VOLUME TWENTY-NINE MARCH 2020
2020 Spring Issue
HYDROVISIONS is the official publication of the Groundwater Resources Association of California (GRA). GRA’s mailing address is 700 R Street. Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95811. Any questions or comments concerning this publication should be directed to the newsletter editor at firstname.lastname@example.org or faxed to (916) 231-2141. The Groundwater Resources Association of California is dedicated to resource management that protects and improves groundwater supply and quality through education and technical leadership. Editor John McHugh email@example.com Editorial Board Adam Hutchinson David Von Aspern Tim Parker
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS PRESIDENT Abigail Madrone West Yost Associates Tel: 530-756-5905 VICE-PRESIDENT R.T. Van Valer Roscoe Moss Company Tel: 323-263-4111 SECRETARY John McHugh Tel: 510-459-0474 TREASURER Rodney Fricke GEI Consultants Tel: 916-631-4500 OFFICER IN CHARGE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS Christy Kennedy Woodard & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122 IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT STEVEN PHILLIPS U.S. Geological Survey Tel: 916-278-3002 ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR Sarah Erck Groundwater Resources Association of California Tel: 916-446-3626
DIRECTORS Bradley Herrema Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Tel: 310-500-4609 James Strandberg Woodard & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122 Rob Gailey Consulting Hydrogeologist Tel: 415-407-8407 Murray Einarson Haley & Aldrich, Inc. Tel: 530-752-1130 Lisa Porta Montgomery & Associates Tel: 916-661-8389 Bill Deboer Montgomery and Associates Tel: 925-212-1630 John Xiong Haley & Aldrich Tel: 714-371-1800 John Van Vlear Newmeyer & Dillion Tel: 949-271-7127 Lyndsey Bloxom Water Replenishment District of So Cal Tel: 562-921-5521 To contact any GRA Officer or Director by email, go to www.grac.org/board-of-directors
The statements and opinions expressed in GRA’s HydroVisions and other publications are those of the authors and/or contributors, and are not necessarily those of the GRA, its Board of Directors, or its members. Further, GRA makes no claims, promises, or guarantees about the absolute accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this publication and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in the contents. No warranty of any kind, implied or expressed, or statutory, is given with respect to the contents of this publication or its references to other resources. Reference in this publication to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm, or corporation name is for the information and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the GRA, its Board of Directors, or its members.
2020 Spring Issue
2020 GRA EVENTS
Learn more about GRA’s events and educational opportunities, visit: grac.org
gra 2020 events
GROUNDWATER MONITORING: The conference is open to all but may be of particular use to those who regulate and manage groundwater resources. THE GRA/CGC 2020 GROUNDWATER LAW AND LEGISLATION FORUM will be an interactive day of learning and discussions regarding the most current legal and legislative issues affecting California groundwater.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH, 2020
The Sutter Club | 1220 9TH Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
GRA CA FOCUS PFAS GRA is known for its timely and high-quality educational events. This one-day symposium will be unlike any other PFAS event you’ve ever attended and is a “must-attend” event for anyone working groundwater projects in California. Sign up early before it sells out! THE THIRD ANNUAL GSA SUMMIT in Sacramento, June 10-11, is an opportunity to celebrate a significant milestone with the first round of GSP submittals (due at the end of January) and to exchange information, ideas and best practices for successful GSP development and implementation.
• Sterling Hotel • 1300 H Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
JUNE 10 - 11, 2020
Hilton Sacramento Arden West 2200 Harvard Street Sacramento, CA 95815
THE THIRD ANNUAL WESTERN GROUNDWATER CONGRESS You’ll find three full day sessions dedicated to Water Resources, SGMA, Contaminants and a myriad of Special Topics related to the furtherance of GRA’s vision of Sustainable Groundwater for All. Get ready for your closeup in Tinseltown!
Learn more about GRA’s events and educational opportunities, visit: grac.org Need a little lunchtime motivation and learning? Join us for GRA CASTS held monthly. https://www.grac.org/events/ Get your SGMA in gear with our Groundwater Sustainability Bootcamp Short Course held in Davis, April 22-23, 2020
LOS ANGELES MARRIOT BURBANK AIRPORT HOTEL
2500 N. HOLLYWOOD WAY, BURBANK, CA 91505
Join the managed aquifer recharge community at BSMAR 17 on April 1-3, 2020 in Tempe, Arizona https://bsmar.site/ or plan now to be a part of worldwide innovation at 11TH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON MANAGED AQUIFER RECHARGE, April 11-15, 2022 in Long Beach, California
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE ABIGAIL MADRONE
Abigail Madrone, Business Development Director with West Yost. Throughout her 19-year career, Abigail has served and supported groundwater and water resources management through groundwater monitoring and analysis, project and program management and public outreach and education.
It’s 2020 and our vision is clear. Sustainable Groundwater for All! Groundwater in California serves a significant role in our overall water supply and during years of drought groundwater becomes even more important. Everyone deserves access to safe, and clean drinking water and Groundwater Resources Association of California (GRA) members and affiliates are committed to maintaining and enhancing our vital resource. We strive to achieve our vision through education and technical leadership dedicated to resource management that protects and improves groundwater supply and quality. There are many opportunities ahead to expand your knowledge, build your professional network and support GRA’s mission. We invite you to join us at upcoming events to stay on the forefront of groundwater management, monitoring, planning and policy. March 3-4: Conference on Groundwater Monitoring – Measurements, Management and Application in Monterey March 11: Groundwater Law and Legislation Forum in Sacramento April 22-23: Short Course on Introduction to Groundwater, Watersheds, and the Nuts and Bolts of Sustainable Groundwater Plans at UC Davis April 29: CA Focus PFAs June 10-11: Third Annual GSA Summit in Sacramento September 14-16: Third Annual Western Groundwater Congress in Burbank 4 HYDROVISIONS
Visit our website grac.org or check your inbox for upcoming announcements and details on these events. Stay tuned for more information on GRACasts!
Renew or Join GRA Renew now and keep building your professional network and capture all the benefits of GRA membership in 2020. Members pay a reduced rate for all GRA events and gain access to the Columbia Employee Store (specific dates apply) to expand your outdoor wardrobe. We are also offering a new and upgraded membership option in 2020. Organizations and companies have the option to pay a single rate, $1,500, that that will bring the value of GRA membership to all staff members. The organization/corporate membership also includes unique advertising opportunities, refer to the website for all the details.
