Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Water Commission Agenda Packet for September 2018
Menchaca, Clarissa From: Butte County Department of Water& Resource Conservation <bcwater@buttecounty.net> Sent: Friday,August]1' 2O189:14AM To: Menchaca, Clarissa Subject: Water Commission Agenda Packet for September 2018 Water Commission Packet Correspondence WaterSolutions Newsletter (printable) WaterSolutions "To manage and conserve water and other resources for the citizens of Butte County" 'rte ' �fl- � 2,fid U�� �2 R. kG"S�s, ,a{�`,ilfy'' �`�i 2y 4"tf#E a }moi r� S L Vols Sustainable Groundwa t er Mana Man +em ent Act Vina and Wyandotte Creek Governance The establishment of governance structures for the Wyandotte Creek and Vina subbasins are moving ahead. On September 11th, the Board of Supervisors will consider adopting two separate agreements, one for the Vina subbasin and one for the Wyandotte Creek subbasin. The two agreements are similar in that they are Joint Powers Agreements (Agreements) that create a new groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) covering each subbasin, and assuming all of the SGMA authorities. Under the Agreements, the two new GSAs would be responsible for developing, adopting, and implementing the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the subbasin in order to implement the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act(SGMA) requirements and achieve sustainability goals. The Vina and Wyandotte Creek GSAs would also involve the public and subbasin stakeholders through outreach and engagement in developing and implementing their respective GSP. Under the terms of the Agreements, Butte County and the other existing GSAs (the City of Chico, Durham Irrigation District, Rock Creek Reclamation District, the City of Oroville and the Thermalito Water and Sewer District)would rescind their individual GSA status to form the respective Vina and Wyandotte Creek GSAs. Although the local 2 agencies would rescind their individual GSA status, they would also retain their existing authorities. For example, Butte County would retain its land use, well permitting and police powers. The creation of the GSAs lends consistency in planning and programs. Both JPAs provide for a robust opportunity for non-public agency involvement on the GSA Boards and the advisory committees. At the heart of the Agreements is the focus to maximize local input and decision-making on the development of sustainable management criteria in Management Areas. In the Vina subbasin, there would be three Management Areas, two in the rural areas to the south and north of Chico and one within and adjacent to the City of Chico. In the Wyandotte Creek subbasin, there would be two Management Areas, one within and adjacent to the City of Oroville and the other in the rural area south of Oroville. This process would address the different water demands and sustainability considerations in the urban and rural areas of the subbasins. Establishment of the governance structures is critical to continue the progress to meet the deadline of developing and submitting a GSP for each subbasin by January 30, 2022. For more information on the proposed governance structure for Wyandotte Creek and Vina please visit our SGMA webpage. , olikt,., a 1 r � A r itt,„(..4 , 6 elk �� ,.;,,,if A7.171II7, k ,,„,,,„,,,,,: i ria ?`qa �� 1rYf ���'`� s i S f' ', t ,,.,fig"" 3 GV Sri I ■ „ "'t ,, ,sr tea`£3r e Public Engagement under SGMA One of the major underpinnings of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is having groundwater management decisions made by local public agencies who agree to be groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs). Along with this authority, SGMA places additional specific public engagement requirements on GSAs. How are we engaging the public? Read Here 3 BUTTE COUNTY 2018 Water Quality Trend Basin Management Objective Water Qualit rend Monitoring Grid Monitoring Results v ,. s This year marks the 17th year of the Butte VINA y • County's Groundwater Quality Trend Monitoring Program. Every year our SNI-• •: m Department collects groundwater from 13 DONNA IV - wells located throughout the county to � e_ "NU• ,,,.:.;,, evaluate groundwater conditions for v' • GNRNAM! �� °YTg"••'Elf DUOI. • x ft evidence of saline intrusion. Butte County's S•LOUGH .• '° most westerly boundary is approximately �u a • .ffi . . RGKe 100 miles east of the Pacific Ocean which r secu . v s: •• -.i WEareRNCA,LAL •., may lead some people to wonder why we �`` would be concerned about saline intrusion • am°°'"l,ew.a«.,,Ivro•. . .� .u,a•.ay-xNRN.m. • 4,ENu,LTa this far inland. •elm-west GmkY • , c• cnm.k.. XIGNVALE e.`"`."Daro Area • Why? Find out here 0 Wham Dayton Ymn e equal, ANOOm • CREEK •MP.b7 BILGE• 1 nl[ aNEBT ORRN.EY. , PoNT.9ue.v...Y O TTE Q 7Mrm.6. • R Tn•n.K.mm.,N. atm sRn, • • G� (•;Y*,w,n C�n.I(..N) 1 •,�n<,m,n Canal lw.nl o 1 l . a a r wuN.M Updated 2121e Basin Boundary Modification Froposed Basin BoundaModifications UpdateR�O.,.6Y.NSID06V --- - R.ga.e auCe SAO..n _- - The Butte County Department of Water i and Resource Conservation's request to N p, modify the Wyandotte Creek and Vina '---------,, _. c?-5-+ f subbasins were submitted and deemed l .,i,3:',3:':-f� ti, : ` complete by the Department of Water - 1•• _ Resources (DWR). This opens up 30-day -- k`.... M �' H comment periods through the DWR SGMA ...-.. moi ';>tiy Yi � ;•.,;ti , * ,,,- Portal. xJ w � f .�; Read more J. :i •i, �� i: a y J ,•.,•y.:• {; i?ili..i�:. .. ., tit ;i;4';'E ; iii ,.EEK r— '4�iSi r cant. �, : is : --- ,.-,-----2—"•r--'4,—. .u.n wni:`,..71., y i�.:z.n•r:.c— 4 .-._.4' Want to know :more about 5 e-StAte's ` "` x-- Butte County's water? New phone number Mailing List Sign-up Meeting Schedules On January first, Butte Want to know more about Water Commission County Department of Water what is happening in the 91512018, 1:30 pm & Resource Conservation world of water? You can now Board of Supervisors changed phone numbers. customize the information Chambers you get from our 25 County Center Drive The mainline phone Department. number is 530.552.3595. 10/3/2018, 1:30 pm Do you only want Board of Supervisors Please update your contact information pertaining to the Chambers information accordingly. Sustainable Groundwater 25 County Center Drive Management Act(SGMA)? Only the WaterSolutions Board of Supervisors newsletter?Would you 9/11/2018, 9:00 am rather we send you all we've Board of Supervisors got? It's all up to you. Chambers 25 County Center Drive To update your personal profile or preferences just 9/25/2018, 9:00 am click the "Update Profile" link Board of Supervisors on the bottom of the page. Chambers 25 County Center Drive GPAC Meeting 9/17/2018, 8:30 am 311 Nicholas C Shouten Lane, Room A009 Chico, CA Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to work with you. We look forward to continuing our dedication to cooperation, collaboration and keeping control of our water in the hands of locals. Please feel free to contact our office with any questions you may have. Sincerely, Administrative Analyst, Associate Butte County Department of Water& Resource Conservation 530.552.3595 bcwater@buttecounty.net www.buttecountv.net/waterresourceconservation 5 DWRC SGMA WaterSolutions z^ 91 308 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 .44 Vfittr 530.552.3595 bcwater@buttecounty.net Butte County Contact Us WATER&RESOURCE CONSERVATION Butte County Department of Water & Resource Conservation 1308 Nelson Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965 tel. 530.552.3595 Unsubscribe cmenchaca@buttecounty.net Update Profile I About our service provider Sent by bcwater@buttecounty.net 6 WATER AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION 308 Nelson Avenue,Oroville,CA 95965 Telephone:(530)5384343 Fax:(530)538-3807 www.buttecounty.net/waterandresource Butte County bcwater@buttecounty.net Paul Gosselin,Director WATER 8 RESOURCE CONSERVATION August 29, 2018 TO: Butte County Water Commission FROM: Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation SUBJECT: Meeting Agenda Date: September 5,2018 Time: 1:30 p.m. Place: 25 County Center Drive Oroville,CA 95965 AGENDA ITEMS 1) Roll call. 2) *Approval of minutes for the August 1, 2018 meeting. (Chair Skinner) 3) Public members wishing to address the Commission on items not listed on the agenda. (The Water Commission is prohibited by State law from taking action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda. Comments will be limited to five minutes per person) 4) *Report from the Basin Management Objective Program (Chapter 33A)ad hoc subcommittee and possible recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. (Kelly Peterson, Water and Resource Conservation) 5) *Presentation on the 2018 Water Quality Trend Monitoring(Kelly Peterson, Water and Resource Conservation) 6) Update and possible recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on activities associated with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. (SGMA). a. *Groundwater Sustainability Plan development (Christina Buck, Water and Resource Conservation) b. *Basin Boundary Modifications (Christina Buck, Water and Resource Conservation) c. *Proposed Governance Structures for the Vina and Wyandotte Creek subbasins (Paul Gosselin, Water and Resource Conservation) 1 d. Groundwater Pumpers Advisory Committee(GPAC) (Paul Gosselin, Water and Resource Conservation) 7) Reports from Water Commissioners and staff on issues of interest. a. *Report on groundwater issues. (Kelly Peterson, Water and Resource Conservation) b. Update on Delta issues (Paul Gosselin, Water and Resource Conservation) c. *Report on water related activities of the Board of Supervisors. (Paul Gosselin, Water and Resource Conservation) d. Update on the activities of Integrated Regional Water Management(IRWM) Plans i. Northern Sacramento Valley IRWM Board (NSV Board)(Christina Buck, Water and Resource Conservation). ii. Upper Feather River IRWM Board(Kelly Peterson, Water and Resource Conservation). e. Other issues. 8) Future meeting dates and locations: October 3, 2018 Board of Supervisors Chambers 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 96965 9) Commissioners wishing to address items not listed on the agenda. (The Water Commission is prohibited by state law from taking action on any item presented if it is not listed on the agenda). 10)*Communications received and referred. (Copies of all communications are available in the Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation, 308 Nelson Avenue, Oroville, California). 11)Adjournment. *Materials attached cc: Water Commission Mailing List Window Posting 2 WC Agenda Item #2 MINUTES OF THE BUTTE COUNTY WATER COMMISSION August 1, 2018 Board of Supervisors Chambers 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 1. Roll call. Commissioners present: Commissioners Chance, Grover, Jones, Roethler, Schohr and Tennis. Commissioners absent: Commissioner Kimmelshue, Skinner and Washington. 2. Approval of minutes for the June 6,2018 meeting. Motion by Commissioner Chance, second by Commissioner Grover to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried 4-0 with Commissioners Roethler and Schohr abstaining. 3. Public members wishing to address the Commission on items not listed on the agenda. None. 4. Report from the Basin Management Objective Program ad hoc subcommittee. Information only, no action. 5. Update and possible recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on activities associated with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act(SOMA). a. Groundwater Sustainability Plan development. Information only, no action. b. Basin Boundary Modification to the Vina and Wyandotte Creek subbasin. Information only, no action. c. Governance Structure Update. Information only, no action. d. Update regarding the Groundwater Pumpers Advisory Committee. Information only, no action. 6. *Presentation and possible recommendation on the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018. Motion by Commissioner Tennis to recommend the Board of Supervisors oppose Proposition 3 Bond of the November 2018 ballot. Commissioner Schohr Seconded. Motion passed 6-0-0. 7. Reports from Water Commissioners and staff on issues of interest. a. Report on groundwater issues. Information only, no action. b. Update on Delta Issues. Information only, no action. c. Report on water related activities of the Board of Supervisors. Information only, no action. d. Update on the activities of the Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM)Plans i. Northern Sacramento Valley IRWM Board (NSV Board) Information only, no action. ii. Upper Feather River IRWM Board Information only, no action e. Other issues. None. 8. Future meeting dates and locations: September 5, 2018, 1:30 pm Board of Supervisors Chambers 25 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 9. Commissioners wishing to address items not listed on the agenda. None. 10. *Communications received and referred. Information only, no action. 11. Adjournment. WC Agenda Item Water and Resource Conservation Paul Gosselin, Director #4 308 Nelson Avenue T: 530.552.3595 buttecounty.net/waterresourceconservation Oroville, California 95965 F: 530.538.3807 bcwater©buttecounty.net Butte County WATER&RESOURCE CONSERVATION STAFF REPORT DATE: August 27, 2018 TO: Butte County Water Commission FROM: Kelly Peterson, Water Resources Scientist Department of Water and Resource Conservation RE: Recommendations of the Water Commission Ad-hoc Subcommittee regarding the Basin Management Objective (BMO) Program The Butte County BMO program has entered its fourteenth year. The BMO program has become an important cornerstone of our water resource management efforts to date. It was a required element of a Groundwater Management Strategy (AB3030 / SB1938) and integrated regional water management plans until recently with the passage of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act(SGMA) of 2014 and the associated Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) which are now intended to fulfill those roles. In order to assure that the intent of the BMO program continues to be met in the interim while GSPs are being developed, without creating duplicative work now that the Department is implementing SGMA county-wide, a review of the program is necessary. On June 6, 2018, the Water Commission appointed Water Commissioners D.C. Jones, Tod Kimmelshue, David Skinner and Ernie Washington to an ad-hoc Subcommittee charged with reviewing and evaluating the BMO program. The Subcommittee has met twice since formation, once on June 29, 2018 and again on August 17, 2018. The review of the BMO program has identified many successes of the program over the years as well as areas that warrant improvement during this transition to sustainable groundwater management under SGMA. The establishment of BMO criteria and comprehensive monitoring and reporting, and outreach to stakeholders are among the strengths of the BMO program. However, the subcommittee felt that a clear need to transition this program into a more efficient, relevant and streamlined program while in place and to propose an expiration date of Jan. 30, 2022 for Chapter 33A in light of new SGMA requirements. On this date, the BMO program with the currently proposed revisions would expire and the fundamental components of the monitoring described in Chapter 33A would transition into a monitoring program more relevant to SGMA as described in the GSPs, required under SGMA for all subbasins in Butte County. Development of three GSPs relevant to the subbasin in Butte County are currently underway and have a deadline for submittal to DWR by Jan. 30, 2022. The revised BMO program will be used foundationally in the development of a new monitoring program more adept at meeting the legal requirements of SGMA and will phase out when the GSPs are submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) by January 30, 2022. As the BMO program moves forward temporarily before becoming enveloped into the new monitoring program as will be described in the GSPs, it should be based on what has worked so far -- scientifically credible BMOs, a strong monitoring program, clear reporting of data, sound evaluation of data and education and outreach to stakeholders. However, the subcommittee felt that the BMO program has been hampered by unrealistic expectations of stakeholder responsibilities and excessive irrelevant reporting requirements. To achieve these goals, a number of changes to the ordinance will be necessary as recommended by the committee. Addressing these recommendations will assure that the BMO program serves a strong relevant purpose while transitioning into the next phase of sustainable groundwater management within Butte County. The Origins of the BMO Program In January 2002, the Water Commission made a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to investigate the concept of utilizing BMOs as a potential program for managing the groundwater basin. The BMO concept was based on a DWR, Northern District proposal and built from a similar program enacted in Glenn County. The Board accepted the recommendation and directed the Department to proceed with the development of BMOs for the basin area of the county. The Department drafted and publically circulated a draft ordinance for consideration by the stakeholders and eventually by the Board. After significant public comment and revisions,the Board approved the ordinance on February 10, 2004 and the BMO ordinance was codified as Chapter 33A of the Butte County Code. The BMO program became a component of the Butte County Groundwater Management Plan (2005). The original intent of BMOs was not to mitigate or provide third party impact protection as required through a Chapter 33 application. The ordinance included specific findings of the Board to articulate its intent: • Protection of the groundwater resource for beneficial use within the County is of major concern to the residents of the County for the protection of their health, welfare and safety. • The beneficial use and maintenance of groundwater and protection of recharge zones is of critical importance to the economy and environment of the County. • BMOs are intended to ensure the continued sustainability of groundwater quantity and quality within the County. • It intends to protect groundwater quality and prevent land subsidence. • It does not hereby intend to regulate, outside of Chapter 33, the use of groundwater; unless established BMOs are exceeded. • BMOs are essential for information gathering and management purposes that the County maintains a monitoring program addressing groundwater elevations, groundwater quality standards and subsidence criteria. • Through the enactment