The following addendum hereby amends and/or modifies the Proposal Documents and specifications as originally issued for this project. All proposers are subject to the provisions of this Addendum.
This Addendum consists of:
• Minutes, Questions and Clarifications from Pre-Proposal Meeting held via Webex on September 14, 2022
• Sign-In Sheet(s) from Pre-Proposal Meeting
• Questions Submitted in Writing
• Attachment - Financial Ratio Evaluation Excel Spreadsheet Receipt of addendum MUST be acknowledged in the submitted proposal. It is the Proposer’s ultimate responsibility to ensure that they have all applicable addenda prior to bid submittal.
This acknowledgment form must be signed, dated, and included with your submitted proposal ____________________________________ _______________________ Company Name Date
______ __________________________________
Signature Please Print Name
All bids must be received before 12:00 (noon) by the Bid Opening date. Bids shall be delivered to Cobb County Purchasing Department, 122 Waddell Street NE, Marietta, GA 30060.
Carahsoft Technology Corporation 10/12/22
Kristina Smith
ATTACHMENT F
Addendum 2
Please find our completed Addendum 2 beginning on the following page.
ATTACHMENT F
ADDENDUM No. 2
Sealed Bid # 23-6692
Request for Proposals
Technology Product Solutions and Related Services
Cobb County Purchasing Department
Date: September 30, 2022
The following addendum hereby amends and/or modifies the Proposal Documents and specifications as originally issued for this project. All proposers are subject to the provisions of this Addendum.
This Addendum consists of:
• Questions Submitted in Writing
Receipt of addendum MUST be acknowledged in the submitted proposal. It is the Proposer’s ultimate responsibility to ensure that they have all applicable addenda prior to bid submittal.
This acknowledgment form must be signed, dated, and included with your submitted proposal ____________________________________ _______________________ Company Name Date
______ __________________________________
Signature Please Print Name
All bids must be received before 12:00 (noon) by the Bid Opening date. Bids shall be delivered to Cobb County Purchasing Department, 122 Waddell Street NE, Marietta, GA 30060.
Carahsoft Technology Corporation 10/12/22
Kristina Smith
ATTACHMENT F
Addendum 3
Please find our completed Addendum 3 beginning on the following page.
ATTACHMENT F
ADDENDUM No. 3
Sealed Bid # 23-6692
Request for Proposals
Technology Product Solutions and Related Services
Cobb County Purchasing Department
Date: October 5, 2022
The following addendum hereby amends and/or modifies the Proposal Documents and specifications as originally issued for this project. All proposers are subject to the provisions of this Addendum.
This Addendum consists of:
• Questions Submitted in Writing
Receipt of addendum MUST be acknowledged in the submitted proposal. It is the Proposer’s ultimate responsibility to ensure that they have all applicable addenda prior to bid submittal.
This acknowledgment form must be signed, dated, and included with your submitted proposal ____________________________________ _______________________ Company Name Date
______ __________________________________
Signature Please Print Name
All bids must be received before 12:00 (noon) by the Bid Opening date. Bids shall be delivered to Cobb County Purchasing Department, 122 Waddell Street NE, Marietta, GA 30060.
Carahsoft Technology Corporation 10/12/22
Kristina Smith
ATTACHMENT F
Carahsoft Organization Chart
ATTACHMENT F
Carahsoft Line Card
Please find the Carahsoft Line Card beginning on the following page.
ATTACHMENT F
9_2022 © 2022 Carahsoft Technology Corp. Proprietary & Confidential 11493 SUNSET HILLS ROAD, SUITE 100 | RESTON, VA 20190 | 888.662.2724 | [email protected]
GOVERNMENT IT SOLUTIONS
Carahsoft Technology Corp. is The Trusted Government IT Solutions Provider®, supporting Federal, State and Local Government agencies and Education and Healthcare organizations. As the Master Government Aggregator® for our vendor and reseller partners, we deliver solutions for Cybersecurity, MultiCloud, DevSecOps, Big Data, Artificial Intelligence, Open Source, Customer Experience and more.
Veritas Technologies is the global leader in enterprise backup and data recovery solutions. Agencies and organizations rely on the Veritas Enterprise Data Services Platform to automate enterprise data protection, ensure 24/7 availability of mission-critical and citizen-facing applications, and provide the insights needed to comply with evolving data regulations.
866-837-4827
VMware is the global leader in virtualization and cloud computing solutions from desktop to datacenter. All 15 cabinet level agencies, military services, numerous DoD agencies, and many other federal agencies rely on VMware to avoid IT infrastructure costs, ensure continuity of operations and provide secure endpoints. 888-6VMWARE
888-686-9273
SAP sets a new standard for innovation and performance in the public sector with integrated solutions that apply database technology, business analytics, applications, cloud computing and mobility to solve IT challenges. SAP brings intelligent ideas to the public sector that achieve mission-critical operations. 888-SAP-1GOV
888-727-1468
Palo Alto Networks is the next-generation security company maintaining trust in the digital age by helping organizations prevent cyber breaches. Palo Alto Networks’ security platform safely enables applications, users and content, empowering government agencies to securely and efficiently move their missions forward. 855-6NEXTGN
855-663-9846
Splunk Inc. is the market leader in analyzing machine data to deliver Operational Intelligence for security, IT and the business. Splunk® software provides the enterprise machine data fabric that drives digital transformation.
More than 13,000 customers in over 110 countries use Splunk solutions in the cloud and on-premises. 855-3-SPLUNK
855-377-5865
Trellix is a global company redefining the future of cybersecurity. Trellix’s security experts, along with an extensive partner ecosystem, accelerate technology innovation through machine learning and automation to empower over 40,000 business and government customers.
855-462-2333
Google Cloud is a trusted technology leader who understands how to help agencies transition from legacy architectures and utilize their data to fuel true mission success. Google Cloud provides cloud-native infrastructure with layered security, machine learning and analytics at web-scale to rapidly innovate and advance agency goals. 844-55-GOOGL
844-554-6645
877-99ADOBE
877-992-3623
Adobe revolutionizes how agencies engage with ideas and information, transforming and extending government services to provide a richer, more productive, and trusted experience with constituents, personnel, and the military. Adobe helps government deliver information to the edge – anytime, anywhere, and through any medium.
Red Hat understands that government agencies demand performance, transparency and value—and that’s exactly what Red Hat offers. As the standard for Linux in governments, Red Hat’s cloud, virtualization, storage and platform solutions bring freedom, collaboration and the power of open source to all government agencies. 877-RHAT-GOV
877-742-8468
Dell is a leader in enabling government agencies to transform their operations and deliver IT as a service. Through innovative products and services, Dell accelerates the journey to cloud computing, helping IT departments store, manage, protect and analyze information in a more agile, trusted and cost-efficient way. 866-DELL-2-GO
866-335-5246
Salesforce is the enterprise cloud computing leader dedicated to helping companies and government agencies transform into connected organizations through social and mobile technologies. Since launching its first service in 2000, Salesforce’s list of over 150,000 customers spans nearly every industry worldwide. 877-SFDC-007
877-733-2007
Amazon Web Services provides a highly reliable, scalable, low-cost infrastructure platform in the cloud that powers hundreds of thousands of businesses in 190 countries around the world. With data center locations in the U.S., Europe, Brazil, Singapore, Japan, and Australia, customers across all industries are taking advantage of the low-cost, agile, flexible, and secure solutions that AWS offers. 888-662-2724
F5 Networks helps government organizations create an agile IT infrastructure that aligns with mission-critical demands. With F5 solutions in place, organizations gain strategic points of control wherever information is exchanged, from client devices and the network to application servers, data storage and everything in between. 877-95-F5GOV
877-953-5468
Symantec enables government agencies to have confidence in their IT infrastructure. Helping agencies protect and manage mission-critical information and interactions, Symantec delivers software and services that address risks to security, availability, compliance and performance. 877-GOV-SYMC
877-468-7962
Micro Focus Government Solutions supports the needs of the U.S. public sector. Micro Focus Government Solutions’ agile and modern software helps solve mission-critical IT challenges. Micro Focus Government Solutions is a purpose-built, U.S. based company that is committed to helping public sector organizations’ mission. 888-554-7468
ATTACHMENT F
9_2022 © 2022 Carahsoft Technology Corp. Proprietary & Confidential 11493 SUNSET HILLS ROAD, SUITE 100 | RESTON, VA 20190 | 888.662.2724 | [email protected]
GOVERNMENT IT SOLUTIONS
COMPLEMENTARY SOLUTIONS
SOLUTION VERTICALS
CARAHSOFT CONTRACT VEHICLES
VMWARE 10iG Technology, Arista, ClearCube, HYCu, Hytrust, Imprivata, Ivanti, Lightbend, Liquidware, NCS, Nutanix, Puppet, Rubrik, Teradici MULTICLOUD Accela, Acquia, Adobe, Akamai, Alfresco, AWS, Anaplan, Anchore, Apptio, Aqua, Aviatrix, Axway, Backblaze, BlackBerry, Box, Brightcove, C3.ai, CIS, CloudBees, CloudBolt, CloudCheckr, Commvault, Confluent, DarkOwl, Databricks, Dell Technologies, Denodo, Digital.ai, DocuSign, Domino, Druva,Elastic, EDB, Exterro, Genesys, GitLab, Google Cloud, Granicus, greymatter.io, GroundWork, HashiCorp, Hootsuite, Jive, Kion, Kiteworks, LinkedIn, Lookout, Micro Focus Government Solutions, Microsoft, MongoDB, Neustar, New Relic, Nutanix, Okta, Orion, OSIsoft, Outsystems, Proofpoint, QTS, Qualtrics, Qualys, Rackspace, Red Hat , Salesforce, SAP NS2, Saviynt, Secureworks, ServiceNow, Slack, Smartsheet, Software AG, Sonatype, Splunk, SwiftStack, Symantec, Teradici, Terra Pixel, ThreatConnect, Trellix, Trustwave, Twilio, Tyler, Virtru, Virtustream, VMware, Voyager Labs, Zscaler GSA SCHEDULE 47QSWA18D008F, GS-35F-0119Y
SEWP V Group A Other Than Small: NNG15SC03B, Group D Other Than Small: NNG15SC27B ESI BPA CONTRACTS Adobe: N00104-09-A-ZF31, N00104-12-A-ZF31, NNX13AA89Z, HSHQDC-13-A-00039; CollabNet: HC1028-11-A-0100; Micro Focus Government Solutions: N00104-13-A-ZF46; Intel: W5P1J-15-D-0008; IronKey: HSTS05-12-A-MED002; Red Hat Linux: HC1028- 14-A-0002; SAP: N00104-08-A-ZF43 ServiceNow: N00104-13-A-ZF47; Splunk: DE-IM0000789; Symantec: N00104-13-A-ZF45; VMware/Dell:
W91QUZ-09-A-0003; ForeScout: #N66001-18-A-0005
SPLUNK AcAlvio, Corelight, Cynerio, Discovered Intelligence, Exiger, Expanse, Infinidat, PencilData, Qmulos, RedFactor, Rhondos, SMS 360, Syncsort, Vectra OPEN SOURCE Acquia, Alfresco, Anchore, CloudBees, Cloudera, Cockroach Labs, Confluent, Databricks, Ekahau, Elastic, EDB, ForgeRock, GitLab, GroundWork, H2O.ai, HashiCorp, Hitachi, Liferay, Lucidworks, Liquibase, Mattermost, MongoDB, Neo4j, Red Hat, Red Hat 3scale API Management, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management, Red Hat Ansible, Red Hat Application Services, Red Hat Ceph Storage, Red Hat CodeReady Studio, Red Hat CodeReady Workspaces, Red Hat Decision Manager, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Red Hat Gluster Storage, Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure, Red Hat Integration, Red Hat Insights, Red Hat Integration, Red Hat JBoss, Red Hat Mobile App Platform, Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform, Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation, Red Hat OpenStack, Red Hat Process Automation Manager, Red Hat Quay, Red Hat Runtimes, Red Hat Satellite, Red Hat Smart Management, Red Hat Storage, Red Hat Virtualization, Sonatype, Tetrate, Zimbra SAP Acsis, Adobe, Apex, Apigee, Ariba, BMC, ClockWork, Cloudera, Datawatch, Dassian, Dell Technologies, GB&Smith, GoSecure, Greenlight Technologies, LC, Micro Focus Government Solutions, NimbleStorage, NoteShark, NS2, NS2 Labs, Onapsis, PingIdentity, Precise, Progress, Red Hat, Resilient, SAP, SAP + Qualtrics, SAP Concur, SAP SuccessFactors, VMware, Volume Integration SERVICENOW 3CLogic, Apptio, Bravium, Dtech Apps, MobiChord, Mobile Reach, NNT, Nuvolo, Pagerduty, Platcore, Stave, Uxstorm CYBERSECURITY 1Kosmos, Agari, Akamai, ALTR, Anchore, Anomali, Aqua, Aquera, Armis, Attivo Networks, AvePoint, Bastille, Bayshore Networks, BeyoundTrust, Blackberry, BlackBerry Cyclance, Blancco, Blinkly, Cellebrite, CertiPath, Cloud Cover, Cofense, Conceal, Contrast Security, Crowdstrike, CyberArk, Dataguise, DataLocker, Digital Guardian, Druva, Dtex, Eclypsium, Entrust, Exabeam, Exterro, F5, Fidelis, FlashPoint, Forcepoint, Forescout, ForgeRock, Fornetix, Fortinet, Forward, Gigamon, GlobalScape, GoSecure, HashiCorp, HID, iBoss, Identity Automation, Imperva, Information Security, Infoblox, Inspired eLearning, IronNet, Keeper, Kion, Kiteworks, Lookout, Material, MediGate, Micro Focus, Mosse Security, Netskope, Netwitness, Netwrix, Neustar, Nlyte, Nucleus Security, Okta, OSIsoft, PaloAlto Networks, Ping Identity, ProofPoint, Qualys, RackTop, Radiant Logic, RangeForce, Rapid7, Recorded Future, RiskSense, RSA, Sailpoint, Samsung, SANS, Saviynt, Secureworks, Securoix, SentinelOne, SkyBox Security, SolarWinds, Sonatype, Splunk, Symantec, Tanium, Tempered Networks, Tenable, Thales, ThreatConnect, ThreatLocker, ThreatQuotient, Trellix, Trend Micro, Trusona, Trustwave, Tufin, Venafi, Veracode, VMware, Waterfall, White Canyon, Zeva, Zimpeium, Zscaler
AI & MACHINE
LEARNING
ABBYY, Adobe, AWS, Alteryx, Basis Technology, BlackBerry, C3.ai, CalypsoAI, Chooch.ai, ClarifAI, Cloudera, Collibra, CORAS, CornerstoneAI, CrowdAI, CrowdStrike, CVEDIA, Darktrace, Databricks, DataRobot, Deep Labs, Dell Technologies, Delphix, Deltek, Denodo, Domino, Eightfold.
AI, Fortinet, Google, H2O.AI, Heavy.AI, HPE, Informatica, IronNet, Kinetica, Kofax, Labelbox, Liqid, Micro Focus Government Solutions, Microsoft Azure, Microway, Modzy, NNData, Nuance, Nutanix, NVIDIA, NVIDIA Networking, Ocient, piXlogic, Red Hat, Rescale, Run.ai, Salesforce, SAP, SAP NS2, Senzing, SFL Scientific, Snowflake, Sophos, Splunk, Tableau, Tensor Networks, Titan Technologies, Trellix, UiPath, Vast Data, Vectra, Veritone
MOBILITY &
TELEWORK
10ZiG, BlackBerry, Blancco, Blue Cedar, ClearCube, Deep Instinct, HYCU, Isec, Liferay, Liquidware, Lookout, MongoDB, NowSecure, Nutanix, Red Hat, Slack, Splunk, Swyft, Teradici, VMware
CX & ENGAGEMENT ABBYY, Accela, Acquia, Adobe, Akamai, Alfresco, Atlassian, Box, Conga, Copado, Decision Lens, Delphix, DocuSign, ForgeRock, Genesys, Google Cloud, Granicus, Hootsuite, Jumio, Liferay, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Mural, New Relic, Nintex, Nuance, Okta, Orion, Qualtrics XM, Red Hat, Salesforce, ServiceNow, Skedulo, Slack, Software AG, Sprinklr, Tableau, Talkdesk, Tyler Technologies, WalkMe, Yext, Zencity, Zoom IN-Q-TEL SOLUTIONS Anomali, Apigee, Apptio, ArchSight, Basis Technology, Boundless, Box, Bromium, Cellebrite, CipherCloud, Cloudant, Cloudera, Contrast, Cylance, Databricks, DataRobot, Delphix, Digital Reasoning, Domino, Endeca, Finch Computing, Frame, Fusion-IO, geoiQ, GitLab, Heavy.AI, Hytrust, Ike, Immersive Wisdom, Initiate, Kofax, LabelBox, Language Weaver, LILT, Local Motion, Lookout, Lucidworks, Magnet Forensics, Markforged, memSQL, MetaCarta, Micro Focus Government Solutions, Mocana, Mongo DB, MotionDSP, NarrativeScience, Nicira, NovoDynamics, Nozomi, Okta, Optiolabs, Orbital Insight, Orion, Palantir, Paxata, Phantom, Pindrop, piXlogic, Platfora, QuantiFind, Recorded Future, ReversingLabs, SDL, SitScape, SilverTail, Skytree, Socrata, Software Government Solutions, Sonatype, Tenable, Teradici, Terrago, Thetus Corp. Trellix, Veracode, Vintri LAW ENFORCEMENT Acadis, ADF Solutions, Adobe, Airgility, Airversity, Authentic8, AWS, Axon, BlackBerry, Blackswift, Blueforce Development, Cellebrite, Chainalysis, Commvault, Conceal, Darkowl, Dedrone, DigitalBlue, Elsight, Flashpoint, Ghost Robotics, Google Cloud, Gridless Power, Icaros, ikeGPS, Informatica, Inspired Flight, Juniper Unmanned, Lightsense, Magnet Forensics, Mark43, Measure, Mi-Case, Microsoft, Microsoft Surface, NTrepid, Nuance, NVIDIA, Okta, piXlogic, Qii.Ai, Recorded Future, Red Hat, Reveal, SAFR, Salesforce, SkyX, Software AG, Sonim, Tableau, TransUnion, Trimble, VELARY, Veritone, Vidizmo, Vintra, VIQ, Voyager Labs, Wickr FEDRAMP SOLUTIONS AchieveIt, Acquia, Adobe, Akamai, Apptio, Armis, Authentic8, AvePoint, AWS, Axon, BlackBerry, BMC, Boomi, Box, Broadcom, C3.ai, CloudCheckr, Cofense, Collibra, Contegix, Copado, CORAS, CoSo Cloud, CrowdStrike, CyberArk, Databricks,DataRobot, Decision Lens, Delinea, Digital.ai, DocuSign, Druva, Eightfold.ai, Elastic, Exterro, FM:Systems, Forcepoint, Genesys, Google Cloud, Granicus, HackerOne, Hootsuite, IBM, iBoss, Infoblox, Informatica, Ivanti, Keeper Security, Kiteworks, Lookout, Micro Focus Government Solutions, Microsoft, MongoDB, MuleSoft, Netskope, New Relic, Nintex, Nuance, Nutanix, Okta, Orock, OwnBackup, PaloAlto Network, Proofpoint, Qualtrics, Qualys, Quzara, Rackspace, Rescale, RSA, SailPoint, Salesforce, SAP NS2, Saviynt, ServiceNow, SkyHigh, Slack, SmartSheet, Snowflake, Software AG, Splunk, Sprinklr, Tanium, Tenable, Trellix, Trello, Tyler Technologies, UiPath, ValiMail, Veracode, Veritone, Virtru, Virtustream, VMware, Vyopta, Wickr, Zimperium, Zoom, Zscaler GEOSPATIAL Accela, AeroCloud, Airversity, AutoDesk, Ball, Bentley, Better GIS, Chooch AI, CompassCom, CompassData, Dedrone, Digital Map, e-PlanSoft, FM:Systems, GeoNorth, Google Maps, Icaros, ikeGPS, Intermap, MapBox, NearMap, Qii.AI, Spire, Terra Pixel, TomTom, Trimble, Vehicle Tracking Solutions, Velary
Adobe, BeyoundTrust, BlackBerry, CA Technologies, Cloudera, Collibra, Databricks, Dell Technologies, F5, Fidelis Security, Forescout, Gigamon, Google Cloud, Granicus, Gridless Power, HPE, Imprivata, Infoblox, Ivanti, John Snow Labs, Kofax, Micro Focus Government Solutions, MuleSoft, NCS, New Relic, Nuance, Nutanix, Nuvolo, Okta, Orion, piXlogic, Red Hat, Salesforce, Samsung, SAP, SentinelOne, ServiceNow, Snowflake, Splunk, Symantec, Tableau, Trellix, Trend Micro, Veritas, VMware, Zscaler
HEALTHCARE
5G SOLUTIONS AWS, CalChip, CID, Ciena, Commscope Ruckus, CTS, Dell Technologies, F5, Infinera, Infovista, Intel, JMA Wireless, MantisNet, Nokia, Orion, PaloAlto Networks, Red Hat, SAP, Telia Carrier, VMware
ATTACHMENT F
EEO Report
Please find our 2021 EEO report beginning on the following page.
ATTACHMENT F
CO= EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
U=
SECTION B - COMPANY IDENTIFICATION SECTION C - TEST FOR FILING REQUIREMENT
1. 2.a.
SECTION E - ESTABLISHMENT INFORMATION c.
SECTION D - EMPLOYMENT DATA
HISPANIC OR NOT-HISPANIC OR LATINO
LATINO
* * * * * * * * * * * * MALE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * FEMALE * * * * * * * * * * *
OVERALL
TOTALS TWO
OR
MORE
NATIVE RACES
ALASKAN
INDIAN OR
AMERICAN
ASIAN
ISLANDER
PACIFIC
OR
NATIVE
HAWAIIAN
BLACK OR
AFRICAN
AMERICAN
WHITE
TWO
OR
MORE
NATIVE RACES
ALASKAN
INDIAN OR
AMERICAN
ASIAN
NATIVE
HAWAIIAN
PACIFIC
OR
ISLANDER
BLACK OR
AFRICAN
AMERICAN
MALE FEMALE WHITE
JOB CATEGORIES
EXECUTIVE/SR OFFICIALS & MGRS
FIRST/MID OFFICIALS & MGRS
PROFESSIONALS
TECHNICIANS
SALES WORKERS
ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
CRAFT WORKERS
OPERATIVES
LABORERS & HELPERS
SERVICE WORKERS
TOTAL
PREVIOUS REPORT TOTAL
SECTION F - REMARKS
DA57607
DA57607 2021 EMPLOYER INFORMATION REPORT EEO-1
SINGLE ESTABLISHMENT REPORT
CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
11493 Sunset Hills Road
SUITE 100
RESTON, VA 20190
CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
11493 Sunset Hills Road
SUITE 100
RESTON, VA 20190
EIN= 522189693
1- Y 2- N 3- N DUNS= 088365767
NAICS: 511210 - Software Publishers
0 0
16 1
54 2
0 0
0 0
73 66
0 0
25 0
43 5
0 0
0 0
73 61
3 5
130
7 638
17 0
0 0
0 800
718
0 0
6 1
65 2
0 0
0 0
74 67
0 0
0 0
8 0
0 0
0 0
8 5
0 0
9 6
33 0
0 0
0 0
48 44
0 0
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 0
1 1
0 0
11 1
35 5
0 0
0 0
52 42
1 6
201
3 571
53 0
0 0
0 835
736
0 0
11 0
37 4
0 0
0 0
52 45
0 0
2 0
4 0
0 0
0 0
6 6
1 0
26 0
25 5
0 0
0 0
57 49
0 0
0 0
3 1
0 0
0 0
4 4
0 0
23 0
39 7
0 0
0 0
69 54
5 11
460
19 1556
101
0 0
0 0
2152
1898
DATES OF PAYROLL PERIOD: 12/15/2021 THRU 12/31/2021
SECTION G - CERTIFICATION CERTIFIED DATE [EST]: 5/11/2022 4:15 PM CERTIFYING OFFICIAL: Kristina Smith
EMAIL: [email protected]
EEO1 REPORT CONTACT PERSON: Kristina Smith
EMAIL: [email protected]
TITLE: Contracts Director
PHONE: 703-871-8504
TITLE: Contracts Director
PHONE: 703-871-8504
ATTACHMENT F
5 (Rev. 9.30.22)
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
City of Stockton’s Insurance Requirements
ATTACHMENT F
REV 2024-03-25
Exhibit B:
Insurance Requirements
(Information Technology)
Vendor/Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for security breaches, system failures, injuries to persons, damages to software, or damages to property (including computer equipment) which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Vendor, its agents, representatives, or employees. Vendor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance claims arising out of their services and including, but not limited to loss, damage, theft or other misuse of data, infringement of intellectual property, invasion of privacy and breach of data.
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Consultant has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(Not required if consultant provides written verification it has no employees)
4. Cyber Liability Insurance, with limits not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as is undertaken by Vendor in this agreement and shall include, but not be limited to, claims involving security breach, system failure, data recovery, business interruption, cyber extortion, social engineering, infringement of intellectual property, including but not limited to infringement of copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, and alteration of electronic
ATTACHMENT F
REV 2024-03-25
information. The policy shall provide coverage for breach response costs, regulatory fines and penalties as well as credit monitoring expenses.
Technology Professional Liability Errors & Omissions
Technology Professional Liability Errors and Omissions Insurance appropriate to the Consultant’s profession and work hereunder, with limits not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. Coverage shall be sufficiently broad to respond to the duties and obligations as is undertaken by the Vendor in this agreement and shall include, but not be limited to, claims involving security breach, system failure, data recovery, business interruption, cyber extortion, social engineering, infringement of intellectual property, including but not limited to infringement of copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, and alteration of electronic information. The policy shall provide coverage for breach response costs, regulatory fines and penalties as well as credit monitoring expenses. a. The Policy shall include, or be endorsed to include, property damage liability coverage for damage to, alteration of, loss of, or destruction of electronic data and/or information “property” of the Agency in the care, custody, or control of the Vendor.
If the Vendor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of Stockton requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Stockton.
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
Additional Insured Status
The City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Vendor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used). Additional insured Name of Organization shall read “City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers.” Policy shall cover City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers for all locations work is done under this contract.
Primary Coverage
ATTACHMENT F
REV 2024-03-25
For any claims related to this contract, the Vendor’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory. Coverage for commercial liability shall be at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Vendor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. This requirement shall also apply to any Excess policies. The City of Stockton does not accept endorsements limiting the Vendor’s insurance coverage to the sole negligence of the Named Insured.
Umbrella or Excess Policy
The Vendor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the Additional Insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Vendor’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall state that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City of Stockton.
Waiver of Subrogation
Vendor hereby grants to City of Stockton a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Vendor may acquire against the City of Stockton by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Vendor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City of Stockton has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Stockton. The City of Stockton may require the Vendor to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City of Stockton. The CGL and any policies, including Excess liability policies, may not be subject to a self-insured retention (SIR) or deductible that exceeds
ATTACHMENT F
REV 2024-03-25
$25,000 unless approved in writing by City of Stockton. Any and all deductibles and SIRs shall be the sole responsibility of Vendor or subcontractor who procured such insurance and shall not apply to the Indemnified Additional Insured Parties. City of Stockton may deduct from any amounts otherwise due Vendor to fund the SIR/deductible. Policies shall NOT contain any self-insured retention (SIR) provision that limits the satisfaction of the SIR to the Named Insured. The policy must also provide that Defense costs, including the Allocated Loss Adjustment Expenses, will satisfy the SIR or deductible. City of Stockton reserves the right to obtain a copy of any policies and endorsements for verification.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A-:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Stockton.
Claims Made Policies (Professional & Pollution only)
If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claims-made basis:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Vendor must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Verification of Coverage
Vendor shall furnish the City of Stockton with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsements Pages of the CGL and any Excess policies listing all policy endorsements. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City of Stockton before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Vendor’s obligation to provide them. The City of Stockton reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
ATTACHMENT F
REV 2024-03-25
Subcontractors
Vendor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Vendor shall ensure that City of Stockton is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors.
Special Risks or Circumstances
City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
Certificate Holder Address
The address for mailing certificates, endorsements and notices shall be:
City of Stockton
Its Officers, Officials, Employees and Volunteers
400 E Main Street, 3rd Floor – HR
Stockton, CA 95202
ATTACHMENT F
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0032, Version: 1
APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC FOR THE OPERATION OF
RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a motion to:
1. Award a Lease Agreement to the University of the Pacific for a term of Twenty (20) years with the option of an additional five-year renewal for radio communications systems. The total contract amount is $806,111.23 for the first twenty years, with optional renewals estimated at a 3% increase each year for a total of $287,666.70. The total amount of the contract shall not exceed $1,093,777.93;
2. Approve findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 in support of an exception to the competitive bidding process; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to take necessary and appropriate actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this motion.
Summary
The City of Stockton's radio communications system upgrade has faced significant delays due to an ongoing land dispute between third parties over one of the current tower sites. This dispute has threatened the timely deployment of essential radio equipment and posed risks to the continuity of public safety, public works, and MUD communication services.
To address these challenges, the City has identified the University of the Pacific’s Burns Tower as a viable alternative location. Burns Tower offers strategic positioning, technical suitability, and a stable operational environment for the required radio infrastructure. The University is willing to enter into a long-term lease agreement, ensuring uninterrupted service and operational certainty.
Staff requests the Council authorize the execution of this agreement, spanning 20 years with an optional 5-year extension, totaling $806,111.23 for the initial term and an estimated $287,666.70 for the extension, bringing the contract's maximum value to $1,093,777.93.
DISCUSSION
Background
A critical component of the City of Stockton's Public Safety and General Government radio communications systems is the strategic placement of radio equipment for optimum performance.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0032, Version: 1
Radio equipment has been installed at radio tower sites based on recommendations and engineering studies prepared by Motorola Solutions, Inc., to provide the best possible radio communications coverage from the available radio tower sites.
In June 1995, Pac West Telecomm, Inc. sold its radio tower site at Hammer Lane, one mile west of Highway 99, and acquired another at Coronado Avenue. The City's radio equipment was relocated to this site. Effective June 1, 1998, Pilot Communications, Inc. took over the Coronado Avenue radio tower site and agreed to honor the monthly rental agreement that the City of Stockton had with Pac West Telecomm, Inc.
The City has radio equipment at radio tower sites throughout its limits and in the County. These sites are owned by either the City of Stockton or San Joaquin County, with the exception of the Coronado radio tower site, which Pavilion Communications, LLC currently owns.
On July 1, 2013, the City of Stockton entered into a contract with SBA Tower for one term of one (1) year. It is renewed annually by the Stockton City Council adoption of the budget and appropriation of funds.
Present Situation
The City’s efforts to install new radio infrastructure equipment at the Coronado Avenue site have been delayed due to an ongoing dispute between SBA Towers, the tower lessor, and the landowners, Pavilion Communications, LLC. This dispute has created significant uncertainty and risks to the timely deployment of essential radio equipment. Delays in addressing this matter could negatively impact the City’s ability to provide uninterrupted public safety and general government radio communications.
To resolve this issue and ensure continuity of service, the City has identified the University of the Pacific’s Burns Tower as a viable alternative location for the required radio infrastructure. Burns Tower is strategically located to provide adequate coverage and meets the technical requirements of previous engineering studies.
The University of the Pacific has expressed willingness to enter into a long-term license agreement with the City, allowing the installation and operation of the City’s radio equipment at Burns Tower.
This solution would provide the City with a stable and dependable location for its critical radio communications infrastructure, free from the legal and operational uncertainties associated with the Coronado Avenue site.
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the execution of this agreement, spanning 20 years with an optional 5-year extension, in the amount of $806,111.23 for the initial term and an estimated $287,666.70 for the extension, bringing the contract's maximum value to $1,093,777.93.
FINDINGS
Pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) section 3.68.070, Council may approve findings which support and justify exceptions to the competitive bidding process. These findings include:
City of Stockton Page 2 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0032, Version: 1
• A Structure Analysis Report was prepared and concluded that the proposed site is adequate to support the proposed equipment.
• Relocating the City's radio equipment would provide strategic positioning, technical suitability, and a stable operational environment for the required radio infrastructure. • An investigation was conducted to evaluate three potential replacement tower sites, with UOP ultimately being selected as the most suitable location.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The Lease Agreement with the University of the Pacific is for a term of twenty (20) years with the option of an additional five-year renewal for radio communications systems. The total contract amount is $806,111.23 for the first twenty years, with optional renewals estimated at a 3% increase each year for a total of $287,666.70. The total amount of the contract shall not exceed $1,093,777.93 (Table 1).
Table 1: Purchase Authority Request
Fiscal Year Lease
Amount
24/25 30,000.00
25/26 30,900.00
26/27 31,827.00
27/28 32,781.81
28/29 33,765.26
29/30 34,778.22
30/31 35,821.57
31/32 36,896.22
32/33 38,003.10
33/34 39,143.20
34/35 40,317.49
35/36 41,527.02
36/37 42,772.83
37/38 44,056.01
38/39 45,377.69
39/40 46,739.02
40/41 48,141.19
41/42 49,585.43
42/43 51,072.99
43/44 52,605.18
Subtotal Amount 806,111.23
City of Stockton Page 3 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0032, Version: 1
Five Year extension:
Year Lease
Amount
44/45 54,183.34
45/46 55,808.84
46/47 57,483.10
47/48 59,207.60
48/49 60,983.82
Subtotal Amount 287,666.70
Grand Total 1,093,777.93
Budget is available for this expenditure in the FY 2024-25 Technology Internal Service Fund, Communications SubFund, Account #3020-000-800004-510-515-00-30-000-000-, Project IR21017.
Future year budget is renewed annually by City Council adoption of the budget and appropriation of funds. Future year ongoing annual costs will be included during the annual budget development process, under Account #3020-000-630013-510-515-00-30-000-000-.
Attachment A - Lease - UOP - Burns Tower Radio Antenna Placement City of Stockton Page 4 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR RADIO ANTENNA PLACEMENT ON THE ROOF TOP OF BURNS TOWER AT
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
This Lease ("Agreement") is made and entered into on _ _________ (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Stockton, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“Lessee” or “Tenant”), and University of the Pacific, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation ("Lessor"). The Lessor and Lessee may be referred to collectively as "Parties" or in the singular as "Party" as the context requires.
ARTICLE 1: PREMISES
Lessor owns land and improvements of the commercial property known as 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211 (“Real Property”). Tenant wishes to install, maintain, upgrade as needed and operate the City of Stockton Public Safety radio communication system equipment and antennas, including all necessary structures devices, equipment, connections, and other appurtenances (collectively, “Antennas”) located on and within a portion of Burns Tower located on the Real Property as more specifically described in Exhibit A attached hereto ("Premises"). Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee hereby leases from Lessor, the Premises for the sole purpose of erecting, maintaining, installing, repairing and leasing the Antennas.
ARTICLE 2: TERM, TERMINATION, AND DEFAULT
2.1 Initial Term. Parties agree the Lessor will lease the Premises to the Lessee for a term beginning on the Effective Date and ending on December 31, 2044 (“Initial Term”), unless terminated by Section 2.4 or a mutual option is exercised by Section 2.2.
2.2 Mutual Option for Renewal Term. If Lessee elects by providing written notice as provided below, and Lessor agrees in writing prior to the end of the Initial Term, this Lease will extend for a Renewal Term of five (5) years, beginning on January 1, 2045, and terminating on December 31, 2049 (“Renewal Term”), provided that:
2.2.1 No material default or breach of this Lease has occurred and continues uncured for more than thirty (30) days after written notice of default or breach, and
2.2.2 Lessee provides a written notice of Lessee's request to exercise the renewal option on or before September 30, 2044, and
2.2.3 The Renewal Term is subject to the same terms and conditions as in this Lease, except that the monthly lease payment for the Renewal Term is specified in Article 3 Lease Payments below.
Upon Execution
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
2.3 Holdover. If at the expiration of the Term, including the Renewal Term, Lessee continues to use the Premises and follow the terms of this Lease with the consent of the Lessor, the Lease shall continue on a month-to-month basis, subject to all terms and conditions of the Lease. During the month-to-month operation, either Party shall terminate the Lease upon thirty (30) days' written notice.
2.4 Termination of Lease. This Lease can be terminated in accordance with the following provisions:
2.4.1 Breach. Each party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement in the event of the other party’s material breach of an obligation, representation, or warranty set forth in this Agreement; provided, however, that such termination will not become effective unless and until (i) the party not in default has given the other party written notice of breach, which notice shall state in reasonable detail the nature of said breach, and (ii) the party allegedly in default shall have failed to remedy said default to the reasonable satisfaction of the party not in default within ten (10) business days following the giving of the notice.
2.4.2 Mutual Renewal is Not Executed. If a mutual option for renewal is not executed prior to the end of the Initial Term, the Lease shall terminate without further obligation by either Party on the last day of the term or another date as mutually agreed upon in writing.
2.4.3 Holdover. The Agreement may be terminated in the holdover term according to Article 2.3.
2.4.4 Mutual Agreement. Upon mutual agreement by the parties, and sixty (60) days’ written notice.
2.4.5 Damage and Destruction. If the Premises become, or is reasonably expected to become, unusable for the intended purpose for a period of at least six (6) months or more as a result of Damages as defined in Section 5.6 below, Lessee shall have the right to terminate the Lease upon thirty (30) days’ written notice.
2.4.6 Surrender. Upon expiration or other termination of this Lease, Lessee shall surrender Premises in good order as reasonable use, and everyday wear are accepted.
2.5 Effect of Termination. Upon the expiration of the Term or earlier termination hereof, Lessee, shall at Lessee’s sole cost and expense, remove the Antennas and all appurtenances thereto, and restore the Premises to substantially the same condition that existed prior to the installation of said Antennas. In the event that Lessee shall not remove the Antennas within sixty (60) calendar days after the termination hereof, Lessor may, at its option, either retain the Antennas as the Property of Lessor or remove the Antennas,
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
and Lessee shall reimburse Lessor on demand for all costs and expenses of such removal.
ARTICLE 3: LEASE PAYMENTS
3.1 Initial Term Lease Payments. For the Initial Term, Lessee will pay Lessor an annual amount in advance, within 15 days after the Lease anniversary date according to the following payment schedule under Section 3.3, Section 3.4, and Section 3.5.
Years Lease Amount
1 $ 30,000.00
2 $ 30,900.00
3 $ 31,827.00
4 $ 32,781.81
5 $ 33,765.26
6 $ 34,778.22
7 $ 35,821.57
8 $ 36,896.22
9 $ 38,003.10
10 $ 39,143.20
11 $ 40,317.49
12 $ 41,527.02
13 $ 42,772.83
14 $ 44,056.01
15 $ 45,377.69
16 $ 46,739.02
17 $ 48,141.19
18 $ 49,585.43
19 $ 51,072.99
20 $ 52,605.18
3.2 Renewal Term Lease Payments. For the Renewal Term, the payment schedule is listed below. Lessee will pay Lessor the identified annual amounts in advance, on the anniversary day, and no later than the fifteenth day in accordance with Section 3.3 and Section 3.4 below.
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
Year Lease Amount
21 $ 54,183.34
22 $ 55,808.84
23 $ 57,483.10
24 $ 59,207.60
25 $ 60,983.82
3.3 Delivery of Lease Payment. Each annual payment will be delivered to the University of The Pacific, 3601 Pacific Avenue, Stockton, CA 95211, or given to other places designated via written notice by Lessor.
3.4 Delayed Lease Payment. Any payment received after thirty days (30) from the anniversary date will be considered late and subject to a late payment penalty of $500 for each calendar month until cured.
3.5 Security Deposit. A security deposit is not required for this Lease Agreement.
ARTICLE 4: LEASE AGREEMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The following expenses are the responsibility of the identified parties below:
4.1 Project-Specific Responsibilities. Attached as Exhibit B is a list of the project deliverables, the party responsible for delivering the deliverable and the party responsible for the cost of the deliverable (“Project Deliverables”). Each party shall have such obligations as set forth in the Project Deliverables. To the extent there are any ambiguities or inconsistences between the Project Deliverables and Sections 4.2 or 4.3, the terms set forth in the Project Deliverables shall control.
4.2 Lessee Responsibilities. Except as set forth in the Project Deliverables or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, the Lessee shall have sole responsibility for the following throughout the term:
4.2.1 Tenant shall pay for all electrical services and other utility services furnished to or consumed by Tenant in the Premises. Any interruption in utilities or other services to the Premises for any reason shall not, regardless of its duration, impose upon Lessor any liability whatsoever, constitute an eviction of Lessee, constructive or otherwise, entitle Lessee to an abatement of rent or to terminate this Lease or otherwise release Lessee from any of Lessee’s obligations under this Lease. Tenant hereby waives any benefits of any applicable existing or future law, including the provisions of California Civil Code Section 1932(1), permitting the termination of this Lease due to such interruption, failure or inability.
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
4.2.2 Lessee shall be liable for the costs and expenses associated with all tenant improvements that support Antennas operation except as specifically set forth in the Project Deliverables.
4.2.3 Lessee shall, throughout the term, at its own cost and expense, without any cost to Lessor, maintain, repair and replace the Antennas and the Premises, including all improvements of every kind, in first order, repair and condition, it being the intention of the Parties that Lessor shall have no responsibility for any repairs, maintenance or replacements whatsoever in, on or about the Premises as related to the Antennas during the Lease term.
4.2.4 Lessee, shall, at its sole cost and expense, (i) comply with (and cause all directors, officers, contractors, subcontractors, agents and representatives (“Lessee Parties”) to comply with) all applicable laws, rules, regulations and ordinances (collectively, the “Laws”) and (ii) obtain (and cause all applicable Lessee Parties to obtain) on or before the date required under applicable Laws all permits in each case required for or relating to the performance of Lessee’s obligations and undertakings under this Lease and the Antennas or otherwise in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Lease. Lessee shall be responsible for all costs associated with compliance, defense of enforcement actions or suits, payment of fines, penalties, or other sanctions and remedial costs related to Lessee’s use and occupation of the Premises and the performance by or on its behalf of any of its obligations.
4.2.5 Lessee shall pay all taxes associated with the Antennas and Lessee’s improvements and installations.
4.3 Lessor Responsibilities. Except as set forth in the Project Deliverables or as otherwise set forth in this Agreement, the Lessor shall have the sole responsibility for providing and paying for the following services and equipment, and service contracts shall be in the name of the Lessor:
4.3.1 Interior and exterior pest control.
4.3.2 Foundation, exterior walls of the building, and load-bearing walls.
4.3.3 Fire monitoring system, annual fire system inspection, and permit costs as required.
4.3.4 Building systems providing services and utilities, including generator, electrical and gas connections, HVAC, wiring, plumbing, conduits, utility lines, and pipes.
4.3.5 Landscaping, hardscape, planting, and irrigation.
4.3.6 Interior and exterior lighting, fixtures, and wiring other than with respect to Antennas.
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
4.3.7 Structural soundness of roof (both structure and membrane).
4.3.8 Installation of Keys according to Article 5.2.
4.3.9 Exterior lighting, fixtures (power, electric charges, installation, and repairs),
4.3.10 Wall shifting to expand footprint of the equipment room.
4.3.11 Emergency back-up generators as a source of electrical power in the event of a power outage.
4.3.12 A dedicated electric meter for Lessee’s equipment, such that Lessee and Lessor may determine the costs of electrical services to be borne by Lessee pursuant to Section 4.2.1.
4.3.13 Lessor shall lead the installation of the generator, HVAC, and any other necessary improvements. Lessee shall seek approval from Lessor, considering safety, structural integrity, adherence to aesthetic university standards, and compliance with appropriate codes and regulations for all proposed operational improvements.
ARTICLE 5: FACILITY REPAIRS AND IMPROVEMENTS; DAMAGE, DESTRUCTION,
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
5.1 Operational Improvements
Tenant shall be responsible for improvements required for the operation and maintenance of Antennas. Tenant shall be given reasonable access to add to the electrical panel as required for the installation of necessary electrical power to the leased spaces, as well as to be able to add conduits within the building as needed, for the installation and operation of the radio and microwave equipment. Lessee shall work with Lessor in order to ensure viable and safe improvements are conducted, and shall receive prior written consent of Lessor prior to any improvements being made. Lessor shall review and approve/disapprove, in its reasonable discretion, any and all proposed operational improvements including, without limitation, the electrical panel, in order to ensure safety, structural integrity, aesthetical University standards, and compliance with appropriate codes and regulations. Lessee shall be responsible for any hazardous remediation and/or abatement that necessitated and caused by the aforementioned operational improvements.
5.1.1 Equipment Installation. Prior to installing or allowing any Equipment to be installed at the Site or making any changes, modifications or alterations to such Equipment, Lessee will obtain all required approvals and will submit to Lessor plans, specifications and proposed dates of the planned installation or other activity, for Lessor’s approval which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, including, if requested by Lessor, a tower loading study and/or an intermodulation study performed and certified by
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
an independent licensed professional engineer. The approved plans will be deemed incorporated into this Agreement. All installation of or other work on Lessee’s Equipment on the Tower will be at Lessee’s sole expense.
5.2 Emergency Contacts. Parties will provide emergency phone numbers of key staff for issues at Premises. Parties will have the ability to communicate twenty-four hours a day when emergency maintenance or conditions occur. For non-urgent issues, Lessee will communicate with Lessor during regular business hours.
5.3 Access. Absent an emergency, Lessee shall have reasonable means of access to the Premises; provided however, Lessee may not exercise such right in a way which would materially interfere with Lessor’s use of the Real Property or such adjoining or appurtenant property. Such access to the Premises is also subject to any reasonable restrictions of Lessee. Absent an emergency, Lessee shall provide Lessor with at least ten (10) business days advance written notice of intent to access the Premises and shall obtain Lessor’s consent to such access. In the event of an emergency, Lessee will immediately notify Lessor of its intent to access the Premises. In all circumstances when accessing the Premises, Lessee shall check in at Lessor’s Police Dispatch Center and must be accompanied by Lessor’s police. Lessor may enter upon the Premises without notification to Lessee, at all times for any purposes not inconsistent with Lessee’s quiet use and enjoyment of the Premises under this Lease, including confirming compliance by Lessee with the terms of this Lease.
5.4 Repairs by Lessor. By taking possession of the Premises, Lessee shall be deemed to have accepted the Premises as being in acceptable sanitary order, condition, and repair. Lessor will be responsible for maintaining and repairing the Premises fixed structures, including but not limited to, HVAC system (heating cooling, ventilation), water for reasonable and everyday drinking, lavatory, plumbing including fixtures, water, wastewater, stormwater connections, windows, doors, built-ins, fencing, gates, walkways, irrigation, graffiti removal, and vandalism repair. Lessor shall address health and safety repairs within a commercially reasonable time. Lessor shall be responsible for the maintenance of the generator but Lessee shall be responsible for all costs associated with any repair or replacement of the generator.
5.5 Repairs and Maintenance of Tenant Improvements. Lessee shall not make any repairs, alterations, changes, or improvements to the Premises without Lessor’s prior written consent. Lessor will not be responsible for any tenant improvements, repairs, alterations, or changes to tenant improvements within the Premises during the Lease Term.
5.6 Damage; Destruction. In the event any part of the Real Property, the Premises or Burns Tower is damaged, destroyed or in need of repair such that the repairs would impact Lessee’s use of the Premises (collectively, “Damages”), each Party shall promptly
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
notify the other Party in writing promptly after it becomes aware of any Damages. In the event the Damages are the result of any action or inaction on the part of Lessee or its employes, contractors or agents, Lessee, at Lessee’s sole cost and expense, shall repair and restore the Real Property, Premises or Burns Tower to the same condition as existed immediately prior to the date of such casualty. All such repairs and restoration shall be performed in a commercially reasonable time at the direction of Lessor unless Lessor elects to repair and restore the Damages in which case Lessee shall reimburse Lessor for the cost of all such repairs and restorations. Lessee shall not be entitled to any compensation or damages from Lessor for any loss of use of any improvements, Lessee’s personal property or any inconvenience or annoyance occasioned by any such Damages.
In the event the Antennas are damaged, destroyed, or in need of repair as the result of any action on the part of Lessor or its employees, contractors or agents, Lessor, at Lessor’s sole cost and expense, shall repair and restore the Antennas to the same condition as existed immediately prior to the date of such casualty.
5.7 Hazardous Materials. Lessee shall not use, store, generate, release, or dispose of any hazardous material on the Real Property, Burns Tower or the Premises. Lessee is permitted to use such materials that are required to be used in the normal course of Lessee’s use of the Premises provided that Lessee complies with all applicable laws related to hazardous materials and that it provide prior written notice to Lessor of such intended use. Lessee is responsible for the cost of removal and remediation, or any cleanup of any contamination caused by Lessee, its employees, contractors or agents.
Lessee agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Lessor from and against any and all loss of rents and or damages, liabilities, judgments, claims, expenses, penalties, and attorney’s fees arising out of or involving any hazardous substance brought onto the Premises by or for the Lessee, or any third party.
ARTICLE 6: GENERAL AND SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
6.1 Waiver. In the event either Lessor or Lessee at any time waive any breach of this Lease, by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or succeeding breach of this Lease, whether of the same or of any other covenant, condition, or obligation.
6.2 Indemnification.
6.2.1 Mutual Indemnification. Lessee agrees to hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to Lessor), and indemnify Lessor and its regents, officers, directors, employees, students and agents (each an “Indemnified Party” and collectively, “Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, penalties, fines, judgments, and expenses (including without limitation attorneys’ fees and costs) (collectively, “Losses”) arising out of: (i) Lessee’s lease, use and enjoyment of the Premises including all acts by Lessee’s employees, contractors and agents, except to the
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
extent that such Losses are caused by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Lessor, its agents, employees, or contractors; or (ii) any breach or default in the performance of any of Lessee’s obligations hereunder.
Lessor agrees to hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to Lessee), and indemnify Lessee from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, penalties, fines, judgments, and expenses (including without limitation attorneys’ fees and costs) (collectively, “Losses”) arising from loss of life, personal injury and/or property damage, caused by or resulting from, in whole or in part, any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Lessor, its agents, employees, or contractors, in connection with the management, use, or occupancy of the Real Property and/or Premises by Lessee solely with respect to the erecting, maintaining, installing, repairing and leasing the Antennas; or (ii) any breach or default in the performance of any of Lessor’s obligations hereunder.
6.2.2 Defense of Claims. In the event Lessor (or an Indemnified Party) is made a party to any action or proceeding by reason of any matter for which Lessee shall indemnify the Indemnified Party, then Lessee, upon notice from the Lessor, shall defend such action or proceeding on behalf of the Indemnified Party at Lessee’s sole cost and expense. Lessor shall provide prompt written notice to Lessee of any Loss for which Lessor is seeking indemnification; provided, however, that the failure to notify Lessee as promptly as practicable shall not relieve Lessee of its indemnity obligations hereunder except to the extent such failure shall have actually and materially prejudiced Lessee.
Lessee shall have the right to control the defense, and Lessor shall cooperate as reasonably requested by Lessee (at Lessee’s expense). Lessor shall have the right to join and participate in, as a party if it so elects, any proceedings or actions related to such claims with counsel of its own choosing at its own cost.
In the event Lessee (or an Indemnified Party) is made a party to any action or proceeding by reason of any matter for which Lessor shall indemnify the Indemnified Party, then Lessor, upon notice from the Lessee, shall defend such action or proceeding on behalf of the Indemnified Party at Lessor’s sole cost and expense. Lessee shall provide prompt written notice to Lessor of any Loss for which Lessee is seeking indemnification; provided, however, that the failure to notify Lessor as promptly as practicable shall not relieve Lessor of its indemnity obligations hereunder except to the extent such failure shall have actually and materially prejudiced Lessor. Lessor shall have the right to control the defense, and Lessee shall cooperate as reasonably requested by Lessor (at Lessor’s expense). Lessee shall have the right to join and participate in, as a party if it so elects, any proceedings or actions related to such claims with counsel of its own choosing at its own cost.
6.2.3 Judgment or Settlement of Claims. Lessee shall not consent to the entry of any judgment or enter into any settlement with respect to any Loss that includes an admission of wrongdoing by Lessor without the prior written consent of Lessor (not to be
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
unreasonably withheld) unless the judgment or proposed settlement involves only the payment of money damages to be paid solely by Lessee or its insurance carrier and does not impose an injunction or other equitable relief upon the Indemnified Party. This indemnity shall not be limited by reason of any insurance coverage required under this Agreement.
Lessor shall not consent to the entry of any judgment or enter into any settlement with respect to any Loss that includes an admission of wrongdoing by Lessee without the prior written consent of Lessee (not to be unreasonably withheld) unless the judgment or proposed settlement involves only the payment of money damages to be paid solely by Lessor or its insurance carrier and does not impose an injunction or other equitable relief upon the Indemnified Party. This indemnity shall not be limited by reason of any insurance coverage required under this Agreement.
6.2 Insurance Requirements. During the term of this Lease, Parties shall maintain in full force and effect at each Party's own cost and expense the insurance coverage appropriate to this Lease. Lessee will provide a copy of self-insurance letter upon attest of Lease.
6.3 Notices. The mailing address for Parties for all required notices is as follows:
Lessor:
University of The Pacific
3601 Pacific Avenue
Stockton, CA 95211
Attention: Lauren Schoenthaler, Chief General Counsel
Lessee:
City of Stockton – Information Technology
400 E. Main Street
Stockton, CA 95202
Attention: Jamil Niazi, Director of Information Technology
6.4 Heading Not Controlling. Headings used in this Lease are for reference purposes only and shall not be considered in construing this Lease.
6.5 Severability. If any portion of this Lease thereof to any person or circumstance shall be declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction or if it is found in contravention of any federal, state, or city statute, ordinance, or regulation, the remaining provisions of the Lease shall remain in full force and effect to the extent that the provisions of the Lease are severable.
