BOUNDARY, AND SELECTED WELLS
1383
Of particular interest in this update are: 1) the extent of groundwater overdraft, 2) land subsidence, 3) the historical water budget and that for future urban development of the study area, and 4) groundwater quality issues.
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Alluvial deposits comprise the aquifer in the Newman area.
Subsurface deposits near Newman are termed the older alluvium and the Tulare Formation. Page (1986) indicated that the base of the fresh groundwater (electrical conductivity less than 3,000 micranhos per centimeter at 25°C) was about 900 feet deep near Newman. KDSA 3 (2018) indicated that the base of the usable aquifer in the vicinity, or bottom of the basin in SGMA terminology, was greater than 800 feet deep. A major confining bed is present beneath much of the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, including the Newman area. This clay is termed the Corcoran Clay (E-clay), and divides the aquifer system into upper and lower aquifers. The Corcoran Clay is readily discernible from the drillers logs for most wells in the area, due to its blue color. The over-lying and under-lying deposits are usually tan or brown in color.
Most groundwater near Newman is pumped from relatively shallow wells tapping the upper aquifer, but active City wells and some irrigation wells tap the lower aquifer. Information on the lower aquifer is available from at least four wells or test holes that 1384
have been drilled in the City to a depth of more than 500 feet.
KDSA developed two subsurface geologic cross sections extending through the City (Figure 2). Drillers and electric logs for water wells and test holes were obtained from the City, the CCID, and the California Department of Water Resources in Fresno for use in developing these cross sections. A test hole (No. 7) was done by the City in the northeast part of the City and Well No. 8 was subsequently constructed at this site. No CCID wells have been drilled in the area since the 2001 report.
4 Subsurface Geologic Cross Section A-A' (Figure 3) extends from near Orestimba Road and the Main Canal on the west through City Wells No. 6, No. 1, No. 4, a test hole near Hills Ferry Road and Canal School Road, to a private well (17Rl) near the extension of Hunt Road, about one-half mile west of the Newman Wasteway. Electric logs are available for three wells or test holes along this section. One of these is a 712-foot deep test hole (20D) that was drilled for the City near Hills Ferry Road and Canal School Road. ;
Another is a 500-foot deep test hole that was drilled near City Well No. 6. Another is for CCID Well No. 3, which is 422 feet deep. Drillers logs are available for the other three wells along this section. All of the wells and test holes along this section penetrated the Corcoran Clay. The top of this clay ranges from about 220 feet deep near CCID Well No. 3 to about 275 feet at City Well No. 4. The Corcoran Clay thickens sub1385 /l:J
I
\
\
\
' \
\
\
)
(D
• ()
Central California Irrigation District
Active City of Newman WeU
EB
0 Inactive City of Nevmrnn Well
City of Newman Test Hole
P·rivate Well
i /\ 1 Location of Subsurface
M Geologic Cross Section
0 2.000 4,000
FIGURE 2-LOCATION OF SELECTED TEST HOLES AND WELLS
AND SUB-SURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS
N
1 5
1386
100
p
UJ
~ 0
-...J
w
ru
..J -100 <(
w
(./)
z
«
~ -200
0 Jw
~ '300
lU
rt
a -4-00
w
~ ..J
lU ~500
-600
WEST
A
CCIDNo. 3
~ ....,~••-'~~~•u • .. "'~··O,~-= , . ,.,~-n.1>.: . ....
EXPLANATION
[1):fJ Sar,:I t. gr&~
[NJ S:?r,d
r=1 Sa'nJ d.rf & rrixl'.'1'$$ ol d:IJ
~ £t)d gra-~ww.d
~~~1 ¢fl'/
Ccy Ho. S Wc-1 t. ldoao~.:awo Il Pcrl«m:J ln~,d
lD.&xr
o ~m 1):0l l I I
HOR!ZOIITAL SCJ.U; ri FEET
....
City t:o. 6 City No.' CllyUo. 4 TH·20D
-:-""'-... __ . '\;-:_
_ ....,,..J----~-... ·...,.,...
-=-=-~::~===~-- ro_."".J"'-:M--~=-:--=~-=---
FIGURE 3 ·· SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A - Ar
EAST
A'
100
0 -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
m
F"
~
~ 0
z
;zJ
m
--I ► <
m
-I
0 $
m
)>
z
(./)
~
'
m
<
m
i
-=n
m
~ ~-
6 1387
stantially toward Highway 33, from about 20 feet at CCID Well No. 3 to about 115 feet at City Well No. 1. Along Cross Section A-A', the clay is thickest and deepest beneath the area near Highway 33.
7 Sand and gravel layers are more common in the upper aquifer beneath the west part of the study area (i.e., at CCID Well No. 3).
Some of the coarsest deposits in the upper aquifer are within the lower 100 feet, just above the Corcoran Clay. In contrast, fine-grained layers are more predominant in the upper aquifer near Highway 33 (City Well No. 4). Information at Test Hole 20D indicates that below a depth of about 500 feet, sand and gravel layers are uncommon in the lower aquifer. In general, deposits of the lower aquifer appear to be coarsest immediately beneath the E-clay, and to become finer with increasing depth. Two former City wells along this section (Nos. 1 and 4) primarily drew and CCID Well No. 3 draws water from these two widespread, coarsegrained zones above and below the Corcoran Clay. In contrast, City Well No. lR produces water exclusively from the lower aquifer.
Cross Section B-B' (Figure 4) extends from north to south, from City Well No. 5 through City Well No. 4 and then two private wells. This section is based entirely on drillers logs, and was correlated with information from Section A-A', which intersects Cross Section B-B' at City Well No. 4. Coarse-grained 1388
ffi
Ill
!.l.
-,..I
,..I
~
<(
w
If)
z
<{
w
~
0 lg!
100
0 -100
-:200
~ -300
..J
LU
O!'
z
0 ~ fii 400
-' UJ
·500.
-600
NORTH
B·
c«)'No,6
EXfLANATION
ffisl &"r:l&gr.uet
~~
~ &m/dcJ & rrb:U-es o/ wr1 l=i md gt;ti-.;I ar,f w,j
e~ etr1
Wo'JU~~1'.'\'l
Pert~ lritwr'.i
T .0. WI Tola [Ȣ1 (fs.eQ
~ .. ·,, M[.oJ
. ~ALS('J.tl;~FEET
SOUTH
91 100
0 -500
-.soo
FIGURE 4 ~ SUBSUHFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B ~ 8'
8 1389
strata were found at a depth of more than 600 feet at Well 19Gl, which is the deepest well along this section. Well 19Gl was drilled to a depth of 632 feet at the Golden Valley Creamery in 1947. This section also shows a predominance of coarse-grained strata within the lower 100 feet of the upper aquifer and just below the Corcoran Clay.
Test Hole No. 7 was drilled to a depth of 505 feet by Maggiora Brothers, Inc. of Watsonville in September 1992 (Figure 1).
The Corcoran Clay was indicated to be present for about 260 to 354 feet in depth. A number of permeable strata were found both above and below the Corcoran Clay at this site. City Well No. 8 was subsequently completed near this test hole.
WELL CONSTRUCTION DATA
City Wells
9 There are presently four active City Wells. Table 1 provides information on dates drilled, depths, and perforated intervals for these wells.
Drillers logs are available for Well Nos. lR, 5, 6, and 8 and electric logs are available for Wells No. 5, 6, and 8. Cased depths of the active wells range from 450 to 635 feet. Wells No. lR and 6 tap strata only in the lower aquifer, whereas Wells No. 5 and 8 are composite wells that tap both aquifers.
1390
Date
No. Drilled
l.R 08/94
5 62/69
6 09/90
8 03/04
TABLE 1-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR CITY OF NEWMlW WELLS
Dri.:LJ.ed Cased Cas:ing Perforated
De;eth (feet) ~eth (£eet) Di3llleter (inches) IntervaJ. (feet) 645 635 16 340-620
465 450 14 162-450
510 500 1.6 350-500
498 485 16 180-4.80
Annul.ar Seal.
(feet}
o-so
0-50 0-50
0-100
0 1391
11 CCID Wells
Table 2 provides construction data for four CCID wells west and northwest of Newman , along the Main Canal. Depths of these wells range from 350 to 432 feet , and all are composite wells , tapping both the upper and lower aquifer.
WATER LEVELS
Near Newman , most of the available water-level measurements are for wells tapping the upper aquifer , but some measurements are for composite wells that also tap the lower aquifer. In general , water levels are deeper in deeper wells , which indicates a downward direction of groundwater flow in the area.
This is common in much of the San Joaquin Valley.
Water-Level Elevations
KDSA (2001 , Figure 4 ) presented a water-level elevation contour map for the upper aquifer in Spring 2000. Water-level contours for the upper aquifer beneath most of the urban area were not provided due to a lack of measurements. Water- level elevations in the upper aquifer west of Newman ranged from 86 to 108 feet above mean sea level, and the direction of groundwater flow was primarily to the east. Water-level elevations in the upper aquifer in the area southeast of Newman ranged from 68 to 78 feet 1392
Date
No. Drilled
--
2 02/54
3 02/54,
36 01/65
42 01/67
TABLE 2-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Dril.l.ed Cased Casing
Depth (feet) Depth (feet) Diameter (incl:les)
350 341 16
14 422 360 16
- 398 16
14 - 391. 16
Perforated
Interval (feet)
90-1S2
157-337
85-150
180-225
24.5-355
90-132
132-393
90-391.
I-'
N1393
13 above mean sea level in Spring 2000, and the direction of groundwater flow was to the northeast. Near Newman, the average water-level slope in the upper aquifer was about eight feet per mile.
Water-level elevations of less than about 75 feet in the area west of Newman appeared to have been representative of the lower aquifer. KOSA (2001, Figure 5) showed water-level elevations for the lower aquifer in Spring 2000. Water-level elevations for wells apparently tapping the lower aquifer at and west of Newman ranged from about 66 to 75 feet above mean sea level, and the direction of groundwater flow was to the northeast in Spring 2000. A cone of depression was present beneath the Newman urban area, where water-level elevations ranged from 52 to 56 feet southwest of Newman. The average slope of the piezometric surface of the lower aquifer upgradient of Newman was about 17 feet per mile in Spring 2000.
Figure 5 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow for the upper aquifer in Spring 2011. An upper aquifer map for Spring 2017 or other years after 2011 could not be prepared, due to a lack of data in the DWR data base. Limited data for Spring 2017 indicate a water-level elevation of 86 feet above mean sea level near the Main Canal south of Preston Road and 57 feet north of Stuhr Road and average water-level slope of about
8.8 feet per mile. In Spring 2011, the average water-level 1394
I
I
---- - --- - ----------------------------1
' I
l • .
,>
• I. - l .,,..,,,___;:rp_11~,, -1
• -t- 1
- \ ; I . "''-1· ' - \ "
---~~:~~.~ \ I
.. \
\
8G
4.7 -- -~ \
FIGURE 5 ~ WATE.R~L~VEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLO,W FOR UPPER AQUIFER (SPRING 2011)
EXPLANATION
l:f3Mla
~
Wei.I. a.nd tdentifica.tipn and
Elevatio:n Ab,ove Mean Se.a
Level {fee't)
0 I
I Study.Area B'oundary
Contour ·ot Wa.ter~Level Elevation
Above Mean Sea Level (feet)
Direction of Groundwater Flow
2,000
I
Scale (feet~
N
1 14
1395
15 slope was about 8.4 feet per mile. The direction of groundwater flow was to the north-northeast.
Figure 6 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow for lower aquifer in Spring 2017. Some of the water-level elevations are for measurements in composite wells, and these values may be somewhat higher than actual elevations in the lower aquifer. Water-level elevations ranged from 49 feet above mean sea level at CCID wells near No. 3 the Main Canal to less than 20 feet at City Well No. 8. An easterly direction of groundwater flow was indicated.
Time Trends
The hydrologic base period utilized for the SJREC GSA is from 2003 to 2012. Thus Spring 2003-Spring 2013 water-level measurements were reviewed in terms of time trends.
City Wells
Water-level measurements for Well 1-R are only available for 2001-04, which is too short of a period to be utilized in this evaluation. Figure 7 is a water-level hydrograph for Well No. 5.
The spring water levels in this well have slightly declined since 2001. Between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013, the water level in this well fell an average of about 0.7 foot per year. Figure 8 is a water-level hydrograph for Well No. 6. The spring water levels in 1396
FIGURE 6 .. WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW FOR LOWER AQUIFER (SPRING 201 7)
1397
20 ~------------,-------------------,,--------------,--------, 30 1:---------+----------j--------1-------1
40 I I r l ~~r\f 'l I I I I <Y'------1---.-0\-ID J
p 50
w w
u..
-
0::: 60 w
s
0 70 II
!-
CL
LU
0 80
90 +------------+-~~---------+---------~---1~+-------~
100 +--------------t----------------1------------------;l+-----~--__j 110 +----"---------'--l--~-___.__ _ _,___....__--+ ___ __.___.....________.__---4-_ _.__......____i 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
FIGURE 7- WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF NEWMAN WELL NO. 5 '--I
1398
20 J I I I
30 r
,. ) )
l
40 50 +-----...
rr ,,.
)
<O
0 n
lU-~~ffi-&~~lol~ll~ J w~
; - 60 L--i-1--~+-1~i~r-1-+~~~~~-tn~i~rlr-~~1~1 i
ffi '--+--+«Hi-\:-U'-t,--ni l~I s: 70 8 q
0 I-
; 80 90 1--~---------+----------Qi-----------, -·--~ I
:f,, )
100 4--------------l--------------__;_--------------1-I-!------~ 110 I
120 -1--~---'---'----'---l----'---..__ _ ____,_ __ ....__--+---'-----'----'---'----+--..__-__.__._1 2000 2005 2010 20:t:S 2017
FIGURE 8- WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF NEWMAN WELL NO. 6 o;, 1399
19 this well have also declined since 2001. Between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013, the water level in this well fell an average of
1.3 feet per year. Both Wells No. 5 and 6 are composite wells.
Figure 9 shows a water-level hydrograph for Well No. 8, which is a lower aquifer well. Measurements for this well prior to 2005 aren't available. Spring water levels fell from 21 feet in 2005 to 40 feet in 2012, or an average decline of 2.1 feet per year.
This decline is considered representative of the lower aquifer in the City.
CCID Wells
Long-term water-level hydrographs for the four CCID wells are provided in Figure 10, 11, 12, and 13. Since 1965, water levels in these wells were relatively stable prior to 2013. Water levels in all of these wells fell during 2013-16, and had partially recovered by Spring 2018. Between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013, water levels in two of these wells (No. 3 and 42) were essentially stable. Water levels in the other two wells (No. 2 and No. 36) fell at average rates ranging from 0.2 to 0.8 foot per year. Overall, records for the four CCID wells indicate an average water-level decline of 0.25 foot per year. All of these wells are composite wells, tapping both aquifers.
1400
10 20
30 40
!-
-
w w
LL 50
-
0:::
w
s 60
0 !-
I 70 I0..
w
0 an 90
100
110
,I
.,.
.,.
,,
,,
-----
-
I
;!
I·
i
2005 2010 2:015 20l7
FIGURE 9- WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF NEWMAN WELL NO. 8 N 0 .. ·-,.. '~•-,-----------------------
1401
N
a.
~
a.
e
r
iJ
C
Ole
N
~
!i
ffi
!!I
!:\!
.
<.I
a
0 ..
2 0
O!<!l'lfbJ Hlj-ltl)\li\'!ltJN\I
~
0 0
==t==:+==t==lt==~=+'.!;~~;:~=t==t=~~=t=t=~=::11:::=~=t=:i==Jt:t=±=J==l==l==t=±=:l==t=t=±=::f==J ;f£l ..
... ,
l'O
~
~H
.:1111:
~ST
;191
n
c!
Ht
Ot
cl6
~9
:IL
~8
==§§~~! ~§g~~~~!~¥~§g g~J ~§ ~i~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~i~~~ i= ;1, ;It>
~~g~g~g~~::~§~§~g~g~g~g~g~g~f~f~g~f~E~f=~=~:t:t:===:== .. =-~-- =-~=-=:=:== ::
=~~~~~~·~ -~1~1~g~g~~§~§~i~I~!~~~~§§~~i~i~!~!~!!~!~!:!:!:!!:!:!5 H ,JO
.:166 , ... ==+==f:'.::'Sl~ ....=1==t:=:t==1~=t:=:t:==t==l==t:::t=:lt:=l:=t=:t=:l==t=:!:=:t==i:::=t=t=:l:=:l=::1!:::=t=:!:=:l=j~~ ,JS6 ~- - · ··· ··· :IL6
.:196
- ;lt6
;11>6
~
"
•
Jl6
;1!6
~00
:!68 l<IC"
==~~!~'S3~I~§§~i~E3~~~E~E~~E3E~~E~E3~I~§§~E3E~~E3~;~~3: ;JSS .., ;llS ==~·ti:;;~,.1~~~~s~t~1~g~~t~l~l~~g~1~1~3~jg~t~i~3~;t~i~1~~~~t~t~i~l;~~~t~t~i~~;-= ;f9S JSS =~E~E=E=t=t=±=t=~==t==1=~~=E=t=E=t=t=±=±=±=i==1=j=~~=1=j=~t=~~e~E~~~r~ ;lvB =~¥~~;:t:::1t:=t=.t=:/~=t=.t=.:t==l:=+=.:t=.=t==l==t=.t=.=t==l==t=:l=:::1~=t"=t"=.t=-=t==l==t"=.t=j:j~_j· .:lfB ==t=:t~~t:::1::±::t::Jl::t::±:j::l=:±::f:j:::t:±::±:j:::::t:±::t::l=:t:t::t:j::l=:t:±:=1:jl=j ~,s ==t=~~-=s,.,. ;~E=i=l=~~=E=i=j::E=t=l=~E=E=i=l=~E=t=t=~==~=t=t=~=~==E=t=t=~~~;; :
==±=~=:1=~~'--~t:1:::!t::t:±:j::::t::±::3::~~=t=±=i=3t:t:±::i=='==E:t:i:=i==t=t=±=~=~E5 SGl -==t=~=3::iE/~t=l=3E=t=t=5==E=i=l::3E:E=t •' :l:~t ~~§~~~; ;;~~§~~;~;~~~~~"""'; SSL l SU I .....
6 m
'
F
I
•
S69
SOI.
SU
Sl'.L
S£l
St>L
SSL
=~~g .. ~~E~~~3~l§§l~§~~E~~g~~E~~E3~~~~fj~~3~i:::::t: SS9 • Sl.9 =3~j~E~2~~i~i~g3~i~~~g~~i~E~•~j~i~g~~~::::::::::::::::::= s 99 ~ I ~
lH3~) 0NflQll;) 7\nln.LVN MO138 ,DV::JijflS \131\IM 01 Hld30 21 n.
IO
Cl)
LL
0 ~
_J
(9
~LL
<(W
_J
0 _J
(9
w~
I<(
>-z
OS
~w
s 8: w
0 n.I
~w
~z
1-
z Z
w
>z
WO
.....I
<(N
_J
.....I _J
~
so
~I--
Ws
~w
0:::
w
~1-
Cl)
I- 0
' w (9 1-
Z -
.....10
QC/)
n.
T"""
0~
0 LL
(9
~
~
WO
1402
22 ffidV~N H3J·3lDV wn m..- 8 "' 8 8 8 8 0
~ 0 ~ ,;: ~ lo! ';l ~ ~ 0 ,-- r ----, :JO • :181
• a::: I ;Ill
I
0 - :191 ... ·
I
;!Sl u...
~tl Cf)
:IH I ~n 0...
;I[[
<( 0 , .. • ;101 0:::.....1
;15
<.9w d ..J r. ;1 8 0- w ,
$ u 0:::LL
Q .... ;19 0.....1 t~ :JS >- .....I -:, I= VI ;I~ IW VI i;) ;IE s 0 :a w ~ . lJII ;ll (9Z o9 .,,. , ;H ~0 .. a:~ <( - ;10
(!) cJ - Ci:: :166
~s er: 0 !:!:: u. ' - :186
-0:: VI :ILG ::J w - :t: 0... z z ti.. :!96
~~ :1 56 Ow !:!: l:J
5i :1
v6 ZI
..I ~ :1 £6 <( I-
~ ~ :IZ6 .....lz
!; l!) :116 Wwf d06 > ('t')
~ ~ .lo :168 w .... :> .....IQ 0 ll. :JO :188
"" ....... a:::z I ..I :!£8 In 1/.1
~ ~ • m W.....1
"" .... • 1--: .....I I :!S8
~~ er: r w ~U8
s
!:i:
1£8
,,._
~ IJZB ~
, .... :118 a:::o -;108 w- I I- a:::
> .._
S6L I I- ..I
w ■ SSL (9 Cf) ~ , I:! ,. SU zo ~ S9L M , Ow .. SSL Cl Svl ....JI 8 • I I- f ,,.._ S£L ~
8 -...., SZL ~ ,., a. St£ w ::>
:,; ... SOL a::: p, 7 M , S6S ::J 0
'I::
S89 (9
I
u
0 S£9
S99 LL
SS9
0 ~ SJ "' 0 .,, 0 "' &! ... 0 "' 0 ., 0 .. 0 ,r, 0
~ g :(l 0 •' ~ "' 0 "' 0 "' 0 ~ 0
"I "1 '! '! ., '\' 'f ..,. ,; 'i' 'I' <;' ~ ~ Z! ... ~ ::i ::i -::: ~ ... 1 ,: ';' 7 -/ 7 (13];1) ONnm19 Wl!(U\fH h\013Q D V:lllrlS ll31'1N\ 01 Hld30 1403
Q
~
...
-I
-
t~
::> 0:: Ill
Iii ~ _w
~ z .
ij
o9
~ 19 u - a:
-
~o u. <{ Ill - :;c :z 0. a:: <(
0 a:
-'
5~
~(!I
0 cl ?i
I- w z (!I
w <t u Q.
00 :a C
":::> Q,
LI\
~~ w U) > en w .....
3 ~
w
ci:
...
03dl'ind H 3HO\f l \ffll'L'W
i , _ I - -
;ll
m
T
,9t
,~
,sr
r
,It
:lzt
m
..
;1
;16
:IDT
8 ;IL
-=r
= =~=;~ ... ~*=~~=!==i==~=*=~==l===t=~~=f=3==t==t=~===l==tii~~~~ ~ 9 .., dS
==+li § ' liliiiiiiil!!! :IV
~E
:I!
~l
~~i~~~glj@~gii@§§gi~§~~t;i~~ ,O - ~ ;I~
-
~~
d%
;196
:IL6
;186
6 :lt 6
,
:1?6
!6
~
:188
,68
,06
LS
:lS
:198
8 =++m~m~m~- ~-±±=t-±±=±-~.~8
:11
:IW
:1£8
8 ~ -
==~==t=~~=~~~~~=t=~~=*==E=~==t=~==1==~==t=~==~=±=3~::±::jt:::f~~ ~L -,
II
oil
""
S1ll
S9
Sll
l
SU
Sll
S£L
SVL
SSL
~ ~
=~~~i ~~~~~~~g~g~f~i~j~~~~§~g~g~f~!~ ~;~~~~~~~= S69
. ~
:
= = =t::j:== == +t ==l-;~§~f~§~~f~§~~l~~g~j~§E~l~~f~~~~E~~~3E~f~~~~:==~=t== SL 9 ~ m
===t==t==t==t==t:=jt::=jt=j==j==j==j==i_--+--...._+_- -- ...._+_- -- ...1. + -- -LI.-_- _--1- , -----1---l--------L-..L-_J S59 LL
G
::J
0:::
w
T"""
23 1404
24 03dWnd 133~·,ir:iv WnNll'S
I I .,
~ § a g n ., 0
·- ~
--
~---.-
~-
--- ·-
--
-
---- ·--- ,
I
:!8t .. •.:W a:: m I'. 0 .:m LL
:!~t
.:IM
Cl)
~ :!Zt I I 0... :nt
- <Co -
:!G
.:IOt
a:: _J ...I (9 w iii ;18 ✓
o- ~ ,~ H a:'. LL a . ... I .:19
t~ ' o_J • :IS
>- u::l
-:::,
.. ~! :If
:Ill
Is Q~ ·-~ ~ ~ •
Zd :fZ Wz 0 . ::., .:It (9 <( ij ~ IIIC.
:10
~~ ~u :166 - a: ~o • ~s • I :186 - u. • < en ~l6 => w zif .:196 0... z !~ - :1ss u. 8 ,n,5 ow 6 C: zI Q :lEG <( ~
~~ .c: ~t6 _J z :!t6
fl; i :105 w
u o; >N co ~ :169 ws:::tn . :b"",
:188 _J . ""' #ll a:: 0 - :!98 Wz .., .... - &! :!SS
~ :J w . :!Ml
ti
- ..., .
SW 3: - ~£8
' ~s """
m
:IZS
I a:: ~
- ~08
' WU SI!£
·1
~a::
- $8£
·~ $LL (9 (/)
g
- S9L za SS'L 00 Q.
I St£ :! _J w ~ J SEL I I ~ {# .. SZL (")~ ,ii, ~ I
Cl Q
- Sll ~
8 8 I
• SOL w
+
.
• . S69 a:: • I
S'8'J =>
S£9 (9 ' , m
' LL __ _J SS9
-
----- . ----
- -~
~ ·l"il ~ ¥,I .. ~ ~ l'(l $
' ~ 1\1 0 ij ~ li1
* :!I ~ ij 2 ~ ~ ij 0
'f 'r ,: ~ :i-
(.133:1} ONOOHE> 1wn.lVN MO"l:1113:)V:!llnS 1131Vi\\ 01 Hldl(] 1405
25 AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Table 3 summarizes pump test data for three of the active City wells for the 1990's. Recent pump test have not been provided. Pumping rates of the City wells ranged from about 1,200 to 1,600 gpm, and specific capacities ranged from 30 to 73 gpm per foot. The highest specific capacity was for Well No. 6.
Table 4 shows pump test results for four CCID wells in October 2016. Pumping rates ranged from about 1,380 to 1,740 gpm. Except for one well, specific capacity values ranged from 62 to 68 gpm per foot. Based on information in the 1992 KOSA report, the transmissivity of the upper aquifer beneath the City is estimated to be about 23,000 gpd per foot. The combined transmissivity of the upper and lower aquifers above a depth of about 550 feet at Newman is estimated to average about 90,000 gpd per foot. This indicates the high productivity of the lower aquifer at Newman. The combined transmissivity of the upper and lower aquifers above a depth of about 420 feet near the Main Canal is estimated to be about 120,000 gpd per day per foot.
Darcy's Law can be used to estimate groundwater flow into the urban area. Using a transmissivity of 23,000 gpd per foot, a width of flow of about 2.6 miles (using general Plan boundaries) in Spring 2011, and an average water-level slope of about 8.4 feet per mile, the amount of groundwater flow in the upper aquifer 1406
TlIBLE 3-PTJMP TEST DATA FOR CITY OF NEWMAN WELLS
Dato Pumping Static Pumpi.ng Drawdown
No. Tested Rate (foot) LovoJ. (£cot) Level (inches) (£0et) 1R 8/27/94 1,600 77.0 130.0 53.0
5 7/06/92 1,600 47.0 95.l 48.1
6 10/05/90 J.,200 47.0 G3 .5 16.S
Data from City 0£ No'Wl:tl..an record.$.
Specific Capacity
(_gpm/ft)
30.2 33.3
72.7 I\)
O'l,
1407
T'.ABLE 4-PUMP TEST DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Date Pumping Static Pump:ing Drawdown
No. Tested Rate (feet) Level. (feet) Level (inches) (feet} 2 10/15/J.6 1,378 65.8 85.8 20.1
3 10/15/16 J.,744 71.6 78.8 7.2
36 10/15/16 1,520 78.8 100 .. 3 21.5
42 10/15/16 1,603 69.9 91.9 22.1
Records from CCID.
Spec:i.fi.c Capaci. ty
(gpm/ft)
62 .4
200.0
67.5 66.6
l\l
-J.
1408
28 was calculated to be about 560 acre-feet per year. For the lower aquifer, using a transmissivity of 67,000 gpd per foot, a width of flow of 2.75 miles, and an average water-level slope of about 10 feet per mile, there were about 2, 100 acre-feet per year of groundwater inflow for Spring 2017. As discussed in the following section, about 2, 100 acre-feet of groundwater were purrped in the urban area in 2017. An estimated 1,750 acre-feet per year of this pumpage was fran the lower aquifer. The amount of groundwater flow into the General Plan was greater than the net consumptive use of groundwater pumped in the urban area (i.e. , pumpage minus incidental recharge) .
PUMPAGE
Table 5 provides a summary of annual pumpage by the City of Newman, the CCID, and from private wells in the study area from 2003-2017. City pumpage increased from about 1,000 acre-feet per year in 1991, to 1,800 acre-feet per year in 2000, and 2,700 acre-feet per year in 2007. After 2007, City pumping decreased to about 2,200 acre-feet in 2011 due to water conservation measures.
City pumpage was 2,600 acre-feet in 2012, and then decreased due to water conservation measures to about 1,900 acre-feet in 2015.
The average City pumpage during 2002-17 was 2,340 acre-feet per year. The average CCID well pumpage during 2003-17 was about 3,260 acre-feet per year. Total pumpage by CCID from their 1409
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Average
TABLE 5-ANlWAL PUMPAGE (1989-2017)
(ACRE FEET PER YE.AR)
fi.i:.i Wel~t;1 CClD Wells Private Wells
2,038
2,089 2,552 1,493
2,381 3,356 1,808
2,498 1,399 1,920
2,670 527
2,716 4,802 1,957
2,682 4,862 1,883
2,470 3,956 1,459
2,275 163 255
2,208 1,716 1,021
2,593 5,078 784
2,534 4,857 2,516
2,324 4,719 2,338
1,918 4,055 6,687
2,004 834 698
2,083 756
2,343 3,258 1,690
29 1410
30 wells varies substantially, depending on canal water supplies.
For example, only about 160 acre-feet were pumped in 2010, whereas about 5,080 acre-feet were pumped in 2012. There are also a number of private irrigation wells in the study area, and CCID provided estimates of pumpage from these wells. Pumpage from these wells ranged from about 260 acre-feet in 2010 to 6,690 acre-feet in 2015. The average pumpage from these private wells was 1,690 acre-feet per year for 2003-2017. The average total pumpage in the study area was thus about 7,300 acre-feet from 2003-17.
CITY EFFLUENT
Table 6 shows amounts of City effluent for 2003-2016. About 300 acres of pasture, alfalfa, oats and corn have normally been irrigated with the effluent, and this has been supplemented by well pumpage. There are 135 acres of holding ponds for the effluent. The amount of effluent used for irrigation ranged from about 600 acre-feet per year to 1,300 acre-feet per year during 2003-16. The average amount of effluent applied during this period was 900 acre-feet per year. Of this amount, an estimated 70 percent, or 630 acre-feet per year was consumed by evapotranspiration. The total amount of effluent during this period is estimated to have been about half of the City pumpage, or about 1,200 acre feet per year. This indicates that an average of 1411
TABLE 6-AMOUNTS OF CITY EFFLUENT
USED FOR IRRIGATION
Year Amount (acre-feet) --2003 800
2004 800
2005 800
2006 1,100
2007 1,400
2008 1,400
2009 1,100
2010 800
2011 900
2012 1,600
2013 1,700
2014 1,500
2015 1,300
2016 1 ,000
Average 1,200
An estimated 300 acre-feet per year of effluent
was evaporated from holding ponds.
31 1412
about 300 acre-feet per year of effluent was probably lost to evaporation from the holding ponds. An average of about 360 acre-feet per year of well pumpage has been used to supplement the effluent for irrigation.
CANAL WATER DELIVERIES
32 Table 7 shows CCID canal water deliveries to lands in the study area for 2003-16. Canal water was delivered to 2,600 acres of land each year during this period. The amount of canal water ranged from 450 acre-feet in 2004 to 9,600 acre-feet in 2009. The average amount of canal water delivered was 7,500 acre-feet per year during this period, or an average of 2.9 acre-feet per acre per year.
CONSUMPTIVE USE
Urban
Urban consumptive use includes evapotranspiration of water from outside water use (lawns, parks, etc), and evapotranspiration and evaporation of City effluent. The outside water use is estimated by subtracting the amount of effluent from the City pumpage. The average City pumpage from 2002-17 was 2,340 acrefeet per year and the average amount of City effluent was about 1,200 acre-feet per year. This indicates that an average of about 300 acre-feet per year was probably lost due to pond 1413
TABLE 7-CCID CANAL WATER DELIVERIES
TO LANDS IH STUDY AREA
Year
-
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Amount (acre-feet)
8,200
8,300
7,200
7,700
9,300
8,900
9,600
7,500
6,500
7,800
7,600
41500
5,800
5,600
The canal water was used for ixrigation
of 2,600 acres of land.
33 1414
34 evaporation. An average of about 360 acre-feet per year of well pumpage has been used to supplement the effluent for irrigation.
The average City outside water use would be 1,140 acre-feet per year. The evapotranspiration for the outside water use is estimated to be 70 percent of this, or 800 acre-feet per year. For the effluent, it is estimated that an average of 630 acre-feet per year was consumed by evapotranspiration of irrigated crops and 300 acre-feet per year was lost due to evaporation from the holding ponds. The total urban consumptive use was thus about 1,700 acre-feet per year (rounded).
Rural
CCID estimated the evapotranspiration of applied water to crops in the study area. The ITRC water use study report for 1997-2008 was used to determine the evapotranspiration of applied water to crops (ETrw) for 2003-08. For 2009-16, the total evapotranspiration (ETc) was determined from the IRRC metric report (landsat data). ETrwvalues averaged 80 percent of the ETc values. Thus where ETrwvalued weren't available, the ETc values were multiplied by 80 percent to estimate the ETrwvalues. The evapotranspiration of applied water to crops in the study area averaged about 7,700 acre feet per year for 2003-2016.
1415
35 Total
The average urban and rural consumptive in the study area was 9,400 acre-feet per year for 2003-16.
LAND SUBSIDENCE
Records of land subsidence are available for the DMC, about
3.5 miles west of the study area. At that location there was about 0.5 foot of subsidence during 2014-16. Records of land subsidence along the San Joaquin River east of Newman indicate minimal subsidence. Land subsidence in the Newman urban area has not been measured.
CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER IN STORAGE
Water levels in wells tapping the upper unconfined aquifer in the Newman area have indicated no long-term change in storage.
There has also been no significant change in storage in the confined aquifer, as it has remained full of water. However, there has been a one time decrease in storage for the confining beds, due to compaction of these beds, which has resulted in land subsidence. Assuming and average subsidence of about 0.1 foot per year over the 3,800 acre area, this amount of water for 2003-12 averaged about 40 acre-feet per year.
1416
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Inorganic Chemical Constituents
City Wells
Table 8 provides the results of chemical analyses of water from active City wells in recent years.
36 Composite Wells. Wells No. 5 and 8 are composite wells. The total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in July 2017 ranged from 812 to 901 mg/1. Nitrate concentrations ranged from 11 to 32 mg/1, less than the MCL of 45 mg/1. Chloride concentrations ranged from 150 to 197 mg/1, less than the recommended of 250 mg/1. Concentrations or iron, manganese, arsenic, and selenium were less than the respective MCLs. Hexavalent chromium concentrations in water from Well No. 5 have ranged considerably in recent years, from non-detectable to 16 ppb. This is probably associated with varying pumping durations prior to when the water samples were collected for analyses. Hexavalent chromium concentrations in water from Well No. 8 have ranged from 4 to 10 ppb from 2015 to 2018, and decreased during this period. Alpha activities have been below the MCL of 15 picocuries per liter.
Lower Aquifer Wells. Wells No. 1R and 6 are lower aquifer wells.
TDS concentrations in water from these wells ranged from 764 to 847 mg/1 in July 2016. Nitrate concentrations ranged from 20 to 1417
TABLE 8-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CITY OF NEWMAN WELLS Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluoride
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Iron
Manganese
Arsenic (ppb)
Hexavalent Chromium (ppb)
Selenium (ppb)
Alpha Activity
(picocuries per liter)
Date
Perforated Interval (feet)
No. lR
110
48 104
340
166
222
22 0.2
7.4 1,530
847
<0.1
<0.02
<2 <1
<5
6 7/6/16
340-620
No. 5
110
52 115
4 442
168
150
32 0.2
7.6 1,440
901
<0.1
<0.02
<2
0.1-16
<5
7/2/13
162-450
No. 6
99 43
86 383
176
136
20 0.2
7.5 1,300
764
<O.l
<0.02
<2
5 <5
5 7/6/16
351-500
No. 8
63 34
138
304
168
197
11 0.2
7.4 1,390
812
<0.1
<0.02
<2
4 <3
7/6/17
180-480
w
...J
1418
38 22 mg/1, less than the MCL of 45 mg/1. Chloride concentrations ranged from 136 to 222 mg/1, less than the MCL of 250 mg/1. Concentrations of iron, manganese, arsenic, and selenium were below the respective MCLs. Hexavalent chromium concentrations in water from Well No. lR have been about 1 ppb or less, well below the MCL of 10 ppb. Concentrations of hexavalent chromium in water from Well No. 6 have ranged from about 5 to 9.6 ppb in recent years, and have decreased since 2015. Alpha activities have ranged from about 4.5 to 5.6 picocuries per liter in water from Well No. lR, and from about 3.1 to 9.9 picocuries per liter in water from Well No. 6, below the MCL of 15 picocuries per liter.
