10/1/2018 Greater Kaweah GSA Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Kaweah Delta Water Conservation District 2975 N. Farmersville Blvd. - Farmersville CA Tuesday, October 2, 2018 GSP Development Status • Kaweah Subbasin Coordination – Numerical Model – Data Management System – Subbasin Hydrogeologic Zones – Basin Setting • Greater Kaweah GSP – GSP Document and Mapping Development 1
10/1/2018 GSP Development Schedule Year 2017 2018 2019 2020 Month Task Number 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 GSP Content Kaweah Sub-Basin Coordination Effort 4A-1 Data Management System 4A-2 Basin Setting 4A-2a Water Supply Accounting 4A-3 Numerical Modeling (Development & Sub-Basin Level Analysis) 4A-4a Sustainability Goal and Undesirable Results 4A-4b Monitoring Networks 4A-4c Minimum Thresholds, Measurable Objectives, and Interim Milestones 4A-4d Projects, Management Actions, and Adaptive Management 4A-5 Outreach Great Kaweah GSA Effort 4D-1 Data Management System (Maintenance) 4D-2 Numerical Modeling (GSA Specific Runs & Data Management) 4D-3a Introduction 4D-3b Basin Setting 4D-3c Sustainability Goals and Undesirable Results 4D-3d Monitoring Networks 4D-3e Minimum Thresholds, Measurable Objectives, and Interim Milestones 4D-3f Water Supply Accounting 4D-3g Projects, Management Actions, and Adaptive Management 4D-3h GSP Reporting 4D-4 Outreach within GSA Area Completion Date GSA Task Sub-Basin Task 1/30/2020 Overlap with Sub-Basin Task Overlap with GSA Task GSP Development Schedule (6-Month Look Ahead) SUBBASIN ACTIVITIES Complete Groundwater Model Update Groundwater Model Simulations Complete Basin Setting/Water Budget SMC Goal and SI Assessment Define Management Areas Water Level Projections Develop Thresholds and Objectives for MAs 2018 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan 2019 Feb Complete Intro and Basin Setting/Water Budget SMC Thresholds and Objectives – Iterative Process Developed by Stakeholders Informed by technical information including groundwater modeling Draft Monitoring Network Chapter Groundwater Model Simulations Projects and Management Actions GSA Deliverable 2
10/1/2018 Numerical Model • Phase 1: KDWCD MODFLOW model review is complete. – Model Assessment TM reviewed by the TAC and comments provided to GEI. – GEI is now in the process of addressing those comments. • Phase 2: Expand the model spatially and temporarily – Model grid has been expanded and refined to 500 ft x 500 ft – Groundwater Elevation database for calibration targets has been completed – Boundary Conditions have been spatially located and are being populated – Davids Engineering data has been processed for input into the model. • Modeling team is working to develop GW pumping by area. – Estimated Completion Date for Draft Calibrated Model: November 2018 • Phase 3: GSA specific model runs – Late 2018/Early 2019 3
10/1/2018 Numerical Model INSERT FIGURE FROM BRENT. Surface Water Deliveries were Subtracted from Crop Demand 4
10/1/2018 Surface Water Deliveries were Subtracted from Crop Demand Data Management System • Data formatting that has been completed and uploaded: – Well Construction • From Tulare Co. database – Lithology – Water Quality • Ongoing Data Formatting: – Remaining Water Quality – Remaining Well Construction – Remaining Lithology 5
10/1/2018 Subbasin Hydrogeologic Zones • The Management Team Technical Working Group has been meeting to discuss the Subbasin wide definitions of Undesirable Results and how to establish Management Areas with Subbasin-wide Hydrogeologic Zones (HZs). – Undesirable Results definitions will be presented at the Subbasin Management Team meeting, and discussed at each GSA’s respective TAC for recommendations. – Hydrogeologic Zones were shown at the Subbasin Management Team meeting on 9/19/18. Proposed Hydrogeologic Zones 6
10/1/2018 Proposed Hydrogeologic Zones Cross Section Index HZ 4 HZ 2 HZ 3 HZ 4 HZ 7 HZ 8 HZ 10 7