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
6.6 No Personal Liability. No official or employee of the City of Stockton shall be personally liable to Lessor in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount due to the Lessor.
6.7 Applicable Law, Resolutions of Disputes, Forum, and Attorney Fees. California law shall govern any legal action pursuant to this Lease with venue for all claims in the Superior Court of the County of San Joaquin, Stockton Branch, or where applicable, in the Federal District Court of California, Eastern District, Sacramento Division. The prevailing Party in any action brought to enforce or construe the terms of this Lease may recover from the other Party its reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in connection with such action.
6.8 Force Majeure. Neither Party shall be responsible for delays or failures in performance resulting from acts of God, acts of civil or military authority, terrorism, fire, flood, strikes, war, epidemics, pandemics, shortage of power, or other acts or causes reasonably beyond the control of that Party. The Party experiencing the force majeure event agrees to give the other Party notice promptly following the occurrence of a force majeure event and diligent efforts to re-commence performance as promptly as commercially practicable.
6.9 Assignment. Parties shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Lease without the other Party's prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, and then only upon such terms and conditions as Parties may set forth in writing.
6.10 Possessory Interest and Real Estate Taxes. Lessor shall pay, prior to delinquency, all general real estate taxes and installments of special assessments, if any, coming due during the Lease Term on the Premises, and all personal property taxes with respect to Lessor's personal property, if any, on the Premises. Lessee will be responsible for paying all personal property taxes concerning Lessee's personal property, if any, on Premises.
If the State of California or County of San Joaquin changes the manner in which property taxes are assessed, Lessor and Lessee shall meet and confer to review evidence of increase to Lessee and discuss and mutually agree upon the proportional share of the property tax increase resulting from new Legislation.
6.11 Entire Agreement, Integration, and Modification. This Lease represents the entire integrated Agreement between Lessor and the Lessee; supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, agreements, previous leases, either written or oral, between the parties and may be amended only by a written Amendment signed by the Lessor and Lessee.
6.12 Authority and Execution. The undersigned hereby represent and warrant that they are authorized by the parties to execute this Lease. This Lease may be executed in counterparts, by fax, pdf, email, electronic copy, or digital signature, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts constitute one and the same Instrument.
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
6.13 Easements and Rights of Way. This Lease is subject to (a) all easements, covenants, conditions, restrictions, rights of way, licenses, or other property interests, liens and encumbrances of public record for any purpose with respect to the Real Property, Burns Tower and the Premises, all as existing on the term, (b) all matters which are discoverable by physical inspection of the Real Property, Burns Tower or the Premises, and (c) all matters known to Lessee or of which Lessee has notice, constructive or otherwise. Lessor shall have the right to reserve unto itself or to grant to third parties additional easements, covenants, conditions, restrictions, rights of way, licenses, or other property interests, liens and encumbrances of public record for any purpose with respect to the Real Property, Burns Tower or the Premises.
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Lease the day and first year hereinabove written.
ATTEST: CITY OF STOCKTON
________________________ BY:_____________________________
KATHERINE ROLAND HARRY BLACK
INTERIM CITY CLERK CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
LORI ASUNCION
CITY ATTORNEY
BY: ______________________ BY: ______________________________
TATIANA ALTMAN
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
JAMES WALSH
CFO & EXECUTIVE VP FOR FINANCE AND OPERATIONS
Signed: Tuesday, October 29, 2024
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
EXHIBIT A
Detailed description of antennas and related equipment to be installed on Burns Tower. Final antenna height is currently being engineered.
Antenna: 1 Rfi BA80-67-DIN @ 300' [Tip: 304.9'] [Base: 295.1'], 118" x 17" x 17", Weight: 18 lbs. [Dipole] Antenna: 3 Amphenol 4420.03-445-Txx @ 200' [Tip: 202.6'] [Base: 197.4'], 63" x 2", Weight: 8.82 lbs. [Omni] Mount: 1 Commscope DB5001-SP5 @ 300', Weight: 20.94 lbs. [Side Mounting Kit] Mount: 3 Commscope DB5001-SP5 @ 200', Weight: 20.94 lbs. [Side Mounting Kit] Mount: 1 PMSU463 @ 135'
Mount: 1 PMSU463 @ 115'
Dish: 1 RFS SC3-W100AC @ 115', 39.5" x 39.5" x 15" [ Radome] Dish: 1 RFS SC3-W100AC @ 135', 39.5" x 39.5" x 15", Weight: 40 lbs. [Radome] Cables: , 2 lines Coax @ 1/2"
Cables: , 4 lines Coax @ 7/8"
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
ATTACHMENT A
2024 COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR BURNS TOWER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
4858-1567-9363, v. 12
4858-1567-9363.13
EXHIBIT B
PROJECT DELIVERABLES
See Attachment
ATTACHMENT A
Scope of Work & Payment Schedule
Burns Tower Emergency Radio Antenna Project
City of Stockton & University of the Pacific
Exhibit B
FACILITIES
UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
1 Project Goal:
To prepare Burns Tower 9th floor for the installation of emergency radio antennas.
A. B. C. D. E. F. G.
Project Deliverables Description Responsible
Party
Time Frame Cost Responsible
for Cost
Payment
Due By
1. Demo Demo is for flooring, carpet, wall University of the Pacific
6/3-6/7 $10,000 University of
the Pacific
Completed
2. HVAC (Building) Install new motor to provide longevity of HVAC system
University of
the Pacific
6/7-6/14 $5,000 University of
the Pacific
Completed
3. HVAC (Mini Split) Install New Mini Spilt for additional Heat loads University of the Pacific
6/14-6/21 $10,000 University of
the Pacific
Completed
4. Paint Paint entire room University of
the Pacific
6/14-6/21 $3,500 University of
the Pacific
Completed
5. Flooring &
Baseboards
New flooring & base University of
the Pacific
6/10-6/25 $5,000 University of
the Pacific
Completed
6. Electrical Upgrades
&
***
60 AMP service, new panel, New Wiring
*Note: Lead times needed for equipment
University of
the Pacific in
coordination
with City of
Stockton
Tentatively
January 3rd,
2025
$37,000 City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
is
completed.
7. Core Drilling Core drill thru 9
th floor ceiling University of
the Pacific in
coordination
February
17th, 2025
$15,000 City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
ATTACHMENT A
Scope of Work & Payment Schedule
Burns Tower Emergency Radio Antenna Project
City of Stockton & University of the Pacific
Exhibit B
FACILITIES
UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
2 with City of
Stockton
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
is
completed.
8. Manuel Transfer
Switch
***
Transfer switch, for generator
*Note: Lead times needed for equipment
University of
the Pacific
Tentatively
January 3rd,
2025
$5,000 City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
is
completed.
9. Ground Wire Install new ground wire for equipment -
Contract directly with Motorola
City of
Stockton w
Motorola
February
17th, 2025
$2,500 (If City
contracts
directly with
Motorola)
City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
is
completed.
10. Generator
***
Generator to be used for black outs and/or
scheduled outages to supplement UPS
*Note: Lead times needed for equipment
University of
the Pacific in
coordination
with City of
Stockton
January 30th,
2025
$10,000 City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
ATTACHMENT A
Scope of Work & Payment Schedule
Burns Tower Emergency Radio Antenna Project
City of Stockton & University of the Pacific
Exhibit B
FACILITIES
UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC
3 is
completed.
11. Conduit Pathways Allows Pathways from the basement to 9th Floor
*Note: If needed.
University of
the Pacific in
coordination
with City of
Stockton
February 17th
30th, 2025
If needed
could be
approximately
$15,000
City of
Stockton
50%
upfront
(execution
of P.O.)
and 50%
when work
is
completed.
*Note: These costs represent only what is in this scope, anything outside of this scope may add additional costs. Additionally, there may be savings, depending on equipment, and materials needed, (example: type of generator, etc.).
ATTACHMENT A
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0060, Version: 1
APPROVE FINDINGS AND RATIFY FINAL EXPENSES FOR TEMPORARY PUMPING SERVICES AT THE 14-MILE SANITARY SEWER PUMP STATION
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution to:
1. Approve findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 which justify and support an exception to the competitive bidding process.
2. Ratify final expenses of Western Oil Field Supply Company of Bakersfield, California, doing business as Rain4Rent, in the amount of $835,534.88 for all costs related to the rental of wastewater pumping equipment to mitigate a breakdown in pumping capacity at the 14-Mile Sanitary Sewer Pump Station.
It is also recommended that the Acting City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.
Summary
The Municipal Utilities Department (MUD) is comprised of three enterprise funds including the Water, Wastewater and Stormwater Utilities. The Wastewater Utility features a sanitary sewer collection system of approximately 900 miles of gravity sewer main, 554 miles of lower lateral pipe, 27 pump stations, and 30 miles of pressurized force main that route sewage for treatment at the Regional Wastewater Control Facility (RWCF). The system collects sewage from properties within the City, special districts outside the City, and certain areas within San Joaquin County. The RWCF is an advanced tertiary treatment facility with a 55 million gallon per day capacity and is located adjacent to the San Joaquin River.
The 14-Mile Pump Station (14-Mile Station) provides sanitary sewer pumping services to a large portion of northwest Stockton. A pumping equipment breakdown interrupted normal and safe wastewater pumping operations that convey flows to the RWCF for treatment and discharge. In accordance with Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 and the City Manager Emergency Contract and Procurement Policy (17.05.150), MUD procured wastewater pumping equipment to continue safe and sanitary pumping operations at the 14-Mile Station until equipment could be repaired/replaced.
If approved by the City Council, this resolution will approve findings and ratify the total expenditure of $835,534.88 for the emergency procurement of wastewater pumping equipment from Rain4Rent.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0060, Version: 1
DISCUSSION
Background
The 14-Mile Station receives and pumps about 7 million gallons of wastewater from northwest Stockton to the RWCF per day.
On June 9, 2024, the 14-Mile Station experienced a pumping equipment breakdown resulting in the inability to safely pump wastewater to the RWCF. The equipment breakdown resulted in a significant loss of pumping capacity and jeopardized the ability to maintain service to northwest Stockton and posed a significant risk to public health, safety and the environment.
Upon discovery of the equipment breakdown, MUD staff installed temporary pumps to maintain wastewater flow, informed appropriate City staff and began work on procurement efforts wherein three (3) quotes were solicited for the rental of emergency wastewater pumping equipment that met all required specifications. Rain4Rent met all requirements and provided the lowest monthly service price.
On June 13, 2023, the City Manager approved a request for emergency procurement authorization to rent wastewater pumping equipment to mitigate the equipment breakdown at the 14-Mile Station in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 and the City Manager Emergency Contract and Procurement Policy (17.05.150).
By December 4, 2024, normal pumping operations at the 14-Mile Station had resumed with the installation of new/rebuilt wastewater pumps and all financial transactions were completed. The total expenditure was $835,534.88 to provide for the wastewater pumping equipment from Rain4Rent.
Findings
Pursuant to the Stockton Municipal Code (SMC) section 3.68.070, the City Council may approve findings which justify and support an exception to the competitive bidding process. The following findings justify and support an exception:
1. The wastewater pumping equipment breakdown at 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station posed a threat to public health, safety and the environment.
2. Emergency wastewater pumping equipment was necessary to resume normal and safe operations at the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station.
3. Rain4Rent was a responsive contractor that was available and capable of providing the necessary equipment that met all required specifications at the lowest monthly rate, which was in the best interest of the public.
4. By December 4, 2024, normal operations had resumed at the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station following procurement and installation of new sanitary sewer pumps.
City of Stockton Page 2 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0060, Version: 1
Present Situation
By December 4, 2024, the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station had resumed normal wastewater pumping operations following procurement and installation of new sanitary sewer pumps.
In addition, in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code section 3.68.070 and the City Manager Emergency Contract and Procurement Policy (17.05.150) 60-day rule, all financial transactions between Rain4Rent and MUD were complete with a final total cost of $835,534.88 for the rental of wastewater pumping equipment at 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station.
Staff recommend the City Council ratify the findings and total expenditure of $835,534.88 for the rental of wastewater pumping equipment from Rain4Rent to mitigate the pumping equipment breakdown at the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Expenditures were charged to the Wastewater Pump Stations Maintenance account for the emergency rental of temporary pumping services provided by Rain4Rent.
There is no impact to the General Fund or any other unrestricted fund, from this action.
City of Stockton Page 3 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS TO RATIFY FINAL EXPENSES FOR THE RENTAL OF TEMPORARY PUMPING SERVICES AT 14-MILE SANITARY SEWER
PUMP STATION
On June 9, 2023, the 14-Mile Sanitary Sewer Pump Station experienced a pumping equipment failure resulting in the inability to maintain safe operations and normal pumping capacity to the Regional Wastewater Control Facility (RWCF). The pump station is a major sanitary pumping station that provides service to northwest Stockton; and On June 13, 2023, the City Manager approved the Municipal Utilities Department request for emergency procurement authorization to rent emergency wastewater pumping equipment to continue safe operations at the 14-Mile Sanitary Sewer Pump Station in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code Section 3.68.070 and the City Manager Emergency Contract and Procurement Policy (17.05.150); and By December 4, 2024, normal operations at 14-Mile Sanitary Sewer Pump Station had resumed, and in accordance with the City Manager Emergency Contract and Procurement Policy 60-day rule, all financial transactions with Rain4Rent were complete; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council approves the following findings pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code Section 3.68.070 to justify and support an exception to the competitive bidding process:
a. The wastewater pumping equipment breakdown at 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station posed a threat to public health, safety and the environment. b. Emergency wastewater pumping equipment was necessary to resume normal and safe operations at the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station. c. Rain4Rent was a responsive contractor that was available and capable of providing the necessary equipment that met all required specifications at the lowest monthly rate, which was in the best interest of the public. d. By December 4, 2024, normal operations had resumed at the 14-Mile Sanitary Pump Station following procurement and installation of new sanitary sewer pumps.
2. The City Council ratifies final expenses in the amount of $835,534.88 to Western Oil Field Supply Company of Bakersfield, California, doing business as Rain4Rent, for all costs related to the rental of emergency wastewater pumping equipment to mitigate a breakdown in pumping capacity at the 14-Mile Sanitary Sewer Pump Station.
3. The City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED February 4, 2025 .
CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0044, Version: 1
APPROVE MOTION TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE STANDARD AGREEMENT WITH HILL’S PET NUTRITION SALES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $195,000
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a motion to:
1. Authorize the City Manager to approve Amendment No. 1 with Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc., in the amount of $195,000, and;
2. Authorize the City Manager to take actions appropriate and necessary to carry out the purpose and intent of this motion.
Summary
The Stockton Police Department (SPD) is seeking Council to approve Amendment No. 1 of the Standard Agreement with Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc (Hill’s). This agreement is to purchase significantly discounted select Hill’s brand pet food for all dogs and cats housed at the Stockton Animal Shelter (SAS) - under the program “Hill’s Food, Shelter & Love.” In exchange, SAS must maintain its credentials and standards of care for pets during the agreement while actively and exclusively displaying and communicating Hill’s partnership in public-facing areas. In addition, SAS employees and volunteers involved with the pet adoption process are expected to educate pet adopters about Hill’s brands and products when providing a free bag of food upon adoption of an animal. Hill’s is the only supplier that provides a program aiming to partner with animal shelters to provide training, shelter visuals, digital aids, and bags of dog food for adoptions.
DISCUSSION
Background
Currently, the SAS has a Standard Agreement with Hill’s, as an authorized Single Available Source provider, to purchase discounted pet food. Hill’s is the only supplier that provides the “Food, Shelter & Love program,” a program aiming to partner with animal shelters to provide training, shelter visuals, digital aids, and bags of dog food for adoptions. They also provide training and pet parenting tips to new adopters through their Pet Parent Website. There is also a significant discount offered on the cost of each bag of food and each flat of wet food purchased to feed the animals of the SAS in comparison to other vendors, such as Purina Pro Plan Food. In addition, Hill’s provides SAS animals with a consistent diet; switching food for the animals in the shelter’s care may very likely result in gastrointestinal distress, vomiting, diarrhea, decreased appetite, and change in animal temperament.
By continuing to contract with Hill’s, SAS avoids the extra costs of vet and medical costs of animals with gentle gastrointestinal tracts.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 2 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0044, Version: 1
A Single Available Source was approved administratively by the City Manager's Office on November 14, 2023, at an estimated amount of $90,000 for the period of November 1, 2023, through November 1, 2026.The Original Agreement (424000326) with an initial Not-To-Exceed amount of $90,000 was approved to begin January 10, 2024, with an initial one (1) year term, and shall renew, for two (2) additional successive terms of one (1) year each. An additional amount of $195,000 is now needed to align with the increased care of animals and Single Available Source term. Adding the additional $195,000 in spending authority will carry the City through the life of the contract which will end on January 10, 2027 following all contract extension options.
Present Situation
SAS’s current “Food, Shelter & Love program” with Hill’s provides nutritionally beneficial food for the animals in care up to adoption. SAS is looking to continue this partnership with Hill’s as the food has proven to be gentler on the animals’ gastrointestinal tract, alleviating vet care and additional medical costs to the City of Stockton. Hill’s was the only vendor in the area that offered the necessary service.
On average, the City was spending approximately $4,400 per month on service and food in fiscal years 2023 and 2024. However, within the first five months of fiscal year 2025, we have seen an increment - averaging $8,000 a month. The increased number of animals the shelter cares for has significantly impacted the amount of food needed per month.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The proposed cost of this amendment is $195,000, with a total not to exceed contract amount of $285,000. Funding is available in the Police Department General Fund, Animal Services Division FY24-25 Budget.
Attachment A - Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc. Amendment 1 City of Stockton Page 2 of 2 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
1 (Rev. 03.21.22)
CITY OF STOCKTON
STANDARD AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
This Amendment Number ___ 1__ to the above referenced Agreement is entered into on ________________ between the City of Stockton (“City”) and Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc. “Contractor”.
RECITALS
Articles of Agreement, Appendix A, states no modification, deletion or addition to these Conditions shall be binding on Hill’s Pet Nutrition unless expressly approved in writing by Hill’s Pet Nutrition.
The City needs to increase the Compensation, Not to Exceed amount in the Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc. Shelter Agreement based on original one year term with an initial two one-year terms of $90,000 for the first year to an addition $195,000 to pay for the additional two one year terms.
The City needs to extend the original end date of the Single Available Source from the initial November 1, 2026 to January 10, 2027.
Now therefore, the City and the Contractor mutually agree as follows:
1.The maximum not to exceed amount to be paid to the Contractor, including if authorized, will now read as follows:
Initial Term the maximum not to exceed amount is $90,000 Extended Term the maximum not to exceed amount is $195,000 Total maximum compensation to be paid to the Contractor under this Agreement for the initial term and the extended term shall not exceed $285,000
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the authorized parties have executed this Agreement.
CONTRACTOR
Hill’s Pet Nutrition Sales, Inc.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Contractor’s Name (if other than an individual, state whether a corporation, partnership, etc.):
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature Date
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Printed Name and Title of Person Signing
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Address
CITY OF STOCKTON
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Will Crew, Acting City Manager Date
ATTEST:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Katherine Roland CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lori M. Asuncion, City Attorney
BY:
Agreement Number: Amendment
Number:
424000326 1
Attachment 1
01/28/2025
Blaine Miller
6180 Sprint Parkway Overland Park, KS 66211
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0061, Version: 1
ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATION OF $2,000,000 TO LIGHT UP
STOCKTON PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the transfer of $2,000,000 from FY 2023-24 Year End Discretionary Funds - City Council Priority Project to the Light Up Stockton, Project No. WD25046.
It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.
Summary
Light Up Stockton is a Council Priority Project focused on streetlight replacement and repairs. The City is responsible for approximately 19,800 streetlights. Currently there are 367 non-functioning streetlights that require replacement or are inoperable due to wire theft, and there is a critical need to make these streetlights operational. This project will also convert the remaining 133 decorative metal halide (MH) streetlights in the downtown area to light-emitting diode (LED) luminaires (Attachments A and B).
It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the transfer of $2,000,000 from City Council Discretionary funds to Light Up Stockton, Project No. WD25046.
DISCUSSION
Background
The City is responsible for the operation and maintenance of approximately 19,800 streetlights. The copper wires that conduct electricity to the lights are accessed by pull boxes located on the sidewalk or the landscaped area next to the light. Wire thieves break into the pull boxes to steal wire and sell it to recyclers as scrap metal. Streetlight wire theft has increased dramatically in the last decade, coinciding with the increase in copper value. This phenomenon is not unique to Stockton; it is an issue that other agencies and industries contend with nationwide.
In 2015, Public Works Operations and Maintenance staff began experimenting with a proprietary pull box lid made of steel with a unique locking mechanism. The locking pull box lids were used successfully for approximately one year until thieves found ways to break into these locking street lids.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0061, Version: 1
In 2017, staff experimented with backfilling pull boxes with low-density concrete caps, but thieves have managed to break through these caps as well.
In 2024, staff began a pilot to evaluate the use of solar streetlighting. The project is roughly four months underway and appears to look promising in terms of providing ample light during inclement weather and proving less attractive to theft and vandalism.
The City is also responsible for the maintenance of approximately 2,269 decorative streetlights throughout the City, with 624 located in the downtown area. In 2023, the Downtown Decorative Street Light LED project replaced 491 decorative MH streetlights with LED within the downtown area.
Recent improvements to LED technology have increased efficiency and reduced product cost, making LED streetlights the preferred light source. LED streetlights use less energy and have a longer luminaire lifetime than MH, reducing ongoing electricity and general maintenance costs.
Conversion of these lights generates the most significant reduction in electrical consumption with an average of 60 percent, which yields the greatest financial and carbon footprint impact.
Present Situation
There are currently 367 non-functioning streetlights that require replacement or are inoperable due to wire theft. Approximately 73,000 linear feet of wire and their accompanying utility boxes were stripped of wires at 41 locations citywide. There is a critical need for public safety to make these streetlights operable. Additionally, the project will convert the remaining 133 decorative MH streetlights in the downtown area to LED luminaires, providing more efficient and safer lighting for the public.
It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the transfer of $2,000,000 from FY2023-24 Year End Discretionary Funds - City Council Priority Project to the Light Up Stockton, Project No. WD25046.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
In December 2024, with Resolution 2024-12-03-1504, the City Council approved the appropriation of $3 million in FY2023-24 Year End Discretionary Funds to support Council Priority Projects.
Approving a transfer of $2,000,000 from FY2023-24 Year End Discretionary Funds - City Council Priority Project to the Light Up Stockton, Project No. WD25046 will provide sufficient funding based on the below-estimated project costs:
Description
# of Lights
Out
# of
Locations
Stolen
Wire
(LF)
LED Cost
(Standard)
Repair Street Lights Out 142 88 $ 400,000
Repair Vandalized Street Lights - Wire Theft 225 41 73,000 $ 950,000 Decorative Street Light Conversion to LED 133 $ 375,000 Contingency (15%) $ 258,750
Staff Time $ 16,250
TOTAL: 367 262 73,000 $ 2,000,000
LIGHT UP STOCKTON
City of Stockton Page 2 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0061, Version: 1
Description
# of Lights
Out
# of
Locations
Stolen
Wire
(LF)
LED Cost
(Standard)
Repair Street Lights Out 142 88 $ 400,000
Repair Vandalized Street Lights - Wire Theft 225 41 73,000 $ 950,000 Decorative Street Light Conversion to LED 133 $ 375,000 Contingency (15%) $ 258,750
Staff Time $ 16,250
TOTAL: 367 262 73,000 $ 2,000,000
LIGHT UP STOCKTON
FY2023-24 Year End Discretionary balance to support Council Priority Projects will be left with $1 million for additional projects as identified by Council.
Attachment A - Vicinity Map
Attachment B - Location List
City of Stockton Page 3 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
µ
0 0.45 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6
Miles
LEGEND
Repair Street Lights Out
Repair of Vandalized Street Lights
Decorative Street Lights Conversion to LED
DIST
DISTRICT 1
DISTRICT 2
DISTRICT 3
DISTRICT 4
DISTRICT 5
DISTRICT 6
LIGHT UP STOCKTON
CITY OF STOCKTON
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ATTACHMENT A
No. Address No. Address
1 817 S CENTER ST 45 9970 RIHN WY
2 CORONADO AV 46 1707 ORVIS DR
3 3843 GOLD RIVER LN 47 NEW BRIGHTON LN & LANDS END DR
4 2218 E FREMONT ST 48 10928 LANDS END DR
5 PERFORMANCE DR 49 9321 LANSDOWNE DR
6 6844 ALEXANDRIA PL 50 9886 PALAZZO DR
7 2423 ARCH AIRPORT RD 51 RIVERMONT DR
8 OAK ST E 52 9637 CODY WY
9 W MARCH LN & TYROL LN 53 1057 GREEN RIDGE DR
10 1232 E LAFAYETTE ST 54 6720 HOLMAN RD
11 25 S COMMERCE ST 55 4205 MCGAW ST
12 STELLA CT 56 506 DAVE BRUBECK WY
13 GRANT ST S 57 4210 LORENZO LN
14 E SWAIN RD & TAM O SHANTER DR 58 2962 BROOKSIDE RD
15 WEST LN & KLINGER RD 59 1020 E MARCH LN
16 2122 FONTANA AV 60 8607 CHERBOURG WY
17 2701 E HAMMER LN 61 9710 ANGELINA CT
18 2266 E MARKET ST 62 ROSE MARIE LN & PRECISSI LN
19 982 OXFORD WY 63 721 W BIANCHI RD
20 E Myrtle St 64 930 W ELM ST
21 10113 WAYFARING DR 65 2546 EAGLE ROCK CI
22 WINSLOW WY & VILLAGE GREEN DR 66 666 DOVEWOOD ST
23 209 E PARK ST 67 821 N EL DORADO ST
24 5758 CARIBBEAN CI 68 CLARENDON AV & ELMWOOD AV
25 1540 N SAN JOAQUIN ST 69 1803 SAN JOAQUIN ST N
26 1221 W FREMONT ST 70 10622 HIDDEN GROVE CI
27 536 W WORTH ST 71 NOVARA WY & VARALLO CT
28 1030 BRISTOL AV 72 2281 OXFORD CI
29 1000 OXFORD WY 73 1936 COTTAGE CT
30 WAKEMAN DR & HOLMAN RD 74 1827 FUNSTON AV
31 1725 S SUTTER ST 75 1835 CARMEL AV
32 9125 BARBARESCO CI 76 147 W ADAMS ST
33 CHANNEL ST & N WILSON WY 77 10324 JOPLIN LN
34 WAKEMAN DR 78 4144 ANGELINA LN
35 8905 DAVIS RD 79 2546 EAGLE ROCK CI
36 3980 INSPIRATION DR 80 10413 BIG OAK CI
37 2710 BREAKER WY 81 3024 OTTO DR
38 2218 SWAINSONS HAWK ST 82 764 E SWAIN RD
39 DUNBARTON WY & MCKELVEY AV 83 394 East Lafayette Street 40 9924 PUTNAM WY 84 4239 HAWK CT
41 9917 PUTNAM WY 85 2530 BURLINGTON PL
42 2051 OLIVIA WY 86 3519 LARCHMONT DR
43 2028 OLIVIA WY 87 7711 Camellia Ln
44 1833 ORVIS DR 88 ELMWOOD AV & GARDENA AV
Repair Street Lights Out
ATTACHMENT B
No. Address
1 Airport way and Boeing
2 3171 McAllen rd
3 2148 S Mariposa rd
4 Lower Sac and Whistler
5 10008 Trinity Pkw.
6 4522 Woodchase Lane
7 Arch-Airport Rd and Performance Dr
8 Arch Airport Rd and Sperry Rd
9 McKinley Ave and Sperry Rd
10 Brookside rd and McGaw St
11 Hammer Ln and Lorraine Ave
12 Performance Dr and Aviation Dr
13 Eight Mile Rd and Golf View Rd
14 4385 Inspiration dr
15 March Ln and Bianchi Rd
16 El Dorado St/Anderson St
17 Center St and Anderson St
18 A street and Milton St
19 Fred Russo Dr and Hydrangea Dr
20 Charter Wy and Mariposa Rd
21 235 N Center St
22 Eighth St and Argonaut
23 Inspiration Dr and Vernaccia Ln
24 25 W Cleveland
25 2266 E Market st
26 2243 E Myrtle st
27 Zephyr Dr and Perlman Dr
28 10003 Trinity Parkway
29 Sierra nevada and Channel St
30 Eighth St and Cambria St
31 2122 S D St
32 Airport Wy and Acacia St
33 Marlette Rd and Scooter Wy
34 754 E Swain Rd
35 Lorraine Av and Governor Ci
36 Airport Wy and Industrial Dr
37 AG Spanos Blvd and Ocean mist Dr
38 Ag Spanos Blvd and Stoney Gorge Dr
39 Main St and Aurora St
40 4533 Manthey Rd
41 Trinity Parkway and Regatta Ln
Repair Vandalized Street Lights - Wire Theft
ATTACHMENT B
No. Address No. Address
1 NE CORNER MAGNOLIA / EL DORADO 45 SAN JOAQUIN & WALNUT 2 NW CORNER HUNGER/MAGNOLIA 46 HUNTER NO HARDING
3 N/S MAGNOLIA, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER/SAN JOAQUIN 47 HUNTER NO HARDING 4 NE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/MAGNOLIA 48 HUNTER & WALNUT
5 W/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW ACACIA/MAGNOLIA 49 SAN JOAQUIN & WALNUT 6 E/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW ACACIA/MAGNOLIA 50 SAN JOAQUIN & WALNUT 7 S/S MAGNOLIA, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN/SUTTER 51 WALNUT E/O HUNTER 8 N/S ACACIA, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN/SUTTER 52 HUNTER NO WALNUT 9 NW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/ACACIA 53 SAN JOAQUIN SO EUCALYPTUS 10 SW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/MAGNOLIA 54 HUNTER NO WALNUT
11 SE CORNER HUNTER/MAGNOLIA 55 HUNTER NO WALNUT
12 NE CORNER HUNTER ACACIA ST 56 SAN JOAQUIN SO EUCALYPTUS 13 S/S MAGNOLIA, MID BLOCK BTW EL DORADO/HUNTER 57 HUNTER NO WALNUT 14 SW CORNER SUTTER/ACACIA 58 SAN JOAQUIN SO EUCALYPTUS 15 SE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/ACACIA 59 EUCALYPTUS W/O SAN JOAQUIN 16 NE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/POPLAR 60 EUCALYPTUS & HUNTER
17 E/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW POPLAR/ACACIA 61 HUNTER NO WALNUT 18 S/S ACACIA, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER / SAN JOAQUIN 62 SAN JOAQUIN & EUCALYPTUS 19 W/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW POPLAR/ACACIA 63 SAN JOAQUIN SO WYANDOTTE 20 N/S POPLAR, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER/SAN JOAQUIN 64 HUNTER NO WALNUT 21 NW CORNER HUNTER / POPLAR 65 HUNTER NO WALNUT
22 W/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW FLORA/POPLAR 66 SAN JOAQUIN SO WYANDOTTE 23 N/S FLORA, MID BLOCK BTW EL DORADO/HUNTER 67 SAN JOAQUIN SO WYANDOTTE 24 SW CORNER HUNTER / FLORA ST 68 SE CORNER HUNTER/HARDING 25 NW CORNER HUNTER / PARK 69 SW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN / HARDING 26 E/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW PARK / FLORA 70 E/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW WILLOW/HARDING 27 S/S FLORA, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER/SAN JOAQUIN 71 NW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN / WILLOW 28 W/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW PARK/FLORA 72 S/S WILLOW, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER/SAN JOAQUIN 29 SE CORNER HUNTER / POPLAR 73 NE CORNER HUNTER/WILLOW 30 SW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/POPLAR 74 SW CORNER HUNTER/WILLOW 31 NE CORNER HUNTER / FLORA ST 75 W/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW WILLOW/HARDING 32 NW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/FLORA ST. 76 N/S WILLOW, MID BLOCK BTW EL DORADO/HUNTER 33 S/S POPLAR, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN/SUTTER 77 SE CORNER WILLOW/ EL DORADO 34 N/S FLORA, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN/SUTTER 78 NE CORNER VINE / EL DORADO 35 SE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN / FLORA STS. 79 NW CORNER HUNTER / VINE 36 NE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN / PARK ST 80 E/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW VINE/WILLOW 37 E/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW FLORA/POPLAR 81 N/S VINE, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER/SAN JOAQUIN 38 W/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW ACACIA/MAGNOLIA 82 W/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW VINE/WILLOW 39 HUNTER & HARDING 83 SE CORNER SAN JOUAQUN / WILLOW
40 HUNTER & HARDING 84 NE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/VINE
41 SAN JOAQUIN & HARDING 85 NW CORNER SUTTER/VINE
42 HUNTER NO HARDING 86 N/S VINE, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA 43 SAN JOAQUIN & WALNUT 87 SE CORNER SUTTER/VINE
44 HUNTER NO HARDING 88 S/S VINE, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN/SUTTER Decorative Street Light Conversion to LED
ATTACHMENT B
No. Address
Decorative Street Light Conversion to LED
89 W/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW ROSE/VINE
90 NE CORNER SUTTER/ROSE
91 N/S ROSE, MID BLOCK BTW SAN JOAQUIN / SUTTER
92 E/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW ROSE/VINE
93 SE CORNER HUNTER / VINE
94 NW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/ROSE
95 S/S VINE, MID BLOCK BTW EL DORADO/HUNTER
96 W/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW ROSE/VINE
97 NE CORNER HUNTER /ROSE
98 N/S ROSE, MID BLOCK BTW EL DORADO/HUNTER
99 SE CORNER ROSE / EL DORADO
100 SW CORNER HUNTER /ROSE
101 E/S HUNTER, MID BLOCK BTW MAGNOLIA/ROSE
102 S/S ROSE, MID BLOCK BTW HUNTER SAN JOAQUIN
103 W/S SAN JOAQUIN, MID BLOCK BTW MAGNOLIA/ROSE
104 SE CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/ROSE
105 SW CORNER SUTTER/ROSE
106 NW CORNER SUTTER/MAGNOLIA
107 E/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW MAGNOLIA/ROSE
108 SE CORNER SUTTER/MAGNOLIA
109 SW CORNER VINE / CALIFORNIA
110 NW CORNER ROSE / CALIFORNIA
111 S/S ROSE, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA
112 N/S MAGNOLIA, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA
113 SW CORNER MAGNOLIA / CALIFORNIA
114 NE CORNER SUTTER/ACACIA
115 NW CORNER ACACIA/CALIFORNIA
116 S/S ACACIA, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA
117 E/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW POPLAR/ACACIA
118 N/S POPLAR, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA
119 NW CORNER SUTTER/POPLAR
120 W/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW FLORA/POPLAR
121 SE CORNER SUTTER/POPLAR
122 SW CORNER POPLAR / CALIFORNIA
123 NW CORNER FLORA / CALIFORNIA
124 NE CORNER SUTTER/FLORA
125 S/S FLORA, MID BLOCK BTW SUTTER/CALIFORNIA
126 SW CORNER SUTTER/FLORA
127 NW CORNER SUTTER/PARK
128 E/S SUTTER, MID BLOCK BTW PARK/FLORA
129 HUNTER & WALNUT
130 SAN JOAQUIN SO WALNUT
131 SAN JOAQUIN SO EUCALYPTUS
132 SAN JOAQUIN SO EUCALYPTUS
133 SW CORNER SAN JOAQUIN/VINE
ATTACHMENT B
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATION OF $2,000,000 FROM THE
GENERAL FUND TO LIGHT UP STOCKTON PROJECT
The City is responsible for approximately 19,800 streetlights. There are currently 367 non-functioning streetlights that require replacement or are inoperable due to wire theft, and there is a critical need to make these streetlights operational; and The Light Up Stockton, Project No. WD25046, will also convert the remaining 133 decorative metal halide streetlights in the downtown area to light-emitting diode luminaires; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Authorize the transfer of $2,000,000 from the FY 2023-24 Year End Discretionary Funds – City Council Priority Project to the Light Up Stockton, Project No.
WD25046.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED February 4, 2025 .
CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 24-1254, Version: 1
ADOPT RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT FOR THE SAFE ROUTES TO
SCHOOL SAFETY AND CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution to:
1. Appropriate grant funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District in the amount of $500,000 to the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
2. Authorize the City Manager to accept grant funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District in the amount of $500,000 for the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all required grant documents, including but not limited to, agreements, amendments, and requests for payment necessary to secure grant funds, and implement the approved grant funded project.
It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.
Summary
The City has been awarded $500,000 in California Air Resources Board (CARB) funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Air District) for the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005. A City Council resolution authorizing acceptance of the grant funds by the Air District prior to execution of the grant agreements is required. The Air District further requires the resolution identify such person authorized to sign the agreements, project documents, and make day-to-day administrative decisions to complete the project.
It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the appropriation of grant funds and authorize the City Manager to accept grant funds from the Air District for the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005, will City of Stockton Page 1 of 2 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 24-1254, Version: 1
connect bicycle lanes near several elementary, middle, and high schools in the Stockton community, which will increase safety and provide opportunities for active modes of transportation. The project will also install missing sidewalk segments, high visibility crosswalks, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, signal upgrades, and update curb ramps to Americans with Disabilities Act standards (Attachment A).
Assembly Bill (AB) 617, signed into law in July 2017, initiated a statewide effort to monitor and reduce localized air pollution, and highly improve public health, in communities that experience disproportionate burdens from exposure to air pollutants through new community-focused and community-driven actions. The communities of Shafter, South Central Fresno, Stockton, and Arvin/Lamont have been prioritized by the Air District and subsequently selected by the CARB as communities in the San Joaquin Valley to receive clean air resources available under AB 617, based on a technical analysis of several pollution and poverty-related criteria. These measures are guided by advice and knowledge of local community members, through their input and involvement on Community Steering Committees (CSC) for each selected community.
Stockton CSC worked closely with the Air District and Public Works staff to understand the project and recommend the project for funding. On August 15, 2024, the Air District approved $500,000 of CARB funds to support the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
Present Situation
On August 15, 2024, the Air District’s Governing Board awarded the City $500,000 of CARB funding.
The Air District further requires a City Council resolution prior to executing AB 617 agreements. In addition to authorizing acceptance of the funds, the resolution must identify such person authorized to sign the agreements, project documents, and make day-to-day administrative decisions to complete the project.
It is recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing the appropriation of grant funds and authorize the City Manager to accept grant funds from the Air District for the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
Authorizing the recommended actions will increase $500,000 in construction funds to the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005. The Air District grant funds are awarded at 100 percent reimbursement with no matching fund requirement.
There is no impact to the City’s General Fund or any other unrestricted fund as a result of taking the recommended actions.
Attachment A - Vicinity Map
City of Stockton Page 2 of 2 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE GRANT FUNDS FROM THE SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT FOR THE SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL SAFETY AND CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO.
WT19005
The Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No.
WT19005, will connect bicycle lanes near several elementary, middle, and high schools in the Stockton community, which will increase safety and provide opportunities for active modes of transportation. The project will also install missing sidewalk segments, high visibility crosswalks, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, signal upgrades, and update curb ramps to Americans with Disabilities Act standards; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council authorizes the appropriation of grant funds from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (Air District) in the amount of $500,000 to the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
2. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to accept grant funds from the Air District in the amount of $500,000 for the Safe Routes to School Safety and Connectivity Improvements, Project No. WT19005.
3. The City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute all required grant documents, including but not limited to, agreements, amendments, and requests for payment necessary to secure grant funds, and implement the approved grant funded project.
4. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED February 4, 2025 .
CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 24-1291, Version: 1
ADOPT RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE THE AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH
FIRE REPAIR PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution to:
1. Appropriate funds in the amount of $20,000 from the Municipal Utilities Department Stormwater Fund to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
2. Transfer funds in the amount of $300,000 from the Citywide Bridge Slope Protection, Project No. WT22039, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
3. Transfer funds in the amount of $483,000 from the Bridge Maintenance Program, Project No.
WT23010, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
4. Approve the Notice of Exemption No. NOE50-23 under the California Environmental Quality Act for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
5. Approve the plans and specifications for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
6. Award a Construction Contract in the amount of $908,369 to Valentine Corporation of San Rafael, CA, for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.
Summary
The Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair project will include concrete repairs, reconstruction of the embankment fill, and installation of concrete slope paving and rip-rap under the bridge (Attachment A).
Design of the project was completed by Siegfried Engineering, Inc. of Stockton, CA, in September 2024. On September 13, 2024, the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009, was advertised for bids. On October 10, 2024, three bids were received. Valentine Corporation submitted the lowest responsive bid in the amount of $908,369. It is recommended that City of Stockton Page 1 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 24-1291, Version: 1
Council award a Construction Contract to Valentine Corporation, in the amount of $908,369. It is also recommended that Council adopt a resolution approving Notice of Exemption No. NOE50-23 under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), approving the plans and specifications for the project, and taking all recommended financial actions. Construction is anticipated to be completed by winter 2025.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2018 and 2021, fires were sustained under the Airport Way Bridge over Mormon Slough due to vandalism from homeless encampments. Structural engineers have completed evaluations of the bridge and determined the structural integrity of the bridge is satisfactory for normal use and operation; however, maintenance repairs are necessary.
Repairs are needed to the bridge’s abutments and concrete deck. Restoration is also needed for the embankment that has been excavated by unsheltered individuals. The Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair project will include concrete repairs, reconstruction of the embankment fill, and installation of concrete slope paving and rip-rap (large jagged shaped rocks) under the bridge (Attachment A). Installation of concrete slope paving at the abutments and river rock at the channel bottom is intended to prevent future vandalism to the abutments and other structural components of the bridge. Preventative measures such as concrete slope paving and rip-rap will be evaluated for use on all future projects where applicable.
On July 22, 2022, the City retained Siegfried Engineering, Inc. to prepare the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) for the construction of the project. The PS&E were completed, and the project was advertised for construction bids on September 13, 2024.
On July 26, 2016, Council adopted a Community Workforce and Training Agreement (CWTA). The CWTA became effective August 25, 2016, and applies to all Public Works projects over $1 million that are bid after that date. On July 16, 2019, by Motion No. 2019-07-16-1403, Council extended the CWTA term to August 25, 2024. On August 20, 2024, by Motion No. 2024-08-20-1203, Council extended the CWTA term to August 25, 2029. The CWTA was not applied to this project because the engineer’s estimate was under $1 million.
Present Situation
On September 13, 2024, the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009, was advertised for bids. On October 10, 2024, three bids were received with the following results:
COMPANY NAME BASE BID ALTERNATE BID TOTAL BID
Valentine Corporation $ 848,085 $ 60,284 $ 908,369
San Rafael, CA
Dirt Dynasty, Inc. $1,194,000 $ 51,672 $1,245,672
Farmington, CA
City of Stockton Page 2 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 24-1291, Version: 1
Saboo, Inc. $1,478,046 $210,994 $1,689,040
Brentwood, CA
Engineer’s Estimate $ 658,100 $ 99,038 $ 757,138
The contract award is based on the lowest responsive bid for the Base Bid. It is the City’s sole discretion to add, or not add, the Alternative Bid(s) to the Base Bid contract. The base bid from Valentine Corporation is the lowest responsive bid and regular in all respects. Valentine Corporation has the proper license to perform the work. Staff recommends Council approve the plans and specifications for the project and award a Construction Contract to Valentine Corporation of San Rafael, CA, in the amount of $908,369 for the base bid plus the alternate bid.
The project is in conformance with the City’s General Plan, pursuant to California Government Code, section 65402, and is categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA as specified under Section 15301(d) of the CEQA guidelines. The activities related to this project constitute a discretionary project under the City’s jurisdiction and qualifies as a project that does not have a significant effect on the environment. This resolution will approve the filing of Notice of Exemption No.
NOE50-23 under CEQA. Construction is anticipated to be completed by winter 2025.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
There is insufficient budget in the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009, to award a Construction Contract in the amount of $908,369 to Valentine Corporation. The resolution includes the following actions to provide sufficient funding to award a Construction Contract and to fund all other construction related costs to complete the project:
1. Appropriation of funds in the amount of $20,000 from the Municipal Utilities Department Stormwater Fund to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
2. Transfer of funds in the amount of $300,000 from the Citywide Bridge Slope Protection, Project No. WT22039, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
3. Transfer of funds in the amount of $483,000 from the Bridge Maintenance Program, Project No. WT23010, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009.
There is no impact to the City’s General Fund or any other unrestricted fund as a result of taking the recommended actions.
Attachment A - Vicinity Map
City of Stockton Page 3 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
ATTACHMENT A
AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE
REPAIR (PROJECT NO. WT19009)
LEGEND
PROJECT
LIMITS --
VICINITY MAP
NOTTO SCALE
CITY OF STOCKTON
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
MAIN STREET
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS, APPROVING THE NOTICE OF EXEMPTION NO. NOE50-23, APPROVE THE PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS, AND AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE
AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR PROJECT On October 10, 2024, the City Clerk of the City of Stockton opened, examined, and publicly declared the sealed bids offered for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009; and
The project includes concrete repairs, reconstruction of the embankment fill, and installation of concrete slope paving and river rock under the bridge; and Valentine Corporation is the lowest responsive bidder, in the amount of $908,369, which includes the base bid, plus the alternate bid; and The project is in conformance with the City’s General Plan, pursuant to California Government Code, section 65402, and is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as specified under section 15301(d) of the CEQA guidelines. The activities related to this project constitute a discretionary project under the City’s jurisdiction and qualifies as a project that does not have a significant effect on the environment; and
Appropriate and transfer of funds is needed to fund the construction of the project and all other construction related costs to complete the project; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City Council approves the appropriation of funds in the amount of $20,000 from the Municipal Utilities Department Stormwater Fund to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
2. The City Council approves the transfer of funds in the amount of $300,000 from the Citywide Bridge Slope Protection, Project No. WT22039, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
3. The City Council approves the transfer of funds in the amount of $483,000 from the Bridge Maintenance Program, Project No. WT23010, to the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
4. The City Council approves the filing of Notice of Exemption No. NOE50-23 under CEQA for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No.
WT19009, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by this reference.
5. The City Council approves the plans and specifications for the Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair, Project No. WT19009.
6. The City Council awards a Construction Contract between the City of Stockton and Valentine Corporation of San Rafael, CA, in the amount of $908,369, and the City Manager is authorized and directed to execute same, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated by this reference.
7. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED February 4, 2025 .
CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
TO: COUNTY CLERK
COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN
44 N. San Joaquin St., Ste. 260
Stockton, CA 95202
CITY OF STOCKTON
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
FROM: Lead Agency
City of Stockton
c/o Public Works Dept.
22 E Weber Avenue, Ste 302
Stockton, CA 95202
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21152(B) AND CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS TITLE 14 SECTION 15062
PROJECT DATA
Project Title: AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR, PROJECT NO. WT19009 CEQA Exemption File No.: NOE 50-23
Applicant: City of Stockton Public Works Department
Project Description/Location: The City of Stockton's Public Works Department will be repairing damages caused by fire to the Airport Way Bridge over Mormon Slough, between East Anderson Street and East Jackson Street. Includes concrete repair, replacement of bridge structural members, reconstruction of the embankment fill, construction of concrete slope paving at the bridge abutments, and installation of rip rap river rock at the channel bottom. See Attachment A for more information.
DETERMINATION/FINDING OF EXEMPTION
The above-described activity/project is exempt from the environmental assessment requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the following section(s) of the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14 ):
The activity is not a "project" as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.
The activity is exempt under the "general rule" at CEQA Guidelines Section15061(B)(3).
The project is "Statutorily Exempt" per CEQA Guidelines Section: ___ _ _ X_ The project is "Categorically Exempt" per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (d).
BASIS FOR FINDING OF EXEMPTION
The activity does not qualify as a project and/or clearly could not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, CEQA does not apply.
� The activity constitutes a discretionary project under the City's jurisdiction and qualifies as a project which has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, is exempt from the provisions of CEQA under the above-noted statutory or categorical exemption(s).
CHAD REED, DIRECTOR
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
By �
Guadalupe Luna, Junior Engineer
September 20, 2023
(DATE OF PREPARATION)
(DATE OF FINAL APPROVAL)
AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING
I declare that on the date stamped above, I received and posted this notice or included it on a list of such notices which was posted as required by California Public Resources Code Section 21152(8). Said notice or list of notices will remain posted for 35 days from the filing date.
Signature Title
Posting Period Ending Date
EXHIBIT 1
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
This contract is made and entered into on _____________, by and between VALENTINE CORPORATION, a STATE OF CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, with a business address at 111 PELICAN WAY SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901 hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR," and CITY OF STOCKTON, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called "CITY."
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, plans and specifications for the construction of AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR, PROJECT NO. WT19009, hereinafter called “PROJECT,” were regularly adopted by Council Resolution No. _________________, on _________________; and
WHEREAS, the contract for said work was regularly awarded to CONTRACTOR, by Council Resolution No. _________________, on ________________.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and of the mutual covenants herein contained, the parties hereto expressly agree as follows:
CONTRACTOR agrees:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. To do the work and furnish all the labor, materials, tools, equipment, and insurance required for the construction of PROJECT in accordance with the plans and specifications adopted on _____________, by Council Resolution No. _________________. The "contract documents," which include the bid documents, project plans, specifications, all letters of clarification, and the City of Stockton Standard Specifications and Plans, are incorporated into and made a part of this contract by this reference to the same extent as if fully set forth.
2. COMPENSATION. To do and perform the work contemplated hereby in a good and workmanlike manner and to furnish all labor, materials, tools, and equipment necessary therefore at the prices specified in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, under the direction of and to the complete satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Stockton. Total compensation for services and reimbursement for costs shall not exceed $908,369.00 or as otherwise mutually agreed to in a Contract Change Order.
3. INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR shall not commence any work before obtaining, and shall maintain in force at all times during the duration and performance of this contract, the policies of insurance specified in Exhibit B, which is attached to this contract and incorporated by this reference, and as provided in the “contract documents” including Section 7-1.06 of the City of Stockton Standard Specifications and Plans as adopted on September 27, 2016, by Council Resolution No. 2016-09-27-1213, effective September 27, 2016.
Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
It shall be a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured.
Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named Insured; whichever is greater.
The Additional Insured coverage under the CONTRACTOR’s policy shall be “primary and non-contributory” and will not seek contribution from the City of Stockton’s insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13.
The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the City of Stockton (if agreed to in a written contract or agreement) before the City of Stockton’s own insurance or selfinsurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
All self-insured retentions (SIR) must be disclosed to the CITY’s Risk Management for approval and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Payment Bond in the amount of the self-insured retention (SIR) may be required.
Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or the CITY.
The CITY reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsements.
Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.
CONTRACTOR shall maintain insurance as required by this contract to the fullest amount allowed by law and shall maintain insurance for a minimum of five years following the completion of this project. In the event contractor fails to obtain or maintain completed operations coverage as required by this agreement, the City at its sole discretion may purchase the coverage required and the cost will be paid by contractor.
CONTRACTOR agrees to include with all Subcontractors in their subcontract the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the Subcontractor’s work.
Subcontractors hired by CONTRACTOR agree to be bound to CONTRACTOR and the CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONTRACTOR is bound to the CITY under the Contract Documents. Subcontractor further agrees to include these same provisions with any Sub-subcontractor. A copy of the CITY Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance provisions will be furnished to the Subcontractor upon request. The Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
General CONTRACTOR shall require all sub-contractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work and contractor will provide proof of compliance to the City.
4. INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall hold harmless, defend, and indemnify City of Stockton and its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including attorney fees arising out of the performance of the work described herein, caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission of the Contractor, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of the City of Stockton. This obligation is independent of, and shall not in any way be limited by, the minimum Insurance obligations contained in this agreement. These obligations shall survive the completion or termination of this agreement.
5. STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. The performance of said work and the furnishing of said materials shall be executed in accordance with Section 8-
1.04B of the City of Stockton Standard Specifications and Plans as adopted on September 27, 2016, by Council Resolution No. 2016-09-27-1213, effective September 27, 2016, and the provisions of the issued project specifications.
The Director of Public Works will furnish CONTRACTOR a weekly statement showing the number of days charged to the contract for the preceding week, the number of days specified for completion of the contract, and the number of days remaining to complete the contract. CONTRACTOR will be allowed one (1) week in which to file a written protest setting forth in what respects said weekly statement is incorrect, otherwise the statement shall be deemed to have been accepted by CONTRACTOR as correct.
6. WORKING DAYS. This work shall be diligently prosecuted to completion before the expiration of 90 WORKING DAYS beginning on the tenth calendar day after the date shown on the Notice to Proceed. It is agreed by the parties to the contract that in case all the work called for under the contract in all parts and requirements, is not finished or completed within the number of days as set forth, damage will be sustained by the CITY, and that it is and will be impracticable and extremely difficult to ascertain the actual damage which CITY will sustain in the event of and by reason of such delay; and it is therefore agreed that CONTRACTOR will pay to CITY the sum of THIRTY SIX HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($3,600.00) per day for each and every calendar day's delay in finishing the work in excess of the number of days prescribed; and CONTRACTOR agrees to pay said liquidated damages as herein provided, and in case the same are not paid, agrees that CITY, may deduct the amount thereof from any monies due or that may become due CONTRACTOR under the contract.
It is further agreed that in case the work called for under the contract is not finished and completed in all parts and requirements within the number of days as specified, the CITY shall have the right to increase the number of days or not, as may seem best to serve Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
the interest of CITY, and if the CITY decides to increase the said number of days, the CITY shall further have the right to charge to CONTRACTOR, CONTRACTOR's heirs, assigns or sureties, and to deduct from the final payment for the work, all or any part, as may be deemed proper, the liquidated damages as specified or the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence, and other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the contract, and which accrue during the period of such extension, whichever is greater, except the cost of final surveys and preparation of final estimate shall not be included in such charges.