CCID Wells
Table 9 provides the results of inorganic chemical analyses of water from the four CCID wells in the study area for July 2017. All of these are composite wells. The perforated intervals shown are for the tops and bottoms of the perforations.
TDS concentrations ranged from 870 to 1,200 mg/1 and nitrate concentrations ranged from 7 to 11 mg/1, below the MCL of 45 mg/1.
Chloride concentrations ranged from 190 to 250 mg/1, compared to the recommended MCL of 250 mg/1. Sulfate concentrations ranged from 120 to 220 mg/1, less than the recommended MCL of 250 mg/1.
Boron concentrations ranged from 0.45 to 0.69 mg/1, high enough to affect boron sensitive crops, if the proposed water was used 1419
TABLE 9-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CCID WELLS
Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Boron
Date
Perforated Interval (feet)
No. 2
100
50 130
3 366
120
210
7 7.8
1,400
870
0.5 7/25/17
90-337
No. 3
110
56 130
3 439
170 170
7 7.8
1,500
910
0.5 7/25/17
85-337
No. 36
44 58
120
3 427
180 190
10 7.9
1,600
980
0.5 7/25/17
90-393
No. 42
54 70
170
4 488
220 250
11 7.8
1,900 1,200
0.7 7/25/17
90-391
w
\0
1420
40 without mixing. The pumpage from CCID wells is mixed with canal water before use, and the resulting boron concentrations are acceptable for irrigation.
HISTORICAL WATER BUDGET
The average canal water delivery to lands in the study area was 7,500 acre-feet per year for 2003-16. The total consumptive use averaged 9,200 acre-feet per year during this period. The average groundwater inflow was 2,660 acre-feet per year. The change in groundwater storage was 40 acre-feet per year. In order to maintain a water budget, the groundwater outflow averaged about 1,010 acre-feet per year.
REFERENCES
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates, 1992, "Groundwater Conditions in the Vicinity of the City of Newman" report prepared for CCID and City of Newman, 30p
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates, 2001, "Groundwater Conditions in the Vicinity of the City of Newman" report prepared for CCID and City of Newman, 33p
Page, R. L., 1986, "Geology of the Fresh Groundwater Basin of the San Joaquin Valley, California", U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401-C. 1421
Appendix R. Update on Groundwater
Conditions in the Gustine Sub-Area of the
SJREC GSP
1422
UPDATE ON GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS IN THE
GUSTINE SUB-AREA OF THE SJREC GSP
prepared for
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA
Los Banos, California
and
City of Gustine GSA
Gustine, California
by
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates
Groundwater Quality Consultants
Fresno, California
May 2019
1423
KENNETH D. SCHMIDT AND ASSOCIATES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY CONSULTANTS
600 WEST SHAW AVE., SUITE 250
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93704
TELEPHONE (559) 224-4412
Mr. Chris White, Executive Director
San Joaquin River Exchange
Contractors GSA
P. 0. Box 2115
Los Banos, CA 93635
Re: Gustine Sub-Area of the
SJREC GSP
Dear Chris:
May 31, 2019
Submitted herewith is our report on groundwater conditions in the Gustine Sub-area of the SJREC GSP. We appreciate the cooperation of the CCID and City of Gustine in providing information for this report.
Sincerely Yours,
1<{-;f~
Kenneth D. Schmidt
Geologist No. 1578
Certified Hydrogeologist 176
1424
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
INTRODUCTION
SURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
WELL CONSTRUCTION DATA
City
CCID
Industrial
Gustine Drainage District
WATER LEVELS
Depth to Water
Water-Level Elevations Water-Level Trends
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
PUMPAGE
CITY EFFLUENT
CANAL WATER DELIVERIES
CONSUMPTIVE USE
Rural
Urban
Total
LAND SUBSIDENCE
CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE GROUNDWATER QUALITY
City Wells
CCID Wells
HISTORICAL WATER BUDGET
REFERENCES
i
Page
ii
iii
1 3
8 8
11 11 11 14 14 14
15 21
25 27 27
27 27 29 29 29
30 30 30
34 34
37 1425
No.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 LIST OF TABLES
Title
Construction Data for City of Gustine and Industrial
Wells
Construction Data for CCID Wells
Construction Data for Gustine Drainage District Wells
Pump Test Data for City of Gustine Wells Pump Test Data for CCID Wells Annual Pumpage in Study Area
CCID Canal Water Deliveries
Chemical Quality of Water from City of Gustine Wells
Chemical Quality of Water from CCID Wells
ii
10 12
13 22 23 26 28
32 35
1426
No.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8 9
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Title
Location of Gustine Sub-Area, Study Area Boundary,
and Selected Wells
Location of Selected Wells, Test Holes, and SubSurface Geologic Cross Sections Subsurface Geologic Cross Section C-C' Subsurface Geologic Cross Section D-D' Subsurface Geologic Cross Section E-E' Water-Level Elevations and Direction of Groundwater
Flow for the Upper Aquifer (Spring 2011)
Water-Level Hydrographs for Upper Aquifer Wells
Water-Level Hydrographs for CCID Wells
Recent Land Subsidence
iii
2 4
5 7
9 16
17 20
31 1427
UPDATE ON GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS IN THE
GUSTINE SUB-AREA OF THE SJREC GSP
INTRODUCTION
As part of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors (SJREC) service area, GSPs for a number of cities, including Gustine, are being incorporated into the SJREC GSP. Kenneth D . Schmidt and Associates (KDSA, 1992 and 2001) prepared two reports on groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the City of Gustine for the Central California Irrigation District (CCID) and the City.
This report is intended to provide an update on groundwater conditions within the Gustine Study Area boundary (Figure 1).
This boundary encompasses lands that are planned for future urban development. This study area is generally bounded by Jensen Road or Highway 140 on the north, Whitworth Road on the west, Gun Club Road on the south, and includes lands to the east where the City effluent is handled. Lands around the City of Gustine are in the SJREC GSA, and some lands to the north and south of the WWTF are in the Merced County Delta-Mendota GSA.
1428
• ffi •
T.8S
WORTHINGTON N RD
w
1 6
z
CJ)
m
z
;:o
C
CJ)
4 W+E
FENTEM ROW
12 13
7 •----:-=-=----_J ... 1"'tl
AYST ~
w
;a I ;a
•
co
flllm
z
0 cn1m
;:o
C
• 17 I NOBLER
w .. rs::
r
en r CJ)
:::c
t----•r----:j-1 GUN CLUB RD..-W ;:o
:e 1----------'------'--- ; I ! Ii ~
o lo 0.25 0.5 I ~ - - Miles
:::c - - I, I
1 1.5 2
16 EXPLANATION:
ll--il Gustine Study Area
~ SJREC GSA Boundary
.. City of Gustine GSA
CJ Merced County DM GSA
• Private Wellls
• City Wells
0 Inactive City Wells
• CCIDWells
FIGURE 1-LOCATION OF GUSTINE SUB-AREA, STUDY AREA BOUNDARY,
AND SELECTED WELLS -------- --- -
14 tv
1429
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Alluvial deposits comprise the aquifer system beneath the western part of the San Joaquin Valley. Deposits near Gustine are termed the older alluvium and the Tulare Formation. Page (1986) indicated that the base of the fresh groundwater (electrical conductivity less than 3,000 micromhos per centimeter at 25°C) was about 900 feet deep near Gustine. This is considered the base of the usable groundwater in the vicinity. A major confining bed is present beneath much of the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, including Gustine. This clay is termed the Corcoran Clay, and divides the aquifer system into upper and lower aquifers. The Corcoran Clay is readily discernible from the drillers logs for most wells in the area, due to its blue color. The over-lying and under-lying deposits are usually tan or brown in color.
3 Most of the groundwater near Gustine is pumped from the upper aquifer (above the Corcoran Clay). One City well and some industrial and irrigation wells in the area were drilled to depths exceeding 450 feet, and tap the lower aquifer. As part of the previous investigations, three subsurface geologic cross sections extending through the City of Gustine were developed (Figure 2).
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section C-C' (Figure 3) extends from near Whitworth Road, between Sullivan and Gun Club Roads on 1430
E9 Test Hole
CD Central Calif. lrrig. District Well
e City of Gustine Well
Unused City of Gustine Well
Private Well
A ~A• Location of Subsurface
. Geologic Cross Section
0 FIGURE 2-LOCATION OF SELECTED TEST HOLES AND WELLS ANED SUBSURFACE GEOLOC,IC CROSS S·ECTIONS
11\
<iii.
Ii' Ii!
1!~J
a.
f
i
79 \
\
4 1431
---' w
> w
---'
,,<
w
CJ)
z
,,<
w
'.2
0 Iw·
>
---' w
er:
-
Iw
w
LL
__,
z
0 > w
---' w
0 -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
WEST
C
18E
18E
Il
T.O. 290'
170
------------------
--------------
-·--------------
EXPLANATION
Sand & gravel
Sand
--------
Sandy day & mixtures of day
and gravel and sand
Clay
Well & Identification
Perforated lnle!Val
Total Depth (feet)
0 500 1,000 I I I
HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET
City No. 4 8J 9A
T.D.545'
FIGURE 3-SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION C-C'
EAST
C'
4H1 100
0 -100
-200
-300
400
-500
-600
5 ---' w·
> w
...J
< w
(J)
z
< w
:.E
0 Iw
>
Iw
a:
.=--
w w
LI..
,._,
z
0 > w
...J
w
1432
the southwest, to the northeast through City Wells No. 1 and 4, thence northeast for about one and one-half miles. An electric log is available for City Well No. 1 and the other information was obtained from drillers logs. Two wells along this section (SJ and 4Hl) exceeded 540 feet in depth. Most of the wells along this section penetrated the Corcoran Clay, the top of which ranges from about 170 feet in depth at Well 18E to about 250 feet at Well SJ. The Corcoran Clay thickens to the northeast along this section, from about 60 feet at Well 18E to about 150 feet at Well 4Hl. Beneath and northeast of the City, sand and gravel layers are common within the lower 100 feet of the upper aquifer. Below the Corcoran Clay, sand and gravel layers are relatively thin along this cross section.
6 Cross Section D-D' (Figure 4) extends from the northwest near Jensen and Baumbauer Roads, along Highway 33, through three industrial wells, to a point near Gun Club Road and half a mile east of Hunt Road. The top of the Corcoran Clay ranges from about 225 feet deep at Well SC to 260 feet deep at Well SA. The Corcoran Clay appears to be relatively flat along this section, because the section is perpendicular to the inferred dip of the alluvial deposits. The thickness of the Corcoran Clay along this section ranges from about 85 feet at Well SA to 120 feet at Well SJ. The sand and gravel layers in the lower part of the upper aquifer are thickest at Well SH, and appear to thin 1433
_J
w
> w
_J
<t
w
en z
<(
w
0 Iw
>
I-
::i
w
a:
-Iw
w
LL
-
z
0 > w
_J
w
100
.Q
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
NORTH
D
5C
SC
Il
T.D. 450'
EXPLANATION
Sand & gravel
Sand
Sandy day & mixtures of clay
and gravel and sand
Clay
wen & Identification
Perforated Interval
Total Depth (feet)
0 500 1,000
HORIZOt:(TAL SCALE IN FEET
. BA 8H 8J
T.D. 545'
;SOUTH
D'
16Q
FIGURE 4-SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION D-D'
100
0 -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
~600
_J
w
> w
. ...J
<(
w
en z
<(
w
0 1-
w
>
5 w
a:
i="
w
w
LL.
....,_.
z
0 >
w
...J
,,W
7 1434
to the south (at Well 16Q). Sand and gravel layers immediately below the Corcoran Clay are thickest to the northwest (Wells SC and SA). At Well SJ, sand and gravel layers in the lower aquifer are relatively thick and extend to a depth below 500 feet.
Cross Section E-E' (Figure 5) extends from CCID Well 22B adjacent to the Outside Canal, to the southeast and east, through City Wells No. 3 and 6. The top of the Corcoran Clay ranges from about 170 to 265 feet deep along this section. The Corcoran Clay along this section ranges from about 90 to 130 feet thick. Two thick, well developed sand and gravel strata were encountered above this clay along the northwest part of this section. Several thinner coarse-grained strata were also encountered below the clay at the Jensen test hole and City Well No. 6.
WELL CONSTRUCTION DATA
City
There are presently four active City wells (No. 4B, 5, 6, and 7). Table 1 provides information on dates drilled, depths, and perforated intervals for these wells. Drillers logs are available for all of these active wells and electric logs are available for Wells No. 1, 5, 6, and 7. Except for Well No. 5, cased depths range from 204 to 240 feet, and these wells tap waters 1435
-:;::-
Q)
Q)
LL
---
....J
w
>
w
....J
<(
w
(f)
z <(
w
2 0
w
>
....J
w
a:
z
0 >
w
....J
w
200
100
0 -100
-200 -300
-400
03 CJ
E3
E
WEST
CCID 228
EXPLANATION
Sand, gravel or cobbles
Sand, silty sand
0 CJ
a:
w
1-
z
w
LL
I
Sandy clay, clayey sand, and
sand/clay mixtures
Clay, silty clay
98 Well and Identification
{ Perforated Interval
T.D. 265 Total Depth (feet)
0 1,000 2,000
Horizontal Scale (Feet)
0 CJ
a:
z
w
(/)
z
w
...,
Jensen
Testhole
0 0
z
0 0
w
(/) (/) (/)
0 a: 0
I
0 <(
0 a:
Iz
::i
I
I
98 r --------------------
-----------------------
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_;_-:_-_-_
------------------- ----
---------
·_f/;,f/. • o ·--:::::.··:::' ~;.:.•::::_::·•.::: ·:· ••• ; ,:;'e!}:'f'}NJf ;; f itf :J§{{;:~~~=~-~=:_~-~-~--~-?_::_~_~?'.?':'.lt_::~~-:=~-~=~~~~~.:..=~~~-=;_~:.~~~-~~~--~_:_i:__]"_~~2:~_~-~-~-~-~-~~~-~-~-~~ o;,~~ a '° :':?~~\,:'O· s::::·.:
----------
T.D. 452
FIGURE 5-SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION E-E'
E' 200
EAST
100
9A
0 -100
-200 -300
-400
m
r
m
<
0 z
JJ
m
r
< m
--i
0 s:
m
)>
z
(J)
m
)>
r
m
<
m
r
--.
"Tl
(D
(D
---
-
9 1436
TABLE 1-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR CITY OF GUSTINE AND INDUSTRIAL WELLS Diam.
State Date Drilled Depth Cased Depth Casing Perf. Int. Annular Seal Well No. Location Com:eleted (feet) (feet) (inches) feet) (feet) 4B 8M2 09/93 250 200 16 167-200 0-167
5 9M 11/98 451 450 16 370-444 0-350
6 8A 12/98 250 240 16 145-230 0-130
7 4M 5/11 209 204 16 165-194 0-110
Formerly
Beatrice 8A 05/73 435 200 16 - 0-50
Cheese 414 12 210-410
Saputo 8H 12/56 254 254 14 174-254 0-60
Hillview Packing 8J 04/73 545 100 16 100-490 0-50
All of the wells are in T8S/R9E. Data from drillers logs, City of Gustine files, Avoset Foods, and Balding, Scott and Hotchkiss (1969). The perforated intervals are for the tops and bottoms of the perforated interval.
I->
0 1437
11 producing strata above the Corcoran Clay. Well No. 5 was perforated from 370 to 444 feet in depth and taps strata below the Corcoran Clay. This well has an annular seal extending to a depth of 350 feet.
CCID
The CCID has two wells along the Main Canal in the Gustine area. Table 2 shows construction data for these wells. Well No. 22B was completed in January 1999. Perforated casing was installed from 60 to 190 feet in depth in this well. Well No. 57 was installed in August 2000 and the casing is perforated from 70 to 190 feet in depth. Both wells tap strata above the Corcoran Clay.
Industrial
Drillers logs are available for three industrial wells in the City (Table 1). All of these wells are still active. Well Sa is cased to a depth of 414 feet and is a composite well (tapping both aquifers). Well SH is 254 feet deep and taps only the upper aquifer. Well SJ is cased to a depth of 490 feet and is a composite well.
Gustine Drainage District
Table 3 contains construction data for Gustine Drainage District wells in the vicinity of Gustine. Depths of wells for which records are available and range from about 90 to 140 feet. 1438
Well No.
22B
57 Date
Drilled
01/99
08/00
TABLE 2-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Drilled
Depth (feet}
200
210
Cased
Depth (feet}
190
210
Casing
Diameter_(inches}
18 16
Data from drillers logs and Balding, Scott and Hotchkiss (1969).
Perforated
Interval (feet}
60-190
70-190
Annular
Seal feet}
0-52
0-50
....
I\)
1439
TABLE 3-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR GUSTINE DRAINAGE DISTRICT WELLS (T8S/R9E) State Date Drilled Dept Cased Depth Casing
Well No. Location Com12leted (feet) (feet) Diam. (inches) 3 T8S/R9E-8Nl 1953 136 136 16
14 5A2 1913 140 140 16
15 16Ml - 105 105 14
16 T7S/R9E-30H 1943 - 93
Data from drillers logs and Balding, Scott and Hotchkiss (1969).
Perf.Int.
(feet)
130-250
30-105
....
w
1440
14 The wells generally have shallow perforations, and were designed to tap the upper part of the upper aquifer. Water from one of these wells (No. 3) was used for irrigation at the Harry P.
Schmidt Park in the City. Since 2001, tile drain systems have been installed beneath a number of irrigated fields. The tile drain systems have proven to be more effective to address subsurface drainage problems, and drainage well pumping has gradually been replaced.
WATER LEVELS
Depth to Water
Near Gustine, most of the available water-level measurements are for wells tapping the upper aquifer. J.M. Lord, Inc. (1990) reported on depth to the shallow groundwater in the Gustine Drainage District, which surrounds the City of Gustine. In June 1989, depth to water ranged from less than five feet northeast and southeast of Gustine, to more than ten feet beneath parts of Gustine.
Water-Level Elevations
Water-level measurements for wells in the area were obtained from the California Department of Water Resources and CCID. The previous evaluation provided a water-level elevation contour map for Spring 2000, which was primarily based on large-capacity wells that tap the upper aquifer. A cone of depression beneath Gustine was indicated by those measurements. Water-level eleva1441 15 tions in this depression ranged from about 70 to 80 feet above mean sea level, about 10 to 15 feet lower than those beneath the surrounding lands. Southwest of Gustine, water-level elevations ranged from about 100 to 120 feet above mean sea level. Northeast of Gustine, water-level elevations ranged from about 75 to 85 feet. The regional direction of groundwater flow in the upper aquifer near Gustine was to the northeast in Spring 2000.
Limite~ data for the lower aquifer indicated a northerly direction of groundwater flow, toward Newman. Water-level elevations in the lower aquifer were indicated to be about 20 feet below the upper aquifer in Spring 2000.
Figure 6 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow for March 2011. Water-level elevations ranged from 108 feet above mean sea level near Gun Club Road, about three miles southwest of the City to 78 feet about a mile northeast of the City. Southwest of Gustine, March 2011 water levels were about 20 feet lower than in Spring 2000. North of Gustine, water levels were close to those in Spring 2000. The direction of groundwater flow was to the northeast. A cone of depression was not indicated beneath the City, but that was due to a lack of water-level measurements for City wells.
Water-Level Trends
Frequent water-level measurements are available for several wells near Gustine during recent decades. Figure 7 shows water1442 ··• ... \
:,:•,. \
Rose Garden Road
:.~ --------
-
__ \. _____ _
'
mexation
Area
T.
7 s.
T.
8 ; s.
! •"- .. ·-···1
78.:0 . _/
· ··--wa11°,9
• °' I
0 . '
• 0
EXPLANATION
· .J • Lower Aquifer
Well and Water".Level Elevation
· Above Mean Sea Level (feet)
. .
Nobel Road
l
o . O
o\_ "'-:::i
. " .
9Q1 Contour of Water-Level
· : Elovatlon Above Mean i,ea Level in Upper Aquifer (feet) · · Direction of Groundwater Flow)
I 35H1 ~•l Well & ldent. With 1 Water-Level Hydrograph
0 2,000
Scale (feet)
--
, FIGURE 6-WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW FOR THE UPPER AQUIFER (SPRING 2011)
N
1 1 6
1443
Groundwater Levels for Well T7S/R8E-35H1
I
--!-----------· --- --
--- ~ -
I- - - ·: - Groyl]_~ rface
-------~~--~--------·
:0- 110.0
Cl)
--- ---•I--- -----· ·----1----4--
0 2.5
2 '-" 105.0 ---- 7.5 0
C 0
:,.::;
ro
> Cl)
w
Cl)
(l)
"O
1----+----- -·- 12.5 s:
,-+
0 17.5
90.0 .J * 22.5 -, &
s
,.......__
.....
Cl)
85.0 · 27.5 (l)
C
80.0 __ __. ___ _,_____ ---- ---- 32.5
75. 0 ---- ---1----9------l-----+---...----+-----+---1--, 37.5 198(1; 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Date
Groundwater Levels for Well T7S/R9E-28P1
___ _ G_:o~n~ ~u!!ace _ L +-_ _ _ __
ao.o -'-----l----+---
1 - --1--- - - 1 -- ---'!'-----+--------- 2.5
-- 0
. ....... ""·-----..
~
-
- 75.0 -
0 (l) ., _____ ,_ 7.5 "Cl
,-+
::r
,-+
0 >-
- - - 1-----1,.....--- -i-------1 u ----1-1----........ 12. 5
17. 5
t\0. 0 --~, ---1---....----+---+----+-----1----+-----+-, 22 .5 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Modified from DWR. Date
FIGURE ?-WATER-LEVEL .HYDROGRAPHS FOR I
UPPER AQUIFER WELLS
CD
-,
&
m.
'-"
1 7
(Continued)
1444
Groundwater Levels for Well T8S/R9'E-21 N1
Ground Surface
··· ~ 0
100. 0 ..,.____---<--_ ----- -- 2.5
.._,
C
0 :;:;
95 .0
Q)
w
Q) > _3 90.0
..!..
Q)
+-'
12.5 q CD
CD
C
85.0 f 17.5
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020· Modified from DWR. Date
FIGURE ?-WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR [
UPPER AQUIFER WELLS (CONTINUED)
1 8
1445
19 level hydrographs for three of these wells. T7S/R8E-35Hl is located near Netherton Road and Schmidt Road. Depth to water usually ranged from about 12 to 22 feet. Overall, the water levels in this well slightly declined between 1982 and 2016, at an average rate of less than 0.1 foot per year. Well T7S/R9E-28P, is located near Kniebes Road and Preston Road, northeast of Gustine. Depth to water in this well has ranged from about 2 to 18 feet . Water levels in this well were stable from 1981 through 2016, except for the temporary declines during drought periods. Well T8S/R9E-21N is located near Taglio Road and Hunt Road, south of Gustine. Depth to water has ranged from about 7 to 12 feet. Water levels in this well were stable from 1964 through 2016.
Figure 8 shows water-level hydrographs for CCID Wells No. 22B and 57. Records for Well No. 22B extend from 1965 to 2018 . Records for Well No. 57 extend fran 2001 to 2018. The seasonally shallowest levels fell from early 2005 through early 2009, then rose through early 2013 to the shallowest levels during the period of record.
The shallowest seasonal levels then fell through 2015, and partially recovered during 2016. Over the long term, the water levels fell about 6.5 feet over a 16-year period, or an average of 0.4 foot per year. As of early 2018, the water level still hadn't fully recovered. This decline was highly influenced by drought conditions in 2014-15. A shorter period of records is available for Well 57, but similar trends are indicated. 1446
0 Ll1 I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I 1 l
-e-CCID Well No. 22
CTI -e-CCID Well No. 57 1 1 1 1
•
5 n::r=rT I I l r f=ll l -I I I I 1\-r
E' 10 I I I I N I 111 11111 11 q++ttA
-.. 1,
[ I----+- I I $-TTl+-t+JJ 1 . I rntffl __,__.____,
0::: 15 --+-- I 11 1 --r-+-+_L_l - ~ I -1711-++++· Lil L s c:::c --t---t ,1THt-t+-~ -17 _l___j___J~ ·rTn-+-1/~--LII 0 f- 20
fI ~ -
8J -i--!-+---l-~ f -+-~tii. 1 .11n~H11LUt m ti
~+t4-tti±RttjjL14,-Hlit.·
1 0 •
25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l-fl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I :-m ◄
1 •
30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r I I 111 35 -i--.JL.l.___L_....L..j_J----1..__J_...L_-l---l---L.___L_..L._l---l--L__L_-1.....--ji-l-___L_....L..1....__j----1..__l_...L_L..4-L___L_...L_i.-4---L..--1..-.J.......J'--+--'--'-..L.....J-+-'-_._..__,_----t-~~~ 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 FIGURE 8 - WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR CCID WELLS
N
0 1447
21 Overall, there is no indication of groundwater overdraft in or near Gustine. In fact, the shallow groundwater levels are considered a problem in the surrounding irrigated areas. The evidence for this is the existence and ongoing activities of the Gustine Drainage District, which was developed to address this problem.
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Table 4 summarizes pump test data for City wells for the 1990's.
More recent pump tests aren't available. Pumping rates for active City wells ranged from about 650 to 2,000 gpm. Specific capacities of these wells ranged from about 6 to 67 gpm per foot.
Table 5 summarizes recent pump test data for the two CCID wells for 2015-16. Pumping rates ranged from about 1,220 to 1,570 gpm and specific capacities ranged from about 14 to 40 gpm per foot.
Transmissivity was determined based on a nine-hour constant discharge test on City Well No. 5 on January 19, 1999. The average transmissivity based on drawdown and recovery data was 54,000 gpd per foot for strata below the Corcoran Clay. Transmissivity was also determined from a 24-hour pump test on City Well No. 6 during February 8-9, 1999. Recovery measurements indicated a transmissivity of 34,000 gpd per foot for strata above the Corcoran Clay. Specific capacities for wells tapping strata 1448
TABLE 4-PUMP TEST DATA FOR CITY OF GUSTINE WELLS
Date Punping Rate Static Level Punping Level Dra'Wdown Specific Capacity Well No. Tested (gpm) (feet) (feet) (feet) (SEm/f-t:)
4B 9/1/93 900 30.0 154 124 7.3
5 1/99 2,010 34.3 133.2 98.9 20.3
6 2/99 1,060 16.8 199.2 182.4 5.8
7 650
Data for Well No. 4B from drillers log. Data for Wells No. 5, 6, and 7 from pump tests at end of well development.
I\)
I\)
1449
Well No.
22 57
Date
Tested
10/15/16
06/15/15
Records from CCID.
TABLE 5-PUMP TEST DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Pl:ntping Rate
(g;em)
1,568
1,219
Static Level
(feet)
26.0 69.0
Pl:ntping Level
(feet)
65.7 157.0
Drawdown
(feet)
39.7 88.0
Specific capacity
(2£m/ft)
39.5 13.7
N
vJ
1450
24 above the clay indicate that values for Well No. 6 are less than the average for all of the upper aquifer wells. The transmissivity of the upper aquifer beneath the City can be estimated from specific capacity values. Using an average specific capacity of 50 gpm per foot and a conversion of 1,500, the transmissivity is estimated to be about 75,000 gpd per foot.
Darcy's law can be used to estimate groundwater inflow into the urban depression cone. Darcy's law is the fundamental equation for determining lateral groundwater flow in the aquifer.
The flow is equal to the transmissivity times the water-level slope times the width of flow.
Q = TIL, where
Q = groundwater inflow (gpd)
I= water-level slope (feet per mile)
L = width of flow (miles).
Darcy's law is applicable in all such evaluations. The waterlevel map for Spring 2000 was used to determine the gradient because it shows the urban cone of depression. Using a width of flow of about 1.9 miles in Spring 2000, and an average waterlevel slope of about five feet per mile for the upper aquifer, the amount of inflow above the Corcoran Clay would be about 2,850 acre-feet per year. Additional amounts of groundwater inflow are also available from below the Corcoran Clay, but this 1451
25 can't presently be estimated, due to a lack of water-level measurements for deep wells in the area. The City of Gustine needs to measure static water levels in all City wells in the spring of each year.
PUMPAGE
Table 6 provides a summary of annual pumpage by the City of Gustine, the CCID, and private wells in the study area from 2003-2016. The City pumpage decreased after 2013, associated with water conservation measures undertaken during the drought.
The annual pumpage in 2015 was 217 acre-feet less than in 2013, a reduction of about 17 percent. The average pumpage by the City during 2003-11 was about 1,250 acre-feet per year. Annual pumpage from the CCID wells in the study area ranged from 22 acre-feet in 2006 to 2,359 acre-feet in 2018. The average pumpage from these wells during 2003-16 was about 1,610 acrefeet per year. There are also a number of private wells in the study area (Figure 1). CCID provided estimates of pumpage from these wells. Pumpage from private wells ranged from about 40 to 2,658 acre-feet per year during 2003-16. The average pumpage from these wells was about 1,060 acre-feet per year. The average pumpage from all of the wells in the study area was thus about 3,900 acre-feet per year from 2003-16.
1452
26 TABLE 6-ANNUAL PUMPAGE IN STUDY AREA
PumEag:e (Acre-feet Eer ~ear)
Year Cit:£ of Gustine Wells CCID Wells Private Wells
2003 1,350 1,705 1,216
2004 1,410 2,073 1,321 2005 1,290 502 288
2006 1,330 22 703
2007 1,466 2,206 1,834
2008 1,338 2,359 1,495 2009 1,043 2,149 1,601
2010 1,163 488 490
2011 1,156 896 806
2012 1,260 2,278 51
2013 1,271 2,231 598
2014 1,149 2,039 1,249 2015 1,054 2,003 2,658 2016 1,203 365 521 Average 1,249 1,610 1,060
Values are from City of Gustine and CCID records.
1453
27 CITY EFFLUENT
There were about 625 acre-feet of City effluent discharged in 2015. About 140 acre-feet per year of this was used to irrigate hay and pasture. The remainder (485 acre-feet per year) percolated or was lost to evaporation from ponds and evapotranspiration from a marsh area. The consumptive use of City effluent is estimated to have been about 80 percent of the amount of effluent, or about 500 acre-feet per year.
CANAL WATER DELIVERIES
Table 7 shows CCID canal water deliveries to 3,600 acres of land in the study area for 2003-16. Canal water deliveries during 2003-2013 ranged from 9,800 acre-feet in 2013 to 13,800 acre-feet in 2013. The average delivery was 11,600 acre-feet per year during 2003-13. CCID canal water deliveries during 2014-16 ranged from 8,700 to 9,300 acre-feet year and averaged 9,000 acre-feet per year, reflective of drought conditions. For the entire period from 2003-16, the CCID average canal water delivery was about 11,000 acre-feet per year.
CONSUMPTIVE USE
Rural
The CCID provided estimates of the evapotranspiration of water applied for irrigation of crops in the study area. For 1454
28 TABLE 7-CCID CANAL WATER DELIVERIES
Year Acre-Feet per Year --
2003 9,800 2004 11,500
2005 10,000 2006 10,700
2007 12,000 2008 11,800
2009 12,700 2010 10,600 2011 11,100 2012 13,400 2013 13,800 2014 8,900 2015 9,300 2016 8,700 1455
29 consumptive use of crops, ITRC data for the evapotranspiration of applied water (ETiw) was used for 2003-2008. Total evapotranspiration (ETc) for 2009-16 was based on the ITRC metric report (landsat data). The average ETc for 2003-16 was 10,300 acrefeet per year. The average ratio of ETiwto ETc was 82%. Thus the estimated average ETiwfor 2003-16 was 8,450 acre-feet per year.
Urban
The City pumpage from 2003-16 averaged about 1,250 acre-feet per year and the effluent flow was about 625 acre-feet per year.
The residual, or outside water use, was thus about 625 acre-feet per year. Assuming an irrigation efficiency of 70 percent, the consumptive use due to outside water use in the City was about 450 acre-feet. Combined with an estimated 500 acre-feet of evapotranspiration of effluent, the total urban consumptive use was 950 acre-feet per year.
Total
The total consumptive use in the study area was about this 8,450 + 950 or 9,400 acre-feet per year. This was about 1,600 feet less than the average canal water deliveries in the study area. This indicates a positive balance in the study area, without considering groundwater flows.
1456
30 LAND SUBSIDENCE
Measurements at compaction recorders in the San Joaquin Valley have indicated that almost all of the historical land subsidence due to groundwater pumping has come from pumpage from the lower aquifer (below the Corcoran Clay). The nearest compaction recorder to Gustine with long-term records is the Oro Loma or Russell Avenue recorder, located near the Delta-Mendota Canal (DMC) and Russell Avenue. Pumpage from the lower aquifer at and near Gustine is indicated to be small. Most of the City pumpage and all of the CCID pumpage has been from the upper aquifer. Because of the limited pumpage from the lower aquifer in and near the City of Gustine and the lack of long-term waterlevel declines, land subsidence is expected to be small (less than 0.1 foot per year).
Periodic surveys of land subsidence have been done along the DMC, which is located about three and a half miles west of Gustine.
Little subsidence was indicated west of Gustine. Recent (2012- 15) measurements of land subsidence are available for the area near and southeast of Gustine from Reclamation (Figure 9). Less than 0.15 foot of subsidence was indicated near Gustine.
CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE
Over the long-term, no significant change in groundwater storage is indicated for the study area.
1457
., , I
,);_~ ~, • /I
-· /
.. /,:
. :,•4'•.
~ ">"-
.... , .
5391ni
.,
.!-w' San' Lu
", Re se rvu ir t
} .Rec Are
\ -·
,1 • ...,
I
' "
I
,1
Riverbank
0 B
Subsidence Rates (feet/year)
July12 to July15-Free
July 2012 to July 2015
0.15to0.3
- Oto 0.15
Do'b
Palos
' ' '
·
, ,. ' ~;
872 ~) ""' - ,( l
i
' \
0 930 m ' \
744m
' r, ;: -- - ' ti' : .
•'
1846 m
'
.-, I (
/
/
/
. 918 m Oal<hursl
} .
._ .. . ,
. .. ; I
, . . '
., I ·, ; · •
')
182 7 m\
. ~ -
"'
1 m
I _1093 nJ
Soul
P.1fo5
GPS Coordinates
...
...
,
...
· ~ !
. . .
ro-----~o
1 ·· ' - -
;(
, · Dinuba
l<ingsburg '
Hanford
0 V
~
lenJoor,e
r 81,\al Air
latic.n
1 1
1 : Farm e I I ,
- ources: Esri,.Delorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, lntermap, increment P Co~p~ GEBCO, USGS, FAO, KI PS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, K~daster NL, Ordnar.ij ce su\ ey,,Esri Japan, ME! I, Esri China (Hong Kong), swi$st9po, ancifttlk"le&is User Communit} , ,- : J 1 ' 1, 1
N
"' GPS Point-December 2011 i
o GPS Point-added July 2012 o GPS Point-added December 2013
RECLAMATION
Managi,w Water in the West
-0.15 to O -0.3 to -0.15
- I
FIGURE 9-
1 RECENT\ LAND SUBSIDENCE/
-0.45 to -0.3
-0.6 to -0.45
0 - -0.75 to -0.6
-0.9 to -0.75
7 14 21
Miles
Subsidence rates calculated by comparing survey values c GPS Stations for the dates specified in the legend.
1458
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
City Wells
32 Table 8 contains the result of recent inorganic chemical analyses of water from the four active City of Gustine wells.
Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in water from these wells ranged from 621 mg/1 to 840 mg/1 in 2016-17. The highest TDS concentration was in water from Well No. 6. Nitrate concentrations in water from these wells ranged from 15 to 42 mg/1, below the MCL of 45 mg/1. The highest nitrate concentration was in water from Well No. 6, which is the most northeasterly upper aquifer City well. Nitrate concentrations in water from this well ranged from 2 to 42 mg/1 during 2011-15. The lowest nitrate concentration was in water from Well No. 5, which taps the lower aquifer. Concentrations of iron, manganese, arsenic, fluoride, and selenium in water from the active City wells were below the respective MCLs.