10/1/2018 HZ 1 HZ 2 HZ 4 HZ 2 HZ 4 HZ 6 HZ 7 SMCs – Next Steps • Once Undesirable Results definitions are finalized, the TACs will review data for each Management Area to set Sustainable Management Criteria (SMCs) in coordination with the other GSAs. – Minimum Thresholds, Measurable Objectives, and Interim Milestones will be coordinated, depending on the Management Area’s location with respect to the other GSA(s). – REMINDER : The GSAs still maintain control over projects and management actions necessary to meet the Measurable Objectives in their respective management areas. 8
10/1/2018 SMCs – Next Steps • As a starting point for Minimum Thresholds, GEI is working to develop GW level trends based on hydrographs for each HZ during the ten worst years of hydrology (2006 – 2016). – This is to identify a GWL to avoid for each Representative Monitoring Site within a given Management Area. • Measurable Objectives (i.e. the target GWL for each Monitoring Site) will be set to meet the Sustainability Goals for each GSA, which are coordinated with the Goal for the Subbasin. Subbasin Level Basin Setting • Subbasin Level Basin Setting report sent to the GSA managers on 9/24/18. The report includes: – Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model (HCM) narrative and figures – Subbasin Water Budget and Water Budget for each GSA – Characterization of Water Quality – Description of Historical and Current Subsidence • GSA Managers to provide their comments by 10/15/18. • Comments received from GKGSA TAC to also be addressed in revision of figures for Basin Setting report. 9
10/1/2018 Subbasin Level Basin Setting - HCM • In addition to a narrative description of the hydrogeology of the Subbasin, the following figures were provided: – Groundwater Contours for key years – Hydrographs for Key Wells throughout the Subbasin – Map of hydraulic parameters Spring 1981 Groundwater Contours 10
10/1/2018 Spring 1999 Groundwater Contours Spring 2011 Groundwater Contours 11
10/1/2018 Spring 2015 Groundwater Contours Hydrographs Criteria for Selecting Key Wells: • Long Period of Record • Known Completion • Representative of GW Levels in the Area A total of 1300 hydrographs have been created for the entire Subbasin and are available for inclusion in the GSPs for each GSA. 12
10/1/2018 Key Well Locations Select Key Well Hydrographs 13
10/1/2018 Vertical Gradients Map (Based on Paired Monitoring Wells) Vertical Gradients Map (Based on Paired Monitoring Wells) 14
10/1/2018 Distribution of Hydraulic Parameters Water Budget • Components have been Identified for Inflow and Outflow. • Framework for Sub-Basin and GSA-Level Water Budgets developed. • Davids Engineering ET Data through 2017 has been included in current iteration of Water Budget. – Subsurface Flow conditions being developed for years 2013 through 2017 for the Sub-Basin. • The Water Budgets themselves are PRELIMINARY and being further refined with data received after they were done. 15
10/1/2018 Greater Kaweah GSA Water Budget Summary Annual Ag Pumping Water Year 1999 16
10/1/2018 Annual Ag Pumping Water Year 2016 Annual Surface Water Delivery Water Year 1999 17
10/1/2018 Annual Surface Water Delivery Water Year 2016 Subbasin Water Quality • 47 Public Water Systems were identified and analyzed within the Subbasin. • Total of 174 public water system wells evaluated. • Water quality data was available in State Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) database. • GeoTracker and EnviroStor Databases were used to identify contaminant plumes/sites. • State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)’s Human Right to Water Portal was used to identify contaminants commonly violating drinking water standards. 18
10/1/2018 Public Well Locations Constituents Analyzed • Arsenic • Nitrate • Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) • Dibromochloropropane (DBCP) • 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) • Sodium • Chloride • Hexavalent Chromium 19
10/1/2018 Observed Arsenic Trends • Wells with high arsenic levels tend to be on the western portion of the Subbasin where the Corcoran clay is present. • Wells generally deeper than 250 ft have arsenic concentrations greater than 5 ppb. • pH levels greater than 9 units were observed in wells with arsenic levels greater than 10 ppb. • pH ranges from 7.0 – 8.6 units were observed in wells with arsenic levels less than 5 ppb. Arsenic Wells Concentration > 5 ppb 20
Recommend
More recommend
