Hydrovisions | Winter Edition 2019

ISSUE THIRTY-ONE DECEMBER 2019

The 2019 Winter Issue

31

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 editor@grac.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 editor@grac.org Editorial Board Adam Hutchinson David Von Aspern Tim Parker

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS President Steven Phillips U.S. Geological Survey Tel: 916-278-3002

John McHugh Santa Clara Valley Water District Tel: 408-630-3105 Thomas Harter Dept. of Land, Air, and Water Resources University of California Davis Tel: 530-752-1130

Secretary R.T. Van Valer Roscoe Moss Company Tel: 323-263-4111

Timothy K. Parker Parker Groundwater Tel: 916-596-9163

Treasurer Robert Gailey Consulting Hydrogeologist Tel: 415-407-8407

J. Paul Hendrix Mid-Kaweah GSA Tel: 559-686-2466

Immediate Past President Chris Petersen GEI Consultants Tel: 916-631-4597 Administrative Director Sarah Erck Groundwater Resources Association of California Tel: 916-446-3626

HYDROVISIONS

James Strandberg Woodard & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122

Vice-President Abigail Madrone West Yost Associates Tel: 530-756-5905

Officer in Charge of Special Projects Murray Einarson Haley & Aldrich, Inc. Tel: 510-879-4546

2

DIRECTORS Bradley Herrema Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Tel: 310-500-4609

Christy Kennedy Woodard & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122 Sam Boland-Brien State Water Resources Control Board Tel: 916-322-9633 Lisa Porta Montgomery & Associates Tel: 916-661-8389 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.

31

HYDROVISIONS

3

4

HYDROVISIONS

GRA LEADERSHIP

President’s Message

President’s Message

By Steve Phillips

Besides being GRA’s President Steven is a hydrologist with the USGS California Water Science Center. Over his 33-year career he has focused primarily on groundwater basin characterization and development of simulation models to better understand these basins, and to help manage these integrated hydrologic systems.

Closing out 2019 and Looking Forward into 2020 In my final President’s message, I’ll recap GRA’s last two conferences of the year, note events on the horizon, briefly mention changes on GRA’s Board, and close on a personal note.

Events GRA’s 2nd annual Western Groundwater Congress was held on September 17–19 in Sacramento. There were 4 tracks of impressive technical presentations, an inspiring keynote speaker, a variety of workshops and fun options, and plenty of networking time.

Christy Kennedy of Woodard & Curran, and GRA Director, was the enthusiastic chair of this event – many thanks to Christy and her amazing team for putting on such a well-received event!

Optimization of Remediation Systems and Long-Term Monitoring was held Nov. 13–14 in Santa Ana. Attendees were pleased with the timely and interesting content, and with the time allotted for discussions with regulators, practitioners and investors associated with remediation sites. Many thanks to Jim Strandberg, Rob Wilhelm, Alyx Karpowicz and other members of the organizing committee for developing a great event!

Upcoming Events In 2019 Include

CONTINUES ON PAGE 6

HYDROVISIONS

• Jan 13­–14: Short Course on Model Sensitivity Analysis, Calibration and Uncertainty Evaluation at UC Davis • March 3–4: Conference on Groundwater Monitoring – Measurements, Management and Applications in Monterey • April 22–23: Short Course on Introduction to Groundwater, Watersheds, and the Nuts and Bolts of Sustainable Groundwater Plans at UC Davis • Spring date TBD: Groundwater Law and Legislation Forum in Sacramento • Spring date TBD: GRA will be holding a major event focusing on PFAS in California

5

GRA LEADERSHIP

• June 10–11: Third Annual GSA Summit in Sacramento • Sept 14–16: Third Annual Western Groundwater Congress in Burbank See announcements and links for more information on these events in this issue and at this site. Also watch for our GRACasts!

Changes in GRA’s Board of Directors Please see John McHugh’s article in this issue for details, but I want to thank departing Directors and welcome (pending the results of membership voting) new ones. Many thanks to Tim Parker, Thomas Harter, Chris Petersen, Paul Hendrix and Sam Boland-Brien for their service and contributions to GRA. I look forward to welcoming Lyndsey Bloxom, Bill DeBoer, John Van Vlear, and John Xiong.

Please also see John’s article on this year’s Director Emeritus inductees. My congratulations to David Abbott, Susan Garcia, Ted Johnson, Tom Johnson, and Tom Mohr!

On a Personal Note

HYDROVISIONS

I have thoroughly enjoyed my past 20 years of involvement with GRA, which include branch officer positions, editor of HydroVisions, and Director and officer positions at the statewide level. These past two years as President have been a privilege, and I look forward to my term as Immediate Past President, which is a substantial transition.

6

Other major transitions in my life are occurring simultaneously. My 39-year career (I started at age 19) with the USGS is ending with my retirement on December 31. Key motivations for retirement are my zest for travel and having fallen in love with a fellow traveler named Lise.

Pictured here are me and Lise in a hot-air balloon and a photo from the balloon after our journey down into the canyon of the Rio Grande, near Taos NM, where we skimmed just above the river surface. That was a magical ride, and I’m looking forward to many more amazing experiences during chapter two of our lives.

I have applied for a Scientist Emeritus position at USGS, so as with GRA I have a “glidepath” (to use a SGMA term) planned and will stay in touch with the groundwater community that has been a big and rewarding part of my life.

Membership It is that time of year to renew your membership, so please go to GRA’s website, and click the membership tab. There are many resources there, and we’ve enabled auto-renew for your convenience.

As always, we welcome ideas on future events and directions. If you are not a GRA member, please consider joining, and engaging in all that is offered!

Cheers,

HYDROVISIONS

President’s Message

7

8

HYDROVISIONS

FEATURE ARTICLE

By Christy Kennedy

Christy Kennedy is the Chair of the 2019 WGC, a Sr. Water Resources Engineer and Hydrogeologist at Woodard & Curran, GRA Director, and Supermom who likes to run on trails, drink strong coffee and commute with her kids on the cargo bike.

Thank you to everyone for creating a successful Western Groundwater Congress – we made it to the moon! From the keynote on day one, all the way to kicking off our 2020 DKT lecturers in the last session; we shattered goals and expectations for the conference.

Here are some of the “firsts” for GRA we accomplished together when we shot for the moon at the WGC: • Nearly 400 attendees!

• Unprecedented numbers of sponsors and exhibitors joined us and our first “Exhibit Hall” showcase • Melissa Marshall of Present Your Science – TED Talk famous, first time as a GRA Keynote Speaker with a transformational talk on impactful presentations • Two technical sessions on emerging contaminants and a PFAS Sampling Workshop, keeping GRA members at the forefront of regulations and techniques for managing emerging contaminants • Watering the Weed – GRA’s first foray into the emerging field of the cannabis industry and impacts related to groundwater • First rolling of the dice experience - casino night and photo booth • First technical session related to the concept of “one water” and non-traditional water supplies • Water sustainability in the beer-making process presentation by two local brewers followed by beer tasting • Student presentations fully integrated into technical sessions • Meditation moment in afternoon break session • Meet Your Branch GRA Reception to help new members meet their fellow branch members and help interactions between different branches • More than 30 participants on the second annual Darcy Dash 5k run/walk • Professional Development workshop focused on increasing impact in presentation style and slides • First packed house on the final session, final day!

HYDROVISIONS

Western Groundwater Congress

Second Annual Western Groundwater Congress – A Celebration of Firsts!