The highest manganese concentrations were in water from Well No. 5. Manganese concentrations in water from this well were variable between 1999 and 2017, but were frequently between 0.02 and 0.03 mg/1, less than the secondary MCL of 0.05 mg/1.
The hexavalent chromium concentration in water from Well No. 5 was 2 ppb, less than the MCL of 10 ppb. This well taps the lower aquifer. Hexavalent chromium concentrations in water from 1459
TABLE 8- CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CITY OF GUSTINE WELLS Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluoride
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Iron
Manganese
Arsenic (ppb)
Hexavalent Chromium (ppb)
Selenium (ppb)
Alpha Activity (picocuries/1)
Date
Perforated Interval (feet)
No. 4B
58 26
73 3
315
110
98 21
<0.1
7.4 945
621
<0.1
<0.02
<2
8.3 <5
8 7/13/16
167-200
No. 5
60 31
240
2 317
200
270
15 0.2
7.3 1,100
660
<0.1
<0.02
<2
2 7.3
3 10/8/14
370-400
410-444
No. 6
110
46 110
2 342
156
180
42 0.2
7.8 1,300
840
<0.1
<0.02
<2
9.6 <5
<3
10/8/14
145-165
190-230
No. 7
131
35 80
2 378
127
118
18 0.1
7.2 1,043
716
<0.1
<0.02
<2
9.7 <5
<3
1/9/14
165-194
Samples for analysis of hexavalent chromium were collected between 8/10/14 and 10/15/14. Samples for analysis of alpha activity were collected between 10/8/14 and 10/15/14
w
w
1460
the other wells were much higher (8.3 to 9.7 ppb), and in water from Wells No. 6 and 7 were near the MCL of 10 ppb.
34 Alpha activities were determined in water fran the active City wells in February 2014. Values ranged from less than 3 to 8 picocuries per liter, below the MCL of 15 picocuries per liter.
Samples of water collected from the active City of Gustine wells in December 2016 were analyzed for numerous trace organic chemical constituents. No trace organic chemical constituent problem was indicated for these wells.
CCID Wells
Table 9 provides the results of inorganic chemical analyses of water from CCID Wells No. 22B and 57 for samples collected in July 2017. TDS concentrations ranged from 820 to 950 mg/1 and the waters were of the mixed calcium bicarbonate-chloride or bicarbonate types. Nitrate concentrations ranged from 10 to 15 mg/1, less than the MCL of 45 mg/1 for public water supplies.
Boron concentrations ranged from about 0.4 to 0.5 mg/1, suitable for irrigation of most crops.
HISTORICAL WATER BUDGET
CCID canal water deliveries to 3,600 acres of crops in the study area averaged 11,000 acre-feet per year during 2003-16.
The estimated average urban and rural consumptive use for the 1461
TABLE 9- CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CCID WELLS
Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Boron
Date
Perforate Interval (feet)
Well No. 22B
75 46
100
3 380
99 130
15 7.6
1,400
820
0.38 7/25/17
60-190
Chemical analyses by BSK Associates.
Well No. 57
120
50 120
<1
330
170
180
10 7.7
1,500
950
0.51 7/25/17
70-190
w
U1
1462
36 period was 9,400 acre-feet per year. There was an estimated canal seepage of 1,100 acre-feet per year from a 2.5-mile long reach of the Main Canal (average of 0.68 cfs for 330 days a year). There was an estimated 1,600 acre-feet per year of deep percolation from irrigated crops in the CCID (11,000 minus 9,400 acre-feet per year). The amount of groundwater inflow above the Corcoran Clay was previously estimated to be about 2,850 acrefeet per year. The average deep percolation from urban irrigation is estimated to have been about (625 minus 450 acre-feet per year, or about 175 acre-feet per year. The pond seepage and deep percolation associated with City effluent averaged 20 percent of the effluent amount, or about 125 acre-feet per year.
The total recharge (excluding groundwater inflow below the Corcoran Clay) thus averaged about 5,950 acre-feet per year for 2003-16. The average pumpage in the study area was about 3,900 acre-feet per year for 2003-16. There was no significant change in groundwater storage in the study area during 2003-20016. The difference between 5,850 and 3,900, or 1,950 acre-feet per year, was made up by the groundwater outflow above the Corcoran Clay and the difference between the groundwater inflow and outflow below the Corcoran Clay.
1463
37 REFERENCES Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates, 1992, "Groundwater Conditions in the Vicinity of the City of Gustine" report prepared for CCID and City of Newman, 30p.
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates, 2001, "Groundwater Conditions in the Vicinity of the City of Gustine" report prepared for CCID and City of Newman, 33p.
Page, R. L., 1986, "Geology of the Fresh Groundwater Basin of the San Joaquin Valley, California", U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1401-C. 1464
Appendix S. Hydrogeologic Conceptual
Model, Groundwater Conditions, and
Water Budget for the City of Los Banos
GSA
1465
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL, GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS,
AND WATER BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
prepared for
Central California Irrigation District
City of Los Banos
Grassland W.D.
San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors
Water Authority
San Luis Water District
Los Banos, California
by
Kenneth D. Schmidt & Associates
Groundwater Quality Consultants
Fresno, California
June 2019
1466
KENNETH D. SCHMIDT AND ASSOCIATES
GROUNDWATER QUALITY CONSULTANTS
600 WEST SHAW AVE., SUITE 250
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93704
TELEPHONE (559) 224-441 2
Mr. Chris White, General Manager
Central California Irrigation District
P.O. Box 1231
Los Banos, CA 93635
Re: City of Los Banos GSA
Dear Chris:
June 11, 2019
Submitted herewith is our hydrogeologic report on the City of Los Banos GSA. We appreciate the cooperation of the City of Los Banos, CCID, Grassland Water District, and San Luis Water District in providing information for this report.
Sincerely yours,
~)t-L."-~tJD
Kenne.eh D. Schmidt
Geologist No. 1578
Certified Hydrogeologist
No. 176
1467
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES v
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vi
INTRODUCTION 1
SURFICIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOS BANOS STUDY AREA 4 Topography 4
Surficial Geology 4
Topsoils 6
Surface Water Bodies 6
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 9
Regional Geologic and Structural Setting 9
Lateral Basin Boundaries 9
Definable Bottom of the Basin 11
Formation Names
Confining Beds
Principal Aquifers
Subsurface Geologic Cross Sections
CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR WELLS
City of Los Banos Wells
CCID Wells
GROUNDWATER USE AND WELL DATA
Primary Uses of Each Aquifer
Depths of Water Supply Wells
City of Los Banos Wells
CCID Wells
Other Wells
WATER LEVELS
Water-Level Depths
Water-Level Elevations and Direction
of Groundwater Flow
Upper Aquifer
Lower Aquifer
i
11 13
13 15
20 20
22 22
22 26
26 26
26 27
27 28
28 32
Continued:
1468
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
Water-Level Fluctuations
Upper Aquifer
Lower Aquifer
SOURCES OF RECHARGE
Los Banos Creek Seepage
Deep Percolation and Canal Seepage
Groundwater Inflow
Other
SOURCES OF DISCHARGE
Pumpage
City Wells
CCID Wells
Private Wells
Groundwater Outflow
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Pump Tests
Aquifer Tests
LAND SUBSIDENCE
Highway 152 Transect
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Inorganic Chemical Constituents
Radiological Constituents
Trace Organic Chemical Constituents
INTERCONNECTED SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS
KNOWN GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SITES
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF LOS BANOS
Recharge
Discharge
Change in Storage
Summary
ii
32 32
41 41
41 43
44 45
45 45
48 48
51 51
51 53
60 61
61 63
70 71
71 72
72 74
75 76
78 Continued:
1469
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR CCID AND SLWD PART OF
STUDY AREA
Recharge
Discharge
Change in Storage
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR THE GWD PART OF STUDY AREA
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR MERCED COUNTY WHITE AREAS
IN THE STUDY AREA
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR LOS BANOS STUDY AREA
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR WELLS
LOS BANOS CREEK STREAMFLOW RECORDS
PUMPAGE FROM WELLS
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF WATER FROM
CITY WELLS
iii
78 78
79 80
82 83
83 1470
LIST OF TABLES
No. Title
1 Construction Data for Active City of Los Banos Wells
2 Construction Data for CCID Wells
3 Annual Pumpage from City of Los Banos Wells (1993-2016) 4 Annual Pumpage from CCID Wells in GSA (1993-2016)
5 Annual Pumpage from Private Wells in GSA (1993-2016)
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
Pump Test Data for City of Los Banos Wells
Pump Test Data for CCID Wells
Summary of Aquifer Test Results
Chemical Quality of Water from City of Los Banos
Wells
Chemical Quality of Water from CCID Wells
Groundwater Budget for City of Los Banos (2003-12)
Groundwater Budget for CCID & SLWD Part of Study Area
(2013-12)
Groundwater Budget for Study Area (2003-12)
iv
23 25
47 49
50 52
54 59
64 69
77 81
84 1471
No.
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Title
Topographic Map of GSA and Location of Subsurface
Geologic Cross Sections
Surficial Geologic Map
Topsoils
Surface Water Bodies
Location of Various GSAs
Definable Bottom of Basin
Depth to Top of Corcoran Clay
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section A-A'
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section B-B'
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section C-C'
Water-Level Elevations and direction of Groundwater
Flow Above Corcoran Clay (Spring 2009)
Water-Level Elevations and Direction of Groundwater
Flow Above Corcoran Clay (Spring 2017)
Long-Term Water-Level Hydrograph for Well T10S/R10E12Ql Long-term Water-Level Hydrograph for Well TlOS/RlOE33Hl Water-Level Hydrograph for City of Los Banos Well
No. 5
Water-Level Hydrographs for Triangle Rock Monitor
Wells
Water-Level Hydrographs for Observation Wells near
Los Banos Creek and the DMC
V
2 5
7 8
10 12
14 16
19 21
29 31
34 35
37 38
40 Continued:
1472
No.
18 19
20 21
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
(Continued)
Title
Potential Groundwater Recharge Areas
Potential Groundwater Discharge Areas
Historical Land Subsidence along
Highway 152 Transect
Known Groundwater Contamination Sites
vi
Page
42 46
62 73
1473
HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL, GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS,
AND WATER BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF LOS BANOS GSA
INTRODUCTION
This report is intended to satisfy Sections 354.14 (Hydrologic Conceptual Model), Section 354.16 (Groundwater Conditions), and Section 354.18 (Water Budget) of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the City of Los Banos Study Area.
This area includes a study area previously developed for an evaluation of the City of Los Banos groundwater conditions. This area extends beyond the City Urban Growth boundazy, and includes an upgradient area tanned the Los Banos Subarea (Figure 1). The area includes lands in the City, the Central California Irrigation District (CCID), the Grassland Water District (GWD), the San Luis Water District (SLWD) , and in white areas of Merced County.
The City of Los Banos is an expanding urban area that relies entirely on groundwater. Hexavalent chranium concentrations in water fran City wells exceed the proposed maximum contaminant level (M::L), of 10 parts per billion (ppb). Also, there are concerns about this supply in terms of adequacy for future growth. This evaluation is the result of a cooperative effort between the CCID, the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority, the City of Los Banos, the GWD, and the SLWD to further evaluate the sustainable groundwater supply for the urban area and adjacent areas.
There are three districts that provide water to the rural part of the study area. The CCID extends fran near :Mendota northward to near Crows Landing, 1474
10 s.t
-Catu,,Drive
T.
15 (l)
::,
C:
a,,
>·
<t:
"'
22 $. e:
z "'
14 Charlesiori "r=io"ad
- 1G
"g _l 31 T i· TI '
~-
. j 10
_-_-._~~-------------......... 1 S.
EXPLANATION
e City of Los Banos Supply Well
CD CClD Supply Well
8 Private Supply Well
0 Well or Test Hole used in
Subsurface Geologic
Cross Section
I No. s 1--e Well and Identification
Location of Subsurface
A A' Geologic Cross Section N
T.
11 S.
o 4,ooo A
··· -· ·o 13 Scale (feet) \ "O .·_:,_~-- 16
a:
~ '- ... • \ ..,_ I
.- .. ,,, W · +~a
----=-----H '\~~i~~---~-~--1 ~~"-!f'--
23 ::e I 24 CC er: 19 I- 20 ~r 21
FIGURE 1 - TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF STUDY AREA AND LOCATION OF
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTIONS
N
1475
3 and surrounds a number of urban areas, including the City of Los Banos.
Both District (CCID) and private wells are used in the CCID to supplement San Joaquin River water and ilrported water fran the Delta Mendota Canal (DM::) that is used for crop irrigation. The GWD has two divisions, one essentially north of Highway 152 and the other south of this highway. The GWD supplies ilrported water fran the DM:: to numerous duck clubs. The CCID wheels water through its facilities to the GWD. The SI.WO extends fran near Santa Nella south to south of Little Panoche Creek and delivers water fran the California Aqueduct and DM::. Private wells are used to supplement this water for irrigation in the part of the District near Los Banos.
Part of this study is an update of three earlier hydrogeologic evaluations prepared by Kenneth D. Schmidt and Associates (KDSA) . The first two were for the CCID and City in 1991 and in 1998. The third evaluation was done in 2010 for the CCID, City of Los Banos, and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The latter report also focused on water transfers in the area upgradient (southwest) of the City.
Info:r::mation on regional groundwater conditions in the vicinity was provided by Hotchkiss and Balding (1971) , Swanson (1990) , and KDSA (1997) .
The latter of these references described a detailed evaluation of the groundwater conditions in the CCID.
The study area for this evaluation includes lands within the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundazy (UGB), upgradient lands to the southwest, and adjacent lands to the northeast in the GWD. In the 2010 evaluation, the Los Banos Creek subarea was delineated. This subarea is 1476
primarily outside of the CCID and up-gradient of the City (Figure 1). Groundwater pumpage from private irrigation wells in this subarea provides most of the water supply, and this subarea has experienced significant water-level declines during dry periods.
Due to the upsloping topography and thinner alluvium to the southwest, changes in groundwater elevation are amplified within the western part of this area. Historically, minor amounts of groundwater have been transferred out of this subarea.
SURFICIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOS BANOS STUDY AREA
Topography
Figure 1 shows the topography of the study area. Lands southwest of Interstate 5 (I-5) are primarily in the foothills of the east edge of the Coast Range. Lands in and southwest of Los Banos and east of I-5 are on the alluvial fan of Los Banos Creek. Land surface elevations range from about 220 feet above mean sea level near I-5 to less than 100 feet above sea level near the northeast edge of the area . Lands slope gently in the northeast in the GSA.
Surficial Geology
4 Figure 2 is a surficial geologic map, modified from the California Division of Mines, San Jose Sheet (Rogers, 1966). Three types of alluvial deposits are shown. The older deposits are to the southwest near I-5 and are tenned the Pleistocene non-marine (Qc) . The deposits near 1477
if
.,; :·, HOlruy Mia,: Rabdl
• • :.--··
____
=-
_
' 'lll l T.
10 r,
_...,._...,..,. ____ ..., . S.
I
I i -·1,r;
.l' .
....
~·-···· ········.1 -· ,To \ 19 ..:;:.: ·--_ze
'6-.'lf.,JC:fr.=.:,,,;¥-'--r.~'-'7'"7'.,,.C-,~,,.-i': ... i'J~~r-cr'.1"":1/',;i'i1 '> /,J}t).. · . ? l , ( ""'~:k;~, FIGURE 2 - SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAP
8 EXPLANATION
Basin Deposits
Quaternary Nonmarine
Terrace Deposits
Pleistocene Nonmarine
Modified From Rogers, (1966)
0 I
Scale (miles)
1 N
1 1478
Los Banos Creek and its alluvial fan are termed Quaternary non-1t1arine terrace (Qf) . The deposits away fran the creek are tenned. basin (Qb) .
Topsoils
Figure 3 shows the major types of topsoils in the area. The U.S. Soils Conservation Service map of soils in the Los Banos area (Cole, 1952) was modified. The topsoils have been grouped into: 1) coarse-grained (sand), 2) fine-grained (clay and silty clay), and 3) intermediate texture (sand clay and clayey sand).
Coarse-grained soils are limited to along Los Banos Creek, south of Sunset Avenue. The fine-grained soils are predominant in the rest of the area. Intermediate topsoils are present both to the northwest and southeast of the coarse-grained soils, and along Los Banos Creek in the area north of Highway 152. They are also present south and southeast of Los Banos.
Surface Water Bodies
6 Figure 4 shows surface water bodies in the area. Los Banos Creek passes through the area from the southwest near the California Aqueduct to the north at the Henry Miller Road crossing. The Los Banos Creek Detention Reservoir is located upstream and to the southwest of the area. The California Aqueduct, DMC, and CCID Main and Outside Canals are all southwest of Los Banos. The Arroyo Canal (Santa Fe Canal), Mud Slough, and former San Luis Drain are northeast of Los Banos. Extensive water bodies are 1479
., .
•f
FIGURE 3 - TOPSOILS
"P.7!
.\ ".} :.'.~.
I!' ··•·,
·.1
""r,,, ~
.,
:i··
·.•
I s:·
EXPLANATION
CJ Fine Grained
D Intermediate
Coarse Grained
LJ UrbanArea
- NoData
Modified From Cole (1952)
0 1
I I
Scale (miles) 1
1480
8 --
2 - --
FIGURE 4 - SURFACE WATER BODIES
1481
created seasonally in the GWD for duck clubs.
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Regional Geologic and Structural Setting
The GSA is within west part of 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 mountains blocks have contributed to ' marine and continental deposits in the Valley. In the west-central part of the valley, more than 12,000 feet of sediments are present. In the Los Banos vicinity, groundwater is present in alluvial deposits that dip slightly toward the trough of the valley (the San Joaquin River).
Lateral Basin Boundaries
Figure 5 shows the study area boundaries and various GSAs. The north, west, and south boundaries of the study area were detemci.ned for the 2010 cooperative study of the Los Banos Area by KOSA. The northeast boundary was subsequently extended to cover additional land in part of the GWD.
This Los Banos GSA is located within the San Luis-Delta M3ndota Sub-basin.
Land of the southwest in the study area (green color) are in the San Luis Water District. Lands in the area west and south of Los Banos Area are in 9 the CCID (yellow color) and in the SJREC GSA boundary. White areas near Los Banos, particularly to the northwest and southeast (blue in color) are 1482
10 28 27 26 25
32 u :'13 I 34 r·= -- 'i C ~ ~.'-=' JW'~ !Mfl , 1.i-. ~') I 33 34 I 35 I 36
T. s
T. 1 OS 5 I / 4 I -I 3 I ~·· & -_Jl-ieetft r: ~ 1&b .... l 4 3 I 2 10 11 12
17 16
14 13
70 21
19 I 20
24 28
27 34 I I .. I --...__ :q7 / I 33 I / 34 I 35 I 1 I , Lh l2 I ~ 1• . .... I ·_,S!> II ~ 35 I 3~
T. 10S
T.11S
~I \J ~:i, I ~ 'j ■ [~I.~ . 5 I ~-~!·;,~·~~ ~ -- > < '
r;t "
N W+E EXPLANATION: 7
9 1)~~~ c:::J Los Banos Study Area
- - Ii.I Merced County with SJ REC
s u'~ ~
fv~ C::J Central D-M (SLWD) GSA 18
1'Ef 11111 Los Banos GSA ~ jj/' c=:J Merced County with GWD s -- ~~ I ___ J Grasslands GSA I C::J SJRECGSA / ~
$1.
s
··-··, . ~.,,Co o.5 1 2 3
ij Delta-Mendota Subbasin ·•-•t"
FIGURE 5 - LOCATION OF VARIOUS GSA's
1483
11 in the Merced County GSA.
Definable Bottom of the Basin
Figure 6 shows the definable bottom of the 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 from about 600 to 800 feet deep in most of the area. As part of this evaluation, electric logs for a number of deep holes were obtained from the California Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources and interpreted to determine the bottom of the basin in more detail. The bottom of the basin in the area ranges from about 500 to 800 feet deep, and is generally deeper beneath Los Banos and the central part of the 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 1484
.. . .! ...
j
'
·; _j: ... '" :·~ .. ,.
,.;!:..i- l~ .
I ~·• ' f
---
·111 1.l '
,;:
,-\ ..
• - .., I
--.
_
,
FIGURE 6 - DEFINABLE BOTTOM OF BASIN
0 I
EXPLANATION
Contour of Depth to
Definable Basin Bottom
(feet)
Scale (miles)
• "•·.t
j:2
5 , I
N
1 T.
10 s.
I->
N
1485
13 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 area are generally tan in color and are termed the Diablo Range deposits. These deposits are shown on several subsurface geologic cross sections that are presented later in this report.
Confining Beds
There is only one confining bed that is important beneath the area: the Corcoran Clay (also tenned the E-Clay). Figure 7 shows the depth to the top of the Corcoran Clay, which was mapped by KDSA (1997a). The Corcoran Clay has been deformed since its deposition. The top of the clay in the area is shallowest (about 50 feet deep) near I-5 and deepest (about 300 feet) near Los Banos.
The Corcoran Clay thickens to the northeast in the area. The clay is about 40 feet thick near the California Aqueduct and about 120 feet thick near the northeast edge of the area.
Principal Aquifers
The principal aquifer tapped by most wells in the area is the upper aquifer (above the Corcoran Clay). A secondary aquifer is the lower aquifer (below the Corcoran Clay). One City well, 1486
···
. i
:.,j,......::,Oll,,-.L...--.C....----+-- - .
:~1;
. -:: ..
..._,J,. ...
Plf('-
•
__
..
[ r
- -
·+ ·-· ' -~
! a: •
1·
0 I
EXPLANATION
Contour of Depth to
Top of Corcoran Clay
(feet)
1 I
N
Scale (miles) 1
1l
1'
.
J -
I ...... ,.
:j2
a
1l
.\
.
·~---~
FIGURE 7 - DEPTH TO TOP OF CORCORAN CLAY
1487
one CCID well, and a number of private irrigation wells in the study area tap the lower aquifer.
Subsurface Geologic Cross Sections
15 Figure 1 shows the locations of wells and test holes for which geologic information is available, and the locations of these cross sections. Besides electric logs, drillers logs for water wells were obtained from the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in Fresno for use in developing these cross sections. Non City wells are identified by their 40-acre designation in a section, following the convention of the U.S. Geological Survey.
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section A-A' (Figure 8) extends from near I-5 on the southwest to near Henry Miller Avenue and Ward Road on the northeast. This section generally extends along the inferred dip of the alluvial deposits (to the northeast). Electric logs are available for six wells or test holes along this section. Included are a 710-foot deep test hole that was drilled near City Well No. 4, a 425-foot deep test hole that was drilled near Well No. 8, Well No. 9, which is 300 feet deep, and a 528-foot deep test hole drilled near Well No. 11. Drillers logs are available for the remaining wells along this section. Twenty-two of the wells or test holes along this section appear to have reach the top of the Corcoran Clay. The top of this clay ranges from about 60 feet deep near Well SN to about 1488
A
SOUTHWEST
'.2
300
7A
i=-
UJ 200
UJ
LL
_J
UJ 100
> UJ
_J
<( 0 UJ
(/)
z
<(
UJ -100
~
0 I- -200
UJ
>
~ _J -300
UJ
a:
z 0 -400
~ > UJ -500 _J
UJ
-600
::,; 1-
z 0 0: ::,
OD
lL W
~a
0 <(
T. D .-:f_-.::-.:::::=:::=.::.::-·
760T.D.
800
~ w 0
> Cl __J
ii: z <( Wz Cl 2 <( (/)
::, ~ 0
~ :...J
w 0 Cl
32R
- - -:::::.::.::.::.::.::~-=.::--:::-- .. -·-- -~
EXPLANATION
P';'I Gravel or mixture of
1£.:rJ gravel and sand
[.:,:'l Sand l:EJ
~ Sandy clay, clayey sand, or
~ mixture of sand and clay
F.::::.::.::j Clay
~ Corocran Clay
7 A Well and Identification IL Perforated Interval
T.D. 116 Total Depth (feet)
.._ 'l, Water Level
~
'"" (Summer 1997)
Water Level
(Spring 2009)
0 1,000 I I I
Horizontal Scat'e (Feet)
(f)
I- w 0 l<'. w::, (f)
Zw (/) z ol<'. ~w Zw Zw 0: ::, > <( w 8 0 (j) <( Ill 0: __J (f) 0 9 w 0:
g ;;i!lfjlO (/) z z <(
1-<eoo :::> 0- 0: 0 CL
TH-1 TH-6 TH-2
~ ll&i {!) T""
i:
- <( <( z zl__J
2c3
No. 6
-------------------------
z 0:
~ 0: __J
~ ci
I- 0:
:::> 0 0-
(/) !:!::
(..)
8:
E=:.:f.:f.:::.:::=~===- +\=:==:.:f-=:-=:-=3::.::::E=:=:-=:=:.:f::.::~:=.:E-"f=:=..~:=:.:f.:::::' JftA~i~i~ttJtilt i~it1::~~~it:i~~~1,;~~~ -'-• -····-· .. ··,··:•. ·.··.~:.>::;:.;:·:'.~:-:i!:.::/{.;:::-:~~:.:;·:-:~:•::.:.:,·.=-:;0.~;~;~-:
.,:-:',• . ...-:,:.::..::•:::.
-T.D. 520--:--· T.D. 505
:.£2
~·:;-~:~}°:
--:-:-
tt
FIGURE
1 8' - SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECT
1489
I,
21L TH-2
:,~,·=~
:...~-::::- -r :-:::--::=--:-:
-T.D. 520-: __ _
~ :s:1(\J :c l!)
('J
:i:
T.D. 505
zl-' _< <Z 2j
No. 6 ~-----------
0 c3 z a:
a: _j
UJ <
:c 0 I- a: ::> 0 0- (/) LL
13 cE
No. 4 No. 9
>- 0 O<
a: 0 UJ a: 2 (/)
:c (D Ix 6
0 a: z fu
No. 8
-=---._--._,..-_Jiili"'----~-=
,_ -· -· -· -::=-::=--::-:-:-::--:-=-=-==--=-=-=-==--=-::.:--::-:-:-:::--:::--:-:-:::--:::-::-='t :-::= -=--- - -----------------~- - - ------ L1J
LL
zO j::llll
<< (/) a: 0 ('J
_j
0 1R2
0:
UJ
~,□ 2<
>- 0 a: a:
a:i
:c
36R
. : '.::· :_;:.::· :.·:4.:::X:·;::->.\-~:i,::;'.'.~}'.~:;•=~·;;s,~;i;:;t,;f::; ..~.~:,:; ;;_:_:: ........ , ........ , ..................... , ........... ~~-~·~•~.~.~~.~.7~<•.;:~.:? ... cr.:.· ..... ~~x iJ&jJIJr~~, ····· T.D. 435
~1.!. :~i'.~~i{:i!!:%:-l~~Vii.~;'.~f /:i~!-;,\t:/: -----·------- ~: •• •.··.•,':.-•• :;'!...,. ..... ~♦: :- • :·:;;_~:~:.- T.D. 560 ------------------
(,1:1~~4t~J~[Mr,JH!
SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'
A'
NORTHEAST
200
100
0 -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
m
r
m
~ '-I
a
z
JJ
m
r
::j
~ -":i
0 s:
~-
en
m
)>
r
m
~ r
-"Tl
m
m
-::!
1 6
1490
about 310 feet at Well 31L. The test holes near City Wells No. 4, 8, and 11 and Wells SM, 16R, and 36R penetrated the base of the Corcoran Clay. The Corcoran Clay is about 90 feet thick near City Well No. 11, 110 feet thick near Well No. 4, and almost 130 feet thick near Well No. 8. The clay thins toward the southwest along this section and apparently pinches out between I-5 and the California Aqueduct.
17 Sand and gravel layers are more common in the upper aquifer beneath the southwest part of the study area (i.e., at Wells 32H and 32R). The permeable strata tapped by most City Wells are primarily in the interval between 100 and 300 feet in depth.
City Wells No. 4, 9, 8, and 11 all appear to tap a laterally extensive coarse-grained layer about forty feet thick, the top of which is about 100 feet deep. Another a really extensive coarse-grained layer appears to be present at a depth of about 220 to 230 feet along the central part of this cross section.
This layer ranges from about 10 to 20 feet in thickness. A coarse-grained layer about ten feet thick and just above the Corcoran Clay is fairly extensive along this section. Finegrained strata are more predominant to the northeast along this section (i.e. Wells 31L and 36R).
The base of the Corcoran Clay is 415 feet deep at Well TlOS/ Rl0E-16R, 402 feet deep near City Wells No. 4 and 11, and 394 1491
18 feet deep near City Well No. 8. Thick coarse-grained, permeable deposits are present below the Corcoran Clay near City Well No. 4 to a depth of 710 feet. More than 200 feet of such deposits are present below the Corcoran Clay at this location. City Well No. 11 encountered three permeable layers between 407 and 514 feet in depth, totaling about 60 feet in thickness. Well SM encountered several sand and gravel layers below the Corcoran Clay.
Subsurface Geologic Cross Section B-B' (Figure 9) extends from the west, near Highway 52 and the Outside Canal, generally along Highway 152 to the east near the Old Santa Fe Grade. The strata along the Corcoran Clay are predominantly clay along the part of the section west of Los Banos Creek. Between the creek and Ortigalita Road, interbedded coarse-grained strata are more common, including stream channel deposits (coarser than sand).
Clay strata are predominant above the Corcoran Clay beneath much of the City. However, the relatively thin interbedded coarsegrained strata at some locations produce adequate amounts of water for City wells. Sand strata above the Corcoran Clay thicken to the east along this section, particularly east of Mercy Springs Road. A number of coarse-grained stream channel deposits were encountered at City Well No. 1, near Center Avenue. 1492
~ w
!:!:,
...J
w
> w
...J
~ C/J
z
<(
w
2 f2
w
>
~ w
a:
z
0 ~ > w
...J
w
200
100
0 -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
B
WEST
14R
g UJIJ <( (/) z I- <(
:) ()
0 i u. 0
oz
UJ :)
00 0 co UJ J:
z~ ffi 0
I- 0:
(/) CJ
UJ z $ <(
co
0:
:)
u.ilu.i Ci) 0
a: ;
:J j:510 <(
~g
13R13R 13R
-------------------------- - -- - - ·- - -- - - -- - - - - ---------------------------
~1~ zo t3 0:
17P
- ·- - _-_-:_-_-_ - - -· .... - - _-:_ - - - - -· -· ·)-'2·--· --·-,.·-~. - - - -_,-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-_.-_:-:_-::.:-:_-::_-_-_-:_-:...-:_-::..-:.-:_-_-$':'.=:: ... ·='- _- ·c .. --·· - ~10 UJ <(
~o
() 0:
510
~ <( _Q
I- a: 0:
0 No. 12
::.-$,:~ •. -;;;; :1 .. ~:.-:,-:·.:: -~-•. z- ·t': ~--~-~ :..~ _ -l=·--= ·.:.:·:.·~. _-_- ~~-~-- _--;-:::...::::-:::-:::-=.:.:=-:::-:::-::.:.. =-=--·--· ·-· -·· .~.·.:::-~-...=..:..=-.-::--..:.-c:.:;_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_---:_--:_-_-_-_-_-_-_:-_--:.._-_-_,-------------------, T.D. 500
~
LtIJ
EI]
t3
f::"."'I
~
~
Gravel or mixture of
gravel and sand
Sand
Sandy clay, clayey sand, or
mixh,ire of sand and clay
Clay
Corocran Clay
14R Well and Identification l1. Perforated Interval
T.D. 305 Total Depth (feet)
.._ 'l, ._ Water Level (Summer 1997)
~ Water Level (Spring 2009)
0 1,000 I
Horizontal Scale (Feet)
:0:: . <:,. 0 0 "'· <:,', 0. 0 ~ . ; . 09b T ; ....... _.,.;;.,._ ........ ,.:•,·· '-: :.-::.-..... ·, .. , .. •,-, .;:.-... _.. ·,:,•·.•--•: .. , .,_.,._... . o_ "'. . ' .. • .. ·o· '<:> . . "· CJ ------------,-----~·:::i:-,=_::-.. :-.-,f,.:;:=·-=-:,::=·--:'-.::_·,:-,: ....... ;,<.:•· ....... -..... '.{·:· ..... :-:.::::-.-::.-=-.-:-.~ -- I.. .:.~ ... ~ 0° ,.:.,: ~: ... ·_: .. ~;.,~,;~ :~: .. ,,.,: -'~--.. ~~-•>-~ ~ _ _ --- -- _-- -· -_ ~--~ ~--~~•: ~ ~-;.~~--~:--~~~~ ~-~-__,, _"'_,..~ :~~-~: ~ _':'.". 0 ·~"; _':' 0 o s,o~·~ ':' ".q T.D. 560
.. ·-· -- - - - - -- ·- - - - - - - - -- - ·- - - - ·- - - - - ·- -- -- -- -- - - ---------------------------------------· - - -~.!,~ ;,9.:~~}-~;,~ ;9:.;;~.:~~5:;v:~:";~~i_:-j ------------------------- ------------------------- ;:_z;.~ ~t~~t,}~9 ~r;,:!}.'( ;_,t.!~ ~ra;C!_
.~q•·~O :O·~(i·~·pO .,;,o·'.'\;,•.·.a·ob 6,?· . .-o".·•o·QD e;,':
-------------------
-------------------
FIGURE ·g·:· - SUBSURFACE GEOLOGIC CRO:
1493
>-
a:
<(
B'
0 ILO
<( ....J oz
wlw 0 <( w::l CI: ID 0 T"" z 0 o T"" T"" <Com (!J (D
er: cc o wJ:
~ z T""
CJ) IT a: ~ -z;s:: :J Cl UJ ;:) 0.. :s:: 0 Cl <( <( :l a:o I- z £1 0 z UJ CJ) :c a: z Wa: <( >- (!J <( t-50 ~~ I- a: ~~ UJ - a: CJ) <Cz 0 :c 0 w<( a: [D UJ a: ~ ;:) TH-2 No. 12 No. 1 TH-1nr, 18R1 EAST w
0 ....J <(
<( a:
Z(!J
<( w
0 IL
~~ oz
a: <(
r-200 a: CJ)
<( 0
....J
0 17P2
~--=i 100
0 :-- _,:::··_::· __ . __ -:.
---·- - -------:......__ -- :: --- -_- ·--_ -..:,r_ -~ -· __ -. -~- -_ __· ~ ---__ ·- ____ :· .5 = ~~~:::..~ ~:.:::~.:'..::_-==~~:.:~:~.:'.-=---=-= ~:·:.:~:: __ ...,_ ___ .. ---·-··-··-·---· -------·-· ... ·-··.O:o (::,_c::,· -,~:0-~-~ .. :-r;:_FFifIS---== '{--:::--_::--_::---:::---:::---:::--_::--_::--_::--_::--_::--_ - - - - - - - - - - - - -:_ - -_·· ··_:-_-_ - __ -..:·:...-_-_-:..-..::_-..:-___ -_. _-:._-:_-__:-_-__:-_-_-:_-_-- ------·1- :..- - -_-_-_:-:_-_-_-__:- -:..-:..-:.. -:._-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-__:-__ ..:. -:.:-:..·- -:_-_-_-..:- - -_-_- - - -_-_-_-:._-_-_:-_-_-:._-:._-_-_-_-_-_-_:-:_::_-_-_-_-..: .f:.__-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:..-_-_ P.,_~'._,_~· -·- ----- -·-· --·-- ---- _____ ; _____ ---·-··---------·---- ---·-=··-- .. . . .• .• ~ ·-·~. -...... · .. .. . . . .... -.-. -.... -.... . -100
,. ------~ ~~~~~~-=-f l;f iiliif i~~J;ilf~===;=~=~3\~}l%!\/)~ }{f:{//!;)51~)~~i)}t~ ----------------------------------------,------··---- 27//////./././///////.ff.m&>=••m - l,;,:,.•-•··;v.o-i"-'OS-•;9_-·;,-'.o-0,-'.•·<.-,;,:.-.,_. ············-··:,,•.·. -200
-/~-
~~~h~~~;gl~L~~~~;~t~i~i~-~~~~ ~~!::·~~: ~--~~~;-?_~o ~o-.»_ -· __ .. · :9~~?_?·-~ :9~~~ -300
------ -------
-400 ------- -------- ~-Ph .o _Oo. 9 c, ·O _Do.- cs ·9 -.o-~,.:,::~ 0 -500
·-~p·-·.a·o~ §_. ·.'c:iT.D. 699 -600
:URFACE GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B - B'
m
r
m
~ ~
0 z
:a
m
r
~
<
m
a
s:
m
)>
z
(/)
~ r
m
<
m
r
-=n
m
m
d
19 1494
20 Subsurface Geologic Section C-C' (Figure 10) extends from Volta on the northwest (Well lA), through City Wells No. 6, 1, and Test Hole No. 10-A, to Well lG, near the southeast boundary of the GSA. This section is generally oriented perpendicular to the inferred dip of the alluvial deposits, and thus the strata appear relatively flat. Well No. 1 was drilled to a depth of 697 feet. The top of the Corcoran Clay ranges from about 280 feet in depth at Test Hole No. 9 to 306 feet at Well No. 1.