New year and New Leadership I am honored to serve and support GRA and am excited to work with such a talented and dedicated team. From the Board of Directors to Branch Officers, Members and Affiliates, GRA represents groundwater and water resource thought leaders throughout the state. We are thrilled to welcome Lyndsey Bloxom, Bill DeBoer, John Van Vlear and John Xiong to the Board of Directors and Rodney Fricke as an Executive Committee Officer. Lyndsey Bloxom is a Senior Water Resources Analyst for the Water Replenishment District and is currently managing the Regional Brackish Water Reclamation Program and the District’s Resiliency Planning efforts. Bill De Boer is a Senior Hydrogeologist with Montgomery & Associates with over 15 years’ experience. John Van Vlear is a Southern California environmental attorney with 30 years of experience focusing on contaminated sites and groundwater. Dr. John Xiong has been a leading environmental consultant and remediation expert in California for 15 years. He has a PhD in Civil Engineering from the Auburn University and is also a PE (Civil) in California. It is going to be a great year and thank you for continuing to support GRA! - Abigail Madrone, 2020 GRA President
Experts in Water Resources Planning and SGMA Implementation
With offices in Oakland, Paso Robles, Sacramento, and Monterey, we specialize in: • Water Resources Planning and Management • Groundwater Sustainability Plan Development • Groundwater Modeling • Managed Aquifer Recharge • Hydrogeologic Investigations • Municipal Well Design • Regulatory Compliance For more information, visit elmontgomery.com or contact: Cameron Tana, P.E. Principal Hydrologist / California Operations Manager firstname.lastname@example.org Derrik Williams, P.G., C.Hg. Principal Hydrogeologist / Director of Business Development email@example.com 6 HYDROVISIONS
2 GREAT EVENTS 1 GREAT LOCATION
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH, 2020
The Sutter Club | 1220 9TH Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
At the GRA Groundwater Law And Legislation Forum you will hear from California legislators regarding groundwater concerns on the horizon in the new California Legislative Session, and have the opportunity to network with your peers in the California groundwater space. The day after GRA’s event, Join ACWA at their 2020 Legislative Symposium. With the release of the Governor’s Draft Water Resilience Portfolio, three pending climate resiliency bond measures, and the challenges of public safety power shutoff and wildfire threats, the State Legislature will clearly be focused on climate change resiliency in 2020.
Jim Strandberg, PG, CEG, CHG, Senior Project Manager with Woodard & Curran, has 30 years of experience providing environmental and water resources consulting services to private- and public- sector clients.
Another Successful GRA Event! On November 13-14, 2019, GRA held the Remediation Conference: Optimization of Remediation Systems and Long-Term Monitoring in Santa Ana. The opening plenary panel of Peter Garcia, DTSC, Nick Amini, Santa Ana Water Board, Tom Bois, Bois and MacDonald, and Matt Winefield, Winefield & Associates was well-received and generated many questions from attendees. The conference offered sessions on Complex Sites (Collecting the Right Data and Crossing the Finish Line), In-situ Remedial Approaches (New Approaches and Refining Existing Technologies), Regulatory Programs and Industry Guidance, Sustainable Remediation, Innovative Instrumentation Approaches, Remedy Optimization, and a closing panel on PFAS Monitoring and Remediation. Wendy Lynch of the SWRCB provided a keynote presentation on the State Water Boardâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Action Plan on PFAS. GRA extends its appreciation to sponsors (Cascade, GSI, Confluence, Ellingson DTD, Wayne Perry, Regenesis, Pace Analytical, Hargis + Associates, QED Environmental Services, Provectus Environmental Products, and Clean Harbors Environmental Services) and exhibitors (Bays Environmental Remediation Management, EOS Remediation, BC2 Environmental, Gregg Drilling, Blaine Tech Services, and VaporSafe).
Optimization of Remediation
OPTIMIZATION OF REMEDIATION SYSTEMS AND LONG-TERM MONITORING
THE GEOCHEMIST’S GALLERY
WILLIAM E. (BILL) MOTZER William E. (Bill) Motzer, PHD, PG, CHG, is a somewhat retired Forensic Geochemist
Perflouoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)1 Introduction PFAS are a “family” of manufactured (anthropogenic) chemicals used in products from the 1940s to the early 2000s that resist heat, oils, greases, stains, and water. Such surface-active agents were used in firefighting foams, stain-resistant products, coating additives (i.e., polytetrafluoroethylene or PTFE also known as Teflon™), and cleaning products. Industrial uses were widespread spanning the aerospace, automotive, chemical, construction, semiconductor, and textile companies. Under typical environmental conditions PFAS do not hydrolyze, photolyze, or biodegrade. Therefore, they are extremely environmentally persistent with potential to bioaccumulate and biomagnify in wildlife because they are readily absorbed upon ingestion, primarily accumulating in blood serum, kidneys, and liver. Animal toxicological studies have indicated potential developmental, reproductive, and systemic effects. The most well-known and researched PFAS compounds are PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid – C8HF15O2; CAS No.: 335-67-1) and PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonic acid – C8HF17O3S; CAS No.: 1763-23-1). Within the United States, PFOS and PFOA are the two PFAS compounds produced in the largest commercial amounts. PFOA is a perfluoralkyl carboxylate synthetically produced as a salt and its ammonium salt is the most widely produced form. 1 Original version appeared in the California Section American Chemical Society newsletter, The Vortex (December2018 and January 2019; www.calacs.org).
The Geochemist SPRING 2020
PFOS is commonly used as a simple salt (such as potassium, sodium, or ammonium) or is incorporated into larger polymers. PFAS are now found in almost all global environments including remote places. However, there are major environmental concerns for groundwater contamination in urban industrial areas. In cases of groundwater PFAS plume investigations, forensic geochemical techniques are being developed to determine sources. Health-based advisories or screening levels for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water have been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies, including California. Surface and groundwater sampling protocols have also been developed; analytical detection methods include high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and tandem mass spectrometry. Common water treatment technologies include activated carbon filtering and reverse osmosis. Polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and related synthetic/manufactured perfluorinated compounds or chemicals (PFC) have been identified as chemicals of emerging concern (CEC). PFC are organo-fluorine (fluorocarbon) compounds containing only carbon-to-fluorine and carbon-to-carbon bonds and thecarbon-to-carbon parent functionalized organic species. Common PFC functional groups bonds and the parent functionalized organic species. Common PFC functional are hydroxyl, acid, chlorine, perfluoro ethers, and sulfonic acid. groups arecarbolic hydroxyl, carbolic acid, chlorine, perfluoro ethers, and sulfonic acid. Within these groups are many PFAS chemicals; perhaps 4,700 or more. Typically, the chemical Withinfunctional these functional groups are many PFAS chemicals; perhaps 4,700 or names are abbreviated (Table1). more. Typically, the chemical names are abbreviated (Table1). Table 1: Some Common PFAS and Their Abbreviations Abbreviatio n
Common Chemical Name
Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
PFOSA (or FOSA)
MeFOSAA (aka MePFOSAAcOH)
2-(N-Methylperfluoro octane sulfonamido) acetic acid
Et-FOSAA (aka EtPFOSAAcOH)
2-(N-Ethylperfluoro octane sulfonamido) acetic acid
Perfluorohexane sulfonic acid
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) Name pentadecafluorooctanoi c acid 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7 ,7,8,8,8heptadecafluoro-1octanesulfonic acid heptadecafluorononano ic acid 2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8 ,8,9,9,10,10,10nonadecafluoro decanoic acid 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7 ,7,8,8,8heptadecafluorooctane1-sulfonamide 2[1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6, 7,7, 8,8,8heptadecafluorooctyl sulfonyl (methyl) amino] acetic acid 2[ethyl(1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5, 5, 6,6,7,7,8,8,8heptadecafluoro octylsulfonyl) amino] acetic acid 1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6 -tridecafluorohexane-1sulfonic acid 2
Chemical/ Molecular Formula
Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) No.