A working day shall not include, nor shall CONTRACTOR be assessed with liquidated damages nor the additional cost of engineering and inspection during any delay beyond the time named for the completion of the work caused by acts of God or of the public enemy, acts of CITY, fire, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, and freight embargoes and subject to approval by the Director of Public Works, inability to get materials ordered by CONTRACTOR or subcontractor due to such causes provided that CONTRACTOR shall notify the Director of Public Works in writing of the causes of delay within five (5) working days from the beginning of any such delay, and the Director shall ascertain the facts and the extent of the delay, and Director's findings of the facts thereon shall be final and conclusive.
If CONTRACTOR is delayed by reason of alterations made in these specifications, or by any act of the Director of Public Works or of the CITY, not contemplated by the contract, the time of completion shall be extended proportionately, and CONTRACTOR shall be relieved during the period of such extension of any claim for liquidated damages, engineering or inspection charges or other penalties. CONTRACTOR shall have no claim for any other compensation for any such delay.
7. CONFORMANCE TO APPLICABLE LAWS. Contractor shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and Municipal laws, rules, and ordinances. Contractor shall not discriminate in the employment of persons or in the provision of services under this Contract on the basis of any legally protected classification, including race, color, national origin, ancestry, sex or religion of such person.
a. TITLE VI
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires that “no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” (42 USC Section 2000d)
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/regulatory/statutes/title-vi-civil-rightsact-of-1964.
The City of Stockton requires compliance with the requirements of Title VI in all of its programs and activities regardless of funding source.
Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
b. DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT POLICY
The City of Stockton has a Discrimination and Harassment Policy (Exhibit C). The purpose of this policy is to reaffirm the CITY’s commitment to demonstrating respect for all individuals by strictly prohibiting discrimination and harassment, including sexual harassment in the workplace, to define the types of behavior and conduct prohibited by this policy, and to set forth a procedure for reporting, investigating, and resolving complaints of discrimination and harassment in the workplace. c. LABOR STANDARDS PROVISIONS/CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE
The bidder shall understand that conditions set forth in Chapter 1, Part 7, Division 2 of the California Labor Code shall be considered part of the contract agreement.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode= LAB&division=2.&title=&part=7.&chapter=1.&article=2.
d. PREVAILING WAGE
CONTRACTOR and any subcontractor shall pay each employee engaged in the trade or occupation not less than the prevailing hourly wage rate. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1770 of the Labor Code, the Director of Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California has determined the general prevailing wage and employer payments for health and welfare, pension, vacation, travel time, and subsistence pay as provided for in Section 1773.1, apprenticeship or other training programs authorized by Section 3093 and similar purposes applicable to the work to be done. CONTRACTOR performing the work under this contract shall obtain a copy of the wage rate determination and shall distribute copies to each subcontractor. As the wage determination for each craft reflects an expiration date, it shall be the prime CONTRACTOR and each subcontractor's responsibility to ensure that the prevailing wage rates of concern is current and paid to the employee.
i. The CONTRACTOR performing the work shall be responsible for obtaining a copy of the State wage rate determination. State wage rates may be obtained at https://www.dir.ca.gov/PublicWorks/Prevailing-Wage.html. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for posting said wage rates at a prominent location at the work site and shall maintain same in a good readable condition for the duration of the work.
ii. Should the CONTRACTOR choose to work on a Saturday, Sunday or on a holiday recognized by the Labor Unions, the CONTRACTOR shall Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
reimburse the CITY the actual cost of engineering, inspection, superintendence, and or other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the contract. Should such work be undertaken at the request of the CITY, reimbursement will not be required. To conform strictly with the provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 2, of the Labor Code of the State of California. To forfeit as a penalty to CITY the sum of TWENTY-FIVE AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25.00) for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed by CONTRACTOR, or by any subcontractor under CONTRACTOR, in the execution of this contract, for each calendar day during which any laborer, worker, or mechanic is required or permitted to work more than eight (8) hours and who is not paid the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work in violation of the provisions of Sections 1770 to 1781 of the Labor Code of the State of California. That all sums forfeited under the provisions of the foregoing sections shall be deducted from the payments to be made under the terms of this contract.
iii. The CONTRACTOR to whom the contract is awarded shall ensure that the prime and each subcontractor will in accordance with Section 1776 of the Labor Code, maintain certified payroll records. A copy of said records shall be provided with each invoice to the Public Works Department, Attention Contract Compliance Officer. It shall be the CONTRACTOR’S responsibility to obtain copies of the current prevailing wage rate determination for all subcontractors. Additionally, certified payroll records must be uploaded to the DIR website as required by labor code.
iv. The CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions established in Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code concerning the 1) certified approval by local joint apprenticeship committees for the employment and training of apprentices, and 2) contribution of funds to administer and conduct apprenticeship programs, if applicable to the job.
e. LOCAL EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE
Pursuant to Stockton Municipal Code Section 3.68.095 the CONTRACTOR and all subcontractors shall make a good faith effort to employ at least 50 percent of the workforce on this project from local residents, as measured by total labor work hours. Failure of any CONTRACTOR or subcontractor to comply with these requirements shall be deemed a material breach of the contract or subcontract. CONTRACTORS and subcontractors shall maintain records necessary for monitoring their compliance with section
3.68.095.
Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
f. SANCTIONS
Deliverables must conform with all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Such conformity includes compliance with federal sanctions, and Contractor certifies that it has not and will not engage in prohibited transactions with sanctioned persons or entities.
CITY agrees:
8. COMPENSATION. To pay CONTRACTOR for the work herein
contemplated in the following manner: Progress payments will be made on or about the first day of each calendar month, in such sum as shall make the aggregate of payment up to such day equal to ninety-five percent (95%) of the proportional contract price, upon the basis of the progress certificate of the Director of Public Works as to the amount of work done and the proportional amount of the contract price represented therefore; and all of the remaining part of the contract price not as aforesaid paid, shall be paid at the expiration of thirty-five (35) days from the completion of said work of construction and the certification by the Director of Public Works of such completion.
9. SECURITIES. Pursuant to Section 22300 of the Public Contract Code, CONTRACTOR will be permitted, at its request and sole expense, to substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to ensure performance under the contract. Said securities will be deposited either with the CITY or with a State or federally chartered bank as escrow agent. Securities eligible for this substitution are those listed in Section 16430 of the California Government Code or bank or savings and loan certificates of deposit.
CONTRACTOR shall be the beneficial owner of any securities substituted for monies withheld and shall receive any interest thereon.
10. CHANGE ORDERS. CITY reserves the right to make such alterations, deviations, additions to or omissions from the plans and specifications, including the right to increase or decrease the quantity of any item or portion of the work, as may be deemed by the Engineer to be necessary or advisable and to require such extra work as may be determined by the Engineer to be required for the proper completion or construction of the whole work contemplated.
Any such changes will be set forth in a contract change order which will specify, in addition to the work done in connection with the change made, adjustment of contract time, if any, and the basis of compensation for such work. A contract change order will not become effective until approved by the City Manager and/or the City Council.
Processing of change orders shall be in accordance with Section 4-1.05A of the City of Stockton Standard Specifications and Plans as adopted by Council on September 27, 2016, by Resolution No. 2016-09-27-1213, effective September 27, 2016, or as otherwise amended by Council. When the compensation for an item of work is subject to adjustment under the provisions of Standard Specifications and Plans, Section 4-1.05A, Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
CONTRACTOR shall, upon request, promptly furnish the Engineer with adequate detailed cost data for such item of work.
11. AUDITS. CITY reserves the right to periodically audit all charges made by CONTRACTOR to CITY for services under the contract. Upon request, CONTRACTOR agrees to furnish CITY, or a designated representative, with necessary information and assistance.
CONTRACTOR agrees that CITY or its delegate will have the right to review, obtain and copy all records pertaining to performance of the contract. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide CITY or its delegate with any relevant information requested and shall permit CITY or its delegate access to its premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material that may be relevant to a matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this requirement.
CONTRACTOR further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the contract.
12. WAIVER. It is expressly understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that a waiver of any of the conditions of this contract shall not be considered a waiver of any of the other conditions thereof.
It is further understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that time is of the essence of this contract in all respects.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their hands and seals the day and year first above written.
ATTEST: CITY:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
CITY CLERK
By:
By: WILL CREW, ACTING CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM & CONTENT:
LORI M. ASUNCION
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
By:
VALENTINE CORPORATION
By:
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
Tax Identification No.
Local Construction Contract - VALENTINE CORPORATION, Project No. WT19009, Airport Way Bridge Over Mormon Slough Fire Repair (Updated 10/18/23)
AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR
PROJECT NO. WT19009
BIDDING SCHEDULE
Each bidder shall bid each item, including all alternate bid(s). Failure to bid an item shall be just cause for considering the bid as non-responsive. Line item costs should include all Contractor's overhead and profit and indirect costs. Bids not presented on City forms shall be cause for considering the bid as non-responsive.
The basis of contract award will be the lower bidder for the Base Bid. It is the City's sole discretion to add, or not add, the Alternative Bid s) to the Base Bid contract.
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST.
QTY
1 MOBILIZATION/ GENERAL CONDITIONS LS 1
2 TRAFFIC CONTROL AND SIGNAGE LS 1
EXCAVATION, GRADING, SOIL EXPORT,
3 HYDROSEEDING, AND SUBGRADE CY 178
PREPARATION
�
UNIT PRICE
•
,,, �fJ,�/,J�
"j6;()tJrt#
�/P e.£-
TOTAL PRICE
I,. ,,,..0 �§3/a- /
.,,3� �t='�
-- �6;/BCJ-
-
4 ABUTMENT FILL CY 146 r #0
• 275- �� 'c\401
1 5 REINFORCED CONCRETE
CY
6 SLAB SOFFIT REPAIR DETAIL 1 SHEET S5.2 SF
7 BRIDGE DECK EDGE REPAIRS (SPAN 1) DETAIL
2 SHEET S5.2 LF
8 PILE CAP SPALL REPAIR DETAIL 2 SHEET S5.0 LF
9 BEAM SEAT REPAIRS DETAILS 1&2, SHEET S5.1 LS
10 DIAPHRAGM BEAM REPLACEMENT DETAIL 3 LS SHEET SS.1
BRIDGE ABUTMENT REPAIR (ABUTMENT 3) 11 DETAIL 3 SHEET S5.2 EA 12 PRIME AND PAINT LS
WPCP IMPLEMENTATION AND EROSION 13 CONTROL LS
14 BRIDGE DECK CRACK REPAIR
LF
15 ASPHALT ROAD REPAIR
SF
16 TEMPORARY STRUCTURES LS
78 � �850 1a1,000 .ll k 15.£!!_.
20 40
1 �f U&>
t'-E---
'''f'PtJ �
w ,.
/];bbo
� 4"1.3 �() !!.!!.
Id' ,,,.
"��pp
� , ..
5:uo
� u._ 1�,��()
.:if
�t't'()
,Oji
1 iii /�PtJO�� • r /��l>til2 , �/)()() ..M-- ����ti..e_ 1 ./l' ez;,--
/'11 btJI) Id' /1� ��o
1 14 •
, ## ��""" -
"' �
���t)()
50 ��/8 s t,O ·-
64 kl� ,_,. �--
1 id���o�
� .,, ��S-o
'111 � 8 8 tJ ..e::..
4'� / 0(')<)�
,..._...
-
I-
....
�
50-00
17 CONCRETE ROCK STABILIZATION !�:?/..P- " q II SF 4,372 '?l;i � Bid Forms Page 4 of 12 Last Revised 03/05/2024
EXHIBIT A
Bid Alternate Bid Schedule
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE QTY
18 BRIDGE DECK METHACRYLATE SEAL AND RESTRIPE SF 4,306 � /4.£!!-- ��z�t/� TOTAL BASE BID M� $848,085.00
TOTAL ALTERNATE BID > pk
BIDDER'S NAME Valentine Corporation
Bid Forms Page 5 of 12 Last Revised 03/05/2024
EXHIBIT A
REV 2024-03-25
Insurance Requirements
(Construction Contracts)
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, and for five (5) years thereafter, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors.
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office (ISO) Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $5,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form CA 0001 covering Code 1 (any auto), with limits no less than $5,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employers’ Liability insurance with a limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Contractors’ Pollution Legal Liability and/or Asbestos Legal Liability and/or Errors and Omissions (if project involves environmental hazards) with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, and $2,000,000 policy aggregate.
5. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) insurance utilizing an “All Risk” (Special Perils) coverage form, with limits equal to the completed value of the project and no coinsurance penalty provisions.
6. Surety Bonds as described below.
If the contractor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of Stockton requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Stockton.
EXHIBIT B Page 11 of 29 EXHIBIT 2
REV 2024-03-25
Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Stockton. The City of Stockton may require the Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City of Stockton. The CGL and any policies, including Excess liability policies, may not be subject to a self-insured retention (SIR) or deductible that exceeds $25,000 unless approved in writing by City of Stockton. Any and all deductibles and SIRs shall be the sole responsibility of Contractor or subcontractor who procured such insurance and shall not apply to the Indemnified Additional Insured Parties. City of Stockton may deduct from any amounts otherwise due Contractor to fund the SIR/deductible. Policies shall NOT contain any self-insured retention (SIR) provision that limits the satisfaction of the SIR to the Named Insured.
The policy must also provide that Defense costs, including the Allocated Loss Adjustment Expenses, will satisfy the SIR or deductible. City of Stockton reserves the right to obtain a copy of any policies and endorsements for verification.
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations and automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by or on behalf of the Contractor.
General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, CG 11 85 or both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used).
Additional insured Name of Organization shall read “City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers.” Policy shall cover City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers for all locations work is done under this contract.
2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory insurance coverage at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Stockton, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. This requirement shall also apply to any Excess or EXHIBIT B Page 12 of 29 EXHIBIT 2
REV 2024-03-25
Umbrella liability policies. The City of Stockton does not accept endorsements limiting the Contractor’s insurance coverage to the sole negligence of the Named Insured.
3. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City of Stockton.
Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) Insurance
Contractor may submit evidence of Builder’s Risk insurance in the form of Course of Construction coverage. Such coverage shall name the City of Stockton as a loss payee as their interest may appear.
If the project does not involve new or major reconstruction, at the option of the City of Stockton, an Installation Floater may be acceptable. For such projects, a Property Installation Floater shall be obtained that provides for the improvement, remodel, modification, alteration, conversion or adjustment to existing buildings, structures, processes, machinery and equipment. The Property Installation Floater shall provide property damage coverage for any building, structure, machinery or equipment damaged, impaired, broken, or destroyed during the performance of the Work, including during transit, installation, and testing at the City of Stockton’s site.
Claims Made Policies (Professional & Pollution only)
If any coverage required is written on a claims-made coverage form:
1. The retroactive date must be shown, and this date must be before the execution date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of contract work.
3. If coverage is cancelled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claimsmade policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective, or start of work date, the Contractor must purchase extended reporting period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City of Stockton for review.
5. If the services involve lead-based paint or asbestos identification/remediation, the Contractors Pollution Liability policy shall not contain lead-based paint or asbestos exclusions. If the services involve mold identification/remediation, the Contractors Pollution Liability policy shall not contain a mold exclusion, and the definition of Pollution shall include microbial matter, including mold.
Umbrella or Excess Policies
EXHIBIT B Page 13 of 29 EXHIBIT 2
REV 2024-03-25
The Contractor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the Additional Insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Contractor’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A: VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Stockton.
Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation which any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss.
Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation. The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Stockton for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City of Stockton with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsements Pages of the CGL and any Excess policies listing all policy endorsements. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City of Stockton before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City of Stockton reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.
Subcontractors
Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City of Stockton is an EXHIBIT B Page 14 of 29 EXHIBIT 2
REV 2024-03-25
additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage, subcontractors shall provide coverage with a form at least as broad as CG 20 38 04 13.
Duration of Coverage
CGL & Excess liability policies for any construction related work, including, but not limited to, maintenance, service, or repair work, shall continue coverage for a minimum of 5 years for Completed Operations liability coverage. Such Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
Surety Bonds
Contractor shall provide the following Surety Bonds:
1. Bid Bond
2. Performance Bond
3. Payment Bond
4. Maintenance Bond
The Payment Bond and the Performance Bond shall be in a sum equal to the contract price. If the Performance Bond provides for a one-year warranty a separate Maintenance Bond is not necessary. If the warranty period specified in the contract is for longer than one year a Maintenance Bond equal to 10% of the contract price is required. Bonds shall be duly executed by a responsible corporate surety, authorized to issue such bonds in the State of California and secured through an authorized agent with an office in California.
Special Risks or Circumstances
City of Stockton reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other circumstances.
Certificate Holder Address
The address for mailing certificates, endorsements and notices shall be:
City of Stockton
Its Officers, Officials, Employees and Volunteers
400 E Main Street, 3rd Floor – HR
Stockton, CA 95202
EXHIBIT B Page 15 of 29 EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT C
BOND FOR FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That we, ______________________________________________________, a STATE OF CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, as Principal and
, a corporation, organized and existing
under the laws of the State of and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Stockton, a municipal corporation, duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, as obligee, in the just and full sum of NINE HUNDRED EIGHT THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY NINE AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($908,369.00), in lawful money of the United States of America (being 100% of the contract price) for the payment whereof well and truly to be made to the said CITY, the said Principal and Surety bind themselves, their successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that the above bounded Principal has simultaneously entered into a contract with the CITY, to do and perform the following work, to wit:
AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR
PROJECT NO. WT19009
NOW, THEREFORE, if the above bounded Principal, CONTRACTOR, Company or
Corporation or its subcontractor, shall well and truly perform the work contracted to be done under said contract, then this obligation to be null and void; otherwise to remain in full force and effect.
No prepayment or delay in payment and no change, extension, addition or alteration of any provision of said contract, or in said plans or specifications agreed to between the said CONTRACTOR and the said CITY, and no forbearance on the part of 1 EXHIBIT 2
the said CITY shall operate to relieve any Surety or Sureties from liability on this bond, and consent by said Surety is hereby given, and the said Surety hereby waives the provisions of Sections 2819 and 2845 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
SIGNED AND SEALED on
APPROVED AS TO SURETY: By:
PRINCIPAL
SURETY
APPROVED AS TO FORM & CONTENT:
LORI M. ASUNCION
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
By:
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
By:
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
2 EXHIBIT 2
BOND FOR LABOR AND MATERIAL
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
That we, VALENTINE CORPORATION, a STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CORPORATION, as Principal and , corporation,
organized and existing under the laws of the State of and duly authorized to transact business under the laws of the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Stockton, a municipal corporation, duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, and unto any and all material suppliers, persons, companies, or corporations furnishing materials, provisions, provender or other supplies used in, upon, for or about the performance of the work contemplated to be executed or performed under the contract hereinafter mentioned, and all persons, companies, or corporations renting or hiring teams, or implements of machinery, for or contributing to said work and all persons who perform work or labor upon the same, and all persons who supply both work and materials, and whose claims have not been paid by the contractor, company or corporation in the just and full sum of NINE HUNDRED EIGHT THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY NINE AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($908,369.00), in lawful money of the United States of America (being 100% of the contract price) for the payment whereof well and truly to be made to said CITY and to said persons jointly and severally, the said principal and Surety bind themselves, their successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
The condition of the foregoing obligations is such that the above bounden Principal has simultaneously entered into a contract of even date herewith, with the CITY, to do and perform the following work, to-wit:
AIRPORT WAY BRIDGE OVER MORMON SLOUGH FIRE REPAIR
PROJECT NO. WT19009
NOW, THEREFORE, if the above bounden Principal, CONTRACTOR, Company or Corporation or its subcontractor, fail to pay for all materials, provisions, provender, or other supplies, or teams, used in, upon, for or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work or labor done thereon of any kind, the Surety on 1 EXHIBIT 2
this bond will pay the same, in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, provided that any and all claims hereunder shall be filed and proceedings had in connection therewith as required by the provisions of Division 3, Part 4, Title 15, Chapter 5, Article 1 of the Civil Code of California, provided that in case suit is brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's fee shall be awarded by the Court to the prevailing party in said suit; said attorney's fee to be fixed as costs in said suit, and to be included in the judgment therein rendered.
No prepayment or delay in payment and no change, extension, addition or alteration of any provision of said contract or in said plans or specifications agreed to between the said CONTRACTOR and the said CITY and no forbearance on the part of the said CITY shall operate to relieve any surety or sureties from liability on this bond, and consent to make such alterations without further notice to or consent by any such surety is hereby given, and the said sureties hereby waive the provisions of Sections 2819 and 2845 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
SIGNED AND SEALED on .
APPROVED AS TO SURETY: By:
PRINCIPAL
SURETY
APPROVED AS TO FORM & CONTENT:
LORI M. ASUNCION
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
By:
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
By:
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
2 EXHIBIT 2
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 24-1295, Version: 1
APPROVE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 2 FOR THE LINCOLN ROAD SEWER TRUNK REHABILITATION PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a motion to:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $200,673 with Siegfried Engineering, Inc. for additional design services and to extend the contract expiration date to June 30, 2026, for the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018.
It is also recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate and necessary actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this motion.
Summary
On March 9, 2021, by Resolution No. 2021-03-09-1204, Council authorized the award of a Professional Services Contract in the amount of $231,000 to Siegfried Engineering, Inc. of Stockton, CA, for design services of the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018. The project was included in the 2020-25 Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
On December 28, 2023, Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 1 was administratively approved by the City Manager to extend the contract expiration date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2025. Siegfried Engineering, Inc. submitted a proposal for additional design serves required to complete the project. Staff negotiated Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $200,673 to extend design support services.
It is recommended that Council approve a motion authorizing the City Manager to execute Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $200,673 with Siegfried Engineering, Inc. for additional design services and to extend the contract expiration date to June 30, 2026, for the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018.
DISCUSSION
Background
The Municipal Utilities Department (MUD) has implemented a Condition Assessment Program for the City’s sewer infrastructure comprised of Closed-Circuit Televised Video inspection, pipe cleaning, and engineering evaluation. This program generates a prioritized list of sewer replacement and/or rehabilitation projects for inclusion in the City’s CIP. The program identified a project to enlarge a City of Stockton Page 1 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 24-1295, Version: 1
large diameter pipe segment along Lincoln Road between Pershing Avenue and Alexandria Place.
The project will upsize approximately 2,800 feet of existing 36-inch diameter pipe to 42-inches. The project was included in the 2020-25 Five-Year CIP.
On March 9, 2021, by Resolution No. 2021-03-09-1204, Council authorized the award of a Professional Services Contract in the amount of $231,000 to Siegfried Engineering, Inc. of Stockton, CA, for design services of the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018.
On December 28, 2023, Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 1 was administratively approved by the City Manager to extend the contract expiration date from December 31, 2023, to December 31, 2025.
Present Situation
The original intent of the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018, was to upsize the existing 36-inch diameter sewer trunk line to 42-inch diameter sewer trunk line approximately 2,800 linear feet along Lincoln Road between Pershing Avenue and Alexandria Place by pipe bursting or cured in-place pipe methods. However, due to the condition of the existing sewer trunk line, these methods were not recommended. The recommended method is to construct a new 42-inch diameter sewer trunk line by open trench, replacing the existing 36-inch diameter sewer trunk line. The recommended method was based on the Preliminary Design Report which was developed to assess the options for rehabilitating or replacing the existing sewer trunk line.
Due to the change in scope, additional design services from Siegfried Engineering, Inc. will be required. Additional paving will be done along the south side of Lincoln Road, the intersection of Alexandria Place and Lincoln Road, as well as the entire road width on Alexandria Place to capture the recent sewer trunk line repair work. The project will also install Americans with Disabilities Act compliant curb ramps at the intersection of Lincoln Road and Pershing Avenue.
While Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 1 was approved under the City Manager’s administrative authority, with Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2, the total contract increase to $431,673.00 will exceed the administrative amendment authority under the contract.
Accordingly, Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 will require Council approval and result in a total contract amount of $431,673.
It is recommended that Council approve a motion authorizing the City Manager to execute Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $200,673 with Siegfried Engineering, Inc. for additional design services and to extend the contract expiration date to June 30, 2026, for the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
There is sufficient funding in the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018, to approve Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 with Siegfried Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $200,673. With approval of Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2, the revised contract amount with Siegfried Engineering, Inc. will be increased to $431,673.
City of Stockton Page 2 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 24-1295, Version: 1
There is no impact on the City’s General Fund or any other unrestricted fund as a result of taking the recommended action.
Attachment A - Vicinity Map
Attachment B - Professional Services Contract Amendment No. 2 with Siegfried Engineering, Inc.
City of Stockton Page 3 of 3 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
RICHMOND Pl
W LINCOLN RD N PERSHING AVE ALEXANDRIA Pl
CITY OF STOCKTON
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ATTACHMENT A
LINCOLN ROAD SEWER TRUNK REHABILITATION
(PROJECT NO. UW21018)
N
PROJECT LOCATION
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
N
PROJECT LIMITS
CITY OF STOCKTON Contract Amendment
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT Number: Number:
419000601 2
All other terms and conditions of the Contract shall remain unchanged and remain in full force and effect unless modified by a written amendment signed by both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the authorized parties have executed this Contract.
Siegfried Engineering, Inc.
Authorized Signature
1P� � 5.,_��,�,· Jr,_
Printed Name and Title of Person Signing
7' 1+ 2 t 12 � .. n > ,� L 8-�"'-J
Address
Will Crew, Acting City Manager
ATTEST:
Katherine Roland, CMC, CPMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lori M. Asuncion, City Attorney
BY:
(Rev. 7.7.23)
CONSULTANT
Date
CITY OF STOCKTON
Date
This Amendment Number 2 to the above referenced Contract is entered into on ________________________, between the City of Stockton (“City”) and Siegfried Engineering, Inc. (“Consultant”) for the Lincoln Road Sewer Trunk Rehabilitation, Project No. UW21018 (formerly M21018).
RECITALS
Section 10, Contract Amendments, states that the Professional Services Contract may be amended only by written instrument signed by Consultant and City; and
Section 5, Schedule and Term, states that the Professional Services Contract shall expire on December 31, 2025; and
The City needs to Increase the Compensation, not to exceed amount in Section 2 of the Professional Services Contract and Exhibit B, by $200,673.00 to pay the Consultant for additional services; and Now therefore, the City and the Consultant mutually agree as follows:
1. The termination date in Section 5 of the Professional Services Contract is amended to: June 30, 2026.
2. The maximum not to exceed amount to be paid to the Consultant, including if authorized, reimbursement of expenses, in Section 2 of the Professional Services Contract and Exhibit B, will now read as follows:
The maximum not to exceed amount in Section 2 of the Professional Services Contract and Exhibit B, is amended to: $431,673.00.
3. City shall pay Consultant for additional changes in scope outlined in Exhibit A.
ATTACHMENT B
EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT B
EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT B
EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT B
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 24-1265, Version: 1
COMMUNITY WELL-BEING PROJECT UPDATES: MOBILE COMMUNITY RESPONSE TEAM,
OPIOID SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS, AND CARE SOLACE COORDINATION HUB SERVICES
RECOMMENDATION
Informational only; no action to be taken.
Summary
This will be a quarterly informational update presented by Community Medical Centers on these projects:
1. Care Link Mobile Crisis Response Team (MCRT) pilot project, funded by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA).
2. CMC Respite Center / Opioid Settlement Agreements (OSA) project, funded through the National Opioid Settlements.
This will be a quarterly informational update presented by Care Solace on this project:
3. Care Solace Behavioral and Mental Health Care Coordination Services, funded through the National Opioid Settlements.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 1 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
COMMUNITY WELL-BEING
PROJECT UPDATES
City Council Meeting
February 4, 2025
Agenda Item #15.1
COMMUNITY WELL-BEING
INITIATIVES
Mobile Community Response
Team (CMC)
Mental and Behavioral Health
Care Coordination
(Care Solace)
SUD Services at Existing
Respite Center (CMC)
MOBILE COMMUNITY RESPONSE DATA
February 4, 2025
Item #15.1
AGENDA
Calls over time
Origin of calls
Demographics of persons in need
MCRT response to calls
Clinical resolutions and outcomes
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Initial 123 120 258 277 183 220 146 234 179 127 115 175 242 176 209 222 253 219 141 Follow-up 10 194 264 459 468 463 531 492 597 345 410 386 642 491 503 486 512 436 405 0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Program Calls Over Time
11,713 total calls since
May 2023
Program Calls September – November 2024 • During this period: • 613 initial calls • 1,353 follow up calls
• Of known reason for call: • 68% for welfare/wellness checks • 17% emotional disturbance
• 9% mild to moderate BH
intervention
• 3% suicidal/homicidal Ideations
• 3% community concern
253
219
141
512
436
405
Sep Oct Nov
Initial Follow-up
Evolution of MCRT Data Collection: Variables Added
May 2023
• Data collection
began
June 2023
• Race/Ethnicity
October 2023
• Gender
• Reason unable
to respond
January
2023
• Reason for call
July 2024
• Experiencing
homelessness
Origin of Calls
Sep ‘24 – Nov ‘24 • 494 of 613 initial calls
had referral type
data available • Over half of initial
calls came from
community members
Community
Member 69%
Police 12%
Self 7%
School 3%
Call Times
Sep ‘24 – Nov ‘24 Call time available for 607 of 613
initial calls 9am-5pm accounted for 83% of all
calls Very few calls came in after 8pm
15 35
55 48
63 52
58 57
67 71
28 31 555 21 9
8 AM
9 AM
10 AM
11 AM
12 AM
1 PM
2 PM
3 PM
4 PM
5 PM
6 PM
7 PM
8 PM
9 PM
10 PM
11 PM
12 PM
After 1 AM
Race/Ethnicity
& Age
Sep ‘24 – Nov ‘24
Caller average age was
35 years old
47% of initial calls came
from patients under 30
26%
21%
18%
14%
9%
7%
5%
0 - 20 21 - 30 31 - 40 41 - 50 51 - 60 61 - 70 71+
Asian, 7%
Black, 16%
White, 24%
Hispanic, 53%
Gender
Sep ‘24 – Nov ‘24
Available for 587 of 613
initial calls the past 3
months
42% 36% 22%
38% 36% 25%
September October November
Female Male
Clinical
Resolutions
Sep ‘24 – Nov ‘24
Engaged in Open and Supportive Dialogue
Assessed for Suicide
Validation of Feelings/Concerns
Remain in community
Assessed for safety
NATIONAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENTS
City Council Meeting
February 4, 2025
Agenda Item #15.1
National
Opioid
Settlement
California
Opioid
Settlement
City of
Stockton
Allocations
$3.875 Billion to California
• 15% to State
• 85% to Local Jurisdictions
0.3256176%
Stockton’s weighted allocation
percentage of local jurisdiction
portion
$2.7 Million distributed to
Stockton since inception
$43.3 Billion in National
Opioid Settlement Funds
Source: California Department of Health Care Services
All funding distribution subject to availability from Opioid Settlements
FUNDING
Current Settlement Agreements
ENTITY DISTRIBUTION PERIOD
Janssen 2022 - 2031
Distributors: 2022 - 2038
• McKesson
• Cardinal Health
• Cencora (formerly
Amerisource Bergen)
Allergan 2024 – 2029
CVS 2024 – 2032
Walgreens 2024 - 2037
Walmart 2024 - 2028
Teva 2024 - 2035
Pending Settlement Agreement
Bankruptcy Settlement
Kroger
Mallinckrodt 2022-2023
How is the City utilizing funds from
the National Opioid Settlement?
PROJECT PARTNER TERM / FUNDING
Community Medical 3 years / Up to $4.5M
Centers
I. Expand Existing SUD
Treatment @ CMC Respite
Center
II. Behavioral and Mental Care Solace 3 years / $855,000 Health Care Coordination
Services
USE OF OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS
Community Medical Centers (CMC)
High Impact Abatement Activities (HIAA)
Support core strategy to provide Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) and Other Opioid-Related Treatment. Evidence-based or evidence-informed programs
and strategies
Treatment and recovery support services
Expand core strategy of Warm Hand-off Programs and
Recovery services.
Expand warm hand-off services
Broaden scope of recovery services
Comprehensive wraparound services
Source: CA Department of Health Care Services, Exhibit A, Final Settlement Agreement: List of Opioid Remediation Uses City Council Meeting
February 4, 2025
Item #15.1
CMC Respite Center
201 N. Stanislaus Street, Stockton
(across the street from CMC
Channel Clinic/Pharmacy)
Open 24 hours per day,
7 days a week
R E S I D E N T I A L 2 4 / 7
Monday–Friday, 8am–5pm
M E D I C A L C L I N I C
CMC Respite Team + Services
C O U N S E L I N G
BH Clinician (LCSW)
Counselor (SUD Certified)
M E D I C A L
X- Waiver Provider (MD/NP/PA)
Medical Assistant (MA)
Nurse (RN/LVN)
S U P P O R T
Case Managers/ CHW
Patient Health Navigators
Peer Counselors
• 1-1 Behavioral and
Substance Use
Counseling • Group Counseling • Case Management • Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) for
opioids and alcohol • Monitored detox • Sobering • Connect to Primary Care Services (PC, Dental,
Vision, etc.)
• Serving individuals 18
and over • 14-Day Transitional
Respite Stay • 24-hour monitoring • Life skills classes and activities • Community programs • Presentations • Transportation & Support for necessary
outside appt. (probation,
medical, placement)
CMC Respite Residential Data
Program started with an
enrollment rate of 52%,
which rose to 82% in
2023. Overall rate is 68%
Respite Residential
Pt. received 24 hrs. services:
Case Management Services
SUD Daily Programing 1-1/Groups
Monitored Detox (as needed)
3 meals & Snacks/Laundry
Wrap Around Services –Med/BH
Appt.
Life Skills Programing
Asst. to needed appt. (Court, PO,
Treatment)
Discharge Planning & Placement
Support System Planning
Demographic Info.
Sept. to Nov. 2024
Program started with an
enrollment rate of 52%,
which rose to 82% in
2023. Overall rate is 68%
36 Population Data
90 % Male
10% Female
Treatment:
44 % received MAT (Medication Asst. Treatment)
50% Opioid & 50% Alcohol treatments
59% received Detox Monitored Services MAT
Prep and/or Other Substance (illicit drugs).
SUD 1-1 & Group Counseling utilizing evidence
base curriculum along with CBT & Motivational Interviewing.
After Care Services
After Care Services: • Case Manager Services
• Followed -After D/C 30+ Days
• Assisted w/Placement • Connected to Outpatient
*SUD*MAT*BH*PCP
• Transportation- Lyft/Bus Passes
• Resources • Community Partnership Connect
Residential Stories: • Successes
• Challenges
• Lessons Learned
Community Collaboration
Networking Partnerships
CVLIHC
Catholic Charities
Gospel Rescue Mission
El Concilio
St. Mary’s Shelter
Hospital ED
Manage Care Plan (HPSJ)
CBH
SUSD
County Collaborative Courts
Lily Pad
Salvation Army
Circle of Friends
Recovery House
MedMark
Aegis
Food Bank
Shower of Love
Bread of Life
THANK
YOU
LeiHua (Lei) McMiller, LMFT
Director of SUD Services
[email protected]
USE OF OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS
Care Solace
High Impact Abatement Activities (HIAA)
Support centralized call centers that provide information and connections to appropriate services and supports for persons with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co- occurring Substance Use Disorder/Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions. Purchase automated versions of Screening, Brief
Intervention, and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) services, and support ongoing costs of the technology.
Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery.
Source: CA Department of Health Care Services, Exhibit A, Final Settlement Agreement: List of Opioid Remediation Uses February 4, 2025
Agenda Item #15.1
Calming the Chaos of Mental Health Care Together
Care Solace is the hub to all mental and social health
supports for communities connecting agencies,
departments, services, and residents to the support they need and navigate the associated chaos of eligibility and availability.
Care Solace is providing care coordination to all city
departments, agencies and social services. • All city departments • Mayor and City Council • Employees and HR • County resources • Community Medical Centers Unhoused
Employees
2,718 Services Provided
Calls, emails, text messages
8 days to booking
16 days to appointment
845 Service requests
URL, QR, phone
3 days
Time to match
Data Overview: October through December
Gender Age
Demographics Served: Ethnicity & Language
Examples of Outreach Strategies
• AFRICAN AMERICAN CHURCHES
• CHAMBER
• RESIDENTS
• NAACP
• URBAN LEAGUE
Demographics Served: Ethnicity & Language
7 0
2 5
1 1
1 1
Examples: Flyers and Signage
Insurance Types
0.1 %
2.4 %
16 %
27.2 %
54.3 %
Mental Health
Categories
Observations by Age
Mental Health Category by Age
Youth/Adolescents Gen Alpha & Gen Z Millennial Gen X
Mental Health Category by Ethnicity
White Hispanic
Mental Health Category by Ethnicity
African American Asian
Total Treatment Types
Individual Therapy: 269 + 290
teletherapy
Assessment: 25
Intensive Outpatient: 8
Psychiatry: 73
Inpatient Care: 8
Partial Hospitalization: 2
Hospitalization: 1
Interventionists: 4
Applied Behavioral Analysis: 92
Medical Detox: 41
Suicidal ideation/self-harm: 67
Example cases
45-year-old female
City resident
Caucasian
Zip code: 95207
Anxiety, Trauma & Stress
Aetna Insurance
Living in difficult situation with
emotional abuse. Long term trauma
and stress because of the
relationship. Tried finding therapist
on her own, (57 calls) but was
unsuccessful. Care Solace matched
her with 12 available providers.
Appointment was booked within 7
days.
37-year-old female
City resident
Hispanic
Zip code: 95210
Alcohol Abuse, Anxiety, Depression
Blue Cross
Client experiencing anxiety, stress,
and was in search of assistance with
substance abuse. Care Solace
matched resident with therapy and a
treatment center.
Client booked appointment on her
own.
54-year-old male
City resident
Native American
Zip code: 95207
Depression, Trauma & Stress
No insurance
Client experiencing depression,
trauma and stress. Lost his job.
Didn’t think it was possible to obtain
care without insurance. Care Solace
matched him same day with
therapist willing to assist with
sliding scale. Appointment was
booked 8 days later.
Share the partnership on all
platforms. Use flyers,
videos and social media
resources provided.
Care Solace will host a
series of webinars and
make them available to
everyone via social media
and employers.
Promote Care Solace
Care Solace is working with the
city on community outreach.
Care Solace has contacted
nonprofits and agencies to make
them aware of the services.
Grassroots outreach is ongoing.
Care Solace is delivering QR
cards and flyers to community
organizations, chambers and
churches.
Community Outreach
Continue to Maximize Our Partnership
Data Support
The data can be mined for
trends over time. Special
requests can be fulfilled at
the request of the city.
Training
Training is complete for first
responders. City departments
are scheduled.
Thank you!
Anita Ward
[email protected]
City of Stockton
Legislation Text
File #: 25-0028, Version: 1
RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 2024 EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AMENDMENT AND AUTHORIZE THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 2025
PERIODIC EVALUATION FOR THE EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN SUBBASIN TO THE STATE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City Council, acting as the City of Stockton Groundwater Sustainability Agency, adopt a resolution to:
1. Approve and adopt the 2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
2. Authorize the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, its consultants, and the Plan Manager to take such other actions as may be reasonably necessary to submit the 2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment to the Department of Water Resources and implement the plan.
3. Authorize the Municipal Utilities Department to work in collaboration with other local agencies to implement the projects and programs developed in the 2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
4. Authorize the submittal of the first Periodic Evaluation.
5. Authorize Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority, its staff, and its consultants to take such other actions as may be reasonably necessary to submit the 2025 Periodic Evaluation to the Department of Water Resources.
It is recommended that the City Manager be authorized to take appropriate actions to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution.
Summary
The drinking water supply for the City of Stockton comes from a variety of sources including the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus rivers, and the groundwater aquifer that underlies the City. The Municipal Utilities Department (MUD) operates a water treatment plant and also maintains groundwater wells throughout the City, which provide drinking water supply to the City’s water distribution system. Groundwater supply is important to the City as a supply source, particularly in times of drought when local rivers experience decreased water flows.
City of Stockton Page 1 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0028, Version: 1
The State of California passed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) in 2014, which established a statewide framework for groundwater management through Groundwater Sustainability Agencies. The City has a vested interest in the sustainable management of the local groundwater subbasin and became a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) in 2015. As a GSA, the City is responsible for groundwater management, monitoring and other activities within its sphere of influence to help control and protect the City’s groundwater supply and improve the sustainability of the basin.
The City and 15 other member GSAs form the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (GWA) and are responsible for preparing the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. In December 2019, the GWA created the first GSP and approved and adopted the plan in compliance with SGMA. The GWA continues to make significant progress toward achieving sustainability goals. This progress includes the following:
· Most monitoring wells show groundwater levels at or above their measurable objectives with interim milestones being met throughout the subbasin.
· Groundwater quality in the subbasin remains suitable to support beneficial uses and is expected to surpass measurable objectives with no exceedances of minimum thresholds observed.
· Groundwater quality should meet measurable objectives or minimum thresholds over the next five years.
Staff recommends that the City Council, acting under its authority as a GSA, approve and adopt the new 2024 GSP Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Exhibit 1 to the Resolution) and authorize the GWA to take actions as may be reasonably necessary to submit the 2025 Periodic Evaluation (Exhibit 2 to the Resolution) for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to the State Department of Water Resources (DWR).
DISCUSSION
Background
The SGMA was signed into law in 2014 and provides for local or regional management of groundwater resources under the responsibility of GSAs. Section 10723 of California Water Code states that “the following agencies created by statute to manage groundwater shall be deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to become a GSA.” The City of Stockton became an approved GSA in 2015.
As described in DWR Bulletin 118, of the 515 groundwater basins in California, 127 are categorized as medium or high priority basins. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is listed as a “high priority” basin. The SGMA requires medium and high-priority basins to develop groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs), develop groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) by 2020 and manage groundwater for long-term sustainability. On behalf of the City of Stockton and the other 15 member agencies, the GWA submitted the 2020 Eastern San Joaquin GSP to the DWR on January 29, 2020.
City of Stockton Page 2 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0028, Version: 1
The GSP must provide, among other items, detailed physical descriptions, monitoring programs, and management provisions, and describe interaction with other plans, such as the Stockton General Plan. The GSP must also indicate a path to groundwater sustainability within 20 years of adoption. A sustainable groundwater basin, as described in the SGMA, includes no groundwater depletions that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses or users of groundwater.
Present Situation
The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority continues to make significant progress toward achieving the sustainability goals outlined in the 2020 Groundwater Sustainability Plan and the 2022 Revised GSP. Progress in the groundwater sustainability goals include the following:
· Most monitoring wells show groundwater levels at or above their measurable objectives with interim milestones being met throughout the subbasin.
· Groundwater quality in the subbasin remains suitable to support beneficial uses and is expected to surpass measurable objectives with no exceedances of minimum thresholds observed.
· Groundwater quality should meet measurable objectives or minimum thresholds over the next five years.
The SGMA requires evaluations of GSPs every five years that include responses to recommended corrective actions from DWR should they remain outstanding. The City coordinated the preparation of the 2024 GSP Amendment with the GWA and all other Eastern San Joaquin subbasin GSAs to respond to DWR’s Recommended Corrective Actions as set forth in their 2023 determination letter. In addition, the GWA agencies also coordinated in the preparation of the first periodic evaluation (2025 Periodic Evaluation) of the GSP to be submitted to DWR.
On July 24, 2024, the GWA noticed the intent to adopt the 2024 GSP Amendment pursuant to California Water Code Section 10728.4. From October 1 through October 31, 2024 a public review period was held to solicit comments from members of the public on the 2024 GSP Amendment. In addition, the Water Advisory Group and Council Water Committee reviewed and recommended the submission of the 2024 GSP Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to DWR at meetings held on October 2, 2024 and October 10, 2024, respectively.
Staff recommends the City Council, acting under its authority as the City of Stockton GSA, adopt the 2024 GSP Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and authorize the GWA, its consultants, and the Plan Manager to take all necessary actions to submit the 2025 Periodic Evaluation of the subbasin to DWR.
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
The costs for this planning activity are available in the FY 2024-25 Budget in the Water Fund - Administration Division.
City of Stockton Page 3 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
File #: 25-0028, Version: 1
Future financial requirements for GSP compliance and implementation under the SGMA will be reviewed and subject to Council approval during the annual budget development process.
There is no impact to the General Fund, or any other unrestricted fund, from this action.
City of Stockton Page 4 of 4 Printed on 1/29/2025
powered by Legistar™
Resolution No.
STOCKTON CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2024 EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AMENDMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE 2025 PERIODIC EVALUATION FOR THE EASTERN SAN JOAQUIN
SUBBASIN
In August 2014, the California Legislature passed, and in September 2014, the Governor signed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) to provide local groundwater sustainability agencies with the authority, technical and financial assistance necessary to sustainably manage groundwater in California; and The City of Stockton is a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) and a member of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (GWA) comprised of 16 local agencies and formed to develop a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) and coordinate sustainable groundwater management in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Subbasin). California Water Code section 10723.6(i) of SB 1168 states that “the following agencies created by statute to manage groundwater shall be deemed the exclusive local agencies within their respective statutory boundaries with powers to become a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA)”; and
The SGMA requires sustainable groundwater management through the development and implementation of GSPs. The GWA submitted the first Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin GSP to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on January 29, 2020; and
By letter dated July 6, 2023, DWR approved the amended GSP, as revised in 2022, and included a list of eight “Recommended Corrective Actions” for the GSAs to consider for the first Periodic Evaluation of the GSP as required by SGMA; and The City coordinated with the GWA and all other GSAs overlying the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to prepare the 2024 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment to respond to DWR’s Recommended Corrective Actions and to prepare the first five-year Periodic Evaluation of the GSP to be submitted to DWR; and
The City acknowledges that during the 20-year GSP implementation period it will be necessary to implement projects and management actions to achieve and maintain sustainable groundwater conditions in the subbasin by or before 2040; and The City acknowledges a Program for Dry Domestic Well Mitigation was adopted by the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority on September 11, 2024, with said resolution being included in Appendix 3-J of the amendments to the GSP; and The City commits to the development and adoption of a Demand Management Program by December 31, 2027, as described in Chapter 6 of the amendments to the GSP; and
On July 24, 2024, the GWA noticed the intent to adopt the 2024 GSP Amendment pursuant to California Water Code section 10728.4. From October 1 through October 31, 2024, a public review period was held to solicit comments on the 2024 GSP Amendment; and
The Water Advisory Group and the Council Water Committee reviewed and recommended the submission of the 2024 GSP Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to DWR on October 2, 2024 and October 10, 2024, respectively; and The City coordinated with the GWA and all other GSAs overlying the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to prepare the Subbasin 2025 Periodic Evaluation to be submitted to DWR; and
Staff recommends that the City Council, acting as the City of Stockton Groundwater Sustainability Agency, adopt the 2024 GSP for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and authorize the GWA to take actions as may be reasonably necessary to submit the GSP Amendment to the DWR; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STOCKTON, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The 2024 GSP Amendment is hereby approved and adopted, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated by this reference.
2. The GWA, its staff, and its consultants are authorized to take such other actions as may be necessary to submit the 2024 GSP Amendment to DWR.
3. The Municipal Utilities Department is authorized to work in collaboration with other local agencies to implement the projects and programs developed in the 2024 GSP Amendment in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
4. The submittal of the 2025 Periodic Evaluation is authorized, a copy of which attached as Exhibit 2 and incorporated by this reference.