City Well No. 1 and Well 35L along this section penetrated the base of the Corcoran Clay. The Corcoran Clay is about 110 feet thick at City Well No. 1 and about 120 feet thick at Well 35L.
Test Hole No. 10-A encountered five relatively thin and poorly developed water-producing strata between 95 and 280 feet in depth, and a production well was not completed at this site.
The coarse-grained permeable deposits in the lower aquifer appear to be much thinner at Well No. 1 than at Well No. 4. Finegrained deposits are predominant along this section between the northerly extension of Canyon Road and City Well No. 6.
CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR WELLS
City of Los Banos Wells
There are presently 13 active City Wells, all of which tap strata above the Corcoran Clay. Well No. 14 is the only active City 1495
i=-
UJ
w
!:::,
....I
UJ
> UJ
....I
<C
UJ
Cf)
z
<C
w
~
f2
UJ
>
~ ....I
w
0::
z
0 ~ > UJ
....I
UJ
C
NORTHWEST
200
100
~ a:
_J
<i.:
a:
0 u:
0 i:i:o
Z<C
a:o
UJ a:
i=~ ::,:..,i
00 (/)>
11 6E
-7~/ :i.;:._':·::·,.:::J'.'.:::;·,::' .'S-=-=-=-
6F
.o·o;::::.. -~Q·
0 r- ·f s z;.;• .. ,•,•.~- t .. ·,'$; --:t ----------: • :"i'! • ... •·•••• _z_ -100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
-700
EXPLANATION
~ Gravel or mixture of
Ll::.U gravel and sand
f:.;.:':1 Sand m::J
a
F-::":I
[:;;3
Sandy clay, clayey sand, or
mixture of sand and clay
Clay
~ Corcoran Clay
1D Well and Identification
IL Perforated Interval
T.D. 340 Total Depth (feet)
..._ 't, Water Level
._ (Summer 1997)
~ Water Level
(Spring 2009)
0 1,000
Horizontal Scale (Feet)
0 0
u: u:
oo
~ <( ~
130 zO (/) ct <(
a: 0: 0~ _J zO a:
UJ ::::! Zw LL D 0: a: ~1 UJlo I <( <( UJ a: <( UJ ::::! z1~ UJ <( I- 0: co 0: UJ 0 I <(
$C\I zo ::, ~o (.!) a: I- 0: I I.() <i.:~ Q 0:
0 0 ::, (.!} ..- ~ (.) CL
(/) _J ri5 0 :c ' (/)
TH-10A 26C
9K 9J No. 6 No.1
...:2_• ,...:.,;,,.• ---·--: .u ..... -~-~
. •, .... ··~;_:_ :-·:.: .. : ...... ;,-;-;-,-: ,:.·. :,·· .. .. : . .. =··· ..... : ....... . ~-----·--t-- :-=-=--:-:-:-=-=--=··0-~~-:---:->-:· ~ •' :::.-·, ·:.-•, ~-.:-.·:. ··'..:·_•:~:-:•-:: .. ; --~~· •: ..... •····* _-_-_-:_-_-_-_-_-_-_-=-=-=. - :·:: ::,:,,::· .. :;,":::::}- -- --_- -=-=-=-=-=-:::-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-:::-:::-=-=-=-=-=-=- --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= .. _-...:
-------------:§~f ~~f w;¥2.f ~f ~~~'E-=~t'~~t~~~~~i:-~;t:c=-~~: :: ::::~~~ :~~:J?~£~·~~']f ~;":']~;L~-=~=:?-:r--'~;m!t==-------s,·.:;: ,; -,;i•;C,,;Yf-X. -------- :-:-=-=-=-=-=---::-=-=-:.:-:-:-:-=-=-=-=-= ::_:.:-:-=-=-:-=-=-=-=-=-=---::-=-:-= - _-,_- -_-_-:-:{::: .. :.:;,:·.··•·:•:: ·------------------------------------- ----------------------- ---------- ----------- ~~~--;,,_3ccv "' ~ .;;_;,_,; ;;;'~~:¥Is. o ·,,;·.9 .;_-.:~- - -->__ - - _________ _t~===f=======~~---~ T.D. 215
-- -- - - - - - - - - - --.::1·. D. 699 - - -- - -- -- -- - - - - - - - FIGURE10- SUBSURFACE GE1OLOGIC CROSS SECTIOr
1496
0 ICJ)
<(
w
I
I-
:::>
0 CJ)
0 0
C\J
7VNVQ NIVIIII
G\fOl::I
NO.LLOO
99 A\fMH01H
G\fOl::I 9Nll::ldS A:::ll::13V'J
G\fOl::I
Ol::10 730 \fdO:::l
G\fOl::I
l::133N0ld
l\fN\f:::l
Nl\fV'J
A\fMH91H
G\fOl:lll\fl::I
:::ll.::H:::l\fd Nl::13H.Lnos
0 rELEVATION RELATIVE TO MEAN SEA LEVEL (FEET) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '? 0 0 1" 0 0 'Q 0 0 '-\) 0 0 t-;- 0 (_)
z
0 -
lo
w
Cl)
Cl)
en
0 a:
0 (_)
-
(!)
0 _J
0 w
CJ
w
0 if
a:
::,
Cl)
en
::>
Cl)
I
0 UJ
rr
1497
22 well with perforations extending below the Corcoran Clay. Table 1 provides information on dates drilled, depth, and perforated intervals for these wells. Drillers logs are available for all of these wells. Electric logs are available for Old Well No. 1, Wells No. 1 and No. 4, and Wells No. 7 through 15.
CCID Wells
Table 2 shows construction data for the four CCID supply wells in the Los Banos area. Cased depths of three of these wells range from 220 to 300 feet and the tops of the perforations range from 25 to 220 feet deep. These wells tap strata above the Corcoran Clay. Well No. 56 is 600 feet deep and is perforated from 400 to 600 feet deep. This well taps strata below the Corcoran Clay.
GROUNDWATER USE AND WELL DATA
Primary Uses of Each Aquifer
The primary use of the upper aquifer is for public supply and irrigation, and a secondary use is for wetlands and domestic use. The primary use of the lower aquifer is for irrigation use. A secondary use in for public supply and wetlands. 1498
TABLE 1-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR ACTIVE CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS Date Drilled Cased Casing Perforated Annular
No. Drilled Depth (feet) Depth (feet) Diameter (inches) Interval (feet) Seal (feet) -- 1 03/51 699 310 16
2 01/58 310 310 16 164-310 0-70
3 07/63 310 310 16 115-134 0-60
145-305
5 06/64 302 159 16 108-154 0-61
301 14 223-270
6 04/76 305 302 - 205-235 0-50
240-245 290-295
7 11/77 300 180 16 104-114 0-50
140-170
9 09/90 300 255 16 180-190 0-163
225-245
10 03/91 242 218 16 125-165 0-50
198-208
11 09/94 290 265 16 130-140 0-50
170-185
215-225 245-255
Continued:
I\)
w
1499
Date
No. Drilled
12 10/95
13 01/99
14 08/98
15 02/02
TABLE 1-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR ACTIVE CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS (Continued: )
Drilled Cased Casing Perforated
Depth (feet) Depth (feet) Diameter (inches) Interval (feet) 290 266 16 140-160
230-240 250-256
300 261 16 135-160
193-203
241-251
134-154 180-200
555 470 16 134-154
180-200
260-270
440-460
540 285 16 135-160
175-185
240-275
Annular
Seal (feet)
0-75
0-60 0-70 0-90
"'
1500
TABLE 2-CONSTRUCTION DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Date Drilled Cased Casing Perforated
No. Drilled De)2th (feet) De)2th (feet) Diameter (inches) Interval (feet) 8-A 03/94 230 220 16 75-220
48-A 11/96 305 300 18 220-260
280-295
56 01/99 610 600 18 400-600
62 04/03 255 250 21 25-125
16 150-240
Data from well completion reports.
Annular
Seal (feet)
0-50 0-50
0-50 0-25
I\)
01 1501
Depths of Water Supply Wells
City of Los Banos Wells
26 Cased depth of the City upper aquifer wells range from 180 to 310 feet. Except for Wells No. 7 and 10, the cased depths of these wells range from 255 to 310 feet. The only active City well tapping the lower aquifer (No. 14) is a composite well, cased to a depth of 555 feet. This well is perforated from 134 to 460 feet in depth (top and bottom of perforations).
CCID Wells
Cased depths of the CCID upper aquifer wells range from 220 to 300 feet. Well No. 56 taps only the lower aquifer, and the cased depth is 600 feet and the casing is perforated from 400 to 600 feet in depth.
Other Wells
Most private irrigation well in the study area tap only the upper aquifer, and are thus generally cased above a depth of about 300 feet. There are some shallow private domestic wells that are cased to depths of less than 150 feet, and thus tap the upper part of the upper aquifer. Some irrigation wells are composite wells (tapping both aquifers), and others only tap the lower aquifer. The composite and lower aquifer wells are generally cased to depths ranging from about 450 to 700 feet. 1502
27 WATER LEVELS
Water-Level Depths
KDSA (1998, Figure 4) provided a depth to water map for Spring-Summer 1997. Many of the measurements were for shallow observation wells measured by the CCID. Several were for shallow monitor wells at the City Wastewater Treatment Facility.
There are less such wells southwest of the Outside Canal, and in part of that area, measurements for water supply wells were used. In addition, water-level measurements were obtained for six monitor wells for the Triangle Rock gravel plant. Depth to water ranged from less than five feet beneath the northwest and southeast parts of the study area in Spring-Summer 1997, to more than 20 feet in most of the area southwest of the Outside Canal.
In most of the City of Los Banos, depth to the shallowest groundwater ranged from 10 to 15 feet. The depths that were shown for the urban area were more representative of the shallowest groundwater, as opposed to those for City supply wells, many of which aren't perforated near the water level, but much deeper.
KOSA (2010, Figure 5) provided a depth to water map for Spring 2009. This map showed the greater depth to water during a dry period, particularly in the Los Banos Creek subarea.
Depth to water ranged from less than 10 feet beneath the northwest, northeast, and southeast part of the area, to more than 80 1503
feet in the area west of the DMC and south of Los Banos Creek.
Depth to water exceeded about 40 feet in most of the Los Banos Creek sub-area.
Upper Aquifer
Water-Level Elevations and
Direction of Groundwater Flow
28 KDSA (1998, Figure 5) provided a water-level elevation and direction of groundwater flow map for Spring-Summer, 1997. This map was also based on shallow wells in some areas. The highest water-level elevations (exceeding 140 feet above mean sea level) were southwest of the DMC. The lowest water-level elevations (less than 90 feet) were to the northeast. Recharge mounds were indicated near Los Banos Creek (southwest of the Outside Canal) and near the City WWTF to the northeast. This water-level map indicated that most of the lateral groundwater inflow into the City came from the southwest.
KDSA (2010, Figure 6) prepared a water-level elevation and direction of groundwater flow map for Spring 2009. This was based on data in the DWR water-level data base and CCID data.
At this time this map was prepared, water-level measurements weren't available for City wells. Since that time they have become available, and the map has been revised to include water-level elevations for City wells (Figure 11). Water-level elevations 1504
T.
9 S.
36 a:
;-:·
0;
EXPLANATION
• Well with Water-Level
Measurement
Contour of Water-Level
Elevation Above Mean
Sea Level (feet)
Direction of
Groundwater Flow N
a:
'O
31. "' 0
er:
0 4,000
I I I
Scale (feet)
32 1
T.
9 S.
Henry Miller Road
T.
10 S.
11 ,.
---
. ,. '. ~·
35 361
I
I
I
I
dl
29 T.
10 S.
cj
16 28
Copa Del Ora Road
I
32 I T.
10 !, IS. -----,1-----~--~.:.__ ___ < --·--- '
I
6 5
8 17
24 ', 19
T.
11 S.
,---
9 16
21 FIGURE 11
- WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF
GROUNDWATER FLOW ABOVE CORCORAN CLAY (SPRING 2009)
1505
30 ranged from more than 140 feet near the DMC and Merced Avenue to less than 85 feet northeast of Los Banos. A cone of depression was indicated beneath the City, and this depression extended at least two miles to the north of the City. A similar overall direction of groundwater flow was generally indicated as in 1997.
However, the most significant change was the lack of a recharge mound along most of the reach of Los Banos Creek for the Spring 2009 map. This was due to minimal streamflow in the creek prior to and during Spring 2009, and also due to the use of measurements for deeper wells (i.e. supply wells). The recharge mound associated with the WWTF (east of the San Luis Canal) was indicated to still be present in Spring 2009. There was a localized cone of depression in Spring 2009 in the area southeast of Los Banos Creek along the DMC. This area coincided with a number of private wells that were used for irrigation of land in the study area.
Figure 12 shows water-level elevations and the direction of groundwater flow for the upper aquifer in Spring 2017. This map is based on measurements for water supply wells as opposed to shallow monitor wells. For this map, measurements were also available for the City wells. Water-level elevations ranged fran more than 115 feet above mean sea level to the southwest to less than 80 feet to the northeast. A well developed cone of depression was present beneath the Los Banos urban area. Otherwise, the direction of groundwater 1506
II
EXPLANATION
i12Jl .-. Well & Identification
Water-Level Elevation
Above MSL (feet) lo, 'O' Contour of Water-level
Elevation Above MSL (feet)
Direction of Groundwater Flow
0 I
Scale (miles)
-.
1 I
·:~~.:_:~.~
N
1 I ~-,.\•·• ' 29··:-:. ' ·ze:
........ ·1
I ~r' •~ • .
[" - .. - ·'. ' ., ~tl!!•~:A~ '
.. ,--~---
5 .. . -;•: ,-, ·.t. __
T.
10 7
s.
,al~
t 11
I S:
51 FIGURE 12 -WATER-LEVEL ELEVATIONS AND DIRECTION OF
GROUNDWATER FLOW ABOVE CORCORAN CLAY (SPRING 2017)
w
I--'
1507
32 flow was to the northeast, except in an area southeast of Los Banos Creek and upslope of the outside Canal, where groundwater was flowing toward a depression in the area south of Cactus Drive in the SLWD. Little indication of a recharge ridge was indicated along Los Banos Creek by the supply well water-level measurements. Such a ridge would be indicated by water-level measurements for shallow observation wells or monitor wells.
Lower Aquifer
Water-level measurements for wells tapping the lower aquifer in the area are inadequate to determine the direction of groundwater flow. However, regional maps prepared for the San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority (SJRECWA) have indicated a southeasterly direction of flow toward the Panoche W.D.
Water-Level Fluctuations
Upper Aquifer
KOSA (2010) evaluated water-level hydrographs for wells in the area fran the DWR website (presented in Appendix A of that report) . Water levels in wells in most of the area were stable or rising through Spring 2009. However, in the area near and southwest of the Outside Canal , and east of the south part of the canal in the study area, water levels fell between 2006 and 2009. Records for twelve wells in Sections 19, 20, 22, 26, 29, 33, 34, and 36 of Tl0S/Rl0E showed this decline, which ranged fran seven to 29 feet. The greatest declines (20 feet or more) were in Wells 19Rl, 29Al, 29N2, 29Q2, 33Hl, 34Al, and 34Cl. 1508
33 Updated water-level hydrographs (through early 2017) are provided in Appendix A of this report. Figure 13 is a representative long-term water-level hydrograph for the part of the study area northeast of the Outside Canal. Well T10S/RlOE-12Ql is located in the northeast part of Los Banos. Water levels in this well generally rose between 1975 and 1987, then fell during 1988-1994 during the drought. The water level then rose from 1996-1999 and was stable through 2006. The water level fell about nine feet during 2006-08, rose about five feet by 2010, then fell about 13 feet in 2015. Overall, water levels have been stable except for temporary declines during dry periods.
Figure 14 is an updated water-level hydrograph for a well in the Los Banos Creek subarea. Well Tl0S/R10E-33Hl is located about a mile east of Los Banos Creek. The water level in this well fell about 20 feet between 1987 and 1993. The water level then rose about 24 feet by 2002. The water level fell about 27 feet between 2007 and 2009, then rose about 18 feet by 2012. The water level then fell about 78 feet by the end of 2014, and more recent measurements aren't available. Water-levels in this well were relatively stable prior to 2009. Water levels declined between 2009 and 2015.
Appendix A also contains water-level hydrographs for 12 City of Los 1509
8 9
10 11
12 13 14
15 ..- 16
tu 17
w
LL 18
---
Cl'.: 19
w
20 S 21
22 I 23 lo.. 24 w
O 25
26 27
28 29
T--r·· FF=i--·-1::~ ---_1-.::·-r· ··-·--+---- 1-
--~--::.) ::;: ).:.:-=..t .:.j-·:::.:::::i ... ·--· ·'·--· ----1----l- ,- ---+-- :1: ... :·t:·· ___ :j::::·:i:::::::j:::--::t=:::r ----j-- ~l~~-+4 -±
----,- -----1----
__ _;___:_f-- ············---~ ---·· __ _j ___ ,;R.~/;:: .,l----1=:1·-----i---- ·! -- ' =~\l---L,r:&~nt- . ~_I I I r·c r- LLJ--t-+-l== ___ . . 1-··-~----_ 1l=t=- ~,------,-- --- =-= -- - - - +--+-4-- i=:± __ JA:: ·-+--- :LJ i--+~ _;-----!-'(~::~~~-==-=------ __ :I -'.·:·--- ---:::.-.-d/~=f=:~=~:=.t-=/=!=1-=\:J==t:..-=--=l-===~-- __ ,_ ----r-· -7'-t="-;'-=]'.X:J.:. ~;d::::.; _+ -'i~ j - ··!·-·+ ~~:_::~i~==~z==~
-~,;t' 1--.. L
-+·---!-- !------1---=1:::··•-i
P-J--···r=-L3J- ... ------~--~- --1=:t:- - -9.·
-- I ---·-···- ••
i--::=t-:::t· '/ =f_:· )1==!-r -- -I - --i : t 1£ : f :±"- :_ f )-:: ~-,-- - .. ----!•--·· .. - - ' _,_ . ! -
.. _, ,,..~=1:=:.:::: --+--.:::.::.C =l:::::::~i;:)-: ='-=----= ----,-L-.. =L::. =$= 1::c )--:--:'- ---- -- --'- --- : .t-: t --'--~ .. ' L~-~:~--·~-. ____ ,_____ - ··i· ··· ;::.1=3·_ .. -~-- : -~- :E_,_[_ __ _ ---1
-- ~~-1-- t=I- l·:::~:-~~slCff W~$ '=1zjJllP;--
. - -- ::t: -! :\ 1:i=;; E'--fi: i - l=O- - -- . . 1-i-- --- . - ,_ -- . 1= - I=' . -I-· .. .. i::::: ' =i= --- -- . . ---~ ,_ -- .... . .. /-- . --4-~j::_::f:::4:::J===§-- :b::: Jtt+ re :· __ -,~ , __ -
_ .i->- : + ·: -. ----•- 1: :_ :~ •:-=J==l=::+- ,:fl!- ---=1Q:F 1 - - - - ,_ - - - - L-.. - -F- - - , - ,_ - n=t== :1=1=,::- = = :fr'.tE-=:n= -1--1 ...•• :....1i:::::::: _:_;-·:_+ ----~-- - -= :: _t-=~-r=tl):::i= =--i='=, =-+±· -:: -: _!Ef---::.:__ 1±::::: .::: - -- -- t==r.:1:::::(1:\=t==,:::~1::r--+----t-·J=·l--t t--+-- ·t-:=: :_\_J- --+ E--:::;.::: .:t :1!:1 ~- -~ __ --- {,:Ji=::- - -_: = - --:E: l:"::. :::~ ~8;>-- -_J---+-'---'l--'- - -=~-=-:±3:: ~!~fl::::t::::·j:::: = _ .v_ - --1 . :::i: --ti=- - =i:: -l- -- =1t--= ,_ -. - --- - , ---t---•- -, - _ __jlf.:~=1==t=:l=:t:::.t F;i:_;:;:~_:j_:::~: _;:_ ~~:~;_;;:~~:~ ---- ':·::t -- ~:.- :::_: :•·-+ I --- -- + t -I ;=:::.:::=~= - ""--- -'---'~:-
..
---- ---- -- -- L :-' '--I§' /3J---~-___ ,
---
__
--:i:-
_ _,-7
-.1::.:~Q~~1~~+-
-,-----t--~·-'::::f. ·=1==r--~t--
.::.::.t::=l="--v- _,:::.::.:.(:.:::::
_..._---t-
:j_--·---l
--+··-+-- ~=t~J)i~licc•:=:=\ft:-z:_ ,:= ' ,- -i c:?i-£=•t~~~1-s---._-----l_,._,_ __ , _____ ..._ J -_. l r=-r-~- ~::~j~~==-1 .. .:.L='~:=--1~ ± '::--:: ::::: = -ii::: r:::.::i-:::·:. t=T:::J~: ;~.---: =-t=.::F::L:[ : . · I-1 I- .. : :
__ ,_
-+--- r--~ ··1 .. ---·1··-- ·----------•.---- ----·1 -tl- -=l=-=1-=-l,=r · ---t·---=i-_-.:."'.._f---+ _;::_:-·!·-- ! !----1--
-1--
1----
:l~E-
___ ,
···I·
·t·--t- -----1-----t
.,_. .... :r·
1-----1
·-I
JYa=_[__J:::l~€t--,-
,-------1--1:,i-t---i-----
+
1·-···-t·--I
1---·--+----1----
--1------
~=:--:----i---- =r.==r=--i
~-:/-.:.:::.:1=-::::
--!·-t-=:1:..
+---t--·-.:t:·
---1--
--1--
30 1-- --f----4 t=L -l-·:::1=:011t:"""?:1=:::1=:::1=:+ -1-t--+ -;---- -----•·
31 32
33 ---+-
1---1----
1960
------t--
--(' --ro.-1=: •---(··::! "l--i-+--1 _,_ L-j--- --·-1·-----· -t-·· ---1----· -+
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 FIGURE 13 - LONG-TERM WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-12Q1 w
.i,,.
1510
I!)
.....
I ! I , . ! ! . 1 I ! ,
1 ,
4 , t
0 N
LO
N
0 ('I')
O LO
""" """ (133:::1) tl31\7'M 01 Hld30
i
0 I!)
LO
LO
0 c.o
00 .-I
0 N
Lf)
.-I
0 N
0 .-I
0 N
0 0
0 N
Lf)
en
en
.-I
0 en
en
.-I
Lf)
00 en LO .-I
c.o
T""
I
('()
('()
I
w
0 T""
0::: -(/)
0 T""
1-
_J
_J
w
s
0:::
0 LL
I
0..
~ (9
0 0:::
0 >-
I
_J
w
> w
_J
I
0:::
w
i
~
0:::
w
1--;-
(9
z
0 _J
w
0:::
:::)
(9
LL
35 1511
36 Banos wells for Spring 1997-Spring 2017. The City measures static (standing) water levels in the wells on a monthly basis when possible.
Well No. 14, which is perforated above and below the Corcoran Clay, is included, because its water-level trends are consistent with those for the other wells. Figure 15 is a water-level hydrograph for Well No. 5, which is considered representative of average trends. Water levels were shallower during the winter and deeper during the summer, and seasonal variations often ranged from about 20 to 30 feet.
A review of these hydrographs indicates water-level declines, ranging from no decline in two wells to O. 7 foot per year (at the well No. 1 site) between 1997 and 2012-14. The average water-level decline in the City wells during this period was 0.2 foot per year.
Water-levels declines during 2013-17 ranged from 0.9 to 3.8 feet per year and averaged 2.0 feet per year.
The most frequent long-term water-level records available near Los Banos Creek and upstream of the Outside Canal are for six shallow monitor wells for the Triangle Rock facility near Pioneer Road and the creek. Water levels in these monitor wells were frequently measured during 1990-99 and from 2006-2017 (Figure 16). Records of outflow from the Los Banos Creek detention dam since 1967 are provided in Appendix B. In part of 2017, water was also discharged to the creek from the DMC, as part of a pilot recharge project. Water levels in these monitor wells 1512
15 20
25 I-
--
w
W 30
LL
--
0:::
w
I--:
35 0
II
lo.. 40
w
0 45
50 55
+---+---------- ·(l--+---+---+---+·---·+---+---+'-·--+--+--+---+--+----+---+------------------- 0 'X) -+--+(( ) C ~,-----~
b G") ·· I ) > ,.. -'
C ,.. (>l 0
-------- _,+--____ -- 0 -- - -.cE' ~--- ----- -- . ' ' ' ---- ) t-t+-----t---l_l--+---((t? l )·1-)---+}-----~------- > < g 'O ( ) ) ) .) q ) )
-------- --- --- --c ----H----,f--(~ ( - -- ---- - - --- )-- - ,) ----- ------ ---------- ------- --- ----- ) 0 ? ) 1 > () '{'r > )
l D < q t Kl 1c!l o D - <D l5 ·- -- >- --,+-----+- ----L, ----0--- ---++--- --+-----ie-----r--+-- ---- - --- - l .~ > ) .) 1l ) 6 n
)
--~~,----+--+-+---t----+---+----;----,.-----r--,-----i----r----· --- -+-----I .)
.)
+----1---+-,--+---+··· --+------1
)
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
FIGURE 15 - WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 5 w
-...J
1513
I---
w
w
LL
--0:::
w
I-
~ 0
II
IQ..
w
0 0 Ii I
5 -t-rrh I ; I H--t-: t-', + H-; 4: : ,+-• rrH1 0 ++-H : I : I ; I : :-H-t-itt+-H-t--- 1 5 ++---+-,-;.-+-
20 +-H-i-,...;-+
25 30
35 40
45 f i i -+- /IW-1
-1 I 1
50 __;j_J ~MW-2 ! I I ;, .l..;
'I' .HJ -•-MW-2R
55 60 ++: I : I f1 rrf ,I: : ' : r: -rlH-:++-\-H-1+,-H· I : I +-:-+-.!,-:+:-~-:+:--+ -•-MW-5 6 5 -H-;-;-,-:-t-t-:-id • I • '\:,.; f+~+: •~ , I ; +-.-,-:--1--H--:---,+-;--;-+--"""'.--t-tt---:- ■ Record of Streamflow in Los Banos Creek
7 0 I I i +-:--'----,+H ;+ I I H- , . .....:.....---+_,_-,--+-.......,..... -:-+-: --: :-+-,-.,....-i I I I :--,-+-:--,--, 7 5 +:--+-H-H-; :-:+ : - :-11---H--
80 1' I I I I l' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I l' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I _II' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I' I' I I I I I' I I I! I' I I I, It' I I I I', I I I: I I I Ii I' I I I I JI j I I I I J,' I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I I' I I I I 11 I I I I 11 I I I l I 1990 . 1991 . 1992 . 1993 . 1994 . 1995 . 1996 . 1997 . 1998 . 1999 . 2000 . 2001 . 2002 . 2003 . 2004 ' 2005 ' 2006 . 2007 . 2008 . 2009 . 2010 . 2011 . 2012 , 2013 . 2014 . 2015 . 2016 . 2017 . 2018. 2019 FIGURE 16-WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR TRIANGLE ROCK MONITOR WELLS 1514
38 39
have risen during and following periods of significant flow in Los Banos Creek, and have fallen during non-streamflow periods.
Some of the deepest water levels in these monitor wells were during the drought of the early 1990's, and during 2006-09 and 2014-16. Average water-level declines in the monitor wells in the absence of streamflow in Los Banos Creek were about eight feet per year during May 2006-January 2009. Records for Los Banos Creek streamflow indicate that the longest period of no outflow from the Dam was between March 1987 and January 1993, or almost six years.
During the more recent drought, water levels in most of these shallow monitor wells were dry for several years, prior to early 2017. However, when there was flow in Los Banos Creek during 2017, the water levels in those wells rose significantly.
Nested monitor well Tl0S/Rl0E-32L is located near the DMC and Los Banos Creek. Figure 17 shows water-level hydrographs for two of the monitor wells at this site (32L5 and L6) that are perforated above the Corcoran Clay. The shallowest spring water levels for the upper aquifer at this site have normally ranged from about 48 to 52 feet. The deepest spring water levels have normally ranged from about 65 to 70 feet. In Spring 2017 depth to water in Well 32L6 was about 37 feet, the shallowest of record. Depth to water in Well 32L5 was 64 feet in Spring 2017, 1515
35 40 45
50 55
60 65
i='
w 70 w
0::::
w 75
s 80
0 II 85 I-
(L
w
0 90
95 100 105 110
115 I
2010 2011
-o-T1 0S/R1 0E-32L5
-+-T1 0S/R1 0E-32L6
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
FIGURE 17 - WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR OBSERVATION
WELLS NEAR LOS BANOS CREEK AND THE DMC
2018 2019
.i:,.
0 1516
41 near the shallowest of record. These shallow levels were during streamflow in the creek.
Lower Aquifer
One of the DMC monitor wells (T10S/R10E-32L4) is perforated only below the Corcoran Clay. Water levels in this well are much deeper than those in Wells 32L5 and L6, and have ranged from about 129 feet deep in Summer 2011 to 175 feet in July 2015. Water levels in this well are influenced by streamflow in the creek and by pumpage. There has been only limited pumpage below the Corcoran Clay in the immediate area. The nearest area where there is extensive lower aquifer pumpage is in the area northeast and east of the City.
SOURCES OF RECHARGE
The primary sources of recharge to groundwater in the Los Banos study area are deep percolation of irrigation return flow in areas irrigated with canal water, canal seepage, seepage of streamflow from Los Banos Creek, intentional recharge ponds, and seepage of water from wetlands supplied by DMC water (Figure 18).
Los Banos Creek Seepage
Historical streamflow records for the outflow from Los Banos Dam are provided in Appendix B. The annual flows since 1965 1517
8 4 I \ \ 3
~ /1//FM~ - >--. I ~
17 , .. _ : .. ·" ··~~ ·"
I
--i
..
16 ... ••· ·1, .. ,,,. ···-··· ~ ##
21 2·~ 2 '• ., ,,_ ... --.
28 27
N W+E 34
s
T.10 S
T.11 S
EXPLANATION:
CJ Los Banos Study Area
Major Canals
-- Stream Seepage
Intentional Recharge Sites
Irrigated Rural Lands
I
I
2 I t 11 tw:a_ ~ L ~tpc1 I I ~ r--1 1~1 -
I U.L~ .r4
~l _, I f~ ..1.r ~ · '5't' ua ,
12 ~ ,
l. Ou,
1-"-_., ,i;f~ : G~
11 - ", , 11
20 26
35 32
s
ups
4 9
16 2 .. ~
,()"-
33 I
4 3
10 15
22 2,
~/G~
(4, 'r<I~~
~~ T
3 2 ..
.. 1 -
J \ ~ ""? ~· + I~+: :l T Ii~ . t=$&~ 1 I ~: ~ ~ ~;t0a
I uG ..
.. ....•. , .. . ,,,; ""
-~ # .... .. .
~,. .... I
..
- -
7 18
17 !T ■■iiii~-=;:;:;::::=-- Miles: I
0 1 2
5 4 3 ~ 2
8 9 10 11
15 17 16 15 14
FIGURE 18 - POTENTIAL LOS BANOS GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AREAS 42 1518
43 have ranged from less than two acre-feet to about 62, 700 acre-feet in 1998. The average annual outflow from 1965-2016 was about 8,450 acre-feet per year. In early March 2010, the DWR released 200 cfs of water from the Dam. The CCID measured creek flow at two locations.
At the Pioneer Road crossing, the flow was 156 cfs, indicating a seepage loss of about 44 cfs, or about 87 acre-feet per day, in the reach between the Dam and Pioneer Road. M9asurements indicated another 6 cfs of seepage between Pioneer Road and the Main Canal. The creek flow at Highway 152 was 126 cfs, indicating a seepage loss of about 25 cfs, or 50 acre-feet per day, between Pioneer Road and Highway 152.
The CCID conducted an evaluation in August 2017, when about 40 cfs was released. Based on this information, the CCID has re-evaluated the seepage from Los Banos Creek within the Los Banos study boundary for 2003-17. The annual seepage ranged from none in 2007, 2009, and 2011-15 to 4,800 acre-feet in 2017.
The seepage averaged 1,500 acre-feet per year during 2003-17.
Deep Percolation and Canal Seepage
The CCID determined that from 2003-16, an average of 48,500 acre-feet of water was delivered to the study area by the CCID and SLWD. The estimated crop consumptive use during this period averaged 29,600 acre-feet per year. The difference, or 28,900 acre-feet per year, is deep percolation to the groundwater. The 1519
44 CCID estimated canal seepage as 0.68 cfs per mile during an average canal run of 330 days. Canal seepage is discussed in more detail later under the water budget section of this report.
Seepage from wetlands in the GSA varies significantly depending on the soil type, and has been estimated to average about 0.5 acre-foot per year (Swanson, verbal communication, 2019).
Groundwater Inflow
Water-level elevation contour maps for the upper aquifer indicate that there has been groundwater inflow into the study area from the south and from the west, particularly in the area north of Los Banos Creek.
In Spring 2017, northeasterly groundwater inflow was occurring along the entire length of the study area at a location near the DMC, where the water-level elevation was about 115 feet above mean sea level.
The average water-level slope along this nine-mile long segment was about seven feet per mile. Specific capacities have previously been mapped in the Los Banos area for the SJRECWA service area. Recent specific capacities for City upper aquifer wells averaged about 43 gpm per foot. Using a conversion factor of 1,500, the estimated average transmissivity in the City of Los Banos is about 65,000 gpd per foot. Transmissivities have been determined for aquifer tests in five upper aquifer sites within 1520
the area, and at two pits along Los Banos Creek. Values ranged from 35,000 to 168,000 gpd per foot. Most values ranged from about 56,000 to 70,000 gpd per foot.
45 Using an average transmissivity of 65,000 gpd per foot along the nine-mile segment, the annual lateral groundwater inflow was about 4,600 acre-feet per year. Another calculation was made for the groundwater inflow into the City of Los Banos. The average water-level slope was about seven feet per mile along a segment of flow of five and a half miles. The groundwater inflow from upgradient areas was about 2,800 acre-feet per year.
SOURCES OF DISCHARGE
The primary sources of groundwater discharge are well pumpage and groundwater outflow. Figure 19 shows the potential groundwater discharge area.
Pumpage
Pumpage in the area is from City wells, CCID wells, private irrigation wells, and other wells. The City of Los Banos provided records of City pumpage. As part of this evaluation, the CCID determined pumpage from CCID wells and private landowner wells in the study area. In addition, they estimated well pumpage in the Los Banos Creek subarea. Historical pumpage records are provided in Appendix C.
City Wells
Table 3 provides pumpage from the City of Los Banos wells for 1521
46 A I I \ II I I A ~ ~:: 1 \~ ;ffi' I
33 T~t ~ ¾ ..
3 ~
, 1-'.'1. , 11 2 I ,, ~ ll.. I I 5 [ fl .;-j I ~ [ , A 1 , - 1 . - 1 ■ 11V ,.,..,.,...,,n, , 1 , I 2 A
: J 7 I . ' . • "\¢i 11 "I ~ I : \[ 'Z_ I I ... I "" 10 L A
17 1 16 1 " ""-1!) \ 1 ~ 1 ~ J-ri ·~ 1 1 17 .. / ( 16 il llUi6- 11, r - 14 ).L;:J~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 1
111~ -~- \ 1 i7 , -~ 15 14 • _i_ i~ \ ,~ ~= l ~ 11 I I A 21 ,._ '~ 22 *~~ '\.. ~ I \. J4\,_ I ~
'
20 N W+E 128
s 27 I 26
EXPLANATION: I I '\." .. ,,, '' "' i rt1 A A
A
A Supply Wells
~ \ ~ K ·f 33 r { - - v I "I I ~ lh §1
A A
0 Drainage Wells '
D Los Banos Study Area
i
:i
..
- Tile Lined Fields
1 !