of BMOs, the County does not intend to limit other means of managing groundwater within the County as authorized elsewhere in statute or ordinance. • The County intends to work cooperatively with local entities and the general public to further develop and implement joint groundwater management plans. Upon enactment of the ordinance, the department began taking steps to implement the program such as producing guidelines for developing BMOs for each of the subinventory units (SIU). The SIUs are based on the Inventory and Subinventory units defined in the Butte County Water Resources Inventory and Analysis report (2005). The first BMOs were adopted in June of 2006. Since then, the Department in cooperation with the Water Advisory Committee, Technical Advisory Committee and stakeholders have collectively refined and modified some aspects of the BMO program. In 2008,the Department launched the BMO Information Center(BMOIC)which is a publically accessible database of key BMO wells and other data within the Counties of Butte, Colusa, Glenn and Tehama Counties. The BMOIC allows stakeholders to access groundwater data and prepare reports. In 2009, the TAC prepared a report and recommendations to streamline the BMO program. The TAC recommended updating and streamlining data collection, utilizing a standardized methodology for setting BMOs, improved communication between the WAC and the TAC and utilizing BMO data as part of the Drought Task Force evaluation. Limited resources from the County are available for managing the BMO program; therefore, program efficiency is essential. In 2011, the Water Commission made recommendations to the Board of Supervisors to further streamline and clarify roles within the BMO program by consolidating SIUs, removing formal approval of BMOs by the WAC, incorporating the BMO and Alert Stage criteria into the Ordinance, removing the WAC/stakeholders from overseeing the monitoring program, clarifying the non-voting roles of SIU representatives and that at-large WAC members, amending the frequency of WAC meetings and modifying the process to reflect that staff prepares the BMOs in consultation with the SIU representative as well as other items. A Review of the BMO Program Water Advisory Committee (WAC) and Public Participation - Public participation is at the heart of the BMO program and a source of its greatest strength and weakness. The goal of the Ordinance in regards to stakeholders, especially those appointed to the WAC, is for full public participation as a liaison with the Department and the respective stakeholders within their respective Sills with minimal support from the department. This model for public participation can only function if public volunteers fully participate. However, the level of participation by stakeholders and the structure of the WAC have not met this goal. The WAC includes SIU representatives as well as representatives from watershed groups and other at-large members for a total of 28 representatives. The WAC was intended to be the primary public venue for BMO issues, however, the WAC has not adequately functioned as the outreach mechanism it was envisioned to be. Since 2006, most WAC meetings failed to have a quorum. And those that did, had a quorum by the slimmest of margins. Finding candidates to fill WAC positions has been difficult or impossible and some positions have been vacant for close to two years.A majority of the members typically miss most meetings. In fairness,there are a small number of WAC members that have consistently participated in the creation of BMOs, outreach to stakeholders and have attended most WAC meetings. The WAC has played an important role as a forum for stakeholders to receive data and share anecdotal information however the information is not reported regularly and can at times be non- relevant to the evaluation of monitoring results. A significant amount of resources and effort have taken place to make the ordinance function as intended. However, the program has reverted to a more traditional structure of having the staff administer the program with minimal input from stakeholders. The repeated attempts to make this process function have been unproductive for both the Department and stakeholders. The envisioned new role of the WAC/SIU representatives includes their transition into one of the Stakeholder Advisory Committees or Technical Working Groups that are being developed as part of the governance structures in the subbasins in which they reside. These committees 1 groups will function to develop the monitoring components as described in the GSP which will be aimed at establishing the monitoring objectives, sustainable criteria, thresholds and project and actions which will provide the tools to sustainably manage groundwater throughout the subbasin in Butte County. Sub-inventory Units - The BMO program established Inventory and Sub-inventory units based on the units defined in the Water Inventory and Analysis report (2005). The SIUs would no longer be valid structures given the dissolution of the WAC and also in light of the new structures provided for under SGMA regarding subbasins and Management Areas. For example, GSPs are now required for each subbasin under SGMA by January 30, 2022. Management Areas are planning areas within subbasins that have common land use practices for which a GSP may identify different minimum thresholds, measurable objectives, monitoring, and projects and actions based on unique local conditions or other circumstances. GSPs may be organized such that each Management Area functions as a chapter of the GSP. Removal of terminology regarding SIU's throughout the ordinance will not only reduce the reporting requirements for each SIU while this Ordinance is in place, but it will also strengthen the program to support ongoing efforts to meet the legal requirements of SGMA. BMOs—BMOs are intended to reflect measurements that demonstrate acceptable local groundwater conditions. When measured groundwater conditions do not meet established BMOs,the program adopted a set of BMO Alert Stages that reflect unacceptable groundwater conditions. The adoption of the standardization methodology by Butte County has resulted in two acceptable methods. The concept of setting BMOs and Alert Stages has proven to be a valuable construct. For clarity and transparency, the BMO criteria should be part of the ordinance while it is in place during transition to more robust and SGMA-relevant sustainable criteria which will be described in the GSPs currently being developed. GSPs will include components describing measurable objectives, sustainable criteria, minimum thresholds, monitoring and projects and actions for each of the undesirable results identified in SGMA. Once GSPs are implemented they will describe criteria similar to BMOs and Alert Stages, however they will be more robust, comprehensive and enforceable. Monitoring - The BMO program utilizes a comprehensive monitoring network that includes domestic, irrigation and municipal supply wells that began under Chapter 33. The network also includes dedicated monitoring wells, of which many have continuous recorders. The department, in consultation with the TAC and stakeholders have continued to evaluate the existing BMO monitoring network to consider adding new wells as resources allow. Under these recommendations, the monitoring of groundwater conditions will continue status quo until the ordinance expires at which point monitoring will continue under the provisions of Chapter 33 and through applicable GSPs. BMO Report - The BMO annual report has increased in volume and complexity while becoming less useful to stakeholders over the years. Typically the development of the Annual Groundwater Status Report which includes 16 individual BMO reports ranging from two to 23 pages in length, is completed by the Department with input from some SIU representatives, if available. This report is presented to the Board each February pursuant to Chapter 33. Unfortunately, a considerable amount of time and effort is expended by staff to develop this report including the individual SIU reports. This document can be streamlined while the Ordinance is in place by focusing on the specific BMOs and BMO monitoring data per subbasin as related to DWR's Bulletin 118 and SGMA instead of the individual SIUs. After the expiration of the ordinance, the GSP will fulfill the goals and objectives of an annual report on groundwater conditions as required by Chapter 33. Such an approach will allow for a more efficient and relevant display of data. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) - The TAC, established by Chapter 33, plays an important role in the BMO program. The role of the TAC should be to evaluate BMO monitoring data and information provided by the Department and provide recommendations to the Department and Water Commission as appropriate. Outreach - One of more important successes of the BMO program is the factual, scientific information provided to stakeholders. The BMO program established a foundation for dialogue between the Department, SIU representatives and stakeholders. A number of SIU representatives have not actively participated in the BMO program. This includes not providing feedback to the Department on the preparation of their BMO, not conducting any outreach to local stakeholders or providing input to the Department regarding the groundwater conditions in their respective SIUs. Beginning in 2009, the TAC has requested a single page survey to be completed bi- annually by SIU representatives on conditions in their Sills. This reporting mechanism has been underutilized in most years since 2009(i.e. 1 of 23 returned in 2018)which means that the TAC does not receive a comprehensive picture on conditions that they would desire to evaluate BMO data. Outreach will continue to be provided while the Ordinance is effective through a variety of methods already occurring including numerous public meetings where data is presented and discussed. These venues include but are not limited to TAC meetings, Water Commission meetings and Board of Supervisors meetings. Monitoring data, associated evaluations and reports are also provided on the Department's website and addressed in monthly newsletter articles when available. Once the governance structures are in place for the subbasins within Butte County, many other opportunities for public participation, outreach and input as required by SGMA will also be available at venues including but not limited to GSA Board meetings, Stakeholder Advisory Committee Meetings, and Technical Working Group Meetings. Response to BMOs - The response to BMO noncompliance currently includes increased outreach to stakeholders and potential investigations that could include additional data collection and monitoring. As was learned during the drought, providing stakeholders with factual information and analysis on groundwater conditions is a powerful tool in groundwater management. Summary of Recommendations from the Subcommittee: • Incorporate an expiration date for the ordinance of January 30, 2022 to align with the final deadline for submittal of GSPs to DWR under SGMA for subbasins in Butte County. • Continue monitoring status quo until expiration of the Ordinance (Chapter 33-A) on January 30, 2022. • Clarify the definition of"Aquifer" • Clarify the definition of"Commission" • Dissolve the WAC by removal of references to it's structure, membership, operations, internal roles, and external interactions with TAC and the Department and rescinds WAC bylaws. • Clarify that the TAC no longer consults with the WAC on local conditions affecting monitoring results • Removes references to WAC members serving as subinventory unit representatives as the structure for public participation in the program • Removes references to subinventory units as land under which monitoring results are grouped for reporting purposes and which serve as a method to determine WAC membership • Clarifies units for water quality measurements Summary The BMO program has been a critical component of the County's water management effort. Over the past thirteen years the BMO program has made enormous progress in developing, analyzing, and disseminating factual information on local groundwater conditions. These actions have been essential to making sound, informed, and locally driven water resource management decisions. Without such data, analysis and outreach and water management decisions would not have contributed to the current level of understanding of groundwater conditions that we currently have which has provided for a mostly-seamless transition to the next phase of sustainable groundwater management under SGMA. The future success of the BMO program can be enhanced through the above recommendations that will help to improve public participation, program clarity, and efficiency until the ordinance expires and transitions into the foundation for the next phase of sustainable groundwater management under SGMA. Recommendation The Water Commission Subcommittee recommends that the Water Commission: 1. Support the recommendations of the Subcommittee. 2. Recommend to the Board of Supervisors that they adopt amendments to Chapter 33A and Water Advisory Committee By-laws consistent with the recommendations and upon completion and consideration of a 30 day public comment period on the draft amendments. 1 Chapter 33A-BASIN MANAGEMENT OSJECfIVESOBJECfIVESEli 2 1This ordinance shall expire on January 30,2022.1 Commented[KP1]:This date is the final deadline for submittal of GSPs to DWR under SGMA for subbasins in Butte County.The sunset clause will address the transition 3 Footnotes: of the BM0 program(specific to Ch.33-A not Ch.33) including the evaluation of alert stages and other constituents per sub-inventory unit,to the monitoring 4 --[1) program that will be reported in the GSPs annually and every 5 years.Note:Chapter 33(not being amended)still requires Butte Co.to monitor groundwater levels 4x/yr. Info.from these efforts will be reported in the annual and S 5 Pditor's note-Section 1 of Ord.No.4034,adopted Sept.13,2011,amended Ch.33A,Groundwater yr.GSP reports. 6 Management,in its entirety to read as herein set out.Former Ch.33A was comprised of§§33A-1-33A- Formatted:Highlight 7 14,and derived from Ord.No.3869,adopted Feb. 10,2004;and Ord.No.3918,adopted Dec. 13,2005.E Commented[KP2]:Will amend this section at the end of the process 8 33A-1-Legislative intent. 9 (a) The Board finds that the protection of the groundwater resource for beneficial use within the County 10 is of major concern to the residents of the County for the protection of their health, welfare and 11 safety. The Board further declares that the beneficial use and maintenance of groundwater and 12 protection of recharge zones is of critical importance to the economy and environment of the County. 13 (b) The Board intends to ensure the continued sustainability of groundwater quantity and quality within 14 the County. 15 (c) The Board intends to protect groundwater quality and prevent land subsidence. 16 (d) The Board does not hereby intend to regulate,outside of Chapter 33,the use of groundwater. 17 (e) It is essential to the success of the Basin Management Objective program that the County maintains 18 a monitoring program addressing groundwater elevations,groundwater quality and land subsidence. 19 (f) En adopting the groundwater management ordinance codified in this chapter, the Board does not 20 intend to limit other means of managing groundwater within the County authorized elsewhere in 21 statute or ordinance, and intends to work cooperatively with local entities to monitor, evaluate and 22 disseminate information on groundwater conditions to foster sound local groundwater management. • 23 (g) It is the intent and purpose of the information collection effort described by this chapter to assist in 24 avoiding negative effects on health and welfare of County residents,such as: 25 (1) Lowering of groundwater levels leading to increased energy consumption,a potential decrease 26 in stream flows,the increased cost of deepening existing wells and the prospect that new wells 27 shall need to be deeper and more costly than would otherwise be required; 28 (2) Damage to public roads, bridges, subterranean infrastructure, canals and other structures 29 caused by land subsidence at substantial cost to the public; 30 (3) Depleting surface and subsurface flows leading to the potential loss of wildlife and critical 31 terrestrial and wetland habitat; 32 (4) Degradation of groundwater quality; 33 (5) A degradation of property values and injury to agricultural lands in Butte County. 34 (h) It is the purpose and intent of this chapter to establish an effective policy concerning groundwater 35 that will assure that the overall economy and environment of the County is protected. Through the 36 adoption of this chapter,the Board of Supervisors seeks to protect the health,safety and welfare of 37 County residents and the general public. 38 (i) The Board does not intend, in adopting this chapter, to determine whether any groundwater in 39 storage above established Basin Management Objectives is surplus groundwater,to define surplus 40 groundwater, or to impose fees, assessments, charges or taxes upon County residents and/or 41 business owners. 42 (Ord,No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 43 33A-2-Definitions. 44 {a) "BMO Alert Stage"means a measurement not achieving a Basin Management Objective. 45 (b) "Aquifer" means a geologic formation that may store, transmit and yield significant quantities of Commented[KP3]:Aquifers could also yield groundwater to rivers,creeks,groundwater dependent ecosystems etc. 46 broundwatert-to-wel-ls-an421-siarings. not just wells and springs,so perhaps removal of this list would be better. 47 (c) "Basin Management Objectives(BMO)"means criteria established for acceptable 4 Formatted:Normal,Indent left 0.3",Space After 6 Pt 48 groundwater elevations,groundwater quality and land subsidence of the Butte County 49 groundwater resource under the provisions of this chapter. 50 (d) "Board"means the Board of Supervisors of Butte County. 51 (e) "Commission"means the nine(9)person Butte County Water Commission appointed by the Board 52 as defined under Chapter 33.iButte-County-WateFGomnission. Commented]KP4]:This change aligns with the style of how the TAC is defined below 53 (f) "County"means the County of Butte. 54 (g) "District" means any purveyor of water wholly or partly within the boundaries of the County that 55 provides water for agricultural,domestic,municipal or industrial use. 56 (h) "Department"means the Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation. 57 (i) "Extensometef'means an instrument for measuring land subsidence. 