5. The 2024 GSP Amendment for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is adopted by the City Council, acting through its authority as a GSA, and the GWA, its consultants, and the Plan Manager are authorized to take all necessary actions as may be reasonably necessary to submit the Periodic Evaluation to DWR. //
6. The City Manager is hereby authorized to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED February 4, 2025 .
CHRISTINA FUGAZI
Mayor of the City of Stockton
ATTEST:
KATHERINE ROLAND, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Stockton
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater
Subbasin
2024 Groundwater
Sustainability Plan Amendment:
Agency Information, Plan Area,
and Communication
Prepared by:
November 2024
EXHIBIT 1
This page is intentionally left blank.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment i
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE NO.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................................................ES-1
1. AGENCY INFORMATION, PLAN AREA, AND COMMUNICATION...............................................................1-1
1.1 Introduction and Agency Information.....................................................................................................1-1
1.1.1 Purpose of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan .................................................................1-1
1.1.2 Sustainability Goal...............................................................................................................1-2
1.1.3 Contact Information .............................................................................................................1-2
1.1.4 Agency Information..............................................................................................................1-3
1.1.5 GSP Organization..............................................................................................................1-10
1.2 Plan Area.............................................................................................................................................1-10
1.2.1 Description of Plan Area ....................................................................................................1-11
1.2.2 Water Resources Monitoring and Management Programs................................................1-23
1.2.3 Land Use Elements or Topic Categories of Applicable General Plans ..............................1-35
1.2.4 Additional GSP Elements ..................................................................................................1-41
1.3 Notice and Communication..................................................................................................................1-43
1.3.1 Beneficial Uses and Users in the Basin.............................................................................1-43
1.3.2 List of Public Meetings Where the 2024 GSP was Discussed...........................................1-44
1.3.3 Decision-Making Process ..................................................................................................1-45
1.3.4 Opportunities for Public Engagement and How Public Input was Used.............................1-45
1.3.5 Inter-basin Coordination ....................................................................................................1-56
1.3.6 Notice of Intent to Adopt the GSP......................................................................................1-56
2. BASIN SETTING .............................................................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model..........................................................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Data Compilation .................................................................................................................2-1
2.1.2 Regional Geologic and Structural Setting..........................................................................2-10
2.1.3 Geologic History ................................................................................................................2-11
2.1.4 Near-Surface Conditions ...................................................................................................2-11
2.1.5 Geologic Formations and Stratigraphy ..............................................................................2-27
2.1.6 Faults and Structural Features...........................................................................................2-35
2.1.7 Geologic Cross-Sections ...................................................................................................2-38
2.1.8 Basin Boundaries...............................................................................................................2-49
2.1.9 Principal Aquifer.................................................................................................................2-50
2.1.10 HCM Data Gaps ................................................................................................................2-71
2.2 Historical Groundwater Conditions ......................................................................................................2-72
2.2.1 Groundwater Elevation ......................................................................................................2-72
2.2.2 Groundwater Storage ........................................................................................................2-91
2.2.3 Seawater Intrusion.............................................................................................................2-93
2.2.4 Conditions as of 2019: Groundwater Quality .....................................................................2-93
2.2.5 Conditions in 2019: Land Subsidence .............................................................................2-115
2.2.6 Conditions in 2019: Interconnected Surface Water Systems...........................................2-116
2.2.7 Conditions in 2019: Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems .............................................2-119
2.3 Current Groundwater Conditions .......................................................................................................2-127
2.3.1 Groundwater Elevation ....................................................................................................2-127
2.3.2 Groundwater Storage ......................................................................................................2-132
2.3.3 Seawater Intrusion...........................................................................................................2-133
2.3.4 Groundwater Quality........................................................................................................2-137 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
2.3.5 Land Subsidence.............................................................................................................2-140
2.3.6 Interconnected Surface Water Systems ..........................................................................2-148
2.3.7 Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystems .............................................................................2-154
2.4 Water Budgets...................................................................................................................................2-156
2.4.1 Water Budget Background Information............................................................................2-156
2.4.2 Identification of Hydrologic Periods..................................................................................2-158
2.4.3 Use of the ESJWRM and Associated Data in Water Budget Development .....................2-159
2.4.4 Water Budget Definitions and Assumptions.....................................................................2-160
2.4.5 Water Budget Estimates ..................................................................................................2-166
2.4.6 Projected Water Budget with Demand Reduction Estimates (ESJWRM PCBL-DR Version
3.0) ..................................................................................................................................2-189
2.4.7 Projected Water Budget with Climate Change and Demand Reduction Estimates (ESJWRM PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0) ..............................................................................................2-195
2.4.8 Projected Water Budget with PMAs Estimates (ESJWRM PCBL-PMA Version 3.0).......2-200
2.4.9 Projected Water Budget with Climate Change and PMAs Estimates (ESJWRM PCBL-CCPMA Version 3.0).............................................................................................................2-208
3. SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT CRITERIA...................................................................................................3-1
3.1 Sustainability Goal.................................................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Updates to Sustainability INdicators ......................................................................................................3-3
3.3 Revised Sustainability Indicators ...........................................................................................................3-3
3.3.1 Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels............................................................................3-3
3.3.2 Reduction in Groundwater Storage....................................................................................3-13
3.3.3 Degraded Water Quality ....................................................................................................3-16
3.3.4 Seawater Intrusion.............................................................................................................3-26
3.3.5 Land Subsidence...............................................................................................................3-26
3.3.6 Depletions of Interconnected Surface Water .....................................................................3-31
4. MONITORING NETWORKS............................................................................................................................4-1
4.1 Monitoring Network for Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels.........................................................4-1
4.1.1 Representative Monitoring Network for Groundwater Levels...............................................4-1
4.1.2 Monitoring Protocols for Groundwater Level Data Collection and Monitoring......................4-5
4.1.3 Frequency and Timing of Groundwater Level Monitoring ....................................................4-6
4.1.4 Spatial Density of Groundwater Level Monitoring Network..................................................4-6
4.2 Monitoring Network for Reduction in Groundwater Storage ..................................................................4-7
4.3 Monitoring Networks for Degraded Water Quality .................................................................................4-7
4.3.1 Representative Monitoring Network for Groundwater Quality..............................................4-8
4.3.2 Monitoring Protocols for Groundwater Quality Data Collection and Monitoring .................4-10
4.3.3 Frequency and Timing of Groundwater Quality Monitoring................................................4-11
4.3.4 Spatial Density of Groundwater Quality Monitoring Wells..................................................4-11
4.4 Monitoring Network for Seawater Intrusion..........................................................................................4-11
4.5 Monitoring Network for Land Subsidence............................................................................................4-12
4.5.1 Representative Monitoring Network for Subsidence..........................................................4-12
4.5.2 Monitoring Protocols for Subsidence Data Collection and Monitoring ...............................4-14
4.5.3 Frequency and Timing of Subsidence Monitoring..............................................................4-14
4.5.4 Spatial Density of Subsidence Monitoring Stations ...........................................................4-14
4.6 Monitoring Network for Depletions of Interconnected Surface Waters ................................................4-15
4.6.1 Representative Monitoring Network for Interconnected Surface Water.............................4-15
4.6.2 Monitoring Protocols for Interconnected Surface Water Data Collection and Monitoring ..4-18
4.6.3 Frequency and Timing of Interconnected Surface Water Monitoring.................................4-18
4.6.4 Spatial Density of Interconnected Surface Water Monitoring Network ..............................4-18 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment iii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
4.7 Data Gaps ...........................................................................................................................................4-18
4.7.1 Groundwater Level Data Gaps ..........................................................................................4-18
4.7.2 Groundwater Quality Data Gaps........................................................................................4-18
4.7.3 Interconnected Surface Water System Data Gaps ............................................................4-19
4.7.4 Groundwater-Dependent Ecosystem Data Gaps...............................................................4-19
4.7.5 Plan to Fill Data Gaps........................................................................................................4-19
5. DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ....................................................................................................................5-1
5.1 Overview of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Data Management System........................................5-1
5.2 Functionality of the Data Management System.....................................................................................5-1
5.2.1 User and Data Access Permissions.....................................................................................5-2
5.2.2 Data Entry and Validation ....................................................................................................5-3
5.2.3 Visualization and Analysis ...................................................................................................5-5
5.2.4 Query and Reporting ...........................................................................................................5-7
5.3 Data Included in the Data Management System ...................................................................................5-7
6. PROJECTS AND MANAGEMENT ACTIONS.................................................................................................6-1
6.1 Projects, Management Actions, and Adaptive Management Strategies ................................................6-1
6.2 Projects..................................................................................................................................................6-1
6.2.1 Project Identification ............................................................................................................6-1
6.2.2 Project Implementation ........................................................................................................6-2
6.2.3 List of Projects .....................................................................................................................6-2
6.2.4 Category A Projects...........................................................................................................6-13
6.2.5 Category B Projects...........................................................................................................6-28
6.2.6 Mokelumne River Loss Study ............................................................................................6-54
6.2.7 Notification Process ...........................................................................................................6-54
6.3 Management Actions...........................................................................................................................6-54
6.4 Adaptive Management Strategies........................................................................................................6-56
6.5 Simulation of Projects and Management Actions in Projected Water Budget .....................................6-58
6.6 Potential Available Funding Mechanisms ............................................................................................6-58
7. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION..............................................................................................................................7-1
7.1 Implementation Schedule ......................................................................................................................7-1
7.2 Implementation Costs............................................................................................................................7-6
7.3 Monitoring and Reporting ......................................................................................................................7-8
7.3.1 Monitoring............................................................................................................................7-8
7.3.2 Developing Annual Reports .................................................................................................7-9
7.3.3 Data Management System Updates..................................................................................7-10
7.4 Data Collection and Analysis...............................................................................................................7-10
7.4.1 Model Refinements............................................................................................................7-10
7.4.2 Construction of Additional Wells ........................................................................................7-11
7.4.3 Data Gaps and Uncertainties.............................................................................................7-11
7.5 Administrative Actions .........................................................................................................................7-11
7.6 Developing 5-Year Periodic Evaluation Reports..................................................................................7-11
7.6.1 New Information.................................................................................................................7-11
7.6.2 Sustainability Evaluation....................................................................................................7-12
7.6.3 Status of Projects and Management Actions .....................................................................7-12
7.6.4 Basin Setting Based on New Information or Changes in Water Use .................................7-12
7.6.5 Monitoring Network Description.........................................................................................7-12
7.6.6 Legal or Enforcement Actions............................................................................................7-12
7.6.7 Coordination ......................................................................................................................7-12 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment iv
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
7.6.8 Other Information...............................................................................................................7-12
7.7 Outreach..............................................................................................................................................7-13
7.8 Implementing GSP-Related Projects and Management Actions .........................................................7-13
7.9 GSP Implementation Funding..............................................................................................................7-18
8. REFERENCES...............................................................................................................................................8-20 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment v
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Appendices
Appendix 1-A Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority JPA Agreement and Bylaws Appendix 1-B Legal Authority of Eastern San Joaquin GSAs Appendix 1-C Agency Resolutions to Become GSAs
Appendix 1-D DWR Preparation Checklist
Appendix 1-E Community Water Systems
Appendix 1-F Relevant General Plan Goals and Policies
Appendix 1-G Freshwater Species in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Appendix 1-H 2024 Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Communication and Engagement Plan Update Appendix 1-I Public Comments Received
Appendix 1-J Response to Public Comments
Appendix 1-K Notice of Intent to Adopt the 2024 GSP Amendment Appendix 2-A Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) Report Appendix 2-B Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) Report Version 2.0 Update (2022) Appendix 2-C Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) Report Version 3.0 Update (2024) Appendix 3-A Consultation Initiation Letter from the California Department of Water Resources to the Eastern San Joaquin Plan Administrator entitled “Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin – 2020 Groundwater Sustainability Plan”, dated November 18, 2021
Appendix 3-B Determination Letter from DWR to ESJ Entitled “Approved Determination of the Revised Groundwater Sustainability Plan Submitted for the San Joaquin Valley – Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin” Dated July 6, 2023
Appendix 3-C Technical Memorandum No. 1 – Groundwater Levels Appendix 3-D Technical Memorandum No. 2 – Subsidence
Appendix 3-E Technical Memorandum No. 4 – Water Budgets and Groundwater Storage Appendix 3-F Technical Memorandum No. 3 – Groundwater Quality Appendix 3-G Technical Memorandum No. 5 – Interconnected Surface Water Appendix 3-H Supplemental Data for Groundwater Level Minimum Thresholds Appendix 3-I Hydrographs Showing Groundwater Level Minimum Thresholds and Measurable Objectives Appendix 3-J Domestic Well Mitigation Program
Appendix 5-A List of DMS Data Types
Appendix 6-A Additional Projects Added to GSP
Appendix 6-B Technical Memorandum No. 6 – Demand Management Program EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment vi
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Tables
Table 1-1: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface for Wells in San Joaquin County.................................. 1-39 Table 1-2: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface for Wells in Calaveras County...................................... 1-40 Table 1-3: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface for Wells in Stanislaus County ..................................... 1-41 Table 1-4: Groundwater Sustainability Workgroup Interests (Collected During Development of 2020 GSP) .......... 1-46 Table 1-5: Stakeholder Database Summary ............................................................................................................ 1-54 Table 2-1: Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Watershed Details ................................................................................ 2-16 Table 2-2: Generalized Stratigraphic Column, Formation Descriptions, and Water-Bearing Properties.................. 2-31 Table 2-3: Production Zone Capacities.................................................................................................................... 2-59 Table 2-4: Wells within Water-Bearing Zones.......................................................................................................... 2-60 Table 2-5: Summary of Chloride Data by Decade.................................................................................................... 2-97 Table 2-6: Summary of Chloride Data by Depth (1940s-2010s) .............................................................................. 2-98 Table 2-7: Summary of TDS Data by Depth (2015-2018)...................................................................................... 2-103 Table 2-8: Nitrate as N Concentrations by Decade................................................................................................ 2-105 Table 2-9: Arsenic Concentrations by Decade....................................................................................................... 2-110 Table 2-10: MCLs for Common Petroleum Hydrocarbons and MTBE ................................................................... 2-114 Table 2-11: MCLs for Common Synthetic Organic Constituents............................................................................ 2-115 Table 2-12: Chloride Concentrations after 2015 .................................................................................................... 2-136 Table 2-13: Summary of Water Budget Assumptions (Historical, Current, and Projected Periods)....................... 2-161 Table 2-14: Average Annual Water Budget for Revised ESJWRM (Version 3.0) – Stream System (AF/year)...... 2-169 Table 2-15: Average Annual Water Budget for Revised ESJWRM – Land Surface System (AF/year).................. 2-171 Table 2-16: Average Annual Water Budget for Revised ESJWRM – Groundwater System (AF/year) .................. 2-173 Table 2-17: Average Annual Values for Key Components of Historical Water Budget by Year Type.................... 2-178 Table 2-18: Average Annual Values for Key Components of Projected Water Budget by Year Type.................... 2-185 Table 2-19: Average Annual Values for Key Components of Projected Conditions with Climate Change Water Budget by Year Type ............................................................................................................................. 2-189 Table 2-20: ESJ Subbasin Land and Water Use Budget Annual Average Comparison Between PCBL Version 3.0 and PCBL-DR Version 3.0......................................................................................................... 2-191 Table 2-21: ESJ Subbasin Hydrologic Groundwater Budget Annual Average Comparison Between PCBL Version 3.0 and PCBL-DR Version 3.0......................................................................................................... 2-194 Table 2-22: ESJ Subbasin Land and Water Use Budget Annual Average Comparison Between PCBL-CC Version 3.0 and PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0 .................................................................................................. 2-196 Table 2-23: ESJ Subbasin Hydrologic Groundwater Budget Annual Average Comparison Between the PCBL-CC and the PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0 ................................................................................................... 2-199 Table 2-24: Summary of ESJWRM Category A Projects Surface Water Deliveries............................................... 2-202 Table 2-25: ESJ Subbasin Land and Water Use Budget Annual Average Comparison Between PCBL Version 3.0 and PCBL-PMA Version 3.0...................................................................................................... 2-204 Table 2-26: ESJ Hydrologic Groundwater Budget Annual Average Comparison Between the PCBL (Version 3.0) and the PCBL-PMA (Version 3.0)..................................................................................................... 2-207 Table 2-27: ESJ Subbasin Land and Water Use Budget Annual Average Comparison Between PCBL-CC Version 3.0 and PCBL-CC-PMA Version 3.0................................................................................................ 2-210 Table 2-28: ESJ Hydrologic Groundwater Budget Annual Average Comparison Between the PCBL-CC and the PCBL-CC-PMA Version 3.0....................................................................................................... 2-212 Table 3-1: Minimum Thresholds for Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels.......................................................... 3-9 Table 3-2: Measurable Objective for Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels ...................................................... 3-10 Table 3-3: Interim Milestones for Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels............................................................ 3-13 Table 3-4: Salinity Tolerances of Major Subbasin Crops ......................................................................................... 3-20 Table 3-5: Measurable Objective and Interim Milestones for Degraded Water Quality for Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L TDS)............................................................................................................................................ 3-24 Table 3-6: Measurable Objective and Interim Milestones for Degraded Water Quality for Chloride (mg/L chloride) 3-25 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment vii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Table 3-7: Minimum Thresholds for Interconnected Surface Water......................................................................... 3-32 Table 3-8: Measurable Objectives and Interim Milestones for Interconnected Surface Water................................. 3-35 Table 4-1: Representative Monitoring Wells for Groundwater Levels ........................................................................ 4-2 Table 4-2: DWR Monitoring Well Density Recommendations.................................................................................... 4-7 Table 4-3: Groundwater Level Monitoring Network Density....................................................................................... 4-7 Table 4-4: Representative Monitoring Network Wells for Water Quality .................................................................... 4-9 Table 4-5: Historical Groundwater Quality Monitoring Frequency at Identified Local Water Quality Wells .............. 4-11 Table 4-6: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Network Density .................................................................................. 4-11 Table 4-7: Representative Monitoring Network for Inelastic Land Subsidence........................................................ 4-13 Table 4-8: Representative Monitoring Wells for Interconnected Surface Water....................................................... 4-15 Table 4-9: Considerations for Well Selection and Well Installation .......................................................................... 4-22 Table 5-1: Data Management System User Types .................................................................................................... 5-2 Table 5-2: Data Collection Site Information ............................................................................................................... 5-3 Table 5-3: Data Types and Their Associated Parameters Configured in the DMS .................................................... 5-8 Table 5-4: Sources of Data Included in the Data Management System..................................................................... 5-9 Table 6-1: List of SGMA Projects............................................................................................................................... 6-4 Table 6-2: Overview of Project Types and Available Funding Mechanisms............................................................. 6-59 Table 7-1: GSP Schedule for Implementation 2020 to 2040...................................................................................... 7-2 Table 7-2: Costs to GSAs and GSP Implementation Costs ....................................................................................... 7-6 Table 7-3: Funding Mechanisms for Proposed Projects and Management Actions................................................. 7-14 Table 7-4: Potential Funding Sources for GSP Implementation............................................................................... 7-18 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment viii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figures
Figure ES- 1: GSP Plan Area within the San Joaquin Valley.........................................................................................1 Figure ES- 2: Basin Setting............................................................................................................................................3 Figure ES- 3: GAMA Water Quality Sampling Locations ..............................................................................................4 Figure ES- 4: Sample Relationship Between Minimum Threshold and Measurable Objective ......................................6 Figure ES- 5: Subbasin-Wide Total Groundwater Pumping and Offsets Required to Achieve Sustainability ................7 Figure ES- 6: Monitoring Sites .......................................................................................................................................8 Figure ES- 8: Opti DMS Screenshot ..............................................................................................................................9 Figure ES- 9: Typical DMS Data Display .......................................................................................................................9 Figure 1-1: Interconnected Planning and Modeling Efforts for Water Resource Protection ....................................... 1-2 Figure 1-2: Plan Manager and Agency Contact Information ..................................................................................... 1-2 Figure 1-3: Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies.................................................................... 1-4 Figure 1-4: Placement within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin .............................................................. 1-12 Figure 1-5: Neighboring Groundwater Subbasins.................................................................................................... 1-13 Figure 1-6: Underlying and Surrounding Counties................................................................................................... 1-14 Figure 1-7: City Boundaries ..................................................................................................................................... 1-15 Figure 1-8: Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) .................................................................................................... 1-16 Figure 1-9: Land Use ............................................................................................................................................... 1-17 Figure 1-10: Land Use by Crop Type....................................................................................................................... 1-18 Figure 1-11: US Fish and Wildlife Service, California State Parks, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Boundaries .................................................................................................................................. 1-20 Figure 1-12: Density of Domestic Wells per Square Mile......................................................................................... 1-21 Figure 1-13: Density of Public Wells per Square Mile.............................................................................................. 1-22 Figure 1-14: Density of Production Wells per Square Mile....................................................................................... 1-23 Figure 1-15: Eastern San Joaquin GMP Region Setting.......................................................................................... 1-31 Figure 1-16: Locations of Groundwater Recharge Projects Prior to SGMA Implementation.................................... 1-35 Figure 2-1: Depth of All Wells in Water Data Library.................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-2: Depth Distribution of Wells in Water Data Library.................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3: GAMA Monitoring Well Network .............................................................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-4: Number of Chloride Measurements Taken at GAMA Monitoring Sites (2005-2017) ............................... 2-6 Figure 2-5: AEM Flight Lines across ESJ Subbasin................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-6: Geologic Time Scale.............................................................................................................................. 2-10 Figure 2-7: Topography............................................................................................................................................ 2-13 Figure 2-8: Major Hydrologic Features..................................................................................................................... 2-14 Figure 2-9: Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Watersheds ......................................................................................... 2-17 Figure 2-2-10: Soil Depositional Areas .................................................................................................................... 2-18 Figure 2-11: Hydrologic Soil Groups ........................................................................................................................ 2-20 Figure 2-12: Occurrence of Hardpan within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin ..................................................... 2-21 Figure 2-13: Areal Extents of Alluvial Fans, Interfans, and Pre-Modesto Formations.............................................. 2-23 Figure 2-14: Existing Areas of Groundwater Recharge (ESJWRM Version 3.0)...................................................... 2-25 Figure 2-15: Average Percent Coarse Fraction in Near-Surface Materials.............................................................. 2-26 Figure 2-16: Potential Recharge Areas.................................................................................................................... 2-27 Figure 2-17: Generalized Geologic Section and Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Setting ........................................ 2-28 Figure 2-18: Geologic Map....................................................................................................................................... 2-29 Figure 2-19: Faults and Structural Features ............................................................................................................ 2-36 Figure 2-20: Base of Fresh Water Elevation and Stockton Fault ............................................................................. 2-37 Figure 2-21: Cross-Section, by Formation, Location Map........................................................................................ 2-39 Figure 2-22: Hydrogeologic Cross-sections A-A’ and B-B’....................................................................................... 2-40 Figure 2-23: Hydrogeologic Cross-sections C-C’ and D-D’...................................................................................... 2-41 Figure 2-24: Hydrogeologic Cross- section E-E’ ...................................................................................................... 2-42 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ix
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 2-25: Cross-Section, by Percent Coarseness, Location Map ....................................................................... 2-43 Figure 2-26: Percent Coarse Cross-Section F-F’..................................................................................................... 2-44 Figure 2-27: Percent Coarse Cross-Section G-G’.................................................................................................... 2-45 Figure 2-28: Percent Coarse Cross-Section H-H’ .................................................................................................... 2-46 Figure 2-29: Percent Coarse Cross-section I-I’........................................................................................................ 2-47 Figure 2-30: Bottom Elevation of Water-Bearing Zones (Shallow)........................................................................... 2-52 Figure 2-31: Bottom Elevation of Water-Bearing Zones (Deep and Intermediate)................................................... 2-53 Figure 2-32: Elevation of Base of Continental Deposits........................................................................................... 2-56 Figure 2-33: Sand and Gravel Isopach Map ............................................................................................................ 2-58 Figure 2-34: Total Number of Cation/Anion Measurements in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin......................... 2-63 Figure 2-35: Trilinear Diagrams ............................................................................................................................... 2-64 Figure 2-36: TDS Annual Variation .......................................................................................................................... 2-65 Figure 2-37: TDS Concentrations in 2017................................................................................................................ 2-66 Figure 2-38: Chloride Annual Variation .................................................................................................................... 2-67 Figure 2-39: Chloride Concentrations in 2017.......................................................................................................... 2-68 Figure 2-40: Sulfate Annual Variation ...................................................................................................................... 2-69 Figure 2-41: Sulfate Concentrations in 2017............................................................................................................ 2-70 Figure 2-42: Hydrographs of Selected Wells............................................................................................................ 2-74 Figure 2-43: Summary of Groundwater Elevation Data, 1940-2018 ........................................................................ 2-76 Figure 2-44: Precipitation Stations ........................................................................................................................... 2-77 Figure 2-45: First Quarter 2017 Groundwater Elevation .......................................................................................... 2-79 Figure 2-46: Fourth Quarter 2017 Groundwater Levels ........................................................................................... 2-80 Figure 2-47: Map of Nested and/or Clustered Well Sites (as of 2020 GSP Development) ...................................... 2-82 Figure 2-48: Nested Well Hydrographs: CCWD 004-006 (as of 2020 GSP Development)...................................... 2-83 Figure 2-49: Nested Well Hydrographs: CCWD 010-012 (as of 2020 GSP Development)...................................... 2-83 Figure 2-50: Nested Well Hydrographs: Sperry Well (as of 2020 GSP Development)............................................. 2-84 Figure 2-51: Nested Well Hydrographs: Swenson Golf Course (as of 2020 GSP Development) ............................ 2-84 Figure 2-52: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-1 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-85 Figure 2-53: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-2 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-85 Figure 2-54: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-4 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-86 Figure 2-55: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-5 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-86 Figure 2-56: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-6 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-87 Figure 2-57: Nested Well Hydrographs: STK-7 (as of 2020 GSP Development)..................................................... 2-87 Figure 2-58: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi MW-21 (as of 2020 GSP Development)............................................ 2-88 Figure 2-59: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi MW-24 (as of 2020 GSP Development)............................................ 2-88 Figure 2-60: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi MW-25 (as of 2020 GSP Development)............................................ 2-89 Figure 2-61: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi SMW-1 (as of 2020 GSP Development) ........................................... 2-89 Figure 2-62: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi WMW-1 (as of 2020 GSP Development) .......................................... 2-90 Figure 2-63: Nested Well Hydrographs: Lodi WMW-2 (as of 2020 GSP Development) .......................................... 2-90 Figure 2-64: Historical Modeled Change in Storage ................................................................................................ 2-91 Figure 2-65: Historical Modeled Change in Annual Storage with Water Use and Year Type .................................. 2-92 Figure 2-66: Maximum Chloride Concentration Greater Than 250 mg/L (1940s-2010s) ......................................... 2-95 Figure 2-67: Maximum Chloride Concentration Above 250 mg/L by Decade .......................................................... 2-96 Figure 2-68: Maximum Chloride Concentration Above 250 mg/L by Well Depth (1940s-2010s)............................. 2-99 Figure 2-69: Maximum TDS Concentrations 2015-2018........................................................................................ 2-101 Figure 2-70: Average TDS Concentrations 2015-2018.......................................................................................... 2-102 Figure 2-71: Maximum TDS Concentrations in Shallow Wells 2015-2018............................................................. 2-103 Figure 2-72: Maximum TDS Concentrations in Deep Wells 2015-2018................................................................. 2-104 Figure 2-73: Nitrate as N Concentrations by Decade............................................................................................. 2-107 Figure 2-74: Arsenic Concentrations by Decade.................................................................................................... 2-109 Figure 2-75: Maximum Arsenic Concentrations 2015-2018................................................................................... 2-110 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment x
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 2-76: Active Investigation and Remediation Sites as of 2019 ..................................................................... 2-112 Figure 2-77: Active Sites with the Potential to Cause Plumes ............................................................................... 2-113 Figure 2-78: Subsidence (Annual Rate of Vertical Displacement) ......................................................................... 2-116 Figure 2-79: Stream Connectivity to the Groundwater System.............................................................................. 2-118 Figure 2-80: Losing and Gaining Streams ............................................................................................................. 2-119 Figure 2-81: Natural Communities Commonly Associated with Groundwater (NCCAGs) ..................................... 2-121 Figure 2-82: NCCAGs Identified as Data Gap Areas for Future Refinement, Likely to Access Non-groundwater Water Supplies..................................................................................................................................... 2-124 Figure 2-83: Areas Identified as GDEs .................................................................................................................. 2-126 Figure 2-84: Fourth Quarter 2019 Groundwater Elevation (WY 2020)................................................................... 2-128 Figure 2-85: First Quarter 2020 Groundwater Levels (WY 2020) .......................................................................... 2-129 Figure 2-86: Fourth Quarter 2022 Groundwater Elevation (WY 2023)................................................................... 2-130 Figure 2-87: First Quarter 2023 Groundwater Levels (WY 2023) .......................................................................... 2-131 Figure 2-88 : Number of Reported Dry Wells in San Joaquin County between WY 2020-2023 ............................ 2-132 Figure 2-89: Modeled Change in Annual Storage with Water Use and Year Type ................................................ 2-133 Figure 2-90: 2023 Annual Groundwater Pumping.................................................................................................. 2-135 Figure 2-91: Average Chloride Concentrations Post-2015..................................................................................... 2-137 Figure 2-92: Monitoring Frequency for Wells Measuring Total Dissolved Solids ................................................... 2-138 Figure 2-93: Wells with Recent TDS Observations by Well Depth......................................................................... 2-139 Figure 2-94: Maximum Concentrations for Wells Measuring Total Dissolved Solids ............................................. 2-140 Figure 2-95: CGPS Station MTWK – Subsidence Time Series.............................................................................. 2-142 Figure 2-96: CGPS Station P309 – Subsidence Time Series ................................................................................ 2-143 Figure 2-97: CGPS Station CMNC – Subsidence Time Series.............................................................................. 2-144 Figure 2-98: CGPS Station CA1S – Subsidence Time Series ............................................................................... 2-145 Figure 2-99: Subsidence Rates (inches per year) Throughout the Subbasin......................................................... 2-146 Figure 2-100: CGPS Station MTWK: Subsidence Time Series.............................................................................. 2-147 Figure 2-101: CGPS Station CNDR – Time Series of Subsidence and Groundwater Levels ................................ 2-148 Figure 2-102: Stream Reaches in ESJWRM.......................................................................................................... 2-150 Figure 2-103: Surface Waters Connected with the Groundwater System at least 75% of All Months in ESJWRM under Current Conditions .......................................................................................................... 2-151 Figure 2-104: Diagram of Gaining and Losing Connected Streams....................................................................... 2-152 Figure 2-105: Current Conditions Average Annual Stream Gains by Stream Node............................................... 2-154 Figure 2-106: Mapping of Potential Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems............................................................ 2-156 Figure 2-107: Generalized Water Budget Diagram................................................................................................ 2-157 Figure 2-108: 55-Year Historical Precipitation and Cumulative Departure from Mean Precipitation...................... 2-159 Figure 2-109: Historical Average Annual Water Budget – Stream System............................................................ 2-175 Figure 2-110: Historical Average Annual Water Budget – Land Surface System .................................................. 2-176 Figure 2-111: Historical Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Groundwater System .................................. 2-177 Figure 2-112: Current Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Stream System.............................................. 2-179 Figure 2-113: Current Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Land Surface System .................................... 2-180 Figure 2-114: Current Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Groundwater System..................................... 2-181 Figure 2-115: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Stream System........................................... 2-183 Figure 2-116: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Land Surface System................................. 2-183 Figure 2-117: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates – Groundwater System.................................. 2-184 Figure 2-118: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates with Climate Change – Stream System......... 2-186 Figure 2-119: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates with Climate Change – Land Surface System2-187 Figure 2-120: Projected Average Annual Water Budget Estimates with Climate Change – Groundwater System 2-188 Figure 2-121: ESJ Subbasin Projected Agricultural Demand in the PCBL-DR Version 3.0 ................................... 2-192 Figure 2-122: ESJ Subbasin Projected Urban Demand in the PCBL-DR Version 3.0 ........................................... 2-192 Figure 2-123: ESJ Subbasin Projected Hydrologic Groundwater Budget in PCBL-DR Version 3.0....................... 2-194 Figure 2-124: ESJ Subbasin Projected Agricultural Demand in the PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0............................. 2-197 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xi
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 2-125: ESJ Subbasin Projected Urban Demand in the PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0..................................... 2-198 Figure 2-126: ESJ Subbasin Projected Hydrologic Groundwater Budget in the PCBL-CC-DR Version 3.0 .......... 2-200 Figure 2-127: ESJ Subbasin Projected Agricultural Demand in the PCBL-PMA.................................................... 2-205 Figure 2-128: ESJ Subbasin Projected Urban Demand in the PCBL-PMA............................................................ 2-205 Figure 2-129: ESJ Subbasin Projected Hydrologic Groundwater Budget in the PCBL-PMA Version 3.0.............. 2-207 Figure 2-130: ESJ Subbasin Projected Agricultural Demand in the PCBL-CC-PMA Version 3.0 .......................... 2-211 Figure 2-131: ESJ Subbasin Projected Urban Demand in the PCBL-CC-PMA Version 3.0 .................................. 2-211 Figure 2-132: Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Projected Hydrologic Groundwater Budget in the PCBL-CC-PMA 2-213 Figure 3-1: Sustainable Management Criteria Definitions Graphic (Groundwater Levels Example).......................... 3-2 Figure 3-2: Location of Representative Monitoring Wells for Groundwater Levels .................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-3: Location of Representative Monitoring Wells for Water Quality............................................................. 3-21 Figure 3-4: Defined Critical Infrastructure in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin .................................................... 3-28 Figure 3-5: Location of Representative Monitoring Sites for Subsidence................................................................. 3-30 Figure 3-6: Location of Representative Monitoring Sites for Interconnected Surface Water.................................... 3-33 Figure 4-1: Representative Monitoring Network for Groundwater Levels................................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-2: Representative Monitoring Network for Groundwater Quality.................................................................. 4-8 Figure 4-3: Representative Monitoring Network for Inelastic Land Subsidence....................................................... 4-14 Figure 4-4: Representative Monitoring Network for Interconnected Surface Water................................................. 4-17 Figure 4-5: Proposed New Monitoring Well Locations (Shown as Orange Diamonds)............................................ 4-21 Figure 5-1: Opti DMS Screenshot .............................................................................................................................. 5-1 Figure 5-2: DMS Data Entry Tool............................................................................................................................... 5-4 Figure 5-3: Landing Page of Groundwater Portal....................................................................................................... 5-5 Figure 5-4: Progress-At-A-Glance Dashboard ........................................................................................................... 5-6 Figure 5-5: Typical DMS Data Display ....................................................................................................................... 5-6 Figure 6-1: Location of Category A Projects ............................................................................................................ 6-12 Figure 6-2: Location of Category B Projects ............................................................................................................ 6-13 Figure 7-1: GSP Implementation Schedule................................................................................................................ 7-4 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Acronyms
µg/L micrograms per liter
1,2,3-TCP 1,2,3-Trichloropropane
AB Assembly Bill
ACS American Community Survey
AEM Airborne Electromagnetic
AEM airborne electromagnetic survey
AF acre-feet
AF/day acre-feet per day
AF/year acre-feet per year
AMI Advanced Metering Infrastructure
AMI automated metering infrastructure
ASR aquifer storage and recovery
AWMP Agricultural Water Management Plan
B.P. before present
Bay-Delta Plan Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuary
bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practice
BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes
C&E Plan Communication and Engagement Plan
C2VSim-FG California Central Valley Simulation Model – Fine Grid Cal Water California Water Service Company Stockton District California State Parks California Department of Parks and Recreation CALSIMETAW California Simulation of Evapotranspiration of Applied Water CalTrans California Department of Transportation
CASGEM California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring CC climate change
CCR California Code of Regulations
CCR Consumer Confidence Report
CCWD Calaveras County Water District
CDEC California Data Exchange Center
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDP census designated place
CDPH California Department of Public Health
CDPR California Department of Pesticide Regulation
CDWA Central Delta Water Agency
CEDEN California Environmental Data Exchange Network
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
cfs cubic feet per second
CGPF CalSim II Generated Perturbation Factors
CGPS continuous global positioning system
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CSJWCD Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xiii
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 CVFPB Central Valley Flood Protection Board
CVRWQCB Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board CV-SALTS Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability CWC California Water Code
CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund
DAC Disadvantaged Community
DBCP 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane
DDW Division of Drinking Water
Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta
DER Department of Environmental Resources
DFW Department of Fish and Wildlife
DMS data management system
DOGGR Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources
DPC Delta Protection Commission
DPR Department of Pesticide Regulation
DPW San Joaquin County Department of Public Works
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
DWR Department of Water Resources
Eastside GSA Eastside San Joaquin GSA
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EC electrical conductivity
EDB ethylene dibromide
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERTs Encoder Receiver Transmitters
ESJ Eastern San Joaquin
ESJGWA Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority
ESJGWA Board Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Board of Directors ESJWRM Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model
ETo evapotranspiration
EWMPs efficient water management practices
ft. bgs feet below ground surface
ft/mi feet per mile
GAMA Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment
GBA Groundwater Basin Authority
GCM global climate model
GDE groundwater dependent ecosystem
GICIMA Groundwater Information Center Interactive Mapping Application GIS Geographic Information System
GMP Groundwater Management Plan
gpd gallons per day
gpm gallons per minute
GSA Groundwater Sustainability Agency
GSP Groundwater Sustainability Plan
GWL groundwater level
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xiv
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 HCM Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model
ICU Program Integrated Conjunctive Use Program
IDW inverse distance weighted
ILRP Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program
InSAR interferometric synthetic aperture radar
IRWM Integrated Regional Water Management
IRWMP Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
ISW interconnected surface water
IWFM Integrated Water Flow Model
JPA Joint Powers Agreement
JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory
LCSD Lockeford Community Services District
LCWD Linden County Water District
LLNL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
LOCA local analogs
MAC Mokelumne-Amador-Calaveras
MAF million acre-feet
MAR managed aquifer recharge
MCL maximum contaminant level
mg/L milligrams per liter
MGD million gallons per day
MHI median household income
MICUP Mokelumne River Integrated Conjunctive Use Program mhos/cm micromhos per centimeter
MO measurable objective
MOA memorandum of agreement
MokeWISE Mokelumne Watershed Interregional Sustainability Evaluation MSL mean sea level
MT minimum threshold
MtBE methyl tertiary-butyl ether
MUD Municipal Utilities Department
MWH Montgomery Watson Harza
NAD 83 North American Datum of 1983
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NCCAG Natural Communities Commonly Associated with Groundwater NDWA North Delta Water Agency
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NGS National Geodetic Survey
NOI Notice of Intent
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service
NSJWCD North San Joaquin Water Conservation District
NWIS National Water Information System
O&M operations and maintenance
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xv
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 OES San Joaquin County Office of Emergency Services
OID Oakdale Irrigation District
OSWCR Online System for Well Completion Reports
PCBL Projected Conditions Baseline
PCE perchloroethylene
PDA Protest Dismissal Agreement
pdf portable document format
PFOA perfluorooctantoic acid
PFOS perfluorooctanesulfonic acid
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PMA Projects and Management Actions
PMC Project Management Committee
PRISM Precipitation-Elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model PS persistent scatter
RCA recommended corrective action
RCD Resource Conservation District
RCP representative climate pathways
RD Reclamation District
RFP request for proposal
RL Reporting Limit
RMN representative monitoring network
RMW representative monitoring well
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAGBI Soil Agricultural Groundwater Banking Index
SAW Stakeholder Advisory Workgroup
SB Senate Bill
SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition
SCWSP South County Water Supply Program
SDACs Severely Disadvantaged Communities
SDWA South Delta Water Agency
SEWD Stockton East Water District
SGM Sustainable Groundwater Management
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SJC San Joaquin County
SJC POC San Joaquin Valley Point of Contacts
SJCFCWCD San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District SJV San Joaquin Valley
SMC sustainable management criteria
SMCL secondary maximum contaminant levels
SNMP Salt and Nutrient Management Plan
SOPAC Scripps Orbit and Permanent Array Center
SRA State Recreation Area
SS specific storage
SSJ South San Joaquin
SSJ GSA South San Joaquin GSA
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment xvi
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 SSJID South San Joaquin Irrigation District
SVRA State Vehicular Recreation Area
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
SWTF Surface Water Treatment Facility
SY specific yield
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAFY thousand acre-feet per year
TCE trichloroethene
TDS total dissolved solids
TNC The Nature Conservancy
TSS Technical Support Services
UNAVCO University Navstar Consortium
UNGL University of Nevada Geodetic Laboratory
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish & Wildlife Service
USGS United States Geological Survey
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
UWMPs Urban Water Management Plans
VFD variable frequency drive
VIC Variable Infiltration Capacity
VOC volatile organic compound
Water Code California Water Code
WDL Water Data Library
WDR Waste Discharge Requirement
WID Woodbridge Irrigation District
WIIN Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation
Workgroup Groundwater Sustainability Workgroup
WPCF Water Pollution Control Facility
WRFP Water Recycling Funding Program
WRIMS Water Resource Integrated Modeling System
WY water year
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-1
Executive Summary November 2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES-1. Introduction
In 2014, the California legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) in response to continued overdraft of California’s groundwater resources. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin (Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, or Subbasin) is one of 21 basins and subbasins identified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) as being in a state of critical overdraft. SGMA requires preparation of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) to address measures necessary to attain sustainable conditions in the Subbasin. Within the framework of SGMA, sustainability is generally defined as long-term reliability of the groundwater supply and the absence of undesirable results.
The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (ESJGWA) was formed in 2017 in response to SGMA. A Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement establishes the ESJGWA, which is composed of 16 Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs): Central Delta Water Agency (CDWA), Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District (CSJWCD), City of Lodi, City of Manteca, City of Stockton, Eastside San Joaquin GSA (Eastside GSA) (composed of Calaveras County Water District [CCWD], Calaveras County, Stanislaus County, and Rock Creek Water District), Linden County Water District (LCWD), Lockeford Community Services District (LCSD), North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD), Oakdale Irrigation District (OID), San Joaquin County No. 1, San Joaquin County No. 2 (with participation from California Water Service Company Stockton District [Cal Water]), South Delta Water Agency (SDWA), South San Joaquin GSA (composed of South San Joaquin Irrigation District [SSJID] including Woodward Reservoir, City of Ripon, and City of Escalon), Stockton East Water District (SEWD), and Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID). The ESJGWA is governed by a 16-member Board of Directors (ESJGWA Board), with one representative from each GSA. The Board is guided by a Steering Committee, also with one representative from each GSA, that is tasked with making recommendations to the ESJGWA Board on technical and substantive matters.
SGMA requires development of a GSP that achieves groundwater sustainability in the Subbasin by 2040. The GSP outlines the need to reduce overdraft conditions and has identified 43 projects for potential development that either replace groundwater use (offset) or supplement groundwater supplies (recharge) to meet current and future water demands. Although current analysis indicates that groundwater pumping offsets and/or recharge on the order of 95,000 acre-feet per year (AF/year) may be required to achieve sustainability, additional efforts are needed to confirm the level of pumping offsets and/or recharge required to achieve sustainability. These efforts include collecting additional data and a review of the Subbasin groundwater model, along with other efforts as outlined in the GSP.
To address the requirements prescribed in SGMA and outlined in the GSP Emergency Regulations (2016), the Subbasin GSAs prepard and submitted a Final GSP by the initial January 31, 2020 deadline. On January 28. 2022, the ESJGWA received a Determiniation Letter from DWR. The Letter identified two deficiencies in the Subbasin GSPs which precluded DWR’s approval, as well as potential corrective actions to address each potential deficiency. The Letter initiated consultation between DWR, the Plan Manager, the ESJGWA, and the Subbasin’s GSAs. On July 27, 2022, the GSAs submitted the 2022 Revised GSP to DWR. In a July 6, 2023 Determination Letter, DWR concluded that the GSAs has taken sufficient actions to correct the deficienes identified by DWR and approved the 2022 Revised Plan. This 2023 Determiniation Letter also outlined eight recommended corrective actions that the GSAs could consider addressing during preparation of the first Periodic Evaluation. The ESJGWA determined that a Plan Amendment was required to adequately address the recommended corrective actions.
Critical Dates for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin
☒ 2020 By January 31: Submit GSP to DWR
☒ 2025 Evaluate GSP and update if warranted
☐ 2030 Evaluate GSP and update if warranted
☐ 2035 Evaluate GSP and update if warranted
☐ 2040 Achieve sustainability for the Subbasin
Figure ES- 1: GSP Plan Area within
the San Joaquin Valley
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-2
Executive Summary November 2024
A Public Draft of the 2024 GSP Amendment was prepared and made available for public review and comment on October 1, 2024 for a period of 31 days ending on October 31, 2024. The ESJGWA received numerous comments from the public, reviewed and prepared responses to comments, and revised the Draft 2024 GSP Amendment. This Final 2024 GSP Amendment includes those edits and revisions, as well as edits to address the eight recommended corrective actions in DWR’s 2023 Determination Letter.
ES-2. Plan Area
The ESJGWA’s jurisdictional area is defined by the boundaries of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin in DWR’s 2003 Bulletin 118 as updated in 2016 and 2018. The Subbasin underlies the San Joaquin Valley, as shown in Figure ES-1.
ES-3. Outreach Efforts
A stakeholder engagement strategy was developed to enable the interests of beneficial users of groundwater in the Subbasin to be considered. The strategy incorporated bi-monthly Project Management Committee (PMC) meetings, Steering Committee meetings, ESJGWA Board meetings, public meetings, an informational open house event, and information distribution to property owners and residents in the Subbasin.
To support the 5-year Periodic Evaluation of the GSP
and development the 2024 GSP Amendment, the
Steering Committee recommended that the chair of
the ESJGWA form an Ad Hoc Project Management
Committee (PMC). Approved by the Steering
Committee in December 2023, the PMC was
comprised of six GSA volunteers representing the
varied interests in the Subbasin and covering both
urban and agricultural areas. The PMC met bi-monthly
during the GSP Periodic Evaluation and GSP Amendment process, and was tasked with driving the review and update process and coordinating other SGMA implementation efforts, including development of a Domestic Well Mitigation Program, coordination of stakeholder outreach and engagement, and annual and long-term budgeting. PMC members reviewed draft work products and other meeting materials to provide input and direction as needed at the bi-monthly meetings. The PMC was also responsible for recognizing and flagging items requiring discussion and direction from stakeholders, the Steering Committee, and the ESJGWA.
Public Meeting Type Number of
Meetings
ESJGWA Board Meetings 5
Steering Committee Meetings 5
Project Management Committee Meetings 20
Public Events (Meetings & Informational Open House
Events)
3 EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-3
Executive Summary November 2024
ES-4. Basin Setting
The Subbasin is located to the west of the SacramentoSan Joaquin River Delta (Delta) and is bounded by the Sierra Nevada foothills to the east, the San Joaquin
River to the west, Dry Creek to the north, and
Stanislaus River to the south. In the eastern portion of the Subbasin, groundwater flows from east to west and
generally mirrors the westward sloping topography of
the geologic formations. In the western portion of the
Subbasin, groundwater flows eastward toward areas
with relatively lower groundwater elevation. Surface
water generally flows from east to west, with the major river systems traversing the Subbasin being the
Calaveras, Mokelumne, and Stanislaus rivers. Multiple
smaller streams flow into the San Joaquin River, which
flows from south to north. The location of the Subbasin is shown in Figure ES-3.
ES-5. Existing Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater levels in some portions of the Subbasin
have been declining for many years, while groundwater levels in other areas of the Subbasin have remained stable or increased in recent years. The change in groundwater levels varies across the Subbasin, with the greatest declines occurring in the central portion of the Subbasin. The western and southern portions of the Subbasin have experienced less change in groundwater levels, in part due to the minimal groundwater pumping in the Delta area to the west and the import of surface water for agricultural and urban uses. In the most recent years, groundwater levels show a general trend of increasing as a result of two signficantly wet water years following two critically dry water years. It has also been established through isotope analysis that the implementation of the Tecklenberg project has added to groundwater levels in the project area.
Groundwater quality in the Subbasin varies by location. Areas along the western margin have historically had higher levels of salinity. Salinity may be naturally occurring or the result of human activity. Sources of salinity in the Subbasin include Delta sediments, deep saline groundwater, and irrigation return water. Total dissolved solids (TDS), which is a measure of all inorganic and organic substances present in a liquid in molecular, ionized, or colloidal suspended form, and chloride are commonly used to measure salinity. The Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program includes numerous water quality monitoring sites in the Subbasin compiled from different sources, shown in Figure ES-4. Maximum TDS concentrations across the Subbasin have been reported as high as 2,500 milligrams per liter (mg/L) along portions of the Subbasin’s western boundary. Maximum chloride concentrations have been reported at concentrations greater than 2,000 mg/L, with higher concentrations measured in the central and western regions of the Subbasin. For drinking water, California has three secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL) standards for TDS, all based on aesthetic considerations such as taste and odor, not public health concerns. These are 500 mg/L (recommended limit), 1,000 mg/L (upper limit), and 1,500 mg/L (short-term limit). TDS concentrations decrease significantly to the east, to typically less than 500 mg/L (the recommended limit for aesthetic considerations). The SMCL for chloride is 250 mg/L. Chloride concentrations are typically low across the Subbasin with the majority of measurements falling within the 0-250 mg/L range. Elevated concentrations of other constituents, such as nitrate, arsenic, and point-source contaminants, are generally localized and not widespread and are Figure ES- 2: Basin Setting
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-4
Executive Summary November 2024
generally related to natural sources or land use activities. The GSP establishes ongoing monitoring of salinity (as TDS and chloride) and uses publicly available groundwater quality data to assess groundwater quality relative to arsenic, nitrate, and a number of other common water quality constituents to fill data gaps and identify potential trends of concern.
While the total volume of groundwater in storage in the Subbasin has declined over time, groundwater storage
reduction has not historically been an area of concern in the Subbasin, as there are large volumes of fresh water stored in the aquifer. The total fresh groundwater in storage was estimated at over 50 million-acre-feet (MAF) in 2015. The amount of groundwater in storage has decreased by
approximately 0.01 percent per year (or -0.34 MAF per year) between 1995 and 2023. As such, it is highly unlikely the Subbasin will experience conditions under which the volume of stored groundwater poses a concern, although the depth to access that groundwater does pose a concern.
Land subsidence has not historically been an area of concern in the Subbasin, and there are no records of land subsidence caused by groundwater pumping in the Subbasin.
Seawater intrusion is not considered an applicable sustainability indicator for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin as the adjoining Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) is managed as a freshwater body, there is minimal pumping near the Delta, and there are relatively low chloride concentrations in the Subbasin.
Surface waters can be hydraulically interconnected with the groundwater system, where the stream baseflow is either derived from the aquifer (gaining stream) or recharged to the aquifer (losing stream). If the water table beneath the stream substantially lowers as a result of groundwater pumping, the stream may disconnect entirely from the underlying aquifer. Major river systems in the Subbasin are highly managed to meet instream flow requirements for fisheries, water quality standards, and water rights of users downstream. The Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) Version 3.0 was used to identify interconnected reaches of rivers and streams contained within or bounding the Subbasin by comparing monthly groundwater elevations from the historical calibration of the ESJWRM to streambed elevations along the streams represented. The Mokelumne, Stanislaus, and lower San Joaquin Rivers were found to be connected at least 80 percent of the time over the model simulation period, and the Calaveras River less than 20 percent of the time. ESJWRM Version 3.0 was also used to evaluate current conditions to those simulated for Water Year 2015 (representing dry conditions with low groundwater levels after a multi-year drought). The resultant trends were very similar to historical gains and losses, with the exception of the Stanislaus River, which has a high number of stream nodes in the center portion of the river that are losing under current conditions. ESJWRM Version 3.0, while the best available tool at the time of analysis, contains uncertainty preventing the GSAs from having sufficient data to determine if or when streams or reaches are connected to the groundwater table with this level of granularity. The GSAs will be collecting more data with the new ISW monitoring wells to help inform this analysis going forward.
Figure ES- 3: GAMA Water Quality
Sampling Locations
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-5
Executive Summary November 2024
ES-6. Sustainable Management Criteria
SGMA introduces several terms to measure sustainability, including:
Sustainability Indicators – Sustainability indicators refer to any of the effects caused by groundwater conditions occurring throughout the Subbasin that, when significant and unreasonable, cause undesirable results. The six sustainability indicators identified by DWR are the following:
• Chronic lowering of groundwater levels indicating a significant and unreasonable depletion of supply if continued over the planning and implementation horizon
• Significant and unreasonable reduction of groundwater storage • Significant and unreasonable seawater intrusion
• Significant and unreasonable degraded water quality
• Significant and unreasonable land subsidence that substantially interferes with surface land uses • Depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water
Sustainability Goal – This goal is the culmination of conditions resulting in a sustainable condition (absence of undesirable results) within 20 years.
Undesirable Results – Undesirable results are the significant and unreasonable occurrence of conditions that adversely affect groundwater use in the Subbasin, including reduction in the long-term viability of domestic, agricultural, municipal, or environmental uses of the Subbasin’s groundwater. Categories of undesirable results are defined through the sustainability indicators.
Minimum Thresholds – Minimum thresholds are numeric values for each sustainability indicator and are used to define when undesirable results occur. Undesirable results occur if minimum thresholds are exceeded in an established percentage of sites in the Subbasin’s representative monitoring network.
Measurable Objectives – Measurable objectives are a specific set of quantifiable goals for the maintenance or improvement of groundwater conditions.
The method prescribed by SGMA to measure undesirable results involves setting minimum thresholds and measurable objectives for a series of representative monitoring wells or sites for each sustainability indicator. Representative monitoring wells are identified to provide a basis for measuring groundwater conditions (levels and quality) throughout a basin or subbasin without having to measure each well, which would be cost prohibitive. In the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, representative wells were selected based on history of recorded groundwater level and/or quality data and potential to effectively represent the groundwater conditions. For the sustainability indicator relating to inelastic land subsidence, representative montioring locations measure ground surface elevations. Similar to the monitoring networks for groundwater levels and quality, monitoring sites were selected based on the history of recorded data and the potential to effectively represent conditions across the Subbasin. As determined following further evaluation, the sustainability indicator relating to significant and unreasonable seawater intrusion was deemed not applicable to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin as the Subbasin is not on the coast, and saltwater intrusion through the Delta is managed by upstream reservoir releases to maintain salinity concentrations around 2 parts per thousand.
A total of 23 representative wells were identified for measurement of groundwater levels in the Subbasin, 21 representative wells were identified for groundwater quality monitoring, and 12 representive wells were identified for monitoring related to interconnected surface water. For measurements related to inelastic land subsidence, four CGPS stations and six survey benchmarks were selected to form the monitoring network for this sustainability indicator. The GSP uses groundwater level data as the basis for evaluating conditions for groundwater storage.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-6
Executive Summary November 2024
Minimum thresholds and measurable objectives were developed for each of the representative monitoring sites. Figure ES-5 shows a typical relationship of the minimum thresholds, measurable objectives, and historical groundwater level data for a sample groundwater level representative monitoring well. Similar analyses can be made for groundwater quality and land subsidence.
Minimum thresholds for groundwater levels were
developed with reference to historical drought low
conditions and domestic well depths. Specifically,
minimum thresholds were established based on
the historical (2015) drought low plus a buffer of
the historical fluctuation or the 10th percentile
domestic well depth, whichever is shallower –
establishing levels that are protective of 90
percent of domestic wells and wells that
community water systems may rely on. In
municipalities with ordinances requiring the use of
City water (water provided by the City’s municipal
wells), the 10th percentile municipal well depth is
used in place of the 10th percentile domestic well
depth criteria.
Measurable objectives for groundwater levels
were established based on the historical (2015)
drought low and provide a buffer above the
minimum threshold. A table summarizing
minimum thresholds and measurable objectives is included in Chapter 3 of this Amended GSP. Graphs showing the minimum threshold and measurable objective for each of the representative wells are contained in an appendix to the GSP.
The minimum thresholds and measurable objectives for groundwater levels are used for the groundwater storage sustainability indicator, as this sustainability indicator is strongly linked to groundwater levels. The groundwater levels minimum thresholds are found to be protective of groundwater storage
Minimum thresholds for groundwater quality were defined by considering two primary beneficial uses at risk of undesirable results related to salinity: drinking water and agriculture uses. Minimum thresholds are 1,000 mg/L total dissolved solids (TDS), 250 mg/L chloride, or the groundwater concentration of those constituents as measured in 2015 at the representative monitoring location, whichever is greater. These values reflect the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Limit (SMCL) for the two constituents of concern (TDS and chloride), plus ackowledges groundwater quality degradation that was already occurring in 2015. Furthermore, these values reflect the agricultural nature of the Subbasin.
Measurable objectives for groundwater quality were set at 600 mg/L for TDS, and the maximum maximum recent historical measurement (as measured between 2015 and 2023) for chloride. The TDS measurable objective of 600 mg/L was developed based on the TDS recommended SMCL for drinking water of 500 mg/L with an added 100 mg/L buffer. A measurable objective of 600 mg/L TDS is close to the recommended SMCL of 500 mg/L and significantly below the upper limit SMCL of 1,000 mg/L, and is considered adequate for drinking water and agricultural uses. The chloride measurable objective was set equal to the maximum measured chloride concentration as measured during recent historical conditions (between 2015 and 2023), accounting for fluctuations in constituent concentrations with hydrologic conditions.
The minimum threshold for inelastic land subsidence in the Subbasin was set at no more than 0.2 foot/year [2.4 inches/year] in any five-year period between 2020 and 2040, resulting in no more than a total additional 2 feet (24 inches) of land subsidence by 2040. This is set within the same magnitude of estimated error of the InSAR data (+/- 0.1 foot [0.03 m]), which is currently the most comprehensive tool available for measuring subbasin-wide land subsidence consistently each year, based on historical subsidence rates. Additionally, the minimum threshold of 24 inches of additional subsidence by 2040 reflects the Figure ES- 4: Sample Relationship Between Minimum
Threshold and Measurable Objective
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-7
Executive Summary November 2024
historical subsidence level with an added buffer, and is in line (both by method and magnitude) with the minimum thresholds established by other nearby basins overlying the Corcoran Clay.
The measurable objective for inelastic subsidence is based on the long-term avoidance of land subsidence: 0 ft/year, on a long-term average. This measurable objective is set recognizing the interconnectedness of the Subbasin with surrounding subbasins, and the ability to meet this objective is dependent on the successful management of all nearby subbasins Finally, the minimum thresholds and measurable objectives established for interconnected surface water representative monitoring wells both use groundwater levels as a metric. Groundwater level data are used to calculate water table gradients and, therefore, the volume of water gained and lost. The interconnected surface water minimum thresholds and measurable objectives for wells with historical groundwater level observations are the same as for the chronic lowering of groundwater levels minimum thresholds. Analyses were conducted to demonstrate that the groundwater level minimum thresholds are protective of stream depletions and stream-aquifer interactions (stream connectivity, stream gains and losses, and stream gains and losses as a percentage of streamflow), and therefore the use of these minimum thresholds is justified. For new representative montiroing wells without historic data sets, minimum thresholds and measurable objectives will be established after at least four years of data have been collected, including data for at least one wet year and one dry or critical year during that time period, utilizing the methodologies outlined in Chapter 3 of this GSP.
ES-7. Water Budgets
The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin has been in an overdraft condition for many years. Overdraft occurs when the amount of groundwater extracted exceeds the long-term average
groundwater recharged.
The groundwater evaluations conducted as a part of the
developmnet of this GSP Amendment provide revised
estimates of the historical, current, and projected
groundwater budget conditions. The current analysis was prepared using the best available information and through updates to the Subbasin’s groundwater modeling tool, the Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM),
Version 3.0. It is anticipated that as additional information becomes available, the model will continue to be updated to continuously refine estimates of annual pumping and
overdraft .