9

FEATURE ARTICLE

HYDROVISIONS

Thank you to all the individuals that worked tirelessly to put together the stellar content and engaging social activities. And again, thank you to all the attendees for helping create these peak moments at the WGC! We look forward to seeing all of you and your colleagues in Burbank in September of 2020 when GRA goes Hollywood! If you are interested in being a part of the volunteer team helping plan events for GRA, please contact me at cskennedy@ woodardcurran.com. Thank you for launching us to the moon!

10

(Ground)Water Management

FEATURE ARTICLE

HYDROVISIONS

(Ground)Water Management

11

FEATURE ARTICLE

Kevin J. Neese Award

by Rob Gailey, GRA Director

HYDROVISIONS

The Kevin J. Neese Award was established in 1999 to honor the late GRA Director, geologist, and attorney, and recognizes a recent significant accomplishment by a person, persons, or entity that fosters the understanding, development, protection, and management of groundwater. GRA Director Rob Gailey presented the 2019 Kevin J. Neese Award to the Land Subsidence Monitoring Team of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in recognition of the detailed information on land subsidence across the San Joaquin Valley during the 2012 to 2016 drought that was developed by the team. The initial dataset and subsequent updates are available on the California Department of Water Resources SGMA Data Viewer (https://sgma.water.ca.gov/ webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#landsub). It is expected that these data will be quite useful for groundwater management planning in a region that contains many critically over drafted and high-priority basins. Dr. Tom Farr accepted the award for the team and gave short talk explaining the methods and results of the team’s work.

12

Kevin J. Neese Award

Rob Gailey has been a practicing hydrogeologist since 1985 and currently works as both a consultant R. M. Gailey Consulting Hydrogeologist

HYDROVISIONS

13

14

HYDROVISIONS

FEATURE ARTICLE

Board of Directors Changes

GRA Board of Directors Changes

By John McHugh

John McHugh is a GRA Director and editor of HydroVisions. To learn more about John see the Fall issue “I am GRA” on page 20.

The nominations for GRA’s 2019 Board of Directors closed on October 4th. The new slate of Directors was approved at the November 15, 2019 Board meeting. They are: Lyndsey Bloxom, Bill DeBoer, John Van Vlear, and John Xiong. The next step will be a vote by GRA’s membership in December. Look forward to learning more about the new Directors in our spring issue.

Four Directors are retiring from the Board at the end of 2019. GRA appreciates the service of Thomas Harter, Paul Hendrix, Timothy Parker, and Chris Petersen.

Thomas Harter has served as a Director since 2008. Thomas chaired the Education Committee and promoted scholarships for college students. He was instrumental in GRA’s cooperation with the Water Education Foundation (WEF) in 2010 to form the GRAWEF Scholastic Fund. Thomas arranged and taught many GRA short courses. He also cochaired the Contemporary Groundwater Issues Council since 2011. Thomas’ experience, knowledge and connections in academia helped GRA promote and understand important issues, including groundwater modeling, groundwater and agricultural, nitrate pollution and surface-water/groundwater interactions.

Thomas Harter, Ph.D. is Cooperative Extension faculty and the Robert M. Hagan Endowed Chair in Water Management and Policy at the Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources; University of California, Davis.

HYDROVISIONS

15

Timothy Parker has served as a Director since 1998. Tim’s leadership helped GRA grow and mature. In addition to chairing or co-chairing numerous conference committees, he served as President (2000 & 2001), Vice President, Secretary, Branch President, and co-authored the book “California Groundwater Management,” second edition published by GRA in 2005. In my opinion his most significant contribution to GRA and the groundwater industry was his role as the Legislative Committee Chair since 2001. This committee helped increase GRA’s visibility and recognition. It also provided input on the statewide groundwater bills, planning, policy, and funding. Notably, this committee influenced and educated politicians and managers who shaped the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, SGMA. Tim, P.G., is a consulting hydrogeologist with certifications as an engineering geologist and hydrogeologist.

Chris Petersen served as a Director since 2011 and currently is the Immediate Past President, having served as Vice President and President. His key initiatives as President were to grow new Branches and improve GRA’s strategic planning efforts.

Chris chaired or co-chaired many conference committees, and chaired the Finance, Events, Executive and Nominations committees. Chris was interested in statewide groundwater events and trends and sought ways to get GRA involved with California agencies. He played an instrumental role in UC Water and GRA lead Recharge Roundtable Call to Action in 2018.

Chris, P.G., C. Hg., is a Principal Hydrogeologist and Project Manager at GEI Consultants (GEI).

Lastly, the new officer slate approved by the Board on November 15, 2019 is: President – Abigail Madrone Vice President – R.T. Van Valer Secretary – John McHugh Treasurer – Rodney Fricke Officer in Charge of Special Projects – Christy Kennedy Immediate Past President – Steve Phillips

HYDROVISIONS

These terms begin in January 2020 and continue through 2022.

16

GRA Board of Directors Changes

HYDROVISIONS

17

18

HYDROVISIONS

Wells and Words

By David W. Abbott, P.G., C.Hg. Consulting Geologist

Wells and Words

Mr. Abbott is a Geologist with 45+ years of applied experience in the exploration and development of groundwater supplies; well location services; installation and design of water supply wells; watershed studies; contamination investigations; geotechnical and groundwater problem solving; and protection of groundwater resources.

Cable Tool Drilling – A falsely maligned and misunderstood valuable tool of the CA groundwater industry During my career in CA (1986 – pres.) there has been much misinformation and confusion regarding the drilling, design, and construction of wells installed by the Cable Tool (CT) method,,.

However, my 12 years’ experience in WA state was different since the CT method was and still is a very common place practice. I recommend the installation of production wells (especially high capacity ones) with CT methods in unconsolidated materials; the Dual Tube Rotary (DTR) method is an attractive alternative method but it is generally an inferior choice to CT. CT is very versatile, compact, and provides superior aquifer samples and hydraulic info during the drilling process compared to other methods. Depthspecific stratigraphic and aquifer information can include: formation (fm) and water quality samples, changes in hydraulic head, and hydraulic field tests. Rapid and recon-level investigations and evaluations of subsurface conditions both in unconsolidated and consolidated materials can best be accomplished with exploration borings and test wells drilled by direct rotary (DR) (mud or air w/ or w/o casing hammer) or reverse rotary (RR) (water) methods. I am a strong proponent and very passionate about CT drilling methods for production wells under many geologic conditions (unconsolidated sediments; especially at depths of 100 to 500 ft. Note that a combination of CT and DR/RR (a hybrid method) can be used for deeper wells with deep water tables; the choice of drilling method usually depends on the geologic environment and the well’s purpose.

HYDROVISIONS

19

The construction of a water supply well with CT is very similar to many shallow monitoring wells constructed with hollow stem auger (HSA).

Nevertheless, I have heard many times from drilling contractors, engineers, hydrogeologists, and geologists various criticisms of the CT method that are un-warranted because they misunderstand the operation of the drill rig based on a lack of familiarity. Successful modern day CT drilling technology has been used for well over a century and typically yields a reliable and longer lasting asset than other methods assuming the well is properly designed, constructed, developed, and maintained.

The top three criticisms about CT method and related questions that I have encountered are: • CT wells cannot be constructed with a wirewrap screen (scrn). How is the scrn placed in the well? Doesn’t the scrn coil up like an accordion as the casing (csg) is driven to depth?

• CT wells do not allow for a properly designed (and locally regulated) well seal or most CT wells do not have a well seal. Can a well seal be installed in a CT well?