58 (j) "Groundwater"means all water beneath the surface of the earth below the zone of saturation, but 59 does not include water which flows in known and definite subsurface channels, as set forth in the 60 case of Los Angeles v.Pomeroy(1899)124 Cal.597. 61 (k) "Groundwater Management Plan" means a plan prepared pursuant to the California Groundwater 62 Management Act(commencing with Water Code Section 10750 et seq.). 63 (1) "Land Subsidence" means the permanent lowering of the ground surface caused by the inelastic 64 consolidation of clay beds in the aquifer system. 65 (m) "Recharge" means flow to groundwater storage from precipitation, irrigation, infiltration from. -----[Formatted:listO 66 streams,spreading basins and other sources of water. 67 (n) "Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)"means the seven (7) person committee nominated by the 68 Water Commission and appointed by the Board as defined under Chapter 33. 69 (o)---"Water-Advisory-Commiittee-(WAC means-an-advisory-body-appointed-by-the-Board. 70 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 71 63n 3 Watorhdv:sn...f•ommittcc 72 (a) The-Water-Advisory-Ger ittoo (WAC) shall be appointed-by-the-Board. The WAG•shall be an 74 _ 75 • _ , -- - - - ' 76 _ - ember&shall-be appointed-one(1) 77 78 - -- -- - - -- - , - _ - - - ' .amental—community and one (1) from 79 easta-organiaed-watershed-group-in-the-eounty:The-operation-oi-tho Wator-Advisory-Committee-shall 80 ' -• ' _. . . • .•- -- - ^c `-- - - ---- Commented[KP5]:Recommendation from last ad-hoc mtg. 81 _{b) 'Sub inventory Units. [Formatted:Normal,Line spacing: single 82 (1) Vina; 83 (23—M&Tj 84 9)—L-laao-Sesei 85 {1) Durham/Dayton; 86 (6)—Westem-Canal 87 {6) Pontz; 88 {7) Esquon; 89 (8) Chorokao; 90 (9)--Rishvale. 91 {4)— Thermalite 92 (11) Biggs West Gridley; 93 (42)---Butt° k: 94 {13) Butto; 95 (14) North Yuba: 96 (15) Angol Slough; 97 (16) Chico Urban Aron. 98 - R.p -- - - • - - • ... • _ e-for prov e 99 department-with--input on the-developme nagement-Glajestive-for-thei sub- 100 ,. 101 102 _(d) Sub invontory units may bo added,modifiod or chap:_: -- _=_.._: ,- - - - -_ - - :-=Were 103 within tho sub inventory unit All modificationc and changoc chall bo reviewed by the WAC orad 104 105 ..(Ord.No.1031,§ 1,9 13 11)1 - Commented[KP6]:language re:SIU's are tied to the WAC as there is a representative from each SIU on the WAC as well as others.Reporting monitoring results by SIU is 106 33A 1 Appointments. transitioning to the reporting of monitoring results by subbasin per the ad-hoc recommendations at the last mtg. 107 (a) The-Board Chall-Gen6iderall-nerriiaatiene or appein t Rent-to-the Water Advisory Committee that 108 meet-the-following criteria: 109 (1) Candidates-who reside, own property-or have theirprinciple-placc of-business-wiiktin-the-sub- 110 inventory unit or entity which they wel*ld--represent-and-are willing-to-serve-in a voluntary- 111 eapaeity and 112 (2) --Gartdidates-nemina#ed-by-tine-citizens of the cub invontory unit. 113 (t ---Me rve-a-four year term.Terms shall-be-staggered by lot-for-two-(2)years 114 at-theonsetand-open to reappointment for-senseeutive-ters 115 (Ord.No.1031,§1,9 13 11) 116 33A-5-Basin Management Objectives. 117 (a) Basin Management Objectives shall be established for: 118 (1) Groundwater elevation: 119 (2) Groundwater quality(temperature,pH and electrical conductivity);and 120 (3) Land subsidence. 121 (6} BMOs shall be based on criteria utilizing data collected from the monitoring network. -- Formatted:Normal,Indent:Left 0.3",Space After. 6 Pt 122 (c) BMO Groundwater Elevation Criteria. One (1) of the following methodologies shall be used to 123 determine the groundwater elevation BMO for wells selected as part of the monitoring network: 124 (1) Historic Range Method: This method is used to establish two BMOs for each well based on 125 spring and fall data,seventeen(17)respectively. 126 i. For wells that have a period of record dating back to at least 1970,the BMO will be based 127 on the historic low groundwater elevation measurement plus twenty (20) percent of the 128 range in measured groundwater elevations,calculated from the first year on record through 129 2006. 130 a. The BMO Alert Stage 1 will be reached for measurements below the BMO. 131 b. The BMO Alert Stage 2 will be reached if measurements are below the historic low. 132 ii. For wells that do not have a period of record dating back to 1970,the BMO will be based 133 on the historic low groundwater elevation measurement taken prior to 2006. 134 a. The BMO Alert Stage 1 will be reached for measurements below the BMO. 135 b. The BMO Alert Stage 2 will be reached for measurements below the historic low 136 minus the range of measurements for the period of record through 2006. 137 (2) Specific Depth Method: The BMO will be set at five (5) feet below the average spring 138 groundwater elevation, where the average spring elevation is calculated from the first year on 139 record through 2006. 140 i. The BMO Alert Stage 1 will be reached if measurements are below the established BMO for 141 that well. 142 ii. The BMO Alert Stage 2 will be reached if BMO Alert Stage 1 continues for a second 143 consecutive year. 144 iii. The BMO Alert Stage 3 will be reached if groundwater levels fall ten (10) feet or more 145 below the average spring groundwater elevation established for the well. 146 (d) BMO Groundwater Quality Criteria. 147 (1) The BMO Alert Stage for temperature will be reached when the measurement is more than five 148 (5)[degrees Celsius outside of the historic range of measurements. 149 (2) The BMO Alert Stage for electrical conductivity (EC-IS) will be reached for measurements 150 greater than nine hundred (900)micro-Siemens per centimeter (uSlcm)for drinking water or f Formatted:Font color.Auto 151 greater than seven hundred(700)(uS/cm)for agricultural;water. [Commented 1KP71:Clarification items 152 (3) The BMO Alert Stage for pH will be reached for measurements below six and one-half(6.5)or 153 above eight and one-half(8.5). 154 (e) BMO Land Subsidence Criteria. 1 155 (1)_—Alert Stage 1 will be reached if annual elastic subsidence exceeds the average annual elastic 156 subsidence measured over the period of record of the extensometer. I157 (2)_--Alert Stage 2 is reached when the annual elastic subsidence exceeds the maximum recorded 158 elastic subsidence over the period of record for the extensometer. I159 (3) —Alert Stage 3 is reached when inelastic subsidence is detected based on annual 160 measurements taken on March 1. 161 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11;Ord.No.4074,§ 1, 1-14-14) 162 33A-6-Monitoring BMOs. 163 (a) Monitoring programs designed to detect changes to groundwater elevations, groundwater quality 164 and land subsidence are the key to proper assignment and evaluation of BMOs. 165 (b) The monitoring programs shall measure select wells and extensometers to determine changes in 166 groundwater elevation,groundwater quality and land subsidence. 167 (c) The County shall make available all groundwater monitoring data through the Department website in 168 a timely manner. 169 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 170 33A-7-Monitoring networks. 171 (a) The monitoring networks used in the development and evaluation of BMOs may include as many of 172 the following as are feasible: selected domestic and irrigation wells from water districts, private 173 owners, municipal and industrial water suppliers and dedicated monitoring wells. Participation in 174 monitoring activities by private landowners shall be on a voluntary basis. 175 (b) The selection of monitoring wells will be done in consultation with the TAC 176 Gemmittee-and-agglicable cub inventory unit rcpresontativos. 177 (c) Additional monitoring wells may be installed and monitored as funding allows. 178 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 179 33A-8-Monitoring frequency. 180 (a) Monitoring Frequency for Groundwater Elevations.At a minimum,groundwater elevations shall be 181 monitored four (4) times during the year: one (1) measurement prior to the irrigation season in 182 March, two (2) measurements during peak groundwater use in July and August, and one (1) 183 measurement following irrigation season in October. 184 (b) Monitoring Frequency for Groundwater Quality. The frequency of groundwater quality monitoring 185 shall be at a minimum of once a year during peak groundwater use(July or August).The following 186 minimum groundwater quality measurements shall be taken: 187 (1) Groundwater temperature: 188 (2) Groundwater pH;and 189 (3) Groundwater electrical conductivity. 190 (c) Monitoring Frequency for Land Subsidence. Land subsidence monitoring shall be conducted on a 191 continuous basis through the use of extensometers. Land subsidence may also be monitored by 192 resurveying existing benchmarks-in-the-sub-inventory-unit aroo. 193 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 194 33A-9-Changes in monitoring. 195 (a) Changes in Monitoring Frequency. If evaluation of the groundwater elevation, groundwater quality 196 or land subsidence data indicates a need for greater monitoring frequency, the department may 197 make changes to the monitoring schedule,as resources allow. 198 (b) Changes in Monitoring Network. If evaluation of the groundwater elevation, groundwater quality 199 standards or land subsidence criteria data indicates a need for a greater number of monitoring wells 200 or survey monuments,the Department may make changes to their monitoring network,as resources 201 allow. 202 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 203 33A-10-Monitoring protocol. 204 (a) All data shall be collected and recorded through methods generally accepted in the applicable 205 scientific field. 206 (b) The Department shall establish methods for data collection,storage and dissemination.Methods for 207 collecting groundwater elevations,groundwater quality and land subsidence shall follow established 208 quality assurance and quality control guidelines. 209 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 210 33A-11-Review of technical data. 211 (a) Standard methods for review and analysis of the collected data shall be established by the 212 department in consultation with the_-TACTechnieal-Advisory Committee. 213 (b) The TAC Techni ittee-shall review,analyze and evaluate BMOs based on spring 214 and fall monitoring data. 215 (c) If a BMO Alert Stage is reached in one or more wells in-one (1)-or more sub inventory units, the 216 TACeslaraisal-Advisecy-Cera ittee will evaluate possible causes and may provide recommendations. 217 (d) The TACeshnieal-Advisory---Cac mittee shall consider all available pertinent hydrologic data, 218 precipitation_—infarrnation-fro• - •- -• . -tatives-and other relevant information 219 when reviewing BMOs. 220 (e) The Department will provide the-Water Advisor -Gornrr+ittcc,Water Commission,the Board and the 221 public with the TAC's_ _. .• • - review, analysis and recommendations, if 222 applicable. 223 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) 224 33A-12-BMO Alert Stage Response. 225 In the event that a BMO Alert Stage is reached, the Department_;An-cooperation-with-the-sub- 226 -in--coo226 ,will: 227 (a) Provide information and outreach to and solicit information from stakeholders in the affected 228 areas SIU-as appropriate. 229 (b) Assist the TAC in their evaluation. 230 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11)1 • Commented IKPB]:Could consider removing this.Since there is nothing in this section that is above and beyond what is stated in other sections except the solicitation of 231 33A-13 Reporting. stakeholder input{from the WAC)which is now irrelevant. 232 (a) The Department shall disseminate information on BMOs,the monitoring network,data and analysis 233 to the public and through the Department website. 234 (b) The Department shall present BMO monitoring data, TAC analysis and other pertinent information 235 to the Water Commission_, Wator Advicory Cornmittoo, oub-iawentoPy--unit--representatives—and 236 stakeholders. 237 (c) The Department shall submit a report to the Board of Supervisors on the BMO program at their first 238 regular meeting in February. 239 (Ord.No.4034,§ 1,9-13-11) WC Agenda Item #5 Water and Resource Conservation Paul Gosselin, Director 4 308 Nelson Avenue I T: 530.538.4343 Ibuttecounty.net/waterresourceconservation Oroville, California 95965 F: 530.538.3807 bcwater@buttecounty.net Butte County WATER&RESOURCE CONSERVATION INTERDEPARTMENTAL.MEMORANDUM TO: Butte County Water Commission FROM: Kelly Peterson,Water Resources Scientist SUBJECT: 2018 Groundwater Quality Trend Monitoring Update DATE: August 24,2018 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation (DW&RC)conducted its seventeenth year of groundwater quality trend monitoring within the county July 23-26,2018.As required by Chapter 33A,the parameters monitored were temperature, pH, and electrical conductivity(EC).These parameters are the basic water quality characteristics needed to evaluate a basin for evidence of saline intrusion.The groundwater quality trend monitoring serves to establish baseline levels for these parameters throughout the county so that any future changes can be identified and further investigation and/or monitoring can subsequently be developed. in 2018, all samples fell within the acceptable range of water quality values set forth by State and Federal agencies and alert stages defined in Chapter 33A. METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS In 2013, DW&RC purchased a Hach HQd portable meter with a pH and conductivity probe. This was the sixth year this meter was used to do the groundwater quality testing. The sites visited in Butte County are on private land and many of the wells are used for agricultural purposes(irrigating orchards, rice, or pasture). However,the two Thermalito wells,Chico Urban Area well,Vina well,and the Llano Seco well provide domestic water supply.The sampling grid spans from north of the Chico Urban Area (Vina sub-inventory unit),west towards the Sacramento River(Llano Seco and M&T sub-inventory units),east towards the foothills(Pentz sub-inventory unit),and south towards Gridley(Biggs-West Gridley sub-inventory unit). Figure 1 shows the approximate locations of the water quality wells in relation to wells monitored four times per year for groundwater level in the Basin Management Objectives Program. As in previous years,we are fortunate to have support and permission from local property owners who coordinate timing of sampling and allow access to their wells.We have provided them with the preliminary results from this year's monitoring. Twelve of the thirteen wells in the network were sampled this year. The Western Canal(West)well was inaccessible due to irrigation infrastructure changes that prevented sampling. It is expected that sampling at this location will resume next year. Following standard sampling procedures,a water sample is pulled from a discharge location at or near the well and values for temperature, pH and EC are recorded when the pH reading from three subsequent water samples stabilizes.Temperature is a standard parameter measured when assessing water quality, mostly to indicate that water being sampled is representative of aquifer water and not water standing in the well itself. The US Environmental Protection Agency(US EPA) establishes drinking water quality standards using two categories, Primary Standards and Secondary Standards'. Primary Standards are based on health considerations and Secondary Standards are based on taste, odor,color,corrosivity,foaming,and staining properties of water.Secondary water quality thresholds for pH and EC compared to the range of 2018 values are presented in Table 1. Table 1. US EPA Secondary Standards for measured parameters Parameter Secondary Standard or Range of Secondary WQ Threshold ! 2018 Values j Notes re: Butte County Results pH 6.5 to 8.5 6.7-7.5 Within range of secondary water quality [thresholds. r Electrical < 900 SIS/cm—drinking water i 186-529 Within range of secondary water quality Conductivity(EC) <700 pS/cm —ag water thresholds. Water quality data for specific wells is presented in tables and graphs on the following pages. Temperature is an important parameter because it affects chemical reactions that may occur in groundwater. Also, considerable changes in temperature could be an indication of other source waters migrating into the aquifer system such as stream seepage or flow from a different aquifer system. To date,temperature has been relatively consistent in all wells. Chapter 33A states that"the BMO Alert Stage for temperature will be reached when the measurement is more than five(5)degrees outside of the historic range of measurements."The 2018 measurements were all within 5.0°C of the historic range of measurements for each well. The 17 year temperature range for all wells is also less than 5°C(Table 3).The lowest temperature reading was in the Thermalito well (17.8°C)and the highest recorded temperature was in the Chico Urban well (22.6°C).At the Chico Urban well,temperature was recorded from the first sample pulled after purging the well as it was deemed most representative of the temperatures recorded. Measurements for pH remained relatively stable compared to previous years (see attached graphs). The lowest pH was found in the Durham Dayton area at 6.7 and the highest was found in the Llano Seco well (7.8). All measurements for pH were well within the secondary water quality thresholds of 6.5 -8.5 (Table 1,Table 4 and included graphs). Electrical conductivity(EC) measures the ability of a solution to conduct an electrical current due to the presence of ions.Observed readings for electrical conductivity can have a large range, up to 447µS/cm at a particular well (Western Canal-west),yet 2018 measurements were all well within the secondary water quality thresholds established by State and Federal regulatory agencies(Table 1,Table 6,and included graphs).The highest EC measurement was from the Esquon well(529µS/cm)and the lowest was from the Llano Seco well(186µ5/cm). CONCLUSIONS This was the seventeenth season the DW&RC collected groundwater quality information. Overall, the results of the water quality sampling indicate no significant changes in groundwater quality with respect to temperature, pH, or electrical conductivity. The greatest change compared to 2017 EC levels occurred in the M&T well which dropped in value by 161 µ5/cm.This well has one of the largest ranges of observed EC levels over the period of record. Per staff recommendations last year,when this well was sampled this year,efforts were made to sample regularly over a longer period of time than the standard minimum 15 minutes used to purge the well before sampling.This effort was taken to establish the amount of time required for pH and EC to stabilize in this well. It was determined that this well should be purged for approximately one hour before sampling to allow for the pH and EC levels to stabilize. Staff recommends ' http:llwww.epa.govlsafewater/consumer/2ndstandards.html 2 that next year,this well be sampled with EC measurements recorded from one hour after the start of the pump until EC levels stabilize for this well. It is possible that the large range in observed EC values in this well over previous years is due to varying lengths of time the pump was running from year to year before a sample was taken. This topic can be further discussed with the TAC at their upcoming meeting in November. Water quality parameters have naturally occurring variability,so year to year changes are expected and nothing in this year's measurements gives cause for concern or immediate further investigation or analysis. Further investigation would be advisable if values were to fall outside of the acceptable range. The focus of this trend monitoring program is to evaluate the basin for evidence of saline intrusion. No major shifts occurred in the EC measurements in the sampled wells and the basin appears to be free of saline intrusion in these areas. This data continues to help establish baseline levels for these parameters across the county so that any future changes in water quality can be evaluated and further investigation and/or monitoring can be developed. Further information on water quality standards for different constituents can be found at www.swrcb.ca.gov or in the Compilation of Water Quality Goals, published by the State Water Resources Control Board. 