: ............. , --,-,--
D Merced County with SJREC
□ Central D-M (SLWD) GSA
l ... * .. ~,a __ l 7 I'\ 8 "J. 9
Los Banos GSA T I ~ .._ ,_ ~ '-r-7S I '9 I 'i!IO I 11
Merced County with GWD ·---- ---
~ 18
I 17'\ I \ f A
Grasslands GSA
~p
A
.415 I A 14
D SJREC GSA BOUNDARY 0.5 1 2 3 -~ I \ ..._ ... ,u l--il 1~ I "115 I 14 A
Miles,-
FIGURE 19 - POTENTIAL LOS BANOS GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE AREAS 1522
TABLE 3-ANNUAL PUMPAGE FROM CITY OF
LOS BANOS WELLS (1993-2016)
Year Pumpage (Acre-Feet) --1993 5,073
1994 5,631
1995 5,307
1996 5,185
1997 6,045
1998 5,287
1999 5,343
2000 4,688
2001 5,461
2002 6,923
2003 6,434
2004 6,914
2005 7,152
2006 7,465
2007 9,113
2008 8,876
2009 8,258
2010 7,712
2011 7,776
2012 8,312
2013 8,486
2014 7,894
2015 6,657
2016 6,121
Average 6,715
47 1523
48 1993-2016. Annual pumping gradually increased from about 5,100 acre feet in 1993 to about 9,100 acre-feet in 2007. The pumpage then decreased and was lower in 2010-11 and significantly lower during 2015-16, due to water conservation measures implemented during the recent drought. The average pumpage from City wells during 1993-2016 was about 6,700 acre-feet per year.
CCID Wells
Table 4 provides pumpage from CCID wells in the area for 1993-2016. The average pumpage of these wells was about 2,600 acre-feet per year. Of this, an average of 670 acre-feet per year was from wells inside the UGB.
Private Wells
Table 5 shows pumpage from private wells in the area for 1993-2016. An average of about 11,300 acre-feet per year was pumped from these wells. Of this amount, about 6,000 acre-feet per year were pumped from wells inside the UGB. An average of 4,900 acre-feet per year was pumped from private wells in the Los Banos Creek subarea, excluding water pumped for transfer, during 2007-16.
Records indicate that punpage from private wells into the DMC/San Luis Canal for transfer of water out of the area ranged from about 1,300 to 5,200 acre-feet per year during 2007-16. The average pumpage 1524
49 TABLE 4-ANNUAL PUMPAGE FROM CCID WELLS
IN GSA (1993-2016)
PumEag:e (Acre-Feet)
Year Inside UGB Outside UGB Total
1993 0 0 0
1994 0 1,008 1,008
1995 0 0 0
1996 0 841 841
1997 706 1,069 1,775
1998 0 0 0
1999 650 1,436 2,086
2000 859 2,112 2,971
2001 918 2,426 3,344
2002 637 2,396 3,033
2003 1,016 2,272 3,288
2004 1,247 2,590 3,437
2005 329 1,086 1,415
2006 21 0 21
2007 1,463 5,326 6,789
2008 922 3,720 4,642
2009 1,291 2,394 3,685
2010 589 685 1,274
2011 435 1,565 2,000
2012 1,490 4,851 6,341
2013 1,517 4,529 6,046
2014 1,093 3,245 4,338
2015 870 3,143 4,013
2016 130 174 304
Average 674 2,610
1525
50 TABLE 5-ANNUAL PUMPAGE FROM PRIVATE WELLS
IN STUDY AREA (1993-2016)
Pum12ag:e (Acre-Feet)
Year Inside UGB Outside UGB Total
1993 12,818 14,201 14,812
1994 15,279 16,356 22,230
1995 11,081 11,967 16,782
1996 4,657 7,733 9,060
1997 4,289 9,479 8,586
1998 2,982 3,424 4,391
1999 6,923 8,317 8,660
2000 6,183 7,168 8,426
2001 6,923 8,317 12,031
2002 2,330 4,607 5,682
2003 5,595 8,439 11,872
2004 5,143 9,280 11,133
2005 4,104 6,006 8,882
2006 4,127 6,170 7,031
2007 4,221 10,142 9,970
2008 3,064 11,803 10,999
2009 6,460 5,127 14,887
2010 6,916 4,509 14,240
2011 6,000 5,125 14,017
2012 6,058 2,966 12,722
2013 2,161 6,444 9,251
2014 5,971 4,777 14,572
2015 6,852 4,012 13,585
2016 2,789 844 6,350
Average 5,955 11,257
1526
51 was about 2,900 acre-feet per year during this period. The maximum annual pumpage from these wells during this period was in 2008. Pumpage from private wells in the CCID for transfer of water out of the area ranged from Oto 1,654 acre-feet per year during 2000-16. The average pumpage from these wells was 990 acre-feet per year. Since 2010, transfers were curtailed when triggers for water levels were exceeded and new monitoring requirements were added to the Warren Act contract.
Groundwater Outflow
The Spring 2009 water-level elevation map shows groundwater outflow from the study area along the north boundary, between Vol ta Road and Ortigalita Road. The width of flow was about 1.5 miles and the average water-level slope was about 12 feet per mile.
Using a transmissivity of about 65,000 gpd per foot, an outflow of about 1,300 acre-feet per year was calculated. The Spring 2017 water-level elevation map shows no lateral groundwater outflow from the study area. The average groundwater outflow for these two years was thus about 700 acre-feet per year (rounded).
AQUIFER CHARACTERISTICS
Pump Tests
Table 6 summarizes short-term pump test data for City wells in March 2015. Pumping rates ranged from about 490 to 2,140 gpm. The highest pumping rates were for Wells No. 5, 7, 10, 13, 1527
Well No.
1 2
3 5
6 7
9 10 11
12 13 14
15 TABLE 6-PUMP TEST DATA FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS
Date
Tested
3/3/15 3/3/15
3/3/15 3/2/15
3/2/15
3/2/15
3/2/15
3/2/15 3/2/15 3/2/15 3/2/15
3/2/15
3/2/15
Pumping Rate
(2Em)
852 887
660
1,243
490
1,430
910
2,140
945
820
1,500 1,300
911
Static Level
(feet)*
35 38 36
38 39
43 47
Pumping Level
(feet)
56 63 65 69
168
60 129
88 171
95 101 128
Drawdown
(feet)
21 25 29
31 21
45 Approximate
Specific capacity
(2Em/f'I:)
41 35
23 40
68 48
* Static levels are for five or ten minutes of recovery after pumping stopped, and do not represent true static levels. Because of this, the actual values for specific capacity would be smaller, particularly for wells with large drawdowns. u,
rv
1528
53 and 14. Approximate specific capacities ranged from 23 to 68 gpm per foot. Short-term water-level recovery was measured, and opposed to true static levels (i.e., prior to
pumping). True specific capacities are expected to be significantly greater for wells with pumping levels exceeding about 70 feet.
Table 7 summarizes short-term pump tests for CCID wells in 2015-16. Pumping rates ranged from about 1,147 to 1,909 gpm.
Specific capacities ranged from about 22 to 161 gpm per foot.
The highest specific capacity was for Well No. 8A, which is located near Los Banos Creek and the Outside Canal.
Aquifer Tests
During 1996-98, the CCID conducted aquifer tests on four wells in the study area. Locations of the tested wells are shown on Figure 1. In November 1996, a 24-hour constant discharge test was conducted on CCID Well No. 8-A. This well is located near Los Banos Creek and Pioneer Road, and is perforated from 75 to 220 feet in depth. The static level prior to pumping was 35.5 feet. The average pumping rate was 2,415 gpm. The drawdown at the end of pumping was 25.5 feet, and the specific capacity was 94.7 feet. Corrected recovery measurements indicated a transmissivity of 168,000 gpd per foot. 1529
TABLE 7-PUMP TEST DATA FOR CCID WELLS
Approximate
Date Pl.mping Rate Static I.evel Pl.mping Level Drawdown Specific capacity Well No. Tested (S,Em) (feet)* (feet) (feet) (gpm/ft)
8-A 10/15/16 1,856 61.9 73.4 11.5 161.4
48-A 10/15/16 1,862 31.5 116.8 85.3 21.8
56 8/12/15 1,147 143.3 180 36.7 31.3
62 6/15/15 1,909 50.0 80.0 30.0 63.6
Records from CCID. Well No. 56 taps strata only below the Corcoran Clay. The other three wells tap strata only above the Corcoran Clay.
V,
.i::.
1530
55 As part of the 1998 evaluation, 24-hour aquifer tests were conducted on three other wells by the CCID in April 1998. CCID Well No. 48-A is located west of Lovers Lane or Badger Flat Road and adjacent to the Main Canal and Los Banos Creek, northwest of the City. The well is perforated from 50 to 80 feet and 100 to 180 feet in depth. The static water level prior to pumping was
11.0 feet. The average pumping rate was 1,960 gpm. The drawdown at the end of pumping was 77.0 feet, and the specific capacity was 25.5 feet. Corrected recovery measurements indicated a transmissivity of 56,000 gpd per foot.
Private Well No. 549 (Tl0S/RllE-18R), located east of the City and north of State Highway 152, is perforated from 166 to 256 feet in depth. The static level prior to pumping was 11.8 feet below the measuring point. The average pumping rate was 1,450 gpm. The drawdown at the end of pumping was 74.9 feet, and the specific capacity was 19.3 gpm per foot. Corrected recovery measurements indicate a transmissivity of 70,000 gpd per foot.
Private well No. 76 (T10S/R10E-35L) is located near the south boundary of the study area and is perforated from 86 to 306 feet in depth. The static level prior to pumping was 8.6 feet below the measuring point. The average pumping rate was 1,570 gpm. 1531
The drawdown at the end of pumping was 74.2 feet and the specific capacity was 22 gpm per foot. Uncorrected recovery measurements indicated a transmissivity of 35,000 gpd per foot. 56 In cooperation with CCID staff, a 24-hour constant discharge test was conducted on Hostetler Well No. 950 during May 20-21, 2009. According to the completion report, this well is screened in the following depth intervals:
140 to 164 feet
181 to 226 feet
264 to 310 feet
416 to 446 feet.
The Corcoran Clay was reportedly encountered between 312 and 425 feet in depth at this well. The static level in the pumped well was 61.7 feet prior to pumping. The average pumping rate was 1,315 gpm. The pumping level at the end of pumping was 140.6 feet and the specific capacity was 17 gpm per foot. Another comparably perforated well was used as an observation well for the test. The completion report for Hostetler Well No. 964 indicates that it is screened in the following depth intervals:
101 to 129 feet
140 to 154 feet
161 to 176 feet
194 to 209 feet
224 to 236 feet
431 to 453 feet.
The well is located 1,700 feet from Well No. 950. The best value of transmissivity from the drawdown measurements for this test was for Well No. 964. The static level in Well No. 964 prior to pumping of Well No. 950 was 46.2 feet. By the end of the pumping period, depth to water in this well was 49.2 feet, and the drawdown 1532
57 was 3.0 feet. A transmissivity of 143,000 gpd per foot was indicated by these measurements.
The best value for transmissivity from the recovery measurements for this test was also for Well No. 964. After about six hours of recovery, depth to water was 48.3 feet, or about two feet below the static level prior to pumping. A transmissivity of 177,000 gpd per foot was indicated by recovery measurements for this well.
A recovery test was conducted on Hostetler Well No. 121 on May 28, 2009. A completion report is not available for Well No. 121, but the reported depth is 217 feet. The well had been pumping at an average rate of about 1,300 gpm for a prolonged period before pumping was stopped for this test. The pumping level was 86.9 feet prior to the cessation of pumping, and the specific capacity was 25 gpm per foot. The water level fully recovered to a static level of 36.0 feet within 20 minutes after pumping stopped. Recovery measurements indicate a transmissivity of 37,000 gpd per foot, in good agreement with the specific capacity value. Well No. 364 was used as an observation well for the test. The water level in Well No. 364 rose from 47.1 feet before pumping of Well No. 121 stopped to 43.3 feet after about six and three-fourths hours of recovery. A transmissivity of 56,000 gpd per foot was indicated by the recovery measurements 1533
for this well.
In summary, for the two Hostetler Well tests, the transmissivity of strata above the Corcoran Clay (above 300 feet in depth) tapped by these wells was 114,000 gpd per foot. The transmissivity of deposits above a depth of 220 feet was indicated to be about 56,000 gpd per foot. 58 Aquifer tests were done in late August 2017 on two small pits in the area bounded by Los Banos Creek on the northwest, the DMC on the southwest, and South Creek Road on the east. Each pit was dug through a local clay layer, into about 10 to 20 feet of saturated coarse-grained deposits of the upper aquifer. Each pit was dewatered, then the water level allowed to recover. For the East Pit, the average pumping rate was about 595 gpm. For the West Pit, the average pumping rate was 885 gpm.
The static level prior to pumping the East Pit was 41.5 feet deep and the specific capacity was 45.8 gpm per foot. Uncorrected recovery measurements for the Eat Pit indicated a transmissivity of 105,000 gpd per foot. For the West Pit, the static level prior to pumping was 34.8 feet deep, and the specific capacity was 36.5 per foot. Uncorrected recovery measurements for the West Pit indicated a transmissivity of 106,000 gpd per foot.
Table 8 summarizes the aquifer test results for wells and pits in the study area. Transmissivities ranged from 35,000 to 1534
Date of
Well Test
CCID No. 8-A 11/96
CCID No. 48 04/98
Well No. 549 04/98 Well No. 76 04/98 Well No. 950 05/09 Well No. 121 05/09
East Pit near
Creek and DMC 08/17
West Pit near
Creek and DMC 08/17
TABLE 8-SUMMARY OF AQUIFER TEST RESULTS
Pumping Drawdown Specific Transmissivity
Rate (gpm) (feet) CaEacit~ (gpm/ft) (gpd Eer foot)
2,415 25.5 94.7 168,000
1,960 77.0 25.5 56,000
1,450 74.9 19.3 70,000 1,570 74.2 22 35,000 1,315 78.9 17 177,000 1,300 50.9 25 37,000
595 12.4 48.0 105,000
885 24.2 36.5 106,000
Perf. Int.
(feet)
75-220
50-180
166-256
86-306
140-310
416-446
T.D. 217
N.A.
N.A.
U1
\0
1535
60 177,000 gpd per foot, and were generally higher for deeper wells and for wells tapping stream channel deposits. Transmissivity values in the range of 70,000 to 168,000 gpd per foot appear to be representative of the entire upper aquifer in the area.
LAND SUBSIDENCE
Subsidence was measured extensively in the area south of the Los Banos study area 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-F) ranged from one to 12 feet in the part of the area that was south of Los Banos in Fresno County.
From 1972 until the early 2000's, much less information was available on land subsidence than for the previous decades.
This was because once water from the 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 some canals and other features. The Delta-Mendota and Outside Canals required extensive repairs due to subsidence in 1974. Surveys have indicated a subsidence ranging from 1.76 to 2.75 feet along the Outside Canal between 1991 and 2017. Subsidence along the Main Canal in 1536
61 the study area ranged from 0.31 to 0.70 foot from 2002 to 2017.
Subsidence along the DMC in the study area ranged from about 0.8 to 1.5 feet during 1984 to 2016.
Highway 152 Transect
Periodic surveys of land surface elevations were done along Highway 152 between I-5 and Highway 99. Figure 20 shows land surface subsidence along this section between 1972 and 2017.
The maximum subsidence (about nine feet) occurred near the Eastside Bypass. In the area west of Highway 33, most of the subsidence apparently occurred after 1988. Subsidence along Highway 152 in the Los Banos study area ranged from about 0.5 to 1.0 foot during 1998 to 2017, and generally increased to the east.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Groundwater quality in the Los Banos area was discussed in some detail by KOSA (2010). The primary chemical constituents of concern in terms of drinking water quality in the groundwater at and near Los Banos were hexavalent chromium, TDS, sulfate, uranium (alpha activity), and selenium. Although nitrate concentrations in strata tapped by City wells have been below the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 45 mg/1, concentrations in water from four of these wells were elevated (exceeding 38 mg/1) in 2017.
1537
I..
..Y ex::
Q.)
Q.) V)
ro tl.O I.. C u C ro ro ro ......:.::: C u V) C Lf) 0.. ro 0 ro ~V) u C u ro <""i > 0 >~ co C > 0 5 Q.) I..
I~ I..
<(
0 -_.-11 - 11 .L I I .. I
-1
-2
-3
g -4
QJ
u
C
QJ
"O
·;;;
-§ -5 VI
-6
-7
-8
-9
-10
Source:
0 ~ Subsidence 1988-2004
- Subsidence 2008-2011
....-subsid ence 2011-2017
..,._Subsidence 1972-2017
X DMC at Hwy 152 Subsidence 2014-2016
+ Outside Canal at Hwy 152 Subsidence 1996-2017
• Los Banos Creek Subsidence 2013-2017
• Main Cana l at Hwy 152 Subsidence 2002-2017
■ SLCC Temple/Santa Rita at Hwy 152 Subsidence 2012-2017 ♦
*Chart does not refl ect subsidence that occured from 2004 to 2008. *The data used was compiled by Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group an Reclamation, RBF, SLDMWA, CCID and SLCC.
5 10 15
..c "'Cl ro ex:: ..c tl.O _ ~ C ro u ::::i ro ·- QJ :t:'. OcC:X::._ ro "'Cl C u C ro - OVl ro C QJ ro u 0.. u ·- > 0 CQJ E ro ro ::::i ·- I.. V) :t:'. :t:'. Q.) O" c:x::
"'Cl cYl ro >
Q.) ~ c:x::c:x::~ ~ 0 I.. (Y) ::::,<C Q.) 0... U roro~-,c C >~E +-' +-' V) C I.. ucc~CQJ ::::i 5 ro ro ro -l ro ro ·- ro '- V) I- I vio...
V) ~ 0::: V) LL
I I I I I I ~I I
20 25 30
Distance from San Luis Dam to Highway 99 (miles)
Elevation change computed from report geodetic surveys along Highway 152 from Caltrans, edtied by Bureau of Reclamation.
V) ro V) C ro
Cl. ro
u >
co ro
Q.)
"'Cl O') ..c "<j- u Lf) V)
~-c,5-0 +-'
V) 5 rooro ro o..c 0 lJ.J I c:r:::u ex::
I I I I I
35 FIGURE 20- HISTO.RIC:,AL LAND SUBSIDENCE
ALONG HIGHWAY 152 TRANSECT
62 ro ..c C
tl.O ro N
o::::i u (Y) ro ........_
(Y) -0..c rl O') 00 rl 0
-avi Q.) N Co.o
" en
-a ..c > ~::::i rl ro ro..c +-'
0 0 V) Q.) 5
ex:: O:::<( co I
I 1 1 I I
40 45 50
1538
63 Once a MCL was developed for hexavalent chromium, this made hexavalent chromium potentially the most important chemical constituent in terms of the chemical quality of water from City wells. However, enforcement of this MCL is temporarily on hold due to litigation. Appendix D contains the results of recent chemical analyses of water from City wells.
Inorganic Chemical Constituents
Table 9 shows the results of chemical analyses for water samples collected from City wells in July 2017. Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations ranged from 380 to 1,100 mg/1. The lowest TDS concentrations (400 mg/1 or less) were in water from Wells No. 6, 11, and 12. These wells are in the west part of the City. In contrast, the highest TDS concentrations (exceeding 850 mg/1) were in water from Wells No. 5, 7, 10, and 14.
The first three of these wells are all located in the east part of the City, and Well No. 14 is the only active City well tapping strata below the Corcoran Clay.
Nitrate concentrations in water from the City wells ranged from 10 to 35 mg/1, below the MCL of 45 mg/1, in July 2017. The highest nitrate concentrations (31 mg/1 or greater) were in water from Wells No. 5, 7, and 10. These three wells are in the east part of the City, have casings perforated above a depth of 130 feet, and have annular seals of about 60 feet deep or less. 1539
TABLE 9-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluoride
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Iron
Manganese
Arsenic (ppb)
Hexavalent Chromium (ppb)
Selenium (ppb)
Alpha Activity (pc/1)
Date
No. 1
54 27
68 3
232
73 97
18 0.2
7.9 820
480
<0.1 <0.02
6.1 27
0.62 <3.0
7/12/17
No. 2
50 26
66 3
220
64 86
18 0.2
8.0 770
440
<O.l <0.02
5.3 30
0.87 <3.0
7/12/17
No. 3
66 34
83 3
256
91 120
28 0.2
7.9 970
580
<0.1
<0.02
4.7 28
0.77 <3.0
7/12/17
No. 5
120
67 160
3 403
240 230
35 0.2
8.0 1,800
1,100
<0.1 <0.02
5.9 40
0.87 9.1
7/12/17
No. 6
47 23
47 2
146
50 100
15 0.2
8.1 680
380
<0.1 <0.02
5.7 26
0.69 <3.0
7/12/17
Continued:
0\
,i:,,.
1540
TABLE 9-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS (Continued: )
Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluoride
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C)
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C)
Iron
Manganese
Arsenic (ppb)
Hexavalent Chromium (ppb)
Selenium (ppb)
Alpha Activity (pc/1)
Date
No. 7
110
63 160
3 415
240
220
33 0.2
8.0 1,700 1,100
<0.1 <0.02
5.3 38
<0.4
12.6 7/12/17
No. 9
48 27
63 3
207
78 84
10 0.2
8.0 760
440
<0.1 <0.02
7.2 32
3.2 3.5
7/12/17
No. 10
95 53
120
3 329
190 170
31 0.2
8.0 1,400
860
<0.1 <0.02
5.0 31
0.70 10.6
7/12/17
No. 11
49 23
45 2
195
47 84
18 0.2
8.1 690
400
<0.1
<0.02
3.8 21
1. 95
3.0 7/12/17
Continued:
m
U1
1541
TABLE 9-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CITY OF LOS BANOS WELLS (Continued: }
Constituent (mg/1)
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Potassium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Fluoride
pH
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C}
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C}
Iron
Manganese
Arsenic (ppb}
Hexavalent Chromium (ppb}
Selenium (ppb}
Alpha Activity (pc/1)
Date
No. 12
50 22
47 2
183
51 75
16 0.2
8.1 660
380
<0.1
<0.02
4.3 22
0.49 <3.0
7/12/17
No. 13
92 49
98 3
342
140 170
26 0.2
8.0 1,300
780
<0.1 <0.02
4.9 34
4.0 7/12/17
No. 14
96 54
190
3 366
310
190
24 0.2
8.0 1,700
1,100
<0.1 <0.02
6.0 38
0.55 8.6
7/12/17
No. 15
53 30
47 2
183
72 96
21 0.1
8.1 770
480
<0.1 <0.02
7.8 20
2.46 <3.0
7/12/17
Records from City of Los Banos. Laboratory analyses by BSK Associates of Fresno.
Hexavalent chromium concentrations are recent average values from Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group. m
m
1542
The lowest nitrate concentrations (16 mg/1 or less) were in water from Wells No. 6, 9, and 12. The first two of these wells are in the north part of the City, and Wells No. 6 and 9 have perforations only below a depth of 180 feet.
67 Chloride concentrations in water from City wells ranged from 75 to 230 mg/1, below the recommended MCL of 250 mg/1. The highest chloride concentrations (170 mg/1 or greater) were in water from Wells No. 5, 7, 10, 13, and 14. These were the same wells with the highest TDS concentrations. The lowest chloride concentrations (less than 90 mg/1) were in water from Wells No. 2, 9, 11, and 12. These wells also produced water with relatively low TDS concentrations. Sulfate concentrations in water from City wells ranged from 47 to 310 mg/1. The highest sulfate concentration (190 mg/1 or more) were in water from Wells No. 5, 7, 10, and 14. These wells also had high chloride concentrations.
Water from Well No. 14 had a sulfate concentration exceeding the recommended MCL of 250 mg/1. The lowest sulfate concentrations (less than 70 mg/1) were in water from Wells No. 2, 11, and 12.
These wells also had relatively low chloride concentrations.
Iron and manganese concentrations in water from all of the wells were less than 0.1 mg/1 and 0.02 mg/1, below the respective recommended MCLs of 0.3 mg/1 and 0.05 mg/1. Well No. 15 had an arsenic concentration of 12 ppb, exceeding the MCL, and 1543
68 this well has been on standby. Water from two other active City wells (No. 5 and 9) had arsenic concentrations between 9.3 and
9.5 ppb, just below the MCL. Arsenic concentrations in water from the remaining active City wells in 2017 ranged from about 6 to 8 ppb. Hexavalent chromium concentrations in water from City wells ranged from 21 to 40 mg/1, exceeding the new MCL of 10 ppb. The lowest hexavalent chromium concentrations were generally in the more westerly City wells, whereas higher concentrations were to the east and northwest (Wells No. 5, 7, and 14).
The City is exploring various options to address the hexavalent chromium issue.
Additional information on some inorganic constituents is available for water from CCID wells. Irrigation analyses are generally done on water samples collected from these wells annually. Table 10 provides the results of water samples collected from the four CCID wells in the study area in July 2017. TDS concentrations ranged from 560 to 1,200 mg/1. The highest TDS concentrations were in water from Wells No. 48-A and 56. The latter of these wells taps strata below the Corcoran Clay. Nitrate concentrations in water from these wells ranged from less than 1 to 30 mg/1, less than the MCL of 45 mg/1 for drinking water. Nitrate concentrations in water from the three upper aquifer wells ranged from 20 to 30 mg/1. The nitrate concentration 1544
TABLE 10-CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER FROM CCID WELLS
Constituent (mg/1) No. 8-A No. 48-A No. 56
Calcium 93 83 67
Magnesium 47 45 28
Sodium 69 99 139
Potassium 3 3 3
Bicarbonate 290 280 150
Sulfate 95 130 260
Chloride 120 150 130
Nitrate 25 30 <1
pH 7.7 7.8 8.1
Electrical Conductivity
(micromhos/cm@ 25°C) 1,100 1,200 1,200
Total Dissolved Solids
(@ 180°C) 670 770 740
Boron 0.47 0.81 1.7
Date 7/25/17 7/25/17 7/25/17
Analyses by BSK Analytical Laboratory.
No. 62
79 33
93 3
260
120 120
20 7.7
1,100
670
0.5 7/25/17
O'I
\0
1545
70 in water from Well No. 56 was undetectable. This well taps the lower aquifer. Boron concentrations ranged from 0.5 to 1.7 mg/1, and the highest concentration was in water from Well No.
56. The boron concentration in water from Well No. 56 was unsuitable for irrigation of most crops, except pistachios. Boron concentrations in water from the other three wells were near or exceeded the recommended MCL of 0.5 mg/1 for boron-sensitive crops. Water from the CCID wells is pumped into canals and blended before use for crop irrigation.
Radiological Constituents
Alpha activities in water from most City wells have been less than 7 picocuries per liter, below the MCL of 15 picocuries per liter. Associated uranium activities have been well below the MCL of 20 picocuries per liter. Alpha activities in July 2017 ranged from less than 3 to 12.6 picocuries per liter. The highest activities were in water from Wells No. 5, 7, and 10. All of these wells are in the east part of the City and have shallow perforations (tops range from 104 to 125 feet) in depth. In contrast, the lowest alpha activities in July 2017 (3 picocuries per liter or less) were in water from Wells No. 1, 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, and 15. This group of wells is in the west or central part of the City. The highest alpha and uranium activities thus appear 1546
to be in the shallower groundwater beneath the east part of the City.
Trace Organic Chemical Constituents
Results of historical analyses for trace organics in water from City wells were provided by the City. Concentrations of these constituents have usually been non-detectable, except for tetrachloroethylene (PCE) in water from City Well No. 13. De71 tectable concentrations of PCE have been consistently found in water from this well since 2001. The concentrations have ranged from 0.8 to 1.6 ppb, less than the MCL of 5.0 ppb. Well No. 13 is located west of Mercy Springs Road and north of Pacheco Boulevard. Trihalomethanes (disinfection by-products) have been found in water from most City wells at concentrations well below the respective MCLs. These low concentrations are likely due to well disinfection practices. Overall, representative concentrations of trace organic constituents in water from City wells have been well below the respective MCLs.
INTERCONNECTED SURFACE AND
GROUNDWATER SYSTEMS
There are no known locations in the Los Banos study area where the surface water and shallow groundwater are interconnected. That is, the shallowest water levels have been below the bottom of the adjacent stream channel or other water body. 1547
Along Los Banos Creek, this is documented by historical waterlevel measurements for shallow monitor wells.
KNOWN GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SITES
72 Figure 21 shows what are considered to possibly be significant groundwater contamination sites in the study area, all of which are all in the City vicinity. Most of the information was taken from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's GEOTRACKER website. Most of these sites involve petroleum, and no known impacts to City wells have resulted. In the Los Banos urban area, solvent related trace organics have been found in shallow groundwater at the former City landfill (dump), located near Mercy Springs and Del Rio Roads. Low concentrations of solvent related trace organics have also been found in shallow groundwater near City Well No. 13, from an unidentified source.
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS
The City includes the urban area and the WWTF and associated effluent use area. The sources of recharge to the groundwater in the City of Los Banos include urban storm runoff, canal seepage, and lateral groundwater inflow. The sources of groundwater discharge in the City include consumptive use. The water-level elevation maps for Spring 2009 and 2017 indicated no significant groundwater outflow. The difference between the recharge and 1548
\
\
... t1ES1~,P~i~r Ai11:··
V'6Fta
tz~
--1I
... , .•
"'·'~-,
'
~
.G>~
~i~r..1~\,,;wi'
'··
II
"'
~-
., :~~c.'¾.,
'"
i
;tZ
;Htril)',M:iillBi\~~:,
. ··~· ,',/.\' . ~•.
Ji
..
; .--------'Ti _,f•.e!!_t !Trent Pump Station~
:..---.....---'---···"""'.---- -
EXPLANATION
Cleanup Program Site
6. DTSC Cleanup Site
N
0 2,000 1
Scale (feet)
=~
·-~-
""' .'\.. ¾,
'--zi!i!
.e.-..., ... ·+1rr.~n~!e;B.'o~ l . -......=-
P,odu~1r1c .,. )J
H,:.½!'.1:~'!lic,rA~
\I'!
,
·
,..
.
·~·::-~~
·~ ;.,
!'l~ ~ A••~, -~ Hervy Mill\Jf',o\}"'
Old Los Banos Dump
I·
\ . "' en
,.,f; )g
\:>.
-,~. :::::-,,
-~
"'I Phillips Road Property!
._,
':,;,
''"" ), '
}
FIGURE 21- KNOWN GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION SITES -..J
w
1549
discharge is the change in groundwater storage. The period selected for the water budget is 2003-12, which comprises a near normal hydrologic base period, based on CCID water deliveries.
Recharge
74 Much of the Los Banos urban storm runoff is presently discharged to canals or channels. An estimated 200 acre-feet per year is percolated to the groundwater in the City. The lateral groundwater inflow was estimated based on the Spring 2009 and 2017 water-level elevation maps. There was a width of groundwater inflow into the City of about five and a half miles, and the average water-level slope was about seven-feet per mile.
Darcy's Law is Q = TIL, where
Q groundwater flow (gpd)
T transmissivity (gpd/ft)
I water-level slope (ft/mile)
L width of flow (miles)
Using a transmissivity of 65,000 gpd per foot, and the previously indicated water-level slope and width of inflow, there was an estimated lateral groundwater inflow into the City of 2,800 acre-feet per year. Most of this inflow came from seepage from the Main and Outside Canals, deep percolation beneath lands in 1550
the CCID irrigated with canal water, and from seepage from Los Banos Creek streamflow.
The reach of the Main Canal in the City is about three miles long. The average canal seepage estimated by the CCID is 0.68 cfs per mile during an average canal run of 330 days. This equals a canal seepage of about 1,300 acre-feet per year. Although this value is entered into the City water budget, the wa-. ter came from the CCID. The total recharge to groundwater in the City was thus about 4,300 acre feet per year.
Discharge
Groundwater discharge in the City is due to consumptive use 75 and groundwater outflow. The consumptive use in the City is due to evapotranspiration from outside water use, evaporation from the effluent ponds, and evapotranspiration of effluent by crops irrigated with effluent. The amount of effluent is estimated to be about half of the groundwater pumpage, or about 3,900 acrefeet per year for 2003-12. The outside water use was also about 3,900 acre-feet per year. Assuming an irrigation efficiency of 70 percent, this equals about 2,730 acre-feet per year of consumptive use from outside water use. An average of about 345 acres of pasture have been irrigated with effluent. Using a consumptive use of applied water of 3.3 acre-feet per acre per year from DWR Bulletin 113-3, this equals about 1,140 acre-feet 1551
76 per year. The nearest pan evaporation records were used to estimate evaporation from the effluent ponds. These records indicate a pan evaporation of 65 inches per year. Using an average wetted effluent pond area of 200 acres and a pan factor of 0.8, and deducting the average annual rainfall of 10 inches, yields a net annual evaporation of effluent from the ponds of 580 acrefeet per year.
The total consumptive use for the City was thus 2,730 plus 1,140 plus 580, or about 4,450 acre-feet per year.
Lateral groundwater outflow from the City, based on the water-level elevation and direction of groundwater flow in Spring 2009 and Spring 2017, was indicted to be insignificant. Table 11 shows the water budget components for the City of Los Banos part of the study area.
Change in Storage
The difference between the recharge and discharge is about -150 acre-feet per year. Water-level records for the City wells were reviewed to determine the average water-level change between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013. The average water-level decline was about 0.55 foot per year. Using a specific yield of 15 percent and an area of 5,900 acres, this yields a change in storage of about 490 acre-feet per year. The average of the two values for change in storage, or about 300 acre-feet per year 1552
TABLE 11-GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR
CITY OF LOS BANOS (2003-12)
RECHARGE
Canal Seepage
Groundwater Inflow
Urban Storm Runoff
Subtotal:
DISCHARGE
Outside Water Consumption
Crop Consumptive Use of Effluent
Pond Evaporation of Effluent
Subtotal:
DIFFERENCE
CALCULATED CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE
GROUNDWATER OVERDRAFT
Acre-feet per Year
1,300
2,800
200
4,300
2,730
1,140
580
4,450
-150
-490
300
77 Note: If the CCID contribution to recharge is excluded, the total recharge would be 700 acre-feet per year and the City water deficit would be 3,750 acre-feet per year.
1553
78 (rounded), is indicated to be the groundwater overdraft beneath the City for 2003-13.
Summary
Assuming that about 500 acre-feet per year of the groundwater inflow to the City was from Los Banos Creek streamflow, the total groundwater replenishment within the City was about 700 acre-feet per year, compared to a total consumptive use of about 4,450 acre-feet per year. This leaves a net deficit of about 3,750 acre-feet per year for 2003-12.
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR CCID AND
SLWD PART OF STUDY AREA
Recharge
Sources of recharge to the groundwater in the CCID part of the study area for 2003-12 included deep percolation from lands irrigated with CCID water, canal seepage, streamflow seepage, and groundwater inflow. Sources of recharge to the groundwater in the SLWD part of the study area included deep percolation from lands irrigated with Aqueduct or DMC water and streamflow seepage.
The average delivered canal water for 18,700 acres in the CCID and SLWD was 51,000 acre-feet per year from 2003-12. The 1554
evapotranspiration of applied water averaged 37,500 acre-feet per year for 2003-12. The difference between the delivered water and evapotranspiration was 13,500 acre-feet per year, which was the deep percolation for this period.
79 There are 7.9 miles of the Main Canal and 7.1 miles of the Outside Canal in the CCID part of the study area, or a total of
15.0 miles. Using an average canal seepage of 0.68 cfs per mile from the CCID, the seepage was 10.2 cfs or 20.19 acre-feet per day canal run. This equals a canal seepage of 6,650 acre-feet over a 330-day canal run. Seepage from other canals in the area is considered insignificant.
The estimated average seepage from Los Banos Creek in the CCID, and SLWD is estimated to be about 1,500 acre-feet per year.
Almost all of the groundwater inflow into the CCID and SLWD part of the study area as of 2017 was derived from Los Banos Creek seepage and seepage from the Outside Canal, which have already been accounted for. However, an average of about 500 acre-feet of other groundwater inflow was estimated.
The total recharge to the groundwater in the CCID and SLWD part of the study area thus averaged about 21,650 acre-feet per year for 2003-12.
Discharge
The discharge from the groundwater in the CCID and SLWD part 1555
80 of the study area is from pumpage of CCID and private wells and groundwater outflow. Pumpage from CCID wells was 2,600 acrefeet per year and from private wells was 11,300 acre-feet per year, or a total of 13,900 acre-feet per year in the area.
Groundwater outflow from the CCID to the northeast occurred along a 7.1 mile long segment. Using the Spring 2017 waterlevel elevation map, the average water-level slope was about eight feet per mile. The average transmissivity along and near the Outside canal is about 140,000 gpd per foot. Using Darcy's Law, the lateral groundwater outflow was about 8,900 acre-feet per year. There is additional groundwater outflow from the study area upper aquifer downward through the Corcoran Clay. Based on a previous evaluation for the SJRECWA (KOSA 1989), the downward flow in the GSA would be about 1,600 acre-feet per year. The total groundwater discharge would be about 24,400 acre-feet per year. The difference between the recharge and discharge was thus -2,750 acre-feet per year. Table 12 shows water-level budget values for the CCID and SLWD part of the study area.