• CT well drilling is too slow and takes too much time to complete. Don’t CT wells take weeks, months, or years to drill?

The brief answers to these questions are, respectively:

HYDROVISIONS

• One option is to use a telescope-size (T) scrn – For example, an 8T-inch scrn assembly will nicely slide down (fit in) an 8-inch standard well csg and the pull-back6 method is used to expose the scrn. Also, older wells were commonly installed with pre-perforated csg or an inside csg perforator (i.e., mills knife) was used to expose the well to the waterbearing fm rather than installation of a scrn and pull-back method.

20

• A properly designed seal is placed exactly like one would for HSA, DTR, DR, or RR methods – install an oversized temporary csg to seal depth and then remove it at the end of well completion while back-filling with cement or sealing material. Older wells installed by CT, RR, or DR prior to state mandated seals commonly were drilled w/o a well seal – hence, the proliferation (and observation) of CT wells w/o seals.

• The average drilling rate for CT is about 40 ft/day (one 8-hr shift) which, by the way, includes pump chamber csg installation. The typical well depth in the US ranges from 100 to 500 ft (averaging about 250 ft), the typical aquifer thickness is between 10 and 100 ft – hence, a CT well can be drilled in about one week (1 shift/day) or about 2 to 3 days if work is performed for three shifts per day. Note that “fast” drilling rates with DD, DTR, and RR are generally discouraged for production wells since “fast” drilling obscures the geology and can prevent groundwater from seeping into the borehole (especially with air rotary) resulting in a perceived dry hole.

Figure 1 shows the geologic log and well profile of a production well drilled by CT methods; there are other possible designs – see Figures 84 and 85 on pages 240/241 of Campbell/Lehr6. The Step-by-Step process of installing such a well for this specific example is: Drill a large diameter bore (24-inch - perhaps using a large diameter bucket auger) to install temporary csg (16-inch) to a minimum of 50 ft. for the well seal. Note that the well seal depth should be based on geology; in this example, the fine sand and brown clay layer.

Install drive casing (a.k.a. pump chamber – 12inch) with hardened steel drive shoe to the bottom of the temporary csg; continue to drive, bail, and advance the 12-inch csg to total depth.

The drive shoe prevents the bottom of the csg from being damaged.

Wells and Words

HYDROVISIONS

Wells and Words

21

Csg joints are usually added in 10-foot lengths and joined by fully penetrating butt welds to ensure csg strength is maintained during the drilling and pull-back phase of construction.

Fm samples are removed with a bailer as the csg is advanced either with reversible piston hydraulic jacks or by driving the csg with the weight of the forged steel bit; drive block (clamps) are attached to the upper end of the drill stem which are mated with a csg drive head which prevents the top of the csg from being damaged. Fm samples are of good to very good quality (not tainted by drilling fluids) and are suitable for sieve analysis and proper scrn aperture selection w/ or w/o filter pack.

Drill to total depth. The drive shoe should be advanced into an underlying impermeable unit, bedrock or a clay layer.

The drilling contractor removes a couple of ft. of csg to ensure that the csg can be removed during well scrn exposure; if unable to move, then the contractor has the option of removing the drive shoe (the place with the greatest friction) with a downhole csg cutter (at one job site we used an upside down Roscoe Moss louver perforator). A third option and a very last resort, a downhole perforator can be used to expose the fm to the well.

Sieve samples and design tailor-made scrn; order scrn and ship by Fed-Ex overnight.

HYDROVISIONS

Construct scrn (12T-inch) assembly as it is lowered down the fully cased 12-inch hole. The assembly is lowered to the bottom of the hole with a bail hook that is attached to a bail bottom and un-hooked when the scrn assembly has reached the bottom of the hole.

22

To prevent fm material from rising or heaving between the scrn assembly and the drive csg (pump chamber) for a natural pack design: the top of the scrn assembly is sealed with a Figure-K packer; expandable (malleable) lead packers were used prior to about 1985. If filter pack is warranted by the sieve analysis - use a slip packer to seal the T scrn assembly to the 12-inch csg.

Pull the drive csg in increments to expose the well scrn either by reversing the hydraulic jack pistons or by main-lining the csg with the drill rig.

The bailer or bit can be placed on top of the scrn assembly to ensure that the scrn assembly does not move.

Develop and conduct pumping tests on the well.

Remove the 16-inch csg as cement is placed in the annular space between the 12-inch and 24inch hole.

One drawback to a CT drilled well is that the performance of traditional suite of geophysical logs (except natural gamma radiation log) cannot be performed but this is offset by the excellent sample recovery, depth specific logging, and subsequent sieve analysis. CT methods provide two basic design options (naturally developed or filter pack) which can be chosen after the sieve analysis is completed; in contrast to DR or RR methods which are nearly always filter pack and pre-designed prior to drilling - in part because the fm characteristics are poorly known in rotary methods. Note that if the preferred design (after sieving) is a filter pack then a smaller diameter scrn can be used. A 2-inch minimum annular space is needed for the filter pack – hence this design would reduce the scrn from 12T to 8-inch.

The transmitting capacity of 12T (100 slot – 61.5 gpm/ft) and for 8-inch (100 slot – 47.50 gpm/ ft) – 23% decrease. Remember: the diameter of the intake (well scrn) is relatively insensitive to the open area. This means that to design an equivalent open-area well with an 8-inch scrn assembly would require a 23% increase in scrn length or 10 ft.

The only other issue, at least in CA, is the lack of high-quality CT drilling contractors; which have been mostly eliminated from the industry by the competition of DR and RR; I kid you not that DR and RR have their place in the industry but so does CT. Competent CT drilling contractors exist in CA but it takes some time identifying them.

Wells and Words

1 Cable Tool - The drilling method involving use of a cable tool drilling rig, which advances the borehole by breaking up the strata with a heavy bit that is suspended from a cable intermittently raised and dropped on the bottom of the borehole. The reciprocal motion of the cable provides energy at the bit causing the formation to fail under compression, and the cuttings are periodically bailed out of the borehole. All italicized words are defined in the NGWA, 2003, Illustrated Glossary of Ground Water Industry Terms: Hydrogeology, Geophysics, Borehole Construction, and Water Conditioning, 69 pp.

Gordon, R.W., 1958, Water Well Drilling with Cable Tools, Bucyrus-Erie Co., S. Milwaukee, WI, 230 pp.

2

Abbott, David W., Summer 2012, Cable Tool Drilling – The oldest and most versatile well drilling tool, HydroVisions a quarterly publication of the Groundwater Resources Association of CA, p.

15-16.

3

Other areas of the US, especially the upper Midwest favor CT drilling methods. CT equipment is usually very easy to repair with a cutting torch and welding equipment. This makes CT ideal for remote, relatively in-accessible, and isolated drill sites. I had one major drilling contractor (a field manager) in southern CA that was skeptical at first about CT but then he realized that the CT rig requires only two persons and the only daily supplies they needed was diesel fuel to operate the rig.

4

US Dept. of the Interior - Water and Power Resources Service, 1981, Ground Water Manual: A water Resource Technical Publication, John Wiley and Sons, NY, 480 pp.

5

Campbell, Michael D. and Jay H. Lehr, 1973, Water Well Technology, McGraw-Hill Book Company, NY, 681p.

6

Driscoll, F.G., Ph.D. (editor), 1986, Groundwater and Wells (second edition), published by Johnson Division, St. Paul, MN, 1089 pp; underlined terms are defined in this reference.

7

I have installed CT wells at the rate of 120 ft/day in an 8-hr shift in Westport, WA along a sand spit composed of sand dunes.