3 Figure 1.Approximate well locations for water quality wells in relation to wells monitored annually(four times)for water level. BUTTE COUNTY Basin Management Objective Water Quality rend Monitoring Grid tr • • J VIVA • • CHICOWRBAN FOOTHILL .+ •'•- DURHAM/ - - DAYTON L- • r M+T" _ • •` PENTZ 1,... - 1 s • DURHAMI DAYTON ' F � • • jANGEL; ESQUO Z ' SLOUGH g a• ` . • ! • • ,` EROKE r, i ® fi � LNO "' LA stco • ;i. • � f S. ..7.., t. WESTERN CA NAL 5 ., ® Legend • r If, • • ......... ....._ itn • BMO Groundwater Level Wells • ._ • Water Quality-Well Name 'T IERMALITO ® Biggs-West Gridley rh:` .. • • C.:.,,,,..4-,:"C;1 1 • .. o Cherokee RICHVALE ® Chico Urban Area O Durham Dayton €., Esquon • ANDOTTE do Uano Seco • CREEK ' • M&T BIGGS- a O Pent - WEST GRIDLEY ®;.- _ • 0 Pent-Butte Valley • BUTTE O Thermalito - •• • • Thermalito domestic BUTTE SINK • • + • ® Vine ' ® Western Canal(east) 0 Western Canal(west) 0 1 2 4 6 BMiles Updated 2018 4 DATA TABLES AND GRAPHS Table 2.Annual groundwater temperature(°C) Sub-inventory Unit 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Biggs-West Gridley 18,5 18.5 18.1 20.5 _18.2 18.3 18/ 19.0 19.2 20.1 18.0 18.4 19.0 18.5• 18.4 18.6 19.3 Cherokee 22.4 21.9 21.2 21.4 21.1 20.7 21.0 20.9 21.9 21.8 21.8 21.3 21.9 21.2 20.8 21,2 21.3 ' gp-_„T', ,�,,,,i,..,_,:, ;;,,i bag 18.4 20.1 18.2 18.8 19.5 21.6 18.0 NM 18.4 17.8 19.0 22.6 Chico Urban Area Y,ti , Durham Dayton 18.8 19.9 21,8 20.4 17.4 NM 19.3 NM 18.9 18.0 NM 18.5 19.1 18.1 18.0 18.8 19.9 Esquon 19.7 18.9 19.6 20.1 20.7 19.0 19.6 19.0 19.1 20.0 21.4 18.1 20.2 18.9 18.0 19.1 18.6 Llano Seco a ; `3;`rfF r nrio ; < kyy o go 20.8 20.6 20.7 20.6 21.7 20.4 23.5 19.9 20.0 19,9 20.1 M&T 17.6 18.2 17.8 19.2 18.6 18.0 17.7 18.6 17.8 NM 18.3 17.9 NM 17.1 17.2 17.2 17.9 Pent gagram rag 22.2 21.5 21.3 21.5 23.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.5 21.5 21.6 22.1 `Peutz-Butte Valley 27.0 26.4 26.7 23.2 =4*Nig, ,. Esr , 2212 FIZZ ESZ kag4ETZILI:g;ma:r gm> Thermalito 18.3 17.9 17.1 17.1 18.4 17.7 18.9 17.6 NM NM 17.8 17.3 17.5 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.8 Thermalito(domestic) :'_2;,Wraia gN �;_ a.`a q,_' 19.4 19.4 19.4 NM NM 19.8 NM 19.9 19.8 20.0 20.3 Vine 19.6 20.3 19.2 19.2 19.6 18.9 19.6 18.9 18.8 22.8 18.8 20.2 21.4 19.5 19.8 19.5 20.5 Western Canal(East) 18.4 18.2 19.9 20.5 18.8 18.6 19.1 19.0 18.8 19.0 NM 18.3 18.9 18.5 19.1 18.6 20.1 Western Canal(West) 19.0 18.1 19.8 20.8 18.5 20.6 21.8 18.5 19.1 20.5 20.1 19,1 20.2 18.6 18.8 NM NM *Pentz-Butte Valley well discontinued in 2006 and NM-No measurement Table 3.Groundwater temperature average and range over 17 year sampling period(°C) Sub-Inventory Unit Average Range Biggs-West Gridley 18.8 2.5 Cherokee 21.4 1.7 Chico Urban Area 19.3 4.8 Durham Dayton 19.1 4.4 Esquon 19.4 3.4 Llano Seco 20.7 3.6 M &T 17.9 2.1 Pentz 21.9 2.6 *Pentz-Butte Valley 25.8 3.8 Thermalito 17.7 1.8 Thermalito 19.8 0.9 (domestic) Vine 19.8 4.0 Western Canal 19.0 2.3 (East) Western Canal 19.6 3.7 (West) 5 Table 4.Annual groundwater pH Sub-Inventory Unit 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 7 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Biggs-West Gridley 7.6 7.5 7.5 7.0 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.9 7.9 7.2 7.9 7.9 7.1 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.7 Cherokee 7,5 7,5 7.1 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.6 7.3 7.3 6.9 7.2 7.2 7.1 6.9 Chico Urban Area :.. ,....:.<,;..,..,<. ,:::....,,.E,.,:: .:,Er ::°< 6.9 6.9 6,9 7,0 7.5 7.3 7.1 NM 6.9 7.0 7.0 7.1 Durham Dayton 7.7 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.5 NM 7.5 NM 7.4 7.7 NM 7.5 NM 7.5 7.5 7.3 6.7 Esquon 7.3 7.5 7.1 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.6 7.2 7.3 5.9 7.4 7.2 7.3 6.9 Llano Seco ,.., ` � ` �1 3 ��zon7.9 8.1 8.2 8.1 7.9 8.0 7.0 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.8 M&T 7.2 7.5 6.9 7.8 7.9 7.6 7.7 7.6 7.6 NM 7.2 7.9 NM 7.4 7.7 7.6 7.6 Pentz ,AM:CM OM 7.6 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.8 7.5 6.7 7.0 7.4 7.2 7.3 "Pentz-Butte Valley 7.1 6.9 7.3 6.2 V.VEA R.VM PIM;,; `,.s:N M. !•=4;s:._".,: Thermalito 7.0 6.5 7.1 7.1 7.9 7.4 7.4 7.4 NM NM 8.0 7.7 7.5 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.4 Thermalito domesa 7.7 7.8 7.7 NM NM 7.8 NM 6.9 7.6 7.6domestica..� ;�✓.s.,..,_A��._.:� :. :�. ,�...�n��� �.___ 7.4 Una 7.5 7.6 6.9 6.2 7.7 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.6 8.0 7.3 7.8 7.9 7.1 7.4 7.3 7.4 Western Canal(East) 7.0 6.6 6.8 6.9 7.3 6.9 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 NM 7.2 6.5 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 Western Canal(West) 7.8 8.1 7.1 6.9 7.9 7,9 7.8 6.6 7.8 7.5 7.7 7.5 7.1 7.5 7.4 NM NM *Pentz-Butte Valley well discontinued in 2006 and NM-No measurement Table 5.Groundwater pH average and range over 17 year sampling period Sub-Inventory Unit Average Range Biggs-West Gridley 7.6 0.9 Cherokee 7.3 0.7 Chico Urban Area 7.0 0.7 Durham Dayton 7.4 1.1 Esquon 7.2 1.6 Llano Seco 7.8 1.1 M &T 7.6 1.0 Pentz 7.3 1.1 *Pentz-Butte Valley 6.9 1.1 Thermalito 7.3 1.5 Thermalito domestic 7.6 1.0 Vina 7.4 1.8 Western Canal(East) 7.0 0.8 Western Canal (West) 7.5 1.5 6 Table 6. Annual groundwater Electrical Conductivity( tS/cm) Sub-Inventory Unit 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Biggs-West Gridley 346 370 323 361 351 382 354 331 343 320 300 291 326 288 296 290 297 Cherokee 222 232 215 266 242 267 268 243 270 275 245 260 330 255 261 284 293 Chico Urban Area Naf;s, ,SW ;n,nai.a ;a 280 291 260 249 250 248 217 NM 214 221 254 295 Durham Dayton 315 348 259 340 322 NM 327 NM 307 315 NM 298 304 322 316 322 355 Esquon 388 526 470 557 507 480 439 419 427 415 408 512 443 417 499 416 529 Llano Seco ; z � u ' �,;; 204 195 196 198 192 184 240 180 182 179 186 M&T 418 551 678 504 465 451 667 445 592 NM 427 391 NM 362 333 498 337 Penh _..:. ? r kt 218 229 227 225 224 204 204 231 210 204 207 213 'Pentz-Butte Valley 195 186 211 240 Thermalito 132 164 149 150 152 242 205 158 NM NM 292 179 181 136 159 136 204 Thermalito&mastic „°; F Ms r -;:d : 374 350 354 NM NM 342 NM 320 324 327 333 Vina 197 225 180 216 192 224 203 200 199 194 174 188 201 200 186 181 190 Western Canal(East) 447 344 400 524 492 471 482 488 465 459 NM 447 442 449 444 441 422 Western Canal(West) 464 248 407 501 309 477 469 462 455 460 630 629 695 428 581 NM NM *Pentz-Butte Valley well discontinued in 2006 and NM—No measurement Table 7.Groundwater EC(µS/cm)average and range over 17 year sampling period Sub-inventory Unit Average Range Biggs-West Gridley 330 94 Cherokee 258 115 Chico Urban Area 248 77 Durham Dayton 315 89 Esquon 458 169 Llano Seco 195 61 M&T 484 345 Pentz 217 27 *Pentz-Butte Valley 208 54 Thermalito 174 160 Thermalito domestic 342 54 Vina 197 51 Western Canal (East) 453 180 Western Canal (West) 481 447 7 Annual Electrical Conductivity (pS/cm) and pH for each water quality sampling well. The red dashed line indicates the preferred maximum level for EC and the black dashed lines bound the acceptable pH range, 6.5-8.5. Therefore,when the red plot of EC values is below the red dashed line(as it always is),then measured EC is within the secondary standard for agricultural water(< 700 pS/cm), which is more restrictive than for drinking water(< 900 pS/cm). To be within the acceptable pH range, the solid black line should be within the black dashed lines. Biggs-West Gridley 720 9.0 EC=700 '0 620 __ _ - 8.5 pH=8.: • 520 - 8.0 e 42D 7.5 p, 0 u ▪ 320 7.o m 220 - 6.5 W pH=6.5 120 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year -111-EC -6-pH Cherokee 720 L.. 9.0 I EC=700 • 620 8.5 pH=8.5 3 520 8.0 O• 420 7.5 A. yr m 320 ::_ 7.0 . 220 �1�'4 6.5 pH=6.5 120 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year -11I-EC -11-pH Chico Urban Area 720 9.0 EC=--700 - 620 - 8.5 pH=8.5 } 520 8.0 1111111 • 420 7.5 O. c 0 v 320 MMIrAh • 7.0 d 220Ulm Im4 • 6.5 pH=6.5 w 120 6.0 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 Year -a-EC -6-pH 8 Durham Dayton 720 _ 9.0 EC=700 q620 — 8.5 pH=8.5 7 520 8.0 420 • foe. ♦ 7.5 320 # er..{'. 7.0 Tu. a 220 - - 6.5 pH=6.5 120 - 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2006 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year --f—EC —s—pH Esquon 720 9.0 EC=700 8.5 a• 620 p•_2 y520 'w E azo _ .r, ./ y320 6.5 • 220 6.0 W 120 5.5 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year --EC -•-pH Llano Seco 720 9.0 EC=700 cn 620 8.5 8.0 u • 420 7.5 a 0 u • 320 7.0 V u pH=6.5 y 220 6.5 w 120 6.0 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year —0—.EC tpH NOTE:The red dashed line indicates the preferred maximum level for EC and the black dashed lines bound the acceptable pH range, 6.5-8.5. Therefore,when the red plot of EC values is below the red dashed line(as it always is),then measured EC is within the secondary standard for agricultural water(<700 pS/cm),which is more restrictive than for drinking water(<900 pS/cm). To be within the acceptable pH range,the solid black line should be within the black dashed lines. 9 M&T 720 - 9.0 EC=700 r iill 620 — — ...- 8.5 pH=8.5 Z. 520 8.0 6' 42074 C7.5 0, c 0 320 7,0 u L. 220 — 6.5 -6, pH=6.5 120 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year —0—EC --pH Pentz 720 9.0 EC---700 , 620 — - - - - - - - - - - - 8.5 u. pH=8.5 520 Pentz Well- 8.0 29!03 c42D Butte Valley 7.5 x u° u 320 , 7.0 'al 220 '� 6.5 120 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year —0—EC —41.—pH Thermalito 720 - 9.0 EC=700 LI 620 - _. ._ ._ _ _- - - -- - 8.5 z• pH=S.5 520 - 8.0 1E 42a 7.5 a oC cd —6 320 7.0 220 — pH=6.5 6.5 m W 120 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year f EC -4—pH NOTE:The red dashed line indicates the preferred maximum level for EC and the black dashed lines bound the acceptable pH range,6.5-8.5. Therefore,when the red plot of EC values is below the red dashed line(as it always is),then measured EC is within the secondary standard for agricultural water(<700 pS/cm),which is more restrictive than for drinking water(<900 pS/cm). To be within the acceptable pH range,the solid black line should be within the black dashed lines. 10 Vina 720 _- 9.0 EC=700 'g. 620 .— 8.5 pH=8.5 Z" a 520 - 8.0 V c c 420 7.5 0. 0 u u 320 7.0 pH=6.5 0220 .r"*.1-1"- ' 6.5 irJ120 _ , , 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year --111.-EC —•—pH Western Canal (East) 720 _- 9.0 EC=700 620 - - - — - _ p - M-8.5 8.5 3 520 8.0 tE lc c420 7.5 Q c 0 u To 320 7.0 u w 220 Y- pH=6. 6.5 120 , , , - 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year --EC —41—pH Western Canal (West) 720 _ - 9.0 EC=700 'La' 620 - 4_ .1-78.5- 8,5 y 520 - 8.0 4, y - 420 7.5 c 0 R 320 "NM in 2017 7.0 V lc 220 - - 6.5 ,;; pH=6.5 120 , 6.0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year --EC •pH NOTE:The red dashed line indicates the preferred maximum level for EC and the black dashed lines bound the acceptable pH range,6.5-8.5. Therefore,when the red plot of EC values is below the red dashed line(as it always is),then measured EC is within the secondary standard for agricultural water(<700 pS/cm),which is more restrictive than for drinking water(<900 pS/cm). To be within the acceptable pH range,the solid black line should be within the black dashed lines. 11 WC Agenda Rem .i #6a er o �' fit`. ',a, •.4^u ..,,+.-rr.:.,. ,s� :�,'u.�e:..Y,,,. ,:�.�•V��.- •:z.;� �d+:�r ,;:.3�`�::;7.:.,�:�,.,�;rm- ^•��n D �` 5�' --. ` ` y .4 ...u .< I c `�t''ya « qc j`,�,'•7. '.nG +'T �.!�(.`/>lu.�,. �.e°3 n "�r �at, 51` �v�r�,s �r,•C�� � '�' �:c�" S' .-x '$ `:�� �����.� 'F Wric^w l \� s a sy -mI' N` .x II, �S+F to R��, m ;, r ��A Y9 e Resolution No. 18-114 RESOLUTION AFFIRMING BUTTE COUNTY'S COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENT KEY PROVISIONS OF THE SUSTAINABLE GROUDNWATER MANAGEMENT ACT WHEREAS,the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 went into effect on January 1, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 enables the State Water Resources Control Board to intervene in groundwater basins unless a local public agency or combination of local public agencies form a Groundwater Sustainability Agency or Agencies(GSA) by June 30, 2017(Water Code §10735); and WHEREAS, retaining local jurisdiction over water management and land use is essential to sustainably manage groundwater and to the vitality of Butte County's economy, communities,and environment; and WHEREAS, any local public agency that has water supply,water management, or land use responsibilities within a subbasin may elect to be a Groundwater Sustainability Agency(Water Code§10721 and §10723(a)); and WHEREAS, counties are presumed to be the Groundwater Sustainability Agency for areas within a basin that is not within the management area of another Groundwater Sustainability Agency(Water Code §10724); and WHEREAS, Butte County is a Groundwater Sustainability Agency for portions of the Vina, West Butte, East Butte, and Wyandotte Creek subbasins in Butte County; and WHEREAS, Butte County and the other Groundwater Sustainability Agencies have committed to develop one groundwater sustainability plan in each subbasin and are working toward mutually agreeable governance structures; and WHEREAS,SGMA places certain responsibilities upon Groundwater Sustainability Agencies to engage the public, utilize the same data and methodologies, and identify projects that will sustain groundwater resources;and WHEREAS, Butte County has committed throughout the SGMA process to compliance, public participation, data sharing, and identification of viable and sustainable water management solutions; and WHEREAS, reaffirming Butte County's commitment to key provisions of SGMA will provide a foundation for the development of governance structures and groundwater sustainability plan development. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Butte County Board of Supervisors hereby commitments to: 1. Use an inclusive and transparent public process that provides the opportunity for stakeholders to review. This process will provide the public with the opportunity to provide substantive input on draft elements of governance structures formed for the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act and on the groundwater sustainability plans developed pursuant to that act. The process will be formal, with a proper notification process for all interested parties and will include adequate public notice and meetings held in the very late afternoon or evenings so that members of the public can attend. Where input is not incorporated into revisions of proposed elements, the revised documents will include the reasoning and support for the direction chosen; 2. Use the same data, methodologies and assumptions for the four subbasins as currently defined for the following elements: (a) Groundwater elevation data; (b) Groundwater extraction data; (c) Surface water supply; (d) Total water use; (e) Change in groundwater storage; (f) Water budget; (g) Sustainable yield; and (h) interbasin flow. These elements are required to be consistent when multiple groundwater sustainability plans are developed within a subbasin; and 3. Identify,analyze and include feasible recharge and water supply projects in the groundwater sustainability plans, without regard to the proposed subbasin boundaries, particularly the opportunities for utilizing supply from available surface water in the County. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of Supervisors this 14th day of August, 2018, by the following vote: AYES:Supervisors Connelly,Wahl, Kirk,Teeter,and Chair Lambert NOES: None ABSENT: None NOT VOTING: None Z(—e.-7/L Steve Lamb , Chair Butte County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: Shari McCracken,Chief Administrative Officer and CI- o he Board of Supervisors 4011 By: — � r r Deputy 41 WC Agenda Item #6b S T Vino Proposed Vina, Subb. ain w r ,, , Q .. • f' F\ ... ..... .._. , orest Ranch n•:• { a ti v 1 1c' a .. Hagan: 6 ` 0 m ,]!nilRd 1-2.1{1f Rd .0c01,-...„,E ,tAvr IlicttRd 'P -. Paradise Ha on City :� Ila'•'�ert Chico ,. .a Q les :y \} 5'e.y''r''` 1: 1 n County Road 29:. '�\` •'_ 1 h Durham ;., tun Hv:y , Q. t nr, ,4�� Gurharn r ti� r 0 �.•, 1)ut f1.1 S `L" tr `'\ 5G J f • u.• V) : v a Cb d 0 Nelson ";lean — \ � -.. .a t• rovl t C I#to Richvale Blvd W - Ril,!vol?Hu> 'Urovilla0 p Butte City alta Ci H it . r„ h StatoHigi'rray tFi2 t':;I - P ty my !f N 0 4.5 37 6 Sources:Esri, HERE,Garmin,USGS, Intermap,INCREMENT P.NRCan,Esri Miles Japan, METI,Esri China(Hong Kong),Esri Korea,Esri(Thailand), NGCC,_©,,c,Rd OpenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community 1; Existing Subbasins and Proposed Subbasin Boundary Modifications ;.E Proposed Vina Subbasin +'..vJ Proposed Butte Subbasin Proposed Wyandotte Creek County Line Existing Bulletin 118 Subbasins Vina,t ```, > Corning h Colusa ' r Chicon ® West Butte } -. , . = East Butte CCC l„,-,:, )S Wyandotte Creek T anti North Yuba o r ,y : - .. Sutter a Durham ` es` $tom.• I.: . .. -�mar �� �`� ��` u` ����"hs�i vh�'a� , • .• bOrov[Ile ••• % %• • ••• GridleV •9@p . ,. k h 3 Miles 4 ro o :�.. ail .