Change in Storage
Water-level changes between Spring 2003 and Spring 2013 were determined for 23 wells in the study area. Average water-level declines in the CCID part of the area were 0.5 foot per year. 1556
TABLE 12-GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR CCID
AND SLWD PART OF STUDY AREA (2003-12)
RECHARGE
Groundwater Inflow
Deep Percolation from Irrigation
Canal Seepage
Los Banos Creek Seepage
Subtotal:
DISCHARGE
Pumpage
Groundwater Outflow (lateral)
Groundwater outflow (downward)
Subtotal:
DIFFERENCE
CALCULATED CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE
GROUNDWATER OVERDRAFT
Acre-feet per Year
500
13,500
6,650
1,500
22,150
13,900
8,900
1,600
24,400
-2,250
-2,450
-2,350
81 1557
Average water-level declines in the SLWD part of the area were
2.1 feet per year. Using an average specific yield of 0.2 the storage change in the upper aquifer beneath the CCID was 12,090 acres x 0.5 foot per year x 0.12 or -700 acre-feet per year (rounded). The storage change beneath the SLWD was 5,783 acres x 2.1 feet per year x 0.12 or -1,500 acre-feet per year. The combined storage change for both districts was -2,200 acre-feet per year. There was some additional storage change due to compaction of the Corcoran Clay and deeper clay layers. This is estimated to be several hundred acre-feet per year. This value for total groundwater overdraft was thus about 2,600 acre-feet per year.
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR THE GWD
PART OF STUDY AREA
82 There are 800 acres of irrigated land in the GWD part of the study area. Provost & Pritchard has indicated that the average water delivery by the GWD to this property has been 1,080 acrefeet per year. They also determined the consumptive use of applied water, which averaged 1,980 acre-feet per year. The remainder of the consumptive use (900 acre-feet per year) was provided by groundwater pumping, and is considered the net deficit for this area.
1558
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR MERCED COUNTY
WHITE AREAS IN THE STUDY AREA
Provost & Pritchard has indicated that there are 2,170 acres 83 of land in the white areas. They estimated that the consumptive use of applied water was about 6, 700 acre-feet per year. No surface water was delivered to this area, and the applied water came from groundwater pumpa.ge. The net deficit was thus 6,700 acre-feet per year.
GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR THE LOS BANOS STUDY AREA
Table 13 provides a groundwater budget for the Los Banos Study Area for 2003-12. This budget combines information from the water budget values for the City of Los Banos, CCID and SLWD, GWD, and the Merced County white areas in the area. The largest items of groundwater recharge are deep percolation from irrigation and canal seepage, which comprises an average of 21,450 acre-feet per year, or 92 percent of the recharge. The total average recharge was 23,650 feet per year. The largest source of groundwater discharge was pumpage from irrigation (21,500 acre-feet per year). This comprised 77 percent of the groundwater discharge. The difference between the groundwater recharge and discharge was an average of -4,250 acre-feet per year. The calculated average decrease in groundwater storage was 490 acre-feet per year in the City, 2450 acre-feet per year in the CCID and SLWD, and 260 acre-feet per year in the white 1559
84 TABLE 13-GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR
LOS BANOS STUDY AREA (2003-12)
RECHARGE
Groundwater Inflow
Deep Percolation from Irrigation
Canal Seepage
Los Banos Creek Seepage
Urban Storm Runoff
Subtotal:
DISCHARGE
Pumpage for Irrigation
Groundwater Outflow (mostly in alluvial form)
Urban Outside Consumption
Effluent Evaporation and
Evapotranspiration
Subtotal:
DIFFERENCE
CALCULATED CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE
Acre-feet per Year
500
13,500
7,950
1,500
200
23,650
21,500
2,000
2,700
1,700
27,900
-4,250
-3,200
1560
areas, or a total of 3,200 acre-feet per year. This is considered a reasonable agreement, considering the accuracy of the various items in the water budget.
85 1561
84 TABLE 13-GROUNDWATER BUDGET FOR
LOS BANOS STUDY AREA (2003-12)
RECHARGE
Groundwater Inflow
Deep Percolation from Irrigation
Canal Seepage
Los Banos Creek Seepage
Urban Storm Runoff
Subtotal:
DISCHARGE
Pumpage for Irrigation
Groundwater Outflow (mostly in alluvial form)
Urban Outside Consumption
Effluent Evaporation and
Evapotranspiration
Subtotal:
DIFFERENCE
CALCULATED CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER STORAGE
Acre-feet per Year
500
13,500
7,950
1,500
200
23,650
21,500
2,000
2,700
1,700
27,900
-4,250
-3,200
1562
APPENDIX A
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPHS FOR WELLS
1563
10 -.----r----r------.------r-----r----.---r---r-~----,--,----.-----,---,---r---,-----.------.-----.---,---, )
15 +----------{)--------+-1----1-----1- ·+-----+---+--------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+------ 20 -+-----------+-+-------+•+-------+----------+---------- b ,g ______ 1 __________ 1 __________ Jr_ _______ +----------+------r-- --+--t--- ---I---+ ---+-------1 j:::' 25
w w
LL
..._,.
0::: 30 w
s
O 35 II
ICL
w
I 9 __ I _ _Q _ _Q_ ___ _ 11 I l-1--- tc
)
.......... ..,. .... "'t''"'"'"'"'""' .. Xf"t"•""'"°'f"'"""'""' )
G
0 40 -I---+-+---+ ----6--6t-----o--
)
)
....................................... --,----+---
) / I I M Q
---•--•----v -o- - --------- ---
)
p
45 -1----+---+--1· ----11-.-,a+--H---- I I I I I I ·+-~1------+---------+---++-+----------+-------t------t---+----+------+----------+---------- {)
?
50 1 1 1 - 1 1 I I I I O I .J ____ J___ I <?--+---------+----------+--------+---+---_.__ ----+---------- )
55 In•••••"•• I'"••"••," I'"•,,,,,, 1111111'"' ••••I'"••"••••• In••••• 1111j" • • •••••••I'"••"••••• I'"••••••••• I'"••••••••• I'"" '"II' 11I••1111• 11 • • j 111111 • • • • • j 11 • • • • 11• 11 j 111111• ••••I 11 • • •••••••I'"•••• 11 •"I'" 1111• • • • • j 11 • •"•••••I••••••• 1111 I'" 11• • • 1111j 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 1 1564
-
I--
LU LU
10 ~--.----.-----.----.-----,,---.-----r-----r-------r---r----r---,--.-----r---.----.----.----r---,--.-----, 15 +······----+··········+··········+··········+··········+·•--l----4---4--•--li----+----1----I-••····+·····-+---+ 0 20 t ........ i ........ + 11 I 25 +-········++···••4~ ...... -0 I II )
.......... "'I"" _______
:> b I
iJ'
' II I I H +I I I Si···--····-lc
--+-------···+··········+·····----t----+-
ct>
LL 30
- ----)--~A-----~-it----nl--filf\&ff 1\tt------t~------t--/\-----~;------~--/( --+-------I 0:: LU I35
0 II 40 lo...
LU
0 45
d)I 8
O! ··~·····r··o··•··
v cp
1 1 1 --11 1 Ht+-+1---+1------+-- 1 1 , -+te-+!--~--'.L I l I I I <1:'.l ---- ------ +----+···+·· 11 I I 11
)
C
::)
------------'\..,.----------------
{)
p
) ,0 ::) )
50 I I I I I· --+---+----+---+--······+··········+---+----+---+-----1 )
55 I I I ·········+--+------+---+----+---+---r--·+··········+··········+··········+··········+···---+---+---t-----+-····+·········· 60 I 11111111111111111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I111111111111 II 111111111I11111111111I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I 111111111111 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 2 1565
10 15
20 -
I--
LU LU 25
LL
---
0:::
LU
I--:
30 0
II
lo_ 35
LU
0 40
45 50
---
---
----------
----------
1997
)
----------- ------ -- .................... -------- ---------- ---------- - --- ----- \
--- - --- ') ---- IO. ·---- ·--------- - --
) ) )
) C
10 ")
,.. --
............ ---- ................ - --------- ............ .........,.... -------- .................... ----------
. 0 ·--- --
% K) ) ,.. ) ,/\, ) ( 0 1i ) ) 10 'i ) )( ---A .,. ) ---- ----- i<.. ------ ~-K~ r, -- I) I-< }- ---- :) -0----- I\ - ---- ---- ). ) i -- -- C n! ) :) V ) 0 ) ,) ) ,_ --Ji ------- - o-6-- ---- .... --.. -- --- -- -- -- ---- --- )I ---------- ---------- C 5- :) 10 ) ) ;:) .)
--~ --- - --
) )
------- ---- --
--- r' - -----
J
) ) :)
(.) q6
----- u-- - .................. - It_ ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- - .. .. , .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
2000 2005 2010
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 3 ------
----- -----
~-------
)-------- ---------- ----------
I(;-~
~M~,
~r >ij
.)
-----
.... . .
2015 2017
1566
15 20
C
-'·········+··· I k I J I I
{)
25 -l-----.----+---•b-·---+----l•----1-----1---... ,-...... _-------+----------•--------- 30 35
40 ,-...
Iw 45
··o·····-r···
1 r--__.L ,--+---- h ....... .
......................................................................... ___
+
___ J_ _ ----------+---------- -----+----------
--Q-···· + I I e7+ ...................................... . 0 ••• ••• • •~•11••••••••1• ••• •••••<••••-fl•••••••••••••••-•••M••••••••• ........ ......... .. . . . . ........?~ +-··········+·•·••-+---I··•· .. ·•········•····•·•··· ...········ ...... . ....... l.L. ... ~Jl!l .... J.Q .......... +---r--t··•· .. ·•········ .. ····•·•··· w
!:::., 50
0:::
w 55
s 60 0
II 65 Ifl_
w 70
0 -----+----------.. +--
·····+··o···t
c5····-r
11> I ---!---- , ,
-------+-'S;\- -- ---+--------+-- I I
i--t-~+-.L
... 0 LJ_\P- 6 ........ +··········+· ........ .
··········-1-··········
---t--+-+- I ............. .
·······+··········+·
~----+----lc---•··~•-l-•~··Q····"'···+·•·· ) ........ (0~ I I I , )
75 --+----+----+----+----+--·······+-·········+··········+-·········-JO I ··U+······-+---+, ---+---··+··········+··········+··········+·······----i--··+·········· 80 +----4----1---4---~---~--+---+··········+··········-11···--1---n+----+----4--+--·--+--- 85 +----+---+---·--+---t----+------tc----,···+··········+-·········+···· I ll~---+---+-----+---~-,.+ .......... +------1---~--4-----1 90 ---+----+--·----i---+--- I I I 95 --+-- --+-----+----+----+-------,~-···+··········+··········+····· I I ··+··········+·---+----+---+-------1 100 f• 1111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 1111111 iRI 11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 6 1567
15 ~--r-------.--,-----,---,--r-----r----r--r----r--,--r----r----.---~---.---,--r--r---.---~ 20 +----+--- +----+ ---f----+---+-----ff----+---+---------+----------+--------1-----+· +----+-----+ ---+-----+----+--------+---------- ~----,~
- 35 t--- ---L-+---r---r -r---1"---------- -- -~ -~
40 w
LL
..__,.
0:::: 45
w
6 I •--+----------
I50 t- I I I I I -----·-t----------t-----t-----t-·-- I I 1---t--------·t----------t----------t----------t----------t I I --- I o 0 I- 55
I
--+---+!----+----------+------+---
la..
W 60 -----ll----+--+------l---+---+----------+----11----+----------+---+------+----------+------+--- +--+ ---+----1 0 65 +---+---+--~--· ~-----1-------+-------···+--··------+-····--·--+-·-·ll--+--~---+---+-·---t----+---+----+----------+-----+-- 70 +----+--·+ ---+---· +--+----+·----------+-------+-----+----------+----~------------+---f--·------+--------------4---1------1 75 ~--+-----,f-----+----+----+----+----+ --+-----+----------+------+---+--+----+----+- 80 +---+---+-----tr--~---+---+ ----·--+-----+---+-----1-----+----------+----------+----------+-------,1------ )
85 111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 1111111 w•I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111I11111111111Iw11111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111I11111111111111111111111I11111111"'111111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111111111111111 I 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 7 1568
15 -.-----.----.---r----r-----r---r------.---,-----r---,,--,--.----.----,---,--.----.----.-------.----,--. b
0 20 +------o-------m-A~-l--~--+----l-•·········+··········+··········+··········+··········+·········•'-1------4---+----+··········+··········+---+-- 0 ) Q
101 IN!?
j::' 25 +-·········ll-······<Ol-····~··'··+·••t••·+·-l---1-+-,.Jl. ......... .j. •••••••••• .j. •••• ___ , ••• + .......... + .......... + .. --+--+----+--, LU LU
LL
.__...
0:::
LU
I-:
30 0 )I
II
lo...
LU
0 35 I I O··t····· 6 I I 1•-I-···+··········+----+··········+· ······+···· .................. . 40 I I I I I I ···+··········+··········+··········+··········-1-··········+······-+ --+---+··········+·····-+----+--+--······+··········+·········· ) )
45 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111! 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111! 11111111111!11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111( 11111111111 ( 11111111111( 11111111111 ( 11111111111 ( 11111111111 ( 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 8 1569
20 -.----.----.-----.-----r-----f""1r---r..-----r---.-----r----,r---.---.--,---,-----.--,---,-----,-----r-----.-----, 30 --
25 +---il--t -- ---- -----·11-.-+---tJ--------- ------- -------- -------- ----+-- I ~--------+----t--~- i~--- ------- --- ------------- ----- ---- -- ----- IT-ll---1----- ,.
...
) .fr ______ ;?_ .. ________ ,-+-~-------
IO
IC iC
i=' 35
LU ~1111_!6-U--- -tll-\+~- --tt----if H+--1>----
+-+19&+-- W- + ~1 +H-\H~ -.. ---... ----- .. -----.. -- - -tt-H+i-t---it·!ltt+H LU LL ..__, ffi 40 s
45 t-if- I :1
IQ_
LU
0 50 +----+----1 )
0 . I o I O ---- --- --- ---- ---K>--++---------+-611---+---------+·~ ----1-----+----------+----------+---------1---
I I IC
+--+---+----------·+----+---t-----i--~-~!--+----------+--- 0 0
)
55 +--------..---6 ------+----------+----------+---------+---------+--a I I I I I ----+----------+----------+------ 60 I I ----------+----+--+-----+----+--------+----------+----------+----------+----u----+----------+----+----+--+----+----+--+--·--+-----,----i )
65 111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 9 1570
20 ~-~-~-~--.------.---r----""T""---r---r---,--,---..----r--~---.---,----,---.------.----.--, 25 I I 1:---L-ff-m--k-~-!---~--~~---~~---~--- 1~--+---;------· j:::' 35
w w
LL
-
161
I I o
0::: 40 w
s
-----~---r I II ·-t----,;tJ I I u I I I I 11 ·-t·---0 --t·---------t-- I I ·---------t··--------1------ 1 11 ---------------- 45 I
lo...
) 1 ) I I I I I I II I I I I I I I~ l\10 lo
-----------1----------+ H--+----------1-----------+ r·trr--r?b ·-- ) 50 L-1--t--+--+-----t--- /',A +
---~------~- -vv -6i g I I J
55 +----------+----+----+- ---1-------1-----------+----------+----- I I -,~----+----+---~----1f----1----+----+--+----+•-·-------+•----•-•-•+•--------- )
60 -1-----+-- -,1.-----1- ---+----+-------+----------+----------+-----C}---l------------1------------1-------.-.- ----1------1-----+----------I I l~--+------1 65 I 11111111111Ii1111111111I11111111111111111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111I11111111111I11111111111I11111111111111111111111 I 11111111111 I 11111111111 I 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 10 1571
15 -.-----r----..----r----r---r---,------r----r-~---.----,,---,--.------.-----.---.-------.------.----.---,-----, ;>
20 +------+-- +-----1---,11 -1----+---+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+----------+-----+---1--- 25 -------
j::' 30 ----
LU LU
LL
-.....,,
I I 6' I I I 10
-rlJU i
u
I~
,--
' -+---T ------+----------
, \
---------------------/ _____ \_~~----------+----------
,
0 ,' ----+-----------------------
1 !?
-----f·I.All--r , I I I
I
I
I
35 ________ j____---r··r- --~- ------- . L_--T --+--+--,-• s
0 40 ..L___-,- 1-
I
I
T
I
--1-.----+-----------------
) I
lo..
LU
/0
O 45 -----
IQ ~:IQ :v
50 +-------~-~-~-----+ -+----------+----------+----------+--~---1- 0 10 I
55 +--------+ --------+---,-----------+--------+----+----------+----------+-------------- +-----+------+---1-1-----+----1,,,_ __________ _, co
0 60 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO_ 11 1572
10 ~-~-~-~---.-----,,---..----r---.-----.--~------r---,--,----.------r-----r--~------r---,--,-----, 0 1 5 ----------- --------+«--------h I
h
lo
2 0 ___________ ,.. _____ _ -•--------+--;?.. ____ _
)
--+---4---+-------<d:'.i--------llol------J!f _________ +----------+----------.-----+---+----i---+-----+- -~- ..--.
) 1f
I~
)
I<
)
(
1-
w W 25 t-,+----+-+-------+---•------•- ----+---1,+----t-----+---------{ >----+-- ) j O i11 LL ..._ 0::
w
I30
0 II
la.. 35
w
0 ------~------------------~------t---1----g---~---O-+-•------- __________ _ __ ---/--19 _____ ?_ I _j __ J ______ f ... _______ _ ---•---•------•------•---- ria3-· t -~ -----,r----+------•---1----+-- (
U-1 l +----+-++ ---- ----·+-----+ • ----I--r--------r- ---- -- -- --- ---- ------ ----- --- - --, : LI-+-i--r7 -- --- --- -_J _____ _ 40 I I I ----- ---- ---------- ---- 45 +---1-----+----------+----------+----------+-------------+---+---+---+----+ L-L-+---+--r--r .i.l~-~ ) ' 50 111''''' '''' I u''" "'"I"'''''" "I"''''''''' I 1111 rr''''' 111'''''" ''I•'''''"'' •I"''"''''' 111,''''" ''I"'"'''''' I""'''''" I""''''''' 111,rn''''' I 11""'''" I""'"'''' I"''''''''' I""""'" I"""''' "I"''"''''' I•''''''''" 111 ''''''''' I 1997 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 12 1573
20 ~-~--~---T-----.----.------r---...------r---.-------r------,-----r-----r--..----r----,----r----, 25 +----l-- I I -- t--------+-----t--------i------- -+-----+--- 3o +--+o;----~-------+--A----!--h--1-----~-----+\-----tt----+~-------+----------~ -
1-
r,
IR
UJ W 35
LL
..._..,
0::::
UJ
I40
0 II
i l,
0 0
rT--~r -•-----< )11-----------
Q p
'-' '-
0 0 lo... 45
UJ
6 ------o--+----------+----------+-- I I I 6----+---H----+---- I I ----+----------+-----------+--< )---r--Q-ff-+--+---i-+ 0 Mo
50 +----------+------+-- ---1----1-, ---l-----+----+---ll----+-----+----------+-------+---+----------+----------+----------+---+--1~+------------ :::,
55 +---+---+----r----;- +----+----+-----+-----+-----+----------+----------+------------- )
60 I 11 11 e II e e II I 11 11 11 e 11 11 I 11 11 11 e e e e e I II e e e e e 11 11 I 11 11 11 e e e e e I II e e e e e II e I 11 11 11 e 11 11 I II e e e e e e e II I 11 11 e 11 11 11 I II e e e e e e e e e I II e e e 11 11 e e I II e e e e e e e II I II e e e e e e e e e I 11 11 11 e 11 11 I II e e II e e e e e I II e e e e e II II I 11 11 11 e e e e e I " e e e e e e e e e I 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 13 1574
20 ~-~-~--~----.-----,----r-----.-----,----r-----r-----,.------r----,---,------.----r---r----, 0 25 +-----------
30 +------+------1---+---+----------t--O I JJ-----+----------+----------+----------+-------------------+------1~---~----1~----+-- j:::' 35
w w
LL
.........,
b
-------w----~ -t---7,r i,---------- ' ',
0:::: 40 w
s
45 I
----:::,--+-+-..6..- I I< I;JTIJr~---- -t--+--+ .. ~-: :---~:-: ,, ------- -~~i\:--i~------+---·---+--+--i I I CD----+----------+-
)
)
)
l- '
o...
w
w \ / '¢
0 50 +---+--- +---r---+·----------+----------+----------+----U I I -~-+-------+----------+----------+IQ----- -~--C 0 55 ------------~---+----------+----------+---+----+---+---+ )
60 I I
65 I II II I I II I I I I II II I I I II II I II II II JI I I I I II I JI I I JI I I I II II II I I I I I I II JI II I I I I I I II JI JI JI I I I I II II II I II II I II I I II II JI I I II I I I I I I I I I I II II II II I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I II II ' " II I I I II I I I II I I I I II I I I ' " I I II I II II , , I II II II I I I ' " JI I I I I I I I I 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 14 1575
15 -.-----.---..-----r--------.---.-------.----.----,---,-----~---.-----r-----.---..-----r--------.---.--~ lo
20 +----+-----+----+---+ ) -------- ---------+-•---------+----------+----------+----------ir-----1-- --1-----+------1---------+----------- 25 +---+---+ I I ~--------.It --------tt-,t--------+-----------+-----------+----------lr-----1--- ----+----+-----+---------+----------- <DJ 0
30 ---------1-----1----< ).I. I I 11 -~-+----+--+--~---+------+---t-------+------------------- I I I I I I I I I f)
w w
LL 35 +---+--+--- +--1-+ -1--~+---£ -1----1------ ---------' -~--------+----+----+--- +---+-----~ ._, I ',
0:::: ,' ',
w / ',
1-- I ' S <( 40 -------+--+, --+----+ _,,_--I---+--~· I ' , ,.._ , 0 ', I- ',
45 +----, ---+--,+,------ ---+-----4-
50 ---+----------+----+----------+----------+----------+-----+---+-----+---+-----1-----+----------+----~1-------1--1 ' ) 0
,-,
55 +---+--+---- I I ,+----+---+--------+----------+---+---------+--<Y-~+-1 I I ---------------- p 0 60 +----------1 I ------+-----1---1---•---+----------+--+-----+-----+--+----4-----+---,--t-----~-+-11 I I I 65 111 I I I II I I I I I " II II I II II 111 I I II II I II I II II I I I II II I II II II II II I I " I I I I I II I I I " I I II I II II I " I I I I I I I I I 111 II I I I I I I I 111 II II I I II I 111 I I II I II II 111 II II II II I I II II II I I I I I 111 I I I I I I I II 111 I I II II II 'I II I I I I I II I I 111 II II I I I I I 111 I I I I I I II I I 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CITY OF LOS BANOS WELL NO. 15 1576
-
1-
w w
20 -.----------------.-------------.------------~--------~ 25 +-----'----,------+-------------i----------~---~-------'-------f 30 +-----------'---+-+---------------+---+-+-----------+-----------1 35 +-----=-----+----'---+-------------'-----+---,."(-------+--------+-----'-t---"H-----1 LL 40
..__,,
0:::
w
I-:
45 -t----.
p--~~____]
0 I50 55 --,---.:...._~··
60 -t----------'---,------,---t-------------'----+------~----'--+-l-+--V----+----------1 65 -t--------'------,---t---~---'----'------'----+-----'-------'---+-+i,..L--'---'----~ 70 -t------'---..__ _ ___._ _ ___, ____ -+-_ _., __ .....__ _ __._ __ ....___-+ __ ..__ _ _._ _ ___,'-_-'-_----1-__ _,_ _ __._ __ ....__ _ ___J 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CCID WELL NO. 8
1577
5-.-------------------,------------------.----------------, 10 15 H · I 11
I-----
w
20 r-----------------------=r~r-===----~~8==~===~~t ~--1=-tb:Hll---------+1 =--------------- ·· ·· I 0::::
w
o S 25 .f-(.)--() 7----------------------"---~1v..J\-1 I -t1 -fu~1Ha--f1-----,---i,~,---'1,:----~1~1 _____ _j, II
I30 r-----------------------~1-----------t----------------=-----\f:=srn------~----------------~~ei-~-------------J 35 +------'------'---~------+-----------'----------+--++-+--V">,:1---~---------1 40 +---------'---~---'---+------------------1+-+-.,....,_----A-,-......:---------- 45 +-----'-------'------'----.__--+------'------'--------'---..__---+---___.__--___._--___.--___. 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CCID WELL NO. 48
1578
20 ~---------------.---------------------r---------------, 25 30 ----------+-----------t----¾-(") J. '~ 1 v•m 1
j::' 35
w w
LL
'--' ffi 40 r-----------'-~d----<;)_-~ __ :_ ___ L
s
~45t======------h-:P-~------------=------------------1 I }J-----1------J.---U----_J la..
w
o 50 ;---------_:_----+--~-----------------------------~~~--------------~-J,: _______ L-------__j 55 +--------------------~---~---'----____._,,__+-+--+---"--F------~-------l 60 -i-------------------1----------------------vt---+-+--<l----------~ 65 -i----~-----~--~-------,1----~---'---_,__ __ ___._ __ --+ __ ____. ___ .__ __ _.__ _ ____, 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR CCID WELL NO. 62
1579
-
1-
w w
20 ....-------""""T""------..----------r-----------,.--------r------~----~ 25 30
35 I \..<-,.._..-• --,,-------u---,r--,---t--t-t----------1---,---------1r----__,-;----t-----f'~---:---i----t---i------1 LL 40 +---------+--~--+-,,_ _ __,_-11----------'-----1-_._ __ _,__._-+-~-~------+---+---'--1--1----'---------+--------14---1 ..._...
o:::'.
w
I--:
45 +----'--'-------+--'----,-~H-----+---_._----+-'-----:-----'---_.__1---_,_---'---'-~--+------U---J~,1 I f I 0 I50 __________ ......__._ ________________ -+---~----+-----'------1--'----+----4------1 CL
w
0 55 +----,---'----,--c--+--+---;----'-_.-,--t-.,_--'--'----l--,--_.;..._.;... __ -+----,----,----+---'---'-----4+----1--4-----'-----1 60 ;-----------------t--,---------------+-------_._--'--r-----+------+-------'-+--+----'--4--+--lf!-------1 65 ;-----+------t-+----;----;--t-------'--r----'-----'---+---'--;----'-+-----,------'--'1---;-------------I 70 ;--__._____.__.,_____._----t_.,_____.___.__...__-t-__.__..___,__,___r-~----'----'---'---+----''---...___.____,_+-__,______,__.,___._--+_..,_____.___,_____. 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-3381M
1580
,.-...
1-
w w
15 ~-----:---,--,--------,--,--:---------,---,----,---,---:----:--------:---,------;--,-----:---r-----:---i 20 -1--------;-----;-+------;--,--+----+--------------+---'-H-~-----:------;-----1-------~------------1 25 +--------------t-~---'+---+-ir-.--------t---+----+--,---+--~--;------------------1 30 -1---+----.-------1--'--+---'---'--+---'--+-+-+--....c.+---..--I'------+---------,-+-------+--------+---'---- LL 35
..._...
0::::
w
I-:
40 +---------+-------1r-1---F----'--------+-------'---+-'----------+--i---l--...,____----+--~-----1 0 I45 +-------------+------------t---------+----'------'---------+----------i-l---H-+-r-.---~-1----1-----'-----l a..
w
0 50 +---------+-~--.-----+t---------,-----+--------+-'--------'--1--'----------A----1-----L-------l 55 -+-------'---+-'--~'---~-t-------1--------'-------+-------+---'---H--+-------1 60 -+----------------+-------1---'----------------+--'---------'--l---'----------,,....i....------l 65 -t-~~-~~----t-....._~__.__....._---t-__.__..___.____.__t--_.__.___.__.....__---+____..____.___.______.'---+----'---'---'---'---+--'--_.____.____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-33H1M
1581
-
1-
w w
35 ~-----~---------r-------..-----------.---------.------~----~ 40 +------1---+---'--'-----,--t---'----;tl----l--------------~--1e----------+-~------f 45 -1----\----~----'------+-~-------------~----------t-----tl----------t---------1 50 n I 'di \
u. 55
...__..
0::
w
I--:
60 65 r-=-n-==-=+£ 7----:=----------=I
CL
w
0 70 ,-----'
75 -
80 ;----------i------1---;-------1-----------t--------t------+-+----- 85 -t-_.______._....__._-----t_~~------t----~---~~-~~----~~~--+-_._~_....__._ __ ....__.______.__, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-33M1M
1582
..--...
1-
w
w
LL
..__.,
30 -.----------.-------,---,-----,------r----------,-------...-------------r-------, 35 '"'
40 -1---------+--'-\-----------'"--i--l---+-~----+---------+--~----~-----+--~~---1 0::: 45
w
s
0 50 r---___._,-t_J,t-+-t-~--:----t-----'--+_:______:____;_~-+-fJ-4__:_--t-_;_~-- 1-
Cl.
w
0 55 -i--------;-----i---'-,---:--~l-:-----1~-l-l---f_____,:_--l.._:___:_-+_____,:_~__'...._____;_~:._j__L_-\-.J-\_+__l_--W 60 +---'-------'---+--------=---i---+-------'-~-----~--1----'-----+-------.\--1-------1 65 +----'----'-............ ---'--+-........... ~~-~-+-~-~~__._ __ __._____.__._____.__-I-____...__....._____.____,_-+-_,____. _ _.__,_---+ _ _.____.____,_____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11 S/R 1 OE-3M 1 M
1583
-
1-
w w
30 ....---------r--------,----.--------"T------.-------,-----~-------,----r------, 35 ,-.,,
40 45 I I I\ I \
LL 50
.__...
0:::
w
I-:
55 L---ll-1---'----L--4___;_----!..=--'"-l-+:_-,---'---___;_+---'------t---'--'---t-tt-----,---;:-'----t--:-----i 0 I60 _j_ ___ -l-l----1---...\--4------'------ll-+------+----:----'----t----'-----t-t--t---:-----;,----t--------; a..
w
0 65 _j_ _ ___:__:::__;___i__------1,µ--1-_;__-----Jl-/---:----+-----:------+--:--:---:-------:-+--:-~--:--\--+--;--------1 70 +------------------l---'-----,---t-1--------t---------+----~-----------1r-+-------------1 75 +----------------------+H--~-----+---------------+--------+----------++--'-------1 80 _ ___.___.__.___._ _ _____. _ _._____.___.__t--_._ ......... __.__....__~~---....___._--+-~-'-~-----'-+-----'---'--.___._ _ _____. _ _._____._~ 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11S/R10E-4G1M
1584
120 ~-----~------~-----~-------,---------.------~----~
130 ~.··. : / 1 =I\=::R +· -1~: ·rs:rr :5: ·····I :1:.' I + •·I I 140 E : 1 :t\ / I . . \ 1 . JI \ ... , I I I 150 / I ; \ " . I l .. I " I + \ - 1- · · · ·· I I ,........._
r W 160 +---------------+----'-_;,.ll---'------'--+-~---f-~~-'---+-~-'----'----+------,.---'---'---1,---t-----f----'~--+-+-------------'-----t w
LL
...__.,
o::: W17 o .... + ....... I .., .' ... Kn---·/ • · 1° ··· I I -l s
0 180 ...... I ---,-- .... , . r
:r:
r
frj 190 0
200 t· ·:---1 ·· ········ ' n ··· 1 ··· l I
·1···············"···············•'·•······.·.·•+,······························I·············+···· ··I·· . ···+ 210 I ····•· .. I I . . .. ·.. I I -~-1 \ n I I
220 I I I ___,_~ I I \ / I
230 +-~~--'-~--~~--------~---~~-~~--~~~~~-'--+-~~-~~---'-~~---' 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11 S/R 1 0E-5L 1 M
1585
45 -.----------.-------.----------.--------.-------...----------.------, 50 55 +------+--'-----+------'---+-------------,r+-+----'------------;--;u---;------"'.---t---------;------, 60 I----
UJ 65
UJ
LL
.__...
0:::
UJ 70
s
0 75
II Ia.. 80 UJ
0 85
90 +----+------------+------------t---------+--------+-~-------+--:---'----i--+---------1 95 +--------+------------------:---t---------~-----+--------+-----,.-----++--------------1 100 +--'------'-...,__--'----+-_.___.___,__.,__-+-__.__..___.___,___+--__._____,__...___.__--+-____.L....-....._____.____,_+-_,_-----'_...,____._---+-...,____.___,___, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11S/R10E-9C2M
1586
55 -.-----------.-------,----------,------r---------,-------....------------r-------, 60 65 -1-----.;.--,-----'--+-i------'------'--+-----~-t--~r-:-----;-----tt"'----i--:-t---;------'---t---:----------t-------, --. 70 IUJ
UJ
LL
-
0::: 75 UJ
s
0 80 II
Ia..
UJ
0 85
90 -1---~-4--------1----'---'--------1--~---------~-------'----------'--,-+-----+-----I----~- 95 +-----------------------+---------+---;--------,;--------*--+--------, 100 -I--_.____._...__._ __ ...__._____.__..__ __ ___.__..___.____._ __ __._____._____..___._ _ __.'--_.___._____. __ ___._____._....___._ __ ...__.____,_____. 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11S/R10E-9G2M
1587
.........
I--
LU LU
u...
----
5 -.----------.-------.----------r------~-------.------------r--------, 10 +-------'-----1---------------1------'----',,.,_-+--+-~-t-----+-----+-.,,.__,...------------t-----------+--c--;----; 15 +------\----1-!1.----'-------+---,---t---t-----'---n---;--O--+-,---'-+-:----t----;~------t-~-----1 0::: 20
LU
s
0 I- 25 -L------'--------l---r\----'---l--'--+---'--'---i----'------+-'----'------+i'----+++---~--+-----+---....... 'f-1--C--i I
lo..
LU
0 30 -1-_ _; ___ ---l---------+--'----~-i..!.--'------~-+----'--'-----+-'---'---'--+-l--'---'---'--+----+-----+--+---I 35 +---------;-~--~--+--------------------+--~-~---+---------+-+---n------i 40 -t-----'-------J'-----'-----'--+--.....___,_ _ _.____._----+---'----'--'---'---+-.,__.....___,_ _ _.__-+-------'---'----'--'---+----'--.,__....._____.__+-__._______,J_--'----' 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11S/R10E-2E2M
1588
5~---------.-------...-------~-----~--------.-----------.-----~ 10 -1---------'--lh-~--!---!----+--'--"'-_ _,...,.. __ -'-___ --'--t-~------------------t---------i 15 ~I')---! ¥ I "x I / . V'f--'------'---1------'---------1------~ ..--...
I--
LU LU 20
LL
..__,,
0:::
LU
I--: i 25 r-:--:--:---:-t--~~-t___:.-----t __ -1---:------+-~~~---+--++------i--------------==-- o
II
I-- SJ 30 r---:---,--:-~~~'---:--~--t---:----+-____:--~++\iW--l--L------_J 0 35 +-----~--'---t--,-----'----'---+--'------'---t--------t--'---'------'--+lf\f-----'---'-.\--1-----'--------I 40 +-----:---:---'---t--!-----,---+----:-~--+-------'---t--'------'--+--'------'---{~-------1 45 +---'----'--...,__---'---t-...,__~__,__..__--+-__.__..___..____,___,___.__----L._,____.__-t-----JL----'--_._____._-+-____.__. _ _.______._-----1-_...,____,___,_____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T11S/R10E-2P1M
1589
I----
UJ UJ
5 -.-------~------,-------~----------,-------....---------~------, 10 -1-----'-----'----+---'--'---'------+--[ >--+I--' ,u I I '--0 UI 'i( I I LL 15 +---'--'--'-l---'---+--'--'1-+-l---'-l-+---+--+---'----+----'--'-----+--1-----ji-'------1-11-+------+--'-~----4----'----I ......,,
0:::
UJ
s
0 I20 +-----'------+------t-+-------+-----'-----+----U-'----+------.....\-1----+\--1----"-'-----I a_
UJ
0 25 ~--~_____L_----+--:-;____j_-+---_____L_-+---:----...J--:--:-~--'-__;__~-H,----'-----1 30 __ __._____.__...____._ __ ...____._____.__..__ __ ___.__..___.__._ __ _.__._____.._____.__ _ ___.'----'----'-----'--+----'------'-....____._ __ ....____.___,____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-381M
1590
-
1-
w w
5 -.-----------r-------.-----------r-----------r--------r-----------r--------, T10S/R10E - 4K1M
10 -l--------i----'----'--+----'--+-+-'--+-------~...____-'+-_-'-__ +--'-------1--~------1 LL 15 -1----'----<J-- Cr--f++--++-KX1--l---lJ.---1...J-----+--------'----+---'----,-----'"--\--l'---+-l-'l"'-....,._,,H'--1r----+-----------f --
0::::
w
s
0 I20
25 -t---------~-----t-------+--------t------~---'-------+--'H-------1 30 +---'-~-~_,_-___. _ _.____._~--_,__,___. _ _.__ __ __._---''--__,___,_--+_..____.__-'-___. ___ __.___.__.,____.__----I-___._...._____.____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T1 0S/R 1 0E-4K1 M
1591
4~---~----~----~---~----~---~----~---~----~--~
5 6 I o-+---a) \ I / I :-o I I I :I\ :11 II ;-1-y • • \ I : C 7 +-----'-+----CO~H-----0-IH--O I I 11 l-0 I I I I I I • I I II I :1 \ 11 ,' ; I . I I -
1-
w 8 +-'---1-l-O I O / I I • . , I I• I K)-11 I I : I I I Ill . , I I I. I I w Ll.