As part of the 5-year Periodic Evaluation and preparation of this Amended GSP, the ESJWRM was updated to Version
3.0 to incorporate new data relating to layering, streams, land use, urban water demand, surface water supply and
water deliveries and to extend the simulation period through Water Year 2023. The model was then recalibrated for the extended period, and water budgets were updated for historical conditions, current conditions, projected conditions baseline, and projected conditions with the impacts of climate change. Projected conditions scenarios were also updated to incorporate an updated list of projects and management actions as well as updates to the sustainable yield estimate.
Based on these analyses, at projected groundwater pumping levels, the long-term groundwater pumping offset and/or recharge required for the Subbasin to achieve a 0 AF/year change in storage is approximately 95,000 AF/year. Groundwater levels are expected to continue to decline based on projections of current land and water uses. Projects and management actions that offset groundwater pumping and/or increase recharge will help the Subbasin reach sustainability, as illustrated in Figure ES-6
Figure ES- 5: Subbasin-Wide Total Groundwater
Pumping and Offsets Required to Achieve
Sustainability
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-8
Executive Summary November 2024
The projected Subbasin water budget was also evaluated under climate change conditions, which simulate higher demand requiring increased groundwater pumping despite more precipitation and streamflows. The updated version of the Projected Conditions Baseline with Climate Change (PCBL-CC) largely used the same perturbation factors (2070 Central Tendency climate change conditions) as the original simulation, but the updated PCBL-CC extended the simulation time period by three additional years. The overdraft modeled under climate
change conditions is simulated to increase above projected conditions without climate change, requiring long-term
groundwater pumping offset and/or recharge required for the Subbasin to achieve a 0 AF/year change in storage is approximately 166,000 AF/year.
ES-8. Monitoring Networks
This GSP Amendment outlines the representative
monitoring networks for five of the six sustainability
indicators. (Seawater intrusion is no longer considered an applicable sustainability indicator for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.) The objective of these monitoring
networks is to monitor conditions across the Subbasin and to detect trends toward undesirable results. Specifically, the monitoring networks were developed to do the
following:
• Monitor impacts to the beneficial uses or users of
groundwater
• Monitor changes in groundwater conditions and
land surface elevations relative to measurable objectives and minimum thresholds • Demonstrate progress toward achieving measurable objectives described in the GSP There are four representative monitoring networks in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin: two representative networks for water levels (one for the chronic lowering of groundwater levels sustainability indicator and one for the interconnected surface waters sustinability indicator), a representative network for groundwater quality, and a representative network for inelastic land subsidence. Representative networks are used to determine compliance with the minimum thresholds.
The monitoring networks were designed by evaluating data from the DWR’s California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) Program, the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), the San Joaquin County Department of Public Works, and participating GSAs. The groundwater level and interconnected surface water monitoring networks consist largely of wells that are already being used for monitoring in the Subbasin. New wells were added to the monitoring networks, including one well located in the Delta, two deep, multi-completion monitoring wells constructed under DWR’s Technical Support Services (TSS) program, and five new shallow monitoring wells for interconnected surface water assessment. Figure ES-7 shows the location of existing monitoring sites for all representative monitoring networks.
Wells in the monitoring networks for water levels (for both the groundwater level and interconnected surface water sustainability indicators) and groundwater quality will be measured on a semi-annual schedule. Monitoring for subsidence will also occur semi-annually. Historical measurements have been entered into the Subbasin Data Management System (DMS), and future data will also be stored in the DMS.
Figure ES- 6: Monitoring Sites
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-9
Executive Summary November 2024
A summary of the monitoring sites in the representative monitoring networks is shown in the table below.
Summary of Representative Monitoring Network Wells/Stations Data Collected Well/Station
Count
Groundwater Level 23
Interconnected Surface Water 12
Groundwater Quality 21
Subsidence (CGPS stations and survey benchmarks) 10
ES-9. Data Management System
The Eastern San Joaquin DMS was built on a flexible, open software platform that uses familiar Google maps and charting tools for analysis and visualization. The DMS serves as a data-sharing portal that enables use of the same data and tools for visualization and analysis. These tools support sustainable groundwater management and create transparent reporting about collected data and analysis results.
The DMS is web-based; the public can easily access
this portal using common web browsers such as
Google Chrome, Firefox, and Microsoft Edge. The
DMS is currently populated with available historical
data. Future data will also be entered into the system
as it is collected.
The DMS portal provides easy access and the ability
to query information stored in the system.
Groundwater data can be plotted for any of the
available data points, providing a pictorial view of
historical and current data.
Recently, a mobile and tablet interface was
developed for the DMS to facilitate the real-time
upload of data collected in the field. The mobile
interface is implemented using the Esri ArcGIS Field
Maps mobile app (or the Collector app if already
installed) and is integrated with the DMS via web
services to ArcGIS Online*. The mobile interface is
intended to provide all ESJGWA staff and their
consultants with an easy-to-use interfaces to collect
well and groundwater related data in the field. Data
collected using the mobile interfaces are pulled into
the DMS on a nightly basis where it is quality
controlled prior to insertion into the database.
The DMS can be accessed at this link using
the Guest Login:
https://opti.woodardcurran.com/esj/
Figure ES- 8: Opti DMS Screenshot
Figure ES- 8: Typical DMS Data Display
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-10
Executive Summary November 2024
ES-10 Projects and Management Actions
Achieving sustainability in the Subbasin requires implementation of projects and management actions. The Subbasin will achieve sustainability by implementing water supply projects that either replace groundwater use or supplement groundwater supplies to attain the current estimated pumping offset and/or recharge need of 95,000 AF/year. It should be noted that this number will be reevaluated in the future after additional data are collected and analyzed. In addition, three projects have been identified that support demand conservation and reduction activities, including water use efficiency upgrades. While the implementation of projects to address sustainabilty has been and will continue to be the cornerstone of the ESJ GSP, the Subbasin is committed to developing a Demand Management Program that would include pumping restrictons if projects are not implemented as expected.
Although the ESJGWA does not have direct authority to require GSAs to implement projects, the ESJGWA will coordinate analysis of GSA-level demands and will compile annual or biannual reports to evaluate progress. If projects do not progress, or if monitoring efforts demonstrate that the projects are not effective in achieving stated recharge and/or offset targets, the Subbasin’s Demand Management Program, a new management action in this GSP, will be implemented.
Projects to increase water supply availability in the Subbasin were identified by individual GSAs. The initial set of projects was reviewed with the ESJGWA Board, Steering Committee, and Workgroup. A final list of 41 potential projects are included in the GSP, representing a variety of project types including direct and in-lieu1recharge, intra-basin water transfers, demand conservation, water recycling, and stormwater reuse. Four new additional projects were approved by the ESJGWA Board at their September 11, 2024 meeting, and are not included in below. More information on these projects is included in Appendix 6-A. With the addition of these four projects, the GSP now includes 45 total projects. Projects are classified into two categories based on project status: Category A and Category B. Category A projects are those that are completed or are anticipated to advance in the next five years and have existing water rights or agreements. Category B projects are those that are not anticipated to advance in the next five years, but may be implemented in the future. Category A projects were simulated in the projected water budget to evaluate their effectiveness on achieving Subbasin sustainability. Category B projects may be elevated to a Category A project should feasibility studies demonstrate a viable project, if water rights or contracts are firmly identified, if partnerships are formed, and if economic evaluation demonstrate that the projects are cost effective, and remain part of the overall adaptive management strategy that the Subbasin is utilizing in GSP implementation to achieve and maintain Subbasin sustainability. These projects are summarized below. 1 In-lieu recharge refers to the use of surface water or recycled water supplies for applications where groundwater is currently used. This “in-lieu” use reduces groundwater pumping and allows groundwater to remain in the aquifer.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-11
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
Category A Projects - projects that were completed or are anticipated to advance in the next five years and have existing water rights or agreements Lake Grupe Inlieu RechargeIn-lieu Recharge SEWD Groundwater levels
Completed 2020-2023 $2.3 M $330,000 Installation for
new intake and
pipeline requires
permits from
DFW, CVFPB,
RWQCB, and
USACE
4,900
SEWD Surface
Water
Implementation
Expansion
In-lieu Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels
Implementation 2019-2029 $750,000 $100,000 Permit approvals from DFW,
RWQCB,
CVFPB, and
USACE by
private
landowners
19,000
White Slough
Water Pollution
Control Facility
Expansion
Recycling/
In-lieu
Recharge/Direct
Recharge
City of Lodi Groundwater
levels
Construction complete 2019-2020 $6 M $4,664 None (permitting complete)
1,000
CSJWCD Capital
Improvement
Program
In-lieu Recharge CSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Can be implemented
immediately
2020-2027, ongoing with 7-
year completion
cycles
N/A $50,000 Individual
applications
need CSJWCD
Board approval
and possible
streambed
alteration
permits
24,000
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-12
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
NSJWCD South
System
Modernization
In-lieu Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Environmental review
complete, funding
secured for Phases 1, 2
and 3. Landowner
improvement district
formed. Phases 1-2
complete.
2018-2025 for
Phases 1, 2, 3;
2025-2028 for
Phase 4; 2028-
2035 for future
phases
Phase 1&2:
$7 M
Phase 3:
$4 M
Phase 4:
$8 M
Future
Phases:
$10-20 M
Phase 1&2:
$200,000
Phase 3:
$200,000
Phase 4:
$200,000
Future Phases:
$200,000
Permits for
pump station
work have been
completed;
minor grading
and road
encroachment
permits may be
needed
10,000
Long-term Water
Transfer to
SEWD and
CSJWCD
Transfers SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Infrastructure is in
place. CEQA completed
and agreements in
place
2019-2021 N/A $9 M Project must
comply with
CEQA
20,000
South System
Groundwater
Banking with
East Bay
Municipal Utilities
District (EBMUD)
In-lieu Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Pilot Dream Project will
be complete by
February 2024.
Working on expanded
banking project
2020-2024 $5 M $400,000
SWCRB change
petition for
Permit 10478
and San Joaquin
County
groundwater
export permit,
and regulatory
permits as
needed
4,000
NSJWCD North
System
Modernization/
Lakso Recharge
In-Lieu Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Constructed Phase 1A,
in progress on Phase
1B. Planning Phase 2
2021-2026 $7 M $150,000
Regulatory
permits as
needed
4,000
Tecklenburg
Recharge Project Direct Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater levels Substantially complete 2022-2024 $1 M $400,000 CEQA review
and possible
grading permit
2,000
City of Stockton
Phase 1:
Groundwater
Recharge Project
Direct Recharge City of
Stockton
Groundwater
levels
Basin design in
progress. Construction
to begin spring 2025.
2022-2026 $11.5 M To be
Determined
Project must
comply with
CEQA
20,000
West
Groundwater
Recharge Basin
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels
Ongoing 2032 To be
Determined
To be
Determined
To be
Determined
16,000
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-13
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
NSJWCD Private
Pump
Partnerships
In-Lieu
Recharge/Direct
Recharge
NSJWCD Groundwater
levels Ongoing 2024 To be Determined
To be
Determined
To be
Determined 3,000
Oakdale
Irrigation District
In-lieu and Direct
Recharge Project
Direct Recharge/InLieu Recharge OID Groundwater
levels Ongoing 2023-2032 To be Determined
To be
Determined
To be
Determined 25,000
City of Stockton
Advanced
Metering
Infrastructure
Conservation City of
Stockton
Groundwater
levels
In progress. Contract
awarded in March 2024.
2023-2028 $17 M To be
determined
Not determined 2,000
Total Category A 154,900
Category B Projects - projects that are not anticipated to advance in the next five years, but may be implemented in the future, particularly if Category A projects do not fully achieve stated recharge and/or offset targets or do not produce a response as simulated in the model City of
Manteca
Advanced
Metering
Infrastructure
Conservation City of
Manteca
Groundwater
levels
Experiencing Delays Not determined $650,000 $300,000 None 272 City of Lodi
Surface Water
Facility
Expansion &
Delivery
Pipeline
In-lieu Recharge City of
Lodi
Groundwater
levels
Planning phase 2030-2033 $4 M $2,340,000 SWRCB
permitting and
CEQA required
4,750
BNSF Railway
Company
Intermodal
Facility
Recharge
Pond
Direct Recharge CSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Planning phase 2020-2025 N/A $50,000 Streambed
alteration permit
1,000
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-14
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
Manaserro
Recharge
Project
Direct Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Planning phase 2023-2025 $500,000 $50,000 CEQA review,
possible grading
permit, possible
water right
change petition
8,000
City of Escalon
Wastewater
Reuse
Recycling/
In-lieu Recharge/
Transfers
SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Planning phase 2020-2028 To be
determined$18
M
To be
determined$40
0,000
CEQA review,
RWQCB
permits, and
road
encroachment
permits
672
City of Ripon
Surface Water
Supply
In-lieu Recharge SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Design complete;
environmental
permitting underway;
negotiations for the right
to connect are
underway.
2028-2030 To be
determined
To be
determined
NEPA
Categorical
Exclusion,
CEQA Mitigated
Negative
Declaration, and
road
encroachment
permits
6,000
City of Escalon
Connection to
Nick DeGroot
Water
Treatment
Plant
In-lieu Recharge SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Conceptual design;
environmental review
complete; Council
approval are pending
further design work and
rate study
2028-2030 To be
determined
To be
determined
Road
encroachment
permits
2,015
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-15
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
Farmington
Dam
Repurpose
Project
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels
Planning/Initial Study 2030-2050 To be
determined
To be
determined
Permits and
approvals form
SWRCB, USBR,
DFW, RWQCB,
CVFPB, and
USACE
60,000
Mobilizing
Recharge
Opportunities
Direct Recharge San
Joaquin
County
Groundwater
levels
Project Development 2024-2040 Not
determined
Not determined Not determined 158,000
NSJWCD
Winery
Recycled
Water
Recycling/
In-Lieu Recharge/
Direct Recharge
NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Conceptual planning
and discussion
2025-2027 To be
determined
To be
determined
WDR permitting
through the
RWCQB and
minor permits for
pipeline
construction
750
SSJID Storm
Water Reuse
Storm Water/
In-lieu Recharge/
Direct Recharge
SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Planning phase 2027-2030 To be
determined$30
M
To be
determined$30,
000
CEQA review
and road
encroachment
permits
1,100
WallaceBurson
Conjunctive
Use Program
Conjunctive
Use/Direct Recharge
Eastside
GSA
Groundwater
levels
Conceptual planning
and discussion 2030-2040 To be determined
To be
determined Not determined 3,000
Calaveras
River
Wholesale
Water Service
Expansion
In-Lieu Recharge Eastside
GSA
Groundwater
levels Conceptual planning 2020-2040 To be determined
To be
determined Not determined 600
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-16
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
Recycled
Water to
Manteca Golf
Course
Recycling City of
Manteca
Groundwater
levels
12-in pipeline installed.
Waiting for DWR to
determine grant
recipients
To Be
Determined
To be
determined
To be
determined Not determined 406
Threfall Ranch
Reservoir, InLieu and Direct
Recharge
Project
In-Lieu
Recharge/Direct
Recharge
Eastside
GSA
Groundwater
levels Design 2025 To be determined
To be
determined Not determined 2,000
Perfecting
Mokelumne
River Water
Right
In-Lieu Recharge
San
Joaquin
County
Groundwater
levels Planning 2024-2025
$125,000
(spent to date)
Total TBD
To be
determined Not determined 158,000
North System
Groundwater
Recharge
Project - Phase
2 Direct Recharge NSJWCD Groundwater
levels
Design phase with
planned construction in
2025-2026
2026-2029 $10 M $100,000 Not determined 3,000
Stormwater
Collection,
Treatment, and
Infiltration
Direct Recharge/
Stormwater
City of
Manteca
Groundwater
levels Planning/Initial Study To Be Determined
To be
determined
To be
determined Not determined To Be Determined
Off-Stream
Regulating
Reservoir
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels Conceptual Phase 2026-2050 To be determined
To be
determined Not determined To Be Determined
On-Farm
Recharge
Project
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels Planning/Initial Study 2024-2030 N/A $100,000 Not determined To Be Determined Bellota Weir
Modifications
Project
Direct Recharge/
Stormwater SEWD Groundwater
levels
SRF loan application
submitted. $12.3M
grant received. Minor
construction started
2023-2030 $ 85 M $1.5M
USACE,
FWS,CVFPB,CE
QA,NEPA
5,200
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-17
Executive Summary November 2024
Project Name Project Type Project
Proponent
Measurable
Objective
Expected to
Benefit
Current Status
Time-table
(initiation and
completion)
Estimated
Capital Costl
Estimated
Annual O&M
Costs
Required
Permitting and
Regulatory
Process1
Maximum
Recharge Benefit
(AF/year)
Water Supply
Enhancement
Project -
Distribution
Pipelines
In-Lieu
Recharge/Direct
Recharge
SEWD Groundwater
levels Design 2024-2040 $7M To be determined
RWQCB,CEQA,
USACE,CVFPB,
DFW
17,000
Water
Treatment
Plant Aquifer
Storage
Recovery Well
- 7401
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels Implementation 2024-2026 $1.5 M To be determined
RWQCB,CEQA,
NEPA 2,420
Beckman Well Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels Refurbish 2024-2028 $200,000 N/A RWQCB,CEQA 800
West Linden
Project
In-Lieu
Recharge/Direct
Recharge
SEWD Groundwater
levels Planning/Design 2024-2035 $60M To be determined
CEQA,RWQCB,
road
encroachment
permits
60,000
Water Supply
Enhancement
Project - Direct
Recharge
Direct Recharge SEWD Groundwater
levels Design 2024-2030 To be determined
To be
determined Not determined To Be Determined
SSJID Water
Master Plan -
System
Improvements
In-Lieu Recharge SSJ GSA Groundwater
levels
Feasibility study
complete 2023-2040 $ 30 – 40 M To be determined Not determined 15,000 Total Category B 509,985
1 Acronyms defined: Stockton East Water District (SEWD), Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District (CSJWCD), North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-18
Executive Summary November 2024
This page is intentionally left blank
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-19
Executive Summary November 2024
ES-11 GSP Implementation
The overdraft condition in the Subbasin requires either projects to offset groundwater pumping and/or increase recharge, or pumping reduction. The exact amount of required offset/recharge will be reevaluated after additional data are collected and analyzed. As previously noted, the overarching philosophy of the ESJ GSP is to implement projects to address the overdraft condition. Should the projects be delayed or not provide the benefits identified, the Subbasin will implement the Demand Management Program, a new management action in this GSP.
Projects will be administered by the GSA project proponents. GSAs may elect to implement projects individually or jointly with one or more GSAs or with the ESJGWA.
Implementing the GSP will require numerous management activities that will be undertaken by the ESJGWA, including the following:
• Monitoring and recording of groundwater levels and groundwater quality data • Maintaining and updating the Subbasin DMS with newly collected data • Maintaining and updating the Subbasin Data Management System (DMS) with newly collected data • Addressing identified data gaps
• Annual monitoring of progress toward sustainability
• Annual reporting of Subbasin conditions to DWR as required by SGMA • Refining Subbasin model and water budget planning estimates • Evaluating the GSP once every 5 years and amending the plan if warranted The ESJGWA Board adopted a preliminary schedule for project implementation. Project implementation is scheduled to begin in 2020, with full implementation by 2040. This approach provides adequate time to put in place methods necessary to refine model estimates and verify project cost effectiveness.
ES-12. Funding
Implementation of the GSP requires funding sources. To the degree they become available, outside grants will be sought to assist in reducing cost of implementation to participating agencies, residents, and landowners of the Subbasin. However, there will be a need to collect funds to support implementation.
The areas associated with ESJGWA-wide management and GSP implementation will be borne by the ESJGWA through contributions from the member GSAs, under a cost-sharing arrangement. These costs include:
• ESJGWA administration
• Groundwater level monitoring and reporting
• Groundwater quality monitoring and reporting
• Inelastic land subsidence monitoring and reporting
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment ES-20
Executive Summary November 2024
• Water use estimation
• Data management
• Stakeholder engagement
• Oversight of management actions
• Annual Report preparation and submittal to DWR
• Developing and implementing a funding mechanism
• Grant applications
• GSP evaluation and updates, if warranted (every 5 years) For budgetary purposes, the estimated initial cost of these activities is on the order of $600,000 to $1 million per year excluding projects and management actions costs and costs associated with the installation of new monitoring wells and grant writing. Additional one-time costs, such as model refinement, are estimated to be on the order of $350,000.
GSAs will individually fund implementation of projects in their respective areas. Options for GSA funding include fees based on groundwater pumping, acreage, or combinations of these, and pursuit of any available grant funds. The GSAs will evaluate options for securing the needed funding on an individual basis.
The estimated initial costs of projects range from on the order of $50,000 to $85 million, depending on the project.
Annual project costs range from $3,000 to $9 million per year to provide funds for operations and maintenance.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-1
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1. AGENCY INFORMATION, PLAN AREA, AND COMMUNICATION
1.1 INTRODUCTION AND AGENCY INFORMATION
1.1.1 Purpose of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan
The purpose of this Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) is to meet the regulatory requirements set forth in the three-bill legislative package consisting of Assembly Bill (AB) 1739 (Dickinson), Senate Bill (SB) 1168 (Pavley), and SB 1319 (Pavley), collectively known as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA defines sustainable groundwater management as “management and use of groundwater in a manner that can be maintained during the planning and implementation horizon without causing undesirable results”, which are defined by SGMA as any of the following effects caused by groundwater conditions occurring throughout the basin (CA DWR, 2018):
• Chronic lowering of groundwater levels indicating a significant and unreasonable depletion of supply if continued over the planning and implementation horizon
• Significant and unreasonable reduction of groundwater storage • Significant and unreasonable seawater intrusion
• Significant and unreasonable degraded water quality, including the migration of contaminant plumes that impair water supplies
• Significant and unreasonable land subsidence that substantially interferes with surface land uses • Depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water
The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin (Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin or Subbasin) was identified by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) as critically overdrafted. The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Eastern San Joaquin GSP, GSP, or the Plan) was originally developed to meet SGMA regulatory requirements by the January 31, 2020 deadline for critically-overdrafted basins while reflecting local needs and preserving local control over water resources. The 2020 GSP was subsequently revised in 2022 to address comments from DWR in their determination letter dated January 28, 2022. This 2024 GSP Amendment addresses comments in DWR’s July 6, 2023 determination letter approving the 2022 Revised GSP, and continues to provide a path to achieve and document sustainable groundwater management within 20 years following initial Plan adoption, promoting the long-term sustainability of locally-managed groundwater resources now and into the future.
While the Eastern San Joaquin GSP offers a new and significant approach to groundwater resource protection, it was developed within an existing framework of comprehensive planning efforts. Throughout the Eastern San Joaquin Region, several separate yet related planning efforts have occurred previously or are concurrently proceeding. The following figure (Figure 1-1) shows flagship reports from these efforts, which include integrated regional water management, urban water management, agricultural water management, watershed management, habitat conservation, and general planning. The Eastern San Joaquin GSP fits in with these prior planning efforts, building on existing local management and basin characterization. A description of prior planning efforts can be found in Section
1.2.2.7 of this document.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-2
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-1: Interconnected Planning and Modeling Efforts for Water Resource Protection
1.1.2 Sustainability Goal
A sustainability goal is the culmination of conditions resulting in a sustainable condition (absence of undesirable results) within 20 years of the GSP’s initial adoption in 2020. The sustainability goal reflects this requirement and succinctly states the GSP’s objectives and desired conditions of the Subbasin.
The sustainability goal description for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is to maintain an economically-viable groundwater resource for the beneficial use of the people of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin by operating the Subbasin within its sustainable yield or by modification of existing management to address future conditions. This goal will be achieved through the implementation of a mix of supply and demand type projects consistent with the GSP implementation plan (see Chapter 6: Projects and Management Actions).
Additional discussion of the sustainability goal can be found in Chapter 3: Sustainable Management Criteria.
1.1.3 Contact Information
The San Joaquin County Department of Public Works Director has been designated as Plan Manager and record keeper. As Plan Manager, the Public Works Director is tasked with submitting a single, jointly-composed GSP to DWR on behalf of the entire Subbasin.
Contact information for the submitting agency and Plan Manager is provided in Figure 1-2.
Figure 1-2: Plan Manager and
Agency Contact Information
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-3
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.1.4 Agency Information
The Eastern San Joaquin GSP was developed jointly by the members of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority (ESJGWA), which is a joint powers authority formed by the 16 groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The ESJGWA includes the Central Delta Water Agency (CDWA), Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District (CSJWCD), City of Lodi, City of Manteca, City of Stockton, Eastside San Joaquin GSA (Eastside GSA) (composed of Calaveras County Water District [CCWD], Calaveras County, Stanislaus County, and Rock Creek Water District), Linden County Water District (LCWD), Lockeford Community Services District (LCSD), North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD), Oakdale Irrigation District (OID), San Joaquin County No. 1, San Joaquin County No. 2, South Delta Water Agency (SDWA), South San Joaquin GSA (composed of South San Joaquin Irrigation District [SSJID] including Woodward Reservoir, City of Ripon, and City of Escalon), Stockton East Water District (SEWD), and Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID). Collectively, these 16 GSAs will be referred to as “GSAs.” Figure 1-3 below indicates the jurisdictional boundaries of the individual GSAs.
The GSAs represent a diverse range of water management organizations. The agencies include water agencies, irrigation districts, water conservation districts, and local governments at the city and county level. The GSAs work through the ESJGWA to coordinate implementation of the GSP by each GSA to cover the entire geographic extent encompassed by the boundaries of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
California Water Service Company Stockton District (Cal Water) formed a partnership with San Joaquin County to participate in the process as part of the San Joaquin County No. 2 GSA, since its status as an investor-owned utility prohibited it from forming its own GSA under SGMA regulations until later amendments under SB 13 (Pavley). As a major purveyor of water in the Stockton region, Cal Water’s participation is considered essential to the development and implementation of a comprehensive plan for sustainable groundwater management in the Subbasin.
The portion of the City of Lathrop located east of the San Joaquin River was initially involved in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin 2020 GSP development process as a 17th GSA (City of Lathrop GSA) and was part of the ESJGWA. The City of Lathrop GSA voluntarily withdrew its status from the ESJGWA in March 2019 following DWR’s approval of their request for a basin boundary modification between the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and the neighboring Tracy Subbasin, which moved the City of Lathrop entirely within the Tracy Subbasin.
WID voluntarily withdrew its status as a GSA and its membership in the ESJGWA in December 2018; WID reinstated its status as a GSA and its membership in the ESJGWA in October 2019.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-4
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-3: Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Sustainability Agencies EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-5
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.1.4.1 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Joint Powers Agreement The Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) provides the basis for forming the ESJGWA. The ESJGWA submitted an Initial Notification to jointly develop a GSP for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin on February 8, 2017. The agreement and bylaws are provided in Appendix 1-A.
The purpose of the ESJGWA is to act as the coordinating agency and cooperatively carry out the purposes of SGMA in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The ESJGWA is a public entity separate from the member organizations and holds the authority to coordinate and exercise the common powers of its members within the geographical area of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin consistent with the terms and conditions of the JPA.
Since its formation, the ESJGWA has employed a consensus-based approach in its goal to provide a dynamic, costeffective, and collegial organization to achieve initial and ongoing SGMA compliance within the Subbasin. Collaboration among the ESJGWA member agencies has strengthened the potential for broad public support for groundwater management activities as well as the ability to leverage local, state, and federal funds (Eastern San Joaquin GWA, 2017b).
1.1.4.2 Organization and Management Structure of the GSAs The governing body of the ESJGWA, the ESJGWA Board of Directors (ESJGWA Board), convenes every second Wednesday of the month at 10:30 a.m. to coordinate efforts to implement the GSP by debating and finalizing key discussion points and decisions incorporated into the Plan. Each of the 16 GSAs has a voice on the ESJGWA Board and has appointed two representatives to serve: one Board member and one Alternate member to attend in the Board member’s absence.
The ESJGWA Board is tasked with developing actions including, but not limited to, the following:
• Approving budget(s) and appropriate cost sharing for any project or program that requires funding from the ESJGWA
• Proposing guidance and options for obtaining grant funding • Adopting rules, regulations, policies, and procedures related to the JPA • Approving any contracts with consultants or subcontractors that would undertake work on behalf of the GSAs and/or relate to Basin-wide issues and, if applicable, recommend the funding that each GSA should contribute towards the costs of such contracts
• Reporting to the GSA’s respective governing boards
• Approving and implementing a GSP
The ESJGWA Board is guided by a Steering Committee that is made up of one representative from each GSA and convenes every second Wednesday of the month at 8:30 a.m. The Steering Committee is responsible for developing recommendations on technical and substantive Subbasin-wide matters. The Steering Committee is tasked with developing actions including, but not limited to, the following:
• Recommending the action and/or approval of technical or policy elements for the implementation of the GSP, including groundwater conditions, thresholds, and projects and management actions • Recommending the action and/or approval of a GSP
To support the 5-year Periodic Evaluation of the GSP and development the 2024 GSP Amendment, the Steering Committee recommended that the chair of the ESJGWA form an Ad Hoc Project Management Committee (PMC).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-6
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Approved by the Steering Committee in December 2023, the PMC was comprised of six GSA volunteers representing the varied interests in the Subbasin and covering both urban and agricultural areas. At the time of the development of the 2024 GSP Amendment, the six members of the PMC represented the following GSAs: City of Stockton, North San Joaquin Water Conservation District, Oakdale Irrigation District, San Joaquin County, South San Joaquin Irrigation District, and Stockton East Water District. The PMC met bi-monthly during the GSP Periodic Evaluation and GSP amendment process, and was tasked with driving the review and update process and coordinating other SGMA implementation efforts, including development of a Well Mitigation Program, coordination of stakeholder outreach and engagement, and annual and long-term budgeting. PMC members reviewed draft work products and other meeting materials to provide input and direction as needed at the bi-monthly meetings. The PMC was also responsible for recognizing and flagging items requiring discussion and direction from stakeholders, the Steering Committee, and the ESJGWA. While the PMC informed administrative concepts and reviewed draft work products at the staff level, they did not have decision-making authority.
Decisions of the ESJGWA Board are made by an affirmative majority of Board members, except in the following cases which require a two-thirds supermajority vote: approval or modification or amendment of the ESJGWA annual budget; decisions related to the levying of taxes, assessments, or property-related fees and charges; decisions related to the expenditure of funds by the ESJGWA beyond expenditures approved in the annual budget; adoption of rules, regulations, policies, bylaws, and procedures related to the function of the ESJGWA; decisions related to the establishment of the members’ percentage obligations for payment of the ESJGWA’s operating and administrative costs; approval of any contract over $250,000 or contracts for terms that exceed two years; decisions regarding the acquisition and the holding, use, sale, letting, and disposal of real and personal property including water rights, and the construction, maintenance, alteration, and operation of works or improvements; decisions related to the limitation or curtailment of groundwater pumping; and approval of a GSP. Each member of the ESJGWA Board has one vote. A process for dispute resolution and noncompliance, including internal resolution and mediation prior to judicial or administrative remedies, is set forth in the ESJGWA Bylaws in Appendix 1-A.
GSAs share in the general operating and administrative costs of the ESJGWA in accordance with percentages determined by the ESJGWA Board.
1.1.4.3 Description of Participating Agencies
A brief description of each of the GSAs that make up the ESJGWA is provided in the sections below.
Central Delta Water Agency – The Central Delta Water Agency (CDWA) service area encompasses a total of 52,000 acres in the northwestern portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The primary land use in this area is agriculture with crops such as vineyards, fruit and nut trees, row crops, and field crops. CDWA protects water supply within its service area (which extends outside of the Subbasin), assists landowners and reclamation districts with water issues, and represents landowners in flood control matters. CDWA does not own any facilities, and surface water from the Delta is the area’s only utilized source of water, along with limited private groundwater pumping. Approximately 5,000 acres of the GSA overlap with the sphere of influence of the City of Stockton (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District – The Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District (CSJWCD) was formed in 1959 under provisions of the California Water Conservation Act of 1931. The CSJWCD includes approximately 73,000 largely agricultural acres, of which 6,300 acres are within the sphere of influence of the City of Stockton. To mitigate declining groundwater levels, the CSJWCD contracted with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) for 80,000 acre‐feet per year (AF/year) from New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus River.
Irrigation facilities have been installed and operated by individual landowners through a surface water incentive program sponsored by the CSJWCD. At the regional level, CSJWCD has participated as a member agency of the Eastern Water Alliance and the Groundwater Basin Authority (GBA), two preceding efforts to the ESJGWA that focused on groundwater management (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-7
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 City of Lodi – The City of Lodi is located northeast of the City of Stockton along Highway 99. The City of Lodi relies on both groundwater and surface water to satisfy customer needs. In 2003, Lodi entered into a 40‐year agreement with WID for up to 6,000 AF/year of Mokelumne River water. The City of Lodi built the Lodi Surface Water Treatment Plant and associated conveyance facilities necessary to deliver this supply, which were completed and operational at the end of 2012. The City of Lodi currently provides up to 3,000 AF/year of treated wastewater to agricultural land in the vicinity of the wastewater treatment plant, White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility. The GSA for the City of Lodi covers 9,000 acres and includes the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility area (City of Lodi, 2015).
City of Manteca – The City of Manteca’s approximately 13,000 acres straddles Highway 99 south of the City of Stockton. Potable water supplies consist of a combination of groundwater and treated surface water from the South County Water Supply Program (SCWSP). Manteca currently receives up to 11,500 AF/year of treated surface water and ultimately can receive up to 18,500 AF/year in Phase II of the SCWSP. Up to 700 AF/year of reclaimed wastewater is applied to fodder crops on City-owned and leased lands (City of Manteca, 2020).
City of Stockton – The City of Stockton Municipal Utilities Department (MUD) service area generally encompasses portions of the City of Stockton north of the Calaveras River and south of the Cal Water service area. Water use measured in 2015 shows approximately 27 percent of the Stockton MUD’s water deliveries come from groundwater, with 73 percent from treated surface water from SEWD and the Delta Water Supply Project. The Delta Water Supply Project came online in 2012 and utilizes surface water both from the San Joaquin River (City of Stockton water right) and Mokelumne River through a 40-year agreement with WID initiated in 2008 for up to 6,500 AF/year with more water as the City of Stockton grows. The City of Stockton GSA (approximately 39,000 acres) overlaps with the extent of the Cal Water service area (City of Stockton, 2015).
Eastside San Joaquin GSA – Eastside San Joaquin GSA (Eastside GSA) is a partnership between Calaveras County Water District, Calaveras County, Stanislaus County, and Rock Creek Water District. The area covers over 126,000 acres, stretching into the western portion of Calaveras County and northern portion of Stanislaus County. • Calaveras County Water District – The Calaveras County Water District (CCWD) provides water service to approximately 13,360 municipal and residential customers in six service areas and shares the same boundaries as Calaveras County. Supply for CCWD comes from reservoir releases on the Calaveras, Stanislaus, and Mokelumne Rivers for a total of approximately 6,000 AF/year for primarily agricultural and residential use. CCWD has several customers with riparian rights along the Calaveras River, has one service area that relies solely on groundwater, and has several areas that utilize recycled water. • Calaveras County – Calaveras County has a total area of 1,037 square miles and extends beyond the boundaries of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Calaveras County Water District is the only public water supplier to residents located in the portion of the County overlying the Subbasin. The only incorporated city, Angels Camp, is located outside of the Subbasin. Calaveras County had one of the fastest growing annual percent increases in population in California between 2000 and 2010 (CCWD, 2020). For the portion of Calaveras County that falls within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, there are numerous domestic, municipal, and monitoring wells.
• Stanislaus County – Stanislaus County has a total area of 973,000 acres and nine incorporated cities and extends beyond Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. There are approximately 30 water suppliers that serve water to Stanislaus County for domestic, commercial, and agricultural uses. The majority of the county’s population resides in incorporated cities due to urban development and steady population growth within city boundaries.
These incorporated cities are outside of the Subbasin. The portions of Stanislaus County that fall within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin not already included in a GSA have partnered with CCWD, Calaveras County, and Rock Creek Water District as the Eastside GSA. The land is mostly unirrigated, and water needs are met by private pumping.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-8
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Rock Creek Water District – Rock Creek Water District was formed in 1941 and covers approximately 1,800 acres in northeastern Stanislaus County. Through the Salt Spring Valley Reservoir in Calaveras County, Rock Creek Water District delivers agricultural water for irrigation (Stanislaus LAFCO, 2018).
Linden County Water District – Linden County Water District (LCWD) provides water and wastewater services to the 300 acres of the unincorporated community of Linden. LCWD is located approximately 12 miles northeast of the City of Stockton along State Route 26. LCWD lies entirely within the boundaries of the SEWD. Between 2000 and 2010, the population in Linden increased by 61 percent from approximately 1,100 to 1,800 residents. LCWD relies on groundwater to meet residential demands in Linden (SJC, 1992).
Lockeford Community Services District – Lockeford Community Services District (LCSD) was established in 1976 and superseded the San Joaquin County Water Works District No. 1 and Lockeford Sanitary District. LCSD provides water and wastewater services to approximately 3,200 residents (as of 2010) in the unincorporated urban community of Lockeford located 17 miles northeast of the City of Stockton on State Routes 12 and 88. LCSD lies within the boundaries of the NSJWCD; however, LCSD’s jurisdiction area is its own GSA and is not part of the NSJWCD GSA.
LCSD’s GSA area is approximately 800 acres and encompasses primarily residential and commercial uses. LCSD anticipates that, as community build-out occurs, it may serve over 5,000 residents. Groundwater from the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is LCSD’s only source of potable water (SJC, 2016a).
North San Joaquin Water Conservation District GSA – North San Joaquin Water Conservation District (NSJWCD), organized in 1948 under provisions of the Water Conservation District Act of 1931, includes approximately 149,000 acres east of the City of Lodi, including about 70,000 acres of irrigated agriculture. NSJWCD also includes approximately 4,740 acres within the Lodi city limits and the community of Lockeford. Pursuant to agreements between NSJWCD, Lockeford, and Lodi, the Lodi and Lockeford acreage is excluded from the NSJWCD GSA. NSJWCD straddles the Mokelumne River and has Dry Creek as its northern boundary. Prior to a basin boundary modification approved in 2016, NSJWCD was located in both the Cosumnes and the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasins. NSJWCD has a 20,000 AF Mokelumne River surface water right which is generally available in normal to wet years. NSJWCD provides surface water deliveries to irrigated acreage and conducts groundwater recharge, but much of the NSJWCD area relies on private groundwater pumping. At the regional level, NSJWCD has participated as a member agency of the Eastern Water Alliance and the GBA, two preceding efforts to the ESJGWA that focused on groundwater management (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
Oakdale Irrigation District – Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) comprises about 81,000 acres, primarily located in the northern portion of Stanislaus County, but with a small portion located within San Joaquin County. A little less than 40 percent of the District’s area overlies the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (over 31,000 acres), and the remaining portion overlies the Modesto Subbasin. SSJID and OID jointly own facilities to provide water from the Stanislaus River for agricultural use (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
San Joaquin County – The San Joaquin County GSA consists of 51,000 acres of areas within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin not covered by the other GSAs. Overlapping agencies include North Delta Water Agency (NDWA), unincorporated county, riparian land along Stanislaus River, and areas in the City of Stockton served by the City of Stockton MUD. In collaboration with the Northeast San Joaquin County Groundwater Banking Authority, San Joaquin County led the development of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Plan in 2004 to review, enhance, and coordinate existing groundwater management policies and programs in the region and to develop new policies and programs for the long-term sustainability of groundwater resources. San Joaquin County has also supported the development of studies and plans in the region, such as the Groundwater Basin Authority System Plan and San Joaquin County Water Management Plan.
• North Delta Water Agency – The NDWA was formed by a special act of the Legislature in 1973 to protect the water supply against seawater intrusion and to ensure a reliable water supply to meet current and future water needs. The NDWA service area now includes approximately 277,000 acres within the counties of Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, and Yolo. Most of the land is devoted to agriculture use and supplied with surface water EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-9
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 from the Delta (NDWA, 2015). The reclamations districts within the NDWA and the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin include Reclamation District (RD) 38 – Staten Island, RD 2086 – Canal Ranch, and RD 348 – New Hope Tract.
San Joaquin County No. 2 (Cal Water) – San Joaquin County No. 2 GSA includes approximately 7,000 acres of the unincorporated San Joaquin County portion of the Cal Water Service Area. Cal Water is an investor-owned public utility regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission; it is a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council. Cal Water has approximately 42,000 connections in the greater Stockton area, primarily south of the Calaveras River. Cal Water utilizes surface water delivered from SEWD and groundwater pumped by Cal Water wells to meet customer demands. Cal Water's Stockton District was formed in 1927 with the purchase of the water system from Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E).
South Delta Water Agency – The South Delta Water Agency (SDWA) was originally formed to address local water supply and water quality concerns in the south Delta area. The SDWA encompasses a total of approximately 150,000 acres within its boundaries, and almost 18,000 acres overlap with the southwestern portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The SDWA does not own any facilities or water rights. Instead, the SDWA protects property owners who have individual water rights. Surface water is the primary source of water used within the agency boundaries given that most of the groundwater is highly saline (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
South San Joaquin GSA – South San Joaquin GSA’s 64,000 acres encompass most of the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID), including Woodward Reservoir and canals leading to SSJID; the City of Ripon; and the City of Escalon. The portion of SSJID within the incorporated City of Manteca is included in the City of Manteca GSA. • South San Joaquin Irrigation District – SSJID was formed in 1909 under the Irrigation District Act and covers approximately 72,000 acres in the southeastern portion of San Joaquin County located within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin boundaries. The cities of Manteca, Ripon, and Escalon account for approximately 20,000 acres of the SSJID area. SSJID in 2005 began the delivery of up to 32,000 AF/year currently (and up to 43,000 AF/year in Phase II) of treated surface water from Woodward Reservoir to the cities of Manteca, Lathrop, and Tracy for the SCWSP, with Escalon to receive water in the future (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
• City of Ripon – The City of Ripon is located at the southern edge of San Joaquin County along Highway 99.
The population in 2015 was approximately 16,000 people and is expected to grow to about 30,800 people by 2040 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). The city’s potable water is provided by city groundwater wells and supplied over 4,000 acre-feet (AF) in 2015. Non-potable groundwater and surface water from SSJID are used for irrigation purposes and recharge (City of Ripon, 2015). • City of Escalon – The City of Escalon is located within the San Joaquin County boundaries along State Route 120. Incorporated in 1957, the City of Escalon was home to approximately 7,400 residents in 2020 (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2020). The City of Escalon has an allotment of 2,015 AF of treated water from the SSJID and the SCWSP; however, the city is not utilizing its allotment and currently relies solely on groundwater wells to serve the city’s population as well as commercial customers. The City of Escalon is selling its allotment of treated water to the City of Tracy but intends to construct a pipeline to convey SSJID water to meet domestic and industrial needs in the City of Escalon (SSJID, 2015b).
Stockton East Water District – Stockton East Water District (SEWD) was formed in 1948, includes a total of 143,300 acres, overlaps with portions of WID, and includes the entire City of Stockton and the entire Cal Water service area. The SEWD GSA covers 101,000 acres of the district, with the remaining SEWD areas covered by the City of Stockton, San Joaquin County, and San Joaquin County No. 2 GSAs. SEWD is guaranteed 56.5 percent of New Hogan Reservoir’s yield and is provided a total amount of 75,000 AF/year from New Melones Reservoir through agreements with USBR. SEWD delivers wholesale drinking water to the City of Stockton, Cal Water, San Joaquin County, and Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) areas in the Stockton MUD (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014). At the EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-10
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 regional level, SEWD has participated as a member agency of the Eastern Water Alliance and the GBA, two efforts preceding the current ESJGWA that focused on groundwater management (Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, 2014).
Woodbridge Irrigation District – WID, organized in 1924 under the California Irrigation District Act, encompasses a gross area of approximately 42,900 acres with over 29,000 acres covered by the WID GSA. WID is discontiguous, resulting in patches of non‐district lands within its boundary, and overlaps with portions of NSJWCD, SEWD, and the City of Lodi. WID owns and operates the Woodbridge Diversion Dam, located on the Lower Mokelumne River northeast of the City of Lodi, as well as an extensive canal system serving approximately 13,000 acres west of Lodi and north of Stockton. Recent improvements made to the new Woodbridge Diversion Dam include state‐of‐the‐art fish and diversion works which enable WID to keep Lodi Lake full year‐round. At the regional level, WID has participated as a member agency in regional groundwater management efforts, including the GBA.
1.1.4.4 Legal Authority
Any local public agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities in a basin can decide to become a GSA under SGMA. A single local agency can become a GSA, or a combination of local agencies can decide to form a GSA by using either a JPA, a memorandum of agreement (MOA), or other legal agreement (CA DWR, 2016a).
In the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, the ESJGWA has legal authority to jointly prepare, adopt, and implement a GSP consistent with the terms of the JPA Agreement and the ESJGWA Bylaws (Eastern San Joaquin GWA, 2017a). The ESJGWA's JPA calls out the following powers granted to GSAs by SGMA:
• Become a GSA individually or collectively;
• Approve any portion, section, or chapter of the GSP adopted by the ESJGWA; • Act through GSAs to implement SGMA and the GSP; and
• Exercise the powers conferred to GSAs by SGMA.
Each GSA that is a member of the ESJGWA has its own legal authorities. For example, NSJWCD has the legal authorities granted to a GSA under the California Water Code (Water Code) as well as the legal authorities granted to a Water Conservation District pursuant to Water Code § 74000 et seq. The legal authorities of each GSA are listed in Appendix 1-B. Agency resolutions to become GSAs are provided in Appendix 1-C.
1.1.4.5 Estimated Costs and Approach to Meeting Costs
Implementation of the GSP requires funding sources. To the degree they become available, outside grants will be sought to assist in reducing the cost of implementation to participating agencies, residents, and landowners of the Subbasin. However, there will be a need to collect funds to support implementation.
For budgetary purposes, the estimated initial cost of these activities is on the order of $600,000 to $1 million per year excluding projects and management actions costs and costs associated with the installation of new monitoring wells and grant writing. Additional one-time costs, such as model refinement, are estimated to be on the order of $315,000.
The ESJGWA Board will evaluate options for securing the needed funding. Additional detail on GSP implementation costs and funding sources are detailed in Chapter 7: Plan Implementation.
1.1.5 GSP Organization
This GSP is organized according to DWR’s “GSP Annotated Outline” for standardized reporting (CA DWR, 2016b).
The Preparation Checklist for GSP Submittal in DWR formatting can be found in Appendix 1-D (CA DWR, 2016d).
1.2 PLAN AREA
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-11
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.2.1 Description of Plan Area
This section provides a detailed description of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, including major streams and creeks, institutional entities, agricultural and urban land uses, locations of groundwater wells, and locations of state lands. The Plan Area document also describes existing surface water and groundwater monitoring programs, existing water management programs, and general plans in the Plan Area.
1.2.1.1 Summary of Jurisdictional Areas and Other Features The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin falls within the larger San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin (see Figure 1-4).
Basin designations by DWR were first published in 1952 in Water Quality Investigations Report No. 3, Ground Water Basins in California, and subsequently updated in Bulletin 118 in 1975, 1980, 2003, and 2020. The San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region contains 11 distinct subbasins, where the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-022.01) is bordered to the north by the Cosumnes Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-022.16), the South American Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-021.65), and the Solano Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-021.66); to the south by the Modesto Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-022.02); and to the west by the Tracy Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-022.15) and East Contra Costa Subbasin (Bulletin 118 Basin Number 5-022.19) (see Figure 1-5).
The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin includes lands south of Dry Creek between the San Joaquin River on the west and the crystalline basement rock of the Sierra Nevada foothills on the east. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin boundary to the south stretches along the San Joaquin County line and continues along the Stanislaus River into Calaveras County to the east. Geologic units in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin consist of consolidated rocks and unconsolidated deposits (CA DWR, 2006).
No adjudicated areas or areas covered by an alternative to a GSP exist within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-12
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-4: Placement within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-13
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-5: Neighboring Groundwater Subbasins
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-14
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin underlies areas of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Calaveras Counties. Figure 1-6 shows the location of these three counties within the State of California as well as the three other counties bordering the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin: Sacramento, Amador, and Contra Costa.
Figure 1-6: Underlying and Surrounding Counties
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-15
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-7 shows the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and the Subbasin’s key geographic features. The Subbasin encompasses an area of about 1,195 square miles. There are eight entities within the region with land use jurisdiction:
the County of San Joaquin, the County of Calaveras, the County of Stanislaus, the City of Stockton, the City of Lodi, the City of Manteca, the City of Escalon, and the City of Ripon. The cities of Lodi, Escalon, Manteca, and Ripon are contained entirely within the Subbasin, while western portions of San Joaquin County and the City of Stockton, and eastern portions of Calaveras and Stanislaus counties lie in neighboring subbasins or outside of groundwater subbasins altogether. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin encompasses the following unincorporated communities:
Acampo, Adela, Atlanta, August, Bear Creek, Burson, Clements, Collierville, Country Club, Dogtown, East Oakdale, Eugene, Farmington, French Camp, Garden Acres, Goodmans Corner, Jenny Lind, Kennedy, Knights Ferry, Lake Camanche Ranches, Lincoln Village, Linden, Lockeford, Milton, Morada, Mormon, Oak Grove, Peters, South Camanche Shore, Taft Mosswood, Terminous, Thornton, Valley Home, Valley Springs, Victor, Wallace, Waterloo, Woodbridge, and Youngstown.
Figure 1-7: City Boundaries
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-16
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-8 shows the spatial extent of Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) and Severely Disadvantaged Communities (SDACs) in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. DWR defines DACs as census geographies (census tracts, census block groups, and census-designated places) with an annual median household income (MHI) that is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI. SDACs are defined as census geographies with an MHI less than 60 percent of the statewide annual MHI. DWR uses the most recently available 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) dataset to identify these areas. For this GSP, the 2016-2020 ACS dataset was used, establishing statewide MHI as $78,672 (CA DWR, Mapping Tools).
Figure 1-8: Disadvantaged Communities (DACs)
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-17
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-9 shows a map of land use in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin across four general categories: cropland, industrial, undeveloped, and urban. These categories were mapped based on categories identified from the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) CropScape 2022 dataset.
Land use patterns in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are dominated by agricultural uses, including nut and fruit trees, vineyards, row crops, grazing, and forage. Both agricultural and urban land use rely on a combination of surface water and groundwater, with some agricultural lands using recycled or reusing water. Land use is primarily controlled by local agencies. Land use patterns in the low foothills to the east are dominated by native vegetation and unirrigated pasture lands (USDA, 2022).
Figure 1-9: Land Use
Crop type varies by region, with fruit and nut trees and vine crops comprising the majority of agriculture in the Subbasin.
Almond orchards dominate the southern portion of the Subbasin, cherry and walnut orchards dominate the central portion of the Subbasin, and vineyards dominate the northern portion (Figure 1-10). Irrigated crop acreage in the Subbasin are 37 percent fruit and nut trees, 24 percent vineyards, and 11 percent alfalfa and irrigated pasture, according to the 2022 CropScape dataset (USDA, 2022).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-18
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-10: Land Use by Crop Type
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-19
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-11 shows a map with boundaries of federal and state public lands within the region that includes the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) manages the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge situated in Stanislaus County where the Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin rivers meet.
Established in 1987 to provide habitat for migratory birds and endangered species, the refuge is 7,000 acres and is located just outside the southern boundary of the Subbasin (USFWS, 2012).
The California Department of Parks and Recreation maintains the Caswell Memorial State Park located along the Stanislaus River near Ripon (California State Parks, 2019). The Caswell Memorial State Park protects a riparian oak woodland and is home to the riparian brush rabbit, an endangered species (California State Parks, 2019). This is the only state park within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin boundary. The Franks Tract State Recreation Area (SRA) and the Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area (SVRA) are also managed by California State Parks; however, both of these areas are located outside of the Subbasin boundary.
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) owns 880 acres of man-made ditches, canals, and marshes with both grassland and riparian habitat, recognized as the White Slough Wildlife Area. The property was designated by the Fish and Game Commission in 1980 and provides recreational opportunities such as fishing, hunting, and hiking (CDFW, 2019a). CDFW also maintains the 353-acre Woodbridge Ecological Reserve to protect primarily the sandhill crane population, but also other migratory waterfowl. The sandhill crane was listed as a threatened species in 1983.
Woodbridge Ecological Reserve and the greater Stockton Delta wetlands make up the largest freshwater marsh in California (CDFW, 2019b). Lastly, Vernalis Ecological Reserve is also shown in Figure 1-11. It serves as a public access area owned by CDFW for hunting and wildlife viewing (CDFW, 2019c).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-20
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-11: US Fish and Wildlife Service, California State Parks, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife Boundaries
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-21
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-12 to Figure 1-14 shows the density, as of 2019, of domestic, public, and production wells per square mile in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, as classified by the DWR Online System for Well Completion Reports (OSWCR), which is discussed in Section 1.2.2.1. This includes approximately 1,000 unique wells collected primarily from DWR’s Water Data Library (WDL), but also other state, regional, and local monitoring entities (CA DWR, n.d.). Though there are overlaps and discrepancies in the designation of wells, domestic wells are largely private residential wells, public wells are municipal-operated wells, and production wells are for irrigation, municipal, public, and industrial purposes (CA DWR, 2019). Areas with few wells exist in the Subbasin, particularly in the northwestern corner of the Subbasin and to the east. Wells containing groundwater level data are described further in Section 1.2.2.1. Community water systems, defined by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) as wells serving 15 or more connections or more than 25 people per day, are identified in Appendix 1-E. Appendix 1-E contains additional detail on where community water systems are found in the Subbasin.
Figure 1-12: Density of Domestic Wells per Square Mile
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-22
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-13: Density of Public Wells per Square Mile
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-23
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-14: Density of Production Wells per Square Mile
1.2.2 Water Resources Monitoring and Management Programs The existing monitoring and management landscape within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is a patchwork of local, regional, state, and federal programs, each serving its own specific function. This patchwork provides valuable data that have supported past needs and will assist in meeting monitoring needs under SGMA. This patchwork of programs includes redundancies, inconsistent protocols, and inconsistent timing of monitoring that may be improved during SGMA implementation.