�� l�i�� rr- _ Ny-('rlVf 1 9 3 vi c m • c m s,ri , . rz om'- '' sk d E ;6 •� r.�� Qlr�y'sw N .�✓ . - 5 , ups; .�� � .-:::.,--",.4:,',-/,'-',i rs • < <L¢ � s.Cv'IW - 2.\ /� W `mid i 'Lt 41. *,-s."7.,..7:-:,. `•' limli O .:.c ..;' r ..__,...-• a5) f L1.- : -::;',.,.7‘;',:..$-,'"...7'1,''.',1 1n f"r-ice`-.=� {rot' " : -' sf t . •A C� ` '(. � .2 61 C t 2, ,.;&3--,&'.‘3, w,-.:��//�� '...-2,•:•',1 cu 4-•••V/ 'c •V ,„4 ,111 ..._ Z. x� N -O-. iris. r. .;,i s S 2 1.1.1 k,'',,-. of y:: H C t ,-4y- aE 0 , . , CO) rl ' SW „-,......-2,---,-7-7,-cis ..,. ? a) "(7 gn"`" �✓� /�r1rZf"a`o, lu co 1 c '-,, ... - ��x1 T.l G.. C C7 Q v v\.F" !!J -": rN t`L, es tns 41 F _E �( a �- '' '.•aye _: '��<v t'tSJ s... 0 F m -fii kC :0 �z �.— r^-x ti aZ , x � In" E. 2 01 `ateu' ' � ��1��'Tl'�:cr g-.�Y�'a n:`. �ie"��"i'\•fir •s�i! ,,., SSS"`t'`2:,.•'ijr.=`Y;�:y�>-{ja: S t't-ga .t"G^ .'9. '� •�'�fw -,,,,, E-.44.4A-4—..-4,,..t),,,,,?;.7§,,,:-„b*:; ,i''.'4.3';V:-* ,r,'...-"f f A'.4';`,F,Wii.,..* ?j32:>.:Ar"% 'rar;r • ,.iis,7?6 �r:r�riyz:�;�; `RC1, cJ2�'�'y-�C?r y w h - a . a r 4C: t r to tii ' � yti�r t ': ..� .fRS r o O _ , t n •/ •t { C L co L U 0yr 3 w041 4. ' • N' s s' -45 ig4 v ti• 01 ,w t^- T C { 1 "te t"" Yi. t. 9 }�r a s r Ct !e w H.- rl E— C 3 4-, zr 5G7 \f6� s p h � ,3 o..' itCU s yC M 4D 1r' ,� ,..f f0,,"�r -c ,Y �.. 3- N. N h' 3 E Y �� 1 . .� rn y z ,. 0 CU0 ' r` "i C j s u • 111 WINN 1 713 t e�--� vl „ ' : < � '`'S�I ~. L {f -j el. ._ yl +2. gS w rz��.iJ S Ev . 01 g '--,. � a?� �U ,w ;w rf 1i 1 .... .. � , s�1a� �` ,, s^rt�, 2 r z '3 v�`J1`<�� .- '7"- -- -. ._. Redding .. • Monitoring Well ; ' .11 •" ""'SIiASTAr' Redding Basin • Subbasin Boundaries 'Y COUNTY Subbasin Name GwE Mm rnum OWE Mmrmun GwEAverapc Count ENTERPRISE. �• _ i • 1 0056191 oec ease lnl change(It) ^" ' 1 Redding/Sacramento N • "" r( l_1 .._... L GW Basin Divide ,^r. -4....-.:', Anderson 5.2 .7.5 .2.5 10 ^ .y .a• ! ! County Boundaries 1 _ .. Bowman NA 19.2 -3 5 5 Bulletin 118 GW _ ' Enterprise NA -e 4 a r 3 " ~ Subbasin Excluded Areas 1 ANAERSON a Millville NA 8.9 -5.6 2 `•n• ti ,MILLVILLE 6 0 6 12 - • Rosewood NA -9.1 s.6 2 E t I 1 I I l -_1 1a. . Miles - .+%. 1 _,,,R( ;.•.-.,.•' .......... ...... South Battle creek NA NA NA 9 ")- - SOUTH Summary 0.2 -19.2 a.5 22 r iii CREEK- ROSEWOOD, � NOTES :BOW reel Aoaedneburnt..,ar.,m,l�,lorw,e..awelm r.,m,^r. , _ BE/N'D nem nimmn,Amg...°nombe,wmar=.IAA onuundr.ler ^ ) .3". i I ` ,a.aw ,A^a.r.recrmed year than n�r..pnaeled. >w { • '" NoloS1 SWticl b.wd Ino axn ^,,. ... t• ` _ ? rano ..o .4 me ea lm color maga err.,num ammo Some r� (ANTELOPE .«croweot ee.,,.ele on mop dee le Om craw Pe..•w e..nw., rn. ,^�. _ • '77\ 1 ` .,.., t ' ,nrr w.. ,n Nda4 Growtl+ww lmN cnv,Oea ore Wand m mwwrrnaM,Mien tram vee, ,^ . Cil ,t _ . .,en degMWtMOlu ap ft Ideauremenl.me nten d✓rp umlar ono p01.10.410.year ' Y Nolo 5. P..gv.am,N+,+l.nwye.•.re blued do me oclu,lmealuad Imola of Groundwater Elevation Change ;.__ -. e. --.-- o,aMaaoolclerataororrmr«wlracalalnewal,drwkr allra..a..l,.rer -- GR�EK ,. s mu 1xAmald bm oaumosrp.pro.mp..l The a red ccubum lr.mrmi.ure mens j >40feet higher 'F_ .:REDS '�O'^'• wd wwtl ml�> M1ar w one meaTh„arelmis.polwn r�'ra alp, MI ' # .m.ndn e� aeG. ••,, r- - •• - I roe a. ary-ea-. ,.r a 351040 feel higher $CUFF ONE-Grourwnlw eie.eton I I bp•-d4b/.e round,...o, . 1E11 a 30 to 35 feet higher TEHAMA . • e, LOS COUNTY l (� „n „. .« • .n mil. sl >25 to 30 feet higher '^^ a 11 11 MOLINOS '^^ • •wt >20 to 25 feet higher ..... w. P" -_r - „ .. . . . _ . .. 2'1-- 1.- 1 Crorrtirtg t ,,4. .• • >15 to 20 feet higher ..m ••- I� 9��1 11 I1.. ,r (1 • I ' ,. .w. ..« >1010 15 feet higher • -- 1 i II2 t ,•i °-- -, a >5 to 10 feet higher • CORNING . 4 1 11!.11z1-.1.-R1141%. • , r r\'1 VINA ,n,. i ,r ,�- ;: 0 to 5 feet higher >, , ,r\.. „ ,-``• ,. • >0to5feettower :1• �, �. •r�, / { rEE --m. • • >5tol0feetlawer • IodeT ",' 1� I �. n. .. •~ r,. >10 to t5 Feet[ower - " 1•- y ,.-ems -..j�e�,, .tile. �l- > + hlco� _ ..._ ... GLENN 7 ear ,s. ....1„ ` BUTTE • >15 to 20 feet lower s '� .• COUNTY • COUNTY �� l : - „.. I..n ,; >20 to 25 feet lower • h s.. . ' lA! '. s r >25to30feet lower ® >30 to 35 feet lower _ x"" -- >35 to 40 feet lower m sa t • ..-. y I i � , _ >40feet lower l . - --- ' lWllows1 ` WEST • „-•' `r m 1-1.1•00 ._ ..1 .. . .� ,s - e I w BUTTE « 3- Y s• '''''...,/ .'e �'~ ., t EAST 1 d +,:�. i ..\ BUTT t�4 .^. rn.. r.. r^« '" ,.. e I ...f �+ , i° r... • �. E WYANDOTTE ,.. (I --' e COLUSA 1 6 REEK . tD or .. ..'. ...._`..- '�,•- „i.... - _.,._.Live0.klf - NORT -.. _ .. Northern Sacramento Basin Groundwater Subbanl I r' - 1 I J YC$'14 - e I Subbasin Name GwE Maximum DGWEOA 000 lit) GWE Aacrago Count r _ --...J ,. [_.f,-:',-';',,',',.,2.._. - eft Inrreaaeinl ocaaa,e(nl Change lm COLUSA / f „« 'LEE _ �� Antelope NA -5.7 -a.0 3 COON - 'LL1 -Winiamsf., o� y'''', BUTTER,, Yubd.'h1 ) ..-"-..-.,,....k..,r .es-",. ,;e.,.,• -1 ;e0t1102.&-r: City; r Bend NA NA NA 0 f J: �` i-• / .e S ''. Calusa 5.7 -46.9 -11.9 67 -"' 1 � _,!&‘... �; -Ji SLITTER (�( I SOUTW;, .^ Coming NA -24.5 -1d 1 ao r C4+ l YEIBA W. . C M ....0...:,"::1 -1t".-:,,n.hl1 .o I NCRQ� Dye Creek 02 NA 02 1 r East Butte 1.9 -9.6 {, ` , t � 4Y. S I,,. Los Malina5 NA -.a_7 d.3 3 , `G - \ - Red Bluff NA -192 -7,1 12I �k -•-- -- 0 Sutler 4.7 �e.5 4.9 7 ����• ` �.., � _b - Vine NA -11.9 -59 29 �� --... � v p 1 • n• West Bune NA -14.1 -5.8 14 'Y• -• ma +. '\I• � • ,.rl !. • - Wyandotte Creek 12.1 -10,3 -0.3 4 ., _. ' \1 ,'4„4, .fes _ ..k \„,_'"1 , 1 r - --lJ.r 'tel _ ! I_ � 1 v i ; Summa 12.1 -46.9 -54 200 - 'I Summary 1 - I ♦ la `,•.' « :NORTH .,,i.3 •O i v ✓.a r In AMERICAN a,.-,iS< STATE OF CALIFORNIA NORTHERN SACRAMENTO VALLEYI. THE RESOURCES AGENCY CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MAP PLATE 1C-D 4...„., :.:, 3 DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES NORTHERN REGION OWECEg �'>1 }��. SPRING 2011 TO SPRING 2018 \\ 2aa0 Moa,6actt August 2018 • Ree Ole.[-Worm.M60 100 to 450 ft WELL DEPTHS ,+'e - 3 15301529.7300 € (Wall depths greater than 100 ft and less than 450 ft deep bgs) BY G.Gordon,PG 7811 c. - G hltp:JAvwvwater a gov/ground alerldala antl mond011nglnGnhelrl_regiCNGfOufdwaSCILeYeligv_IeVCI menrtCnng.Clm • n Well s. ,i r :,, - .. MonitoringE N7 RPRISE COUNTY Redding Basin Subbasin Name GwE Minimum OWE Maximum GIME Average Count '-- Subbasin Boundaries ',- .. t� Increose(ft) Decleesa(nl Change illi =I Redding/Sacramento N ! I GW Basin Divide -! e r G1• Andaman 2.2 -5.0 05 11 County Boundaries Bowman 3.1 A.1 a.3 5 rr�yti Bulletin 118 GW r ? Lr. A , ,` i' Enterprise a.a 1.1 o.a 3 ` ` Subbasin Excluded Areas ;• ANDERSON �a ,ic. "" :1y11 - `: Millvllle 1.0 -99 -zo 3 ‘..? L'' 2 �-gMILLVILLE -''- 6 0 6 12i•;;;'•:'•-=,•":',; ;---;:', >t ., t; Rosewood 2.4 NA 2.0 2 I I I I t I I t ? __. Miles :_._ f South Battle Creek NA NA NA 0 _ r. •,,.� Sum 4.3 .6.1 ,. ,_ r ,. �1 B47.14';';',1. �_��.-- z� I� wry i,, RO$ W.00DF' 1� `:NOTES �«,. JjBOWMANep„ah.-.M.,.Mks...0,1pr- ai.<a,ma..,.r.l.r Irl- - '.r. 0.4 52015 Anegowereneu itlealn,hupnorxte u _1..1 i_r .:r,,....[\ _ )r W �'1- w 1 ehninonbawd.. wd FMecvnurd ri.Nen Yralla 1 'i,. _...... Nall ;Liam a.NWan vn.,aer ol.ww mertmanaairmd, -. ri'i . N.1- Snit rap nowse el rM drer�.Ywn h tebbebwosmn ;: /ANT-LOPE µ ,,.w be w. sb.. ..eywaarnwe. �-,r ^ I '-'•-•:::'.0,::,-; :;:':''.•;:i:',''':;•• •••,'•---.darnti ▪ k� i r. rm. We 4. arww.4-Inp0e.rxn. baud on,r..u..rr.rr.l0Menr.n,v.% ' 1 r' _I �IWteecM1tl 100Li 450.R.Meawremew Lie Liken&dip*Nu.me 9Q t-" - -• Igo �' e E- t i'' iRe ��• �REKI "- _- GroundwaterEtevallonChan tufa ( a�ey N,o.e,«we�.aemwenLi.a.af..e .e.ectl wiMklwN Ipkmnehk wRew)a MegwnM..tm el igMMml nae "'".",...•-•.:1;,,;:,.4-"--',\• d ? I cd.area0a.re,,,�u..rmwrera.0.1.1w�..erre,e. >40feethl er i { 1 Ia -i- ` s 'fl ? m.n,rrubacm4deraepreorn.lneemr, o1du,aai�edallow ..M •r r. � °RED S " I .... d:«nrrwr.e pwothe ,aeame trtafi..rn..l...w.dumb: d.rawa, J r.a4`. t aoe,rbr.k.,4armw.s.+r,,,ewatm,..mw„e.r drerew.wn. Mill, >35to4Ofieethlgher BUFF cit. • Nue. my-t Gown... .51 30 to 35feet higgher TEHAMA I `,, LOS � • '.. rr 1� �� l i - i �. � ;i I 1 . 1,; r MOLINOS :::::.,,,:>:,,:25,to 30 feet hl her. � � � .........;,._,..1.,.:.t....,......:.Y - COU��NTY a I aoTi r r "'? >20to25fioothlgher •• „"••:17,i. " �` 9 , . ' ;>v f ‹:,.1 ler ) l { >15to20foothigher; . ,.. r t „. I >10 to 15`feet hl her. K J `•-•!S it f >5to10feethigher {- CORNING ; I t is • �'� _.01D5feethigher ',1-••:-/.-s•••,""'","'„;:",_ � ,," ^ �¢i.� y € -� . �.� .s' UIN � :,.,. .,040, 1.41,00....:-. it � L � " x.,rr i ' 5to10Teetlowei u c c 7 ^-0re d t. >15 to 2O feet tower T GLE LN J r ,too COU >10to 15feet tower, • -� " ' I! r 1 ' 8UTT8 ! - I r . COQ af/ j�I� 4 ! .... ' ) m. ' •' II . I >20to25ifeettower i_ ._... rI H > --„;,,-,-. 2'50 30 feet tower ! • } ,--_-,:l_. .! 41 1 I f fi -•->30 to 35;feet tower l .,If�rl',PI, •e , Li . :L'..:. .;. :>35to4ofeetrower: i I• 4 „ '°{'_ I!! "'v.:" 4 c' >40feettower2 -r•,,I WDowa -0e_,: ST i c;: I '' BurrE r a • 4 .� ._ 4 _.._ �_ �• Y/Af eOTTE M r iCO USA „ �\CEK 1 v ._ .,_ t ry.1 I G - i e.- 1 ea - Y TLI e,_ 50 • k I f. I ,�Yl1BIAI Northern Sacramento Basin Groundwater Subbaslns y ' ' j 1-' r-- .. y y (NCR q f 1..... ..,....46. 6 C YCY-5,1 C7 1! r!., I ..�.. Subbasin Name GWE Mw ronn GWE Maximum G44EAveruge Count f .0 .-lam '.' ,,,....`4 y.1 y a-.: 1 I -i In...es.04 Decrees.Sft} chow.0,0 _: t �-_ ` } } r 1 / f] COLUSA ' ' , 6 i Antelope 3.5 -12 o.0 7 COON 1..-.. wUl-n� i , �.S R- ''' :-" ` c Bend NA NA NA 0 •,: • CLi j "' EI _s L�-" r_ Bend 35.7 -22A -1.1 80 I 1&:� _.. I - 1t), ',..i,,,,,,-* 4 •,,:,... , •. - :, i SO.LITH! r," SUTTER Coming e.3 3 0.1 as �r / �� . I nYl18A� xx Dye Creek NA - -0.e 1 4 • e • I'I rrl'M. - (NCI�O)r • n.. East Butte 5,4 A.5 '-'1 __�„_; �... n th l'r - z LosMatinee 3,1 -ii 1.0 2 E - F,IJ,,, \•-''•-�� a' ":r .-� "' Red Bluff lei -9.7 1.5 td ▪ .� 1 V .,h�s F r. -7:7-4 Sutter 15.3 -3.3 2.0 12 t=" • ae } t rltE' ,,i.. .-._...- ..,` i ` '..!-V1' I Vine toe -73 1.5 zs 16'.2-'" A*, Ar ''.,,':e_ - a ,...-,..-;i -r‘ �- . ,. `:, West Butte 8,9 -5.8 2.0 58 '"' `� ! , , -,d'''''-',e.'..4.,,". - Wyandotte Creek 20.2 .3,9 7.8 4 yR> n 1 e - d' `ti - - •^-t -r1 r� il '7(`Summary 35.7 _2.0 1.5 227 ._ ._ \,'".1 a ,,-.1[1:-::..''''',=. v e �� "NbiR �. i• • rn l f. (.r. MEF2ICA ii, - '. l `mac', •1 - I I,rn STATE OF CALIFORNIA NORTHERN SACRAMENTO VALLEY ; THE RESOURCES AGENCY y..,,,,4 QEI>ARTMENr OFWATERRESOURCEs CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MAP PLATE IC-E .e �� NORTHERN REGiON OFFICE SPRING 2015 TO SPRING 2017 ..,_,W. i Dale: zaa0lunin SOW August 2018 � Red BO.ca5ron,i.9sae0 100 to 450 ft WELL DEPTHSae.+ (530)529'7300 (Well depths greater than 100 ft and less than 450 ft deep 595) e7. G.Gordon,PG 7811 j hhp-lA' swaler.sa.goagronnowslerr4ala_and_mandonngrrwnnem_regrartlGroundwster1.evevgv_Ievel_nwnionny osn _- Redding • Monitoring Wet ,,-• �, Ead PS ' -rt -SHASTA`" Redding BaSin NTERPRISE �� SUbbasin Boundaries - -I _ COUNTY Subbasin Nance DOVE rluaim,.m ilWE Maximum GYVE AverageCeara. •••,,,-..,ReddinglSaeramento - .tl:' Increase 911 Decrease 1151 Change IR) r 1 GW Basin Divide 1 i s. Anderson NA -73 -3.d 13 .: «d' e on nCounty Boundaries on..` :r " Bowmen 0, -ae -22 s F ,....,-Al Bulletin 118 GW • Enterprise NA -5.5 -3.6 3 t " Subbasin Excluded Areas ANDERSON a, • • , MiEEville 0.9 -58 -z.9 4 on n ▪"• 'era ;MILLV[L"LE 6 0 6 12 """ - "" •r ,_� Rosewood z.1 -55 -t1 2 1 I 1 I 1 1 ] '• South Battle Creek NA NA NA e i-..... Miles -. ,� t j� 4l - I SOUTH Summary 71 -06 -2.1 28 . r� • r.,. I -.' 1 . �t BATTLE ,«. j A. rl CREEK ROSE W_02.0. ,,� ._L ,;,..... : . e. ' c r ::.1.a / ., NOTES 'BOWMAN ° M. ti' ,I •►"- -BEND t. Neat a ye°wro rumba Ind..lh,r g.:,m..dere..,,ere Wrr a ere .,. ,«- L, // verm+year Ulan me paras year.Ane9•I.e number wa014.IN ..4•47** I / �>w 031.00ara ete,ar•me•ro Lam r intl...newel year rim Lr ere peer roam yew.• iJ. • -. ! :/ .. 5.... - #Ae3, Shun p,•e4 onne•,ed•.orv..a..ru•oree n.rrr.r eacn r we Wit. ANT. LOPE . ,ee yen«bra,.enoon cow ranarnmann,nnanatonedbee r 1 r,S ...may Crl hey..an nap day to Me cane pe...4 re wain Ohm_ a 7 n In mw ,m rw "..-. ♦ !' iqo 4'. Geunirraler awe rime,ate Med on w•n,u,eneon reran len ee.e W dye.al.IN01.roPla ase nr4eaw,ermnh we.aYedunae dor ur leo Groundwater Elevation Chane i:$4.41. CR EK pe106 ona"Y°" Change . .-. . -- a.�Bluf_] mo a wa•ae.dan Dain♦d an.m d••» oe ober ihe .lerryl - -. v-. ..r.e rw,r dktece lra.rampc rs ace)ollM prow thump m.e4bual:t . >49fealhi her �i et baron erarea"°"°a"Tonared g -':REb rata ppra.m,n.rndadariaw of Nem w>ae. rowan .101011 :..: . BLUFF ,. l " no▪de' ,remedmr rim tiring rnoh'ne enr`.nn'°e de onorooutleeno 111111 >35 to 40 feet higher 1, >3D to 35 feet higher TEHAMA r • GM.G.edwa„re Meager q - LOS. eye.•moo wand nonce • COUNTY ��s,.'-. ,MOLINOS . >25 to 30 feet higher 1e"' '-" • ,w r >20 to 25 feet higher _ ....: I. - ; 'Corp'.,_,_ 1'. ... �- . ... _ . . . -- ...- • es r eng f 3 >1510 20 feet higher ' \ f.-/� r I- • ,« >w• N•14 1 .. >10to15feethigher ., ti .f .r. - s,:.. • >5 to 10 feat higher . CORNING ' , l m • ,' f'\ VINA.-, Oto5feet higher -- o. e-- . 1 f` ' -r... r-- r.. ,«• , - 1. err ''„ 1 11'`/ : I L/ - / 1 >0 to 5 feet lower ! • 1:� m• >5 to 10 feet lower 4" >10 to 15 feet lower .n n. '-- , `ems°- .t" ' . , ' trir;:• l ; hleo ..- -_.. --- a- COUNTY>1510 20 feet lower GLENN x, *r r .r.n. COUNTY .. I , n.. .10i.0 6. >20 to 25 feet lower ,..- r , •,--,_.:_.,,,.N, .Sr \ : - v1 " �' , >25 to 30 feet lower -. 'y 15-1'1: 1;4I •• ' r _��\ ▪ }., ��` -- ._ ® >30 to 35 feet lower '�. t '". .>, ,., i I.- as �4' ,rr ,.r. • ,.ra • Ij L . ♦ a 1 is.1 • ▪ ,. NM >35 to 40 feet lower • I I ' •� ;'t r. .. tel_ >40feet lower -• t.'. mellows/ e• .I a. WEST ' ' i, - r.• .-�.... A�'. s I _ BUTTE ;v '.tr"' m nr• .- -- ... i .Ir ... • 2 !. ..."•'J.,,!•: - .. �. EAST \ Lw u •« . . . e.BUTTH , J.: - , �+ .-• iN"OTTE ' M' «,- n. -M ,••00 n« .. CO)USA .. .«r. „ CREEK ' 1 • �• it k. ..... ,•.:. Z•••• ad ., ier -- N ..-t 'Clue 0.k ORT Northern Sacramento Basin .r a UBA Su44asin Name OWE MnxtC n,OWE Mnnrmum GWEAvervgc cvr,nl 4 {I • 't r-' Cal. ' r • i '_ Irtun4se Itt] Con [fty Change Ih] IL.,_._.:-- :,5 7p jy ,r y I COLUSA el 11 ' Antelope NA -14.0 -9? s _ ` BUTTER COUN Williams «• r:- Bend NA -s.2 -s.z 1 '--r r '-- ,„ k;' EQONfl -voiia Colusa 5.5 -224 -5.3 e7 tj'- • a A'• ��x • ..0 Clly.' .. Coming 1.4 -n.o -7.4 37 e ^� SUFTER r SOUTH' • «. Dye Creek NA -0.3 -0.2 2 - :,. -Cr / ' - n,.(1/ / „"- 1, NCRO} �♦ •-• �,i {NCRO} - ._. East Butte 2.3 -4.9 -0.8 19 '-��: ♦11, Las Halloos NA -64 -5.2 3 '": 1 a . 4. / \' r ti.. -' i- e •\ \tel.._____1:..,.I.-- - ' ° ..• Red Bluff 0.0 .116 -4 3 16 rx11' !' ,•.. ` 1,0 I -_ II ... r .11' .n O ry"` • Sutter -11D -5.0 16 ..4 0 i }��•' 1 , \ ` l i i ° Vine NA -11.3 -5 b 29 } -r u L.n_3�\t L .i ,(4,..;' _ i. ----;' . 4 West Butte NA -9.5 28 15 ,e," -h r rna, 1,Gr~ -- `15.� ▪ r ....71V' I._ Wyandotte Creek 12.1 -4.9 3.7 4 Y,�� Summary 12,1 -22.4 -46 234 -. `>r �ji"" 3 ,n« ism ,,.,. n' 1 II1.I NORTH 1 3 3 e• -fir .AMERICAN • Iri • STATE OF CALIFORNIA NORTHERN SACRAMENTO VALLEY 3 THE RESOURCES AGENCY PLATE 1C-A f" ear w� DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES CHANGE 1N GROUNDWATER ELEVATION MAP , i 0456. g NORTHERN REGION OFFICE SPRING 2017 TO SPRING 2018 `' �• . k Au gust 2018 , d�;. 2440 Man shoal Red arpn.Caldern.a 96000 100 to 450 ft WELL DEPTHS „ e (5301529-790D (Well depths greater than 100 Sand less than 450 R deep bgs) 100 G.Gordon.PG 7811 he p.Qwwsl.water ca g oWgroundwa lel(data_and_moorlonnglno n hern_reg i oNGro a rnlu-aterLeveuew_leve i_mdn 4 one!)elm WC Agenda Item! ^; ,�,� #7c .Nagi _4e Wit. A r '7s�L � %3"s `S�F�'..g. �e9 r, r �"�4� � �+Y'f'6"� �.y.�. r M-"`^^-' a �R'>5� •F'� r140 '4,N41400,91ilegm14040013,10AWkszA*110.SPAWAPTNPONAVO*T004"4. � e ;;. Resolution No. 18-132 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE WATER SUPPLY AND WATER QUALITY ACT OF 2018(PROPOSITION 3) WHEREAS,through the citizen's initiative process the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018 will appear on the November 2018 General Election ballot as Proposition 3; and WHEREAS,Proposition 3 will invest$8.877 billion in California water infrastructure,including safe drinking water, Sustainable Groundwater Management (SGMA) implementation, watershed restoration, fish and wildlife habitat conservation, infrastructure repair,and other water management programs;and WHEREAS, Proposition 3 dedicates bond funds to improve watershed conditions, water supply reliability, flood protection and support the implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act;and WHEREAS,the voters of California decide on whether to enact the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018 in the November 2018 General Election;and NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Butte County Board of Supervisors hereby declares a neutral position on the Water Supply and Water Quality Act of 2018(Proposition 3). PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Butte County Board of Supervisors this 281"day of August, 2018, by the following vote: AYES:Supervisors Connelly, Kirk,Teeter,and Chair Lambert NOES:Supervisor Wahl ABSENT: NOT VOTING: Steve Lambert it Butte County and of Supervisors ATTEST: Shari McCracken,Chief Administrative Officer and C - ' .f the 8� Supervisors By: Deputy WC Agenda Item #10 COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED AND REFERRED BUTTE COUNTY WATER COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 5,2018 Copies of all communications are available at the Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation 308 Nelson Avenue Oroville, CA 95965 1. *California Water Plan eNews, Wednesday's Update, July 25, 2018 2. *Article from Chico Enterprise Record, July 30, 2018, Groundwater management boundaries shifting 3. *California Water Plan eNews, Wednesday's Update, August 1, 2018 4. *California Water Plan eNews, Wednesday's Update, August 8, 2018 5. *Article from Chico Enterprise Record, August 13, 2018, Butte County still a leader in water conservation 6. *Article from Chico Enterprise Record, August 15, 2018, Meeting Wednesday night in Durham on groundwater planning 7. *California Water Plan eNews, Wednesday's Update, August 15, 2018 8. *California Water Plan eNews, Wednesday's Update, August 22, 2018 9. *Article from Chico News&Review, August 23, 2018, Water War 10. *Email from Bob Mulholland to the Butte County Board of Supervisors, August 27, 2018, Proposition 3 1 ... .. }' 1 ., J C• • rr I S � 5 CAL1 FO NIA ! i = WATE L� eNEWS , }f ... ...� rh �'-^<' ��� •� � ,.� ..,,...K ...... . < -.��:;,- s i°,s:, ,.�,.::.al r, ':..: as .,,�..a;. ,..�„ .�_,kN.,.<s,d•:..,:...-,.si , , s �- Yarl, G Ai , W. dwf �" 1 v` L✓ sY (1677� d :v �,. � �• a No. This weekly electronic newsletter is designed to keep you current on California Water Plan news. We welcome comments,suggestions,and any news tips that may be of interest to water planners. WATER PLAN CALENDAR Governor Brown to host Governor Brown will bey Global Climate Action hosting the Global Climate .