8

Abbott, David W., Spring 2012, Applying the Right Tools for Evaluation and Development of Groundwater Resources – rigs, equipment, and construction materials, HydroVisions a quarterly publication of the Groundwater Resources Association of CA, p.

13-14.

9

Glotfelty, Marvin, F, 2019, The Art of Water Wells: Technical and Economic Considerations for Water Well Siting, Design, and Installation, NGWA Press, Westerville, OH, 175 pp.

10

See UOP Johnson Screens fittings and accessories catalog.

11

HYDROVISIONS

Wells and Words

23

24

HYDROVISIONS

FEATURE ARTICLE

The Federal Corner

The Federal Corner

By Jamie Marincola, U.S. EPA Jamie Marincola is the California Water Division Coordinator at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9. For more information on any of the topics, please contact Jamie at 415-9723520 or Marincola.JamesPaul@epa.gov.

EPA Invites 13 Projects in California to Apply for a total of $1.6 Billion in Water Infrastructure Loans. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is inviting 13 projects in California to apply for a total of $1.6 billion in Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) loans. EPA’s WIFIA loans will allow communities across the country to implement projects to address national water priorities – including providing for clean and safe drinking water by reducing exposure to lead and emerging contaminants, addressing aging water infrastructure and developing water recycling and reuse projects. Groundwater project include Pure Water Soquel, City of Oceanside’s Pure Water, Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project, and Roseville’s Water Future Initiative. To learn more about the projects, visit: https://www.epa.gov/wifia/wifia-selected-projects

HYDROVISIONS

USGS Publishes Paper on Guidelines and Standard Procedure for High-Frequency Groundwater-Quality Monitoring Stations.

High-frequency water-quality monitoring stations measure and transmit data, often in near real-time, from a wide range of aquatic environments to assess the quality of the Nation’s water resources.

In its report, the U.S. Geological Survey provides guidelines for the use of water-quality sondes and sensors for high-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring and updates the guidance pertaining to standardized records computation procedures for a wide range of groundwater environments. The specific groundwaterquality monitoring guidelines presented in the report address station selection, design, installation, and operations; sonde and sensor inspections and cleaning and calibration methods; troubleshooting procedures; data evaluations, data corrections, and record computations; and record review, approval, and auditing procedures for the groundwater environment.

25

FEATURE ARTICLE

EPA Reaches Settlements to Study and Mitigate Indoor Air and Groundwater Contamination in Sunnyvale, California. EPA announced two agreements to study indoor air quality, advance cleanup, and take action related to groundwater contamination in Sunnyvale, California. The first settlement, with Philips Semiconductors Inc., requires the company to study indoor air quality in commercial buildings at the Signetics site and evaluate options to speed cleanup of contaminated groundwater. The second settlement adds Advanced Micro Devices and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation as signatory parties—with Philips as the party performing the work— to assess vapor intrusion and implement mitigation measures in residential buildings adjacent to the Signetics site that are located over the groundwater contamination. The work performed under these two settlements is estimated to cost $4 million.

For more information on the Signetics site, please visit: www.epa.gov/superfund/philips

HYDROVISIONS

The Ups and Downs of Groundwater Levels after the July 2019 Ridgecrest, CA Earthquakes.

Effects from the two July 2019 Ridgecrest, CA earthquakes were observed in several USGS continuous groundwater-level monitoring sites in California, Nevada, and Arizona. The groundwater levels that show step-like changes generally recovered immediately following the events, but at two site there are longer-term changes in slope or permanent shifts in altitudes of the groundwater levels. To read more about this phenomenon, go to: https://www.usgs.gov/ center-news/ups-and-downs-groundwater-levelsafter-july-2019-ridgecrest-ca-earthquakes

26

The Federal Corner

Southern California Branch Highlights

The Southern California Branch focuses on southern California’s Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Following our branch’s July and August summer break, several branch officers and members attend the GRA’s Groundwater Congress held during September. Our most recent branch monthly meeting was our second professional networking and social event of the year, held on October 24, 2019 at the Towne Park Brewery in Anaheim, and was well attended by approximately 60 people, including several students and recent graduates. The meeting featured a three-speaker panel, which included Christy Kennedy, Business Development Leader for Woodward Curran and a GRA Board Member; Tracy Egoscue, founder of the Egoscue Law Group and former Executive Officer of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board; and Tom McCarthy, General Manager of the Mojave Water Agency. These three excellent panel speakers provided valuable insights and answered attendee’s questions about topics such as the current and anticipated future state of the industry, regulations, SGMA, need for advanced degrees, advice regarding student networking for job finding. The branch anticipates ending 2019 with another fun and festive GRA-Southern California Branch Holiday Party. After that, we look forward to an exciting, event-filled 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.

HYDROVISIONS

Branch Highlights

By Herbert (Bert) Vogler, Branch President

27

HYDROVISIONS

FEATURE ARTICLE

28

Lifetime Achievement Award

Lifetime Achievement Award

By Kevin McGillicuddy

Kevin McGillicuddy is the Chief Hydrogeologist for the Roscoe Moss Company. Kevin was a founding member and Chair of the CA/NV AWWA Water Well Technology Committee and a member of the AWWA A100 Well Standards Committee.

The 2019 GRA Lifetime Achievement Award was presented to Dr. Dennis Williams at the Second Annual Western Ground Water Congress in Sacramento on September 18, 2019. The purpose of the GRA Lifetime Achievement Award is to recognize individuals who have made exemplary contributions to the groundwater industry.

This year Dr. Williams was recognized for his significant contributions in the fields of groundwater science, resource development and computer modeling during his 50-year professional history.

Dr. Williams promoted the development and application of these disciplines extensively throughout his professional career here in California and in multiple countries in the Middle East. He earned his master’s and doctorate degrees from the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology where he studied under Dr. M.S Hantush and C.E. Jacob. Dennis’ doctoral thesis involved the development of the first groundwater basin model for the Owens Valley.

HYDROVISIONS

Dr. Williams’ professional career began with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power as an Engineering Geologist where he oversaw the management of the Department’s Owens Valley well system. In 1971 he joined Louis Berger Group and accepted a hydrogeologist position in Iran. Four years later, Dennis left Louis Berger to start his own groundwater firm, Agro Water. While operating Agro Water in the Middle East, Dennis managed more than 100 well construction projects. It was during this time that Dennis developed the groundwater model and built the first seawater intrusion barrier along the Caspian Sea in northern Iran. He was the first to use SCADA systems to control the wells in the barrier system and in other well fields in the region. In addition to his work in the Middle East he consulted to the United Nations on groundwater development in India.

29

FEATURE ARTICLE

In 1978 Dr. Williams founded Geoscience Support Services in Pomona which over time became one of the leading groundwater focused consulting firms in California. Beginning in the 1970’s Dennis developed some of the first computerbased groundwater models; he made numerous contributions in this field including developing practical applications for a wide range of modeling and calibration techniques.

HYDROVISIONS

Dennis was extremely instrumental in the evolution of the design of high capacity municipal groundwater production wells. He helped develop technical specifications that include design, drilling, zone-testing, construction, development, and evaluation techniques that are commonly used today. In the 1980’s Dennis led an applied R & D project with Roscoe Moss Company to develop a large-scale Well-Aquifer sand tank model used to evaluate the hydraulic efficiencies of artificial gravel packs and well screens. Critical findings of the tank model research challenged the prevailing screen design beliefs at the time. The research was published in the seminal paper “Modern Techniques in Well Design” and was used to update the AWWA A100 Well Standards.