PFC polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE or Teflon™) was discovered in 1938 by Dr. Roy Plunkett, a research chemist with E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company at their Jackson Laboratory in Deepwater, New Jersey. By the early 1940s, poly-fluorinated chemicals were manufactured in industrial quantities. PFC and PFAS have been used in fluoropolymer manufacturing because these chemicals impart valuable properties such as fire resistance and oil and water repellency. Fluoropolymer compounds were used in non-stick cookware surfaces such as Teflon™ and clothing waterproof membranes such as Gore-Tex®. Additional uses include floor waxes, carpet stain guards, fire-fighting foams, paints, sealant, cleaning products, paper and engineering coatings for industrial manufacturing, and as emulsifiers coating varieties of food packages such as microwave popcorn bags. Fluoropolymer products may therefore contain trace amounts of PFOA which can be imparted to foods packaged by these materials. PFOA may also result from degradation byproduct from other types of PFC.
Environmental Impacts and Toxicity Currently, the two most studied PFAS are PFOA and PFOS because their environmental distribution is widespread and global. They are extremely persistent, having been detected in low concentrations in the environment and in blood of much of the general U.S. population. Average PFOA blood levels in persons age 12 or older are 2.1 parts per billion (ppb), with 95% of the general population at or below 5.7 ppb. Average PFOS blood levels are 6.3 ppb, with 95% of the general population at or below 21.7 ppb. They are also detected at much lower concentrations in urine, breast milk, and umbilical cord blood. Additionally, PFOA and PFOS remain in people for prolonged periods (e.g., PFOA has a half-life in human tissue of 2 to 4 years; PFOS for 5 to 6 years).1
Subsequent testing in laboratory animals has indicated possible developmental and other adverse effects. Therefore, PFOA and PFOS may pose potential human health risks given their potential toxicity, mobility, and bioaccumulation potential. Adverse health effect likelihood depends on the amount and concentration of ingested PFAS and exposure time span. Accordingly, in 1999, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) began investigating PFC after receiving data on PFOS toxicity and its global distribution. PFOS was the key ingredient in fabric repellant Scotchgard™ manufactured by 3M. in May 2000, under U.S. EPA pressure, 3M, announced the phase out of PFOA, PFOS, and PFOS-related product production. However, PFOS and PFOS-related chemicals are currently produced in China.
Federal Regulatory Update as of January 2020 December 2019 Public Law 116-92 (military spending law) requires the U.S. EPA to add PFAS to the Toxic Release Inventory. Congress is currently considering PFAS legislation (H.R. 35) that would list PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA; it would also prompt cleanup requirements under CERCLA (aka Superfund). The U.S. EPA is considering enforceable drinking water MCLs for PFOA and PFOS. To be continued in the next issue.
FEDERAL CORNER ANDREW SALLACH Andrew Sallach, P.E. is a Public Health Service Officer at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9.
GROUNDWATER & LAW USGS Publishes Report on Effects of Surface-Water Use on Groundwater during the California Drought The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) completed a geochemical survey of domestic wells throughout the Yuba and Bear River watersheds during the final years of the California drought in order to understand the impacts of extreme drought on groundwater supply availability and quality. During the drought, groundwater levels declined in many parts of the state and wells were deepened in response. Most of the wells deepened during this time were domestic wells drilled into fractured bedrock throughout the Sierra Nevada foothills region of northern California.Â The report highlights key findings from the assessment. The report was prepared in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board and is available at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2019/3077/fs20193077. pdf
Federal Corner SPRING 2020
USDA Funds Conservation Innovation in California with Grants for New Tools and Technologies The Natural Resources Conservation ServiceÂ (NRCS) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture is awarding grants to support the development of innovative systems and technologies with science-based tools to help producers improve the health of their operations and protect our natural resources for the future. The projects in California are intended to tackle issues like habitat, soil health and water management, the grants build on successful partnership approaches. The Pacific Flyway Wildlife Program intends to enroll 10,000 acres of bird habitat which will be available during critical migration periods. NRCS also funded six Conservation Innovation Grant (CIG) projects in California. To learn more about the projects, visit: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/ca/newsroom/ releases/?cid=NRCSEPRD1520814 https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/ca/newsroom/ releases/?cid=NRCSEPRD1477222
SIERRA RYAN SHELLEY FLOCK ALYSSA ABBEY MAX HALKJAER Sierra Ryan is a Water Resources Planner at the County of Santa Cruz, Shelley Flock and Alyssa Abbey work in Water Conservation for Soquel Creek Water District, Max HalkjĂŚr is a Hydrologist and Geophysicist with Ramboll
Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) The Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (Basin) is the sole water supply for 50,000 people in Santa Cruz County. The Basin is in critical overdraft due to historical over-pumping, and is experiencing seawater intrusion. With the recent emphasis on healthy aquifers through the California Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, and as the impacts of climate change are starting to manifest, water managers throughout the State have begun implementing Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) projects as a way to improve the capture and infiltration of stormwater. While the focus on MAR projects has largely been in agricultural regions, local water managers believe that urban settings like much of Santa Cruz County can also benefit from recharge projects to offset the impacts of development on natural recharge. Several small-scale recharge projects have already been implemented by various local entities, and large-scale recharge is included as a project in the Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Basin.
USING GEOPHYSICS TO ADVANCE RECHARGE PROJECT IDENTIFICATION IN AN URBAN ENVIRONMENT
Traditionally, recharge project locations in the County have been selected based on a number of factors including land ownership, parcel size, known geology, and topography. Costly soil borings and percolation tests may then be conducted at the potential project sites to estimate recharge capacity and create project designs. Recently, new geophysical technology has become available which can be applied strategically to improve the efficiency of site selections, saving the costliest work for only the most suitable sites. Working together, the County of Santa Cruz and Soquel Creek Water District partnered with Ramboll to evaluate whether geophysics could be a cost saving tool for recharge project identification.
We developed the following process, with the goal of eliminating unsuitable sites as early in the process as possible: • GIS analysis to identify prime sites • First flush water quality testing • Geophysical surveys • Quantitative analysis of water availability • Soil boring and percolation tests • Design and permitting Figure 1: DualEM being towed by an ATV With the help of grant funding, staff implemented this strategy in unincorporated urban land within the Basin. We selected eight sites through the initial GIS analysis, which used new MAR suitability layers created by Dr. Andy Fisher at UC Santa Cruz. First Flush water quality testing results did not eliminate any of the sites from consideration. We chose to use the Ramboll DualEM tool to conduct the geophysical analysis. DualEM comprises two electromagnetic sensors on a small sled, which is pulled by an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) (Figure 1). The sensors measure electromagnetic resistivity down to a depth of 30 feet. Soils with low resistivity are less suitable for recharge than those with high resistivity. Though it can be used in any setting, DualEM is particularly well suited to urban sites because it is portable and can easily be moved from site to site, is not constrained by above or below ground utilities, is only as loud as the ATV pulling it, and does not cause any site disturbance. The outcomes of the assessment are displayed both in layers on aerial maps (Figure 2-page 19), and as cross sections. The results were incredibly helpful, and lead to eliminating five sites. We also used the DualEM results to choose the most promising locations within the remaining three sites for physical analysis (Figure 3-page 19).