Existing monitoring within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is extensive, complex, and performed for a variety of purposes by a variety of entities. During a review of existing groundwater monitoring data and programs, data were collected from the following agencies and programs. Programs and agencies are listed by the jurisdiction they operate across: statewide, regional, or local. The sections that follow describe in detail the programs most heavily relied upon in the development of the GSP and are organized by data type. Section 1.2.2.3 addresses the interconnection between databases.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-24
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Statewide Monitoring Programs (Agencies and Databases):
• California Data Exchange Center (CDEC)
• California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR)
• California Environmental Data Exchange Network (CEDEN) • California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Drinking Water (DDW) • Department of Water Resources (DWR):
o Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) Surveys
o California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) o California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Groundwater Information Center Interactive Mapping Application (GICIMA)
o Online System for Well Completion Reports (OSWCR)
o Water Data Library (WDL)
• Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program • GeoTracker
• University NAVSTAR Consortium (UNAVCO)
• United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR)
• United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Regional Monitoring Programs:
• Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) • California Department of Public Health (CDPH)
• Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) dairy data, Dairy Cares
• USGS’s National Water Information System (NWIS)
• Central Valley Dairy Representative Monitoring Program • EnviroStor
• Groundwater Quality Trend Monitoring Program through SWRCB Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) • San Joaquin River Restoration Program
Local Monitoring Agencies
• Cal Water
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-25
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Calaveras County Water District
• City of Lodi
• City of Manteca
• City of Stockton
• Linden County Water District
• Lockeford Community Services District
• North San Joaquin Water Conservation District
• Oakdale Irrigation District
• San Joaquin County
• South San Joaquin Irrigation District
• Stockton East Water District
A description of the monitoring programs that will be used in GSP implementation is provided in Chapter 4: Monitoring Networks.
1.2.2.1 Groundwater Level Monitoring and Data Sources
1.2.2.1.1 CASGEM
DWR maintains several groundwater level monitoring programs, tools, and resources covering California. The California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) Program is DWR’s primary resource for groundwater level data and has been used extensively in the development of this GSP. The CASGEM Program was authorized in 2009 by SB X7-6 to establish collaboration between local monitoring parties and DWR to collect and make public statewide groundwater elevation data. The program provides the framework for local agencies or other organizations to “assume responsibility for monitoring and reporting groundwater elevations in all or part of a basin or subbasin” (Water Code §10927). As part of SGMA implementation, wells that are in the Subbasin’s representative monitoring network have been migrated out of CASGEM and into SGMA; all other pre-existing CASGEM wells remain in that program under voluntary monitoring status.
Three CASGEM monitoring entities exist in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin: CCWD, San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (SJCFCWCD), and Stanislaus County. These three agencies have completed separate CASGEM Monitoring Plans, which are included in the references section. • CCWD CASGEM Monitoring Plan: CCWD adopted a CASGEM Monitoring Plan in November 2012, with the following objectives:
o Collect semi-annual groundwater levels from a selected monitoring well network o Upload groundwater levels to the CASGEM website after data quality steps have been completed o Maintain and update the monitoring well network plan documents including additions and removals from the monitoring network
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-26
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 These objectives are helpful to this planning effort, as they include regular monitoring of groundwater levels and data upload to CASGEM. The CCWD plan also includes a description of the CASGEM monitoring network and groundwater level measurements. The monitoring network includes two USGS nested monitoring wells equipped with pressure transducers, which continuously monitor groundwater levels. The monitoring network also includes seven other wells that are not USGS wells. These wells are not equipped with pressure transducers, and manual groundwater elevation measurements are taken at all wells twice a year. As stated in the CCWD CASGEM plan, the non-USGS wells are owned by private landowners, and additional wells may need to be added in the future if owners opt out of the monitoring network (CCWD, 2012). This monitoring network covers the portion of Calaveras County within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. • SJCFCWCD CASGEM Monitoring Plan: The SJCFCWCD CASGEM Monitoring Plan provides a description of the CASGEM monitoring network and groundwater conditions in San Joaquin County. This plan covers the portions of the Eastern San Joaquin and Tracy Subbasins within San Joaquin County. The SJCFCWCD has been taking semi-annual water level measurements since 1971 at wells owned by a variety of entities and by private individuals. A large portion of wells in the district’s network are privately owned (SJCFCWCD, 2006).
SJCFCWCD sent out consent forms to these private well owners to release well information to CASGEM; about 40 of these forms were signed and returned, and construction information for these wells was uploaded to CASGEM. This information includes attributes such as well depth, coordinates, reference point elevation, and depth of screened interval.
• Stanislaus County CASGEM Monitoring Plan: The Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources (DER) established a CASGEM monitoring plan in 2016 to cover the portion of Stanislaus County within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, often referred to as the northern triangle. This plan details the groundwater level monitoring history, protocols, and network for the northern triangle portion of Stanislaus County. This area is rural and most of the development exists between the Stanislaus River and near the Woodward Reservoir. Wells selected for the CASGEM program are in the developed areas. 17 wells are included in this CASGEM plan to be measured semi-annually, consisting of one domestic and ten irrigation wells, plus six wells that are of unknown type. Well information such as depth and screened interval was uploaded to CASGEM for these wells (Stanislaus County DER, 2016).
1.2.2.1.2 San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District The SJCFCWCD publishes semi-annual groundwater reports covering groundwater conditions in San Joaquin County.
These reports include tables, hydrographs, and maps on groundwater levels. Groundwater level results from each semi-annual report are compared with values from the previous period. Groundwater level data collected by the district include the data mentioned in the CASGEM section, above, and additional data that are not incorporated into CASGEM.
The data are maintained by the SJCFCWCD.
1.2.2.1.3 Water Data Library
DWR’s WDL contains measurements of groundwater elevations from water supply and monitoring wells monitored by numerous entities, such as DWR and local agencies. Groundwater level measurements available from the WDL are either continuously or periodically measured. Continuous measurements are provided by automatic water level measuring devices that take readings at wells; periodic measurements are manual recordings typically occurring at monthly or semi-annual time intervals. Measurements displayed through the WDL are taken through other programs, such as CASGEM. The WDL lists the organization responsible for collecting each water level measurement. The WDL water level measurements are available through the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) Open Data website as a bulk download, or through the WDL website on a per station basis.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-27
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.2.2.1.4 USGS – National Water Information System
The NWIS is a USGS program comprising several water datasets, including groundwater level measurements, river flow, and river stage data. Like the WDL, NWIS contains continuous and periodic water measurements for recent and historical conditions. Within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, there are only a few active NWIS sites and many inactive sites with historical records. For stream measurements, active sites are largely along major streams, such as the Mokelumne River, the Stanislaus River, and the San Joaquin River; along Delta waterways; or in the Sierra Nevada foothills, upstream of reservoirs.
1.2.2.1.5 Data Received Directly from GSAs
A number of the GSAs collect water level and water quality information within their GSAs at varying frequencies and detail. These data were provided as part of the Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) data collection efforts and were compared with and included in groundwater level and water quality datasets analyzed for updates to the ESJWRM model and the preparation of this GSP.
The development and update of the ESJWRM took place in an open and transparent process. Coordination efforts took place through the Eastern San Joaquin County GBA, the organizational structure for agency coordination that proceeded SGMA regulations and the formation of the ESJGWA, and through the Subbasin Steering Committee.
Through this effort, many of the staff and consultants representing the GSAs forming the ESJGWA participated as a forum to review model input data and assumptions. The group facilitated major modeling decisions and provided input data, including groundwater pumping records, surface water delivery records, urban demand, and local water levels and quality data.
Local agencies with consistent representation in meetings related to the development of the ESJWRM included San Joaquin County, WID, City of Lodi, NSJWCD, LCSD, CCWD, City of Stockton, Cal Water, SEWD, City of Lathrop, City of Manteca, SSJID, City of Escalon, OID, and Stanislaus County. Other agencies contributed local data to information collection efforts later in the GSP development and revision process.
Online System for Well Completion Reports – The OSWCR is a DWR program used to document and compile boring or well completion records throughout California. There are as many as 2 million domestic, irrigation, and monitoring water wells in California included in this dataset, including approximately 10,000 domestic wells located in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. When a well is constructed, modified, or destroyed, drilling contractors are required to submit a Well Completion Report to DWR for upload to the interactive OSWCR web site. OSWCR is used as a data source for wells identified for monitoring. In this GSP, the OSWCR database was used to describe the Plan area and identify sustainable management criteria.
1.2.2.2 Groundwater Quality Monitoring and Data Sources
1.2.2.2.1 Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program The GAMA Program is an extensive groundwater quality monitoring program that was established by the SWRCB in 2000. The program compiles groundwater quality data from several agencies including the DWR, USGS, Department of Pesticide Regulations (DPR), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), and others. Agencies submit data from monitoring wells for 258 constituents including total dissolved solids (TDS), nitrates and nitrites, arsenic, and manganese. GAMA data for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin contains water quality results collected by the SWRCBDDW (formerly DHS-DDW), DPR, DWR, LLNL, and USGS from the 1940s to present. Figure 2-3 in Chapter 2: Basin Setting shows the GAMA well locations throughout the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, roughly 6,800 monitoring points.
1.2.2.2.2 Water Data Library
DWR’s WDL contains groundwater quality data in addition to the groundwater level records described previously. This information includes data from discrete groundwater quality samples collected by DWR and other cooperating entities.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-28
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 These water quality data list the entity responsible for taking the sample but do not specify what program the sample was taken under. The WDL water quality measurements are available through the CNRA Open Data website as a bulk download, or through the WDL website on a per-station basis. WDL water quality measurements in this GSP are utilized for basin characterization but are acquired from the other programs.
1.2.2.2.3 National Water Information System
The USGS NWIS contains groundwater quality data, in addition to the groundwater level measurements previously discussed. Groundwater quality results in NWIS relate to GAMA records, but there is no direct link between the two databases. Some NWIS sites have a State ID listed, which is a common identifier used for wells. This indicates these wells can be connected to other databases using the State ID information. However, differences in the format of the State ID between NWIS and other databases create challenges in cross referencing between databases. In this GSP, NWIS water quality measurements are utilized for basin characterization but are acquired from the other programs.
1.2.2.2.4 Division of Drinking Water
The SWRCB DDW monitors public water system wells for Title 22 requirements such as organic and inorganic compounds, metals, microbial, and radiological analytes. Data are available for active and inactive drinking water sources for water systems that serve the public – defined as wells serving 15 or more connections or more than 25 people per day. Data are electronically transferred from certified laboratories to DDW daily. Data generated from this program are used for regulatory compliance by water purveyors and become part of Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) and GAMA.
1.2.2.2.5 GeoTracker
GeoTracker, operated by the SWRCB, contains records for sites that require cleanup, such as leaking underground storage tank sites, Department of Defense sites, and cleanup program sites. GeoTracker also contains records for various unregulated projects as well as permitted facilities including: ILRP, future CV-SALTS, oil and gas production, operating permitted underground storage tanks, and land disposal sites. GeoTracker receives records and data from SWRCB programs and other monitoring agencies.
1.2.2.2.6 Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program
The Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) is a program established by the CVRWQCB focused on monitoring and regulating the concentration of pesticides, toxicity, and nutrients (such as TDS and nitrates) in surface and groundwater. General orders under the ILRP require agricultural users in the Central Valley to prevent sediment, fertilizer, pesticides, manure, and other materials used in farming from leaving the field in irrigation or stormwater and entering surface waters or leaching below the root zone to groundwater. Agricultural users biannually sample and submit data for irrigation and domestic wells. As part of the ILRP, the San Joaquin County & Delta Water Quality Coalition members monitor drinking water wells on enrolled parcels for nitrates. This requirement began January 1, 2019, based on the February 7, 2018 revision of ILRP WDR (Order) for the Eastern San Joaquin River Watershed by the SWRCB. The ILRP program is in the process of developing a comprehensive monitoring network for future use to address the ILRP data objectives. The San Joaquin County & Delta Water Quality Coalition members also monitor domestic wells for nitrate in high vulnerability areas.
1.2.2.2.7 Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) The Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-SALTS) program was launched by the CVRWQCB in 2006 in an effort to develop sustainable salinity and nitrate management plans and solutions to the salinity problem in the Central Valley. CV-SALTS is a coalition of agricultural, business, and industry parties along with local, regional, and state governments which facilitate and fund efficient management systems of salinity, technical studies, and the 2017 Final Salt and Nitrate Management Plan (SNMP). The 2017 SNMP was developed based on a EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-29
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 detailed water quality analysis conducted for salinity (represented by TDS) and nitrates using measurements from wells across multiple agencies from 2000-2016. Appendices to the SNMP and supporting documents contain summary information about these constituents by Subbasin, including Eastern San Joaquin. Basin Plan Amendments identify specific actions and recommendations for individual basins in the Central Valley. Efforts are underway to implement a salinity monitoring program and the CV-SALTS program will likely require monitoring and data submittal.
1.2.2.3 Interconnection of Databases
Several of the databases discussed above utilize the same water level or water quality data. These records often specify the monitoring entity responsible for the measurement. Although these data overlap between databases, the correlation between databases is not specified. For example, water level data in the WDL are also in CASGEM, but this link is not mentioned in WDL records. This lack of connection poses problems for gathering water level and quality data in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and throughout California. For instance, if certain water level data are gathered through CASGEM but not uploaded to NWIS, users who gather water level measurements through NWIS would miss the CASGEM data. Efforts have been made in the development of this Plan to overcome the issue related to overlap and poor correlation between databases, but the issue remains. It is recommended that agencies work together to utilize a common unique identifier to ease use of multiple datasets.
1.2.2.4 Land Subsidence Monitoring
Subsidence monitoring is performed using continuous global positioning system (CGPS) stations, extensometers, and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) surveys. CGPS data are primarily available from two programs.
UNAVCO’s Plate Boundary Observatory Program – Reporting since 2004, the UNAVCO (formerly University Navigation Satellite Timing and Ranging or NAVSTAR Consortium) Plate Boundary Observatory network consists of a network of about 1,100 continuous global positioning system (CGPS) and meteorology stations in the western United States to measure deformation resulting from the constant motion of the Pacific and North American tectonic plates in the western United States. Stations located within the Subbasin contain data from at least 2006 to current and include station P309 located east of Linden and station P273 located west of Lodi. Other stations are also available in nearby Subbasins.
University of Nevada Geodetic Laboratory (UNGL) - Several additional CGPS stations from the University of Nevada Geodetic Laboratory (UNGL) were also located in the Subbasin. These stations provide additional subsidence data for the Subbasin; however, these stations have drawbacks, such as data gaps, and discontinuous monitoring, and are used on an academic/research basis that may result in increased monitoring gaps. Station CA15 is located north of the city of Stockton and has a continuous period of record between September 2013 and October 2021. Station CMNC is located along the southern edge of the Camanche Reservoir and has observations in 2020 and between February 2022 through January 2024. These locations also provided additional spatial coverage to the UNAVCO and SOPAC CGPS stations
Subsidence analyses have also been conducted using satellite-based methods over limited time periods, as described below.
United States Geological Survey – The USGS report Land Subsidence along the Delta-Mendota Canal in the Northern Part of the San Joaquin Valley, California, 2003-10 (Sneed et al., 2013) presents land subsidence data in the southwestern portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin from 2007 to 2010. Data for about 100 square miles of the Subbasin were recorded using Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) processing, a satellite-based remote sensing technique that can detect ground-surface deformation. Two InSAR techniques were used: conventional InSAR and persistent scatter (PS) InSAR. Both sources of data were collected from the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency’s Advanced Land Observing Satellite.
California Department of Water Resources -– DWR has made two InSAR datasets available for SGMA application:
TRE Altamira InSAR point and raster data and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Jet Propulsion EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-30
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Laboratory’s (NASA JPL) raster data. Vertical displacement approximations in both datasets are collected by the European Space Agency’s Sentinel-1A satellite. The two different datasets represent two different processing results, one by TRE Altamira Inc. and one by NASA JPL. The TRE Altamira data have coverage between January 2015 and June 2018. Both annual and total raster datasets from TRE Altamira are available and represent interpolations of the vertical displacement point features. The NASA JPL processed dataset spans Spring of 2015 to Summer of 2017 (CA DWR, 2019). The TRE Altamira dataset is mapped in Figure 2-64 and discussed in Section 2.2.5.
There are no DWR or USGS extensometers in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
1.2.2.5 Groundwater Storage Monitoring
There are no existing programs that conduct regular monitoring specific to groundwater storage in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The ESJWRM historical model was used to generate estimates for historical groundwater storage based on a series of inputs including historical groundwater elevation data. The ESJWRM generated estimates for current and projected volumes of groundwater in storage based on assumptions for how future conditions may change relative to historical conditions.
1.2.2.6 Interconnected Surface Water Monitoring
There are no existing programs that conduct regular monitoring specific to the interconnection of surface water to groundwater in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. However, surface water monitoring and groundwater level monitoring will be integrated to characterize spatial and temporal exchanges between surface water and groundwater and to estimate potential depletions of surface water caused by groundwater extractions. Additional information on how the depletions monitoring network was developed, monitoring frequency, and summary protocols is provided in Chapter 4: Monitoring Networks. Sources of groundwater level data are described in Section 1.2.2.1. Surface water data on stream flows and levels from stream gages are available from the USGS, CDEC, and local agencies.
1.2.2.7 Other Water Management Programs and Plans
The subsections below contain descriptions of historical and current water management programs and plans, including Integrated Regional Water Management Plans (IRWMPs), Agricultural Water Management Plans (AWMPs), and Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) that apply to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
1.2.2.7.1 Groundwater Management Plan
The Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Plan (GMP), developed by the Northeastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Banking Authority in September 2004, was a collaborative effort between local water interests with historically diverse viewpoints to reinforce local control and provide direction for the sustainable development of groundwater resources. The GMP covered a geographic region that included the entire Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin that falls within San Joaquin County but excluded portions within Calaveras and Stanislaus counties to the east. The GMP boundaries were generally defined by the San Joaquin County line to the east, the San Joaquin River to the west, Dry Creek to the north, and the Stanislaus River to the south. A map of the Eastern San Joaquin GMP Region is shown in Figure 1-15.
Now a legacy document superseded by the Eastern San Joaquin GSP, the 2004 GMP provided valuable resources related to potential concepts, projects, and monitoring strategies that were leveraged in the early versions of this GSP (Northeastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Banking Authority, 2004). The following management objectives influenced the development and implementation of the GSP:
• Maintain or enhance groundwater elevations to meet the long-term needs of groundwater users within the Groundwater Management Area
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-31
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Maintain or enhance groundwater quality underlying the Basin to meet the long-term needs of groundwater users within the Groundwater Management Area
• Minimize impacts to surface water quality and flow due to continued Basin overdraft and planned conjunctive use
• Prevent inelastic land subsidence due to continued groundwater overdraft Figure 1-15: Eastern San Joaquin GMP Region Setting
1.2.2.7.2 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
The Eastern San Joaquin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (Eastern San Joaquin IRWMP) is a collaborative regional planning document that was published in June 2014, with an Addendum released in February 2021. The IRWMP defines and integrates key water management strategies to establish protocols and courses of action to implement the Eastern San Joaquin Integrated Conjunctive Use Program (ICU Program). The ICU Program was designed to implement a comprehensive, prioritized set of projects and management actions to meet adopted EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-32
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Best Management Objectives, moving the Eastern San Joaquin County Region toward the goal of sustainable and reliable water supplies (San Joaquin County, 2021).
The following IRWMP objectives related to groundwater use would potentially influence implementation of the GSP:
• Minimize adverse impacts to agriculture, communities, and the environment • Maximize efficiency and beneficial use of supplies
• Protect and enhance water rights and supplies
1.2.2.7.3 Mokelumne Interregional Sustainability Program Report The Mokelumne Watershed Interregional Sustainability Evaluation (MokeWISE) was formed following efforts made by the Mokelumne River Forum over seven years by a diverse set of stakeholders in the Upper and Lower Mokelumne River watersheds, with the objective to develop and evaluate alternatives to optimize water resources management within the Mokelumne-Amador-Calaveras (MAC) and Eastern San Joaquin IRWM planning regions. The plan offers a bi-regional approach by bringing together stakeholders, and it brings together the interregional sections of two IRWM regions identified as the Mokelumne River Forum (San Joaquin GBA, 2015).
The following MokeWISE objectives related to groundwater use would potentially influence implementation of the GSP:
• Groundwater is not considered a viable additional source in Amador and Calaveras counties • The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is considered critically overdrafted • Groundwater is not considered a viable additional supply source in Amador and Calaveras counties due to low yield, unreliability, age of groundwater, and limited storage options, although conjunctive use and recharge opportunities may be available
1.2.2.7.4 Agricultural Water Management Plans
AWMPs were developed and adopted by OID, SEWD, SSJID, and WID in 2015 in compliance with SB X7-7 of 2009, which requires certain agricultural water suppliers to prepare an AWMP and implement Efficient Water Management Practices (EWMPs). The Critical EWMPs include:
• Measure the volume of water delivered to customers with sufficient accuracy to comply with requirements of the Water Code
• Adopt a pricing structure based at least in part on quantity delivered (Volumetric Pricing) Applicable Conditional EWMPs that have the benefit of less applied water or increasing system efficiency include:
• Facilitate alternative land use for lands with exceptionally high water duties • Facilitate use of available recycled water
• Facilitate financing of capital improvements for on-farm irrigation systems • Implement an incentive pricing structure that promotes one or more of the goals identified in the Water Code • Expand line or distribution systems, construct regulating reservoirs to increase distribution system flexibility and capacity, decrease maintenance, and reduce seepage
• Increase flexibility in water ordering by, and delivery to, water customers within operational limits EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-33
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Construct and operate supplier spill and tailwater recovery systems • Increase planned conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater • Automate canal control structures
• Facilitate or promote customer pump testing and evaluation • Designate a water conservation coordinator who will develop and implement the water management plan and prepare progress reports
• Provide for the availability of water management services to water users • Evaluate the policies of agencies that provide the supplier with water to identify the potential for institutional changes to allow more flexible water deliveries and storage • Evaluate and improve the efficiencies of the supplier’s pumps The updated 2020 AWMPs provide a framework of management practices to help meet water management goals that align with the goals of the Eastern San Joaquin GSP.
1.2.2.7.5 Urban Water Management Plans
UWMPs are developed by Cal Water, CCWD, City of Lodi, City of Manteca, City of Ripon, City of Stockton, SSJID, and SEWD every five years according to requirements of the Water Code.
Agencies acting as GSAs use the following actions to encourage conservation and efficient use of water:
• Water waste prohibition ordinances
• Metered distribution systems
• Tiered water rates and conservation pricing
• Public education and outreach efforts
• Water conservation program coordination and staffing support • Free residential plumbing retrofit devices
• Washing machine rebate program
1.2.2.8 Canal Diversions and Seepage
Canal seepage in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is tracked on a district-by-district basis. All of the major irrigation districts utilize a combination of natural watercourses, canals, and pipelines to distribute surface water diversions to their customers.
OID diverts water from the Stanislaus River at Goodwin Reservoir through the Joint Main Canal on the north side and the South Main Canal on the south side. Approximately 330 miles of laterals carry water to landowners off of the main canals. While the entire lateral system historically consisted of open, unlined ditches, 100 miles of the laterals have been converted to pipelines; 105 miles are open, concrete-lined ditches; and the rest remain unlined. Approximately 40 percent of the OID service area is within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-34
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 In SSJID, similarly, the primary source of recharge in the groundwater system is conveyance seepage and deep percolation of applied water. SSJID diverts from the Stanislaus River initially and then sends the water through a system of lateral canals to its customers. Like OID, the entire system was open and unlined, but over time it has been slowly concrete lined and replaced with buried pipelines.
SEWD uses two unlined canal systems to deliver water from the Stanislaus River: Upper Farmington Canal and Lower Farmington Canal. SEWD also uses natural watercourses to distribute their water, such as rivers, creeks, and sloughs.
CSJWCD also uses the Upper Farmington Canal for distribution, as well as natural watercourses within its boundaries.
Historically, WID has also made efforts to improve the efficiency of the delivery infrastructure it maintains. Water for WID is diverted from the Mokelumne River and from the Delta at the end of Beaver Slough. In 2015, WID had about 100 miles of lined and unlined canals, and pipelines.
Canal seepage, generally considered a loss to districts in the short term, provides groundwater recharge and has played and will continue to play a crucial role in the long-term sustainability of groundwater resources in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
1.2.2.9 Conjunctive Use Programs Prior to SGMA Implementation Conjunctive use is the use of surface water to allow the Subbasin to recharge and store additional water supply, either through in-lieu use or direct recharge. This section describes conjunctive use programs that were in place in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin prior to the beginning of SGMA implementation in 2020, including both in-lieu recharge and direct recharge projects.
In-lieu recharge occurs for both agricultural and municipal purposes wherever surface water is being delivered to offset the use of groundwater. Agencies that conducted in-lieu recharge prior to SGMA implementation include CCWD, City of Lodi, City of Manteca, City of Stockton, CSJWCD, OID, SEWD, SSJID, and WID. Riparian users of surface water also benefit from in-lieu recharge.
Direct recharge projects existed in NSJWCD and SEWD, as shown below in Figure 1-16. NSJWCD’s Tracy Lake Groundwater Recharge Project includes direct recharge of 500 to 1,000 AF/year by placing surface water in the bed of South Tracy Lake to allow for percolation. The Cal-Fed/Costa Recharge project includes direct recharge of about 300 AF/year by flooding about 20 acres of vineyards post-harvest. NSJWCD is expanding these programs to add additional in-lieu and direct recharge projects in its service area. SEWD’s Farmington Groundwater Recharge Program was developed in 2001 with a conceptual plan to recharge surface water via field flooding on about 1,200 acres. SEWD has operated a 60-acre recharge site since 2003 as a result of the Farmington Program with additional 73 acres added in 2020. The observed recharge amount ranges from 2,800 AF/year to 5,800 AF/year with an average of 4,400 AF/year for a total recharge volume of about 65,000 AF since the inception of the project. SEWD also has several wells to pump some of this recharged water for municipal supply during especially dry years.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-35
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Figure 1-16: Locations of Groundwater Recharge Projects Prior to SGMA Implementation
1.2.3 Land Use Elements or Topic Categories of Applicable General Plans
1.2.3.1 General Plans in the Plan Area
San Joaquin County has jurisdiction over land use planning for the majority of the surface area of the Subbasin.
Stanislaus County, Calaveras County, and the incorporated cities of Stockton, Manteca, Lodi, Ripon, and Escalon make up the remaining area. Implementation of the Eastern San Joaquin GSP may be affected by the policies and regulations outlined in the San Joaquin County General Plan, as well as the General Plans for the five cities, given that the long-term land use planning decisions that would affect the Subbasin are under the jurisdiction of the counties and respective cities.
This section describes how implementation of the various General Plans may change water demands in the Subbasin, how the General Plans may influence the GSP’s ability to achieve sustainable groundwater use, and how the GSP may affect implementation of General Plan land use policies. Policies outlined in the General Plans that will potentially influence implementation of the GSP are discussed below and listed in Appendix 1-F.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-36
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.2.3.1.1 San Joaquin County General Plan
The San Joaquin County General Plan describes the official county “blueprint” on the location of future land use, type of development encouraged, and decisions regarding resource conservation. Stakeholder input informed the development of the county’s vision and guiding principles, which represent the county’s core values and establish benchmarks for the General Plan’s goals and policies. The General Plan encourages preservation of the San Joaquin County’s groundwater resources and states that future urban and agricultural growth should occur within the sustainable capacity of these resources (SJC, 2016b).
1.2.3.1.2 Calaveras County General Plan
The Calaveras County General Plan has provided a framework for growth and development in Calaveras County. The Calaveras County General Plan, initially developed in 1996, underwent an extensive update process in collaboration with local stakeholders and policymakers to understand the challenges facing the community and to enact a common vision for the future. This update, with its various elements, was finalized in 2019. (The Housing Element was finalized in 2023.)
The Calaveras County General Plan recognizes that water is a limited and valuable resource and that the region is experiencing localized problems with both water supply and quality. To mitigate these issues, the General Plan delineates policies and goals that promote sustainable water resources management in the region (Calaveras County, 2019).
1.2.3.1.3 Stanislaus County General Plan
The Stanislaus County General Plan provides a comprehensive, long-term plan to guide development within the Stanislaus County boundaries through 2035. The General Plan was updated and adopted in 2016 to reflect the evolving conditions of the region. While Stanislaus County’s economic base remains predominantly agricultural, the county's land use and economy continue to diversify in response to increased pressure to convert productive agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. To address the region’s changing water needs, the Stanislaus County General Plan supports goals, policies, and implementation measures that promote sustainable water management and protect the local groundwater sources (Stanislaus County, 2016).
1.2.3.1.4 City of Stockton General Plan
The City of Stockton General Plan establishes the City’s 2040 vision and provides supporting goals, policies, and actions needed to achieve it. The General Plan for the 2040 vision was built upon the prior 2035 Stockton General Plan (adopted in 2007) and was a collaborative process that involved a diverse group of stakeholders and interests. The General Plan update incorporated feedback from City Council study sessions, Planning Commission study sessions, community workshops, and numerous other public meetings and outreach events (City of Stockton, 2016).
The City of Stockton’s General Plan recognizes that groundwater supplies are vital to Stockton’s ability to meet current and future water demands. The city has focused attention on optimizing available surface water supplies and cooperating with agencies in the region to manage the groundwater resources at a sustainable yield and to address regulatory pressures, droughts, and saline intrusion (City of Stockton, 2016).
1.2.3.1.5 City of Lodi General Plan
The City of Lodi General Plan Update, published in 2010, outlines a vision for Lodi’s future and provides a set of policies and programs that guide community growth and development. The 2010 General Plan Update replaced the 1991 General Plan and was informed by input from community members and stakeholders who participated in the planning process through different avenues, including public workshops and meetings, mail surveys, interviews, presentations, and newsletters (City of Lodi, 2010).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-37
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 The General Plan recognizes that groundwater contamination and overdraft in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin can threaten the city’s ability to meet current water demands and limit future development (City of Lodi, 2010).
1.2.3.1.6 City of Manteca General Plan
The City of Manteca adopted the current Manteca General Plan in February 2024 to reflect the current conditions of the city. This recent version updated the 2003 General Plan and was the result of a collaborative process between community members, city staff, and decision-makers to produce a General Plan that is current, progressive, flexible, and viable. The General Plan Update also reevaluates the existing vision for Manteca through 2040, incorporates new planning strategies, and brings the General Plan into compliance with recent social and environmental justice policies and laws (City of Manteca, 2024).
The Manteca General Plan Update recognizes that groundwater is a large source of potable water supply for the city and that the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is in overdraft. To address groundwater overdraft in the city, a significant number of policies in the General Plan promote increased understanding of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
1.2.3.1.7 City of Escalon General Plan
The Escalon General Plan was developed by the city in 1994 and updated in 2010 to reflect the most current conditions of the city and to provide comprehensive planning for future development. The Escalon General Plan was developed through a cooperative effort involving the City Council and Planning Commission, city staff and their consultants, and stakeholders (City of Escalon, 2010). The Escalon General Plan delineates policies that support the long-term preservation of water supplies and water quality in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (City of Escalon, 2010).
1.2.3.1.8 City of Ripon General Plan
The City of Ripon’s General Plan was updated in 2006 to guide the use of private and public lands within the community’s boundaries through 2040. The General Plan update provides a framework for promoting growth and reevaluates where growth should be located. The General Plan development process was informed by community members representing a wide variety of interests, city department heads, and staff representatives of public agencies (City of Ripon, 2006).
The General Plan supports the preservation of groundwater quantity and quality as it is an important source of water supply for the City of Ripon. Future development within the planning area is expected to have minimal effects on groundwater supplies, although it is unknown how development will impact groundwater quality. The General Plan predicts that the City of Ripon may have to abandon a large number of wells as sources of potable water due to localized contamination, and, as a result, additional development may be prohibited until an adequate source of potable water can be identified. Surface water is expected to meet water demands for surrounding agricultural uses (City of Ripon, 2006).
1.2.3.2 Effect of GSP Implementation on Applicable General Plans The General Plans in the Subbasin provide guidelines to facilitate anticipated growth within the sustainable capacity of existing resources. Successful land use planning also promotes sustainable water supply and use within the region.
Due to the complementary nature of the General Plans and the GSP, the goals and policies in the General Plans support the ability of the GSAs to achieve sustainability.
Implementation of the GSP, including changes in groundwater management, may influence the type of land use and location of future development, depending on the level of changes set forth by the GSP, such as enacted programs, plans, and policies. While General Plan implementation may result in land use changes and changes in water consumption, minimal change in water demand is expected from GSP implementation. The potential for future management actions, which could impact water supplies and development, is discussed in Section 6.5. Most of the land within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is currently developed to some use, and conversion from agricultural EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-38
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 uses to urban uses is not anticipated to increase water demand. However, conversion from agriculture to urban use may have an effect on water source, depending on the location in the Subbasin, and may shift supply from groundwater to surface water.
1.2.3.3 Land Use Plans Outside the Plan Area
Land use decisions in neighboring areas experiencing overdraft are likely to affect groundwater conditions in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Ongoing coordination with neighboring groundwater subbasins will include updates on major land use planning that may impact the groundwater system. The cities of Tracy, Lathrop, Modesto, Galt, and Elk Grove are the largest urban areas neighboring the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The portions of the Tracy and the Delta-Mendota Subbasins that are adjacent to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are also located within San Joaquin County. These land use planning areas are covered by the San Joaquin County General Plan described in Section
1.2.3.1.1. The City of Tracy, located within San Joaquin County and the Tracy Subbasin, updated its General Plan in 2011. The City of Tracy General Plan identifies the Tracy Subbasin as a source of water supply for the city. The City of Tracy is working towards reducing its reliance on groundwater and reserving its use for emergency situations and droughts (City of Tracy, 2011).
The City of Lathrop, located within San Joaquin County and the Tracy Subbasin, relies on potable water supplies consisting of a combination of groundwater and treated surface water from the South County Water Supply Program.
The General Plan for the City of Lathrop was first adopted in 1991 and last amended in 2022. The General Plan reflects the city’s long-range aspirations by defining goals and policies for current and future development and by providing guidance on proposed projects.
The City of Modesto, located in Stanislaus County, relies on the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins for its groundwater supplies. The City of Modesto General Plan, last updated in March 2019, identifies historical declining groundwater levels as a result of increased urban demands. While steps have been taken to address groundwater levels, the General Plan calls for continued protection and conservation of groundwater sources while pursuing additional water supplies to meet continued growth (City of Modesto, 2019).
The City of Galt, located in Sacramento County, is on the southern edge of the Cosumnes Subbasin and last updated its General Plan in 2009. Groundwater from the Cosumnes Subbasin is the sole source of water supply for the city.
The General Plan outlines policies to ensure groundwater availability and protection (City of Galt, 2009).
The City of Elk Grove, located in Sacramento County, relies heavily on groundwater from the South American Subbasin. To address years of drought conditions and low precipitation, the City of Elk Grove Draft General Plan outlines several goals and policies to protect groundwater supplies while meeting increased water demands from agricultural production and a growing population (City of Elk Grove, 2018).
1.2.3.4 Well Permitting
On 28 March 2022, Governor Newsom signed Executive Order (EO) N-7-22 to amend prior proclamations of states of emergency due to California’s ongoing drought conditions. EO N-7-22 required that additional steps be taken by well permitting agencies to approve a permit for the construction of a new well or alternation of an existing well located in a medium- or high- priority basin subject to SGMA. For applicable wells, permitting agencies must obtain written verification from the GSA managing the area of the basin where the proposed well is to be located that the well would not conflict with the GSP or decrease the likelihood of the basin reaching its Sustainability Goal. EO N-7-22 was subsequently rescinded once the drought-related state of emergency was lifted.
On 13 February 2023, Governor Newsom signed EO N-3-23 to keep in place some of the provisions originally contained EO N-7-22 One of the provisions retained by EO N-3-23 is the requirement that well permitting agencies not approve a permit for a new well or alteration of an existing well without first obtaining written verification of GSA approval that EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-39
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 groundwater extraction by the proposed well would not be inconsistent with the GSP and the programs it contains. The EO exempts de minimis new wells and new wells that replace existing, actively permitted wells with wells that will produce an equivalent quantity of water when the existing well is being replaced because it has been acquired by eminent domain or while under threat of condemnation.
The Basin GSAs are working with the permitting agencies (i.e., counties) to review and provide written verifications for permit applications within their jurisdictions as required under the EO. As described above, several counties have already amended their well permitting processes to incorporate GSA verification.
1.2.3.4.1 San Joaquin County
San Joaquin County oversees a well permitting program for any new, replacement, back-up, and de minimis well construction. The purpose of this program is to prevent groundwater contamination and safety hazards by regulation of the location, construction, repair, and destruction of water supply, monitoring, and geophysical wells and borings.
Pursuant to Water Code §13808, all new wells that do not meet the exemption criteria must submit additional information prior to the issuance of a permit by the Environmental Health Department. The permit program is enforced by Ordinance Code of San Joaquin County §9-1115, and Municipal Codes of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy, Escalon, and Ripon. Applicants must provide information about groundwater elevation estimates, land elevation estimates, extraction volume estimates, depth of Corcoran Clay, and other basic well characteristics.
San Joaquin County has established water well standards for new wells that define property line setbacks (at least 10 feet depending on well type), casing perforations, gravel packing, well seals, backflow prevention, disinfection requirements, sampling taps, and more, as well as the requirement for installing monitoring device(s) for groundwater extraction, elevation, and/or water quality. Other setbacks for potential sources of contamination or pollution require at least 50 feet depending on the contamination source and well type.
The San Joaquin County Well Standards outline well grouting and construction standards to prevent contamination, pollution, and degradation of water wells and of the groundwater by intrusion of poor-quality water. Wells must have a watertight annular seal near the land surface to keep surface water and other potential contamination out of the well.
The minimum depth of the annular seal depth for wells in San Joaquin County is summarized in Table 1-1 (SJC EHD, 1993).
Table 1-1: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface
for Wells in San Joaquin County
Well Type Feet
Public Water Supplies 100
Individual Domestic Well 100
Industrial Wells 100
Agricultural Wells 50
In response to EO N-3-23, San Joaquin County updated its well permitting process to require applicants to fill out either a Well Exemption Statement (for exempt wells) or a New Well Information Form (for non-exempt wells). For non-exempt wells, the New Well Information Form is forwarded with the rest of the application to the applicable GSA for review and consideration for a written verification.
1.2.3.4.2 Calaveras County
The Calaveras County Board of Supervisors adopted a well construction and destruction ordinance in 1998. The ordinance mandates that a permit must be obtained from the Calaveras County Environmental Health Department prior to development or modification of any well within the Calaveras County boundaries. The purpose of the program is to regulate the construction, alteration, abandonment, and destruction of wells such that groundwater will not be EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-40
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 contaminated and that groundwater supplies will not jeopardize the health, safety, or welfare of Calaveras County residents.
To prevent polluted or contaminated water from entering the well, the well program established a minimum depth at which the annular space should be filled as well as minimum horizontal setback requirements. Horizontal setbacks from property lines range from 10 feet (for small parcels) to 150 feet (for underground storage with nearby wells at least 25 feet away). The minimum annular seal depths for wells in Calaveras County are summarized in Table 1-2 (Calaveras County Board of Supervisors, 2008).
Table 1-2: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface for Wells in Calaveras County Well Type Feet
Public drinking water well 50
Commercial well 50
Industrial well 50
Individual domestic well 20
Agricultural well 20
Vertical geothermal exchange wells 20
Wells within 25 feet of a water way 20 feet below the bed of the water way In response to EO N-3-23, Calaveras County updated its well permitting process to require applicants to fill out either a Well Exemption Statement (for exempt wells) or a New Well Information Form (for non-exempt wells). For nonexempt wells, the New Well Information Form is forwarded with the rest of the application to the applicable GSA for review and consideration for a written verification.
1.2.3.4.3 Stanislaus County
Pursuant to Chapter 9.36 of the Stanislaus County Code, well owners must first receive a valid permit from Stanislaus County to construct, install, repair, or destroy any well or well seal within the county. Stanislaus County DER is responsible for reviewing the applications and issuing permits. On April 5, 2022, the county adopted the “Stanislaus County Groundwater Well Siting and Construction Guidelines,” which prescribed well annular seal depths to be more protective than current standards, with special requirements to address local hydrogeologic conditions and know water quality issues. The default minimum seal depth was increased from 20-50 feet to 50-80 feet and deeper seals are specified that exceed the state well standards, (CA DWR, 1991), to provide additional protection under locally variable conditions. Standards for seal depths were identified for the safe construction of all wells to prevent the intermixing of water between the upper zone and underlying aquifers.
In 2014, the DER adopted a groundwater ordinance to prohibit unsustainable extraction of groundwater in unincorporated areas of the county. The DER reviews each well permit application and determines whether the well is subject to, or exempt from, the prohibitions in the Groundwater Ordinance. Permit applications for wells intended to extract 2 AF/year of groundwater or less are exempt from the prohibitions in the groundwater ordinance (Stanislaus County, 2019b). If the permit applicant is not exempt, a supplemental application for non-exempt wells must be submitted and demonstrate that the groundwater pumped from the well will be sustainably extracted and will not cause any of the “Undesirable Results” listed in Section 9.37.030 (9) of the ordinance. Additional permit application fees may be required, and the application review is conducted at the expense of the applicant (Stanislaus County, 2019c).
In response to EO N-3-23, Stanislaus County updated its well permitting process to refer applicable well permits to the GSAs for approval. If a GSA finds that a well permit application is not consistent with requirements in its GSP to prevent Undesirable Results, the applicant must provide substantial evidence that the proposed extraction is will not cause or contribute to their occurrence in accordance with Stanislaus County’s Discretionary Well Permitting Implementation Guidelines.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-41
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 The minimum annular seal depths for wells in Stanislaus County are summarized in Table 1-3, and are consistent with the state well standards (CA DWR, 1991).
Table 1-3: Minimum Depth of Seal Below Ground Surface for Wells in Stanislaus County Special Management Area Feet
Corcoran clay area upper zone 50 – 80
Corcoran clay area lower zone at least 10 feet into Corcoran clay below the upper zone Alluvial fan upper zone 50 – 80
Alluvial fan lower zone 50 – 80 or at least 10 feet into a competent clay layer below the upper zone
Fractured bedrock 50 or into the first solid rock stratum below the water table or to prevent the vertical migration of pollution Wells completed in setback zones Qualified Professional required Wells completed in areas with
potential lower zone contamination
Qualified Professional required
1.2.3.4.4 Sacramento County
Sacramento County, which borders the northern boundary of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (see Figure 1-6), oversees well permitting within their jurisdiction and requires property owners to obtain a permit for work including well construction, modification, repair, inactivation, destruction, installation, and replacement. Each well or pump requires its own permit application and fee, but waivers can be considered for multiple wells or exploratory borings of similar construction (Sacramento County, 2019).
The Sacramento County Code water well standards are designed to meet or exceed the water well standards in DWR’s Bulletin 74-81 and 74-90. These standards apply to all types of monitoring wells, vapor extraction wells where applicable, and any other well installed in an area where special precautions are necessary to protect groundwater quality. The Sacramento County Environmental Management Department has the power under special circumstances to grant a variance from provisions in Chapter 6.28 of the Sacramento County Code and to prescribe alternative requirements in their place (Sacramento County, 2019).
The minimum annular seal depth for wells in Sacramento County is 50 feet for all well types, except for in cases of special approval (Sacramento County, 2019).
1.2.4 Additional GSP Elements
The Additional GSP Elements section of the GSP provides GSAs with the opportunity to discuss “any additional Plan elements included in Water Code §10727.4 that the Agency determined to be appropriate”. These additional elements include:
• Control of saline water intrusion
• Wellhead protection areas and recharge areas
• Migration of contaminated groundwater
• A well abandonment and well destruction program
• Replenishment of groundwater extractions
• Activities implementing, opportunities for, and removing impediments to, conjunctive use or underground storage
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-42
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Well construction policies
• Measures addressing groundwater contamination cleanup, groundwater recharge, in-lieu use, diversions to storage, conservation, water recycling, conveyance, and extraction projects • Efficient water management practices, as defined in Water Code §10902, for the delivery of water and water conservation methods to improve the efficiency of water use • Efforts to develop relationships with state and federal regulatory agencies • Processes to review land use plans and efforts to coordinate with land use planning agencies to assess activities that potentially create risks to groundwater quality or quantity • Impacts on groundwater dependent ecosystems
Each of the Additional Elements listed are relevant and important to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, and are discussed throughout this GSP, as identified below.
Control of saline water intrusion – Section 2.2.3 describes the current status of saline water intrusion in the Subbasin.
Section 3.2.4 addresses seawater intrusion as a sustainability indicator. Actions to identify and monitor for saline water intrusion is described in Section 3.3.3.
Wellhead protection areas and recharge areas – Section 1.2.3.4 addresses wellhead protection programs in San Joaquin County, Calaveras County, and Stanislaus County.
Migration of contaminated groundwater – The migration of contaminated groundwater that may impair water supplies is addressed in Section 3.3.3.
A well abandonment and well destruction program – Requirements and procedures for well destruction and abandonment are discussed in Section 1.2.3.4.
Replenishment of groundwater extractions – Proposed projects and management actions that will facilitate replenishment of groundwater extraction are discussed in Chapter 6: Projects and Management Actions. Areas where potential groundwater replenishment could occur through direct recharge are described in Section 2.1.4.5.
Activities implementing, opportunities for, and removing impediments to, conjunctive use or underground storage – Existing conjunctive use projects are identified in Section 1.2.2.9. The proposed projects and management actions that will address implementing, opportunities for, and removing impediments to, conjunctive use or underground storage projects in the Subbasin are discussed in Chapter 6: Projects and Management Actions.
Well construction policies – Section 1.2.3.4 addresses well construction policies in San Joaquin County, Calaveras County, and Stanislaus County. Annular well seal depth requirements are tabulated in Tables 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3.
Measures addressing groundwater contamination cleanup, groundwater recharge, in-lieu use, diversions to storage, conservation, water recycling, conveyance, and extraction projects – Proposed projects and management actions that address groundwater recharge, in-lieu use, diversions to storage, conservation, and water recycling are discussed in Chapter 6: Projects and Management Actions.
Efficient water management practices, as defined in Section 10902, for the delivery of water and water conservation methods to improve the efficiency of water use – Ongoing efforts to implement efficient water management practices are described in Section 1.2.2.7. Conservation methods and efficiency of water use are also noted in many local or regional general plans, detailed in Section 1.2.3. Projects relevant to this topic are discussed in Chapter 6: Projects and Management Actions.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-43
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Efforts to develop relationships with state and federal regulatory agencies – A strong relationship between the GSAs and existing regulatory agencies is valuable to the success of this GSP. Efforts to develop this relationship are described in Chapter 7: Plan Implementation.
Processes to review land use plans and efforts to coordinate with land use planning agencies to assess activities that potentially create risks to groundwater quality or quantity – Summaries of land use plans both inside the Subbasin and in nearby Subbasins can be found in Section 1.2.3. Efforts are being made at the local level to develop a formal opportunity for GSAs to provide input on the land use and water-related elements of future General Plans and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation to promote consistency with the GSP.
Impacts on groundwater dependent ecosystems – Groundwater dependent ecosystems (GDEs) are defined in Section 2.2.7. The methodology for identifying GDEs can be found in Section 2.2.7.1. A map of identified GDEs in the Subbasin is shown in Section 2.2.7.2. Adverse impacts to GDEs are described under Depletions of Interconnected Surface Water, Section 3.3.6, as part of the undesirable results discussion.
1.3 NOTICE AND COMMUNICATION
1.3.1 Beneficial Uses and Users in the Basin
The CVRWQCB designates all groundwaters in the Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin as suitable or potentially suitable, at a minimum, for municipal and domestic water supply, agricultural supply, industrial service supply, and industrial process supply (CVRWQCB, 2016).
As listed in Water Code §10723.2, beneficial uses and users of groundwater in the region include the following interests:
• Agricultural users and domestic well owners that hold overlying groundwater rights. • Public water systems/municipal well operators in the Subbasin. • Community water systems (wells serving 15 or more connections or more than 25 people per day). 433 community water systems were identified in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and are presented in Appendix 1-E Of these 433 community water systems, 182 are located in DAC or SDAC areas, shown also in Appendix 1-E.
• Local agencies that have land use planning jurisdiction. These include counties of San Joaquin, Calaveras, and Stanislaus, and cities of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Escalon, and Ripon. • Environmental users of groundwater, including species and habitat reliant on instream flows, as well as wetlands and GDEs. Identified GDEs are mapped in Figure 2-69 in Section 2.2.7.2. Freshwater species in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are listed in Appendix 1-G. • Irrigation districts in the Subbasin that divert surface water to deliver to their customers. • Lands managed by the federal government. The San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge lies just outside of the Subbasin boundary. While managed by the State of California, Caswell Memorial SP is in the Subbasin and Carnegie SVRA and Franks Tract SRA are situated just outside of the Subbasin. • DACs and SDACs. DACs and SDACs are mapped in Figure 1-8 and are primarily in the western portions of the Subbasin. Approximately 27 percent of the Subbasin area is considered disadvantaged and 5.4 percent is considered severely disadvantaged. 33 percent of the Subbasin population is considered either DAC or SDAC; within that, 16.5 percent of the population is SDAC. DACs include the following census designated EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-44
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 places (CDPs)1: Stockton City CDP, Terminous CDP, Taft Mosswood CDP, and French Camp CDP. Severely disadvantaged communities include: Kennedy CDP, August CDP, Garden Acres CDP, and Thornton CDP. • Entities that monitor and report groundwater elevations. Monitoring in the Subbasin is extensive. A list of monitoring agencies can be found in Section 1.2.2.
• California Native American tribes
1.3.2 List of Public Meetings Where the 2024 GSP was Discussed During the 2024 update of the ESJ GSP, meetings of the ESJGWA Board and Steering Committee were open to the public with meeting information noticed, as appropriate, and posted to the ESJGWA website (discussed below in Section 1.3.4.2.2). In addition, public meetings and an informational open house event were held throughout the GSP update process (see Section1.3.4.2.4).
Below is a list of the public meetings where elements of this 2024 GSP Amendment were discussed.
Meeting Type Date
Steering Committee Meeting November 8, 2023
Steering Committee Meeting December 13, 2023
ESJGWA Board Meeting January 10, 2024
Steering Committee Meeting March 13, 2024
ESJGWA Board Meeting March 13, 2024
Steering Committee Meeting April 10, 2024
ESJGWA Board Meeting June 12, 2024
Stakeholder Advisory Workgroup
Meeting #1
June 27, 2024
Stakeholder Advisory Workgroup
Meeting #2
July 17, 2024
Steering Committee Meeting August 14, 2024
ESJGWA Board Meeting August 14, 2024
1 A census designated place is a concentration of population identified by the United States Census Bureau for statistical purposes. CDPs are delineated for each decennial census as the statistical counterparts of incorporated places, such as cities, towns, and villages.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-45
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Meeting Type Date
Steering Committee Meeting September 11, 2024
GSA Open House September 25, 2024
ESJGWA Board Meeting December 11, 2024
1.3.3 Decision-Making Process
The ESJGWA Board is tasked with the vote and approval of policy decisions for the development and implementation of this GSP. The ESJGWA Board receives input from the Steering Committee, the PMC, and the public, as described in Section 1.1.4.2.
The governing bodies of each of the individual GSAs take action and provide direction to their Board member representatives and must individually adopt the final GSP Amendment. Projects will be administered by the GSA project proponents. Although the ESJGWA does not provide direct authority to require GSAs to implement projects, the ESJGWA will be working on GSA-level water budgets and evaluating the best ways to evaluate progress. Work toward implementing projects and management actions is further described in Sections 6.2 and 6.3, respectively. If the implementation of projects is not sufficient to achieve sustainability goals, a demand management policy, included as a management action in the 2024 GSP Amendment, provides a framework for how the GSAs of the Subbasin plan to achieve sustainability through other means. A description of the agencies that comprise the GSAs can be found in Section 1.1.4.3.
1.3.4 Opportunities for Public Engagement and How Public Input was Used Throughout the process of the initial development of the GSP and this particular update, the ESJGWA engaged both stakeholders and the public. This effort has been greatly aided by the facilitation support provided through DWR’s Facilitation Support Services Program. In some cases, outreach and engagement opportunities were specific to the initial development of the 2020 GSP; these are detailed in Section 1.3.4.1. In other cases, outreach and engagement opportunities began during the 2020 GSP development process and have been adapted or modified for this 2024 GSP Amendment; these are discussed in Section 1.3.4.2.
1.3.4.1 Opportunities Specific to the 2020 GSP Development Process
1.3.4.1.1 Groundwater Sustainability Workgroup
When developing the initial 2020 GSP, the ESJGWA convened a Workgroup in order to promote stakeholder input and relied upon the Workgroup when developing the 2020 GSP. The Workgroup began with an application process to ensure a diverse cross section of populations were represented to serve on the Workgroup. Workgroup members participated and provided valuable input throughout the 2020 GSP development process.
Applications were distributed to organizations within every GSA to establish a Workgroup that represented the region’s broad interests, perspectives, and geography. The Workgroup included members from a variety of organizations who represent one or more of the interested parties’ groups. Table 1-4 lists the organizations and interests represented on the Workgroup. While this Workgroup was not active during the 2024 GSP amendment process, the information collected during their involvement remains relevant and a guiding factor in this update and GSP implementation activities.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-46
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Table 1-4: Groundwater Sustainability Workgroup Interests (Collected During Development of 2020 GSP) Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Groundwater
Sustainability Workgroup – Interests Represented
AG Agricultural Community BUS Business
CM Neighborhood DAC Disadvantaged Communities
ENV Environmental INST Institutional
FM Flood Management NA Native American
GU Groundwater User
Role/Organization AG BUS CM DAC ENV FM GU INST NA Application Notes 2Q Farming ✓ ✓ ✓
2Q Farming is interested in making a
difference for agriculture and communities,
and in preserving water rights for future
generations so they will have the ability to
irrigate and access the water necessary for
life.