30

level courses in hydrogeology and groundwater modeling for several decades at USC’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department.

For his valued contributions to the science of groundwater development, modeling techniques, and as an educator Dr. Dennis Williams is most deserving of the GRA’s Lifetime Achievement Award.In its report, the U.S. Geological Survey provides guidelines for the use of waterquality sondes and sensors for high-frequency groundwater-quality monitoring and updates the guidance pertaining to standardized records computation procedures for a wide range of groundwater environments. The specific groundwater-quality monitoring guidelines presented in the report address station selection, design, installation, and operations; sonde and sensor inspections and cleaning and calibration methods; troubleshooting procedures; data evaluations, data corrections, and record computations; and record review, approval, and auditing procedures for the groundwater environment.

Dennis’ technical written works include being principal author of the Handbook of Ground Water Development which continues to serve as the basis for well design techniques throughout the world. He was chief reviewer for the American Society of Civil Engineer’s Hydraulics of Wells textbook. He has authored numerous publications on the subject of groundwater management and production well related subjects. He has served on many expert and blue ribbon panels for the groundwater industry and has provided expert testimony and technical support for groundwater litigation cases in California Superior Court, US Districts Courts in California and New Mexico, International Arbitration Courts in Paris, FR and US Supreme Court.

In addition to leading Geoscience, Dennis is a research professor and has taught graduate Lifetime Achievement Award

Inland Empire Branch Update; Summer and Fall 2019

The IE Branch -- Greetings from the (relatively) new Inland Empire Branch, which is focused on issues related to groundwater in the Inland Empire Region (primarily Riverside County and San Bernardino County, which is the largest county in the contiguous United States), as well as providing a forum for groundwater and hydrogeology professionals to gather and discuss developments in their field. The IE Branch conducted several speaking events in Riverside and San Bernardino since its inception including: • March 22, 2018, presenting Doug Headrick, General Manager & Chief Engineer of the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, “Sustainable Groundwater: The Path to Success” (history of groundwater management in the San Bernardino region).

• July 10, 2018, presenting Dr. John A. Izbicki, USGS, “Hexavalent Chromium: Tracing Sources and Impacts in the Mojave Desert and Elsewhere” (extent of hexavalent chromium released from a natural-gas compressor station at the Hinkley Site in the Mojave Desert, and from naturally occurring sources).

HYDROVISIONS

• November 14, 2018, presenting Kirby Brill, PE, GRAC David Keith Todd Distinguished Lecturer and Former General Manager, Mojave Water Agency, “Building Bridges to a New World in Water Resource Management” (radical changes in the water resource management that will increasingly require new tools, skillsets and approaches).

Branch Highlights

Jim Finegan, Branch Secretary

31

• March 28, 2019, Eric Lindberg, PG, CHG, Senior Engineering Geologist / Chief and Celia Pazos, PG, Engineering Geologist; Inspection Team Lead Regional Cannabis Cultivation Regulatory Unit, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, Riverside, CA, “Environmental Impacts of Cannabis Cultivation in Southern California” (environmental crimes that the Cannabis Cultivation Regulatory Unit has witnessed in their efforts to regulate water use and wastewater discharges associated with the new commercial cannabis cultivation industry).

• August 14, 2019, Maurice Hall, GRAC David Keith Todd Distinguished Lecturer and associate vice president of water for the ecosystems program, EcosystemsWater Environmental Defense Fund, (how more holistic and inclusive groundwater management can increase the resilience of our water supply and sustain and enhance the services that groundwater basins provide for a wide range of stakeholders).

The IE Branch will continue to engage with local topics and present contemporary and relevant issues via our speaker series and planned activities. We are planning at least one more event for 2019, so stay tuned!

IE Branch officers: • President – Erik Gaiser, 909-241-3624 • Vice President – Galen Kenoyer, gkenoyer@ burnsmcd.com • Secretary – Jim Finegan, 951-334-5341, jfinegan@kleinfelder.com • Treasurer – Derek Hoffman, 909-890-4499, derek.hoffman@greshamsavage.com

HYDROVISIONS

• Member at Large – Lance Eckhart, 760-9467015, leckhart@mojavewater.org

32

Inland Empire Branch Update; Summer and Fall 2019

HYDROVISIONS

33

34

HYDROVISIONS

(Ground)Water Management

(Ground)Water Management in the West Part 3: Texas

By Larry French, P.G. and Abhishek Singh, Ph.D., P.E.

Larry French, P.G., is the Director of the Groundwater Division at the Texas Water Development Board, which monitors the conditions of the state’s aquifers, develops groundwater availability models, and assists local organizations that manage groundwater.

Abhishek Singh, PhD, PE, has over 15 years of research and consulting experience in the areas of water resources planning and management. Dr. Singh leads INTERA’s California Operations.

HYDROVISIONS

In the third instalment of this series of articles surveying (ground) water management paradigms across the Western United States, we travel to a state that straddles the traditional East-West divide along the 100th meridian. Despite its distance from California, Texas shares many common features with California when it comes to water resources. Both states display a high degree of spatial and temporal variability in water availability; both states rely heavily on groundwater (especially in parts of the state with limited surfacewater supplies or during prolonged droughts); both states inhere [to be inherent] the right to groundwater in ownership of land1; and both states tend to view surface-water and groundwater through different legal lenses. Texas has had a well formulated, stakeholderdriven groundwater management framework for several decades and has invested heavily in characterizing, modeling, and managing its groundwater resources. California is embarking on this path with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. In this article we provide an overview of the water management in Texas, comparing and contrasting these with the state of practice in California.

35

History of Water Rights Administration Texas views surface water and groundwater rights through different lenses. Surface water belongs to the state of Texas. Since 1967, anyone wishing to use surface water must receive a water right from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which monitors and administers surface water rights.

Groundwater, on the other hand, belongs to the landowner and is governed by the “rule of capture,” which grants landowners the right to pump groundwater beneath their property.

The Texas Legislature acknowledges private ownership of groundwater but also passed legislation in 1949 authorizing the establishment of groundwater conservation districts (GCDs) – locally based units of government created to manage and protect groundwater (Figure 1).

GCDs have the authority to create and enforce rules for conserving, protecting, recharging, and preventing waste of groundwater. A GCD develops a comprehensive management plan, adopts rules necessary to implement the management plan, and manages groundwater by permitting production from water wells. The Texas Legislature also created special subsidence districts to regulate groundwater pumping in areas prone to subsidence.

HYDROVISIONS

Groundwater Management Framework

36

Texas has experienced many droughts leading to severe shortages of water supplies throughout the nearly 60 years of water planning. In 1985, House Bill 2 was passed to set up a structure to designate “critical groundwater areas” for possible inclusion into GCDs. A significant drought in 1996 resulted in legislation passed in 1997 that flipped the top-down water planning approach to create a bottom-up process with 16 regional water planning groups (RWPGs) develop plans with funding and guidance provided by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB).

RWPGs consist of diverse stakeholders, including GCDs, that consider local issues when developing water management strategies to meet water

needs over a 50-year planning horizon. The regional plans are subsequently incorporated into a state water plan by staff at the TWDB. This bottom-up process of developing a state water plan is repeated every five years. The TWDB also provides loans and grants for water projects in the state water plan, thus providing an incentive for local participation in regional water planning.

As part of groundwater planning, GCDs are organized in groundwater management areas (GMAs) that cover common, shared regional aquifers (Figure 2, Major Aquifers in Texas).