We had initially hoped that DualEM could eliminate the need to do more costly soil borings as a component of site selection, however despite the useful results, DualEM still leaves some data gaps that can only be filled by physical assessment. For example, DualEM is unable to identify groundwater elevations. At one location, the boring discovered groundwater at less than 10 feet below the surface, much higher than our initial understanding based on nearby well logs, therefore that site was eliminated from consideration. Groundwater elevation also constrained another location within one of the two remaining sites, leaving us with three final locations. For each of these three locations, an engineer created a preliminary design plan, annual recharge capacity estimate, and cost estimate. The project partners are moving forward to seek grant funds to implement one of the projects. The process proved to be an effective way to identify suitable sites at a much lower cost than traditional methods, and can be used as a model to replicate in urban settings throughout California. Some lessons learned include: 1) the cheapest and easiest step in the process is Step 1, every possible site constraint should be evaluated before moving to the on-the-ground work; 2) the DualEM method was an effective way to eliminate sites and locate the best project location within a large site at a low cost; 3) subsurface borings are still critically important. Staff at the County and the Soquel Creek Water District were pleased with the process outlined above and believe that it is a sensible, cost-effective strategy for continued use within the County and anywhere that is considering MAR projects as a component of their water supply portfolio. Funding for this work was provided by the Department of Water Resources, the State Water Resources Control Board, and Soquel Creek Water District.
Figure 2: Example DualEM results from 27-30 feet below ground surface at an orchard.
Figure 3: DualEM crosssection from a large site.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT IN THE WEST – PART 4: ARIZONA JULIET MCKENNA LISA PORTA Juliet McKenna, P.G., is a principal hydrogeologist and water planning consultant with Montgomery & Associates (M&A) in Tucson, Arizona. She has more than 25 years’ of experience as a water resources consultant and has worked in California and Arizona. Lisa Porta, P.E., joined Montgomery & Associates as a senior water resources engineer in January 2019 and has more than 12 years of groundwater modeling and integrated water planning experience in California and the Western United States. She works in M&A’s Sacramento office and is a member of the GRA Board of Directors and the Technical Committee Chair.
The fourth installment of this series on groundwater management across the Western United States looks at one of California’s neighbors, Arizona. Arizona has many factors in common with California in terms of water resources, among them: arid desert lands underlain by deep basin aquifers and high mountain ranges that capture precipitation and provide spring runoff; use of Colorado River water; hundreds of miles of publicly financed aqueducts to move water around the state; large agricultural communities that account for approximately twothirds of the state’s water use; and continued population growth into the foreseeable future. In this article we provide an overview of the groundwater resources, management practices, and laws and regulations in Arizona and conclude with a comparison to California.
Groundwater Management SPRING 2020
Groundwater: Where it is and how it is used in Arizona Arizona has a long history of groundwater dependence and during the second half of the last century, groundwater pumping to serve a growing population was causing rapidly falling water tables and land subsidence. Basin and range extensional tectonics in the southern and western parts of the state have created widespread basin-fill aquifers, which are deep sedimentary basins separated by bedrock mountains (Figure 1). Not coincidentally, these groundwater-rich areas host more than 90% of the state’s population and much of its productive farmland. Figure 1. Extent of basin-fill aquifers in Arizona, from USGS Groundwater Atlas of the U.S., 1995 Arizona’s legislature responded by passing the landmark Groundwater Management Act (GMA) in 1980. The GMA establishes Active Management Areas (AMAs) in 28% of the state’s area where approximately 82% of the current population lives (Figure 2). Within AMAs, the law requires proof of a 100-year water supply before land can be subdivided and sold. The law grants groundwater rights and prohibits irrigation of new agricultural lands. It also mandates water conservation and replenishment of pumped groundwater. Conservation requirements apply to the municipal, industrial, and agricultural sectors, but domestic well pumping and certain other water uses such as mining are exempted from the replenishment requirement. Figure 2. Active Management Areas and Tribal lands in Arizona The GMA paved the way for federal funds to construct the Central Arizona Project (CAP), a 336-mile canal that delivers a portion of Arizona’s Colorado River water to the population centers of Phoenix and Tucson. CAP water is either used directly by various water users or for aquifer recharge. All recharge projects and water storage activities are permitted by the Arizona Department of Water Resources (AWDR). Today, Arizona has an extensive network of managed aquifer recharge projects for both recycled water and CAP water, with a state-wide capacity to recharge more than 2 million acre-feet (AF) of water each year.
Figure 3. Hydrograph of selected index wells northwest of Phoenix within an Active Management Area. The graphs show a trend of declining water tables prior to the enactment of the Groundwater Management Act in 1980, stabilization of water levels after 1980, and rising water levels after the onset of recharge in the area in 2004 The results of four decades of groundwater management in Arizona are notable – groundwater levels in the AMAs are recovering after decades of decline (Figure 3) – and Arizona has a more diverse water portfolio. Whereas during the 1950s, the state’s water supply was more than 70% groundwater, today it consists of 40% groundwater, 36% Colorado River water, 21% in-state rivers, and 3% reclaimed water. Furthermore, thanks to conservation efforts, the state’s total annual water use dropped from a high of over 10 million AF in 1980 to an estimated 7.5 million AF currently -a period in which population has almost tripled. The Rest of the State: Unregulated Areas In contrast to the successes within AMAs, the groundwater in basin-fill aquifers are being depleted quickly outside of AMAs where pumping is essentially unregulated. These areas of undeveloped land have plentiful sunshine and relatively shallow groundwater that is inexpensive to pump, therefore, they have been quite attractive to large-scale farming interests that are relocating from water-stressed areas such as California and Saudi Arabia. Stories of rapid groundwater level declines and lost production from many wells in these areas have garnered national attention. In response to widespread concern across Arizona, the 2020 session of the state legislature is showing bipartisan interest in new groundwater laws that protect groundwater resources in rural areas outside the AMAs. More than one quarter of Arizona consists of tribal land, where the GMA does not apply (Figure 2). However, as sovereign entities, many of Arizona’s 22 tribes have enacted water codes and undertaken groundwater management planning. Tribal nations situated within AMAs can opt to participate in water banking and credit accrual programs and, while some tribes have adjudicated or settled water rights claims, many tribal water rights claims are not yet settled. Collectively, Arizona’s tribes are entitled to large amounts of the state’s water resources and have an important role to play in the state’s water future. Available Tools and Data Wells in the state of Arizona must be registered with ADWR by a licensed driller, and drillers’ logs and other well information must be provided to the state. Within AMAs, owners of wells equipped to pump more than 35 gallons per minute (gpm) must measure and report annual pumping volumes to 22 HYDROVISIONS
Groundwater Management SPRING 2020
the state. ADWR annually monitors water levels at approximately 1,700 index wells around the state and collects water quality samples from 100 or so wells. Well construction, pumping, and water level data reported to and measured by ADWR are made available to the public and are used for groundwater modeling and to support planning efforts and various water use applications. Comparison to California Although both Arizona and California have groundwater management laws in place, there are significant differences between the GMA and California’s 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The GMA requires selected basins to reach “safe yield” by 2025 – a timeframe of 45 years after enactment of the GMA. SGMA requires selected basins to reach “sustainability” by 2040 or 2042 – less than 30 years after enactment, and within 20 years of submitting a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). Safe yield in Arizona is an accounting exercise applied over an entire AMA and is achieved when reported pumping is equivalent to recharge. Most of the AMAs are already at or on track to achieve safe yield by 2025. However, since recharge is not required to occur within the hydrologic pumping impact area, areas of significant declining water levels may still exist even if the AMA has reached safe yield overall. SGMA has a higher bar that is based on measurable outcomes for a variety of “sustainability indicators” at specified monitoring points, and it is up to basin managers to decide which tools to use to reach sustainability – for example: metering, pumping limits, and/or recharge. Another difference is while all the alluvial basins in California are subject to SGMA, many of Arizona’s basins are not covered by the GMA. Arizona has a history of proactive water resource management to build upon, and as climate change and increased competition threaten limited water resources, protecting groundwater resources across the state will continue to be one of Arizona’s greatest challenges.