'-"
a:
W 9 +---~-------+--< 1---------1)-{ )---H-{ )-I---{ J c }---fH-'1+-f-t-,1---+-------'--+-------+-~-------- s
0 10 +--------------------1----tt--·-I-{ }-f-{ }-( }--•H-'-+----o------_._--+--~------'-+--+---------1 II
1-
[b 11 +-----'--+-------------1-------i -+~-t-'-t-----;---t----'--.---+--------+-'----1+--+---'----I 0 12 +---'-------;--+-'-----+---'--t----'------'---'---l----c-----tt--+------11-'-1-l----;--_;.--+---'-----'-----+-----'---'----'--1-C~_._-'--IH-----f 13 14 +------ir-'---'--+-,----;----'---+--'----+---'--'------!---'----+---.-----'----'--.--t----'-...;_-+---'----'-~-------1 15 +-....__....___.__._+-.,__.,__.,__.,__+--L-L........JL........JL.......-if----'----'----'---'--+--'---'--'--'--+--'---'----'----'--+----'----'----'-----'--+--'--'----L----L--+---'---'---'----'---+-.....__.....__...,____,; 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T1 0S/R 1 0E-5P1 M
1592
o~-----~------~-----~-----~------~-----~----~
5 -10 r
w w
LL
-
o::'.
w
t;: I ·!' 'I\ 1· r:::::,.,· :--0... .J._ ___ _;,_,_....._a . . .M S 15 I 0 r
I
r
20 L--~~~J~~V--~---ri-J-___ _;_ __ ~-------+-i----~1---___;__;,_-.!Q-_.:._-+---'------, 25 -1--_:_~--+-_.:.__ _ _:_-+_.:.___.__.:.__~ _ _:_ _ _.:.__+-_;----i-_--1--~-:-----l 30 -t--'-~-~-'----t-~------'---'---+-___.__.,___.___.__t--_.__-'-_'--_.__-+---J'--_.___.____._+-_,__-----'--'---'---4--'-----L-----'-----' 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T1 0S/R 1 0E-11 D1 M
1593
1- ----
w w
10 ~-----~------..----------r-----------r--------r------~-------, 15 I ,......_ _ / II I :11 : f-\-0 .,... I /l I I I
20 +--:,....-----+---'--'--P\----,-----------+----+-+--t---+--T1---,--~-"t:,(---;-------------t----;-------r-------, 25 ---1 LL 30 -1-------'----'---+--------+------+-----'--1------~-1---'------+------+---------'t--1-t-----1----f-----t '-"
0:::
w
I35 +---~---~-------t-------i------------;---:----.---;----t---i---:-~--;-----t-----t----1 0 I40 -1--------------1--------~------+---'------1-----'----+-+------+-__,. __ ---I a..
w
0 45 ----------------------------------------------++------+--+------< 50 ;---------+------+---t------+------+------+---'---+----,-------+------+--t---'-----'--'----'--+-'------+---;----+-----'------+------+---+-..;+--'-----------1 55 ;------------+-+---,---~-1----,----'----t---'-----'--+---'-----+-----'-----+---<J------------I 60 __ __._ __ ..___----t-----'--+--__._--+-_t---__ ~-----~-~~~--~-~____.--+-__._--+-_,.___._----t-____. ___ __.___, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-20H1M
1594
10 -.-------.-------.-----------,------~--------r---------,-----~ 15 I ) , -Q I I ; I h_ Ix I
20 +-'-----~--------------------~----=1----r---.--:...-+----+----------~----~- -
1-
w W 25 -.--
..._,. '/'
-
..... ,~-----.ih;(') _,_, __ I I \ I '/ '1' -:-----t-.-:.--- - LL
0:::
w
I--:
30 +-----r-~t----i------+--'---+_:_-~)---k(--l-------L------- o
II I35 r----------r-----:----t--~---t---.----1f-----\l--l--~Q_~---L-=------_J 0 40
45 -------------~---------1------------------------1--1-------'-- 50 --~~-~___._-t-_~___._~_.,__--t-__,__..____.____,__t----__._____._____.._____.__--+-____.'----'-__.___._+-___._____,__...,______._---+ _ _._____.____,___, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T1 0S/R 1 0E-21 P1 M
1595
-
1-
w w
5~-----~-----~-----~------,----------.----------.------.
T10S/R10E - 22J1 M
10 +----~----+---~--'--+-----H-----l4ft-t----'------+----Ht------t--'-------j-~-------1 LL 15 -+-----------------+--1~---1-1-----1----+-·+--'----~------+----+--'-------+-------------1 ..__,,
0:::
w
s
0 I20
a..
w
0 25 -i------;--t---------1--------t--------t----o------t----~-----i------t 30 ----~-~-----i-~-~-~-......-~~~-~----~~~~~----i----~~-----~-~-----i-~-~_.____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-22J1M
1596
5 ....----------,--------.---------r------~------....-----------,--------, 10 +----'"--'--'----++--,-------+-------,,-~--t-t=>"'~~-'"---7"---t"--:--in-it---:--i----'--------t--,------, i=- 15
w w
LL
-
0:::
w
I-:
20 0
II
tsL-----l--------1------------------i------'---i--_'.._~--'---+-__:_----'_---\:-t----'-------i 30 +-------'---+-------1--------+--------'----+--;---,-----'---+--------+--+-,....,.-----1 35 -I---'------'--_.___._--+ _ _.___.___.__.,__-+-___,___..____,___.__+--__._____.______.._____.__--+-__,'---_._----'------'-+--'-----'-....__-'----+-_.___._____.___, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-26E1M
1597
10 ....-------..--------..--------,------------r--------r-------..-------, 15 I , h I I .\ ,' 1=., I, ... ....-:-~::, r----+--.:---+----+---'------t-----,------1 20 -
i=' 25
w w
LL
'-"'
C::: 30 ·~ w
s
35 l _____________ J-______________ -+=---------------t----------t-------t1t----~rrrr-~~7 I ICL
~4oL--------4----~+--_:__;__-+-_:.----+--:-----'-----... 45 +-----~---+-----;------'---"--t----------+-----'------+--;...._--------t--'----'-----+-~-1------1 50 -i----------~-----~---'---1---------------+----'--------+--------------- 55 -t-___.____._...._____._ __ ....____.___._ _ _.__--t-__,_ _ _._____.___._ __ _,____.__._____._--+-____..______.____._____.'---+---'------'-_._____._----4_...._____.___.____. 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-34A1M
1598
10 -.---------,--------,------,------r---------,-------~------,--------, 15 · )--l-'·-------1------------,..-+----------1-----,..------+-------------t-----------t---------1 20 -+--~---..-i-+----------~-----+--'-------+-----,,.._,~----+-------t-------1 ~25
w
w
LL
..__..
35 I
lo..
w
0 40
45 -i---~-------t-------------~---------+-------+------+----t----+-------1 50 --------------------------+-------------+--------+-----'-----'-----+---------1 55 -___._~_....,_____._-t-~~--------~---~~-~---+--~---'-----'-'--+-___.____._....._____._---+_....,_____.____.____, 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-34C1M
1599
5 -.----------r------.--------,---,-------,-------.-----------r------, 10 ,....
~15
I.LI I.LI
LL
---
0:::
I.LI
I--:
20 0
II I25 L-------L----------i---'---_:_---+_;_ __ __:__~ _ _:_.:_ __ +-____ -l-\+~-'t----1 30 +---------+----------------------+-----~--+------------35 +-___._____._ _ _._____.__ __ _.____.___.__..__-t------'--..___.___._ __ .....__,___,.___._--+-____.,.___.__._____._-+----'-----'-_._---'----+-_._____.____,_____. 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-35K1M
1600
0 ......-----------r-------"T""--------r------.-----------r----------r------, 5 -1---------+-----'-----f-_:_-.:___:_,,c----{ )---c:,,IV--------+---1-t-----'-----+------;---t-------1 .:~-
~10
w w
LL
..__,,
0:::
w
I--:
15 0
II
to L-----1-----------------1------------J------_:_-i--_--: __ :,__+-------'-_:_--'------'.~---:t---:---1 25 ..l.-..--_i___..f.-------:-----'-t-----:-------+--~_:__:_-+--__:__;__c_~-------'-----+~-H--------i 30 +----'----'---'-----'---+--'---'-~-..___-~-..___~~---~--.___._--+-___, _ _._~___, __ _.___._...._____.__--+--'-----'--~--' 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018
WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R10E-36N2M
1601
-
1-
w w
LL
..........
o~-----~-----~---------.-------.----------.----------r-------, 5 I r I I './ ', :/ \.I:; I '\:: tr-~----+----+-·
0:::
w
I10
0 II
la..
w
0 15 .,L__-'-__;__------1_:_------1H:-'----+___;_-.i..--:--+-_:_-4t----+-""'-_:__+---'-_..;._--'--tt----+-t----------, 20 -1----~----t-~~----------~~-t--~~-~---+-~~-~~~,-----~----t-~--~ 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2018 WATER-LEVEL HYDROGRAPH FOR WELL T10S/R9E-13J1M
1602
APPENDIX B
LOS BANOS CREEK STREAMFLOW RECORDS
1603
~ ClA~lOW
Year JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL 1965
1966
1967 26 6 3 35
1968 10 6 2 7 2 2 2 31
1969 6,708 11,851 5,952 3 8 12 24,534
1970 4,865 595 12 4 3,273 8,749
1971 1,460 2 12 4 4 3 1,485
1972 3 2 3 3 2 1 14
1973 1,793 8,840 3,810 5 6 3 2 3 4 3 54 14,523
1974 3,979 1,373 3,995 1 4 6 6 6 5 9,375
1975 1,186 4,651 359 7 10 7 6,220
1976 3 1 4
1977 2 2
1978 4,550 15,075 4,455 432 1 24,513
1979 4,614 684 553 1 5,852
1980 4,677 8,277 1,948 3 1 3 14,909
1981 7 153 645 4 1 810
1982 6,367 4,447 1,263 7,252 1,004 1 569 7,942 28,845
1983 9,263 13,178 18,556 3,021 2,529 298 1,872 5,574 54,291 1984 2,297 2,144 454 4,895
1985 766 294 12 3 1,075
1986 5,695 10,608 21 50 48 234 16,656
1987 960 1 3 2 1 1 968
1988 1 1 1 1 4 8
1989 1 1 1 3
1990 1 1 1 2 5
1991 1 1
1992 1 1 2
1993 6,760 6,601 2,292 1,014 1 1 16,669
1994 1,514 1,514
1995 5,794 462 12,888 2,182 1 1 21,328
1996 1,705 11,674 3,208 875 148 7 1 1,015 9,649 28,282
1997 17,825 4,547 976 1 23,349
1998 10,643 37,048 8,422 2,892 1,885 1,190 248 128 282 62,738 1999 1,190 4,630 214 1 1 1 6,037
2000 5,821 1,028 6,849
2001 2 934 1 2 939
2002 192 1 3,588 3,781
2003 2,106 132 1 1 2,240
2004 1,455 735 2,190
2005 5,025 5,140 3,318 809 14,292
2006 3,554 2,310 1,553 7,417
2007 1 1
2008 958 5 963
2009
1604
2010 728 2,396 784 3,908
2011 2,864 3,782 5,906 700 13,252
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016 5,430 390 5,820
Totals: 103,438 161,416 104,875 26,183 6,439 1,259 38 82 574 297 3,619 31,154 439,374 1605
Sacramento District
Water Control Data System
US Army Corps of Engineers
WCDSHOME GLOSSARY CONTACT
I Plot Menu Pag1. I Plot I
1 03DEC18 06:42:20
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL
2400 01OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 02OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 03OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 04OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 05OCT2016 0.0 0 . 0 20562.
2400 06OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 07OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 08OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 09OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 10OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 11OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 12OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 13OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 14OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 15OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 16OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 17OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 18OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 19OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 20OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 21OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 22OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 23OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 24OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 25OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 26OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 27OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 28OCT2016 0.0 0 . 0 20562.
2400 29OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 30OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 31OCT2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 01NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 02NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 03NOV2016 5.0 0.0 20562.
2400 04NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 05NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 06NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 07NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 08NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 09NOV2016 0.0 0 . 0 20562.
2400 10NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 11NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 12NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562.
2400 13NOV2016 3.0 0.0 20562.
2400 14NOV2016 3.0 0.0 20562.
2400 15NOV2016 3 .0 0.0 20562 .
03DEC18 06:42:20
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
ac-ft
INST-VAL
19375.
19361.
19356.
19347.
19338.
19334.
19329.
19325.
19306.
19306.
19306.
19297.
19297.
19288.
19288.
19288.
19284.
19279.
19275.
19270.
19261.
19257.
19257.
19243.
19243.
19243.
19243.
19302.
19297.
19297.
19297.
19297.
19284.
19293.
19284.
19284.
19284.
19279.
19279.
19275.
19275.
19270.
19270.
19275.
19266 .
19257.
LOS BANOS
FLOW - RES IN FLOW -RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
DISTRICT HOME
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
1606
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19257.
2400 17NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19257.
2400 18NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19247.
2400 19NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19234.
2400 20NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19252.
2400 21NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19247.
2400 22NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19247.
2400 23NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19247.
2400 24NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19243.
2400 25NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19234.
2400 26NOV2016 2.6 0.0 20562. 19238.
2400 27NOV2016 2.0 0.0 20562. 19243.
2400 28NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19234.
2400 29NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19234.
2400 30NOV2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19229.
2400 01DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19229.
2400 02DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19220.
2400 03DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19220.
2400 04DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19220.
2400 05DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 06DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 07DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 08DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 09DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 10DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 11DEC2016 3.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 12DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 13DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 14DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19211.
2400 15DEC2016 4.0 0.0 20562. 19220.
2400 16DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 17DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 18DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
2400 19DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
2400 20DEC2016 2.0 0.0 20562. 19202.
2400 21DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19193.
2400 22DEC2016 3.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
2400 23DEC2016 11.0 0.0 20562. 19220.
2400 24DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19216.
2400 25DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19207.
2400 26DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19207.
2400 27DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19207.
2400 28DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19207.
2400 29DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
2400 30DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
2400 31DEC2016 0.0 0.0 20562. 19198.
1 03DEC18 06:42:20 PAGE 3
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 01JAN2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19184.
2400 02JAN2017 5.0 0.0 20562. 19193.
2400 03JAN2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19193.
2400 04JAN2017 287.0 0.0 20562. 19763.
2400 05JAN2017 134.0 0.0 20562. 20030.
2400 06JAN2017 54.0 35.0 20562. 20067.
2400 07JAN2017 101.0 50.0 20562. 20169.
2400 08JAN2017 564.0 73.0 20562. 21143.
2400 09JAN2017 651.0 175.0 20562. 22088.
2400 10JAN2017 242.0 200.0 20562. 22171.
2400 11JAN2017 1369.0 688.0 20562. 23522.
2400 12JAN2017 273.0 427.0 20562. 23216.
2400 13JAN2017 140.0 343.0 20562. 22812.
2400 14JAN2017 98.0 258.0 20562. 22495.
2400 15JAN2017 69.0 200.0 20562. 22235.
2400 16JAN2017 63.0 200.0 20562. 21962.
2400 17JAN2017 0.0 200.0 20562. 21565.
1607
2400 18JAN2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 21478.
2400 19JAN2017 394.0 0.0 20562. 21864.
2400 20JAN2017 0.0 217.0 20562. 21435.
2400 21JAN2017 659.0 416.0 20562. 22966.
2400 22JAN2017 886.0 450.0 20562. 23831.
2400 23JAN2017 1565.0 900.0 20562. 25151.
2400 24JAN2017 776.0 907.0 20562. 24890.
2400 25JAN2017 613.0 1800.0 20562. 24306.
2400 26JAN2017 97.0 454.0 20562. 23598.
2400 27JAN2017 62.0 450.0 20562. 22827.
2400 28JAN2017 48.0 450.0 20562. 22030.
2400 29JAN2017 39.0 450.0 20562. 21215.
2400 30JAN2017 28.0 450.0 20562. 20379.
2400 31JAN2017 24.0 150.0 20562. 20128.
2400 01FEB2017 42.0 0.0 20562. 20211.
2400 02FEB2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20211.
2400 03FEB2017 66.0 0.0 20562. 20458.
2400 04FEB2017 62.0 0.0 20562. 20580.
2400 05FEB2017 47.0 52.0 20562. 20571.
2400 06FEB2017 51.0 129.0 20562. 20416.
2400 07FEB2017 707.0 200.0 20562. 21421.
2400 08FEB2017 399.0 200.0 20562. 21816.
2400 09FEB2017 202.0 200.0 20562. 21821.
2400 10FEB2017 732.0 200.0 20562. 22876.
2400 11FEB2017 310.0 300.0 20562. 22896.
2400 12FEB2017 146.0 399.0 20562. 22392.
2400 13FEB2017 100.0 400.0 20562. 21797.
2400 14FEB2017 68.0 400.0 20562. 21138.
2400 15FEB2017 57.0 400.0 20562. 20458.
1 03DEC18 06:42:20 PAGE 4
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16FEB2017 58.0 300.0 20562. 19979.
2400 17FEB2017 66.0 200.0 20562. 19813.
2400 18FEB2017 106.0 150.0 20562. 19726.
2400 19FEB2017 65.0 99.0 20562. 19657.
2400 20FEB2017 1124.0 116.0 20562. 21656.
2400 21FEB2017 1124.0 300.0 20562. 23291.
2400 22FEB2017 369.0 425.0 20562. 23181.
2400 23FEB2017 187.0 450.0 20562. 22658.
2400 24FEB2017 119.0 450.0 20562. 22001.
2400 25FEB2017 0.0 450.0 20562. 21282.
2400 26FEB2017 72.6 450.2 20562. 20533.
2400 27FEB2017 65.0 325.0 20562. 20016.
2400 28FEB2017 68.0 142.0 20562. 19740.
2400 01MAR2017 100.0 400.0 20562. 21797.
2400 02MAR2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19882.
2400 03MAR2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20007.
2400 04MAR2017 47.0 0.0 20562. 20188.
2400 05MAR2017 66.0 0.0 20562. 20318.
2400 06MAR2017 64.0 0.0 20562. 20444.
2400 07MAR2017 43.0 0.0 20562. 20529.
2400 08MAR2017 38.0 0.0 20562. 20604.
2400 09MAR2017 33.0 0.0 20562. 20670.
2400 10MAR2017 33.0 0.0 20562. 20736.
2400 11MAR2017 28.0 0.0 20562. 20792.
2400 12MAR2017 27.0 0.0 20562. 20844.
2400 13MAR2017 26.0 0.0 20562. 20896.
2400 14MAR2017 19.0 0.0 20562. 20934.
2400 15MAR2017 22.0 0.0 20562. 20977.
2400 16MAR2017 14.0 0.0 20723. 21005.
2400 17MAR2017 17.0 0.0 20884. 21039.
2400 18MAR2017 14.0 0.0 21045. 21067.
2400 19MAR2017 19.0 0.0 21206. 21105.
2400 20MAR2017 19.0 0.0 21367. 21143.
2400 21MAR2017 19.0 0.0 21528. 21181.
2400 22MAR2017 31.0 0.0 21688. 21243.
2400 23MAR2017 20.0 0.0 21849. 21282.
1608
2400 24MAR2017 17.0 0.0 22010. 21315.
2400 25MAR2017 19.0 0.0 22171. 21353.
2400 26MAR2017 0.0 0.0 22332. 21353.
2400 27MAR2017 19.0 0.0 22493. 21430.
2400 28MAR2017 8.0 0.0 22654. 21445.
2400 29MAR2017 17.0 0.0 22815. 21478.
2400 30MAR2017 8.0 0.0 22976. 21493.
2400 31MAR2017 7.0 0.0 23137. 21507.
2400 01APR2017 7.0 0.0 23298. 21521.
2400 02APR2017 0.0 0.0 23459. 21445.
1 03DEC18 06:42:20 PAGE 5
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 03APR2017 97.0 0.0 23619. 21637.
2400 04APR2017 8.0 0.0 23780. 21652.
2400 05APR2017 4.5 0.0 23941. 21661.
2400 06APR2017 12.0 0.0 24102. 21685.
2400 07APR2017 0.0 0.0 24263. 21709.
2400 08APR2017 17.0 0.0 24424. 21743.
2400 09APR2017 8.0 0.0 24585. 21758.
2400 10APR2017 7.0 0.0 24746. 21772.
2400 11APR2017 13.0 0.0 24907. 21797.
2400 12APR2017 0.0 0.0 25068. 21801.
2400 13APR2017 13.0 0.0 25229. 21826.
2400 14APR2017 2.0 0.0 25390. 21830.
2400 15APR2017 8.0 0.0 25551. 21845.
2400 16APR2017 10.0 0.0 25711. 21864.
2400 17APR2017 5.0 0.0 25872. 21874.
2400 18APR2017 12.0 0.0 26033. 21898.
2400 19APR2017 0.0 0.0 26194. 21898.
2400 20APR2017 0.0 0.0 26355. 21935.
2400 21APR2017 0.0 0.0 26516. 21937.
2400 22APR2017 0.0 0.0 26677. 21937.
2400 23APR2017 10.0 0.0 26838. 21957.
2400 24APR2017 0.0 0.0 26999. 21952.
2400 25APR2017 3.0 0.0 27160. 21957.
2400 26APR2017 0.0 0.0 27321. 21957.
2400 27APR2017 3.0 0.0 27482. 21962.
2400 28APR2017 0.0 0.0 27642. 21962.
2400 29APR2017 0.0 0.0 27803. 21962.
2400 30APR2017 12.0 0.0 27964. 21986.
2400 01MAY2017 0.0 0.0 28125. 21962.
2400 02MAY2017 0.0 0.0 28286. 21962.
2400 03MAY2017 4.5 0.0 28447. 21971.
2400 04MAY2017 0.0 0.0 28608. 21952.
2400 05MAY2017 0.0 0.0 28769. 21957.
2400 06MAY2017 0.0 0.0 28930. 21947.
2400 07MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29091. 21937.
2400 08MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29252. 21937.
2400 09MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29413. 21932.
2400 10MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29573. 21923.
2400 11MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29734. 21918.
2400 12MAY2017 0.0 0.0 29895. 21918.
2400 13MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30056. 21903.
2400 14MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30217. 21894.
2400 15MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30378. 21884.
2400 16MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30539. 21836.
2400 17MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30700. 21869.
2400 18MAY2017 0.0 0.0 30861. 21867.
1 03DEC18 06:42:20 PAGE 6
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
1609
2400 19MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31183. 19919.
2400 20MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31344. 19915.
2400 21MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31505. 19901.
2400 22MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31665. 19896.
2400 23MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31826. 19887.
2400 24MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31987. 19873.
2400 25MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32148. 19869.
2400 26MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32309. 19864.
2400 27MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32470. 19901.
2400 28MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32631. 19855.
2400 29MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32792. 19850.
2400 30MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32953. 19823.
2400 31MAY2018 0.0 0.0 33114. 19813.
2400 01JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33275. 19804.
2400 02JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33436. 19800.
2400 03JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33596. 19800.
2400 04JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33757. 19786.
2400 05JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33918. 19763.
2400 06JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34079. 19740.
2400 07JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34240. 19726.
2400 08JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34401. 19722.
2400 09JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19703.
2400 10JUN2018 26.0 0.0 34562. 19754.
2400 11JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19754.
2400 12JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19676.
2400 13JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19667.
2400 14JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19653.
2400 15JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 16JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 17JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19616.
2400 18JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19607.
2400 19JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19593.
2400 20JUN2018 25.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 21JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19575.
2400 22JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19566.
2400 23JUN2018 34.0 0.0 34562. 19634.
2400 24JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19534.
2400 25JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19529.
2400 26JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19516.
2400 27JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19497.
2400 28JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19479.
2400 29JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19470.
2400 30JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19466.
2400 01JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19447.
2400 02JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19438.
2400 03JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19461.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 7
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 04JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19415.
2400 05JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19402.
2400 06JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19393.
2400 07JUL2018 37.0 0.0 34562. · 19466.
2400 08JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19361.
2400 09JUL2018 46.0 0.0 34562. 19452.
2400 10JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19347.
2400 11JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19320.
2400 12JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 13JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 14JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 15JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19275.
2400 16JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19261.
2400 17JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19252.
2400 18JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19243.
2400 19JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19225.
2400 20JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19207.
2400 21JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19198.
2400 22JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19180.
1610
2400 23JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21153.
2400 24JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21143.
2400 25JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21129.
2400 26JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21119.
2400 27JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21110.
2400 28JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21091.
2400 29JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21077.
2400 30JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21077.
2400 31JUL2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21072.
2400 01AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21048.
2400 02AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21039.
2400 03AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21024.
2400 04AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21015.
2400 05AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 21005.
2400 06AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 20986.
2400 07AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 20982.
2400 08AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 20967.
2400 09AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 20948.
2400 10AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34562. 20939.
2400 11AUG2017 0.0 0.0 34221. 20929.
2400 12AUG2017 0.0 0.0 33879. 20920.
2400 13AUG2017 0.0 0.0 33538. 20906.
2400 14AUG2017 0.0 0.0 33196. 20891.
2400 15AUG2017 0.0 0.0 32855. 20877.
2400 16AUG2017 0.0 0.0 32513. 20863.
2400 17AUG2017 0.0 0.0 32172. 20863.
2400 18AUG2017 0.0 0.0 31830. 20844.
1 03DEC18 06:42:20 PAGE 8
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 19AUG2017 0.0 0.0 31489. 20835.
2400 20AUG2017 0.0 0.0 31147. 20825.
2400 21AUG2017 0.0 0.0 30806. 20816.
2400 22AUG2017 0.0 0.0 30464. 20806.
2400 23AUG2017 0.0 0.0 30123. 20797.
2400 24AUG2017 0.0 0.0 29782. 20787.
2400 25AUG2017 0.0 0.0 29440. 20778.
2400 26AUG2017 0.0 0.0 29099. 20764.
2400 27AUG2017 0.0 0.0 28757. 20759.
2400 28AUG2017 0.0 0.0 28416. 20745.
2400 29AUG2017 0.0 0.0 28074. 20745.
2400 30AUG2017 0.0 0.0 27733. 20721.
2400 31AUG2017 0.0 0.0 27391. 20721.
2400 01SEP2017 0.0 0.0 27050. 20698.
2400 02SEP2017 0.0 0.0 26708. 20698.
2400 03SEP2017 0.0 0.0 26367. 20684.
2400 04SEP2017 0.0 0.0 26025. 20674.
2400 05SEP2017 0.0 0.0 25684. 20660.
2400 06SEP2017 0.0 0.0 25342. 20651.
2400 07SEP2017 0.0 0.0 25001. 20641.
2400 08SEP2017 0.0 0.0 24660. 20632.
2400 09SEP2017 0.0 0.0 24318. 20627.
2400 10SEP2017 0.0 0.0 23977. 20613.
2400 11SEP2017 0.0 0.0 23635. 20613.
2400 12SEP2017 0.0 0.0 23294. 20604.
2400 13SEP2017 0.0 0.0 22952. 20585.
2400 14SEP2017 0.0 0.0 22611. 20557.
2400 15SEP2017 0.0 0.0 22269. 20557.
2400 16SEP2017 2.5 0.0 21928. 20562.
2400 17SEP2017 0.0 0.0 21586. 20552.
2400 18SEP2017 0.0 0.0 21245. 20524.
2400 19SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20903. 20515.
2400 20SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20496.
2400 21SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20490.
2400 22SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20482.
2400 23SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20468.
2400 24SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20454.
2400 25SEP2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20454.
1611
2400 26SEP2017
2400 27SEP2017
2400 28SEP2017
2400 29SEP2017
2400 30SEP2017
0 . 0
0 . 0
2.5 0 . 0
0.0 0 . 0
0.0 0 . 0
0.0 0.0
20562.
20562 .
20562.
20562 .
20562 .
20449 .
20435.
20440 .
20435 .
20416 .
*** Advisory: Inflows are a computed value. The inflows are computed from changes in storages which can produce erratic hourly results. Inflows can be averaged over several hours to produce a more realistic value.
Accessibility
Contact Us
Contact PAO
FOIA
Infonnation Quality Act
Link Disclaimer
Privacy & Security
a
~
Public Inquiries
1612
Sacramento District
Water Control Data System
US Army Corps of Engineers
WCDSHOME GLOSSARY CONTACT DISTRICT HOME
I Plot Menu Pag§. 1 Plot I
27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 1
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac -ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER -AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 01OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20407.
2400 02OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 20398 .
2400 03OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 20388 .
2400 04OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20S62. 20384 .
2400 0SOCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562 . 20374.
2400 06OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20S62. 20370 .
2400 07OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20S62. 20356 .
2400 08OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20S62 . 20351.
2400 09OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20S62 . 20346 .
2400 10OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20337 .
2400 11OCT2017 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 20328.
2400 12OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 20328.
2400 13OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562 . 20314.
2400 14OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20309.
2400 15OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20304.
2400 16OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 20295 .
2400 17OCT2017 2.0 44.0 20562. 20211.
2400 18OCT2017 0.0 75.0 20562. 20063.
2400 19OCT2017 0.0 75.0 20562. 19910.
2400 20OCT2017 0.0 46.0 20562. 19809.
2400 21OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19809 .
2400 22OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562 . 19809.
2400 23OCT2017 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 19800.
2400 24OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19800.
2400 25OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19800.
2400 26OCT2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 19800 .
2400 27OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19790.
2400 28OCT2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19790.
2400 29OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562 . 19790 .
2400 30OCT2017 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 19786.
2400 31OCT2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19786.
2400 01NOV2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 19777.
2400 02NOV2017 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 19777.
2400 03NOV2017 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 19772.
2400 04NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19772.
2400 05NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19772.
2400 06NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19767.
2400 07NOV2017 0.0 0;0 20562. 19763.
2400 08NOV2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19758 .
2400 09NOV2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 19758 .
2400 10NOV2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562 . 19758 .
2400 11NOV2017 3.0 0 . 0 20562 . 19763 .
2400 12NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562 . 19763.
2400 13NOV2017 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 19754.
2400 14NOV2017 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 19744.
2400 15NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 2
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
1613
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16NOV2017 7.0 0.0 20562. 19758.
2400 17NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19758.
2400 18NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19758.
2400 19NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19758.
2400 20NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19754.
2400 21NOV2017 2.5 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 22NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 23NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 24NOV2017 2.5 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 25NOV2017 2.5 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 26NOV2017 0.0 2.5 20562. 19749.
2400 27NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 28NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 29NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 30NOV2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 01DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19735.
2400 02DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 03DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 04DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19726.
2400 05DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19722.
2400 06DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19722.
2400 07DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19717.
2400 08DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19717.
2400 09DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19717.
2400 10DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19708.
2400 11DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19703.
2400 12DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19699.
2400 13DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19699.
2400 14DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19699.
2400 15DEC2017 2.0 0.0 20562. 19703.
2400 16DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19699.
2400 17DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19685.
2400 18DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19685.
2400 19DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19685.
2400 20DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19680.
2400 21DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19680.
2400 22DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 23DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19676.
2400 24DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 25DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 26DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 27DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 28DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19662.
2400 29DEC2017 3.0 0.0 20562. 19667.
2400 30DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19662.
2400 31DEC2017 0.0 0.0 20562. 19662.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 3
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 01JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19662.
2400 02JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19662.
2400 03JAN2018 2.5 0.0 20562. 19667.
2400 04JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19667.
2400 05JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19667.
2400 06JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19676.
2400 07JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 08JAN2018 19.0 0.0 20562. 19708.
2400 09JAN2018 21.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 10JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19747.
2400 11JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 12JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 13JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 14JAN2018 3.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 15JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19744.
2400 16JAN2018 3.0 0.0 20562. 19749.
2400 17JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19754.
1614
2400 18JAN2018 3.0 0.0 20562. 19754.
2400 19JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19754.
2400 20JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19754.
2400 21JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19740.
2400 22JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19735.
2400 23JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19740.
2400 24JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19740.
2400 25JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19740.
2400 26JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19735.
2400 27JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 28JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 29J.A.N2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 30JAN2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 19735.
2400 31JAN2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 01FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19726.
2400 02FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19726.
2400 03FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19731.
2400 04FEB2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 19726.
2400 05FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19722.
2400 06FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19722.
2400 07 FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19717.
2400 08FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19717.
2400 09FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19712.
2400 10FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19712.
2400 11FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19708.
2400 12FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19708.
2400 13FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19708.
2400 14FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19585.
2400 15FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19694.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 4
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19685.
2400 17FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19680.
2400 18FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19680.
2400 19FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19671.
2400 20FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 21FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 22FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19648.
2400 23FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19648.
2400 24FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19644.
2400 25FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19639.
2400 26FEB2018 2.5 0.0 20562. 19644.
2400 27FEB2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 19648.
2400 28FEB2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19648.
2400 01MAR2018 11.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 02MAR2018 5.0 0.0 20562. 19667.
2400 03MAR2018 0.0 3.5 20562. 19662.
2400 04MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 05MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 06MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 07MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 08MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 09MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 10MAR2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 19657.
2400 11MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19635.
2400 12MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 13MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 14MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 19653.
2400 15MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20723. 19648.
2400 16MAR2018 0.0 0.0 20884. 19644.
2400 17MAR2018 2.0 0.0 21045. 19648.
2400 18MAR2018 0.0 0.0 21206. 19648.
2400 19MAR2018 0.0 0.0 21367. 19648.
2400 20MAR2018 5.0 0.0 21528. 19657.
2400 21MAR2018 7.0 0.0 21688. 19671.
2400 22MAR2018 79.0 0.0 21849. 19827.
2400 23MAR2018 86.0 0.0 22010. 19998.
1615
2400 24MAR2018 26.0 0.0 22171. 20049.
2400 25MAR2018 14.0 0.0 22332. 20077.
2400 26MAR2018 11.0 0.0 22493. 20100.
2400 27MAR2018 7.0 0.0 22654. 20114.
2400 28MAR2018 7.0 0.0 22815. 20128.
2400 29MAR2018 7.0 0.0 22976. 20141.
2400 30MAR2018 0.0 0.0 23137. 20141.
2400 31MAR2018 0.0 0.0 23298. 20115.
2400 01APR2018 0.0 0.0 23459. 20115.
2400 02APR2018 0.0 0.0 23619. 20151.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 5
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 03APR2018 0.0 0.0 23780. 20151.
2400 04APR2018 0.0 0.0 23941. 20141.
2400 05APR2018 3.0 0.0 24102. 20146.
2400 06APR2018 3.0 0.0 24263. 20151.
2400 07APR2018 5.0 0.0 24424. 20160.
2400 08APR2018 3.0 0.0 24585. 20165.
2400 09APR2018 5.0 0.0 24746. 20174.
2400 10APR2018 0.0 0.0 24907. 20174.
2400 11APR2018 0.0 0.0 25068. 20169.
2400 12APR2018 5.0 0.0 25229. 20179.
2400 13APR2018 0.0 0.0 25390. 20155.
2400 14APR2018 0.0 0.0 25551. 20155.
2400 15APR2018 0.0 0.0 25711. 20146.
2400 16APR2018 0.0 0.0 25872. 20146.
2400 17APR2018 0.0 0.0 26033. 20146.
2400 18APR2018 0.0 0.0 26194. 20141.
2400 19APR2018 0.0 0.0 26355. 20132.
2400 20APR2018 0.0 0.0 26516. 20132.
2400 21APR2018 0.0 0.0 26677. 20132.
2400 22APR2018 0.0 0.0 26838. 20128.
2400 23APR2018 0.0 0.0 26999. 20128.
2400 24APR2018 0.0 0.0 27160. 20118.
2400 25APR2018 0.0 0.0 27321. 20114.
2400 26APR2018 0.0 0.0 27482. 20100.
2400 27APR2018 0.0 0.0 27642. 20100.
2400 28APR2018 0.0 0.0 27803. 20090.
2400 29APR2018 0.0 0.0 27964. 20077.
2400 30APR2018 0.0 0.0 28125. 20077.
2400 01MAY2018 0.0 0.0 28286. 20067.
2400 02MAY2018 0.0 0.0 28447. 20053.
2400 03MAY2018 0.0 0.0 28608. 20072.
2400 04MAY2018 0.0 0.0 28769. 20049.