GCDs within a GMA jointly determine how they want to manage groundwater resources by developing policy statements known as desired future conditions (DFCs) of the aquifers in the GMA. A DFC is “the desired, quantified condition of groundwater resources (such as water levels, spring flows, or volumes) within a management area at one or more specified future times…”

DFC statements are combined with the science of groundwater availability models to determine groundwater availability, which GCDs consider in the implementation of management plans, permitting decisions, and management strategies to achieve the DFCs.

Available Tools and Data Estimating future water supplies is key to the water planning process. The TCEQ estimates surface water supplies using water availability models (WAMs). The TWDB estimates available groundwater supplies using the DFCs determined by GCDs and groundwater availability models (GAMs). Texas is unique in recognizing the importance of standardized regional groundwater models for the purpose of consistent groundwater availability estimation.

In 1999 the Texas Legislature required the TWDB to “…obtain or develop groundwater availability models for major and minor aquifers in coordination with groundwater conservation districts and regional water planning groups.”

(Ground)Water Management in the West - Part 3: Texas

Confirmed Groundwater Conservation Districts * 1. Bandera County River Authority & Groundwater District - 11/7/1989 2. Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer CD - 8/13/1987 3. Bee GCD - 1/20/2001 4. Blanco-Pedernales GCD - 1/23/2001 5. Bluebonnet GCD - 11/5/2002 6. Brazoria County GCD - 11/8/2005 7. Brazos Valley GCD - 11/5/2002 8. Brewster County GCD - 11/6/2001 9. Brush Country GCD - 11/3/2009 10. Calhoun County GCD - 11/4/2014 11. Central Texas GCD - 9/24/2005 12. Clear Fork GCD - 11/5/2002 13. Clearwater UWCD - 8/21/1999 14. Coastal Bend GCD - 11/6/2001 15. Coastal Plains GCD - 11/6/2001 16. Coke County UWCD - 11/4/1986 17. Colorado County GCD - 11/6/2007 18. Comal Trinity GCD - 6/17/2015 19. Corpus Christi ASRCD - 6/17/2005 20. Cow Creek GCD - 11/5/2002 21. Crockett County GCD - 1/26/1991 22. Culberson County GCD - 5/2/1998 23. Duval County GCD - 7/25/2009 24. Evergreen UWCD - 8/30/1965 25. Fayette County GCD - 11/6/2001 26. Garza County UWCD - 11/5/1996 27. Gateway GCD - 5/3/2003 28. Glasscock GCD - 8/22/1981 29. Goliad County GCD - 11/6/2001 30. Gonzales County UWCD - 11/2/1994 31. Guadalupe County GCD - 11/14/1999 32. Hays Trinity GCD - 5/3/2003 33. Headwaters GCD - 11/5/1991 34. Hemphill County UWCD - 11/4/1997 35. Hickory UWCD No. 1 - 8/14/1982 36. High Plains UWCD No.1 - 9/29/1951 37. Hill Country UWCD - 8/8/1987 38. Hudspeth County UWCD No. 1 - 10/5/1957 39. Irion County WCD - 8/2/1985 40. Jeff Davis County UWCD - 11/2/1993 41. Kenedy County GCD - 11/2/2004

DALLAM

SHERMAN

HARTLEY

MOORE

HANSFORD

60

OCHILTREE

HUTCHINSON

EL PASO

38

OLDHAM

POTT ER

DEAF SMITH

RANDALL

CARSON

63

Groundwater Conservation Districts of Texas

WHEELER

GRAY

COLLINGSWORTH

PARMER

CAST RO

DONLEY

ARMSTRONG

SWISHER

BRISCOE

55 CHILDRESS

HALL

HARDEMAN HALE BAILEY

27

MOTLEY

FLOYD

LAMB

36

WILBARGER WICHITA

FOARD

COTTLE

CLAY HOCKLEY

COCHRAN

81

CROSBY

LUBBOCK

84

YOAKUM

ANDREWS

WINKLER

ECTOR

BAYLOR

ARCHER

THROCKMORTON

YOUNG

78

MONTAGUE

+ Pending Election Results # Created by the 84th Legislature & Created by the 85th Legislature

Other Districts ** Edwards Aquifer Authority Harris-Galveston Subsidence District Fort Bend Subsidence District County Boundaries

RED RIVER

93

BOWIE

DELTA TITUS

DENTON

COLLIN

HOPKINS

HUNT

FRANKLIN

MORRIS

CASS

CAMP

54

MARTIN

MIDLAND

12

SCURRY

BORDEN

JONES

SHACKELFORD

66

48

HOWARD

28

88

82

21

TAYLOR

JOHNSON

EASTLAND

CALLAHAN

ERATH

COLEMAN

MCCULLOCH

53

LIMESTONE

83

SAN SABA

SUTTON

42

BANDERA

REAL

94

GONZALES

97

51

DIMMIT

MCMULLEN

WEBB

23

** The subsidence districts and the Edwards Aquifer Authority are not groundwater conservation districts as defined under Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code, but have the ability to regulate groundwater production (Senate Bill 1537 from the 79th Legislative Session and House Bill 2729 from the 86th Legislative Session).

Groundwater Conservation District GIS Data created by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. For more information, please contact TCEQ at 512-239-1000 or wras@tceq.texas.gov.

15

CALHOUN

10

ARANSAS

NUECES

19

KLEBERG

BROOKS

6

MATAGORDA

98

°

9 JIM HOGG

GALVESTON

WHARTON

91

JACKSON

SAN PATRICIO

DUVAL

Dates indicate when district was established by law or election.

FORT BEND

VICTORIA

77

80

JIM WELLS

ORANGE JEFFERSON

CHAMBERS

BRAZ ORIA

REFUGIO

3

LIBERTY

HARRIS

14 95

GOLIAD BEE

LIVE OAK

Confirmed districts are arranged in alphabetical order.

HARDIN

MONTGOMERY

WALLER AUST IN

LAVACA

29 45

LASALLE

5

WASHINGTON

COLO RADO

65

DEWITT KARNES

85

SAN JACINTO

47

17

WILSON

24

MAVERICK

ZAPATA

GRIMES

LEE

FAYET TE

30

ATASCOSA

TYLER

50

BRAZ OS

25

GUADALUPE

BEXAR

FRIO

* Districts that have, in whole or part, authority as assigned

by Chapter 36 of the Texas Water Code. Please refer questions pertaining to individual districts to the district themselves. (www.twdb.texas.gov/groundwater/conservation_districts/index.asp)