DAVID W. ABBOTT David W. Abbott, P.G., C.Hg. Consulting Geologist
General guidelines for hydrogeologic properties in predicting characteristics of aquifers, expected well yields, and well depths Once again, I have become involved in a low-yield domestic (Dom) water supply well project where the drilling contractor installed a 1,000- foot (ft.) exploration boring in bedrock using the direct air-rotary drilling method with a downhole pneumatic hammer (a.k.a. DTH) which helps break-up and pulverize the underlying formations. The driller reported on the California DWR Well Completion Report (WCR) that the exploration boring encountered (15 to 1,000 ft.) crystalline rock (granite) and estimated 1 gallon per minute (gpm) from a 2-hour (in-adequate) air-lift test1 (no formal pumping test was conducted); this is not a surprise. Pumping water levels (PWL) are difficult, if not impossible, to measure during an air-lift test; one possible remedy to this problem: measure the recovery water levels after the air-lift has been turned off. The WCR also did not report the depth to static water level (SWL). Ponder this: the WCR states that the Depth to First Water was 600 ft. but the SWL was measured later at about 24 ft. below the top of casing!
WELLS AND WORDS
Wells and Words
Upon further inquiry, review of billing statements, and a video survey, it was discovered that the contractor: (1) drilled the exploration boring in two days (this is really fast drilling and does not allow enough time for the unconfined groundwater to enter the borehole and equilibrate with adjacent water table; (2) did minimal 1 An informal comparison between air-lifting testing and more formal pumping tests on multiple wells in fractured rock systems suggests that the air-lift long-term estimate of pumping rates can be reduced by about 2/3 to be equivalent to the formal pumping test results.
(1 hour) “well development” (the pulverized rock during drilling can create an effective paste to seal off the local water table from the borehole, especially in an unconfined system); and (3) later conducted a video log and the geology appeared to be a gneissic shale (0 to ≈300 ft.) overlying a granite (≈300 to 1,000 ft.); both with some widely-spaced but, candidly, overall un-impressive fractures. As suggested in Table 12, drilling depths in granitic/metamorphic (G/M) or gneissic shale rocks are likely to be less than 200 to 300 ft. deep (and typically are less than 400 ft.)3; yields are from 0 to 25 gpm in G/M or < 10 gpm in shale. Much of the fracturing observed in the video was in the gneissic shale; although some deep fracturing was observed in the granite. The hydrogeologic characteristics of aquifers can be generalized based on their composition, geologic history, and depositional environments. The geologic properties limit the range of predictable Transmissivity (T-value)4 and hydraulic conductivity5; which in turn limit the probable range in well yields and their practical exploration boring depths. Remember6, the T-value is roughly (order of magnitude) directly proportional to the Specific Capacity (SC)7: T = SC × 2,000 (confined aquifer) or T = SC × 1,500 (unconfined aquifer) (empirical formulas). Given a T-value of about 1,000 gpd/ft for G/M rock would yield a SC of 0.5 gpm/ft of dd (confined) or 0.66 gpd/ft unconfined) – not a significant difference. Using 50 ft. of acceptable, prudent, and reasonable dd in fractured rock would produce a water supply well of about 25 gpm. These various aquifer characteristics and parameters in turn can determine the life-expectancy of the water supply well with (w/) or without (w/o) well maintenance. Table 1 is a summary table that is presented in an older reference2; Manual of Water Well Maintenance and Rehabilitation (1981) published by US EPA in association with the National Water Well Association8 (NWWA), and is helpful in summarizing these various relationships and observations. Table 1 offers multiple observations and stories (two are discussed here).
2 Gass, Tyler E., T.W. Bennett, J. Miller, R. Miller, and the National Water Well Association Technical Committee, 1981, Manual of Water Well Maintenance and Rehabilitation Technology, Grant No. R805211-02-1 Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, National Environmental Research Center, USEPA, Ada, OK, 247 p. 3 see the following: Davis, Stanley N. and L.J. Turk, 1963, Optimum Depth of Wells in Crystalline Rocks, National Groundwater Association publication Groundwater, pp. 6-11; Davis, Stanley N. and L.J. Turk, July-August 1969, Best Well Depth in Crystalline Rocks, Johnson Drillers Journal, pp 1-5; and Singhal, B.B.S. and R.P. Gupta, 2010, Applied Hydrogeology of Fractured Rocks (second edition), Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 408 p. 4 Transmissivity (T-value) is the rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. T-values are given in in gallons per day through a vertical section of an aquifer one foot wide and extending the full saturated height of an aquifer under hydraulic gradient of 1. (Driscoll, 1986). 5 see page 29 of Freeze, R. Allan and J.A. Cherry, 1979, Groundwater, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 604p. 6 Abbott, David W., Winter 2005, Determining the long-term discharge of a well using the specific capacity, published in Wells and Words column GRA HydroVisions, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 4 and 17. 7 See page 1021 of Driscoll, Ph. D., Fletcher G. (principal author and editor), 1986, Groundwater and Wells (second edition), published by Johnson Division, St. Paul, MN, 1089p. 8 Later Re-named the National Ground Water Association (NGWA).
Observation 1: Well Depth and Consolidated Crystalline Rocks. These include granitic, metamorphic, and basaltic rocks. G/M rocks are typically low-yielding aquifers (ranging from 0 to 25 gpm with reasonable drawdowns [dd] â&#x20AC;&#x201C; say about 50 ft.); while Basaltic rocks (like those found in the Columbia River Basalt Plateau in eastern WA) can produce 0 to â&#x2030;Ľ 1,000 gpm (with reasonable dd) resulting from the columnar joint systems, the upper/lower entablatures9, and the sometimes thin unconsolidated sedimentary inter-beds between basalt flows. Table 1 suggests that for G/M rocks the typical range of well depths are from 50 to 200 ft.; other published resources3 suggest depths on the order of 300 to 400 ft. These relatively shallow depths in G/M rocks result from fracture systems that are generally distributed and inter-connected at shallow depths rather than at deeper depths; there has been reported to be some uncommon exception to this rule10. When installing wells in G/M rocks one is better off drilling two 500 ft. exploration borings rather than one 1,000 ft. boring. Note that the T-value for secondary permeability (fractures), which determine the expected well yield, ranges from 50 to 1,000 gpd/ft or between 2 to 3 orders of magnitude less than for unconsolidated alluvial sediments (10,000 to 1,000,000 gpd/ft).
