between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013 was 11,950 acrefeet per year. The period selected (2003-12) was to comply with the DWR SGMA requirement to use a recent base period for the water budget. It should be noted that this period was slightly below average in terms of average surface water supplies to the CVP Contractors west of the SJREC GSA. Overall, the small storage decreases indicate little overdraft in the service area. Figure 41 shows the average annual changes in storage in the M&A&!•••n• aw ~ for 2003-12.
LAND SURFACE SUBSIDENCE
The land surface can irreversibly subside when water levels in confined aquifers decline and interbedded fine-grained confining beds are compacted. Subsidence begins when the water surface in the aquifer falls below a certain threshold level . The rate of subsidence depends on how far water levels fall below that level, how long they remain there, and the characteristics of the sediments. Grain size is the most important sediment characteristic (Meade, 1968) . Observations in the San Joaquin Valley indicate that subsidence began when water levels dropped more than about 100 feet below the earliest measured levels. Subsidence due to pumping from above the Corcoran Clay has been demonstrated to be reversible at two Mendota area compaction recorders. That is, compaction occurs during seasonal pumping periods, and then the 1086
Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
Santa
Clara
Madera
Merced
Merced
Fresno
S
Merced
anta Clara
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10 9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16 17
15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23 23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 VALERIA
AVE
S FAITH HOM E RD
W BELMONT
AVE
M ST
W
H ST
L
A
OC UST
VE
L S T W
POMELO
AVE
VE
MC CLINTOCK RD
BY STRUM
RD
VOLTA RD
S
N ST
W
ALMON D
AVE
EUCALY PTUS RD W
HWY 33
MERRILL AV E
BRANNON AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
I
ST
SYCAMORE AVE
S DE RRICK AV E
ELGIN
AVE
W NE ES AVE
PALM AV E S
W M ERRILL AV E
N FAIRFAX AVE
CE NTER AVE
S
PIONE ER RD W
HWY 165 S
MERCEY S PRINGS RD S
HWY 33
SANTA NELLA BLVD S
SNYDER RD
W
OLLER S T
P ST W
4TH
ST
N ST
INGOM AR RD S
ORESTIMBA
RD
FRONTIER ST
W
HE NRY MILLER AVE W
HUNT RD S
N SAN DIE GO AVE
N DOUGL AS
AVE
W ASHLAN AV E
SUNS ET AVE W
H
E
N DOS PA LOS R D
HUNT RD S
COTTON GIN RD W
SHAIN AVE
V LI LA
FO LSOM AV E
L
ST
BASS
AVE
CE NTE R AV E S
S PRAIRIE FLOWE R RD
ELM AVE
FIALHO AVE W
SANTA FE GRD
ORANGE AV E
SHIE LLS RD
W S HAIN AVE
N DOS PALOS RD
ARMS TRO NG RD
BADGER FLAT RD S
CAPRI AVE
W
W HE RNDON AV E
MOFFETT RD
N CAM BRIA AV E
FAHEY RD W
W BULLARD AVE
N FAIRFAX
AVE
S MITCHE LL RD
HOYER
RD
W M INT AV E
HWY 152 W
S CE NTRAL AVE
GRAND AV E W
JOHNSON RD
S
I-5 I-5
I-5
DRAPER RD
N LY ON AV E
LINDEN AVE W
SANTA LUCIA
AVE S
W M CKINLEY AV E
HOLSTEIN RD W
HWY 140 W
BE LL RD
INGOM AR GRD W
KNIEBES RD
S
RE YNOLDS AVE S
ANDERSON RD
COPA DE ORA AV E W
N ORLEANS AVE
UP PER RD