- GLOB CLI MATE COMMENTS Action Summit next month .. v ..,...?„,,„T. T , N SUGGESTIONS Summit in San Francisco in San Francisco.In addition . : to recognizing focal and regional achievements in addressing SUBSCRIBE / UNSt113SCitIBclimate change,the three-day event will encourage commitments to decarbonize the global economy.The summit will run Sept. 12-14. Stakeholders meeting The partner agency team for the Open and ransparent Water Data Act will hold a public meeting Thursday,Aug.T2,in Sacramento.It to discuss water data is an opportunity for stakeholders to discuss long-term water data governance options governance options,and get an overview of a report from the Redstone Group on sustainable governance and funding of open water data. Delta Stewardship Council This week's Delta Stewardship Council meeting will include a presentation on the role of the Collaborative Science and Adaptive continues summer series Management Program.The presentation is partof the council's on data to decision-making summer series on data to decision-making.The meeting will be tomorrow,July 26, in Sacramento. Obstacles of sharing The California Water Quality Monitoring Council's Data Management Workgroup is meeting tomorrow,July 26,in Sacramento.The agenda monitoring data is on agenda includes a series of presentations on obstacles faced by non-State for tomorrow's meeting organizations when it comes to publicly sharing monitoring data. r Free community planning A software program for sustainable city planning , is being offered to hundreds of cities,counties ,.- . v'. software being made and regional agencies across California al{2 > available across California- Urban Footprint helps planners determine ommunitie The UrbainFootprtn the best oufcomes for their c s t software offers a data l•ibrary,scenario planning capabilities and analysis modules to evaluate "� , . ° , , planning projects. �� �, f PPI Ire earth-app les, Next month in San Francisco,the Public Policy Institute of California s T� > ;t- (PPIC),will discuss}the state's ability to prepare for drought�and t n,=)recent,drougut;;less`ons to,, --,,-,r.-r;�_,ate change. ogra'�k on Honda r Sef t10 mill look at new .;�'ka �F, ,GT;B:.,tea�5"�, ,r,fj r { �.;>1.. �11.- mo i.:a :+«r � A rFl ,',, -1 �s r,n :.\,.a.Sr�`�� f Ii:..a _C'•, 5 ksi�S• 9 jxln..,,r-S rch S t y /�,th- �.I .., - -- �n ,f, i �• ... Vv 1 an ' 'v&''ai Vl'' n ��wi6-t� t ke-'ile-tho!-1ile rtl IFV strierer�ient' F.. t ,g-,�'J!1 iG',. 'c Y'�3 � AA- \i N �,�Ylc,:4Cre/3� S �};f1.-V.eh hc,. .� U � Ij it� � tr; ro htanda iesp e t °crfatech ngg i a�06 ;:" 3 , , , �� a%��e' esti ce Assaci. a s>i - ��.=� ..�. , ; a e o e o 0 of a -o o a s o _ a 'i S� n - � Lc ,y/ ,� r z _vl s < -.:✓i-L E,Ssl�Eiw,'�e�`•r�'i'"`F"s`;.0:����r�<, (v'-5x.'x.,�->-F'-r'��§t'�`�=`..>�"%:SY��?���,.y'!�h�;.t,�`rt:,r>�-,vnrfi�.��l�'r.".zi•,.�a�,,S�i,9::�:�v.yS`s,Sa,�'t"'�srza;�„>y�`s'r%"'.���Y.r�...;y;�6s'�.rr,�.r�;,.;�,,,v�T`*�"(`x�;P�-�r- 'h.„l,z�Y e^,a"bs.,::'sT,„.,;�..-<,.rY`°:;i!.3"'{s`�F.ti..n>.'y�.r''o.a'��'+'k,'S`•;_?�Zg`%,..1�=;t-X.i��s>f�cr..'�f£-��3,-t�w�''c�a.e��.2h'^�`,.ri���..s"Gf"/3.�--.�:.M,-r�.."�^;.�k��`�;;i's'.�ax�1`.k,;,..'`..•�.'c ;�..�kt,•%�'�{Yc'�Y, d v ` '� `ih-.. s - ?` . gAG �„ r ;�l�� ' . „9,`'r � �! �,Rr:,,,F'R�`,,,,r) �, .Fr,. :.. ,, ry � o;vrJi u "x �.,< -.e a .s'�' S� cs 3.'r�•r%cup' „,,� CORRESPONDENCE CI1iCOER corn # Groundwater management boundaries shifting By:Steve Sehaonaver,July 30, 2018 OROVILLE »The local effort to manage the water beneath Butte County continues to be tweaked, with the Board of Supervisors Tuesday backing a change for some planning boundaries. The changes still have to be approved by the state. Under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, plans have to be prepared to maintain the amount and quality of the water in California's aquifers. In Butte County's case, the area of the Sacramento Valley floor is included, but not the foothills That part of the county had arbitrarily been divided into four"sub-basins,” each of which would have an agency created to come up with and maintain the plan. The old boundaries split the cities of Chico and Oroville, and the Western Water District, between two sub-basins. The plan the supervisors backed Tuesday has three basins that would not divide any entities, and each of which get most of their water from similar sources. The Vina sub-basin would extend from the Tehama Coun- ty border south to include Chico, Durham and Butte Val- ley. Most of the water used there is groundwater. The Butte sub-basin would encompass irrigation districts that use surface water. It would include the Western Canal Water District,the Richvale Irrigation District, the Biggs- West Gridley Water District and the Butte Water District that draw from the Feather River, and Reclamation Dis- tricts 2106 and I004 as well as the M& T Ranch, which draw from the Sacramento River. The Wyandotte Creek sub-basin would include the entire city of Oroville,the Thermalito Water and Sewer District and all the areas south and east of the Feather River down to the Yuba County line. If the proposed boundaries are approved by the Depart- ment of Water Resources, the next step will likely be set- ting up joint power authorities to draw and maintain the plans. As envisioned,they would be governed by board drawn from the water providers in the sub-basin, with rep- resentatives of independent household and agricultural well users. More information is available on the county Department of Water and Resource Conservation website, www.buttecountv.net/waterresourceconservation. Contact Steve Schoonover at 530-896-7750. �..; • 5 ,• - s raj > ' a',s, >ar k 5r''iJ,. v k,nr -,-a y � M �� '...'• sli-i ! ar'k, 441 �s F. - �' f 7� F CALIFORNIA� • `? r -� it ' r �• r kms; e'i'✓F'v u, r,.C. '"� `}4i �' .✓ , .., Fir �1V - ^ Sr' 7h4 Y. , .r' : { LL 4�l fir 'tlts�+ r`r. 12.."�`.•..f ri S--:7-...x� •�� � �a � .- PLAN �' ,f � °sr4 gr � . ''"S :� � 1 � 1:-. Yom..Y:.-,a Z r f SR ,�'', Z f�9 r ,.��,�, y; ,��. ;3 J �' ��y( iFi...�+ .h ��,;1'n''.�Y�•� �. .5����u '.:4 til'.4„ ,¢y 1 ; 4 , . 3 ' Z 1 5 f', . 4 dn i...i S,1..ir.4:'C*ft 4. ii` )'I•. d'•l Aug, 4 2018 • re �'+mak. z -s��f•-"'.` .t --f.:-.: y,. r , ..y� - a�' This weekly electronic newsletter is designed to keep you current on California Water Plan news. I '', x WAFER PLAN.' , We welcome comments,suggestions,and any news tips that may ben of interest to water planners. < -CALENDAR Flood-MAR workshop A chance to provide input on DWR's flood-managed aquifer recharge(Flood-MAR)activities,will be available during a workshop and webinar will seek V.: fz comMENTSand webinar session in Sacramento on Aug.30. Flood-MAR is a SS G TONS ry: public input on strategy resource management strategy that uses flood water to recharge 4 k <SUBSCRIBE!' Y groundwater aquifers.The emerging strategy will help improve water ¢, f ' NgUBCXI3E resources sustainability throughout California. News and updates are :, z :r ' available by subscribing to the Flood-MAR Listserv. a ft r Delta's contaminants The Delta Independent Science Board has , , c finished a review on the scientific basis for 'g and nutrients are examined ', .. . " . .�� , assessing water quality in the Delta.The :�� ^. 1 t in science board's review review focuses on the Delta's contaminants Ny- t `J and nutrients. It also looks at how findings Nutrients about those elements have been used in Mere;�. ecosystem health decisions. , s - y- � � 'r The California Landscape Conservation Partnership's Tribal Team Discussing tribal perspectives p p' '. f will be hosting a webinar on Monday,Aug. 13,at 1 p.m. It will include --, on landscape and cultural t a presentation and discussion about tribal perspectives on ecological " resources restoration work landscape and cultural resources restoration work.The speakerwill z z be Ron Goode,chairman of the North Fork Mono Tribe. ..yl: J ,- C Z" N h C Sy S-- Y�S C -. ` s The Public PolicyInstitute of California k� , PPIC IC panel discussion will r , . <,.��.�{ ` (PPIC)has taken a look at reforms that , ` r'"` look at ways to improve 'w;�`-- are needed to help the state manage ,, SF: -- t California's drought resilience drought in a changing climate.The x r '�`W findings will be part of a panel discussion , 4 E on Monday,Sept,1t),in San Francisco. ...7t,-4,-.--�; . ,,, The PP1C took lessons learned from the recent drought;ana atililied'' them to a variety of climate change simulations.A panel of experts will talk about reforms to improve drought resilience. Caltrans study looksrat The way people travel and the waygoods are transported has an ,:.,,- . - �Z • t_ , /jEa"`�'' + �' �:.. effect on the way water is used in California.•Caltrans has-released r - California will be - s ,, the-ways n anew study that:looks at the ir..nsp9,„,,. on transformation.R.e 5r, 'Y e `ri COU`d U1:tkn futUl[e 3n state's futuee It cover`s evp_r..g„,,,,,tech o o -a `d `o erlttai Ideas that's ' �. i^ '''"-',f3::11 i2 .l' ?'�.�'r:"-"YS ,..�i7,,,,,`2 x-� 1 ti :rr,: s+.r :. tet•.. l iiiiiea 1.� ,.a59.,..' r_ .;,.`. 3- .. ^` 3' �.• g,-a� f,'Galea,I'Ta -,d n!--OA a rEC��D-, w�V,,oi 1fal,. si Stial ounC�J 'i `�... �f + .?^d .5�`a -z,.,� -•# �=i..�`'"�Za �"'��-��To.t"a:.L`:�':;�s:�::.; s.,.u �,t �� ,� ry,�,`^]� r.,� <� �.. N�Y,,Yr �, x j .-..:,. ,,,-.. _s` U."Fr3 ,4. % o'y�y�f r .c-o 'c t""• 9 t ,;r a-3 fs,, `f ', r ;7?2`� A �w '� r r'c�� � c �� � tIX'� e..rSCOriEur���� 4 e,a �;�� �•��-� , � �a" a � s:6 'C�4 T n`. z4 s}f�' �a r�v. Yd r n . 4.b s^ I t,i,v, i,...:r�',' . -,- ', '• t2• , r �r J . _ � y,.,.:, �K J SF fit^ .,lf+" �'W' l iY r s; , ' y CA IFORNIA . e • . ... ... _ , . _, . . _ _... .. .__ . ... .. - - ..„ ,. , , ., .. . „ ,,,. . ,„. , ..„,., ...,..,.), . 2018 ✓ . .. a ...„ -- , _._ 8, ,.... tel .... ' This weekly electronic newsletter is . . We welcome comments,suggestions,anddesigned anyto newskeep tipsyou that maycurrent on be ofCalifornia interest to waterPlan plannernewss WATERAF PLAN Water CALENDAR Adaptation forum will Registration is open for the 3rd California cover strategies for creating Adaptation Forum. It will be Aug.27-29, COMMENTS f in Sacramento'The biennial eventwill SUGGESTIONS resilient communities feature a variety of workshops and breakout C'alifcirr�ic� sessions coveringo various adaptation crura liar' SUBSCRIBE! oivni UNSUBSCRIBE strategies for creating resilient communities. There will also be a presentation on new summary reports for California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment. -,-----, Two-day workshop will include A two-day workshop and webcast based in Washington, D.C.will a dose look at California's take a close look at California's Fourth Climate Change Assessment. The first day will cover all aspects of the assessment;the second day climate change assessment will be spent looking at assessments being done in other states.The workshop and webcast will be Aug.14 and 15. The potential of delta The Delta Science Program and UC Davis are teaming upon a salinization to be discussed symposium that will look at the potential for climate change to cause salinization in deltas and estuaries.There will be discussion on how.. during Davis symposium information on salinity adaptation can be used to better manage the Bay-Delta ecosystem.The symposium+mill be Sept.26,in Davis. California's new laws California's new legislation on water use goals will be discussed during an Alliance far Water Efficiency webinar.on Wednesday, on water use goals t0 l!e Aug.29.Two bills signed by Governours r Brown earlier:this year will addressed during webinar require urban water providers to set new targets for water use. This webinar will cover the implementation timeiine,formulas for calculating water targets,and other elements of the new laws,. White a rex lores T � � � he American Water Warks Association has released a white paper th8 development of cash to help utilities develop cash reserve policies.The report uses case studies to provide utilities with exam !es on how they can app the . reserve policies for utilities unique circumstances and considerations to:create'a reserve plan it Details are available'in this:announcemenfi; zY < Comma being�accepted. Public comments are being accepted . �. , a .al ?, �„ .rEv' �-f?.5 ''tv Y: i ,� /� r .moi iss . •r/,F>...,� y.;,on,a,dl ft action=plaid;Mame F'fvfeeted oii!ulO -I afar+protectwng \ o , w .�`� h Y a �� E .ea� �F-� .�ICB�r�OT11[C1lr7fl� Developed t}y thG�Cearl ss ,�vn >�>�sa �y "��A- �`ti. s��,.:2�hc'u. "°"�----areas,,,,,-1,0 ;zv`�3's"-'Zs N�'� t ass ,�f, l n r ` l s .k� �� r_': _+° I itis arine.areas . Protection Coul cil1and t ie California 1> � 7,-.,,,,::::?,1.?..,.!..,. z, r� R :S Y a G .F...r�aµt e y nJ� M1Iildlife the`" la/n�si .:- d -ems, ,, .; „ R i.:. P- .! 9e %n L5hari,V p .lqsr o-- 4 E, e . 4'4 4 a'd a == C a B a, aurCe ,�L<yv t c, 3,ff+c a `. „;-'F;?.f�.z;e-�,,�:nEeY,,Y:ryy/..r�Y,x,_.�2'',;;a,ss a,T`'";?2`t:Y.e,.1.zn`;�t'".2':v.`;L;:v":%^i,r,''s..;%-:5,'.�..=�TG.�r-.,�:,<<{:'`r✓..°''.r5-�"H,✓`,..3,�,s.,.,a`',:J-.'^,,„�.h-•97tiJ:,.`_-.:3�.0iz1:wm�.,�.:c.,x'e.s,.'N:;4n'.z.£,`,x+fg:a^;d..-;z'`�+.=:,.;r.5:-'..,'Y.S1.dZ,;;:r`{.�'i-i-sw,<*;:4,..fiirir�w,_:>„ir.v«,),�a''y^:`f.;'..���.!�r',..<r;'.:.l.�<<.--.,���.�Ys...-...Jfi...;.r-v`,'rM<;:,:.li,ih`;ar=�.rs"•",ta�..,.'2,'.Y-`-'.'+�.n.=;S-',v,,0•Y.r..,.'o�C,i 9J.,„h„.a!I?_.,>.^vC•'<me^`ti.e✓o.9:r,J,s2f.1e rr r,F_',^�:c:x?,,{,�)yK.c,a,,�`�%,:.6r.),F'.,yyr.v�.,-.ae'>`S»,�'Gf,?a,''+.=.,:l.�i,c,.t:,F..r.,,:m.�v.*,.<,,a�'.,e.:,�.w.".'_.2 v.��-oS^se;5`'.C`,.S's.�c..y•v?�-r.�•.>.Rr-:`3..s$.'P,r:i..'/;t"z`r<t.d'...az.1�t,a;w..',Gu.,�i.'.i!%.',r,-i��.F<m,k�..S'��:,:s:>.`=»+<<'r:'���'�.ii,=`m''.s:,,jz,.y.'-,s`,%�a,.,a:.-...3.�..;J�,,,c.;;.:G.:-�..a..r_:.xaf5..r;`a'�'��2r•.;s.�o?:.:P a`-�.,5.a.�.��,�-C'�R'-�l','s.:..f'r-.�s,:,'..�'.;_,a.�a>i,Z/ti✓s�r.J»o..0 ..z 4- - va= v v- . 'e .I...'..^n`.Q' ViaAZTS� Pe - v vq 0 - - 7Il ! �r.�.- fa .,.�#.y .'..!.i'_ii1a. E! a � 0 • 0 = as3n. 4.?t '3r ,r ` --3 ' o t i + , 4',.,..,...-....„,,i,-A;..!.i� a�x -! ? '�ryTu,S• k' --‘-',,:'•:'- . ` 4 i yJr_. - „,,r5.. + s . ,,-,"n. „,-,.-s„s .r��, .. a : �xf } a' /" - any,`.�'.'"`C�'f•= � 57r- . a Z rJ -5 t,,L` "4 -_` -. � /-� s, t �-'��,.. ' x ',->. �� xt` •i'�Gv, l `.� s.`3-,14.��s' �'`\ ; � z S -' z �- 't, � ��h' '....�. ....' +' r,...r. CORRESPONDENCE ChICOERcom # Butte County still a leader in water conservation By:Staff Reports,August 13, 2018 Butte County continues to outpace the state by a long shot when it comes to water conservation, according to num- bers released last week by the state Water Resources Con- trol Board. The board released water savings reported for June by 360 urban water suppliers in the state, which averaged 16.8 percent compared to June 2013, the benchmark year be- fore the last drought. The four Butte County water agencies that report beat that by almost 10 percent, at the least. The Del Oro Water Co. led the way with 38.6 percent sav- ings, compared to June 2013. Del Oro serves Magalia, Sterling City, Lime Saddle and a number of other small communities in Northern California. Customers of the Oroville Division of the California Wa- ter Service Co. had savings of 28 percent, with the Chico Division of Cal Water at 26.1. The Paradise Irrigation District reported savings of 27.7 percent. Cal Water's Willows Division saved 26.1 percent, and the Marysville Division saved 24.7 percent. Yuba City report- ed 20.4 percent savings. Red Bluffhowever used more water in June than in June 2013, but just slightly. Water use was up by 0.3 percent. Regionally, the differences were not pronounced. Savings in the Sacramento River watershed were 18 percent; on the South Coast, 16.1 percent; in the Bay Area, 17.2 per- cent. The Sacramento Valley does use significantly more water per person per day that the urban centers or the state as a whole. In June that number was 169 gallons, compared to 96 gallons on the South Coast and 83 gallons in the Bay Area. Locally per capita daily water use was 87 gallons for Del Oro customers, 106 gallons in Oroville, 173 gallons in Chico, 217 gallons in Paradise, and 155 gallons in Wil- lows. CORRESPONDENCE ChICOERcom # ff -- t�P Meeting Wednesday night in Durham on groundwater planning By:Steve Schoonover,August 15, 2018 DURHAM—A meeting is planned Wednesday night in hold well. Durham on local efforts to keep the state from taking over A move is underway to have Durham included in the Vina management of Butte County groundwater. Sub-basin. If that is approved by the state Department of Water Resources, a representative from the Durham Irri- The meeting is 6-8 p.m. in the Durham Memorial Hall, TheMidway, gation District might be added to the JPA board as well. 9319More information about local groundwater management In September 2014, the governor signed a series of bills in Butte County is available at www.buttecounty.net/ passed by the Legislature requiring development of plans to waterresourceconservation. manage the groundwater basins under the state to avoid "undesirable results." The move was in response to excessive pumping during the drought that caused a decline in water tables and intrusion of salt water into coastal aquifers. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act allows lo- cal authorities to draw their own plans, as long as they ac- complish the objectives of the state law,within deadlines it set. If the locals don't do it,the state will step in,take control, and impose its own plan. The county government and water providers here think that's a bad idea, so they have been working toward the local alternative. The effort is still in the preliminary stages. The deadline to have plans in place for the groundwater basins beneath Butte County is Jan. 31, 2022. What's being discussed so far is a governance structure to manage the plans once they are developed,and what the boundaries of the local basins would be. Wednesday's meeting is intended to bring Durham resi- dents up to speed on what's going on, answer questions and take comments. Currently,the county and water agencies are leaning to- ward setting up joint powers authorities to manage the plans. Those are agencies that handle a governing need that crosses jurisdictional lines. An example is the Butte County Association of Governments that handles trans- portation planning in the county and operates Butte Re- gional Transit among other things. JPAs are usually governed by a board composed of repre- sentatives from each of the entities included. For example the Vina Sub-basin encompasses the northwest county. The JPA board for it has been envisioned as including a representative from Butte County,the city of Chico and the Rock Creek Reclamation District, as well as an independent agricultural pumper and someone on a house- �� • •---: o ♦ til y" �- 4 e-<gSpf4{z �ti ,<Ys ,�li � � - t✓knx r`' ..r�°�' -_ y .LAR" n?'