2400 05MAY2018 0.0 0.0 28930. 20044.
2400 06MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29091. 20040.
2400 07MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29252. 20035.
2400 08MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29413. 20040.
2400 09MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29573. 20021.
2400 10MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29734. 20026.
2400 11MAY2018 0.0 0.0 29895. 20012.
2400 12MAY2018 0.0 0.0 30056. 19984.
2400 13MAY2018 7.0 0.0 30217. 19998.
2400 14MAY2018 0.0 0.0 30378. 19970.
2400 15MAY2018 0.0 0.0 30539. 19956.
2400 16MAY2018 0.0 0.0 30700. 19947.
2400 17MAY2018 0.0 0.0 30861. 19942.
2400 18MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31022. 19933.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 6
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
1616
2400 19MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31183. 19919.
2400 20MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31344. 19915.
2400 21MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31505. 19901.
2400 22MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31665. 19896.
2400 23MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31826. 19887.
2400 24MAY2018 0.0 0.0 31987. 19873.
2400 25MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32148. 19869.
2400 26MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32309. 19864.
2400 27MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32470. 19901.
2400 28MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32631. 19855.
2400 29MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32792. 19850.
2400 30MAY2018 0.0 0.0 32953. 19823.
2406 31MAY2018 0.0 0.0 33114. 19813.
2400 01JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33275. 19804.
2400 02JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33436. 19800.
2400 03JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33596. 19800.
2400 04JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33757. 19786.
2400 05JUN2018 0.0 0.0 33918. 19763.
2400 06JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34079. 19740.
2400 07JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34240. 19726.
2400 08JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34401. 19722.
2400 09JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19703.
2400 10JUN2018 26.0 0.0 34562. 19754.
2400 11JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19754.
2400 12JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19676.
2400 13JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19667.
2400 14JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19653.
2400 15JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 16JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 17JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19616.
2400 18JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19607.
2400 19JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19593.
2400 20JUN2018 25.0 0.0 34562. 19644.
2400 21JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19575.
2400 22JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19566.
2400 23JUN2018 34.0 0.0 34562. 19634.
2400 24JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19534.
2400 25JUN2018 0,0 0.0 34562. 19529.
2400 26JUN2018 0,0 0.0 34562. 19516.
2400 27JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19497.
2400 28JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19479.
2400 29JUN2018 0,0 0.0 34562. 19470.
2400 30JUN2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19466.
2400 01JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19447.
2400 02JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19438.
2400 03JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19461.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 7
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 04JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19415.
2400 05JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19402.
2400 06JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19393.
2400 07JUL2018 37.0 0.0 34562. 19466.
2400 08JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19361.
2400 09JUL2018 46.0 0.0 34562. 19452.
2400 10JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19347.
2400 11JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19320.
2400 12JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 13JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 14JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19306.
2400 15JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19275.
2400 16JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19261.
2400 17JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19252.
2400 18JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19243.
2400 19JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19225.
2400 20JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19207.
2400 21JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19198.
2400 22JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19180.
1617
2400 23JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19175.
2400 24JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19162.
2400 25JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19144.
2400 26JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19130.
2400 27JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19116.
2400 28JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19112.
2400 29JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19089.
2400 30JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19080.
2400 31JUL2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19067.
2400 01AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19053.
2400 02AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19040.
2400 03AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 19026.
2400 04AUG2018 0.6 0.0 34562. 19008.
2400 05AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 18995.
2400 06AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 18986.
2400 07AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 18981.
2400 08AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 18963.
2400 09AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34562. 18954.
2400 10AUG2018 0.0 0.0 34221. 18941.
2400 11AUG2018 0.0 0.0 33879. 18936.
2400 12AUG2018 0.0 0.0 33538. 18914.
2400 13AUG2018 0.0 0.0 33196. 18901.
2400 14AUG2018 0.0 0.0 32855. 18887.
2400 15AUG2018 0.0 0.0 32513. 18878.
2400 16AUG2018 0.0 0.0 32172. 18878.
2400 17AUG2018 0.0 0.0 31830. 18860.
2400 18AUG2018 0.0 0.0 31489. 18847.
1 27NOV18 12:34:19 PAGE 8
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 19AUG2018 0.0 0.0 31147. 18838.
2400 20AUG2018 0.0 0.0 30806. 18820.
2400 21AUG2018 0.0 0.0 30464. 18820.
2400 22AUG2018 0.0 0.0 30123. 18807.
2400 23AUG2018 0.0 0.0 29782. 18791.
2400 24AUG2018 0.0 0.0 29440. 18775.
2400 25AUG2018 0.0 0.0 29099. 18762.
2400 26AUG2018 0.0 0.0 28757. 18757.
2400 27AUG2018 0.0 0.0 28416. 18744.
2400 28AUG2018 0.0 0.0 28074. 18726.
2400 29AUG2018 0.0 0.0 27733. 18722.
2400 30AUG2018 0.0 0.0 27391. 18708.
2400 31AUG2018 0.0 0.0 27050. 18704.
2400 01SEP2018 0.0 0.0 26708. 18699.
2400 02SEP2018 0.0 0.0 26367. 18686.
2400 03SEP2018 0.0 0.0 26025. 18682.
2400 04SEP2018 0.0 0.0 25684. 18673.
2400 05SEP2018 0.0 0.0 25342. 18664.
2400 06SEP2018 0.0 0.0 25001. 18664.
2400 07SEP2018 0.0 0.0 24660. 18650.
2400 08SEP2018 0.0 0.0 24318. 18637.
2400 09SEP2018 0.0 0.0 23977. 18628.
2400 10SEP2018 0.0 0.0 23635. 18615.
2400 11SEP2018 0.0 0.0 23294. 18601.
2400 12SEP2018 0.0 0.0 22952. 18588.
2400 13SEP2018 0.0 0.0 22611. 18570.
2400 14SEP2018 0.0 0.0 22269. 18570.
2400 15SEP2018 0.0 0.0 21928. 18548.
2400 16SEP2018 0.0 0.0 21586. 18544.
2400 17SEP2018 0.0 0.0 21245. 18535.
2400 18SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20903. 18530.
2400 19SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18517.
2400 20SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18508.
2400 21SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18499.
2400 22SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18495.
2400 23SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18495.
2400 24SEP2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18482.
2400 25SEP2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 18486.
1618
2400 26SEP2018
2400 27SEP2018
2400 28SEP2018
2400 29SEP2018
2400 30SEP2018
0.0 0 . 0
0.0 0 . 0
0 . 0
0.0 0 . 0
0.0 0.0
0.0 20562.
20562.
20562.
20562.
20562.
18463.
18464 .
18464 .
18446.
18442.
*** Advisory: Inflows are a computed value. The inflows are computed from changes in storages which can produce erratic hourly results. Inflows can be averaged over several hours to produce a more realistic value.
Accessibility
Contact Us
Contact PAO
FOIA
Infonnation Quality Act
Link Disclaimer
Privacy & Security
Public Inquiries
1619
Sacramento District
Water Control Data System
US Army Corps of Engineers
WCDSIIOME GLOSSARY CONTACT DISTRICT HOME
I Plot Menu Pag~ I Plot I
26APR19 07:41:19 PAGE 1
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 01OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18429.
2400 02OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18424.
2400 03OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18415.
2400 04OCT2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 18411.
2400 05OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562 . 18402.
2400 06OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18398.
2400 07OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562 . 18384.
2400 08OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18380.
2400 09OCT2018 5 . 0 0.0 20562. 18389.
2400 10OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562 . 18367 .
2400 11OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562 . 18358.
2400 12OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18354.
2400 13OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562 . 18345.
2400 14OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18336.
2400 15OCT2018 0.0 0.0 20562 . 18331.
2400 16OCT2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 18327 .
2400 17OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18318.
2400 18OCT2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 18314 .
2400 19OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562 . 18305 .
2400 20OCT2018 0 .0 0.0 20562. 18301 .
2400 21OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18301 .
2400 22OCT2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562 . 18287.
2400 23OCT2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18287.
2400 24OCT2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18287.
2400 25OCT2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18279.
2400 26OCT2018 0 .0 0.0 20562 . 18274.
2400 27OCT2018 0 .0 0.0 20562 . 18274.
2400 28OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18265 .
2400 29OCT2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18261 .
2400 30OCT2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18252 .
2400 31OCT2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18248.
2400 01NOV2018 0 . 0 0 .0 20562. 18239 .
2400 02NOV2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 18239.
2400 03NOV2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18230.
2400 04NOV2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562. 18230.
2400 05NOV2018 0 . 0 0 . 0 20562. 18221.
2400 06NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562 . 18221.
2400 07NOV2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562. 18217.
2400 08NOV2018 0 .0 0 . 0 20562. 18204.
2400 09NOV2018 0 .0 0.0 20562 . 18204.
2400 10NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204 .
2400 11NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562 . 18204 .
2400 12NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562 . 18204 .
2400 13NOV2018 0 . 0 0.0 20562 . 18204 .
2400 14NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562 . 18204 .
2400 15NOV2018 0.0 0 . 0 20562 . 18204 .
1 26APR19 07:41 : 19 PAGE 2
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW -RES IN FLOW -RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR- RES EOP
cfs cfs ac -ft ac -ft
1620
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 17NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 18NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 19NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 20NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 21NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18164.
2400 22NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 23NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 24NOV2018 7.0 0.0 20562. 18182.
2400 25NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18160.
2400 26NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18160.
2400 27NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18160.
2400 28NOV2018 13.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 29NOV2018 11.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 30NOV2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 01DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 02DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 03DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18195.
2400 04DEC2018 2.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 05DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 06DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 07DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 08DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18195.
2400 09DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18195.
2400 10DEC2018 9.0 0.0 20562. 18213.
2400 11DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18195.
2400 12DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18191.
2400 13DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18191.
2400 14DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18191.
2400 15DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 16DEC2018 36.0 0.0 20562. 18257.
2400 17DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18213.
2400 18DEC2018 64.0 0.0 20562. 18340.
2400 19DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 20DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 21DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 22DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 23DEC2018 3.0 0.0 20562. 18204.
2400 24DEC2018 39.0 0.0 20562. 18283.
2400 25DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18265.
2400 26DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 27DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18195.
2400 28DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18208.
2400 29DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 30DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 31DEC2018 0.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
1 26APR19 07:41:19 PAGE 3
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 01JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18178.
2400 02JAN2019 4.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 03JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 04JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 05JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 06JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18169.
2400 07JAN2019 15.0 0.0 20562. 18199.
2400 08JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18182.
2400 09JAN2019 31.0 0.0 20562. 18243.
2400 10JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18182.
2400 11JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18182.
2400 12JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18182.
2400 13JAN2019 73.0 0.0 20562. 18327.
2400 14JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18178.
2400 15JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18178.
2400 16JAN2019 4.0 0.0 20562. 18186.
2400 17JAN2019 40.0 0.0 20562. 18265.
1621
2400 18JAN2019 40.0 31.0 20562. 18327.
2400 19JAN2019 27.0 31.0 20562. 18380.
2400 20JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18380.
2400 21JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18424.
2400 22JAN2019 6.0 0.0 20562. 18437.
2400 23JAN2019 9.0 0.0 20562. 18455.
2400 24JAN2019 11.0 0.0 20562. 18477.
2400 25JAN2019 9.0 0.0 20562. 18495.
2400 26JAN2019 5,0 0.0 20562. 18504.
2400 27JAN2019 7.0 0.0 20562. 18517.
2400 28JAN2019 7.0 0.0 20562. 18517.
2400 29JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18535.
2400 30JAN2019 0.6 0.0 20562. 18548.
2400 31JAN2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18548.
2400 01FEB2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18566.
2400 02FEB2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 18659.
2400 03FEB2019 99.0 0.0 20562. 18856.
2400 04F EB2019 620.0 0.0 20562. 20086.
2400 05FEB2019 1282.0 0,0 20562. 21153.
2400 06FEB2019 164.0 200.0 20562. 21081.
2400 07FEB2019 97.0 200.0 20562. 20877.
2400 08FEB2019 46.0 200.0 20562. 20571.
2400 09FEB2019 141.0 200.0 20562. 20454.
2400 10FEB2019 452.0 200.0 20562. 20953.
2400 11FEB2019 188.0 200.0 20562. 20929.
2400 12FEB2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 20929.
2400 13FEB2019 27.0 200.0 20562. 20477.
2400 14FEB2019 584.0 200.0 20562. 21239.
2400 15FEB2019 513.0 200.0 20562. 21860.
1 26APR19 07:41:19 PAGE 4
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac-ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST-VAL
2400 16FEB2019 374.0 200.0 20562. 22205.
2400 17FEB2019 242.0 200.0 20562. 22289.
2400 18FEB2019 143.0 200.0 20562. 22176.
2400 19FEB2019 89.0 200.0 20562. 21957.
2400 20FEB2019 68.0 200.0 20562. 21695.
2400 21FEB2019 76.0 200.0 20562. 21449.
2400 22FEB2019 39.0 200.0 20562. 21129.
2400 23FEB2019 33.0 200.0 20562. 20797.
2400 24FEB2019 32.0 200.0 20562. 20463.
2400 25FEB2019 25.0 150.0 20562. 20216.
2400 26FEB2019 25.0 100.0 20562. 20067.
2400 27FEB2019 21.0 100.0 20562. 19910.
2400 28FEB2019 0.0 0.0 20562. 19910.
2400 01MAR2019 21.0 0.0 20562. 19882.
2400 02MAR2019 35.0 0.0 20562. 19952.
2400 03MAR2019 37.0 0.0 20562. 20026.
2400 04MAR2019 28.0 0.0 20562. 20081.
2400 05MAR2019 30.0 0.0 20562. 20141.
2400 06MAR2019 54.0 0.0 20562. 20248.
2400 07MAR2019 123.0 0.0 20562. 20491.
2400 08MAR2019 97.0 0.0 20562. 20684.
2400 09MAR2019 64.0 0.0 20562. 20811.
2400 10MAR2019 62.0 0.0 20562. 20934.
2400 11MAR2019 65.0 0.0 20562. 21062.
2400 12MAR2019 50.0 0.0 20562. 21162.
2400 13MAR2019 34.0 0.0 20562. 21229.
2400 14MAR2019 31.0 0.0 20562. 21291.
2400 15MAR2019 27.0 0.0 20723. 21344.
2400 16MAR2019 24.0 0.0 20884. 21392.
2400 17MAR2019 24.0 0.0 21045. 21440.
2400 18MAR2019 17.0 0.0 21206. 21473.
2400 19MAR2019 20.0 0.0 21367. 21512.
2400 20MAR2019 43.0 0.0 21528. 21555.
2400 21MAR2019 29.0 0.0 21688. 21584.
2400 22MAR2019 24.0 0.0 21849. 21608.
2400 23MAR2019 87.0 0.0 22010. 21695.
1622
2400 24MAR2019 0.0 0.0 22171. 21690.
2400 25MAR2019 10.0 0 .0 22332. 21709.
2400 26MAR2019 15 .0 0 . 0 22493. 21738.
2400 27MAR2019 10 .0 0 . 0 22654 . 21758 .
2400 28MAR2019 15.0 0.0 22815. 21787.
2400 29MAR2019 10.0 0.0 22976. 21806.
2400 30MAR2019 5.0 0.0 23137. 21816.
2400 31MAR2019 15.0 0.0 23298 . 21845.
2400 01APR2019 8 . 0 0.0 23459 . 21860.
2400 02APR2019 2 . 0 0 .0 23619. 21864.
1 26APR19 07:41:19
LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS LOS BANOS
FLOW-RES IN FLOW-RES OUT TOP CON STOR STOR-RES EOP
cfs cfs ac -ft ac-ft
TIME DATE PER-AVER PER-AVER INST-VAL INST -VAL
2400 03APR2019 42.0 0 . 0 23780. 21947.
2400 04APR2019 0 . 0 0.0 23941. 21889.
2400 05APR2019 10.0 0 . 0 24102. 21908.
2400 06APR2019 3 . 0 0 . 0 24263. 21913.
2400 07APR2019 8.0 0 . 0 24424. 21928.
2400 08APR2019 2.0 0.0 24585 . 21932.
2400 09APR2019 5.0 0.0 24746 . 21942.
2400 10APR2019 0.0 0.0 24907. 21937.
2400 11APR2019 0.0 0 . 0 25068. 21932.
2400 12APR2019 5.0 0.0 25229. 21942.
2400 13APR2019 0.0 0.0 25390 . 21942.
2400 14APR2019 0.0 0.0 25551. 21937.
2400 15APR2019 3.0 0.0 25711. 21942.
2400 16APR2019 0.0 0.0 25872. 21937.
2400 17APR2019 3.0 0 . 0 26033. 21942.
2400 18APR2019 0.0 0.0 26194. 21942.
2400 19APR2019 3.0 0 . 0 26355 . 21947 .
2400 20APR2019 0.0 0 . 0 26516. 21942.
2400 21APR2019 0.0 0.0 26677 . 21937.
2400 22APR2019 0.0 0.0 26838 . 21937.
2400 23APR2019 0.0 0 . 0 26999. 21932.
2400 24APR2019 0.0 0.0 27160. 21932.
2400 25APR2019 3.0 0 .0 21937.
*** AdYisory: Inflows are a computed Yalue. The inflows are computed from changes in storages which can produce erratic hourly results. Inflows can be ayeraged oYer seyeral hours to produce a more realistic Yalue.
Accessibility
Contact Us
Contact PAO
FOIA
PAGE 5
Infonnation Quality Act
Link Disclaimer
Privacy & Security
Public Inquiries
1623
APPENDIX C
PUMPAGE FROM WELLS
1624
SJREC GSA updated 04/29/2019
ANNUAL PUMPAGE IN ACRE FEET FOR DEEP WELLS LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LOS BANOS URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AREA AND IN THE AREA SOUTH TO THE STATE AQUEDUCT 'Mth and without the LOS BANOS CREEK SUB-AREA
I DEEP WELL STUDY AREA
SUMMARY TABLE A
Deep wells in City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary
Sum A+B+C
Deep Wells 0/S City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary
Sum D+E
Deep Wells - LB Creek Sub-Area
Sum F
Sum G
Deep Wells DMC!Aqueduct - LB Creek Sub-Area
Sum H+l+J
Deep Wells others-SLWD LB Creek Sub-Area
Sum L
Sum A+B+C+O+E
Sum F+G+H+l+J+L
Total (AF)
Sum A+B+C+D+E (%)
Sum F+G+H+l+J+L (%)
SUMMARY TABLE B
Total - CITY (A)
Total - PRIVATE (IN URBAN) (B)
Total - PRIVATE (0/S URBAN) (E+F+H)
Total - CCID (IN URBAN) (C)
Total - CCID (IN URBAN) (D)
Total - CCID (O/S URBAN) (G)
Total - PRIVATE OTHERS (0/S URBAN) (l+J+L)
2007! 2008!
14,7971 14,754!
5,7671 6,982!
4 580 4 642
4 012 2 790
1,319! 4,3971
6 006! 9 058I
20,564! 21 7361
15,917! 20,886!
36,482 I 42,622!
56%1 51%1
44%1 49%)
9113 8876
4 221 4 957
9 643 13161
1 463 922
1 314 930
4 012 2 790
6 716 10 986
2009! 20101 2011!
8 6281 8,3141 14153!
6,1181 5 019! 5,4391
5,392 6 330 5,247
1,403 176 1,252
5 2391 1,024! 2261
9495! 7,9101 8,7701
14,745! 13,3331 19 591 I
21,530! 15,4401 15,495!
36,275! 28,7731 35,086!
41%1 46°/o! 56%!
59%1 54%! 44%!
877 809 7718
6,460 6,916 6 000
13,190 11,275 10,372
1 291 589 435
991 510 314
1 403 176 1 252
12 062 8,499 8 996
20121 20131 20141 20151 20161 20171
15.861 I 11 633! 7,0641 13779! 9,5401 8,2861
4,1721 7,470! 54941 4 978! 8441- 1,735!
4,256 2,812 6 846 6139 1 970 1173
3,644 3 503 2,528 2177 174 18
4,3031 3,1001 4 340! 1776! 2 859! ol
8,4661 6,439! 7,726! 7,4461 4,380! 1,309!
20 0331 19,102! 12,558! 18,7571 10,384! 10,021 I
20,670! 15,8551 21,440! 17,5381 9,383! 2,5001
40,702! 34,9571 33,998! 36,2951 19,7671 12 521 I
49%! 55%1 37%1 52%1 53°/o! 80°/o!
51%! 45%1 63%! 48%1 47°/o! 20°/o!
8313 7955 0 6057 6622 7412
6 058 2161 5 971 6 852 2 789 867
9 062 9256 12,103 10 748 2 814 2 902
1 490 1,517 1 093 870 130 7
1 206 1 026 717 966 0 6
3 644 3503 2,528 2177 174 18
10 929 9,539 11,586 8 625 7 239 1 309
20181
8,668!
3,407!
1,393
205
211 I
41901
12 0761
5,9991
18,0741
67°/o!
33%1
7659
973
4 793
36 14
205
4 394
Total (AF) 364821 42,622! 36,2751 28,7731 35086! 40702! 34,9571 33,998! 36,2951 197671 12,5211 180741 NOTES:
A. City of Los Banos Wells
B. Private Deep Wells within the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary C. CCID Deep Wells within the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary D. CCID Deep Wells 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary E. Private Deep Wells 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary F. Private Deep Wells 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary Los Banos Creek Sub-Area
G. CClD Deep Wells 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary Los Banos Creek Sub-Area
H. Deep Wells - DMC Pumpers 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary Los Banos Creek Sub-Area
I. Deep Wells - DMC Pumpers - SLWD 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary Los Banos Creek Sub-Area
J. Deep Wells Aqueduct Pumpers - SLWD 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary Los Banos Creek Sub-Area
L. Deep Wells - others-SLWD - 0/S the City of Los Banos Urban Growth Boundary 1625
APPENDIX D
RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF
WATER FROM CITY WELLS
1626
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
ASSOCIATES
Certificate of Analysis
Sample ID: A7G1000-01 Sample Date - Time: 07/12/17 - 08:53 Sampled By: Ryan Harris Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Description: Well 1 Sample Type: Grab
Field Data: pH=7.07 Temp=25.9 °C
BSK Associates Laboratory Fresno
General Chemistry
Aggressive Index 12 A709340 07/24/17 07/24/17
Alkalinity as CaCO3 SM 2320B 190 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 SM 2320B 190 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Carbonate as CaCO3 SM 2320B ND 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Hydroxide as CaCO3 SM 2320B ND 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Chloride EPA300.0 97 1.0 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Color, Apparent SM 2120B ND 5.0 cu A708680 07/12/17 18:51 07/12/17 Conductivity @ 25C SM 2510B 820 1.0 umhos/cm A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Fluoride EPA 300.0 0.12 0.10 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Hexavalent Chromium EPA 218.7 35 0.25 ug/L 5 A708827 07/13/17 07/13/17 Langelier Index SM 2330B 0.35 A709340 07/24/17 07/24/17 MBAS, Calculated as LAS, mol wt 340 SM 5540C ND 0.050 mg/L A708807 07/12/17 20:00 07/12/17 Nitrate+ Nitrite as N EPA300.0 4.0 0.23 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 10:53 07/13/17 Nitrate as N EPA300.0 4.0 0.23 mg/L A708812. 07/13/17 10:53 07/13/17 Nitrite as N EPA 300.0 ND 0.050 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 10:53 07/13/17 Threshold Odor SM 2150B ND 1.0 T.O.N. A708607 07/12/17 18:25 07/12/17 Perchlorate EPA 314.0 ND 2.0 ug/L A709365 07/25/17 07/25/17 pH (1) SM 4500-H+ B 7.9 pH Units A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 pH Temperature in °C 23.4
Sulfate as SO4 EPA 300.0 73 1.0 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Total Dissolved Solids SM 2540C 480 5.0 mg/L A708826 07/13/17 07/17/17 Turbidity SM 2130B ND 0.10 NTU A708680 07/12/17 19:16 07/12/17 Metals
Aluminum EPA200.7 ND 0.050 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Antimony EPA200.8 ND 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Arsenic EPA200.8 6.1 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Barium EPA 200.7 0.073 0.050 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Beryllium EPA200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Cadmium EPA 200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Calcium EPA 200.7 54 0.10 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 MS1.4 Chromium EPA200.8 35 10 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Copper EPA200.8 ND 5.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Iron EPA 200.7 ND 0.030 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17
Lead EPA200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Magnesium EPA 200.7 27 0.10 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Manganese EPA 200.7 ND 0.010 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Mercury EPA200.8 ND 0.20 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 CVO.O Nickel EPA200.8 ND 10 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Potassium EPA200.7 2.5 2.0 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Selenium EPA200.8 4.1 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 A7G1000 FINAL 07272017 1611
Printed: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt www.BSKAssociates.com Page 5 of 76 1627
\ 1
)1 A7G1000
JI General DW - EDT
./.I
ASSOCIATES
Certificate of Analysis
Sample ID: A7G1000-01 Sample Date - Time: 07 /12/17 - 08:53 Sampled By: Ryan Harris Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Description: Well 1 Sample Type: Grab
Field Data: pH=7.07 Temp=25.9 °C
Metals
Silver EPA 200.8 ND 10 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Sodium EPA 200.7 68 1.0 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 MS1.4 Thallium EPA 200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Hardness as CaCO3 SM 2340B 240 0.41 mg/L
Zinc EPA 200.7 ND 0.050 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17
Radiological
Gross Alpha SM 7110C 1.51 pCi/L A709096 07/19/17 07/20/17
1.65 Sigma Uncertainty 0.220 ±
MDA95 1.06 pCi/L
Organics
EDB and DBCP bJl GC-ECD
Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) EPA 504.1 ND 0.010 ug/L A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17 Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) EPA 504.1 ND 0.020 ug/L A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17 Surrogate: 1-Br-2-Nitrobenzene EPA 504.1 98% Acceptable range: 70-130 % EPA 505 - Simazine, Atrazine, and Alachlor Onlll
Alachlor EPA 505 ND 1.0 ug/L A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
Atrazine EPA 505 ND 0.50 ug/L A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17 Simazine EPA 505 ND 1.0 ug/L A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
Surrogate: 1-Br-2-Nitrobenzene EPA 505 98% Acceptable range: 70-130 % Volatile Organics bll GC-MS
1, 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13117 07/13/17 1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane EPA524.2 ND 10 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1,2-Trichloroethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1-Dichloroethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1-Dichloroethene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1, 1-Dichloropropene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2-Dichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2-Dichloroethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,2-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,3-Dichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 A7G1000 FINAL 07272017 1611
Pr'1nted: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-1 0 Final.rpt www.BSKAssociates.com Page 6 of 76 1628
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
ASSOCIATES
Certificate of Analysis
Sample ID: A7G1000-01 Sample Date - Time: 07 /12/17 - 08:53 Sampled By: Ryan Harris Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Description: Well 1 Sample Type: Grab
Field Data: pH=7.07 Temp=25.9 °C
Organics
Volatile Organics b~ GC-MS
1,3-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,4-Dichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2,2-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Butanone EPA 524.2 ND 5.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Chlorotoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Hexanone EPA 524.2 ND 10 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 4-Chlorotoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 4-Methyl-2-pentanone EPA 524.2 ND 5.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Acetone EPA 524.2 ND 10 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
Benzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromochloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromodichloromethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromoform EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromomethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Carbon Tetrachloride EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chlorobenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloroethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloroform EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloromethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dibromochloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dibromomethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dichlorodifluoromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dichloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Di-isopropyl ether (DIPE) EPA 524.2 ND 3.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Ethylbenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Hexachlorobutadiene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 lsopropylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 m,p-Xylenes EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Methyl-I-butyl ether EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Naphthalene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 n-Butylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 n-Propylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 a-Xylene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 p-lsopropyltoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 sec-Butyl benzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Styrene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) EPA 524.2 ND 3.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) EPA524.2 ND 2.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Butylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 A7G1000 FINAL07272017 1611
Printed: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt www.BSKAssociates.com Page 7 of 76 1629
ASSOCIATES
Sample ID: A7G1000-01
Sampled By: Ryan Harris
Sample Description: Well 1
Field Data: pH=7.07 Temp=25.9 °C
Volatile Organics bl£ GC-MS
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)
Toluene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
Trichloroethene (TCE)
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl Chloride
Surrogate: 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4
Surrogate: Bromofluorobenzene
Total 1,3-Dichloropropene
Total Trihalomethanes
Total Xylenes, EPA 524.2
A7G1000 FINAL 07272017 1611
Printed: 7/2712017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt
EPA 524.2
EPA524.2
EPA524.2
EPA524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA524.2
Certificate of Analysis
Organics
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 5.0 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
92% Acceptable range:
103 % Acceptable range:
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
www.BSKAssociates.com
70-130%
70-130%
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
Sample Date -Time: 07/12/17 - 08:53
Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Type: Grab
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
1630
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
ASSOCIATES
Certificate of Analysis
Sample ID: A7G1000-02 Sample Date - Time: 07/12/17 - 09:08 Sampled By: Ryan Harris Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Description: Well 2 Sample Type: Grab
Field Data: pH=6.99 Temp=24.8 °C
BSK Associates Laboratory Fresno
General Chemistry
Aggressive Index 12 A709340 07/24/17 07/24/17
Alkalinity as CaCO3 SM 2320B 180 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Bicarbonate as CaCO3 SM 2320B 180 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Carbonate as CaCO3 SM 2320B ND 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Hydroxide as CaCO3 SM 2320B ND 3.0 mg/L A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Chloride EPA 300.0 86 1.0 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Color, Apparent SM 2120B ND 5.0 cu A708680 07/12/17 18:53 07/12/17 Conductivity @ 25C SM 2510B 770 1.0 umhos/cm A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 Fluoride EPA 300.0 0.12 0.10 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Hexavalent Chromium EPA218.7 34 0.25 ug/L 5 A708827 07/13/17 07/13/17 Langelier Index SM 2330B 0.40 A709340 07/24/17 07/24/17 MBAS, Calculated as LAS, mol wt 340 SM 5540C ND 0.050 mg/L A708807 07/12/17 20:00 07/12/17 Nitrate + Nitrite as N EPA 300.0 4.2 0.23 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 11:05 07/13/17 Nitrate as N EPA 300.0 4.2 0.23 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 11:05 07/13/17 Nitrite as N EPA 300.0 ND 0.050 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 11:05 07/13/17 Threshold Odor SM 2150B ND 1.0 T.O.N. A708607 07/12/17 18:25 07/12/17 Perchlorate EPA 314.0 ND 2.0 ug/L A709365 07/25/17 07/25/17 pH (1) SM 4500-H+ B 8.0 pH Units A708761 07/12/17 07/12/17 pH Temperature in °c 23.4
Sulfate as SO4 EPA 300.0 64 1.0 mg/L A708812 07/13/17 07/13/17 Total Dissolved Solids SM 2540C 440 5.0 mg/L A708826 07/13/17 07/17/17 Turbidity SM 2130B 0.42 0.10 NTU A708680 07/12/17 19:18 07/12/17 Metals
Aluminum EPA 200.7 ND 0.050 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Antimony EPA 200.8 ND 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Arsenic EPA 200.8 5.3 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 Barium EPA 200.7 0.067 0.050 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Beryllium EPA200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 CV0.0 Cadmium EPA200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Calcium EPA200.7 50 0.10 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Chromium EPA200.8 34 10 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Copper EPA200.8 ND 5.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Iron EPA 200.7 ND 0.030 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17
Lead EPA 200.8 ND 1.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Magnesium EPA200.7 26 0.10 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Manganese EPA200.7 ND 0.010 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Mercury EPA200.8 ND 0.20 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 CV0.0 Nickel EPA200.8 ND 10 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
Potassium EPA200.7 2.5 2.0 mg/L A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17 Selenium EPA200.8 ND 2.0 ug/L A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17 A7G1000 FINAL07272017 1611
Printed: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt www.BSKAssociates.com Page 9 of 76 1631
ASSOCIATES
Sample ID: A7G1000-02
Sampled By: Ryan Harris
Sample Description: Well 2
Field Data: pH=6.99 Temp=24.8 °C
Silver EPA200.8
Sodium EPA200.7
Thallium EPA 200.8
Hardness as CaCO3 SM 2340B
Zinc EPA200.7
Gross Alpha SM 7110C
1.65 Sigma Uncertainty
MDA95
EDB and DBCP bl£ GC-ECD
Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) EPA504.1
Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) EPA 504.1
Surrogate: 1-Br-2-Nitrobenzene EPA504.1
EPA 505 - Simazine, Atrazine, and Alachlor On Ill
Alachlor EPA 505
Atrazine EPA 505
Simazine EPA 505
Surrogate: 1-Br-2-Nitrobenzene EPA505
Volatile Organics bl£ GC-MS
1, 1, 1,2-Tetrachloroethane EPA 524.2
1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane EPA 524.2
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane EPA 524.2
1, 1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane EPA524.2
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane EPA 524.2
1, 1-Dichloroethane EPA524.2
1, 1-Dichloroethene EPA 524.2
1, 1-Dichloropropene EPA 524.2
1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene EPA 524.2
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene EPA 524.2
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene EPA524.2
1,2-Dichlorobenzene EPA 524.2
1,2-Dichloroethane EPA 524.2
1,2-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene EPA 524.2
1,3-Dichlorobenzene EPA524.2
A7G1000 FINAL07272017 1611
Printed: 7/2712017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt
Certificate of Analysis
Metals
ND 10 ug/L
66 1.0 mg/L
ND 1.0 ug/L
230 0.41 mg/L
ND 0.050 mg/L
Radiological
2.01 pCi/L
0.246 ±
1.06 pCi/L
Organics
ND 0.010 ug/L
ND 0.020 ug/L
104 % Acceptable range:
ND 1.0 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 1.0 ug/L
104% Acceptable range:
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 10 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
www.BSKAssociates.com
70-130%
70-130%
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
Sample Date -Time: 07/12/17 - 09:08
Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Type: Grab
A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17
A708842 07/13/17 07/20/17
A708842 07/13/17 07/21/17
A709096 07/19/17 07/20/17
A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
A708902 07/14/17 07/14/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
1632
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
ASSOCIATES
Certificate of Analysis
Sample ID: A7G1000-02 Sample Date - Time: 07/12/17 - 09:08 Sampled By: Ryan Harris Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Description: Well 2 Sample Type: Grab
Field Data: pH=6.99 Temp=24.8 °C
Organics
Volatile Organics b~ GC-MS
1,3-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 1,4-Dichlorobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2,2-Dichloropropane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Butanone EPA 524.2 ND 5.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Chlorotoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 2-Hexanone EPA 524.2 ND 10 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 4-Chlorotoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 4-Methyl-2-pentanone EPA 524.2 ND 5.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Acetone EPA 524.2 ND 10 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
Benzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromobenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromochloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromodichloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromoform EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Bromomethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Carbon Tetrachloride EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chlorobenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloroethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloroform EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Chloromethane EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dibromochloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dibromomethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dichlorodifluoromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Dichloromethane EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Di-isopropyl ether (DIPE) EPA524.2 ND 3.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Ethyl tert-Butyl Ether (ETBE) EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Ethylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Hexachlorobutadiene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 lsopropylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 m,p-Xylenes EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Methyl-I-butyl ether EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Naphthalene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 n-Butylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 n-Propylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 a-Xylene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 p-lsopropyltoluene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 sec-Butylbenzene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 Styrene EPA 524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Amyl Methyl Ether (TAME) EPA524.2 ND 3.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) EPA524.2 ND 2.0 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 tert-Butylbenzene EPA524.2 ND 0.50 ug/L A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17 A7G1000 FINAL 07272017 1611
Printed: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-1 0 Final.rpt www.BSKAssociates.com Page 11 of 76 1633
.\' \,
jj
ASSOCIATES
Sample ID: A7G1000-02
Sampled By: Ryan Harris
Sample Description: Well 2
Field Data: pH=6.99 Temp=24.8 °C
Volatile Organics by: GC-MS
Tetrachloroethene (PCE)
Toluene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
Trichloroethene (TCE)
Trichlorofluoromethane
Vinyl Chloride
Surrogate: 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4
Surrogate: Bromofluorobenzene
Total 1,3-Dichloropropene
Total Trihalomethanes
Total Xylenes, EPA 524.2
A7G1000 FINAL07272017 1611
Printed: 7/27/2017
QA-RP-0001-10 Final.rpt
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
EPA 524.2
Certificate of Analysis
Organics
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 5.0 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
104% Acceptable range:
100% Acceptable range:
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
ND 0.50 ug/L
www.BSKAssociates.com
70-130%
70-130 %
A7G1000
General DW - EDT
Sample Date -Time: 07/12/17 - 09:08
Matrix: Drinking Water
Sample Type: Grab
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17
A708850 07/13/17 07/13/17