W SILAXO AVE
M IDDLE RD
W
COZZI R
S
D
N WASHOE AVE
W L INWOOD
AVE HICKORY
AVE
JENS EN RD S
W HARDING RD
E
ST
S MORGAN RD
LE XI NGTO N AV E
S
N DOUGLAS
AVE
FIG
LN
N OXFO RD AVE
NOBLE RD
W
HOBART
AVE
EASTIN
RD
W ALTHE A AVE
N FAIRFAX AV E
AS H AVE
W BEHY ME R
AVE
CANAL
HWY 152 S
SAN M ATEO AVE
MINT RD W
JULIP R
S
D
HOLLY
AVE
PACHECO BLVD W
N NEWCOM B AVE
HENRY MILLE R
AVE W
N LY ON AV E
I-5 W
TE RCE IRA RD S
H ST W
AUGUST RD
W SAN
JOSE AVE
PIONE ER RD W
SHY ST
S
ELFERS RD
ES THER AVE
S
ELGIN
AVE
EMORY AVE
W
HWY 33 S
E MARSHALL RD
W GETTYS BURG
AVE
KILBURN RD
CANAL SCHOOL RD S
W S HIE LDS AVE
S BLAKER RD
W M ARS HALL RD
L ODI RD
S
W LINWOOD AVE
S OHIO
AVE
M ORRIS
RD
LUNDY
RD
SIMMONS
RD
W VAL ERIA AVE
BRADBURY
RD
P UMP
RD
CHERRY
AVE
N CUSTER
AVE
CUSTER
AVE
TULIP AV
HWY 140 W
PRINCE R
S
D
EHRLICH RD
SULLIVAN
RD
WARD RD
S
HUTCHINS RD W
PARADISE AVE
W CARMELLIA AVE
DE NTON & LE AK RD W
W M ILLER AVE
ROX BURY RD W
DIEHL
RD
SHAIN
AVE
SIMM ONS RD
CARMELLIA AVE W
AUBREY AV E
S
CYPRESS RD
W
W HARDING RD
CACIA
AVE
ELAINE RD
WEST M AIN ST
E UCALYPTUS RD
W
W S IMM ONS RD
CHE RRY
AVE
GUN CLUB RD W
TAGLIO RD W
ARROYA AVE S
RUBLE RD
N SAN
BE RNARDINO AVE
ORTIGALITA RD
S
LUX
AVE
N E LGIN AVE
N DAVIDSON AVE
HOYER
RD
M ILLS RD
S
N EVA
AV
NS
E
ALM OND DR W
N BRANNON RD
MOFFETT RD
PHILLIP S RD W
MOFFATT RD S
CHINA CAM P RD W
FE NTEM RD W
GAY ST
W
DIANA RD S
WEST
RD
N NEWCOM B AVE
N S AN
DIEGO AVE
INDIANA AV E S
N JERRO LD AVE
N HUDSON
AVE
LE WIS RD
BRYANT
AVE
CLAUSEN
RD
N MILLUX RD
M AS ONRD W
PUMP RD W
WILLIS RD S
E STUHR
RD
N HUDS ON AV E
CARLUCCI RD
S
PFITZER RD W
N JERROLD AVE
ISLAND
AV E
S DE RRICK AV E
DODDS
EHRLICH RD
JENNING S RD
WANGENHEIM
RD TAGLIO RD
W
RAMOS RD W
W KE Y AVE
PRESTON RD W
APRICOT AVE
HWY 152 S
HALE RD
BATTEN RD W
V OLTA R
S
D
N FAIRFAX AV E
AZEVE DO
RD
W BRADBURY
RD
LEOTA ST
S
BRAZO RD W
DE NTON & LE AK RD W
W COPPE R
AVE
W O XALIS AVE
W CALIFORNIA
AVE
SANTA RITA GRD W
ROME RO RD W
PFITZER RD W
S SAN
BE RNARDINO AVE
W SAN JOSE AVE
PALM AV E S
DOS PALOS
RD
S CA RPEN TER R D
N RUS SE LL AV E
AZE VEDO RD S
ORCHARD RD S
HUSMAN RD
W
MIL LUX
AVE
MERVE L AV E W
CACTUS DR
W
LAG UNA RD
W
JERS EY RD S
NANTES AV E S
N MILLUX RD
N JE RROL D
AVE
A PPLE
AVE
HILMAR RD
HARVEY RD
VENICE
RD
JORGE NSEN RD
W
CANYON RD S
N OHIO AVE
RAMOS RD S
N HUDS ON AV E
W W HITE SBRIDGE AVE
N SAN
BERNARDINO AVE
WORTHINGTON RD
W
GUN CLUB RD W
WILS ON RD S
BORBA RD
W
W O LIV E AVE
ROSE G ARDEN
RD W
NEWS OM RD
S
HALEY RD W
LO CKE AV E
CLE MENT AVE S
ALM OND DR W
CREE K RD S
JOHNSON RD S
I-5 S
MADERA
RD
N BRANNON
RD
FINK RD
ORCHARD RD S
W IKE CROW RD
W HARDING RD
HOGIN
HEARSTRD W
HE LM CANAL RD
POLE LINERD S
W O RM SBY AVE
RIVE R RD
SANTA FE GRD W
S SAN BENITO AVE
WARD RD
S
CATRINA ST W
HWY 152
WOO RD S
CH EROKE E RD
W PANOCHE RD
MORAGA AVE S
INGOM AR GRD W
WASHINGTON RD W
WARD AV E
SANTA FE GRD W
MEDLIN RD
AUGUST RD
JORGENSE N RD
SWIFT AVE S
WILD DUC K RD S
W WHITESBRIDGE AVE
HUSM AN RD W
SANTA FE GRD
SANTA CRUZ GUN CLUB RD S
CAMP 13 RD W
POLE LIN E RD W
I-5 S
SANTA FE GRD W