.»�:. ( l hrFf � r< r� ." .1 E.' • - . "r f y Y i -.. ha r"r7_ ���' s £����Cyi`£ ;.i.).:-:;'...-•...',",;.'!"-:.1:<.'.7...-.', 4� jit �`1��_P% etre-.,' . � :,'wy 2� Pi;d • r, F � ms �'�.-t �;SL� ��W�ai'.� �5"v : �'0•• '"N CALIFORNIAt {_y ;• s;.:ti''�e. -!----_.•,.-.•!.- •r'4_-..{ ? ✓.` ;,, '` 3 t _s'"4 � � hw� � yyY'tr�.:�: �Ya i r.,;�i `�.�.a�";� ��cN fit,y ?yam kY Z �PL ' NeNES ` sz', ,fir i itWAW,f'i::iligAiRtAC 'Zk etark::: :,.':''.'-'-'w::- 9: P,,,,,,,:=Witg-'N'ZN-,...:',...,','c''' ,,,4iirt: ...!".•!.: ''' wed; ,,esr:,;,31 I pu 4 EZ ''',114," ,. "Z1 s 11 f , 5 2018 3 V �q4 This weekly electronic newsletter is designed to keep you current on California Water Plan news. -,• We welcome comments,suggestions,and any news tips that may be of interest to water planners. »PLAN. •,h 8' h5• ,`rtfj(, P r • , ua t CALENDAR • Listening sessions scheduled DWR and the State Water Resources �hu ,:-.„-,,,;.......-. ,...,::154.4-. s Control Board have scheduled three listening - . ��'� .' � ,. � to review new water � t' �'� 5.':-,'";,•: COMMENTS Ik sessions to discuss a draft report, Making ,,§� . . ., .. IONS, , conservation legislation Water Conservation A California Way of Life, y +f V 3,'''.'!.';11/,4•;;.:!:::',F=.:,..,-;:":;:;;:,::/;;;:;,tIt is a primer on new water conservation and .A{l'i .�• 3 i7 „ O `,'!. S1t.11 SE� R IB J �' drought planning legislation in California.The �� 3 listening sessions will be Wednesday, Sept. 5, in Sacramento, ..fi ' 3 ,-..--• •., Friday, Sept.7, in Los Angeles;and Tuesday, Sept. 11, in Fresno. :�r >, t Y, - •�;' Russian River Pilot Notes and materials from the July 31 workshop oni the Russian ,� , ,:r� River Pilot project have been posted online.The pilot is exploring workshop materials � how regional leaders and the State can cooperate more effectively made available online to improve water resources sustainability for the Russian River.The w y ry work is part of the sustainability outlook for Update 2018. $395 million in federal The Governor's Office of Emergency Services ti 4 �`w has announced new federal fundina opportunities -rye funding available under two �Y under two grant programs,The Pre-Disaster mitigation programs Mitigation and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Sf< .Mh YYff� Shf'u programs offer a total of more than$395 million in .,' u « OES funding nationwide.The deadline for filing a notice of interest is Tuesday, Sept.4. Ca `- - , ti :"• WestFAST newsletter The latest edition of the Western States Federal Agency Support 1< r Team(WestFAST)newsletter deals extensively with wildfires in takes extensive look at the West.The articles include a look at fire ima a devela ed b g rY p ;ti C ty ry a;` the wildfires in the West NASA,and work being done to forecast wildfre activity.WestFASTY lE ... is a collaboration of 12 federal agencies with water management u-.. ' �b a responsibilities in the West. pc..:':- i _ 1. -- _, CALFIRE issues assessment Program$' CALFIRE's Fire and Resource Assessment Pra is ,>< of state forest and out with its look at the state's forests and rangelands. <: The report covers sustainability assessments on a cAL,�� since leas.. } rangeland sustainability variety of topics involving private and public lands.ane 4; " z t chapter is dedicated to water resources.It looks at - r�- A. z opportunitiesfor watershed°protection. .. is y; \,. , z a Analytics platform will be The State Water Board will be offering a brown bag emrnar onj ♦ , a navel bio optics geospatiai;analyttcs platform that can be used �'' =',:',.....,':„.',',-,,,,,,,,,=-,',, presented of Statel ate>r �`o }< lFa t. X W,.S `�^j,�, a�lP,,.. rr.;-4'9.7�,,-*�, °:,, to monitorwater:quality , optic-modefi,soscan also provide y�� �S� �w{ �, � �4'x ��,4 t:.�,�+ ��•++65, > {?}r �'�,,..t�1.k��yN rr , ,..,-..,...,,,...,,,......v,. :tf� J' L` { S . -, . ,,.-.:,wti, `� .60.1lC br btrtie rrrar infonnahon on mn'ryinve/yetaSoe and sails to reduceire llsk The �tj•:, rt..,':.,;rr,^ c �:�i.1"i+t3> J��. ���e v�. �✓,i.; -,+7,.-�,�. _.*..}2yt<;, ,,.7. 'gr .,rw ..lr-r. ;vey .-h ,;�' �_ „>,n ti.,��.uF� �., `ar ✓:'�J��: ;Jl }`,v � �r„� ;''i„* .s'� c,��- x�,._<''�.a��'� ,.c ia�s 5 S � r, .; ' ',- .., ' r '- ' ;.--. ` 5Q` *„. a,. ;5 `:a% `”. ,.k• , },c,rr tir �; } y S`. ,e r3, t em,c"'";-,.,:":"'"-.•.:-::, �'- -,-`,. -, „E,sr i ': " 'V c..r A' '....,=-:iit ft W€IE(I I l'IGrSC. --p�lElg .,*AY0 alit S-nr t37e Q x5; ',.3� r,` c- .. � ✓. CJ'^ ,i - 51, 'y 1,i-. V I 5;; ti^"nV {�' !1 L U w`Z;' :: - -,4Z.�Ji'...,,Jtr i fr,p��` , '• :- 4 'Cp > _.? 'Sg..;. -i.. :x4. ''',.'4.'0i,, '.':6.=... s�1,,e,',.$,V,'''-'-C,' rfn{E 41..'• k,,` ,s`tr ,.,'s�-' ';`..*Al�gtr•tk'...t 1 y Yash F,:��2f '�' ✓ �'s�xvw, 'M` a= y 0-45'x . CA`� IF � RNIA ., W • WATER PLAN - - ' . .... ''-,.'''''.',.''','"-..:.,'..:;:::::::-....:::::::'"7 . Wednesday Update u 22 2018y t This weekly electronic newsletter is designed to keep you current on California Water Plan news. • We welcome comments,suggestions,and any news tips that may be of interest to water planners. WATER PLAN • CALENDAR Save the date for Save the date for the California Water Plan es, „a , Update 2018 plenary. It will be at the Civic � Update 2018. plenary '-;;;;,--.,;,,i-• � .. COMMENTS/ Center Galleria in West Sacramento on SUGGESTIONS in West Sacramento Oct.9 and 10. It will bean opportunity for stakeholders to discuss Update 2018 with .: .:,.,2,--...- ,,,- . SUBSCRIBE f . r . UNSUBSCRIBE DWR representatives.State Controller ;;.,";p71.:„..,...,,..- Betty Yee will deliver the keynote address. :w, ;:::::,.,..,..,.-„,..,:,:,:,-,,,,..„,„..„,„•.:',,'"2.-,,; . Registration details and webcast information wil .e announced in an z upcoming edition of the California Water Plan eNews. Registration is open for A public workshop on flood-managed aquifer recharge(Flood- next week's Flood-MAR MAR)will be held Thursday,Aug.30,in Sacramento. It will be an opportunity for public input on DWR's Flood-MAR activities.Flood- workshop in Sacramento MAR is a resource management strategy that uses flood water to recharge groundwater supplies. Registration is required.The workshop will also be available as a webinar. ,-. Flood-MAR overview. To learn more about the basic elements-of Flood-MAR,a video of last month's Watershed University webinar is available online. available in video of it features LJVVR's KamyarGuivetchi providing an overview of the last month's webinar Flood-MAR process.He explained how it helps California prepare for extreme floods and droughts,and the public-private parnerships neededto scale-up the implemenation of Flood-MAR projects. Issue brief looks The University of California has released an issue brief after taking a look at groundwater recharge.The paper examines when at beneficial uses of groundwater recharge of surface water is a beneficial use.The groundwater recharge;. findings do include recommendations for clarifying current State policy to encourage recharge projects. Explore California's A neinteractive website from UC Davis provides k , streamflows with new a chancel°explore and visualize streamflow u patterns across the state California eFlows F interactive website includes details on stream classy Ications and a • 4 K, r +,' -:--'",,'.4.,'3",i'-V.'. t,Y variety of=flow metrics for seasons throughoutt:',,;3',:-.4-.--S.,',.,. -.$•-'0-,:,c`r ' �; � 4 y�4 the`- ear tiThe website will eventually encompass, ; `''' ,F.". .;t,,?.aa=.' t-, r x te v. �S ;:n a0 =r,.;'.?,:. - ,s> > s f, r '� �a,.N,;�?�. Y .u�.v:�vy'y ;,vt:"j;-, e.�;�,;; .,�1 u,�`.': ..q 4 l -,`i.5`'d. �::5%:;:tS` J ,.�4� \ ,,yyrr g.rti <<> ;; T ;1,formation on�hydrolo'gy. eomo' holo le;i, x,:. �.0 � „4 .„.„,-.,..4..v....,,-...,. ,..,R t :a`. ,,,,,.+, ko,—. %&i,..;,,:,p,----,-g,L;,.,nv ,.V.:4,,;,y,:ua v. /2y> a ,./ o itG at,.. 1- x1. ! „,„*.4.4456-1",,. .-,'` ` ,,a4b',,3 i„ L[„{� { Vr ,dill lr rlv�r,ol en l twG ,rte a 2fi. 1si,. C rov•' u >� ,xc> i' rrvF;s - '.r� ��'� �`�a<.�vz � ''2 , =,-,..„.-� Y.r �: ma -•e e9,,c1-,eclsio s{i Ifo is . . 4: �xz Cal la •l .1::19f. _ I i 11:11- .G di nal • ',n til • -ta ' - o o - a '. I ry -11'4''',.,j-P-6--41,-',-,..,k,..:27:7.,;-1::=1;;;.-14 f 1 �I,rti 7.,£, a 0 .r-o' :: .. .. .0 ; o .'ra, ua AL,.:8 '.3 ;- L i@ :::: I a f _ Bl .t pgP ' tial`T;0Ji =00 - 6oa 0 . 0 0 � ...�...t. sok R :.�-�• � ��Ffi >�i.�,`o�''L r/�"grc. Ga,',.Y < �^-xz'sr.;•” _ �` �,fr,� Y- r!_ ,:>' �`$: 7,,r r ;v, Ilw: _ a. J ,,,,YY` ', ye:. x "i F '�; ! rr�s-�f. t < ..f �, ;� 3 lr v� ew z' wr �#"tr: . F• .�8a :r �'g'tas;;.en:... ;�'b=;i, ^ �� � ,`v' �`✓•y t6 jtik:., �G�i, , S?,S RP-- � r-�le^r<Y. �. '� u3� ��: ,E..^'.' ..�...,.1 .>a�.� fir. �k� � yS.as-,.v '�S=3�� �5' ��, xa�v-�,:. �,.. �=J='�,..r:✓.,_.>n, r.,. -.t- _ .eas�T'� '_:%�<.:c.•,::War• ..3„ .�..,.�UT .,a.s-�.a..i`-'� -y,..,b,.:� + +' n�z�� < <�a1:=�:�=j"Gc�+ ;�vn .,:. �ts�•aG:: � ,s<��v,�s,� .,�:sv��� ..�;y%`,�.s, wo, �. }. °'C'. °39'. ,n't l' c':'` f. •4... ;:Y.3 kh .,4„..4 CORRESPONDENCE 0\ i • - 1,�_�. Water War By:Graham Womack,August 23,2018 Butte County farmers showed up in force to a rally at the state Capi- standards could help restore salmon populations.His group's posi- tol,riled by recently proposed updates to the Bay-Delta Plan aimed tion is that to do so,50 percent to 60 percent of water flow must largely at buoying the state's imperiled salmon population. remain in-river from February through June and other standards On July 6,the State Water Resources Control Board announced it must be in place the rest of the year to govern temperature.He'd was looking to increase water flows for portions of the Sacramento- also like to see California become more sustainable in its water us- San Joaquin River Delta.The board noted on its website that it was age. "part of a delicate balancing act—addressing an ecological crisis in "What the board is proposing is not going to cut it,"said Rosenfield, the watershed and preventing further collapse of Bay-Delta fisheries who didn't attend the rally but noted that others from his group did. while acknowledging the other vital water uses for millions of Califor Following the rally,the board updated a list of frequently asked nians." questions.The list notes that a flow proposal for the lower section of Local farmers,though,fear that 55 percent to 60 percent of water the San Joaquin River"would provide a range of 30 to 50 percent of might be diverted under this plan, potentially harming agriculture.So unimpaired flow from February through June in the Merced,Tu- on Monday(Aug.20),the Butte County Farm Bureau sent two buses olumne,and Stanislaus rivers." carrying approximately 80 people from Butte,Colusa,Glenn,Sutter, The board added,"The starting point is proposed to be 40 percent of Tehama and Yuba counties to a"Stop the Water Grab"rally at the unimpaired flow.This is not the same as a 40 percent reduction." north steps of the Capitol in Sacramento. "The impacts of the state water board's Bay-Delta amendment is All of this might not be enough,though,to bring local farmers on going to reach far and wide,"Colleen Cecil,executive director for the board with the plans and avert a legal battle. Butte County Farm Bureau,told the CN&R."It'll affect everybody in "There will be a lawsuit,"Cecil said."Without a doubt,there will be a the state." lawsuit." An estimated 1,500 people attended the rally.The event attracted She added that the California Farm Bureau,the 53-county group that numerous local,state and federal officials,including U.S.Congress- the Butte bureau belongs to,has a team of attorneys.She also antici- men Doug LaMalfa,Tom McClintock,Jeff Denham and Jim Costa. pates lawsuits against the state from irrigation districts and possibly "We're all Californians," LaMalfa told the CN&R after giving a speech. the federal government,since the plans could impact the New Melones Dam reservoir and its functionality. "We're all fighting for similar things." Les Heringer has managed the M&T Ranch just southwest of Chico It would be only the latest skirmish between President Donald Trump since 1986,growing almonds,walnuts and prunes as well as beans and Gov.Jerry Brown,with the administration falling short in a law- and wheat. Heringer and his adult son Lee,who's worked on the suit earlier this year against California over its sanctuary state policy. ranch 10 years,each made the trip to the Capitol. Trump has weighed in on California water policy before,including on "What brought me out here today is ag is fully engaged on protecting Aug.6,when he tweeted that"California wildfires are being magni fled&made so much worse" because water to fight the fires was our water," Les said."If there's no water,there's no farm.We cannot "being diverted into the Pacific Ocean." farm without water." Lee agreed:"I think it's important to show Sacramento how im- portant The New York Times and others quickly refuted Trump's claim, portant of an issue this is to farmers,"he said."It's not just affecting it has supporters,including LaMalfa—the Congressman said he asked people's pocketbooks.It's affecting their livelihoods and all the em- Trump during a campaign stop in Redding in June 2016 why water ployees that depend on their income from these ranches to provide was being run out to the ocean. for their families." Asked if he'd heard rumblings of a federal lawsuit, LaMalfa said,"It'd David Lundberg,a rice farmer who lives in Chico,said he made the be rumbly right now to say that.But yes." trip to the event because of talk of people losing 50 percent of their LaMalfa noted that he'd recently spent time in Shasta County with water. U.S.Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke due to the ongoing fire in his "It's pretty devastating for everybody who has water," Lundberg district.Zinke,the Congressman said,was aware of the support said. among three members of the water board for the Bay-Delta updates. "He as well as those folks on Bureau of Reclamation are really upset The state water board has retreated somewhat since releasing its that three out of five members of an appointed board could go so far proposals.While it was scheduled to hold hearings Aug.21-22 to to try to make that kind of decision,"LaMalfa said. review the plans,the agenda for these hearings noted that"any final action by the[board]will be continued to a future[board]meeting." Jon Rosenfield,a conservation biologist with the Bay Institute in San Francisco,said by phone that updating state and federal water —NCE Thomas, Autum From: Gosselin, Paul Sent: Monday,August 27,2018 3:45 PM To: Buck, Christina; Peterson, Kelly;Thomas, Autum Subject: FW: Proposition 3 FYI—Could you add this to the WC correspondence? thanks From: Menchaca, Clarissa Sent: Monday, August 27,2018 3:39 PM To: B0S<BOS@buttecounty.net> Cc:Gosselin, Paul<PGosselin@buttecounty.net>; Hatcher, Casey<CHatcher@buttecounty.net> Subject:FW: Proposition 3 Please see the below correspondence from Bob Mulholland concerning Proposition 3. Clam Me44.chacc Associate Clerk of the Board Butte County Administration 25 County Center Drive, Suite 200, Oroville, CA 95965 T: 530.538.7643 F: 530.538.7120 Twitter [ Facebook j YouTube I Pinterest From: Bob Mulholland<chicobob@msn.com> Sent: Monday,August 27,2018 3:32 PM To:Clerk of the Board <clerkoftheboard@buttecounty.net>;Admin Front Desk <CountyAdminFrontDeskHG@buttecounty.net> Cc:Steve Schoonover<sschoonover@chicoer.com>; news@chicoer.com; KHSL TV<news@actionnewsnow.com>; KRCR TV<news)bontencalifornia,com>; Lorraine Dechter<Idechter@actionnewsnow.com>;Jerry Olenyn <iolenyn@krcrtv.com>; chiconewstips@newsreview.com; Melissa Daugherty<melissad@newsreview.com> Subject: Fw: Proposition 3 August 27, 2018 Butte County Board of Supervisors Cc. Media I wish it was an error in the Chico Enterprise-Record (8/27/18), that the Butte County Water Commission is recommending the Butte County Board of Supervisors to pass a Resolution to oppose Proposition 3 on the November 6, 2018 ballot. Proposition 3 includes over $200 million for repair work on the Oroville Dam and $100 million for fire recovery and mitigation. When Proposition 3 passes, the Powers to Be will work with various government agencies from the state to the local level to implement it. If the Butte Board of Supervisors is on record in opposition for the state to spend the money on Oroville Dam, most likely the State will take that message at face value and hold off on allocating money for Oroville. After all, state bond money is allocated over years, as the payments are part of the state's General Fund and they can't spend the total bond money in one year. Over the decades I have been in a lot of private meetings in the State Capitol where budgets are being discussed and decided on. On some occasions- I heard- no need to send money to that county, their Board of Supervisors was against the idea or bill. If the Butte County Government and local Agencies are urging a No vote on Proposition 3, the Message will be clear- put the Oroville Dam at the end of the list- years down the road. The Sites Reservoir is a good example. It will be funded by Proposition 1, which passed statewide on the 1114/14 ballot with a 67.1% vote. Colusa County, the home of the Sites Reservoir, passed it with a 67.4%. Smart voters- they'll see billions of dollars coming into their small populated county. Butte County voted 52.1% for Proposition 1. Bob Mulholland 1051 Adlar Ct. Chico, CA 95926 530-891-5260 chicobob@msn.com 2 Butte County Water&Resource Conservation September,2016 Volume 19,Issue 8 , r WaterSolutions rf:; � y "To manage and conserve water and other resources for the citizens of Butte County 'rF • w.r Vina and Wyandotte Creek Governance � �z By Paul Gosselin k. The establishment of governance structures for the Wyandotte Creek and Vina -; fQ y X> subbasins are moving ahead. On September 11th, the Board of Supervisors will 3'75 consider adopting two separate agreements, one for the Vina subbasin and one for the Wyandotte Creek subbasin. The two agreements are similar in that they are Joint Powers Agreements (Agreements) that create a new v . groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) covering each subbasin, and assuming all of the SGMA authorities. Under the Agreements, the two new GSAs would be responsible for developing, adopting, and implementing the Groundwater Inside this issue Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the subbasin in order to implement the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements and achieve Public Engagement 2 sustainability goals. The Vina and Wyandotte Creek GSAs would also involve Water Quality Trend Monitoring 4 the public and subbasin stakeholders through outreach and engagement in developing and implementing their respective GSP. Under the terms of the Basin Boundary Modification Update 6 Agreements, Butte County and the other existing GSAs (the City of Chico, California Reservoir Durham Irrigation District, Rock Creek Reclamation District, the City of Oroville Storage 8 and the Thermalito Water and Sewer District) would rescind their individual GOVERNANCE,page 7>>> • ti t ' SVOninge ,044:cc { o< 5Sr r y•'1w�� 0.;, • • tie �u .,0 441. h i4V�5 r y5 k' ^fie ' ,�. wee ,L� F.wc,.?,. z Sets# a le Ground�wat r Manta extent A t Public Engagement under SGMA By Paul Gosselin One of the major underpinnings of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is having groundwater management decisions made by local public agencies who agree to be groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs). Along with this authority, SGMA places additional specific public engagement requirements on GSAs. Public engagement responsibilities under SGMA differ from existing practices of public agencies. Local public agencies are accustomed, by practice and law, to conduct their business in an open and transparent manner. For example, the Brown Act sets standards for public agency governing boards to ensure that their actions are transparent and to provide an opportunity for public participation. Common practices include sending agendas to mailing lists, posting materials on websites and sometimes issuing press releases. Recognizing the importance of engaging their • constituents on decisions, local agencies use other approaches to get input from their constituents such as holding special meetings or workshops. As local agencies assume their GSA responsibilities, they are required to go beyond their routine practices in a couple different areas. Most notably, SGMA calls upon GSAs to not only involve their traditional constituents but to specifically engage beneficial users of groundwater. Beneficial users of groundwater include agricultural, domestic, municipal wells operators, public water systems, local land use agencies, environmental users of groundwater, California Native American Tribes, disadvantaged communities and others. Some of the important provisions of SGMA include: • Developing a list of interested parties along with an explanation of how their interests will be considered (CA Water Code Sec. 10723.8.