tehama county groundwater sustainability agency
TRANSCRIPT
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 1
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Wednesday, June 28, 2017 8:30 AM Tehama County Board of Supervisors Chambers
727 Oak Street, Red Bluff, CA 96080 http://www.tehamacountypublicworks.ca.gov/Flood/
Dawn Grine, City of Corning; Clay Parker, City of Red Bluff; Bill Borror, City of Tehama; Kris Lamkin, El Camino Irrigation District Todd Hamer, Los Molinos Community Services District;
Martha Slack, Rio Alto Water District
District 1: Harley North, District 2: Ernest Bonner, District 3: Bart Fleharty, District 4: Hal Crain, District 5: David Lester
Gary Antone, Executive Director, Ryan Teubert, Flood Control/Water Resources Manager
This meeting conforms to the new Brown Act Open Meeting Requirements, in that actions and deliberations of the Groundwater Commission created to conduct the people’s business are taken openly; and that the people remain fully informed about the conduct of its business. Any written materials related to an open session item on this agenda that are submitted to the Clerk/Recording Secretary less than 72 hours prior to this meeting, and that are not exempt from disclosure under the Public Records Act, will promptly be made available for public inspection at Tehama County Public Works, 9380 San Benito Ave., Gerber, CA 96035 during normal business hours
1. Call To Order / Pledge Of Allegiance / Introductions
2. Public Comment
This time is set aside for citizens to address this Commission on any item of interest to the public that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Groundwater Commission provided the matter is not on the agenda or pending before this Commission. The Chair reserves the right to limit each speaker to three (3) minutes. Disclosure of the speaker’s identity is purely voluntary during the public comment period.
3. Approval Of Minutes
Approve minutes from the following Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission meetings:
March 22, 2017
April 26, 2017
Agenda Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission June 28, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 2
4. Presentation On The Tehama County Well Permitting Process
Informational Presentation by the Environmental Health Department on the Tehama County Well Permitting process.
5. Presentation on Tehama County Aquifers
Informal Presentation by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on Tehama County Aquifers.
6. Update on Spring Groundwater Levels
Informational presentation on spring groundwater levels.
7. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Update
Informational update regarding the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) A. SGMA timeline and upcoming tasks. B. Update on GSA status in surrounding counties C. Sacramento Valley Subsidence Network Resurvey D. Update on State Water Resources Control Board Fee Schedule E. Questions on reviewed documents
8. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Grant Application and Basin Boundary Adjustment Ad-Hoc Committees
Discussion and possible action on forming two ad-hoc Committees to assist with development of the SGMA Grant application and Basin Boundary Adjustments.
9. Groundwater Commission Meeting Schedule Change
Discuss combining the July and August Groundwater Commission meetings into a single meeting on August 9th.
10. Adjourn
(ID # 10434)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Nichole Bethurem
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 ext 3045 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Approval of Minutes
Requested Action(s) Approve minutes from the following Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission meetings:
March 22, 2017
April 26, 2017 Background Information: See attached minutes. Attachment List: March 2017 Minutes (PDF) April 2017 Minutes (DOC)
3.1
Packet Pg. 3
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 1
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Minutes Wednesday, March 22, 2017 8:30 AM Tehama County Board of Supervisors Chambers
727 Oak Street, Red Bluff, CA 96080 http://www.tehamacountypublicworks.ca.gov/Flood/
1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / INTRODUCTIONS
Attendee Name Title Status Clay Parker City of Red Bluff Representative Present
Dawn Grine City of Corning Representative Present
Kris Lamkin El Camino Irrigation District Representative Present
Martha Slack Rio Alro Water District Representative Present
Todd Hamer Los Molinos Community Services District Representative Present
Harley North District 1 Representative Present
Ernest Bonner District 2 Representative Present
Bart Fleharty District 3 Representative Present
Hal Crain District 4 Representative Present
David Lester District 5 Representative Present
Bill Borror City of Tehama Representative Present
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Ryan Teubert announced the bylaws were approved by the Flood Control and Water Conservation District Board. The Board of Directors also approved the recommendation to appoint Ian Turnbull and Chris Henderson to the AB3030 Technical Advisory Committee.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by Commissioner Fleharty, second by Commissioner Grine to approve the February 22, 2017 Groundwater Commission minutes.
3.1.a
Packet Pg. 4
Att
ach
men
t: M
arch
201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Minutes Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission March 22, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 2
RESULT: APPROVED [11 TO 0]
MOVER: Bart Fleharty, District 3 Representative
SECONDER: Dawn Grine, City of Corning Representative
AYES: Parker, Grine, Lamkin, Slack, Hamer, Bonner, Fleharty, Crain,
Lester, Borror, North
4. DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES PRESENTATION
Bill Ehorn, Department of Water Resources Supervising Engineering Geologist, presented information on the Groundwater Sustainability Plan regulations required by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014.
Clay Parker questioned how much land subsidence has been detected in Tehama County.