Table 1: Hydrogeologic Characteristics of Typical Aquifers, Life Expectancy of Wells Penetrating such Aquifers, and Well Depth
Life Expectancy (years)
Source: Gass, Tyler E., T.W. Bennett, J. Miller, and R. Miller, 1981, Manual of Water Well Maintenance and Rehabilitation Technology, Grant No. R805211-02-1 from the Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Ada, OK, published by the National Water Well Association, 247 pages
9 A layer of relatively thin, irregular columnar jointing above and below the thicker, more regular columnar joints of the basal colonnade, in two- or three-tiered lava flows. 10 Bisson, Robert A. and J.H. Lehr, 2004, Modern Groundwater Exploration: Discovering new water resources in consolidated rocks using innovative hydrogeologic concepts, exploration, drilling, aquifer testing, and management methods, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. publication, Hoboken, NJ, 309 p.
WELLS AND WORDS SPRING 2020
Observation 2: Maintenance and the useful life of a water supply well. Maintenance can play a major and significant economic role in the operating capacity and increase the useful life of a water supply well. Usually, I recommend an annual maintenance program that includes a review of data (pump discharges, SWL, PWL, and water quality) with a more complete maintenance package (step-dd testing and, if needed, rehabilitation) every 5 years (yrs.). For example, from Table 1, the estimated and typical average life of a water supply well installed in unconsolidated alluvial deposits (Row 1 of Table 1) w/o maintenance ranges from 25 years (yrs.) (20 to 30 yrs.) for a Dom well, 2.5 yrs. (2 to 3 yrs.) for an irrigation (Irr) well, and 6 yrs. (2 to 10 yrs.) for a municipal (Muni) well. Contrast that with the average life of a water supply well in unconsolidated alluvial deposits w/ maintenance ranges from 45 yrs. for a Dom well, 7.5 yrs. for an Irr well, and 35 yrs. for a Muni well. Maintenance is expected to extend the economic investment of a water supply well by 180% (Dom); 300% (Irr), and 583% (Muni). More structured and regular maintenance of a water supply well can easily pay for itself over the life-cycle11 of a well. Some of the differences in the life expectancy times shown in Table 1 between Dom, Irr, and Muni wells result from various well design standards that are used to construct the well and also operation/pumping schedules12. 11 Glotfelty, R.G., Marvin F., 2019, The Art of Water Wells: Technical and economic considerations for water well siting, design, and installation, published by NGWA Press, Westerville, OH, 175p. 12 Schnieders, Michael, January 2020, Challenges in Operation of NonTraditional Wells, Water Well Journal published monthly by NGWA, Vol. 74, No. 1, pp. 20-23.
The Groundwater Resources Association is comprised of a diverse group of experts in the groundwater industry and related fields. GRA unites these experts through collaboration, education and networking in an effort toward ensuring sustainable groundwater for all. WE ARE GRA!
Zack Levinson is a Graduate Student in the Geology Department at Sacramento State University. I am Zack Levinson and I am GRA! I am a graduate student at Sacramento State University, where I am currently a candidate for a masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree in Geology. My research uses publicly available borehole geophysical data from oil production wells to identify along strike variations in fault-offset and assess the impacts of those variations on the sealing nature of the fault. My research is part of a larger effort by the USGS California Oil, Gas, and Groundwater Program (COGG) to study the interaction between oil and gas development and groundwater resources. Before coming to Sacramento, I earned a B.S. in Geology from California State University, Bakersfield, where I was recognized as the top graduating senior in the School of Natural Sciences, Mathematics, and Engineering. Since moving to Sacramento, my family and I have enjoyed the plethora of local breweries and outdoor activities available here. Northern California has truly been a fantastic new adventure for my entire family. My journey with GRA began when my brand-new graduate school advisor suggested I volunteer at the First Annual Western Groundwater Congress. Eager to please, I enthusiastically agreed, and I could not be happier that I did. During the Congress I was genuinely impressed with not only the organization of GRA as a whole, but also its individual members. They welcomed and included me in a way Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;d never before experienced from a professional association. I started attending the monthly Events, Education, and Affiliates (EEA) Committee conference calls, and that quickly led to several other chances to become involved in GRA, including my current role on a subcommittee to help create and organize new student engagement opportunities at GRA events. Developing and implementing new ways to engage students has been an extremely rewarding experience for me because I have received so many benefits from my interactions with GRA, and now I can pay it forward and share these opportunities with my fellow students. This subcommittee exists to communicate the benefits and opportunities available to students through the GRA, so if you are a student, staff, or faculty member with feedback or suggestions, or if you would like to get involved with the GRA, please feel free to reach out to me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I look forward to hearing from you. 28 HYDROVISIONS
GRA BRANCH UPDATES SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRANCH DAN NUNEZ, BRANCH PRESIDENT
As newly elected President of the SoCal Branch, I would like to take the opportunity to thank every member for the support over the years and make the promise to continue to grow branch membership and hold meetings and social events throughout the year. We had a newly elected board in December 2019, and I would like to introduce our new Board Members and Technical Advisors:
Executive Board: Dan Nunez (Regenesis Bioremediation) – President Erik Cadaret (WSC Inc.) – Vice President Mike Crushank (WSC Inc.) – Secretary Ben McVeigh (OFRS, Inc.) – Treasurer
Technical Advisors: Herbert (Bert) Vogler (Kleinfelder) – Past President Chris Baker (DWR) – Past President/Technical Advisor Clayton Sorensen (GSI Environmental Inc.) – Professional Membership & Corporate Sponsorships William Sedlak (Consultant) – Technical Advisor Toby Moore (Golden State Water Co.) – Technical Advisor Christina Meadows (CSU Long Beach) – Student Memberships & Scholarships Francien Cason (CSU Long Beach) – Student Memberships & Scholarships Brittney Maine (CSU Long Beach) – Student Memberships & Scholarships Below are the events we plan to promote this year. As always, we are looking for fresh ideas on speakers and venues. • Early- to Mid- April– Scientists, Engineers, and Lawyers: How we work together on Hot Topic Projects in the LA Groundwater Basin (Tracy Egoscue and Tim Wood) – Port of Long Beach Area, TBD • April 30th - GROUNDWATERx @WRD Albert Robles Center - Pico Rivera • May – Open (options: Baseball event/presentation) rival game • June – WRD Brian Partington @ WRD Albert Robles Center - Pico Rivera • July – Paul Parmentier pull the drill rigs in Long Beach • August – Wells: Lessons Learned from Multiple Perspectives (Kevin McGillicuddy & Joe Kingsbury) @ Roscoe Moss • September – 3rd Western Groundwater Congress Goes Hollywood, Los Angeles Marriott Burbank Airport Hotel • October – Professional Networking and Social Event: Groundwater Communications…The Other Vital Part of our Industry (Lyndsey Bloxom, and others to be named) • November – PFAS in OC GW Basin (Jason Dadakis) – Part 2 • December – Holiday Party @Karl Strauss (Anaheim)
Spring Featured Event: GROUNDWATERx: We are excited to produce a special TEDx like event this year that we are calling GROUNDWATERx on April 30th, 2020. It’ll be an opportunity for professionals and students to present a 2.5-minute, one slide presentation on a groundwater related topic of their choice and compete for prizes and scholarship funds. There will be an opportunity for professional networking, socializing, and follow up time with the presenters. This event will be hosted by WRD at their brand new, state-of-the-art Albert Robles Center for Water Recycling and Environmental Learning. Stay tuned for a meeting announcement and a Call for Abstracts. We are expecting a large and diverse audience to be in attendance. Special thanks to GSI Environmental for their annual sponsorship. We would like to specially thank GSI Environmental, Inc. for their support as an Annual Sponsor to the GRA Branch! With their support, we are making strides to bring the best speakers and variety of events to our GRA membership in the southern California region for 2020. The Southern California Branch again thanks all GRA Members who are involved and participate in our Branch. We hope you’ll attend our upcoming networking events and branch meetings and look forward to seeing you there. Additionally, we are always looking for ideas and feedback for speakers, new events and locations. Please feel free to reach me directly at email@example.com
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA BRANCH BILL DEBOER, BRANCH PRESIDENT
The San Francisco Bay Area Branch had a busy 2019 and is planning an even busier 2020. Last year we hosted 9 monthly branch meetings, a (free) pub-based membership drive, co-sponsored a holiday party in collaboration with AEG and PEMA, and welcomed new Vice President Jake Wilcox of APEX Companies. Our first event of 2020 was the annual San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board Annual Regulatory Update, traditionally our largest event, which packed the venue and drew 170 participants. Board staff Alec Naugle, Ross Steenson, and Erica Kalve provided valuable updates on Board happenings, the 2014 TCE Vapor Intrusion Framework, and Board perspective on PFAS contamination. We always appreciate their commitment to engaging with the Branch. We also used the opportunity to thank past Branch President Eric Sandberg (Cascade Drilling) for his contributions to the branch from 2016 to 2018. Thank you to Cascade Drilling for sponsoring the event. In February, Lawrence Livermore Lab Isotope Hydrologist Amanda Deinhart gave a presentation titled ‘New Approaches to Sustainable Water Management’. Registration is open for the March meeting, featuring Julie Haas from the Department of Water Resources who will provide information on the California State Well Standards update process. In April, we are teaming-up with the AEG San Francisco Bay Area chapter to host a workshop event with local college and university students. Come join us for a poster session and brief presentations from several of the students. All of these meetings occur on the third Wednesday of the month and are hosted by Scott’s Seafood and Grill in Jack London Square, Oakland. We are always looking for speakers, topics of interest, volunteers and sponsors! Please contact Branch President Bill DeBoer at firstname.lastname@example.org or 925.212.1630.
