northern sacramento valley conjunctive water management investigation public workshop december 8,...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management
Investigation
Public Workshop
December 8, 2010
The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and
The Natural Heritage Institute
12/8/2010 1
![Page 2: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Workshop Objective & Process
• Objective– Respond to questions from October 21, 2010
workshop 1
• Process– Organized questions into topics– Describe each topic– Provide response– Engage in discussion
12/8/2010 2
![Page 3: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
How Does The Proposed Project Work?
![Page 4: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Re-operate Surface Reservoirs with Groundwater “Backstop”
• Reservoir re-operation – Additional releases to meet program objectives
(North of Delta water supply and environmental enhancement)– Expect reservoir refill from surplus surface flows– Honor existing CVP and SWP delivery obligations and
operations constraints
• Groundwater operation– Pump groundwater to “repay” reservoirs if storage conditions put
contract deliveries or temperature control at risk– Groundwater used in lieu of surface entitlements that then
remain in storage– Minimize or avoid GW impacts
12/8/2010
![Page 5: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
10
Spring(no inflow)
Summer(no inflow)
Fall-Winter(inflow)
Spring(no inflow)
8
Project ReservoirOperation
BaselineReservoirOperation
Re-Operation Case 1- Reservoir Refills
Reservoir Full
100
Deliveries = 50
Target Carryover = 50
50
Reservoir Full
100
Reservoir Full
100
FloodRelease = 20
Inflow = 70
100
Inflow = 70
FloodRelease = 10
100 100
Reservoir Full
Target Carryover = 40
Deliveries = 60
40
![Page 6: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
10Project ReservoirOperation
BaselineReservoirOperation
Re-operation Case 2- Reservoir Does Not Refill
Reservoir Full
100
Reservoir Full
100
Deliveries = 50
Target Carryover = 50
50
Reservoir Partially Full
80
Target Carryover = 40
Deliveries = 40
40
Target Carryover = 40
Deliveries = 60
40
Target Carryover = 40
Deliveries = 30
40
Reservoir Partially Full
70
Spring(no inflow)
Summer(no inflow)
Fall-Winter(inflow)
Spring(no inflow)
Summer(no inflow)
Inflow = 30
Flood Release = 0
70
Inflow = 30
Flood Release = 0
80
GW
Groundwater = 1040
![Page 7: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Project Performance SummaryProject Scenario 2 Evaluated with Revised Model Including Biological
Opinions, Forecast-based Operation and Minimum Reservoir Release Criteria
12/8/2010 7
Performance MetricSac R
(Shasta)Feather R (Oroville)
Total number of years in simulation (1922-2003) 82 82
Number of years no project releases made 62 45
Number of years project releases made 20 37
Average annual (82 years) project release, (TAF)(Roughly 2/3 environmental and 1/3 ag benefits)
Cumulative benefit over 82 years (TAF) =
25
2,050
30
2,460
Maximum year project release (TAF)(Includes environmental and ag)
180 102
Number of years “payback” pumping is needed 4 11
Average annual (82 years) project pumping (TAF)Cumulative pumping over 82 years (TAF) =
2164
9738
Maximum year project pumping (TAF)(Maximums do not occur in same year)
100 100
Average annual (82 years) reservoir refill from surplus flows (TAF) 23 23
Spillage of payback water 0 -2
![Page 8: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Questions How Does The Proposed Project Work?
• Can you do just reservoir re-operation without doing the pumping for repayment?
• Where does the water for environmental enhancements and other project benefits come from?
• How does the payback water get used?
• How do the project benefits compare to the frequency and magnitude of payback?
12/8/2010 8
![Page 9: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
• How would the reservoir releases be measured?
• How would it be determined that water needs to be repaid…what triggers reservoir payback?
• Which aquifer are we talking about, the deep or shallow?
• Does the study address the total groundwater picture?
Questions, continued
How Does The Proposed Project Work?
12/8/2010 9
![Page 10: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
• What are the existing contractual obligations?
• Public wants assurance that there is adequate thought going into monitoring and mitigation.
Questions, continued
How Does The Proposed Project Work?