Agricultural Business – Farmer
Representative
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
As a representative of agricultural business,
this member sees SGMA as an opportunity to
manage the Subbasin while keeping
jurisdiction, implementation, monitoring, and
oversight at the local level.
Calaveras County Resource
Conservation District ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Calaveras County RCD hopes to partner with
groundwater users in the western part of
Calaveras County to address sustainability
and recharge.
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
California Sportfishing Protection Alliance,
longtime Mokelumne River stakeholder, is
interested in reducing groundwater overdraft,
managing surface water responsibly, and
resolving longstanding conflicts.
Representative is interested in the technical
aspects of groundwater management and
gaining a better understanding of recharge.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-47
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Groundwater
Sustainability Workgroup – Interests Represented
AG Agricultural Community BUS Business
CM Neighborhood DAC Disadvantaged Communities
ENV Environmental INST Institutional
FM Flood Management NA Native American
GU Groundwater User
Role/Organization AG BUS CM DAC ENV FM GU INST NA Application Notes Catholic Charities of the Diocese of
Stockton
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
The Environmental Justice Program of the
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Stockton
works with disadvantaged communities.
Some of these communities have concerns
regarding drinking water quality and toxic
contamination of groundwater supplies.
Environmental Justice Coalition for Water ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water
is interested in ensuring that environmental
justice interests are present, informed, and
meaningfully engaged in a process that bears
considerable importance for health, wealth,
and growth.
J.R. Simplot Co. ✓ ✓ ✓
As a local industry representative with a stake
in groundwater quality, this representative
sees benefit in being part of the stakeholder
process.
Lima Ranch ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Lima Ranch views water as a precious
commodity that must be conserved and used
sustainably. Representative values preserving
water rights and using water efficiently.
Machado Family Farms ✓ ✓ ✓
Representative manages a family farm and
brings agricultural experience and experience
with the California Public Utilities Commission
to provide a balanced perspective.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-48
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Groundwater
Sustainability Workgroup – Interests Represented
AG Agricultural Community BUS Business
CM Neighborhood DAC Disadvantaged Communities
ENV Environmental INST Institutional
FM Flood Management NA Native American
GU Groundwater User
Role/Organization AG BUS CM DAC ENV FM GU INST NA Application Notes Manufacturers Council of the Central Valley ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Through their involvement as a stakeholder,
Manufacturer's Council of the Central Valley
provides resources to manufacturers
impacted by the implementation of GSPs and
to GSAs looking to work with the sector.
Restore the Delta ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Representative is interested in the link
between surface water flows for the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and
groundwater management. Additionally, this
member brings connections for broad
environmental justice outreach.
San Joaquin Audubon ✓
San Joaquin Audubon is interested in overall
water use and environmental issues.
San Joaquin County Environmental Health
Department
✓ ✓ ✓
The San Joaquin County Environmental
Health Department plays a role in protecting
the area's groundwater resource, drinking
water, and public health.
San Joaquin Farm Bureau ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
The San Joaquin Farm Bureau is interested in
helping manage and utilize the groundwater
reservoir to better supply all needs for the
short and long term.
Sequoia ForestKeeper ✓
Sequoia ForestKeeper has been submitting
comments on water-related issues to the
SWRCB since 2015.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-49
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Groundwater
Sustainability Workgroup – Interests Represented
AG Agricultural Community BUS Business
CM Neighborhood DAC Disadvantaged Communities
ENV Environmental INST Institutional
FM Flood Management NA Native American
GU Groundwater User
Role/Organization AG BUS CM DAC ENV FM GU INST NA Application Notes Sierra Club - Delta-Sierra Group ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Sierra Club cares about the future of the
Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and
sustainability. They believe that
representation of individuals is lacking and
there is insufficient outreach.
Spring Creek Golf & Country Club ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Representative is golf course superintendent
at Spring Creek Golf & Country Club and is
interested in groundwater rights and
contributing to the stakeholder Workgroup.
The Hartmann Law Firm ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Representative is Advisory Water
Commissioner, District Counsel for multiple
reclamation districts.
The Wine Group ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
The Wine Group has technical knowledge
and provides a unique viewpoint that supports
the successful development of a GSP for the
Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
Trinchero Family Estates and Sutter Home
Winery
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Trinchero Family Estates and Sutter Home
Winery is interested in helping develop a
balanced approach for communities and
businesses.
University of the Pacific ✓ ✓ ✓
Representative is an Emeritus Professor of
Operations/Engineering Management at the
University of the Pacific and is engaged in
research on stream flow diversion for
groundwater recharge.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-50
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024
1.3.4.1.2 Situation Assessment
During development of the initial 2020 GSP, the ESJGWA applied for and received facilitation support through DWR’s Facilitation Support Services Program to conduct a Situation Assessment, the purpose of which was to facilitate the stakeholder engagement process by determining stakeholder concerns related to the GSP development process. The facilitation services supported third-party interviews conducted with the members of the Workgroup in the winter of 2018 as part of the Situation Assessment. All Workgroup members were invited to participate in the Situation Assessment, and 17 were interviewed during a series of in-person and phone interview sessions. Assessment summary and highlights are available on the ESJGWA website.
Situation Assessment questions covered topics including:
• Outreach and engagement approach
• Meeting presentations
• Meeting discussions
• Strengthening the Workgroup process
• Decision making and input
• GSP development and plan content
• Resource and management conditions data
• Implementation considerations
Based on Situation Assessment findings, changes were made to the 2020 GSP development process, including meeting presentations and discussions, the draft GSP, and its review schedule.
1.3.4.2 Continuing Opportunities for Public Engagement
The sections below detail the opportunities for public engagement that were specific to this 2024 GSP Amendment.
Many began with the development of the initial 2020 GSP and have been continued and modified as appropriate to fit the needs of this particular GSP Amendment process.
1.3.4.2.1 Communication and Engagement Plan
With the support of the Workgroup, the ESJGWA developed an initial Stakeholder Outreach and Engagement Plan in June 2018 during the development of the 2020 GSP. This plan was updated as part of the 2024 GSP amendment process and renamed the Eastern San Joaquin Communication and Engagement Plan (C&E Plan). The ESJGWA supported the update of this Plan (see Appendix 1-H) for the San Joaquin Subbasin, which details communications and engagement recommendations for GSAs to consider as the GSP continues to be implemented and the needs of interested parties in the region evolves. The original goals of the Outreach and Engagement Plan are still relevant in the recent iterations of this plan:
• Keep interested list of stakeholders informed and aware of opportunities for involvement through email communications and/or their preferred mode of communication • Engage DWR for facilitated support to aid in the development of the GSP • Open ESJGWA planning efforts to the public with agendas and meeting minutes published on the ESJGWA website
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-51
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Inform and obtain comments from the general public through public meetings held on an approximately quarterly basis
• Facilitate productive dialogue among participants at Advisory Committee, Workgroup, and public meetings through the use of qualified facilitators to obtain, consider, and integrate feedback accordingly throughout the planning process
• Seek the input of interest groups during the implementation of the GSP and any future planning efforts • Obtain input about preferred locations to conduct public informational meetings to reach diverse audiences and disadvantaged communities
• Provide timely and accurate public reporting of planning milestones through the distribution of outreach materials and posting of materials on the ESJGWA website for the GSP • Secure quality media coverage that is accurate, complete, and fair • Maintain an active communications tracking tool to capture stakeholder engagement and public outreach activities and to demonstrate the reporting of GSP outreach activities The ESJGWA used various methods to engage with and solicit input from interested parties during the 2020 GSP development process. In order to evolve the updated C&E Plan with the needs of the community, the development process started with a review of previously established commitments made by Subbasin GSAs and the ESJGWA in various SGMA-related documents and by the needs and ideas presented by interested parties. Seven individual or small group interviews were conducted between March and July of 2023 with key interested parties in the Subbasin to gather feedback on communication and engagement strategies taken during GSP implementation. Interviewees represented diverse interests, including disadvantaged communities, municipal and industrial, agricultural, domestic well, and those representing environmental water users.
Gaps or inefficiencies throughout GSP implementation were identified, showing a consistent lack of adequate support in key areas:
• Concerns over Demand Management Program: Respondents expressed concerns about potential demand reduction strategies that could be overly restrictive and disruptive to their lives and livelihoods. • Lack of Clarity on Sustainability Approaches: There was a perceived lack of clear answers and progress regarding long-term sustainability approaches.
• Cost Concerns: High water management costs and increased water rates were a concern, indicating a lack of public understanding around GSAs approach to funding. • Bureaucratic Processes: Respondents noted overly bureaucratic processes that might limit the effectiveness of the GSAs and the ESJGWA if things escalate beyond the local level. • Lack of Consistency and Transparency: There was a significant lack of consistency and transparency, particularly in how, where, and when GSAs share information and engage with each other and the public.
In order to address these key areas, the C&E Plan details the following strategies that could be implemented or expanded:
• Communications and Engagement Tracker: A strategy that involves the GSAs establishing a record-keeping system to catalogue the type and timing of outreach activities, enhancing their level of organization and compliance with requirements, with the support of the ESJGWA where necessary and feasible.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-52
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Outreach Toolkit: A comprehensive approach by the GSAs to create a suite of standardized outreach materials and a library of relevant guides, aiming to ensure consistent messaging and best practices in communications and engagement, with the support and coordination of the ESJGWA. • Interested Parties Database: GSAs create a shared and comprehensive database, supported by the ESJGWA, to distribute information tailored to different jurisdictions and audiences, with the database managed by a third-party platform for easy maintenance, access, and tracking of public engagement. • Targeted Outreach: GSAs, in compliance with applicable regulations, implement specific efforts to identify, contact, educate, and engage with underrepresented groundwater users and non-English speakers on groundwater resource management, with coordination and collaboration support from the ESJGWA. • Workgroups and Committees: GSAs, in compliance with applicable regulations, consider establishing a committee or workgroup focused on small and underrepresented communities to engage on well protection and other related projects affecting these groundwater users, with support from the ESJGWA, • Native American Heritage Commission: GSAs submit and receive a Tribal and Sacred Land tribal contact list to the Native American Heritage Commission, ensuring they stay informed and in contact with recognized Indigenous communities in the region, a core component of inclusive engagement, especially for project implementation, with support from the ESJGWA
• Website Management: GSAs, in compliance with applicable regulations, establish and maintain web pages on their own or the ESJGWA websites, containing clear and accessible information, updates, and resources related to groundwater management, with the choice of management depending on the GSAs’ comfort and discretion.
• Enterprise Management System Management and Transparency: GSAs and/or the ESJGWA, in compliance with applicable regulations, maintain a catalog of data management systems and publish their methodology for maintaining and using the collected data, ensuring full transparency. • Comment Portal: GSAs and/or the ESJGWA, in compliance with applicable regulations, establish, maintain, and respond to public comments through an email contact portal, which collects data on the commenter and allows for categorization of comments, with links to the portal clearly available on their websites. • Funding and Financing: ESJGWA, in compliance with applicable regulations, coordinate with its member agencies to evaluate funding, grant, or in-kind support resources for facilitation, media relations, or outreach coordination services, supporting the addition of new staff or a dedicated outreach coordinator for the Subbasin to enhance communications and engagement efforts related to GSP implementation. • Outreach Coordinator: Recommendation to contract with an outreach coordinator to assist the ESJGWA and its member agencies with the tactics listed in the C&E Framework and any other ongoing communications and engagement efforts in the Subbasin, in compliance with all applicable codes and regulations.
1.3.4.2.2 ESJGWA Website
The ESJGWA website has been online since 2018 and continues to be maintained on a regular basis at www.esjgroundwater.org. It contains an introduction to SGMA, details on member agencies, and ESJGWA Board updates with meeting information and materials posted regularly. There are detailed sections for GSP resources, technical reports and data, educational materials, and meeting notices with the accompanying presentation materials and minutes. A section of the website is devoted to press releases, newsletters, public notices, and other major events and accomplishments. Contact information is readily available for interested parties to communicate with ESJGWA members and staff, and members of the public can subscribe to the ESJGWA mailing list to receive updates on GSP EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-53
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 development and outreach events. Improvements to the website itself and the approach for its use will be continuously updated to meet the public engagement goals of the Subbasin.
1.3.4.2.3 Stakeholder Database
The ESJGWA developed a database of stakeholders who represent the region’s interests, perspectives, and geography. The database was developed by leveraging existing stakeholder lists and databases from prior Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin engagement efforts, conducting new research, and obtaining referrals from key stakeholders and stakeholder groups.
During the initial development of the stakeholder database, the ESJGWA worked with those responsible for implementing the GSP to obtain contact lists of interested parties within the Subbasin as well as other diverse contact lists they maintain.
This robust stakeholder list of interested parties includes, but is not limited to, the following:
• Community water systems
• Agricultural well owners
• Domestic well owners
• Municipal well operators
• Groundwater users (including agricultural)
• Local land use planning agencies
• Government agencies
• Nonprofit organizations
• Environmental organizations
• Higher education institutions
• Community based organizations
• Neighborhood organizations
• California Native American Tribes
• Disadvantaged communities
• Private citizens
The Stakeholder Database has been regularly updated by adding additional parties who expressed interest at public meetings and through website signups. Contacts were updated or removed as needed. The database continues to serve as the foundation for targeted outreach and communication and was also used to:
• Provide a single repository to collect, store, and organize information on Subbasin stakeholders • Allow individuals to self-identify their SGMA interests when they sign up as an interested stakeholder • Identify the interests and concerns of organization contacts and individual stakeholders EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-54
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Plan meetings and send notices to stakeholders based upon their identified interests and role • Document all stakeholders invited to GSP development meetings and their primary input at the meetings • Post meeting agendas and minutes
• Produce communication and engagement summary reports
Table 1-5 provides a summary breakdown of the number of parties and interests represented in the Stakeholder Database.
Table 1-5: Stakeholder Database Summary
Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Authority Stakeholder Database Interest Represented Number of Stakeholders
Government Agency (i.e. County, State) 64
Business (i.e. Consultant, Local Business, Legal
Representation) 41
Nonprofit (i.e. Environmental Organization, Thinktank) 5 Higher Education 3
Community Based Organization (i.e. Farm Bureau) 2
Water Purveyors (i.e. Public Utilities, Irrigation Districts) 77 No Affiliation Provided 93
Total 285
Outreach materials promoting informational open house events were distributed via email to the stakeholder database, and hard copies were distributed to this list throughout implementation process since the 2020 GSP.
The following section describes the stakeholder education and outreach activities completed during the development of the 2024 GSP Amendment.
1.3.4.2.4 Stakeholder Education and Outreach
Recognizing that an inclusive outreach and education process supports the success of a well-prepared GSP, the ESJGWA has prioritized stakeholder involvement and outreach in plan development and implementation, dedicating staff and financial resources for this high‐priority effort. • The ESJGWA held two public Stakeholder Advisory Workgroup (SAW) meetings and one informational open house event devoted to SGMA outreach and providing information to the public on the 2024 GSP Amendment development process. The purpose was to provide participants with information on GSP development, seek feedback from stakeholders and the public, provide a forum for the public to interact with their GSA representatives, and address questions in a transparent manner. These events were held on an approximately quarterly basis in different locations throughout the Subbasin, as listed below. o June 26, 2024 – Robert J. Cabral Agricultural Center, Stockton (23 attendees) o July 17, 2024 – Robert J. Cabral Agricultural Center, Stockton (18 attendees) o September 25, 2024 – Robert J. Cabral Agricultural Center, Stockton (40 attendees) • Additionally, GSA member agencies hosted local informational community meetings related to the SGMA process and to publicize the release of the Public Draft GSP for public comment.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-55
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Individually, member GSAs provided targeted outreach materials to their constituencies through the distribution of outreach and informational materials
• Community events, including guided tours of facilities for the community, grower outreach meetings, and a tour for community leaders, were held to promote recharge projects and plans, and discuss challenges. • Member GSAs provided SGMA and project related updates to their Boards and other leadership bodies, including the Water Advisory Committee and the Linden-Peters Chamber of Commerce. • Factsheets, email announcements, and newsletters were used to raise awareness about topics and events relevant to the GSP and SGMA.
• Social media channels, such Facebook, were used to distribute targeted information relevant to SGMA, the GSP, and specific projects.
• Comment cards, provided in postcard format at the public informational open house, allowed the public and stakeholders to contribute written comments, solicit additional information, make suggestions, and submit other feedback as appropriate.
1.3.4.2.5 Incorporation of Stakeholder Feedback
The development of this GSP was informed and supported by stakeholder feedback, which was documented, addressed, and incorporated at numerous points throughout the development process. The public was invited to provide input at each Steering Committee and ESJGWA Board meeting. Information provided for GSP development was refined based on input from public meetings. Stakeholder involvement was additionally supported through the two public meetings and the open house held in September 2024 to solicit input on the draft Amended GSP from a wide range of beneficial users of groundwater in the Subbasin. Questions raised by participants at these meetings were addressed and, as needed, follow-up content presented and discussed at subsequent meetings.
In addition to influencing GSP development and decisions related to groundwater management, feedback from stakeholders played a key role in enhancing education and outreach efforts, and the stakeholder involvement process more broadly. Interviews in the initial stages of the C&E Plan development and survey responses received during the later stages, both provided valuable insight into how engagement can be improved. The second in-person SAW meeting also yielded some feedback, centering on two areas. • How to fund efforts toward sustainability, both at the GSA level and the ESJGWA level. • How to increase involvement of more diverse interests beyond water managers.
1.3.4.2.6 Draft 2024 GSP Amendment Public Comment Review Period The Public Draft 2024 GSP Amendment was posted on the ESJGWA website for a 31-day public comment period from October 1, 2024 through October 31, 2024. Notices and press releases were provided in English and Spanish publicizing the public comment period and inviting members of the public to attend the September 2024 informational open house event for more information. This event was scheduled to align with the release of the Public Draft 2024 GSP Amendment to provide a forum for the public to receive information, ask questions, and provide input. Hard copies were made available upon request.
The ESJGWA received 52 public comment submissions from a range of interested parties, including non-government organizations, neighboring subbasins, ESJGWA GSAs, state and federal agencies, and others. These individuals and organizations are listed below, and comments are provided in Appendix 1-I. • Barton Ranch, Inc.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-56
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • Calaveras County Water District
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• City of Stockton
• Sierra Club, Delta-Sierra Group
• NV5
• Restore the Delta
The PMC was responsible for reviewing and summarizing public comments, and drafting proposed response to comment recommendations for approval by the ESJGWA Board. The ESJGWA’s responses to comments are provided in Appendix 1-J.
1.3.5 Inter-basin Coordination
As part of the SGMA process, stakeholder outreach includes inter-basin coordination efforts. To date, ESJGWA has participated in the San Joaquin Valley Point of Contacts (SJC POC) meetings hosted quarterly, as well as initial introductory meetings with its neighboring subbasins. Given that the ESJ Subbasin was the first of its neighbors to submit a plan, the majority of neighboring basins were not in a position to begin meaningful coordination until recently.
There have been discussions about the establishment of annual meetings between representatives of the ESJGWA and the neighboring subbasins to begin a more formal coordination process. The purpose of these coordination meetings will be to share and discuss elements relevant to the subbasins, including water budget estimates, boundary flow assumptions, shared interconnected surface waters, and minimum thresholds.
A summary of the initial inter-basin coordination meetings with neighboring subbasins is below. • Cosumnes Subbasin – April 15, 2019
• Tracy Subbasin – June 20, 2019
• Modesto Subbasin – July 10, 2019
• South American, Solano, and East Contra Costa Subbasins – July 19, 2019 • Tracy Subbasin – September 25, 2024
To establish these annual coordination meetings, the ESJGWA plans to reach out to neighboring subbasins as part of GSP implementation to set more formal coordination between neighboring subbasins.
1.3.6 Notice of Intent to Adopt the GSP
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt a GSP was signed by the Plan Manager on behalf of the GSAs and distributed on July 24, 2024. The NOI was posted to the ESJGWA website homepage and hard copies were mailed cities and counties within the Subbasin, including the following:
• County of Calaveras
• County of Stanislaus
• County of San Joaquin
• City of Escalon
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 1-57
Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication November 2024 • City of Manteca
• City of Ripon
• City of Stockton
The signed NOI is provided in Appendix 1-K.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Amended Groundwater Sustainability Plan 2-1
Basin Setting November 2024
2. BASIN SETTING
This Basin Setting chapter contains three main sections as follows:
• Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model – Section 2.1 (Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model) provides the geologic information needed to understand the framework under which water moves through the Subbasin. It focuses on geologic formations, aquifers, structural features, and topography. • Current and Historical Groundwater Conditions – Section 2.2 (Historical Groundwater Conditions) and Section 2.3 (Current Groundwater Conditions) describe and present groundwater trends, levels, hydrographs and level contour maps, estimated changes in groundwater in storage, identify groundwater quality issues, address land subsidence, and address surface water interconnection. • Water Budgets – Section 2.4 (Water Budgets) describes the data used to develop the water budget. This section also discusses how the water budgets were calculated and provides water budget estimates for historical conditions, current conditions, and projected conditions.
2.1 HYDROGEOLOGIC CONCEPTUAL MODEL
2.1.1 Data Compilation
This section describes the hydrogeologic conceptual model (HCM) for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin (Subbasin), as was included in the 2020 Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) and reconsidered during the 2024 Periodic Evaluation. The regulatory framework is based on the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 23 § 354.14. The HCM presents the physical characteristics used to define water movement throughout the Subbasin.
Data supporting development of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin HCM is available to the public from a variety of local, state, and federal agencies, as well as from non-governmental entities. The data presented herein were compiled from numerous studies conducted in the eastern portion of the San Joaquin Valley (SJV). Information from several online databases that support ongoing monitoring and development of the groundwater resources within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and across California were amassed, digitized, evaluated, and reconfigured in support of the HCM. Most information was compiled during the development of the 2020 GSP. Where new data available between 2020 and 2024 provide additional information to the HCM, it has been incorporated into this chapter. New data support the original understanding of the Subbasin HCM and therefore, the original HCM remains in the 2024 GSP with additional detail incorporated where additional insights can be made.
To accomplish the data compilation task, software programs such as Microsoft Excel, ArcGIS, QGIS, CrossView, and Python1 platforms for entering, storing, displaying, and evaluating the volume of data available were used. The following subsections describe the online programmatic databases from which much of the data were sourced and provide insight on the unique obstacles within each.
2.1.1.1 Groundwater Level Data
The California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) and San Joaquin County monitoring well networks provided the basis for determining groundwater levels across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin in the 2020 GSP. CASGEM maintains a website that allows users to download site locations and groundwater level information.
San Joaquin County’s monitoring well data came from the San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (SJCFCWCD).
1 Python version 3.11 was used as well as the Pandas, NumPy, Matplotlib, GeoPandas, Rasterio, Shapely, and cmocean packages
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Amended Groundwater Sustainability Plan 2-2
Basin Setting November 2024
Since the 2020 GSP, all groundwater level data have been centralized in the California Department of Water Resource’s (DWR) Water Data Library (WDL) database. Well information can be found in WDL, and all available historical data can be downloaded for each well.
There are approximately 1,000 unique wells across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Despite the large number of wells, horizontal and vertical data gaps still exist. Large areas of the Subbasin contain very few wells, particularly in the northwest and southeast portions of the Subbasin (see Figure 2-1).Substantial efforts have been made to fill these data gaps since the 2020 GSP. Section 7.1 describes what has been done as part of GSP implementation between 2020 and 2024 to address these gaps.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Amended Groundwater Sustainability Plan 2-3
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-1: Depth of All Wells in Water Data Library
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Amended Groundwater Sustainability Plan 2-4
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-2 shows the distribution of well depths of WDL wells within the Subbasin, a large number of which do not have construction depth or screen interval information. This makes determining groundwater levels for depth-discrete aquifer intervals impossible. Groundwater elevation contour maps were prepared for the Subbasin’s single principal aquifer, consistent with CCR Title 23 § 354.16 Groundwater Conditions requirements. Despite uncertainties due to limited construction information, this GSP presents maps that provide a useful description of groundwater conditions.
Figure 2-2: Depth Distribution of Wells in Water Data Library
2.1.1.2 Groundwater Quality Data
This GSP relies on groundwater quality data from the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. GAMA includes water quality data from numerous sources, such as United States Geological Survey (USGS) and DWR. The GAMA database contains approximately 6,800 well sites throughout the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin with over 1.6 million water quality measurements (Figure 2-3).
Although GAMA provides data on many groundwater parameters and wells throughout the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, significant data gaps remain. For instance, there are inconsistencies in the parameters measured, as well as in the sampling periods. Some wells are sampled at regular intervals (i.e., quarterly or annually), while others are sampled irregularly. Such assorted schedules make analysis over a given period of time difficult. Data gaps are also apparent when looking at parameters over a longer timeframe. For example, chloride, an important and commonly measured groundwater quality parameter, is reported in only a small fraction of the total number of GAMA wells. As shown in Figure 2-4, out of the over 6,800 wells listed in GAMA for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, no more than 700 chloride measurements were taken during any year since 2005.
No new groundwater quality sources have been identified since the development of the 2020 GSP that are as comprehensive as GAMA.
0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
No Depth Data 0- 100 100-250 250 - 500 > 500
Number of Wells
Depth (ft.)
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Amended Groundwater Sustainability Plan 2-5
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-3: GAMA Monitoring Well Network
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-6
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-4: Number of Chloride Measurements Taken at GAMA Monitoring Sites (2005-2017) Below is a list of attributes for each groundwater quality result in GAMA:
• Well ID
• Results
• Chemical
• Units
• Qualifier
• RL (Reporting Limit)
• Approximate Latitude
• Approximate Longitude
• Well Type
• Well Depth
• Top of Screen
• Screen Length
• Source
• Source Name
• Other Names
The attributes of each well in the GAMA database are not always complete or accurate. Well depths and screen interval data, where available, promote vertical analysis of groundwater quality data because these data can be correlated to depth-discrete aquifer zones. Additional depth-specific water quality monitoring is a focus of the monitoring network for this GSP, as discussed in Chapter 4 of this GSP.
2.1.1.3 Stratigraphic Data
The Online System for Well Completion Reports (OSWCR) provided a majority of the groundwater well logs used in developing the HCM. This online database, developed and maintained by DWR, is a compilation of well completion reports accessible to the public for viewing and downloading. Tables of water well records are also available which contain attributes such as construction depth and well type (e.g., domestic or agricultural). However, not every well record is complete within the tables or only a few attributes may be listed. None of the stratigraphic or geologic data are provided in the tables. Stratigraphic or geologic data must be obtained from the individual well completion reports, which are only available as scanned images downloadable in portable document format (pdf). Once the well completion reports are retrieved from the database, the geologic information can then be manually digitized into Microsoft Excel or other database software.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-7
Basin Setting November 2024
Critical information needed from the well completion reports are construction depth, screen interval, and borehole stratigraphy. The quality and completeness of the reports are, however, highly variable. Very few well logs contain all of the critical data; many more list only a few of the key attributes or none at all. Descriptions of the borehole stratigraphy also vary widely, from comprehensive geologic descriptions to single-word captions (e.g., sand, sandstone, or clay).
Given the volume of wells in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and the critical importance of the data being retrieved, great attention was paid to this aspect of the data compilation effort.
Once compiled, the well construction and stratigraphic data from OSWCR were correlated with well data available from the CASGEM and San Joaquin County monitoring well databases. To accomplish this task, individual well logs from OSWCR were assigned a unique location and then matched to a specific well within the CASGEM and San Joaquin County datasets (CA DWR, 2000).
Although the State ID format does not allow for matching between OSWCR, CASGEM, and San Joaquin County databases, well completion reports from OSWCR were correlated to wells in the other databases. This connection was made by plotting CASGEM/San Joaquin County well locations in Geographic Information System (GIS) software and correlating well completion reports to nearby wells with similar attributes. For instance, the State ID of the CASGEM/San Joaquin County wells and the modified State ID of the OSWCR were used to locate the features within the same Township/Range/Section. Well completion reports were matched to wells by attributes such as screen interval and seal depth or based on written location descriptions or hand-drawn sketches of the location.
To further support spatial analysis, well completion reports from OSWCR with no corresponding well in any database were added to the data set. Well completion reports for wells from other sources, including USGS nested wells and municipal wells, were also added. Well completion reports from OSWCR that did not correspond to wells in a different database were plotted using latitude and longitude coordinates listed in OSWCR. These coordinates are often approximations of the actual location; many latitude and longitude values are the geometric center of the section containing each well. All totaled, the borehole stratigraphy from approximately 330 groundwater wells was digitized to provide horizontal spatial coverage.
While groundwater wells provide valuable data in the shallower portion of the basin that are mostly accessed for groundwater use, the hydrostratigraphic units within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are much deeper, reaching a maximum depth of approximately 1,000 feet. Data from the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) were used to assess the geologic strata at the depths important to the HCM, as these wells are typically much deeper than groundwater wells.
Interpretation of geologic formations from the well completion reports and DOGGR well logs was undertaken after digitizing stratigraphic data from the various sources. This process relied heavily on the distinguishing features of each formation (Section 2.1.5), surficial geologic maps (Section 2.1.5), location and depth of borehole (Section 2.1.7), and professional judgement.
2.1.1.4 Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) Surveys
Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) surveys were completed across the state since the 2020 GSP. The data collected provides additional data to inform the HCM of the surveyed basins. Data are collected from a helicopter carrying geophysical equipment on a large hexagonal frame about 30 meters above the ground. This equipment sends a weak electromagnetic signal into the ground and measures the response received back. An electrical resistivity profile of the subsurface down to depths of as much as 300 meters can be developed using the received data. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin was included in Survey Area 6, which also included the Cosumnes, Tracy, and East Contra Costa Subbasins and Livermore Valley Groundwater Basin.
Figure 2-5 shows where the survey’s flight lines were completed across the Subbasin (CA DWR, 2023 and CA DWR, 20024).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-8
Basin Setting November 2024
Aquifers are typically composed of sands and gravels that have high resistivities, while aquitards are composed of silt and clays that have low resistivities. The resistivity profiles help in mapping the overall dimensions and extent of the aquifer systems. The AEM survey data is analyzed in detail, correlated with data from nearby wells, and modeled to produce subsurface maps of the resistivity, lithology (the physical characteristics of rocks), and an initial hydrostratigraphic model (a description of the water-bearing and water-confining properties of rocks). Well lithology and oil and gas well geophysical logs located along the AEM flight lines were compiled to provide additional data to support the surveys. Groundwater levels and water quality data were also compiled.
DWR processed the collected AEM data to filter out potential noise in the data and, if necessary, remove the data where interference is too great to effectively interpret. Resistivity models were produced that provide profiles indicative of areas with relatively coarser-grained (sands and gravels) and finer-grained (silts and clays) material, represented by areas of higher and lower resistivities, respectively. The resistivity data were then processed, combining the detailed high-quality well lithologic data with information on the spatial heterogeneity from the resistivity to provide an interpretation of lithology. The resistivity and coarse fraction data were combined to produce an initial hydrostratigraphic model for each subbasin, designating areas or layers of the subsurface having similar hydrogeologic properties (Department of Water Resources (CA DWR), 2023).
The resistivity data, and the texture interpretation DWR developed, are useful as an additional source of information to contribute to local understanding of the Subbasin’s hydrogeology and structural features. These data were incorporated into the following pieces of the GSP:
• New cross-sections in the HCM
• Additional shallow subsurface texture map included in the HCM • Refinements to the model stratigraphy in ESJWRM, described in detail in the ESJWRM Version 3.0 Model Documentation TM included in Appendix 2-C.
Python was used to process the data provided by DWR.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-9
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-5: AEM Flight Lines across ESJ Subbasin
2.1.1.5 GIS Data
In accordance with CCR Title 23 §354.14, maps of various basin attributes are required as part of the HCM. To produce these maps, GIS software was used to store, manage, and analyze spatial and tabular data. GIS software was also used to extrapolate data through complex processes in cases where information or guidance was limited. For example, in accordance with CCR Title 23 §354.16, groundwater elevation contour maps are required based on the best available information. This requirement does not specify methods to use for producing the data, but the DWR Best Management Practice (BMP) for HCM suggests techniques used in Tonkin, M. and Larson, S. (2002), which uses geostatistical methods in conjunction with logical interpretations of groundwater level data to provide an adequate level of detail and accuracy.
Certain GIS software programs, including QGIS and ArcGIS, were relied on heavily. QGIS is a powerful open-source program, whereas ArcGIS is the industry standard. Both are capable of completing the required elements for the GSP.
QGIS provided the graphical capabilities for final map production. ArcGIS was specifically utilized because of a thirdparty extension, CrossView, which is capable of generating hydrogeologic cross-sections that are presented in Section
2.1.7. The Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system and North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) were utilized along with the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) for all spatial data.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-10
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.2 Regional Geologic and Structural Setting
The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin lies within the San Joaquin Valley, which is part of the Central Valley of California.
The Central Valley is a 400-mile-long, 50-mile-wide, northwestward trending asymmetrical structural trough filled with geologic units deposited over a long period of time. See Table 2-2 (Section 2.1.5) for the generalized stratigraphic column and Figure 2-6 below for the geologic time scale. The Sierra Nevada Mountain Range, east of the Central Valley, consists of pre-Tertiary igneous and metamorphic continental rocks. The Coast Range, to the west, consists of pre-Tertiary and Tertiary semi-consolidated to consolidated marine sedimentary and continental rocks. The material sources for the Central Valley continental deposits are the Coast Range and the Sierra Nevada, which are composed primarily of granite, related plutonic rocks, and metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks from Late Jurassic to Ordovician age (Bertoldi et al., 1991).
Figure 2-6: Geologic Time Scale
Millions of
Years Ago
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-11
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.3 Geologic History
The origin of geologic formations within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin varies in geologic time ranging from recent to Pre-Cretaceous bedrock or basement. Six to 10 miles of sediment have been deposited within the Central Valley and include both marine and continental deposits consisting of gravels, sands, silts, and clays. During the middle Cretaceous (~100 million years ago), parts of the Central Valley were inundated by the Pacific Ocean resulting in deposition of marine deposits. Marine conditions persisted through the middle to late Tertiary period (~3-30 million years ago) after which time sedimentation changed from marine to continental deposits due to the retreat of the sea and the regional rising of land mass previously inundated by the ocean. Intermittent volcanism dominated with the deposition of rhyolites and andesites (CA DWR, 1967).
2.1.4 Near-Surface Conditions
2.1.4.1 Topography
Ground surface elevations vary extensively across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, from almost 1,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the upland areas in the east to around sea level in the flat lying valley floor to the west. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin topographic map is provided as Figure 2-7.
The modern-day physiographic features are a direct result of the geologic history of the region. Surficial features on the valley floor in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin can be divided into physiographic units as described by DWR (1967) and Burow and others (2004): river flood plains, channels, and overflow lands; low alluvial plains and fluvial fans; and dissected uplands. The dissected uplands lie along the flanks of the valley between the Sierra Nevada to the east and the alluvial plains and fluvial fans to the west. Local relief ranges in excess of 100 feet in the form of dissected hills and gently rolling lands. The most extreme slopes are observed in Calaveras County, which are steeper than 25 percent. West of the dissected uplands is a belt of coalescing fluvial fans of low relief (less than 10 feet) that forms the low alluvial plains and fans that range in width from about 14 to 20 miles. These fans lie between the dissected uplands and the nearly flat surface of the valley trough. River floodplains and channels occur as narrow, disconnected strips along the channels of the major rivers. Overflow lands of the valley trough tributary to the San Joaquin River define the area inundated by rivers when floods are highest under natural conditions.
2.1.4.2 Major Hydrologic Features
The major hydrologic features within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are shown in EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-12
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-8. The Subbasin is bounded on all sides except to the east by streams. Adjacent groundwater subbasins also share an interest in the impacts of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) on these boundary streams.
In the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, the major rivers running east-west have headwaters high in the Sierra Nevada and flow west toward the axis of the valley Figure 2-8. Little deposition is taking place currently, and the rivers are cutting downward on the upper reaches of the fans where the river floodplains are commonly entrenched to depths of 50 to 80 feet. However, toward the lower ends of the fans where river gradients are low, many small streams and tributaries of the major rivers are actively aggrading their beds.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-13
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-7: Topography
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-14
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-8: Major Hydrologic Features
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-15
Basin Setting November 2024
The San Joaquin River is the principal drainage outlet of the northern San Joaquin Valley, flowing northward on the west margin of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin to its confluence with the Sacramento River in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) (Burow et al., 2004). Three major westerly flowing tributaries to the San Joaquin River within or adjacent to the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are the Stanislaus River (Subbasin south boundary), the Mokelumne River (north portion of Subbasin), and the Calaveras River (central portion of Subbasin).
The Stanislaus River drains a watershed of about 1,040 mi2(Burow et al., 2004) and flows through the dissected uplands between the communities of Knights Ferry and Oakdale, along the low alluvial plains and fans near the City of Riverbank to the confluence with the San Joaquin River near Vernalis (see Figure 2-9). Most of the watershed area falls within Modesto Subbasin. The flow in the Stanislaus River varies seasonally from less than 134 acre-feet per day (AF/day) during the dry season in early fall to over 16,400 AF/day during wet season in winter. These flows correlate to discharges from 68 to over 8,270 cubic feet per second (cfs) recorded at the Orange Blossom Bridge gauging station approximately one mile east of Oakdale and eight miles west of the Subbasin boundary along the river (CA DWR, 2019).
The Mokelumne River drains a watershed of about 5,550 km2(2,140 mi2) and flows through the dissected uplands between the communities of Jackson and San Andreas into Pardee Reservoir where it is released to flow downstream into Camanche Reservoir and out along the alluvial plains and fans toward its confluence with the San Joaquin River near Isleton. On the north boundary of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is Dry Creek and the Lower Dry Creek Watershed, the majority of which is within Cosumnes Subbasin. Dry Creek is mapped as an ephemeral drainage and is tributary to the Mokelumne River with its confluence near Thornton. Flow in the Mokelumne River below Camanche Reservoir varies seasonally and is dependent on discharges from the on-stream reservoir, from less than 200 AF/day during the dry season to 9,900 AF/day during the wet season. These flows correlate to discharges from as low as 100 to no more than 5,000 cfs reported by the USGS below the Camanche Dam. Major watersheds of the river are the Upper Mokelumne River (most of which is outside of the Subbasin to the east, with a small portion overlapping with Cosumnes Subbasin) and the Lower Mokelumne River (mostly contained in the Subbasin, with a small portion intersecting the South American and Solano Subbasins).
The Calaveras River, also with headwaters in the Sierra Nevada, drains a watershed of about 1,370 km2(530 mi2) and flows into and across the Subbasin to its confluence with the San Joaquin River on the northwest side of Stockton.
Flow in the Calaveras River below the New Hogan Reservoir varies seasonally from 608 AF/day to 19,800 AF/day and is dependent on discharges from the on-stream reservoir. These flows correlate to discharges from 223 to over 10,000 cfs reported by the USGS below the New Hogan Reservoir.
In addition to the Stanislaus, Mokelumne, and Calaveras Rivers, 10 watersheds extend into and across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Three of these watersheds extend beyond the western boundary of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin into the East Contra Costa or Tracy Subbasins: Middle River-San Joaquin, Five Mile Creek-San Joaquin, and Lone Tree Creek-San Joaquin. The Lone Tree Creek-San Joaquin watershed has its headwaters in the Coast Range foothills. Figure 2-9 depicts the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and the watersheds that overlie the Subbasin.
Table 2-1 is a list of watersheds that overlie the Subbasin.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-16
Basin Setting November 2024
Table 2-1: Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Watershed Details Watershed Name Total Area
(square miles)
Area within
Subbasin
(square miles)
Percentage of
Watershed within
Subbasin
Lower Mokelumne River 223 202 91
Lower Dry Creek 88 47 53
French Camp Slough 88 88 100
Upper Mokelumne River 93 15 16
Lone Tree Creek 158 158 100
Little Johns Creek 122 63 52
Rock Creek 107 44 41
Calaveras River 224 133 60
Middle River-San Joaquin River 213 49 23
Mormon Slough 75 75 100
Lower Stanislaus River 218 37 17
Lone Tree Creek-San Joaquin River 169 98 58
Five Mile Creek-San Joaquin River 154 62 40
Bear Creek 127 127 100
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-17
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-9: Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Watersheds
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-18
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.4.3 Surface Soils
Soils in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are one of the primary controlling factors on surface water percolation rates through the vadose zone down to the groundwater table. As described in CA DWR (1967), soils in the region of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin can be grouped into five main categories:
1. Alluvial fan and flood plain soils
2. Organic basin soils
3. Basin soils
4. Lower terrace soils
5. Higher terrace and upland soils
These groupings coincide in part with the geologic formations in that the oldest soils are found on the nearly level high terraces and old fluvial fans in the eastern part of the area. The oldest soils typically have claypan or hardpan layers at depths of two feet or less. The youngest soils are forming on the recently deposited alluvium along stream bottoms and on recently exposed surfaces. These soils are generally deep and rich in nutrients. The soils at intermediate stages of development are on the low terraces. Figure 2-2-10 shows the areal distribution of the five soil types in San Joaquin County (CA DWR, 1967).
Alluvial fan and floodplain deposits are
present in three areas of the Eastern
San Joaquin Subbasin bounding major
east-west rivers: Mokelumne,
Calaveras, and Stanislaus Rivers.
Figure 2-2-10 depicts soil depositional
areas within the Subbasin. These areas
have the best infiltration rates,
exclusive of the peat locales in the
Delta (northwest portion adjacent to the
Mokelumne River).
Soils of the Mokelumne and Stanislaus
River fans have young soil profiles of
sandy loam to loam. Infiltration rates of
the soils are predominantly between
0.6 to 2 inches per hour. Areas of silt
loam are also common especially in the
floodplain and have a lower infiltration
rate of less than 0.6 inches per hour.
Soils in the alluvial fans tend to coarsen
toward the apex of the fan. The soil
types show little compaction and slight
accumulation of lime or clay. Hardpan
development, which would preclude
infiltration, is minimal.
Figure 2-2-10: Soil Depositional Areas
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-19
Basin Setting November 2024
The soils of the Calaveras fan have deeper profiles of loam and clay loam with an infiltration rate of less than 0.6 inches per hour. These soils tend to be darker and heavier than the Stanislaus and Mokelumne River fan soils likely due to the source area being restricted to metamorphic or pre-Tertiary sedimentary material, whereas the Mokelumne and Stanislaus Rivers received large contributions from a granitic source (CA DWR, 1967).
The organic basin soils are restricted to the lower Delta portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Peat, muck, and clay loam are terms commonly applied to soils in this group. The organic basin soils have variable infiltration capacity.
Where peat is the dominant soil constituent, infiltration is high (greater than 2 inches per hour); where clay loam or muck occurs, infiltration is low (less than 0.6 inches per hour) (CA DWR, 1967).
The interfan and basin soils lie between the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus River fans in a northwesterly trending belt and around the periphery of the organic basin soils. These soils generally have well-developed profiles, medium-to-heavy textures, and fairly well compacted subsoils. Locally, hardpan overlies silty to silty clay loams.
Consequently, these soils have low infiltration rates (less than 0.6 inches per hour).
The terrace and upland soils have profiles containing moderately dense accumulation of clay and claypan, relatively near the surface. These layers are impervious barriers to the local downward movement of water, except where root holes and other breaks permit infiltration.
The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) categorizes soils by hydrologic soil groups. The hydrologic soil group is an estimation of the infiltration rate of the first five feet of soil based on depositional characteristics (mostly grain size and sorting) and secondary characteristics (compaction, lithification, and weathering). Hydrologic soil groups and their relative infiltration rates are listed below:
• A (high)
• B (medium)
• C (slow)
• D (very slow)
Figure 2-11 shows the distribution of soils mapped by hydrologic soil group across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
The broad geologic features of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin reflecting the river drainage elevations, areas, and percent above snowline are also apparent in the map of soils distribution. The Stanislaus and Mokelumne River alluvial fans have the overall highest infiltration rate followed by the Calaveras River fan. The smaller foothill watersheds have the lowest average infiltration rates. The relatively high permeability of windblown sands on the Mokelumne and Stanislaus River fans and the recent alluvium of the current Mokelumne and Calaveras River floodplains are also recognizable (Figure 2-11).
Hardpan is a strongly cemented weathering profile that limits infiltration unless it is modified by ripping or excavating.
Some hardpan is discontinuous and relatively shallow (located at a depth of five feet or less) and often is ripped with a bulldozer for agricultural purposes. However, in other areas, particularly in the older pre-Modesto formations, the hardpan is more continuous and extends to depths that cannot be reached by ripping methods.
The Farmington Groundwater Recharge/Seasonal Habitat Study Final Report, prepared by Montgomery Watson Harza (MWH) and dated August 2001 (MWH, 2001), overlaid the NRCS’s interpretation of where hardpan soils would be found under natural conditions. The extent of the thickest hardpan is shown in Figure 2-12 in dark blue cross hatching.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-20
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-11: Hydrologic Soil Groups
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-21
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-12: Occurrence of Hardpan within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-22
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.4.4 Imported Water
The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin does not rely on imported water supplies. All surface water used within the Subbasin originates from sources either within or directly tributary to the Subbasin. Several districts receive surface water from the Stanislaus River with a point of diversion approximately four miles upstream of the eastern boundary of the Subbasin (located in the Sierra Nevada foothills and not part of a Bulletin 118 groundwater basin). While this diversion point occurs outside of the Subbasin boundary, this water naturally enters the Subbasin by diversion or by surface-groundwater interaction.
2.1.4.5 Groundwater Recharge and Discharge Areas
Groundwater recharge and discharge is driven by both natural and anthropogenic (human-influenced) factors. Areas of recharge and discharge within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are discussed below. Quantitative information about all natural and anthropogenic recharge and discharge is provided in Section 2.4.
2.1.4.5.1 Description of Recharge Areas
The recharge potential of soils and formations encountered in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin varies considerably and is dependent on primary and secondary geologic effects. Primary geologic patterns that influence permeability relate to grain size and sorting as a result of depositional characteristics. Secondary geologic effects that influence soil recharge characteristics are associated with post-depositional events such as consolidation, lithification, and weathering, including the development of hardpan soils (MWH, 2001). Additional information on geologic formations is provided in Section 2.1.5.
The primary (original) geologic permeability of the pre-Modesto formations is variable depending on grain size, but in general is low due to secondary (post-depositional) effects including the development of hardpan soils. However, the units are heterogeneous (variable), and permeable channels are common beneath the hardpan. The primary permeability of the Modesto Formation varies both east-west and north-south due to grain size differences in the original depositional environments. On any given drainage, the alluvium is generally coarsest (and most permeable) in the east where the gradient is steepest, and the relatively high energy stream carries and deposits a high proportion of coarse bedload sand and gravel (the proximal fan). Suspended sediment (clay and silt) is generally not deposited until it is carried farther west to a lower energy environment (the distal fan). As a result, the average permeability, and thus the average recharge rates, of the alluvial fan decreases overall from east to west (MWH, 2001).
The grain size distribution produced from each watershed depends on several characteristics, including the type of geologic materials in the source area, the watershed's gradient and total area, and the portions of the watershed subject to rainfall and snowmelt runoff. During the Pleistocene Epoch when the Modesto and Riverbank formations were deposited (approximately 1 million to 10,000 years ago), a colder, wetter climate produced a lower snowline than at present, and coarse glacial outwash dominated the major streams originating in the interior of the Sierra Nevada (Mokelumne and Stanislaus River fans). Alluvium of the smaller foothill watersheds consists primarily of fine-grained material in interfan areas (Bear Creek and Little Johns/Rock Creek drainages). The Calaveras River drainage is intermediate between the two, forming a moderately coarse alluvial fan between the Calaveras River and Mormon Slough (MWH, 2001). Figure 2-13 depicts the aerial extents of the alluvial fans, interfan areas, and pre-Modesto formations.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-23
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-13: Areal Extents of Alluvial Fans, Interfans, and Pre-Modesto Formations EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-24
Basin Setting November 2024
Within this overall framework, the alluvial fans of each drainage contain coarse-grained channel and levee deposits of relatively high permeability within finer-grained overbank and floodbasin deposits of low permeability. Stream channels migrate and abruptly jump to new locations over time in this depositional environment, creating deposits that are heterogeneous both laterally and vertically. As a result of this depositional environment, localized silt and clay lenses are common even in the alluvial fan areas. However, no regional clay layer is expected to exist that would severely reduce or inhibit vertical migration of water. The recent (Holocene) alluvium in the current incised river floodplains (Mokelumne and Calaveras Rivers) and windblown (eolian) sand deposits are of limited extent but relatively permeable (MWH, 2001). These present and historical alluvial depositional factors are useful in understanding rainfall percolation rates when the soil moisture deficit is zero and groundwater recharge occurs; groundwater system preferential vertical movement pathways through the principal aquifer and aquitards; and future groundwater management alternatives.
The Eastern San Joaquin Water Resources Model (ESJWRM) estimates the recharge that occurs in different areas of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, largely due to the percolation of rainfall and applied irrigation water. Figure 2-14 shows the spatial distribution of percolation in the Subbasin, with generally less percolation occurring in finer soil areas (e.g., Hydrologic Soil Group D) and areas without extensive irrigation (i.e., native landscape). The higher percolation areas are those that substantially contribute to the replenishment and recharge in the Subbasin. Section 1.2.2.9 describes conjunctive use programs that were in place prior to the implementation of SGMA, and Figure 1-16, shown previously in Chapter 1: Agency Information, Plan Area, and Communication, maps direct recharge areas in the Subbasin.
DWR’s texture interpretation of the AEM data provided an additional data source for evaluating near-surface conditions in terms of percent coarseness of the material. Figure 2-15 shows the average percent coarseness (coarse fraction) in the top 50 ft of the subsurface along the survey flight lines. Darker blues represent finer material, while greens and yellows represent coarser material. On the eastern side of the Subbasin, where the alluvial fans identified in Figure 2-13 lie, the resistivity data indicate that the near-surface material is relatively coarser than in other areas of the Subbasin. This is consistent with general understanding of alluvial fan structure, where coarser materials are found further east where the gradient is higher. Increasingly to the west, the material becomes increasingly finer. Resistivitybased coarse fraction data complements ESJWRM model output, Hydrologic Soil Group mapping, Soil Agricultural Groundwater Banking Index (SAGBI) mapping, and geologic maps to identify areas in which natural groundwater recharge is occurring.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-25
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-14: Existing Areas of Groundwater Recharge (ESJWRM Version 3.0) Note: Figure shows the distribution of deep percolation of precipitation and applied water based on ESJWRM Version 3.0 model outputs. It does not include recharge from rivers and streams, boundary flows, or recharge projects.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-26
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-15: Average Percent Coarse Fraction in Near-Surface Materials
2.1.4.5.2 Description of Discharge Areas
Groundwater discharge primarily occurs through groundwater production wells. Groundwater production in Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is discussed further in Section 2.2. Groundwater also discharges to rivers and streams where groundwater elevations are higher than river stage. Other sources of groundwater discharge are evapotranspiration from riparian areas, phreatophyte woodlands, and other groundwater-dependent ecosystem (GDE) communities.
Groundwater discharge to streams is described more in Section 2.2.6 and discusses analyses based on modeling results from the ESJWRM for approximately 1,700 stream nodes (locations along simulated streams where calculations are made related to stream flows and interaction with groundwater) in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
2.1.4.5.3 Description of Potential Recharge Areas
Figure 2-16 shows areas with their potential for groundwater recharge, as identified by the Soil Agricultural Groundwater Banking Index (SAGBI). SAGBI provides an index for the groundwater recharge for agricultural lands by considering deep percolation, root zone residence time, topography, chemical limitations, and soil surface condition.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-27
Basin Setting November 2024
SAGBI data are derived from “modified” SAGBI data. “Modified” SAGBI data show higher potential for recharge than unmodified SAGBI data because the modified data assume that the soils have been or will be ripped to a depth of 6 feet, which can break up fine grained materials at the surface to improve percolation. Modified SAGBI data categorize 310,098 acres out of 610,890 acres (51 percent) of agricultural and grazing land within the Subbasin as moderately good, good, or excellent for groundwater recharge (University of California, Davis, 2018).
Figure 2-16: Potential Recharge Areas
2.1.5 Geologic Formations and Stratigraphy
Geologic formations within the Central Valley and Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are generally grouped as either eastside or westside formations based on their location relative to the San Joaquin River and the source of the sedimentary material of which they are composed. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is located to the east of the San Joaquin River. Eastside continental formation material generally originates from deposits from the Sierra Nevada and westside continental formation material generally originates from the deposits of the Coast Range. Rising land masses contributed to the erosion and deposition of alluvial sands and fan deposits. Glaciation in the Pleistocene also contributed to the steepening of streams during melt water periods (CA DWR, 1967).
The block diagram of the Central Valley (Figure 2-17) provides a generalized geologic cross-sectional view of the geologic setting. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is located in the foothills margin between the roughly horizontal alluvial sediments of the Central Valley geomorphic province, labeled “Central Valley” in Figure 2-17, and the granitic Sierra Nevada geomorphic province, labeled “Sierra Nevada” in Figure 2-17.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-28
Basin Setting November 2024
Sediment deposits can be subdivided into consolidated and unconsolidated deposits, with the consolidated sediments underlying the unconsolidated sediments. The most important fresh water-bearing formations in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are the sands within the consolidated Mehrten and Laguna Formations and the unconsolidated younger alluvial deposits consisting of the Riverbank and Modesto Formations.