CROWS LAND NI G RD
POME GRANATE AV E
PEAR AV E
FIG
AVE
HWY 152 W
HWY 33 S
DAV IS RD
W HERNDON
AVE
MORAN RD MORAN RD
W S TUHR RD
PETE M ILLER RD
HILLS FE RRY RD
IND IA NA RD S
ALFALFA
RD
OLD LAS
PALM AS AVE
N DOUGLAS
AVE
PRUN E
AVE
FRE ITAS RD
J T CROW RD
HWY 14 0 W
HWY 140 W
BLUE H ILL
HELM DITC H RD
FINK RD
W S HAW AVE
SCHM IDT RD S
PETE MILLER RD
COTTON RD W
BUNKER RD
W
ORESTIM BA RD
COTTONWOOD RD
W
CHARLE STON RD W
WHITWORTH RD S
HALLOWE LL RD
NE THE RTON RD W
N RUS SE LL AV E
N GALV EZ AVE
MANUCHA RD
DODDS RD
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
BRAVEL SLOUGH
B
SALT
SLOUGH
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
OWENS CREEK
OWENS
CREEK
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SAN JOAQUIN
RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
EAST SIDE BYPASS
EAST
SIDE
BYPASS
JOAQUIN
SAN
RIVER
LAKE
HONDA
ASH
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
ASH SLOUGH
LAKE
RAMONA
ASH
SLOUGH
OLSON POND
EL NIDO
RESERVOIR
FLAT
POND
ASH
SLOUGH
MUD SLOUGH
MUD
SLOUGH
LITTLE PANOCHE CREEK
LOWER
RUTH LAKE
UPPER
RUTH
LAKE
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
DELTA MENDOTA
CANAL
WELL
POND
PEAR
SLOUGH
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
MUD
DEEP SLOUGH
CREEK
BEAR
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
SALT
SLOUGH
DUCK
POND
LAS
GARZAS
CREEK
LAS GARZAS
CREEK
LOS BANOS
CREEK
LOS BANOS CREEK
FRESNO
RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
QUINTO
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
CREEK
MUD
SLOUGH
FRESNO
RIVER
MUD SLOUGH
LITTLE
BUTTONWILLOW
LAKE
BUTTONWILLOW SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
BIG WATER
LAKE
DEEP SLOUGH
FRESNO RIVER
DUCK POND
SAN LUIS
RESERVOIR
BEAR CREEK
BEAR
CREEK
LONE
WILLOW
SLOUGH
BEAR CREEK
BERENDA
SLOUGH
CHOWCHILLA RIVER
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
EAST SIDE
BYPASS
OWENS
CREEK
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
CHOWCHILLA
RIVER
COTTONWOOD
CREEK
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED
RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
MERCED RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
RESERVOIR
MUD
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
DUCK
POND
BERENDA
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
SLOUGH
BERENDA
LOS
BERENDA
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
BEAR
CREEK
NORTH FORK LOS
BANOS CREEK
DRY
CREEK
DRY CREEK
DRY CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
PANOCHE CREEK
PANOCHE
CREEK
SAN
JOAQUIN
RIVER
SOUTH
FORK
LOS BANOS CREEK
LONE WILLOW
SLOUGH
ASH
SLOUGH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LITTLE
PANOCHE
CREEK
LOS
BANOS
RESERVOIR
FRESNO RIVER
FRESNO RIVER
ORESTIMBA
O`NEILL
FOREBAY
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CALIFORNIA
AQUEDUCT
CREEK
BANOS
CREEK
ORESTIMBA
CREEK
FIGURE 41 - AVERAGE ANNUAL CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE FOR UPPER AQUIFER FROM 2003-2012
DELTA-MENDOTA
SUBBASIN
0 2
.