49

CALDWELL

NEWTON JASPER

BASTROP

69

31

MEDINA

ZAVALA

TRAVIS

2

HAYS

18

92 52

UVALDE

32

COMAL

KENDALL

1

KINNEY

43

99

4

BLANCO

20

KERR

73

BREWSTER

70

WILLIAMSON

POLK WALKER

BURLESON

GILLESPIE

33 EDWARDS VAL VERDE

LLANO

37

SABINE

TRINITY MADISON

7

MILAM

SAN AUGUSTINE

ANGELINA

LEON

ROBERTSON

BELL

11

67 HOUSTON

13

BURNET

MASON

KIMBLE

90

56

FALLS

LAMPASAS

SHELBY NACOGDOCHES

MCLENNAN

35

PANOLA

RUSK CHEROKEE

FREESTONE

CORYELL

MENARD

64

79

59

86

MILLS

CONCHO

89

SMITH HENDERSO N

ANDERSON

BROWN

44

HARRISON

NAVARRO

HILL BOSQUE

HAMILTON

68

MARION

UPSHUR

VAN ZANDT

ELLIS

71

SOMERVELL

58 COMANCH E

RUNNELS

SCHLEI CHER

TERRELL

WO OD

DALLAS

GREGG

HOOD

96

NOLAN

COKE

IRION

PECO S

RAINS

TARRANT

16

39

CROCKETT

57

ROCKWALL

KAUF MAN

TOM GREEN

REAG AN UPTON

PARKER

PALO PINTO

STEPHENS

62

FISHER

DAWSON

WARD

8

LAMAR FANNIN

GRAYSON

61

JACK

STERLING

CRANE

74

COOKE

WISE HASKELL

STONEWALL

KENT

MIT CHELL

LOVING

KING

GARZA

TERRY

GAINES

KNOX

DICKENS

26

LYNN

46

42. Kimble County GCD - 5/3/2002 HUDSPETH CULBERSON 43. Kinney County GCD - 1/12/2002 44. Lipan-Kickapoo WCD - 11/3/1987 76 45. Live Oak UWCD - 11/7/1989 REEVES 22 46. Llano Estacado UWCD - 11/3/1998 47. Lone Star GCD - 11/6/2001 48. Lone Wolf GCD - 2/2/2002 49. Lost Pines GCD - 11/5/2002 40 50. Lower Trinity GCD - 11/7/2006 JEFF DAVIS 51. McMullen GCD - 11/6/2001 52. Medina County GCD - 8/26/1991 53. Menard County UWD - 8/14/1999 54. Mesa UWCD - 1/20/1990 55. Mesquite GCD - 11/4/1986 56. Mid-East Texas GCD - 11/5/2002 72 57. Middle Pecos GCD - 11/5/2002 PRESIDIO 58. Middle Trinity GCD - 5/4/2002 59. Neches & Trinity Valleys GCD - 11/6/2001 60. North Plains GCD - 1/2/1955 61. North Texas GCD - 12/1/2009 62. Northern Trinity GCD - 5/15/2007 63. Panhandle GCD - 1/21/1956 64. Panola County GCD - 11/6/2007 65. Pecan Valley GCD - 11/6/2001 66. Permian Basin UWCD - 9/21/1985 67. Pineywoods GCD - 11/6/2001 68. Plateau UWC and Supply District - 3/4/1974 69. Plum Creek CD - 5/1/1993 70. Post Oak Savannah GCD - 11/5/2002 71. Prairielands GCD - 9/1/2009 72. Presidio County UWCD - 8/31/1999 73. Real-Edwards C and R District - 5/30/1959 74. Red River GCD - 9/1/2009 75. Red Sands GCD - 11/5/2002 76. Reeves County GCD - 11/3/2015 77. Refugio GCD - 11/6/2001 78. Rolling Plains GCD - 1/26/1999 79. Rusk County GCD - 6/5/2004 Unconfirmed Groundwater 80. San Patricio County GCD - 5/12/2007 Conservation Districts 81. Sandy Land UWCD - 11/7/1989 82. Santa Rita UWCD - 8/19/1989 98. Aransas County GCD + # 83. Saratoga UWCD - 11/7/1989 99. Southwestern Travis County GCD + & 84. South Plains UWCD - 2/8/1992

85. Southeast Texas GCD - 11/2/2004 86. Southern Trinity GCD - 6/19/2009 87. Starr County GCD - 1/6/2007 88. Sterling County UWCD - 11/3/1987 89. Sutton County UWCD - 4/5/1986 90. Terrell County GCD - 11/6/2012 91. Texana GCD - 11/6/2001 92. Trinity Glen Rose GCD - 11/5/2002 93. Upper Trinity GCD - 11/6/2007 94. Uvalde County UWCD - 9/1/1993 95. Victoria County GCD - 8/5/2005 96. Wes-Tex GCD - 11/5/2002 97. Wintergarden GCD - 1/17/1998

34 HEMPHILL

GLASSCOCK

Confirmed Groundwater Conservation Districts (Cont.) *

LIPSCOMB

ROBERTS

41

0

25

50

100

Miles

KENEDY

87

75

STARR

WILLACY

HIDALGO

DISCLAIMER: This map was generated by the Texas Water Development Board using GIS (Geographical Information System) software. No claims are made to the accuracy or completeness of the information shown herein nor to its suitability for a particular use. The scale and location of all mapped data are approximate. Map date: JULY-2019

CAMERON

TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD 1700 North Congress Avenue | P.O. Box 13231 Austin, Texas 78711-3231 www.twdb.texas.gov 512-463-7847

Figure 1, Groundwater Conservation Districts

(Ground)Water Management in the West - Part 3: Texas

HYDROVISIONS

Figure 2, Major Aquifers in Texas

37

Over the years the TWDB developed dozens of GAMs, along with associated databases, analytical tools, and visualization interfaces.

The TWDB uses these models to develop modeled available groundwater estimates, which represent the amount of annual pumping that achieves a DFC, thereby forming the basis of the GCD’s groundwater planning, management, and permitting.

Discussion Related to California

HYDROVISIONS

The Texas approach to groundwater management has some striking similarities as well as differences with California. Similar to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA), groundwater management in Texas is a bottom-up, stakeholder-driven process, which emphasizes local control. However, unlike California, where the objective is to maintain groundwater at sustainable levels without ‘significant and unreasonable undesirable results’, Texas groundwater management is geared towards achieving DFCs, which is a collective policy decision that may not be hydrologically sustainable. DFCs for several GCDs entail significant long-term reductions in groundwater storage (like 50% remaining storage in 50 years). Other GCDs have adopted DFCs that protect critical spring flow or address land subsidence due to groundwater withdrawals.

Texas also stands apart in the regional groundwater availability models it developed and mandated for groundwater planning.

While California has state-wide and regional groundwater models, SGMA planning does not require their use for agency-level planning.

38

experience critical groundwater problems.

California enforces its groundwater management policy through local GSAs, and if needed, by the “State Backstop.” Enforcement can include fees and civil penalties levied by GSAs or the state. In Texas, enforcement generally remains at a local level although “affected parties” can seek TCEQ action if GCDs do not appropriately manage groundwater.

In summary, groundwater is critical to sustaining the economies and environmental health of both California and Texas. While there are similarities and differences in management approaches and styles, both states depend on local stakeholders representing diverse interests.

Groundwater policy is not static, and every Texas legislative session includes efforts to slightly adjust or substantially modify groundwater policy. Even with policy differences, there is general agreement that the technical issues of groundwater-surface water relationships, brackish groundwater desalination, and aquifer storage and recovery will need to be factored into statewide policy to address future groundwater management issues.

31 Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 356.10.

Supreme Court of Texas, The EDWARDS AQUIFER AUTHORITY and The State of Texas, Petitioners, v. Burrell DAY and Joel McDaniel, Respondents. No. 08–0964, Decided: February 24, 2012 https://caselaw.findlaw.com/tx-supreme-court/1595644. html 1 2

California also prioritized groundwater basins based on the degree of overdraft and set compliance schedules for groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) to develop and implement groundwater sustainability plans.

Texas does not have a statewide priority system for aquifers and groundwater management though may designate priority groundwater management areas for areas expected to (Ground)Water Management in the West - Part 3: Texas

Directors Emeriti

By John McHugh, Director and HydroVisions Editor The following directors were designated as Emeriti at the Western Groundwater Congress on September 25th, 2019: • David Abbott • Susan Garcia • Ted Johnson • Tom J2.375 inohnson

Newly recognized Board Emeriti with President Steve Phillips

HYDROVISIONS

Directors Emeriti

• Tom Mohr

39

Background

Susan Garcia

The context of the Emeritus designation lies in GRA’s 2014 evaluation of strategies to strengthen the Board through incorporation of new talent, succession planning, and graceful retiring of Directors who had completed an exemplary tenure of service.