12/8/2010 10
![Page 11: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Investigation Tools and Data
![Page 12: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Overview of Analysis Tools
12/8/2010 12
Ground WaterModel
Other User Input
EnvironmentalObjectives
System OperationWith
Conjunctive Management
Surface WaterModel
CalSim Results
Surface WaterModel
CalSim Results
SW-GW InteractionTarget River Flows
GW PumpingReservoir Ops
Other Assumptions
![Page 13: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Groundwater Model Area and Grid Density
Sacramento
Orland Unit
GCID
Butte Basin
Willows
12/8/2010
Chico
![Page 14: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Groundwater Flow Model• Regional scale with high spatial detail
– 5,950 square miles (3.8 million acres)– 88,922 surface nodes– 7 vertical layers
• Aquifer properties based on analysis of more than 1,000 production wells
• Calibration– Static calibration for year 2000– Water levels from 257 monitoring wells
• Monthly time step, 1982 through 2003
12/8/2010
![Page 15: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Surface Water Operations Model • Spreadsheet-based for ease and speed of
operation• Re-operates Shasta and Oroville Reservoirs
relative to a baseline condition depicted by CalSim II outputs (1922 through 2003)
• Driven by additional target deliveries for:– Environmental restoration in Sac and Feather Rivers– Unmet Sac Valley agricultural demands
• Various operational constraints• Uses generalized SW-GW interaction functions
derived from GW model12/8/2010
![Page 16: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
QuestionsInvestigation Tools and Data
• Why are critical dry years not used in the analysis?
• What is the time-step used to develop the groundwater model? Is the time-step appropriate for capturing localized effects of day to day well operation and aquifer response?
• Were economic impacts beyond just project costs and benefits considered, such as impacts to specific segments of the agricultural community?
12/8/2010 16
![Page 17: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Project Benefits
![Page 18: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
QuestionsProject Benefits
• What are the project benefits?
• Are there benefits to the groundwater systems and were they considered in the economic analysis?
12/8/2010 18
![Page 19: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Project Benefits• Increased Sac Valley surface water supply
– More local benefit (water supply) from CVP and SWP
– Reduced overall reliance on Sac Valley groundwater, though increased local pumping in certain years
• Improved habitat in Sac and Feather Rivers through – Recovery of salmon populations– Ecosystem sustainability
12/8/2010 19
![Page 20: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Project Impacts
![Page 21: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
QuestionsProject Impacts
• What are the impacts of groundwater pumping in the valley on foothill aquifers?
• What are the critical recharge months in the upper reaches? In the area in general?
• Project pumping may be a small share of Valley wide pumping but what proportion is it of pumping within the project area?
12/8/2010 21
![Page 22: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Typical Sacramento Valley GW Hydrograph (Butte Co.)
12/8/2010
![Page 23: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Sacramento Valley Water Uses and Sources by County
![Page 24: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Peak Year Project Pumping (100 TAF1) in Relation to Estimated Annual Baseline Pumping
Area
Estimated Baseline
Pumping (TAF)
Project Pumping as % of Area
Baseline
Butte County 411 24%
Glenn and Colusa Counties 635 16%
Butte, Glenn and Colusa Counties
1,046 10%
Northern Sacramento Valley (Butte, Glenn, Colusa, Tehama and Shasta Counties)
1,323 8%
Entire Sacramento Valley(Source: GW model water budgets)
2,500 +/- 4%
12/8/2010 24
1 Peak year project pumping is 100 TAF in the Butte Basin and in GCID but the two not occur in the same year based on the 1922 through 2003 modeling
![Page 25: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
QuestionsProject Impacts
• Is the interconnection between streams and underlying aquifers sufficiently defined to predict the effects of even modest changes in groundwater levels (e.g., Butte and Big Chico Creeks)?
12/8/2010 25
![Page 26: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
• What is the extent of the impact on domestic (and other wells)? You show 0 to 6 feet, but you also say that near the wells that are pumping payback water it could be 50 or 60 feet? Even a few feet can have a large impact. This needs to be clarified.
Questions, continued
Project Impacts
12/8/2010 26
![Page 27: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Comparison of Drawdown from Modeling and Averaged for Impact Analysis
12/8/2010 27
Potential Impact Zones:Worst Case, New Wells
Regional Aquifer Drawdown in Aug 1990 , Scenario 1, New Well Field
Figure 11-15, p.11-16 from Modeling Report, Feb 2010
![Page 28: Northern Sacramento Valley Conjunctive Water Management Investigation Public Workshop December 8, 2010 The Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District and The Natural](https://reader034.vdocuments.site/reader034/viewer/2022051819/5517b765550346892b8b46cd/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Next Steps
• Draft and Final Investigation Report
• Additional public meetings
• Phase 2
12/8/2010 28