Figure 2-17: Generalized Geologic Section and Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin Setting With depth, the stratigraphy of unconsolidated sediments consists initially of Recent to Pleistocene Age alluvial deposits of the Post-Modesto deposits and the Modesto and Riverbank Formations. The sediments of these units are typically unconsolidated sands and gravels interbedded with considerable silts and clays. These clays separate the upper sediments over the lower Late Plio-Pleistocene Age Laguna Formation and the older Eocene to Pliocene Age Mehrten Formation. The Laguna and Mehrten Formations are characterized by poorly consolidated sediments and are differentiated based on color and sand type. The Laguna Formation is typically light brown, and the differentiating characteristic of the Mehrten is black sands derived from volcanic detritus. The Valley Springs and Ione Formations are encountered below the Mehrten Formation. The formations have a distinct geologic dip and thickness to the west.
The geologic map shown in Figure 2-18 illustrates the surface deposits of the Pleistocene-aged Modesto Formation and Turlock Lake Formation largely within the valley floor (Wagner et al., 1981; Wagner et al., 1991). The knolls and ridges to the east represent outcrops of the Tertiary-aged Laguna, Mehrten, Valley Springs, and Ione Formations. The geologic stratigraphic column is provided on Table 2-2.
Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-29
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-18: Geologic Map
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-30
Basin Setting November 2024
This page is intentionally left blank.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-31
Basin Setting November 2024
Table 2-2: Generalized Stratigraphic Column, Formation Descriptions, and Water-Bearing Properties Era*
Period*
Epoch* Formation &
Map Symbol
Thickness Maximum
(feet) Rock Characteristics and
Environment
Water-Bearing
Properties
Holocene Stream Channel
Deposits
50± Continental unconsolidated
gravel and coarse to medium
sand deposited along present
stream channels.
High permeability,
significant avenue for
percolation to
underlying formations.
Late Pliocene Modesto (Qm) 65-130± Continental fan and interfan material, locally some basin
types, lenticular gravel, sand,
silt, clay.
Moderate
permeabilities.
Unconfined aquifer.
Quaternary
Pliocene Riverbank (Qr) 150 to 250 Continental fan and interfan material, locally some basin
types, lenticular gravel, sand,
silt, clay. Reddish clay-rich
duripan caps the unit.
Moderate
permeabilities.
Unconfined aquifer.
CENOZOIC
Recent to PlioPleistoceneFlood Basin
Deposits (Qb)
Turlock Lake
Formation (Qtl)
0-1,000± Continental basinal equivalent
of Laguna, Tulare & younger
formations. Clay, silt & sand,
organic in part.
Generally low
permeabilities,
saturated
environment,
unconfined to
confined.
Plio-Pleistocene Laguna (Tl) 0-1000± Continental, semi-to unconsolidated silt, sand &
gravel, poorly sorted, includes
Arroyo Seco Gravel pediment
of Mokelumne R. area.
Moderate permeability,
Unconfined to locally
semi-confined.
Restricted perched
bodies in some areas.
Mio-Pliocene Mehrten (Tm) 0-600± Continental andesitic
derivatives of silt, sand and
gravel & their indurated
equivalents; tuff; breccia;
agglomerate.
Moderate permeability
to high where "black
sands" occur.
Confined to
unconfined.
Tertiary
Miocene Valley Springs
(Tvs)
0-500± Continental rhyolitic ash, clay,
sand & gravel and their
indurated equivalent.
Low permeability. Not
considered as
significant in
groundwater studies.
Eocene Ione (Tl) 0-500± Light colored clay and sand.
Marine shale, siltstone and
sandstone
Contains saline waters
except where flushed
in outcrop areas.
ZOIC
Creta-ceous
Cretaceous
Jurassic
Undifferentiated
Bedrock
Igneous, metamorphics and
ultramafics.
Contains saline
waters. Not relevant to
fresh water basin
except as possible
contaminant source.
MESO
Pre- Cretace- ous
Sources: CA DWR, 1967; Burow et al., 2004
* Figure 2-5 contains time scales corresponding to formations EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-32
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.5.1 Geologic Formation Descriptions
The Tertiary-age units that overlie the basement rocks and generally outcrop within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are discussed in the following sections, from oldest to youngest.
2.1.5.1.1 Pre-Ione Eocene Rocks
The pre-Ione Eocene rocks, as described by Chapman and Bishop (1975), were deposited in a pre-Ione bedrock paleochannel system. Their composition includes sedimentary rocks of marine origin with biotite, chlorite, and muscovite. Feldspar is a significant component of this unit (Creely & Force, 2007). The thickness of this unit is highly variable in the foothill area as it is controlled by basement complex topography. The unit “wedges out” to the east and assumes a more uniform regional thickness to the west in the Central Valley Mesozoic-Cenozoic sediment pile (Creely & Force, 2007). Depictions and full geologic formation detail are provided in Table 2-2. The Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks and terrace deposits are separated from the Jurassic volcanic/metamorphic basement by an angular unconformity from small-scale faulting. The Franciscan Group, Cretaceous, and Eocene Undifferentiated deposits have been impacted by the east-west Stockton Fault (CA DWR, 1967).
2.1.5.1.2 Ione Formation
The Eocene Age Ione Formation has been mapped along the eastern margin of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and, as described by Loyd (1983), contains interbedded kaolinitic clay, quartz sand, sandy clay, and lignite. The Ione Formation is characteristically light in color, with color influenced by iron oxide, lignite, and carbonaceous mud rocks and shale (Creely & Force, 2007). Pask and Turner (1952) subdivided the Ione Formation into upper and lower members based on mineralogy. The upper and lower members contain kaolinite (anauxite) clays. Deposits can include coarse-grained sand (up to 2 mm diameter).
Ione sand is one of the most important sources of commercial clay and silica sand in the Ione Formation (Creely & Force, 2007). Ione sand has a white color with a pearly luster and appears massive; however, closer examination usually reveals cross stratification, heavy mineral laminae, and burrows (Creely & Force, 2007). Quartz is abundant with varying feldspar content in both members.
The lower member contains 8 to 10 percent feldspar, with the upper member containing 20 to 25 percent feldspar. The minerals biotite and chlorite are rare in the lower member and common in the upper member. Heavy mineral deposits vary. The lower member contains mature minerals like zircon and ilmenite. The upper member contains hornblende and epidote. Chromite is also commonly found in the Ione Formation. The upper member is largely absent north of Jackson Valley due to erosion and deposition during the development of the overlying Valley Springs Formation. The Ione Formation is deposited in both marine and fluvial continental environments (Creely & Force, 2007).
2.1.5.1.3 Valley Springs Formation
The Oligocene-Age Valley Springs Formation is described by Loyd (1983) as stream channel and alluvial deposits derived mainly from rhyolitic volcanic rocks, including some white, welded tuffs, and ash flows. The basal contact of the Valley Springs Formation is characterized, locally, by the presence of rhyolitic conglomerate. These tuffs may display alteration to clays, and, in extreme cases, only a claystone bed with relict tuffaceous texture remains. Pure deposits of rhyolitic ash exist in areas, while many sand and ash beds are present. In general, the clay beds of the Valley Springs Formation are greenish in color, may contain silt, sand, and large pumice fragments. The sandstones range in grain-size from fine to coarse and are typically well cemented. Predominantly composed of quartz and preCretaceous material, the relatively sparse conglomerate lenses within the tuff, clay, and sandstone may also contain pumice fragments. In general, the Valley Springs Formation is predominantly fine-grained, containing less coarsegrained deposits. In the Central Valley, the Valley Springs Formation is considered to be largely non-water-bearing.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-33
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.5.1.4 Mehrten Formation
Overlying the Valley Springs Formation is the Miocene Age Mehrten Formation, described as being stream channel, alluvial, and mudflow deposits derived mainly from andesitic volcanic rocks. The Mehrten Formation is considered the oldest significant fresh water-bearing formation within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
Bartow (1992) generally describes the Mehrten in the east-central portion of the Central Valley as being sandstone composed of amphiboles, pyroxenes, and pebbles (mostly volcanic) with lenticular bedding and gray to blue color.
Bartow discusses a major change in regional volcanism as the rhyolitic pyroclastic deposits of the Late Oligocene and earliest Miocene were replaced near the end of the Early Miocene by reestablished andesitic arc volcanism in the northern Sierra Nevada. This andesitic volcanism provided the source materials for the Mehrten Formation.
Ferriz (2001) discusses how the Mehrten Formation outcrops discontinuously along the eastern flank of the Valley and was laid down in the Mokelumne area by streams carrying andesitic debris from the Sierra Nevada. The Mehrten thickens in the northeastern part of the San Joaquin Valley; generally, it can be more than 700 to 1,200 feet thick at depths ranging from more than 300 feet below ground on the east side of the valley to depths exceeding 1,400 feet along the central portion of the valley. The contact between the Mehrten Formation and underlying Valley Springs Formation is a non-distinct unconformity.
The Mehrten Formation is subdivided into upper and lower units. The upper unit contains finer grained deposits (black sands interbedded with brown-to-blue clay), and the lower unit consists of dense tuff breccia. Deep wells in the Stockton area indicate that the upper portion of the Mehrten Formation contains a high percentage of clay, suggesting that the upper portion of the unit may be finer grained than the middle or lower portions with resulting semi-confined conditions (CA DWR, 1967).
The black sands of the Mehrten Formation (black andesite detrital grains) generally have moderate to high permeability and yield large quantities of fresh water to wells, which makes them a preferred exploration target for groundwater supply in the eastern half of the Central Valley (Davis & Hall, 1959; CA DWR, 1967). East of Jack Tone Road, a large number of wells produce water from the relatively permeable “black sands” commonly described as hard sandstones (CA DWR, 1967).
2.1.5.1.5 Laguna Formation
The Pliocene to Pleistocene Laguna Formation is composed of discontinuous lenses of unconsolidated to semiconsolidated alluvial sands, gravels, and silts and is typically light brown. These poorly exposed stream-laid alluvial deposits form high terraces and are associated with the last major uplift in the Sierra Nevada.
The Laguna Formation outcrops in the northeastern part of San Joaquin County and dips at 90 feet per mile and reaches a maximum thickness of 1,000 feet, with the thickest areas (400 to 1000 feet) observed near the Mokelumne River in the Stockton Area (CA DWR, 1967). The Laguna Formation is moderately permeable with some reportedly highly permeable coarse-grained fresh water-bearing zones.
2.1.5.1.6 Turlock Lake Formation
The Turlock Lake Formation consists primarily of arkosic alluvium, mostly fine sand, silt, and in places clay, at the base grading upward into coarse sand and occasional coarse pebbly sand or gravel (Marchand & Allwardt, 1981). The age of the Turlock Lake Formation is about 600,000 to greater than 730,000 years old, but younger than about 1 million years. The Turlock Lake commonly stands topographically above the younger fans and terraces throughout the northeastern San Joaquin Valley, in a broad band between the Merhten, Laguna, and the younger Riverbank and Modesto alluvial fans to the west. A buried soil separates the Turlock Lake Formation into two units (upper and lower) in the northeastern San Joaquin Valley. The thickness of the Turlock Lake is variable and appears to increase toward the east. Estimates of thickness in the subbasins to the south range from 295 to 850 feet for eastern Stanislaus County, 1,000 feet for northern Merced County, and 160 to 720 feet in the Chowchilla area.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-34
Basin Setting November 2024
The Turlock Lake Formation is differentiated from the west to east by its Corcoran Clay member that is present in the southwest corner of the Subbasin near Manteca, and dominates the area west of Highway 99 south of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The Corcoran Clay becomes interbedded with the sands and silt of the upper Turlock Lake Formation and is not found in the central and northern portions of the Subbasin. The Corcoran Clay is found ranging in thickness from a feather edge to 160 feet beneath the present bed of Tulare Lake. The Turlock Lake Formation is dominant within the basins to the south.
2.1.5.1.7 Riverbank Formation
The Riverbank Formation consists primarily of arkosic sediment derived mainly from the interior Sierra Nevada, which forms at least three sets of terraces and coalescing alluvial fans along the eastern San Joaquin Valley (Marchand & Allwardt, 1981). The Riverbank Formation is about 130,000 to 450,000 years old. The Riverbank, as exposed in the northeastern San Joaquin Valley, is primarily sand, containing some scattered pebbles, gravel lenses, and some interbedded fine sand and silt. The Riverbank unconformably overlies the Laguna Formation, and its terraces and fans truncate or are cut into Turlock Lake alluvium or fill post-Turlock Lake gullies and ravines, which, in turn, are cut and filled near the foothills by terraces of the lower member of the Modesto Formation. The Riverbank Formation is informally subdivided into three units (lower, middle, and upper) which appear to coarsen upward, like those of the older Turlock Lake Formation. The Riverbank Formation also shows a variable thickness that tends to increase toward the major river channels; 150 to 200 feet is reported in northern Merced and eastern Stanislaus Counties, 260 feet along the Merced River, and about 65 feet along the Chowchilla River.
2.1.5.1.8 Modesto Formation
The Modesto Formation is composed of mainstream arkosic sediments and associated deposits of local derivation laid down during the last major series of aggradation events in the eastern San Joaquin Valley (Marchand & Allwardt, 1981). Gravel, sand, and silt were deposited as a series of coalescing alluvial fans extending continuously from the Kern River drainage on the south to the Sacramento River tributaries in the north. They occur in a wide band immediately east of the San Joaquin Valley axis and to the west of the Riverbank and older fan remnants. Radiocarbon dating estimates the age of the Modesto Formation to be older than 9,000 years before present (B.P.) to 42,000 years B.P. Most of the prime agricultural land and many of the major cities are located in the young alluvial soils associated with the undissected Modesto terrace and fan surfaces. Modesto deposits overlie late Riverbank alluvium and older units and are locally incised or covered along modern channels by post-Modesto deposits.
The materials of the Modesto Formation are virtually identical to those of the Laguna, Turlock Lake, and Riverbank Formations, but their association with low terraces and young fans and their moderate to slight degree of erosional modification and soil profile development clearly differentiate them from older alluvium. The total thickness of the Modesto deposits is reported to be 50 to 100 feet in eastern Stanislaus County, 130 feet along the Merced River, and about 65 feet along the Chowchilla River fan. The Modesto Formation also thickens toward each river channel and toward the south; there is significant evidence of local facies changes laterally. Exposed sections differ substantially from exposures near the foothills and from exposures along the westward draining rivers.
2.1.5.1.9 Post-Modesto Deposits – Recent Alluvium and Basin Deposits In general, these younger units are less consolidated and sedimentary in nature, representing a sequence of young alluvial fills including alluvial fans, channel, point bar, levee, crevasse splay, interdistributary, and floodbasin alluvium.
The alluvial fan deposits are much smaller than the late Modesto fans. The age of these deposits ranges from 9,000 years B.P to modern time. Lacustrine, swamp, and marsh deposits are presently accumulating in poorly drained areas on the alluvial fan toes. In oxbow lakes on river flood plains, near the edge of the Delta where Holocene sea level rise caused alluviation of the lower Mokelumne and Cosumnes Rivers, lakes and swamps have formed where tributary gullies have been blocked by mainstream aggradation (Marchand and Allwardt, 1981).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-35
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.6 Faults and Structural Features
The Stockton Fault – The Stockton Fault is the largest fault in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, shown in Figure 2-19. It is a large reverse fault with displacements of up to 3,600 feet (1,100 m) that trends transverse to the regional structure and bounds the Stockton Arch on the north. Bartow (1985) shows relative movement along the fault as northside-down. The timing of the vertical movement is predominantly post-Eocene (Hoffman, 1964), and the latest movements appear to have been subsequent to deposition of the basal part of the Valley Springs Formation, probably during Miocene time.
The Vernalis Fault – The Vernalis Fault is a reverse fault with northwest-southeast trend that bounds the TracyVernalis anticlinal trend that is mapped outside of the west boundary of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. East-sidedown movement of as much as 1,500 feet (460 m) probably took place at the same time as the major movements on the Stockton Fault (Bartow, 1985). The relative thickness of sediments can be inferred from the elevations of the base of the freshwater aquifer system shown in Figure 2-20. The freshwater aquifer system on the north side of the Stockton Fault extends approximately 600 feet deeper than the aquifer system south of the fault. Relative movement along the fault is north-side-down, thus allowing for greater accumulation of the continental Tertiary sediments and deepening of the aquifer materials in this area.
Stockton Arch – The Stockton Arch is a broad transverse structure that underlies the southern half of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The arch is bounded on the north by the Stockton Fault, and the southern limit is the line of truncation of Paleogene strata south of Modesto (Bartow, 1985). Indications of northward-shallowing marine facies in the lower Paleogene sequence suggests that the arch was present by Paleocene time. Erosion during the Oligocene time apparently reduced whatever physiographic expression the arch may have had and left a nearly flat plain prior to deposition of the later Tertiary units.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-36
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-19: Faults and Structural Features
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-37
Basin Setting November 2024
As a result of the north-side-down movement along the Stockton Fault, the Tertiary sediments are thicker north of the fault and thinner south of the fault. This feature also influences the location, depth, and thickness of the “base of the fresh water,” as shown below in Figure 2-20. The base of fresh water is discussed further in Sections 2.1.7 and 2.1.8.2.
Figure 2-20: Base of Fresh Water Elevation and Stockton Fault Angular unconformities – There are a series of angular unconformities formed during the Cenozoic-related to uplift of the Sierra Nevada to the east (Bartow, 1985). The Cenozoic history of the Sierra Nevada is one of progressive westward tilting, perhaps episodic, with an increasing rate in the late Cenozoic. The subtle angular unconformities that separate the Tertiary units are evidence of this progressive tilting. The Tertiary units rarely have dips of more than 2 degrees; the difference in dip between the Ione and the Valley Springs Formations, for example, may be less than 1 degree. The discordances are most apparent in terms of gradients of depositional surfaces measured in distances of several miles. The largest discordances are between the Ione Formation (about 1,500 feet/mile) and the Valley Springs Formation (94 - 120 feet/mile), between the Mehrten Formation (99 - 131 feet/mile) and the Laguna Formation (52 - 79 feet/mile), and between the Laguna Formation and the Quaternary deposits (less than 18 feet/mile). The Ione-Valley Springs unconformity represents the Oligocene regression that affected most of central and southern California, and the Mehrten-Laguna unconformity probably marks the accelerated uplift of the Sierra Nevada beginning 3 to 5 million years ago (Huber, 1981) in the central part of the range. The Sierra Nevada was relatively stable through the Miocene with only a minor discordance between the Valley Springs and Mehrten Formations; their lithological difference reflects primarily a change from rhyolitic to andesitic volcanism in the source area. Uplift of the Sierra Nevada continued through the Quaternary, but the record is complicated by Quaternary climatic events (e.g., glaciation) which were the principal controlling factor in Quaternary sedimentation for the east side of the Great Valley.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-38
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.7 Geologic Cross-Sections
Five geologic cross-sections (A-A’, B-B’, C-C’, D-D’, and E-E’) were developed for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin based on the stratigraphic information amassed as part of the data compilation efforts. A geologic cross-section is an interpretive diagram of the lateral and vertical subsurface relationships of geologic formations. A cross-section location map with locations of groundwater and oil and gas wells reviewed in the development process is provided as Figure 2-21. Three of the cross-sections (A-A’ through C-C’) are along east-west transects in the north, central, and southern portion of the Subbasin, respectively; two of the cross-sections (D-D’ and E-E’) are generally along north-south transects. Cross-section D-D’ generally transects the cities of Lodi, Stockton, and Manteca in the west portion of the Subbasin, and cross-section E-E’ transects the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin along the alignment of Jack Tone Road from the northeast to the southwest portion of the Subbasin. Each of the five geologic cross-sections are provided in Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24.
Four additional cross-sections (F-F’, G-G’, H-H’, and I-I’) were added as part of the 2024 Amended GSP, following the release of DWR’s AEM data. To supplement the existing cross-sections by geologic formation, these additional crosssections show an estimate of percent coarseness of the subsurface material. Percent coarseness estimations were developed by DWR, derived from AEM resistivity data through a comprehensive translation process in which texture characteristics of the subsurface are related to the collected resistivity measurements. Cross-sections by coarse fraction represent multiple flown survey lines stitched together to show a continuous line. Darker brown areas represent relatively finer materials (lower coarse fraction) and lighter yellow areas represent coarser materials (higher coarse fraction). Lithology logs used by DWR to generate the texture interpretation of the resistivity data are included on each cross-section. Figure 2-25 shows the locations of these four additional cross-sections. Cross-sections F-F’, G-G’, HH’, and I-I’ are included in Figure 2-26, Figure 2-27, Figure 2-28, Figure 2-29, respectively.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-39
Basin Setting November2024
Figure 2-21: Cross-Section, by Formation, Location Map
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-40
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-22: Hydrogeologic Cross-sections A-A’ and B-B’ EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-41
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-23: Hydrogeologic Cross-sections C-C’ and D-D’ EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-42
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-24: Hydrogeologic Cross- section E-E’
SOUTH
E’
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-43
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-25: Cross-Section, by Percent Coarseness, Location Map EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-44
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-26: Percent Coarse Cross-Section F-F’
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-45
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-27: Percent Coarse Cross-Section G-G’
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-46
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-28: Percent Coarse Cross-Section H-H’
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-47
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-29: Percent Coarse Cross-section I-I’
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-48
Basin Setting November 2024
This page is intentionally left blank.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-49
Basin Setting November 2024
Stratigraphic data fromwell completion reports of hundreds of water wells and oil and gas wells (indicated by an asterisk on the cross-sections) were used to develop the geologic cross-sections. Stratigraphy (e.g., clays and silts, sands and gravels, sedimentary rock, metamorphic and igneous rock) is presented directly on the cross-sections along with the well screen interval (shown in red). The deeper oil and gas wells are shown extending to the bottom depth of the crosssections, but many extend several hundred to thousands of feet beyond the depictions provided.
The analysis interpreted geologic formations from the borehole data after digitizing stratigraphic data from the various well log sources. This process relied heavily on the distinguishing features of each formation. Particularly, the black sands prevalent in the Mehrten Formation and evidence of shells noted in the descriptions that likely indicated a change to marine sediments of the Ione Formation were often mentioned in well logs. The analysis used surficial geology, location, and depth of the borehole to determine geologic formations. The analysis inferred formation contacts in places where data were limited, including areas on the east and west limbs of the cross-sections, as well as vertically throughout.
As evident on the east-west geologic cross-section transects, the oldest formations are present on the east side of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, shown overlapping the older sedimentary and/or basement rocks of the Sierra Nevada (A-A’), with progressively younger formations present to the west and vertically occupying shallower depth intervals.
The east-west depictions also show the contacts of the formations steeply dipping in the east and nearly flat lying or at low gradients to the west. The northwest-southeast trending cross-section D-D’ shows the formations in their relatively flat-lying positions, with oldest formations on the bottom and progressively younger formations above. This crosssection transect is essentially normal to the dip of the beds. In slight contrast to D-D’, the transect of cross-section E-E’ is somewhat oblique to the dip of the beds, thus there is an apparent down-dip toward the south. This effect is seen because the transect is moving into younger materials from the south toward the north.
The base of fresh water is superimposed on the cross-sections as supported by works from Page (1974) and Williamson (1989), as represented in Figure 2-20. The base of the fresh water represents the vertical extent of fresh non-saline groundwater within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin principal aquifer. The sands of the Mehrten Formation are thickest in the northeast portion of the basin and there is a corresponding deepening of the freshwater aquifer on the north side of the Stockton Fault, as shown on cross-sections A-A’ and B-B’. The depth of the base of fresh water is shallower south of the Stockton Fault in the southern portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
Further discussion of the principal aquifer is provided in Section 2.1.9.
Well depths generally decrease in total depth from north to south across the Subbasin and locally within proximity of the major surface water drainages. In general, coarser sands are found at shallower depths within the lower unit of the Laguna Formation and upper Mehrten Formation (C-C’) in the area of the Stanislaus River Drainage. Similarly, shallow well completions evident on cross-section D-D’ and the southern portion of E-E’ are indicative of the sandier nature of the recent alluvial deposits, the Turlock Lake Formation, and the Laguna Formation near the San Joaquin River.
2.1.8 Basin Boundaries
2.1.8.1 Lateral Boundaries and Boundaries with Neighboring Subbasins The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is within the larger San Joaquin Valley, which comprises the southernmost portion of the Great Valley Geomorphic Province of California. Groundwater subbasins bounding the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin are shown in Figure 1-5 and include:
• Cosumnes Subbasin to the north of Dry Creek
• Modesto Subbasin to the south of the Stanislaus River • South American Subbasin to the northwest of the Mokelumne River • Solano Subbasin to the northwest of the Mokelumne River EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-50
Basin Setting November 2024
• East Contra Costa Subbasin to the west of the San Joaquin River • Tracy Subbasin to the west of the San Joaquin River
Foothill and bedrock highs are to the east within Calaveras and Amador Counties.
2.1.8.2 Definable Bottom of the Basin
The base of the fresh water defines the bottom of the basin, the maximum vertical extent of fresh non-saline groundwater within the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. While water-bearing materials exist below this depth, the saline nature of the groundwater, in addition to the depth itself, generally makes accessing deeper groundwater not economically viable.
Because of the extreme depths to the base of fresh water shown in Figure 2-20, efforts by the USGS have been used to define the “base of fresh water” through the interpretation of the California DOGGR well logs and deep oil well geophysical logs as depicted on maps and cross-sections above. Base of fresh water (encountered saline) has been observed as shallow as 650 feet below ground surface (bgs) in the eastern part of the basin to over 2,000 feet bgs in the northern part of the basin as depicted on the surface contour map and supported by work completed by Williamson (1989).
2.1.9 Principal Aquifer
The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin HCM has one principal aquifer that provides water for domestic, irrigation, and municipal water supply and that is composed of three water production zones. The zones have favorable aquifer characteristics that deliver a reliable water resource because of their basin location and sand thickness.
The zones are:
• Shallow Zone that consists of the alluvial sands and gravels of the Modesto, Riverbank, and Upper Turlock Lake Formations
• Intermediate Zone that consists of the Lower Turlock Lake and Laguna Formations • Deep Zone that consists of the consolidated sands and gravels of the Mehrten Formation Details on the formations are provided in Section 2.1.5.
2.1.9.1 Zones within Principal Aquifer
Zones within the principal aquifer are based on the compilation of five hydrogeologic cross-sections (see Figure 2-22 through Figure 2-24). Cross-sections were based on over 330 well logs in the Subbasin. From these data, well depths for municipal and irrigation wells range from 75 to over 800 feet bgs, with an average depth of 350 feet bgs.
Well logs were reviewed for the following information used in preparing the cross-sections:
• Depth of water table
• Depth and thickness of saturated fine to coarse grained sand and gravel layers • Depth and thickness of discrete layers of sands
• Depth and thickness of discrete clay or silt layers that locally confine groundwater • Depth of water-bearing aquifer materials (e.g., sands and gravels) down to the base of fresh water and deeper, where available
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-51
Basin Setting November 2024
Analyses identified significant permeable zones with high production rates and good water quality at relatively shallow depths (less than 700 feet bgs) due to the following conditions:
• The relatively shallow depths of production wells had high specific capacity that met the water supply demand and reduced the cost associated with drilling deeper • The base of fresh groundwater is deep; ranging from depths of 700 to 1,900 feet bgs • Deeper water is saline and not considered suitable for potable or agricultural use These results were cross-checked with the AEM data to validate the texture of shallow deposits, such as alluvial fans and sediments that interact with streams, and were used in updates to the hydrogeological conceptual model and the ESJWRM model stratigraphy. See Appendix 2-C for more detail on how AEM texture data were incorporated into the representation of Subbasin hydrostratigraphy.
Figure 2-30 and Figure 2-31 depict the wells used during this hydrogeologic characterization effort. Information compiled was used to detail the three permeable water-bearing zones described from surface downward in the following sections.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-52
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-30: Bottom Elevation of Water-Bearing Zones (Shallow) EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-53
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-31: Bottom Elevation of Water-Bearing Zones (Deep and Intermediate)
2.1.9.1.1 Shallow Zone
The shallow water-bearing zone is composed of permeable sediments from recent alluvium, Modesto/Riverbank Formations, and the upper unit of the Turlock Lake Formation that are present west of the older geologic formations and extend across the majority of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. This zone is generally unconfined above the aquitards (clays/silts, including Corcoran clay, and old soil horizons/hardpan layers).
The depositional structure on the eastern side of the valley trough is depicted on the hydrogeologic cross-sections A-A’ through E-E’ (see Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24). This structure results in the groundwater flow that follows both the dip of the beds and hydraulic head differentials. Erosional and depositional features dominate aquifer characteristics. The cross-sections also depict the aquifer thickness from 30 feet to greater than 300 feet.
The Shallow Zone characteristics are supported by the sand thickness information detailed below along with review of basin aquifer parameters and AEM texture data. This zone has high yielding wells. Aquifer characteristic values range as follows (CA DWR, 1967; Burow et al., 2004):
• Transmissivities up to 90,000 gpd/feet
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-54
Basin Setting November 2024
• Specific yields up to 17 percent
• Vertical permeability estimates up to 0.1 feet/day
2.1.9.1.2 Intermediate Zone
As depicted on the hydrogeologic cross-sections A-A’ through E-E’ (see Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24), sands, typically from 10 to over 60 feet thick, are found below the low permeable clay layers or aquitards. The sands and gravels are developed with one relatively continuous sand unit at 350 feet bgs, within the top of the lower unit of the Turlock Lake Formation and Laguna Formation, thinning out at topographic highs to the east. Eastern basin depositional structure shows a pinching, wedging, and combination water-bearing zones with the surficial alluvium.
The aquifer characteristics are supported by the sand thickness information detailed herein for the principal aquifer.
The eastern distribution of this water-bearing zone near the surface suggests unconfined groundwater conditions.
Typically, this zone is found under semi-confined conditions with high yielding wells and is considered the current primary production zone. Area groundwater numerical models support the CA DWR (1967) and Burow and others (2004) aquifer characteristic values range as follows:
• Transmissivities up to 59,500 gallons per day (gpd)/feet • Storage coefficients typically 0.00001 (unitless)
• Vertical permeability estimates up to of 0.07 feet/day
2.1.9.1.3 Deep Zone
The water-bearing “black sands” of the semi-consolidated Mehrten Formation are considered a significant source of water for Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin production wells. The formation is thick in the west, with a limited number of deep wells that penetrate the entire depth of this unit as depicted on the hydrogeologic cross-sections A-A’ through E-E’ (see Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24). This water-bearing zone is confined due to the thick overlying clay units, consolidation, and basin location. Semi-confined conditions are more likely to the east because of the dipping of beds and stratigraphic layer thinning and erosion of clay/silt beds. The beds of the Mehrten Formation dip are at a steeper slope of 90 to 180 feet per mile westward. Consolidated sediments of the Mehrten and Valley Springs Formations are at valley bottom depth and exposed on the eastern foothills. Recharge to these aquifer formations occurs because of the high topographic setting with increased rainfall and exposure of weathered surface and runoff from the adjacent fractured Sierran bedrock.
As depicted on the hydrogeologic cross-sections A-A’ through E-E’ (see Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24), boring logs indicate a significant 30-foot thick gravel encountered at a depth from 140 to 170 feet. Thickly bedded sands were found to exceed 250 feet. At the eastern margins of the basin, consolidated portions of the Mehrten, Valley Spring, and Ione Formations are important for low-yielding bedrock wells and are considered aquifer recharge sources for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. The relatively low permeability and consolidated nature of the Valley Springs and Ione Formations act as the bottom of the Deep Zone (Burow et al., 2004).
The aquifer characteristics are supported by the sand thickness information. The well yields are high in this zone, over 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm). Area groundwater numerical models support the CA DWR (1967) and Burow and others (2004) aquifer characteristic values range as follows:
• Transmissivities up to 250,000 gpd/feet
• Storage coefficients that are typically 0.0001
• Vertical permeability estimates up to of 0.05 feet/day EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-55
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.9.1.4 Limited Aquitards
The Corcoran Clay member of the Turlock Lake Formation and other interbedded clay/silts are aquitards that inhibit groundwater flow. The Corcoran Clay (found at the base of the upper unit of the Turlock Formation) is present at a depth of about 200 feet bgs. The Corcoran Clay has a limited distribution in the extreme southwestern extent of the Subbasin, southwest of the City of Manteca. The clay is typically 20 to over 100 feet thick and is locally eroded and interfingered with coarser materials at its margin. Groundwater below the Corcoran Clay is confined. The Corcoran Clay is found more significantly in subbasins to the south where it is a significant vertical barrier to flow.
Thick clay and silt layers are found within the Laguna and Mehrten Formations. These two formations each have two documented upward coarsening alluvial sequences (Burow et al., 2004). Significant clay and paleosols divide the water-bearing zones at the base of each sequence. The cross-sections (Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24) show both the clay and silt horizons range in thickness from less than 10 feet to over 150 feet. The vertical permeability estimates range from 0.01 to 0.007 feet per day (Burow et al., 2004).
Discontinuous clay horizons have been eroded significantly by the movement of the ancestral rivers. As depicted on the cross-sections, thickest sequences of uppermost permeable units and overbank fines below these layers have been observed. The general thickness and depth are supported by a southeast to northwest movement of river channels to the existing channel location.
Hydraulic connection for the entire depth of the principal aquifer is supported by cross-section depictions that indicate the laterally extensive interbeds of high and low permeable layered deposits. The historical erosional and depositional history supports the referenced hydraulic interconnection. This observation is consistent with the possible thinning and wedging out of the regional clay units due to reworking or ancestral erosion (Davis et al., 1959). In addition to the natural connectivity, the number of water wells drilled through these zones also indicates additional hydraulic connection because of the construction of long well gravel packs that connect the water-bearing zones.
2.1.9.1.5 Deep Saline Groundwater
Connate or saline water occurs from the base of fresh water (shown in Figure 2-20 or Figure 2-31) to the base of continental deposits (shown in Figure 2-32), forming a saline layer that ranges in thickness from 50 to 2,250 feet from the east to the west across the Subbasin. The deep saline layer is not currently a water production zone for consumption or land application. Information used in developing the thickness of the saline water above continental deposits is from Page’s 1974 Base and Thickness of the Post Eocene Continental Deposits in the Sacramento Valley and the thickness of the aquifer developed by Williamson and others (1989).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-56
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-32: Elevation of Base of Continental Deposits
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-57
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.9.2 Aquifer Characteristics and Groundwater Quality Because of the horizontal and vertical distribution of sediments and hydraulic connection between the water-bearing zones, one Principal Aquifer is defined.
An important step in aquifer characterization includes the completion of sand and gravel thickness (isopach) maps. An isopach map illustrates thickness variations within a tabular layer or stratum. Isopachs are contour lines of equal thickness over an area. The combined isopach map for the principal aquifer is depicted on Figure 2-33. The isopach map details are as follows:
• Over 313 water supply well logs with depths to 1,000 feet were used, with an average depth of 540 feet bgs. • Average sand and gravel thickness is 140 feet.
• The thickest sand and gravel sequences ranged from 500 to 700 feet near the Stanislaus River, south of Woodward Reservoir and northeast of Oakdale.
• Thicknesses from 200 to 400 feet were observed west of Morada along Bear Creek and toward the Delta. • The 200 to 500 feet thickness contours were observed near Stockton along the Duck Creek historical drainage.
Recognizing the sand and gravel thickness and the relative hydraulic conductivity of these permeable units, a more comprehensive understanding of the aquifer transmissivity can be made as detailed in Section 2.1.9.2.1.
As discussed in Section 2.1.4.3, soils facilitate rainfall and applied water infiltration, which is a significant recharge source for the Shallow Zone. Other recharge takes place through infiltration and percolation of surface water bodies and via groundwater flow from upgradient areas to the zones within the entire principal aquifer and potentially from flow between subbasins from the north, south, and west. The Intermediate and Deep Zones are recharged via infiltration near sand and gravel layers that are typically thicker near historical riverbeds. Vertical movement of water through sand deposits is more rapid compared to the confining clay deposits. In the high topographic areas along the east margin of the Subbasin, water-bearing zone sediments are exposed at the surface and considered significant to recharge.
2.1.9.2.1 Aquifer Parameters and Production Zone Well Capacities The GSP uses several sources to summarize the field-tested aquifer characteristics and production zone well capacity information for the principal aquifer.
For depiction purposes, Table 2-3 includes four investigation areas encompassing the entire Subbasin: Calaveras County, Farmington, Manteca, and near the Stanislaus Triangle Area (Riverbank). For these examples, the maximum well yields range from greater than 100 to 2,800 gpm. The range in specific capacity is 27 to 90 gpm/ft of drawdown.
These numbers relate to the testing of individual well capacities and the anticipated pumping water level related to the pumping rate. Transmissivity and storage values relate to the aquifer character anticipated at a distance away from a pumping well. Specific yield (SY) is defined as a unit volume of water released from an aquifer per unit decline in water table. Specific storage (SS) of a saturated aquifer is defined as the amount of water released from storage per unit decline in hydraulic head (Freeze and Cherry, 1979).
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-58
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-33: Sand and Gravel Isopach Map
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-59
Basin Setting November 2024
Table 2-3: Production Zone Capacities
Sources/Well
Information
Maximum
Well
Yield
(gpm)
Maximum
Well
Specific
Capacity
(gpm/ft
drawdown)
Maximum
Transmissivity
(gpd/ft)
Maximum
Specific
Yield
(Unconfined
[%])
Specific
Storage
(Confined
[Unitless])
Sand and
Gravel
Thickness
Encountered
Mehrten
Depth, (feet)
Entire Eastern
San Joaquin
Subbasin
(CA DWR, 2006)
1,500 n/a n/a 7.3 % >150 400-600
Calaveras County
(WRIME, 2003)
>100 >10 >35,000 >6 % >120 At Surface
Farmington
(DE, 2012)
800 27 19,600 >5 % 0.001 >110 230
Manteca
(NV5, 2017)
2,500 90 61,000 >10 % 0.0001 >130 350
Stanislaus
Triangle
(BookmanEdmonston, 2005)
>2,800 >40
(DE, 2007)
35,000 17 % 0.001 >150 Dip to the
West
Using the basic physical properties of groundwater flow, a confined aquifer transmissivity is defined by:
T = Kb
Where: T is transmissivity
K is the hydraulic conductivity (rate of flow under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit cross-sectional area)
b is the aquifer thickness.
Using a typical clean sand hydraulic conductivity value of 500 gpd/feet 2 and a thickness of 120 feet, the aquifer
transmissivity averages approximately 60,000 gpd/feet, which is similar to the documented values reported above (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). For additional comparison, data for the five layers of the ESJWRM were provided in the ESJWRM Model Report and Version 3.0 Model Documentation Updates TM (see Appendix 2-A and Appendix 2-C, respectively)
The distribution of production wells and monitoring wells is provided on Figure 2-30 and Figure 2-31. Table 2-4 provides descriptors for the three water-bearing zones:
• Number of wells for each zone
• Well depths
• Wells used on the cross-sections
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-60
Basin Setting November 2024
Additional aquifer parameter confirmation is provided by the ESJWRM as follows (Woodard & Curran):
• Horizontal Hydraulic Conductivity – The horizontal hydraulic conductivity varies across the non-saline model layers ranging from 1.1 ft/day to 72.7 feet/day or 0.148 to 10 gal/day/feet2. • Specific Storage and Yield – SS and SY are used to represent the available storage at nodes in confined and unconfined aquifers. SS values range from 4.18 x 10-6to 2.05 x 10-4. SY values range from 4 to 10 percent.
Table 2-4: Wells within Water-Bearing Zones
All Wells
Water-Bearing Zone Number of
Wells
Average Construction
Depth (feet bgs)
Average Construction Bottom
Elevation (feet MSL)
Shallow 452 165 -82
Intermediate and Deep 201 539 -411
Pumping Wells
Water-Bearing Zone Number of
Wells
Average Bottom of
Screen Depth (feet bgs)
Average Bottom of Screen
Elevation (feet MSL)
Shallow 148 270 -238
Intermediate and Deep 113 369 -300
Groundwater Wells Used in Cross-Sections, by Formation
Water-Bearing Zone Number of
Wells
Average Bottom of
Borehole Depth (feet
bgs)
Average Bottom of Borehole
Elevation (feet MSL)
Shallow 39 234 -144
Intermediate and Deep 273 672 -566
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-61
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.9.2.2 Regional Historical Groundwater Flow and Surface Water Interaction The horizontal groundwater flow direction for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin is typically towards areas of lower groundwater near the center of the Subbasin. The flow generally mirrors topography and is relatively consistent over time. The flow direction follows the overall west dipping gradient of the geologic formations in the eastern portions of the Subbasin. Higher groundwater elevations are in the foothills on the east side of the Subbasin, and the elevations decrease following the topography. In the western portion of the Subbasin, groundwater flows east toward areas with relatively lower groundwater elevation. Horizontal groundwater flow is further discussed in Section 2.2.
The GSP evaluates vertical groundwater gradients using the USGS nested wells in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin.
Clark and others (2012) drilled and assessed several nested wells or multiple well sites in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. These nested well sites include three to five monitoring wells per borehole with screen intervals at depths of approximately 100 to 900 feet (Clark et al., 2012). Groundwater elevation in these monitoring wells, measured from 2006 to 2008, usually indicate the same trend. Groundwater elevation is typically lower in monitoring wells with deeper screen placement, suggesting a downward flow of groundwater. The difference in groundwater elevations from the shallowest to deepest monitoring wells within each borehole is typically between 5 and 20 feet (Clark et al., 2012).
Additional discussion regarding differences and distribution across the Subbasin is provided in Section 2.2.
Historical groundwater-surface water interaction in the context of the twenty-seven years of the historical model (ESJWRM) is discussed in Section 2.2.6.
2.1.9.2.3 General Groundwater Quality
2.1.9.2.3.1 Geologic Formation Groundwater Quality
The USGS and other government agencies completed several major studies concerning groundwater quality in the Central Valley of California, which includes the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Repeatedly mentioned in these studies is the natural geochemical effects on groundwater quality that is specific to geologic formations (Creely & Force, 2007; Faunt, 2009; CA DWR, 1967). This natural effect is of great interest for the GSP implementation because groundwater level fluctuations from overdraft and recharge may result in water quality changes that is specific to geologic formations.
Natural geochemical reactions can be highly variable, even from well to well, as reactions depend on a number of factors, including the amount of 1) reactive surface area of the formation sediments; 2) available oxygen in the formation as affected by fluctuations in groundwater elevation, depth to groundwater, and oxygenated near-surface recharge; and 3) potentially inorganic-oxidizing bacteria.
For the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, igneous and metamorphic rocks of the Sierra Nevada Mountains underlie the upstream drainages. These rocks predominately contain oxygen, silicon, aluminum, iron, calcium, sodium, potassium, and magnesium (Creely & Force, 2007). Rivers draining areas of granitic rocks typically have better water quality than metamorphic or volcanic rocks (CA DWR, 1967). For example, the Mokelumne River drains areas of granitic origin and has a lower salt content than the Calaveras River, which drains an area of primarily metamorphic rocks (CA DWR, 1967). Streams originating from either igneous or metamorphic rocks have relatively low amounts of dissolved solids, compared to marine sedimentary rocks that make up the Coast Range west of the Subbasin (Faunt, 2009). However, marine formations also underlie continental deposits in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and have considerable amounts of chlorine, sulfur, bromine, and boron from connate water (Creely & Force, 2007). Connate water originates from fluids that are trapped in the pores of the sedimentary rocks as they are deposited and can contain many mineral components as ions in solution. Above these marine formations are continental deposits described in Section 2.1.5.
Groundwater quality in wells in Calaveras County is characterized by Metzger and others in a 2012 study, Test Drilling and Data Collection in the Calaveras County Portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, California, December 2009 – June 2011 (Metzger et al., 2012). These wells are in the eastern portion of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, in an area underlain by the Ione and Valley Springs Formations. This study assessed groundwater samples EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-62
Basin Setting November 2024
and identified three water types present: calcium-magnesium-bicarbonate, sodium-bicarbonate, and mixed cationmixed anion water. The mixed cation-mixed anion group consisted mostly of sodium and chloride. These groundwater samples also showed high levels of arsenic, which were attributed to pH level variation or redox potential (Metzger et al., 2012). The Ione Formation, for instance, is known to have high sulfate levels in groundwater related to the pH influence on pyrite-sulfide rich coal deposits.
Arsenic is of particular concern because it is naturally occurring in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin and is hazardous to human health. Izbicki and other’s (2008) study, Source, Distribution, and Management of Arsenic in Water from Wells, Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin, California, assesses the concentration and sources of arsenic in various wells. Arsenic was detected mostly in San Joaquin County, and the largest concentrations were in the western portion of the Subbasin (Izbicki et al., 2008). The surficial geology in this area consists of the Modesto and Riverbank Formations, which are underlain by the Turlock Lake and Laguna Formations (see Figure 2-18, Figure 2-22, Figure 2-23, and Figure 2-24). Sources of arsenic include weathering of minerals containing arsenic, desorption of arsenic under certain pH values, and release of arsenic in redox conditions (Izbicki et al., 2008).
Another element of great importance is nitrogen as it is included in many compounds that are by-products of agriculture, which heavily dominates the landscape of the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Elevated levels of nitrate can typically occur as a result of fertilizer application, manure and septic waste, and natural sources. Extensive work by Holloway and others (1998) showed the Mokelumne River watershed contained significant quantities of nitrogen from bedrock lithology. The upper part of the watershed, outside the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin, is underlain by igneous and metamorphic rock, but the metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks contained the highest levels of nitrogen (Holloway et al., 1998).
General water quality of principal aquifers is summarized in the following sections, as required by CCR Title 23 §354.14.
General water quality can be determined by assessing commonly measured inorganic parameters as indicators of change. Evaluating these inorganic parameters involves looking at historical trends and comparing results to certain thresholds, as well as determining water types. These parameters include major cations and anions, listed below:
Anions Cations
Bicarbonate Calcium
Carbonate Magnesium
Chloride Potassium
Sulfate Sodium
2.1.9.2.3.2 Ion Composition
Evaluating the historical trends of these parameters is not straightforward. GAMA records include some groundwater quality results for the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin going back to the 1940s. However, a thorough analysis requires a large amount of data on all the major cations and anions mentioned above. A large number of measurements of this kind were taken from 2005 to 2017, as shown in Figure 2-34. This analysis was not updated as part of this GSP amendment as basic groundwater chemistry reflects the geology of origin, which has not varied considerably since the preparation of the 2020 GSP.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-63
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-34: Total Number of Cation/Anion Measurements in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-64
Basin Setting November 2024
General water quality of the Subbasin can be determined by assessing water type over specific years, in this case, within the time frame of 2005 to 2017. Evaluating the years 2005, 2011, and 2017 provides an even spread over the selected time frame and gives an idea of possible water type trends. Trilinear diagrams for each of these years show relative concentrations of the major cations and anions (see Figure 2-35). Each symbol in the diagram represents a water sample collected. Water samples, represented by the same symbol, are plotted in the two lower triangle diagrams for each year based on their relative cation (left) and anion (right) concentrations. The top diagram represents a projection of the two ternary diagrams for easier comparison.
Due to the difference in sampling locations, the years 2005 and 2011 show carbonate and bicarbonate-rich waters, and 2017 displays increased chloride and sulfate concentrations in some wells. These dates correlate to both data size increases and heavier rainfall periods. Chloride concentrations in 2017 are generally less than 150 milligrams per liter (mg/L), with some higher measurements reaching 2,000 mg/L. Sulfate
concentrations in 2017 are mostly under 300 mg/L, but a few extremely high levels up to 100,000 mg/L exist near the City of Manteca.
GAMA groundwater quality data in the northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin were assessed by
Bennett et al. in 2006. Groundwater samples were compared to thresholds such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCL).
None of the major cations and anions measured in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin resulted in exceedances of the SMCLs (Bennett et al., 2006). These measurements took place in December 2004 to February 2005. Additional parameters were sampled in this study and are discussed further in Section 2.2 (Historical Groundwater Conditions).
Figure 2-35: Trilinear Diagrams
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-65
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.9.2.3.3 Total Dissolved Solids
A wide range of total dissolved solids (TDS) values exist in the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Based on data in the GAMA database from 2005 to 2017, TDS values generally varied from 100 to 2,000 mg/L (Figure 2-36), with a median value of 520 mg/L. Over the 13-year period shown in Figure 2-36, the median concentration of TDS has steadily increased from approximately 400 mg/L in 2005 to approximately 600 mg/L in 2017. Figure 2-37 shows the variation of TDS concentrations across the basin in 2017. Sources of TDS in the Subbasin include Delta sediments, deep deposits, and irrigation return water, as discussed in Section 2.2.4.1. Additional details on TDS concentrations are provided in Section 2.2 (Historical Groundwater Conditions).
Figure 2-36: TDS Annual Variation
Note: This Box-and-Whisker plot represents a summary of five different statistic values of the distribution. Minimum and maximum values are represented by the end points of the extended lines. The center line indicates the median. The top and bottom of the rectangle indicate the first quartile (25th percentile) and third quartile (75th percentile) of the distribution, respectively.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-66
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-37: TDS Concentrations in 2017
2.1.9.2.3.4 Chloride
Chloride concentrations also vary considerably across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin. Based on data in the GAMA database from 2005 to 2017, chloride values generally varied from non-detect to 300 mg/L (Figure 2-38), with a median value of 50 mg/L. Over the 13-year period shown in Figure 2-38, the median concentration of chloride has remained fairly stable. Higher chloride concentrations during 2017 are apparent near the cities of Manteca and Stockton (
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-67
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-39). Sources of chloride in the Subbasin are similar to those for TDS and include Delta sediments, deep deposits, and irrigation return water. Additional details on chloride concentrations are provided in Section 2.2 (Historical Groundwater Conditions).
Figure 2-38: Chloride Annual Variation
Note: This Box-and-Whisker plot represents a summary of five different statistic values of the distribution. Minimum and maximum values are represented by the end points of the extended lines. The center line indicates the median. The top and bottom of the rectangle indicate the first quartile (25th percentile) and third quartile (75th percentile) of the distribution, respectively.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-68
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-39: Chloride Concentrations in 2017
2.1.9.2.3.5 Sulfate
Sulfate concentrations vary considerably across the Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin ranging from non-detect to around 250 mg/L with a median value of around 25 mg/L Figure 2-40, based on data in the GAMA database from 2005 to 2017. Over the 13-year period shown in Figure 2-40, the median concentration of sulfate, like chloride, has remained fairly stable and does not show any obvious trends. Higher sulfate concentrations during 2017 are apparent near the cities of Manteca and Stockton Figure 2-41
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-69
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-40: Sulfate Annual Variation
Note: This Box-and-Whisker plot represents a summary of five different statistic values of the distribution. Minimum and maximum values are represented by the end points of the extended lines. The center line indicates the median. The top and bottom of the rectangle indicate the first quartile (25th percentile) and third quartile (75th percentile) of the distribution, respectively.
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-70
Basin Setting November 2024
Figure 2-41: Sulfate Concentrations in 2017
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-71
Basin Setting November 2024
2.1.10 HCM Data Gaps
All hydrogeologic conceptual models contain a certain amount of uncertainty and can be improved with additional data and analysis. The Eastern San Joaquin Subbasin HCM data gaps are present in the understanding of the HCM presented in this GSP. While recent efforts have been made to address these data gaps, as noted below, the following data gap elements still require additional information and will be updated with future monitoring, modeling, and data refinement efforts.
Aquifer Characteristics
o Aquifer characteristics (such as hydraulic conductivity) have a significant impact on how projects and management actions in one part of the Subbasin may influence sustainability in other parts of the Subbasin.
While this data gap has been filled to some extent with the airborne electromagnetic (AEM) data collected by DWR and the boring logs from the new monitoring wells constructed in the Subbasin, improving the understanding of the Subbasin aquifer system and leading to the addition of a shallow alluvium layer and other refinements to ESJWRM numerical flow model refinements, much still remains unknown. Aquifer characteristics should be confirmed through additional aquifer testing or additional monitoring wells.
Groundwater Level Data
• Depth- or zone-specific water levels to assess vertical interconnection, including zones within the principal aquifer. This data gap has been partially addressed by the recent construction of the two Technical Support System (TSS) and Delta multi-completion well.
• Additional shallow groundwater data near surface waters and natural communities commonly associated with groundwater (NCCAGs). This data gap has been partially addressed by the recent construction of five new shallow monitoring wells near interconnected surface waters. • Additional groundwater level data in the east and northwest areas of the Subbasin. This data gap has been partially addressed by recent improvements to the groundwater level representative monitoring network. See Chapter 4 for additional information.
• Additional groundwater level data near major creeks and rivers to improve quantification and understanding of subsurface flows between groundwater subbasins and surface water-groundwater interaction. This data gap has been partially addressed by the recent construction of five new shallow monitoring wells near interconnected surface waters and formation of a representative monitoring network specific for monitoring impacts to interconnected surface waters.
Groundwater Quality Data
• Water quality of the three zones within the principal aquifer. This data gap has been partially addressed through recent refinements to the representative monitoring network for groundwater quality. See Chapter 4 for additional information.
o Additional monitoring at various depths for different constituents will help inform the understanding of water quality. This can be achieved through installation of new monitoring wells or through determination of screened intervals of existing monitoring wells. o Additional depth-specific water quality data will inform minimum thresholds for the degraded water quality sustainability indicator and help monitor and identify potential undesirable results.
Subsurface Conditions
EXHIBIT 1
2024 Groundwater Sustainability Plan Amendment 2-72
Basin Setting November 2024
• Stockton Fault extent and impact on the base of fresh water. • Improved characterization of near-surface soil conditions as they relate to recharge. • Further definition of aquifer characteristics (e.g., hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and storage parameters) within and near Subbasin boundary areas to the east, southeast, north, and northwest, including aquifer tests.