GRA Director for 10 years during the period 1998 to 2007

Intent: The Director Emeritus designation intent is four-fold: 1. To recognize and reward retired Directors with this designation for substantial, consistent, and recognizable service to GRA during their term(s); 2. To create a role that active and future Directors may aspire to;

Committee

Founding member of the Southern California Branch, serving as both Vice President and President Susan continues to be a strong advocate for groundwater education; as a teacher she focuses her efforts on younger school-aged children Her groundwater education accomplishments have been widely recognized, including by the Water Replenishment District of Southern California

3. To facilitate Director succession planning and transfer of knowledge, wisdom, and experience; and 4. To cultivate continued support and involvement in GRA.

Ted Johnson Original GRA member, joining in 1992

2019 Class of Emeriti Provided below are our 2019 Director Emeriti and a summary of their accomplishments.

David Abbott GRA Director for 23 years during the period 1994 to 2018 Secretary for 2 years

GRA Director for 11 years during the period 2007 to 2017 Served as Secretary, Vice President and President Strong contributor to events, including Oil, Gas and Groundwater As GRA President, Ted managed key transitions in Association Management and focused on Strategic Planning

Awards committee chair, and served on many event planning committees Treasurer for San Francisco Branch since formation in 1992

HYDROVISIONS

Author of popular HydroVisions column Wells and Words since 2006

40

President for 2 years while also chairing the Education

Directors Emeriti

Tom Johnson GRA Director for 10 years during the period 2001 to 2010 Served as Vice President and President Tom made significant improvements to GRA’s committee structure and productivity of GRA Board meetings Has been active in groundwater at the national level having served multiple terms on the Board of Directors and was Board Chair for the NGWA Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers Tom Mohr GRA Director for 10 years during the period 2001 to 2010 Served as Vice President and President Served as Sacramento Branch Officer in the 1990s Chaired the Events Committee Significant contributions to GRA through leadership of contaminant-focused events (emerging contaminants, Dry cleaners, 1,4 dioxane, perchlorate) Tom presented the 1,4-Dioxane webinar that was among the most popular GRA-Casts (800+ attendees)

HYDROVISIONS

Directors Emeriti

41

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! Stephanie Bibby is an Environmental Scientist for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

HYDROVISIONS

I am Stephanie Bibby and I am GRA! I am an Environmental Scientist and Deputy Group Leader at the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). I manage drinking water and groundwater monitoring and regulatory compliance programs, and I also help lead an amazing team of wildlife biologists, NEPA analysts, and water quality specialists. Before LLNL, I earned a PhD in geology where my research focused on using environmental tracers to better understand and manage groundwater basins. In my free time, my husband and I enjoy exploring new restaurants in the Bay Area, drinking Belgian beers, and enjoying the great outdoors year-round, which is truly a gift in California.

42

My journey with GRA began as a PhD student when I attended my first GRA Conference in 2010. I was immediately hooked on this amazing organization! I joined GRA committees as a student liaison, and in 2017 I began Co-Chairing the Events, Education, and Affiliates (EEA) Committee. My role within the EEA Committee, is to help coordinate different student engagement opportunities at GRA events. I love being able to support GRA’s students because as a student member I received so many valuable benefits like networking opportunities, travel funding to conferences, and leadership opportunities. If you’re a student out there looking to get more engaged in GRA, please feel free to reach out to me at bibby2@llnl.gov. Looking forward to hearing from you!

HYDROVISIONS

43

HYDROVISIONS

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 symposium will feature numerous oral presentations, poster sessions, optional workshops, field trips and an awards luncheon. Visit the BSMAR 17 website for more information.

Have questions or want to volunteer to help with the symposium? Contact Mike Hulst atMike.

Hulst@nv5.com or (623) 398-7421.

44

Do you have an innovative technology, approach, or success story you would like to have published in a leading peer-reviewed environmental groundwater journal? If so, submit a manuscript for consideration to the National Ground Water Association’s Groundwater Monitoring & Remediation®. GWMR is the premier journal for showcasing practical contributions in the field of environmental site characterization and remediation. Since its inception in 1981, GWMR has been a resource for researchers and practitioners in the field. It is a quarterly publication offering the best in application oriented, peer-reviewed content from a practitioner’s perspective. Each issue features papers containing cutting-edge information on treatment technology, columns by industry experts, news briefs, and equipment news. GWMR plays a unique role in advancing the practice of the groundwater monitoring and remediation field by providing forward-thinking research with practical solutions.

Follow this link for more information about publishing your work in GWMR: https://www.ngwa.org/publications-and-news/journals/groundwater-monitoringremediation/for-authors-and-reviewers-gwmr

HYDROVISIONS

45

Parting Shot

By 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.

HYDROVISIONS

The financial district in downtown San Francisco was built upon artificial fill placed in Yerba Buena Cove. Since the start of the gold rush in 1848, artificial fill has added more than 3 square miles to the City. The practice of dumping artificial fill on the tidal flats along the eastern and northern margins of San Francisco created flatland for growth and development.

The original shoreline of Yerba Buena Cove was located near the Transamerica Pyramid (right side), approximately 2,100 feet (0.4 miles) from the foot of Pier 7 and the average thickness of the fill is about 10 feet.

The earliest artificial fills consisted of nearby dune sand and, less frequently, colluvium and weathered rock, which were simply dumped on the soft and wet bay mud. A seawall, built to prevent the fill from being washed away now extends more than 3 miles from Fort Mason to China Basin and supports The Embarcadero. Later, a seawall was constructed by building a long ridge of rock and earth. For a long time, no restrictions were placed on the type or quality of the fill; spoils from excavations, debris from quarries, dune sands, and mud dredged from the bay were dumped indiscriminately. Some parts of the fill area were also used for public dumps; so, large deposits of manmade debris were also added to the mixture, including miscellaneous discarded objects of a large urban population, such as shoes, bottles, broken pottery, and bed frames.

The filled shoreline, former creeks, and wetlands are among the most geologically unstable areas of San Francisco and constitute a major hazard during earthquakes. Un-engineered fill settles unevenly over time and is also prone to strong shaking and liquefaction during earthquakes.

The four rectangular buildings of the Embarcadero Center (vertical lighting along edges) are aligned along a historic pier that extended into Yerba Buena Cove during the early years of the Gold Rush.

Photographed from the end of Pier 7 in downtown San Francisco. GPS coordinates of photograph are 37.800156° and -122.394498°.

46

Groundwater Issues Council Workshop

HYDROVISIONS

47

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 dgarrison@smithmooreassoc.com 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 dgarrison@smithmooreassoc.com for more information.

Sponsored Article

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):

HYDROVISIONS

• 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.

48

ARTICLES BOTH SPONSORED AND NOT ARE DUE FOUR WEEKS BEFORE PUBLISHING

RATES

HALF PAGE AD:

1= $250 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off

FULL PAGE AD:

1= $400 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off

SPONSORED ARTICLE:

1= $625 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off

ARTWORK FILE IS DUE THREE WEEKS BEFORE PUBLISHING

HYDROVISIONS

49

HYDROVISIONS

50

ISSUE THIRTY-ONE

31

DECEMBER 2019