(a)(4)). • Establishing and documenting a process to consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater (CA Water Code Sec. 10723.2). • • Encouraging the active involvement of diverse social, cultural, and economic elements of the population within the groundwater basin (CA ., Water Code Sec. 10727.80). With these requirements, local agencies who elect to be a GSA cannot operate r. .:'_.. ,,. '�'` "business as usual." As Butte County and the other GSAs began governance discussions in the Wyandotte Creek and Vina subbasins, we explored new ways ':',.,oatietkidgept to broaden public involvement. We recognized that we needed to do more than rely on our existing mailing lists and traditional media outlets to inform ` vtizivitilitile the public, especially those who rely on private wells. An innovative approach ; v}a was developed to create a direct mailing to the owners of parcels not served by itidtitstitte water purveyors. The assumption was that these parcels rely on wells either for domestic and/or agricultural use. The Department and Butte County .;:;;145.1ifitptif .4.. Geographic Information Systems staff utilized county databases to develop subbasin specific mailing list of owners of parcels with private wells. For g 'Sbiletv7r4.1,k-;k10,X meetings in Vina and Wyandotte Creek, postcard mailings went to over 10,000 addresses. The mailings not only informed people of the upcoming meetings, ' but encouraged them to join the email list. By joining the email list, people can "' easily stay informed. Like any new system, there were some glitches, but 7 overall the process worked well. We found that over half of the people who showed up at the meetings did so because of the direct mailings. We also found a significant increase in the subscribers to the mailing list with most of the people having domestic wells. The method of direct mailings has proven to We want to be a success. As we move forward on the journey to develop a GSP in the Vina, make i t Wyandotte Creek and Butte subbasins, we expect to continue to use direct mailings and other ways to fully engage the public. If you know of friends or neighbors who would like to keep informed and participate in local water easy... resources decisions, please have them join the email list on our webpage http://www.buttecounty.net/waterresourceconservation/Home.aspx or by texting "BCWATER" to 22828. Text a;r A BCWATER OP"4 - -',.-J r . to 22,?2-; --) w_ -. 14 to get started. , ,k 0 . Message and data 1 Irates rna a l . 2018 Water Quality Trend Monitoring Results By Kelly Peterson This year marks the 17th year of the Butte County's Groundwater Quality Trend Monitoring Program. Every year our Department collects groundwater from 13 wells located throughout the county to evaluate groundwater conditions for ^x`.. evidence of saline intrusion. Butte County's most westerly boundary is approximately 100 miles east of the Pacific Ocean which may lead some people to wonder why we would be concerned about saline intrusion this far inland. The saline water in our subbasins is not from saltwater intrusion from the current coastline but rather from older sediments in the basin that were deposited in a marine environment as far back as the Late Jurassic period (close to 150 million • , years ago). These older marine sediments containing saline or brackish water are located within our groundwater subbasins along with younger terrestrial ( sediments containing freshwater. r-, Butte County's water quality program is designed to track single monitoring events throughout the county every year during the peak irrigation season each July or August.The data is collected to establish baseline levels across the county in order to detect changes which may require further investigation. The wells being monitored span widely across the County from the north near Chico west towards the Sacramento River, east towards the foothills near Butte College and south towards Gridley(see map). Monitoring was conducted from July 23, 2018 to July 26, 2018 for 12 of the 13 wells due to irrigation infrastructure repairs at one of the wells, however we f expect monitoring to continue at this well next year. Three water quality j.r characteristics; temperature, pH and electrical conductivity (EC) were recorded from water within each of the wells. Objectives have been set for these three water quality constituents measured each year. If water quality data reach certain stages outside of the established objectives, we refer to them as wells in "Alert Stages". For temperature, an Alert Stage is reached when the measurement is more than five (5) degrees Celsius (CC) outside of the historic range of measurements. For pH, an Alert Stage is reached if the water sampled has a pH below 6.5 or above 8.5. For EC the Alert Stage is reached for drinking water for measurements greater than 900 micro Siemens per centimeter (µS/cm) and for agricultural water the Alert Stage is set for measurements greater than 700 µS/cm. As usual, the 2018 monitoring results indicate no significant changes in groundwater quality with respect to temperature, pH or EC. Of the wells measured, none were in an Alert Stage and all objectives were met. Additionally, ,., all results fell within the acceptable range of water quality values set forth by State and Federal agencies. This year temperatures ranged from 17.8 °C to 22.6 °C, and the pH of the water sampled in 2018 ranged from 6.7 to 7.8, all within the acceptable range. In general, EC values this year were close to previously observed levels and ranged from 186 to 529 µS/cm. These values are below the secondary water quality thresholds of 700 µS/cm established by State and Federal agencies for irrigation x ;° water and 900 uS/cm for drinking water. Collection of this data continues to help establish baseline conditions for these -°;; -ry-'- ' parameters across the county. If changes occur to water quality conditions in the future, they can be evaluated in relation to this baseline data, investigated further and/or potentially monitored on a more frequent basis. Detailed tabular and graphical results will presented in a staff memo to the Technical Advisory Committee in the fall and will be available on our website: • http://www.buttecounty.net/waterresourteconservation/GroundwaterQuality. On behalf of our Department, I would like to extend our gratitude to the well owners who have coordinated with us over the years and have allowed access to their wells to make this monitoring possible. BUTTE COUNTY Basin Management Objective Water Quality rend Monitoring Grid -, ‘, ( t! • • ti. • J ‘f• • • VINA Q la -, CHICOWRS,,pN FOO ILL s,< • DURHAM!,: `� • DAYTON r M+T • ,� „I PENTZ k-S- s` - • O• r -- 1,•,.,_417,..„-..-;„,\_...e , DAYTON• , ® Y �' ..• ; , I ANGEL • • • • ESQUO • --'� ,‘ z ' SLOUGH \'''--t " rs j ® • • ./�I• 5y ) 'EROKE \L:f \.. LLANO ® f i ssco • `. ' ,f, . i WESTERN CAtWAL f �►"t •. Wit;' } �� ] Legend i , • BMO Groundwater Level Wells • ; / ' j Water Quality-Well Name • = r•E�RMALITO .' , • Biggs-West Gridley ` �'f�i .''� 0 Cherokee RICHVALE • Ar• Chico Urban Area O Durham Dayton • • ., • Esquon • YANDOTTE • Llano Seco • CREEK • M&T BIGGS- e_r' • Pentz 4WEST GRIDLEY 411. • • • Pentz-Butte Valley . BUTTE O y • Thermalito BUTTE • • • Thermalito domestic SINK •� •���� Q Vino + Western Canal(east) 0 1 2 4 6 8 �, ., w 4,�� ,..m.c asaa� .` L • Western Canal(west) Mites t .`Gr. Updated 2018 <-.'; -; It* b y 40, "�3''C-�!✓ y 1f l - S - J Basin Boundary Modification Update By Christina Buck Comment Period Open for Wyandotte Creek Basin Boundary Modification Our Department's request to modify the Wyandotte Creek subbasin was submitted and deemed complete by the Department of Water Resources(DWR). This opens up a 30-day comment period through the DWR SGMA Portal. This basin boundary modification request moves portions of the East Butte subbasin into the Wyandotte Creek subbasin in order for the City of Oroville to be located completely within a single subbasin. As a result, Thermalito Water and Sewer District moves from the East Butte subbasin to the Wyandotte Creek subbasin. To submit a comment, visit the SGMA Portal — Basin Boundary Modification Request System (https://sgma.water.ca.gov/basinmod/modrequest/comments/184) before the September 21, 2018 (s oposed Basin Boundar j Modifications deadline. J .JAS Update on Butte and Proposed Vina Subbasin Vina Subbasin rJ gin Proposed Butte Subbasin (. Modification Request i Proposed Wyandotte Creek 4 County Line Our Department, in µrj ° coordination with 1 ,N A t,t .,w other GSAs in the East - . '""' and West Butte ...,•.•........................,•�'�`„rH cls/' "+.: Pram�� x..-♦ Z4r o „. / subbasins, is working yai° =i !~" "` ; to submit a request to .♦e = c +a♦a+a w ' ,*e*,*,*,:fi+^� ; P DWR to consolidate ++++•Q .„,„„...,,,,A. ..... ...•••••4++r+r♦ - .... 5V+;+*5', Durham ,.,n. , ' portions of the East eas.4•; aea4o♦ g....o*eae�Pva` and West Butte eaeai*iai°4 *ti.„. , " . r *•+.♦a♦+♦••a•♦raa iore*pr•` ,r .i subbasins and expand J Pr+ar•+aa raa at vw• • '� ♦6+♦♦+♦4444♦♦♦♦♦4e4 •+• �♦• 44♦+4+404*r+aea♦are•*6 •444 1 °°eii°aeiii❖i°i*i❖ii°iii:*iii•i*@viii*i �fi the Vina subbasin t�'-a44s4a•*r+44x4+4♦4♦x44+4x44• "' • sr44+xee•e♦r•e♦44+•ee♦e♦•••f asa♦♦a#+,ae♦•aaar•♦♦♦♦ae♦♦•♦♦•a♦+a*•••*+a♦♦♦a♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦r, i �a<..•� ♦+♦;4♦s+++♦a♦+♦*rr++++r+�*r.♦,O�` "nM further to the south to 461x•44*4414♦•e.+4.4rr+4444re•@♦ ^•-• i'e•o•ii 4•i•:+4*i•i Si*SSiiiii♦i•Siiiiiiii♦ioi•f - - ' include the Durham a*+•+••4.4+4x4++r+4r•r•♦•♦•*rr•rr •:.0..,..- .+.or4x4a•e••.•44+.•r•♦•♦•♦•r•♦•••r� +•,r,,0,..,r, ,.er.r a e..a,..a ♦a♦♦,+#arr+a++a•,a+:z. Oroville area. For more 04♦a♦♦xa♦+� �Y1+ +. ♦♦ r/ a04aaa14r O,.a'� is♦♦♦+ +4 +4+♦+ . 4+..♦4....+r..`< = 1 information, Visit our �:� ae444•xr4♦aee4e••♦•♦+•4eexR♦♦r4r•••o' r, iii --P4.O.4•••r•r4•••+•+•••r••0••+•+04+4++� 9w 1 T@•G,::T+74��:+ab♦••°e,•+#@♦*♦4♦*♦+*aM+a,,a++*+••4a4•x+4♦xa,♦,•x♦,+„r, ''''a' '^.Mw -ae+rar4r+x4r4eoe.44r+xxxx4.4.44.4•t: Basin +•:a0♦•Or•O♦O•+°Oa•♦•:•♦•:4re0•♦•♦*♦•+•♦•eaD♦•:•+•••♦•O♦•O♦+i *ao•••♦•♦r•••r•*••••;00 4xrrr*•4r•r4r nr,.• a Boundary Q ,♦•e•aa,•r•a•♦•,•r•,•,•,•,r,•,♦,+,rax,�,♦,a,�,aa�,�,�,�•�,a•e,�,�,�,:,�,t '',.,•+ree+appyprpraaaar*arar•aaa•ara•r•er•aa♦•asra +, N..F, �„ ,rt•. Modification website s°*o*•,♦+*,♦,♦,♦,*x♦4*+♦4++•,4r+,♦r+4♦,♦4Q+ax♦♦+x♦+4♦4.4�•+4rr♦,4+♦,✓ 44 _Do. TE ? - j o•0••++4•x+++4+•.4444+++++++4.444.4.► REEK n.oa (https://tinyurl,com/ ee♦♦44rx♦x4x4xx44r4.44x+xx4e4*re♦exx+�. /o-ao�e+a4e+••••.•♦4•••••••♦•••ro4••••♦+ ; a•4444+••44♦+♦4•.++++.•♦440+•+.4 ..•••••a•+•ii•+•i•xiii•e••••••aiii•ii♦ira•i*o°'+•1 yatq wq f9). Once ..:•x••• .•0 +•4•• .0000.0.❖• 4 Caridle •••••4•.'•^ •i•••+a4*004•000+*♦•+•+000•OOr•0♦•4'4♦ ♦Y•o••o•o♦{ submitted and deemed x♦x+4*44x14♦♦♦+x4,••0.• ♦♦44x4♦♦♦4*4+ .•4.4.4,4rx,•••,pr•*44,.,0:e,4,•,eap4•♦44.1,4,.,0.:•04aex,+,xt. complete, a 30-day i••+•••444+++++++•.+44++4♦.♦+.+a+4+. 4•♦*iiiir•i*�•i9..•.L.•.L+.L�+A�.++,xe4�9 0.♦-�ao.a, i.: ++•ei*ii Ate, i � comment period will *r•r4 'XV H.a l.aa °° ,�*• .,,,.,u, also open for this '�* 4. . w . "°” vy« proposed modification. e +•+•o Contact ChristinaBuck - with questions or a a ~' 12' 5„,toSoucoes:�Esri THERE,Caimin,LiSCS„Inleemap,INCREMENT P,NRCan,Esn comments. AeJ as . Miles Japan,METI,Esrl Chlna�Hong lc�r.),Esr:Korea.Esri(Thailantly.Nc-CC. ':"' «-.+6penSlreeZ.pcon�nHullirs'andjin4t 115er Camrnunily - .ar _ i, & T F s `f-.. t4; ,- a-•-ri s g, 0 +l'? 's., ,- - F�S - . "�a�c. c. i -. ., ...e_�...nx:..:...a., t:l...• t J_.` ..`'-".4..`'Yxd-,n W};3.:a.t..e.�.�i, .✓n_..W#,s-,-` __...%..:,x ,.xv..s_�,\..:.5,eaa=v�<..n.? u.._t....o-u_:Lv S t s...¢,.. ". ix,}us�::x.•x::xvr.:o! DID YOU KNOW? WHICH IS GROUNDW TER. #pyGwD --la* . „, t'r8't e&t crew (, r GROUNDWATER DAY ,G!INA N�mok1� Septenabex 4 0 .. .. . . assaraaon —k 414.— _gPYGw© 4' I'rnfcc!'fsryr >>> Governance (cont.) m r,r cnouHOwATEB UAY r•i Sci•tec her 053 GSA status to form the respective Vina and Wyandotte Creek GSAs. DID YOU KNOW? Although the local agencies would rescind their individual GSA status, they pnlb S'r,°f U,@ water on earth i5 useable. would also retain their existing authorities. For example, Butte County °f•rrhlclii ,r°°^",'rater would retain its land use,well permitting and police powers. The creation of © of trcshwater.:Very day the GSAs lends consistency in planning and programs. Both JPAs provide for Gf6t1r1CIV:atCl i,1 :n,i�n�i5 a robust opportunity for non-public agency involvement on the GSA Boards 1.,,9„rlhan.,�rusia.,.a.strmrms. anh accts combinr d and the advisory committees. At the heart of the Agreements is the focus to maximize local input and decision-making on the development of ground vfltflr For IVIl:drenl,inrr wit supply sustainable management criteria in Management Areas. In the Vina Grountl:v,ler•,ccaunt5 subbasin, there would be three Management Areas, two in the rural areas whtorhthdhyUSn "lihht to the south and north of Chico and one within and adjacent to the City of "'°` 'a' ''-'°'''''°°"'' � have their oVfn Yell rer+SCntn�,'.4 Chico. In the Wyandotte Creek subbasin, there would be two Management 5'�5 b�r�n ry,,.� �,s o!prounttwalcr arc Areas, one within and adjacent to the City of Oroville and the other in the u, r,rr,trrlurar,rr�g,lho =htr,,. Irl 199„,hUl irirtUber w15:[t,:II rural area south of Oroville. This process would address the different water demands and sustainability considerations in the urban and rural areas of O u,;,°°' ” °'; "rrYo",r•, the subbasins. Establishment of the governance structures is critical to O L,lifcrnlapufnpslb,Plr oro r rrof 9 roantivtater each day n third more continue the progress to meet the deadline of developing and submitting a th"`i the 5Lcond h'n"`5`st•tr.Te`1S aGc,,u�,r!•,I:nm�umr;.mo:;c.rrxcee�r�,v GSP for each subbasin by January 30, 2022. For more information on the ,.•+rd,n,hWor:c;:„fe "emmen.a,,,m:sv::nsoe,,rn„r•,r;.•r>ear proposed governance structure for Wyandotte Creek and Vina please visit : LEAFIN MME NGWA ww,: eIrovrner°rglraye,':d aI4l http://www.buttecounty.net/waterresourceconservation/ SustainableGroundwaterManagementAct.aspx ..� -rer� ` 4amr' . , ' , v" f ,., . "fin "£z v.!. ..•-•'7,r rl?�, y▪ ur. Meeting Schedules '' 'OM G �.�tx�- z i>';� 5-,�� ▪a j,?�r .t� ' I11s2 i`. sr�.2,'I rxMti'"r st Vi �, Water Commission r y ° > x / .1•- IF,e h F 37 j S.J S}.bi f Z'iV k,... r2%..,,'4'4i L'% 9/5/2018,1:30 p.m. • n ;,' 4 z 4,... 'I e'�` � t ti i N�tL�' S,3. Board of Supervisors Chambers ` ;,,' �;� "j Vit,4 `�`` .1 `may 25 County Center Drive �p<' ' • v� �)r..h%.,,4v.; }/ . o� ,, e,? -s4 Board of Supervisors ,:p}�s,,-3., -- ` tifl '(f e�23.. f-.,,,,i tai tt x ¢ , u . ` em , eim, S. . s9/11/2018,9:00 a.m. S Board of Supervisors Chambers 1 x � r {c5 r, . ' rY, `' 4- 425 County Center Drive , v , jr vi :/ . t � Sr✓l S > S � 3 £tJ !t + r- 0,,1y, ' ' yp £ . ^ry ) ▪. . 1� E _ t £9/25/2018,9:0D a.m. � 4.K: te�Board of Supervisors Chambers r ; S Pd ▪ f -a 104 ei • t �}� ). . 1 325 County Center Drive i x' §s; GPAC'Meeting s � 4 s :�.>_a .>�,. r :gym ▪ ��. 9/17/2018,8:30 a.m. 311 Nicolas C.Shouten Lane • Chico,Room A009 Ending At Midnight- August 28,2018 ,l ,R i_..S � 'iia . ON 3� i0,� : .�•—rr �� t�..� l �-,�-�-:�����1._ R. �_,� Lei 1 f•a _ I 4552 l LEGEND 3 4000.) I i 3538•, Department of Water& € ` V HInan,.aI 3000 0000 • I i ':,,,, Resource Conservation f 2000 f .W i 2000 1 1 2000 308 Nelson Avenue I 7.or CaPrmli:of Iimm 4 Hv��a Oroville,CA 95965 1000 1 1000 1000 1 ® "'I__�__ Phone:530.552,3595 ill o._I 1__ 0 0• ��..(( Fax:530.538.3807 Trinity Lake Lake Shasta Lake Orovilie Folsom Lake E-mail:bcwatterr buttecounty.net 64%I o 60% ° 69% 52" C+� ;..i I '3-#"sa 4h/oI �: � /oI ;._,t. Website:www.buttecounty.net/ I waterandresource Water&Resource o Conservation Staff z4 I -`, i.,; 2030 ......., 2000{ I — • Paul Gosselin,Director .y fi.. I • 10000 1 " 1000 Christina Buck, T.Assistant Director i i �. i 0 • Kelly Petersen,Water New Melones Lake .?, ,, Don Pedro Reservoir 1025 Resource Scientist 76%1 131% 79%I I -1°/,,, i ' • Au tum Thomas, 3. 0 — - Administrative Analyst � � Lake McClure Water Commission • Kathy Chance 2030 .. ,, ' • Mark Grover 1000 I 1 Vis, :" �.' • DC Jones,Vice-Chair 0 , A • Tod Kintntelshue --- — " • Manny Roethier San Luis Rese coir ," t > 1000 Ryan Schohr 47%1 110% ,: I• — 520; ' •• David Skinner-,Chair �-- 1--- �— . f:' 0' • Matthew'Tennis 0 i---------- --- Pine Flat Reservoir Millerton Lake 29°/o I 73% • Ernie Washington 55°1oI 116% soo 1 325 Lake Perris Casaic Lake Butte County 77% I 101% 87%t 1 107% WATER&RESOURCE CONSERVATION Graph Updated 0829/2018 04:48 PM