SPOTLIGHT ON SOME 2020 GRA EVENTS Learn more about GRA’s events and educational opportunities, visit: grac.org
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11TH, 2020
The Sutter Club | 1220 9TH Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
The GRA/CGC 2020 Groundwater Law and Legislation Forum will be an interactive day of learning and discussions regarding the most current legal and legislative issues affecting California groundwater. You will hear from California legislators regarding groundwater concerns on the horizon in the new California Legislative Session, and have the opportunity to network with your peers in the California groundwater space. Is your organization interested in Sponsorship opportunities for this event? Click here for more information and registration.
DRAFT AGENDA | EVENT REGISTRATION
RESILIENCE THROUGH RECHARGE AND RECOVERY, the 17th Biennial Symposium on Managed Aquifer Recharge (BSMAR 17), will be held at the DoubleTree by Hilton – Phoenix/Tempe, April 1-3, 2020. This 1.5-day symposium will feature numerous oral presentations, poster sessions, optional workshops, field trips and an awards luncheon. Visit the BSMAR 17 website for more information. The conference is a collaborative effort between the Arizona Hydrological Society (AHS) and the Groundwater Resources Association (GRA) of California and continues a longstanding series of symposia originating in Arizona in 1978. The last BSMAR conference (BSMAR 16) was held in March 2018 in San Diego. BSMAR 15 was combined with the Ninth International Symposium on Managed Aquifer Recharge (ISMAR 9) held in Mexico City in 2016. Have questions or want to volunteer to help with the symposium? Contact Mike Hulst at Mike.Hulst@nv5.com or (623) 398-7421.
LET’SJUNE CELEBRATE! 10 - 11, 2020
GRA wants to recognize all GSAs that have achieved an important SGMA milestone by submitting their GSPs in January 2020! INFORMATION AND REGISTRATION REFLECT. CELEBRATE. SHARE. LEARN
A UAL GS
GSAs that have yet to submit their GSP will greatly benefit from attending this conference to learn from the experiences of those that have gone through the process. Key reasons to attend the Summit this year: • Celebrate the 5-year anniversary of SGMA implementation and the successful milestones • Participate in two days of learning, networking, and collaboration • Exchange information, ideas and best practices for successful GSP development and implementation This year’s Summit will feature several ways to engage and connect: • Interactive panel sessions • Outreach best-practices workshop • Lunch-time networking around table topics • GSA sharing booth • Exhibitors • Celebratory reception Opportunities for registration fee waivers are available to GSA board, staff and committee members, as well as community members and not-for-profit organizations involved in GSP development. Don’t miss this opportunity to share and mingle with other SGMA practitioners! For more information, contact Lisa Porta, GRA Director and 2020 GSA Summit Chair (email@example.com).
The purpose of the GRA Awards Program is to recognize exceptional individual contributions and noteworthy projects related to the understanding, protection, and management of groundwater resources. All nominations for the Lifetime
Achievement and Kevin J. Neese Awards must be received by GRA no later than Friday, April 17, 2020.
Nominations should be completed using the nomination forms available on the GRA website at Lifetime and KJNeese. Nominations should not exceed one page, identify the award for which the nomination is made, and include justification for the award based on the award descriptions presented below. Additional supporting documentation is welcome. GRA may contact nominators for additional information as necessary. The GRA Awards will be presented to the recipients selected by the GRA Board of Directors during the Third Annual Western Groundwater Congress (29th GRA Annual Meeting) in Sacramento, CA, September 14-16, 2019. AWARDS Lifetime Achievement: Presented to individuals for their exemplary contributions to the groundwater industry, contributions that have been in the spirit of GRA’s mission and organization objectives. Individuals that receive the Lifetime Achievement Award have dedicated their careers to the groundwater industry and have been pioneers in their field of expertise.