4 8 12
Miles
-1600 AF/year
A
-450 AF/year
B
-3050 AF/year
C
0 AF/year
H
-850 AF/year
D
0 AF/year
K
-4600 AF/year
E
0 AF/year
F 0 AF/year
I
-150 AF/year
G
-1300 AF/year
J
101
1087
102
land surface rebounds during subsequent non-pumping periods.
Subsidence was measured extensively in the part of the SJREC GSA south of Los Banos by the U.S. Geological Survey for many decades. The total land subsidence between 1926 and 1972 (taken from U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 437-I by Ireland, Poland, and Riley, 1984) ranged from one to 12 feet in the part of the GSA south of Los Banos.
From 1972 until about 2010, much less information was available on land subsidence than for the previous decades. This was because once water from the San Luis Canal (California Aqueduct) became available, it was thought that the subsequent decrease in pumpage would essentially eliminate overdraft and land subsidence.
However, by the drought of the early 1990's, it had become apparent that subsidence was continuing. Some information has been available for the settling of sane canals and other features. The Delta-Mendota Canal and CCID Outside Canal have required extensive repairs due to subsidence, and the repair or replacements of Mendota Dam and Sack Dam are being considered. Figure 42 shows present land subsidence monitoring sites in the area, including compaction recorders and GPS sites, DMC land surface points, and SJRRP land surface points. Figure 43 shows land subsidence along the CCID Outside Canal from 1960 to 2017 between the head of the Canal near Mendota Dam to Highway 152. The total subsidence was about four feet near the head of the canal, near and north of Nees Avenue, and near the county line.
1088
Stanislaus
Merced
Stanislaus
M
Merced
Fresno
Merced
Madera
Stanislaus
Merced
33 34
35 36
31 6
5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16
19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21
22 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28
27 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10
11 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14
19 20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23
24 30
29 28
27 26
29 30 25 28 27 26
25 32 33 34 35
36 31
32 33 34 35 36
5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
6 8
9 10 11 12
8 7
9 10 11 12
7 17
16 15 14 13 18 17
16 15 14 13 18
17 16
20 21 22 23
24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20
22 21
28 27 26 25 30
29 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 29
33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32
33 34
4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4
3 2 9
10 11 12 8 7 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7
15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 27
26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 2
1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 12
7 8 9
10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 18
17 16 15 14 13 18 16 17 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 20
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 22 23 21 24 19 20 28
27 26 25 30 29 28 27
26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30
29 28
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34
35 36 31 32
33 3
2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
5 4
3 2 1 6 5 4
3 11
12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 10 11 7 12 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 13
18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
18 14 13 17 15 18 16 17 16 15
14 19
20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 24 20 23 21 19 22 20 21 22 23
24 29
28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 25 27 30 26 29 28 30 27 26
25 33
34 35 36 31 32 33
12 7 8 12 7 9 8 9 10 7 11 12 10
11 8 9 10 11
14 13 18
16 15 14 13
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36
31 32 33 34 35
31 32 33 36 31 34 35 36
3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 2 1 3 6 4 5 11 12 7 8 9 7 8 10
9 11 12 10 9 10 7 11 11 8 12 12 7
8 7
16 11 12 9 10
13 18 18 17 16
17 15 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 14 14 13 15 18 13 17 18
17 15 14 13
24 19 20 21 22
30 29 28 27
32 33 34
5 4
3 9
10 15
23 24 20 21 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 19 20 19 21 24 23 20 21 24 22 23
25 30 26 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 6 1 5 2 1 6 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3
2 11 12 7 8 9 10 11
17 18 17 16 15 13 18 17 16 14 15 14 17 16 14 13
13 15 18
21 22 23 24 19 20 21 20 21 24 19 22 23 22
24 23
23 24 19 22 20 21
27 26 25 30 25 30 29 27 26
26 28 27
28 29
8 Firebaugh
Mendota
Newman
Turlock
Atwater
Delhi
Dos
Palos
Gustine
Hilmar-Irwin
Livingston
Los
Banos
Winton Chowchilla