GRA REQUESTS NOMINATIONS FOR THE 2020 “LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT” AND “KEVIN J. NEESE” AWARDS
Previous Lifetime Achievement Award recipients include: 2019 – Dr. Dennis Williams, PG, CHG 2018 – Dr. Dennis Helsel 2017 – Dr. Daniel B. Stephens 2016 – Dr. Miguel A. Mariño (1940 - 2016) 2015 – Dr. John A. Izbicki 2014 – Dr. David Huntley (1950 – 2015) 2013 – Dr. Shlomo P. Neuman 2012 – Anne J. Schneider, Esq. (1947 – 2010) 2011 – Joseph C. Scalmanini, PE (1945 – 2014) 2010 – Dr. John A. Cherry 2009 – Dr. T.N. Narasimhan, PG (1935 – 2011) 2008 – Dr. Perry L. McCarty 2007 – Dr. Herman Bouwer (1927-2013) 2006 – Glenn A. Brown, PG, CEG (1924 – 2015) 2005 – Dr. Luna B Leopold, PG (1915 – 2006) 2004 – Dr. John D. Bredehoeft 34 HYDROVISIONS
2003 – Rita Schmidt Sudman 2002 – Thomas W. Dibblee, Jr., PG (1911 – 2004) 2001 – Carl J. Hauge, P.G., CEG 2000 – Dr. Joseph H. Birman, PG, GP, CEG, CHG (1924 – 2015) 1999 – Dr. David Keith Todd, PE (1923 – 2006) 1998 – Eugene E. Luhdorff, Jr., PE (1930 – 2010) Kevin J. Neese: Established in 1999 to honor the late GRA Director, geologist, and attorney, the Kevin J. Neese award recognizes a recent, significant accomplishment by a person, persons, or entity that fosters the understanding, development, protection, and management of groundwater. Previous Kevin J. Neese Award recipients include: 2019 - National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory Land Subsidence Monitoring Team for developing detailed information on land subsidence across the San Joaquin Valley during the 2012 to 2016 drought. 2018 – Los Angeles Sustainable Water Project for a study that examines all water resources within the Los Angeles area and whether integrated management of those resources can be accomplished to achieve 100% reliance on locally sourced water by the year 2050. The study was the product of UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, the Colorado School of Mines Hydrologic Science and Engineering Program and the UCLA Sustainable LA Grand Challenge. 2017 - Center for Groundwater Evaluation and Management (GEM) of Stanford Univ. School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences for the application of groundbreaking surface and airborne geophysical work that is being done by this group to the application of groundwater characterizations. 2015 – California Department of Water Resources for its significant contributions to local agencies to advance groundwater planning, management, and conjunctive use with Regional Partnerships, Integrated Regional Water Management, and Drought Grant programs 2014 – Governor Edmund “Jerry” G. Brown for his leadership in developing sustainable groundwater management legislation and shepherding it through the legislative process 2013 – Santa Clara Valley Water District for implementing its unique Domestic Well Testing Program
2011 – Sacramento County Environmental Management Department for its Abandoned Well program, the first of its kind in California 2010 – Senator Fran Pavley for her leadership in the enactment of the comprehensive, statewide groundwater level monitoring legislation in California 2009 – U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center for its development of a new 3-dimensional groundwater-modeling tool for California’s Central Valley and report “Groundwater Availability of the Central Valley Aquifer,” Professional Paper 1766 2008 – Orange County Water District for its Groundwater Replenishment System (GRS), a new water purification plant that became operational last January 2007 – University of California Cooperative Extension Groundwater Hydrology Program for its efforts to engage scientists, regulators, farm advisors, dairy industry representatives, and dairy farmers to better understand the effects of dairy operations on water quality 2006 – Senator Sheila Kuehl for her work to improve the production and availability of information about California’s groundwater resources 2004 – California Department of Water Resources for its publication in 2003 of its updated Bulletin 118: “California’s Groundwater” 2002 – Glenn County Water Advisory Committee for its formulating a significant groundwater management ordinance that was adopted by the Glenn County Board of Supervisors
2012 – David L. Orth, General Manager of the Kings River Conservation District for his leadership and dedication to the collaborative initiatives to develop the Upper Kings River Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
2001 – American River Basin Cooperating Agencies and Sacramento Groundwater Authority Partnership for fostering the understanding and development of a cooperative approach to regional planning, protection and management of groundwater 2000 – Board of Directors of the Chino Basin Watermaster for delivering a remarkable OBMP that created a consensus-based approach for making water supplies in the Chino Basin more reliable and cost effective 1999 – Governor Gray Davis for his work and leadership in addressing MTBE.
Regulatory & Permitting
Sustainable groundwater management
is a priority for everyone. West Yost knows the regulatory environment and has the working relationships with
regulatory agencies to get you to your
DAVIS • CARLSBAD • IRVINE • PLEASANTON SACRAMENTO • SANTA ROSA • WALNUT CREEK
we are water SPRING 2020
HYDROVISIONS ADVERTISING & ARTICLE SPECIFICATIONS
Logo & Ad Specs:
Your ad must be in the requested dimensions (no rotating) and sent as a 300dpi PDF. You must send your logo in an EPS or AI vector format with outlined fonts. If you do not have an EPS version of your logo, please ensure what you send is a high-resolution transparent PDF. Logos pulled from websites are not suitable for printing. Design or logo questions? Contact David Garrison, GRA Creative Director at firstname.lastname@example.org Vertical Ad: 4.25w X 11h Full Page Ad: 8.5w X 11h
Do you need help designing your ad?
GRA is happy to help in designing a simple ad for you using your company logo for a nominal fee. Please email email@example.com for more information.
Sponsored Articles in HydroVisions are an ad in article-form. They are clearly marked to readers as sponsored. In these articles you can broadcast the message of your organization’s mission or product.
Authors (Both Sponsored and Non-Sponsored):
• Please provide an unformatted Word document of your story without embedded images. You can signify where you’d like a submitted image using brackets. • Images you wish to be included with your article must not be embedded in the Word document; send them separately and labeled with names corresponding to where you’d like them used in the Word document. • Articles must have a brief title and a byline. • Supply a 300dpi headshot of the author. • Article length must be between 500 - 1000 words. • Please include an “About the Author” post script, to provide our audience with the context of your perspectives. • Avoid using diagrams or graphs in your article, words are preferable.
ARTICLES BOTH SPONSORED AND NOT ARE DUE FOUR WEEKS BEFORE PUBLISHING
HALF PAGE AD:
1= $250 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off
FULL PAGE AD:
1= $400 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off
ARTWORK FILE IS DUE THREE WEEKS BEFORE PUBLISHING
1= $625 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off
Reach hundreds of folks in the Groundwater Industry and beyond in this flash sale for advertising in GRA’s Spring Edition of HydroVisions! Since launching our new publication last June, we’ve had nearly 2000 individual reads! First head Here: to download and fill out your form, once that’s complete; upload your design Here: and we’ll take care of the rest!
GRA PARTING SHOT JOHN KARACHEWSKI
John Karachewski is a geologist for the California EPA (DTSC) in Berkeley. He is an avid photographer and often teaches geology as an instructor and field trip leader. Photograph across the wide Eel River floodplain, ponds, tidal creeks, estuary (background), dunes, and wave-dominated delta in northwestern California. The Eel River and tributaries form the third largest watershed entirely in the state. The river is nearly 200 miles long and drains a rugged area of 3,684 square miles in five counties. The river provides groundwater recharge, recreational, agricultural, municipal, and industrial water supply. Since the early 20th century, the Eel River has also been dammed in its headwaters to provide water, via interbasin transfer, to parts of Mendocino and Sonoma Counties. The Eel River system is among the most dynamic in California because of the influence of major Pacific storms and the region’s unstable geology. At its mouth, the Eel River produces an estimated annual runoff of 6.9 million-acre-feet per year, or about 9,500 cu ft/s. The Eel’s maximum recorded flow of 936,000 cu ft/s on December 23, 1964 was the largest peak discharge of any California river in recorded history. In contrast, during the dry months of July through September, the river achieves nearly zero flow. The river also carries the highest suspended sediment load of any river of its size in the United States, in part due to the frequent landslides in the region. The river basin also supports abundant forests – including some of the world’s largest redwood groves – and historically, one of California’s major salmon and steelhead trout runs. Tidal marsh in the Eel River Delta is being restored to improve habitat for Pacific salmon, tidewater goby, green sturgeon, migratory waterfowl, and other species that once flourished in the area. The Eel River Delta provides rich habitat for abundant aquatic and terrestrial species as well as flourishing agricultural communities, primarily dairy and beef cattle. Photographed by John Karachewski Ph.D. at Table Bluff County Park near the town of Loleta. GPS coordinates of photograph are 40.695144° and -124.275622°