Bill Ehorn replied NASA data and the DWR Northern Region survey crews have detected 3 to 4 inches of subsidence in the Hamilton City area of Glenn County Approximately one foot of subsidence detected in the Arbuckle area of Colusa County. Tehama County has not been resurveyed since 2008; the entire Sacramento Valley is currently being resurveyed. It is anticipated a detailed report of the results will be relased in fall 2017.
Executive Director Gary Antone added Department staff was involved in the initial set up of sites in 2008 and are aware of potential area of concerns in Tehama County. To date, we have not had any issues.
Commissioner Bonner asked if subsidence occurs with the rise and fall of local water tables. Bill Ehorn explained elastic and inelastic land subsidence, noting clay may compress and rebound when rewetted. At some point clays are compressed so much they do not rebound. Commissioner Grine questioned how underground infrastructure is affected in areas with one foot or more of subsidence. Bill Ehorn answered it is typical to see well pads rise slightly in areas with subsidence in the one foot range.The Arbuckle area expereinced cracks in bridge abutments, which were reported to Caltrans. Overall, infrastructure issues in the Sacramento Valley have been minimal. Bill Ehorn noted there has been an increase of land use over the last decade as more orchards have been planted in areas that were previously native pasture, and are using are now using groundwater. Ryan Teubert added that it will be necessary to provide educational outreach and work with ranchers and farmers on groundwater extraction issues.
3.1.a
Packet Pg. 5
Att
ach
men
t: M
arch
201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Minutes Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission March 22, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 3
Supervisor Burt Bundy expressed concerns related to out of County impacts on our groundwater. The State Water Board is determining instream flows that is exporting water out of Tehama County. Supervisor Bundy asked if Tehama County has a say in how those impacts will affect our sustainability.
Bill Ehorn did not have an answer at this time. Todd Hamer added he appreciates the work by Bill Ehorn and requested additional information on Tehama County specific data, including recharge zones and aquifer descriptions, to see what the County looks like on a groundwater sense. Bill Ehorn noted he has discussed future presentation topics with staff. Commissioner Bonner asked if Tehama County has a hydrographer; Ryan Teubert stated not at this time. If the need arises, a consultant could be hired, providing funding is available. Commissioner Bonner asked if DWR will have charts or graphs for us showing cause and effect of a 25% required water usage cutback. Bill Ehorn replied that is not something DWR typically provides, and that it could be part of the water budget analysis. Ryan Teubert added that the District’s Groundwater Sustainability Plan will be a base document to build upon. Commissioner Fleharty asked about the status of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies throughout the state. Bill Ehorn noted many agencies across the state still have overlap issues and are working to resolve any conflicts by July 1, 2017.
5. DROUGHT UPDATE
Due to a conflict schedule of the Board Chambers, this item will be presented at another meeting. Commission memebers were given a copy of the presentation.
6. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS
Due to a conflict schedule of the Board Chambers, this item will be presented at another meeting. Staff will send an email to Commissioners for input on future meeting topics.
7. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:41 a.m.
3.1.a
Packet Pg. 6
Att
ach
men
t: M
arch
201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 1
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Minutes
Wednesday, April 26, 2017 2:00 PM Tehama County Board of Supervisors Chambers
727 Oak Street, Red Bluff, CA 96080 http://www.tehamacountypublicworks.ca.gov/Flood/
1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / INTRODUCTIONS
Attendee Name
Title Status
Clay Parker City of Red Bluff Representative Present
Dawn Grine City of Corning Representative Present
Kris Lamkin El Camino Irrigation District Representative Present
Martha Slack Rio Alro Water District Representative Absent
Todd Hamar Los Molinos Community Services District Representative Present
Harley North District 1 Representative Present
Ernest Bonner District 2 Representative Present
Bart Fleharty District 3 Representative Present
Hal Crain District 4 Representative Present
David Lester District 5 Representative Present
Bill Borror City of Tehama Representative Absent
Chairman Clay Parker called the meeting to order at 2:00 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert announced the DWR presentation, agenda item number 4, has been rescheduled for the June meeting. Ryan Teubert noted he received a call from Commissioner Slack who was sick and unable to attend today’s meeting.
3. SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT UPDATE
A) Update on Recent Sustainable Groundwater Management Activities Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert provided information regarding the State Water Resources Board SGMA Fee and provided a frequently asked questions document on the topic.
3.1.b
Packet Pg. 7
Att
ach
men
t: A
pri
l 201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Minutes Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission April 26, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 2
B) Update on Groundwater Sustainability Agencies in surrounding counties
To date 172 local agencies that have formed GSAs or submitted their Notices of Intent, which covers 277 areas and 106 different groundwater basins.
There are 60 local agencies listed as exclusive GSA agencies, including Tehama County
There are 73 other agencies that have overlapping GSA notices working to resolve their overlap issues prior to the June 30, 2017 deadline. Shasta County’s six eligible GSAs are coordinating to create a single GSA.
Glenn County continues to work through the process. A majority of their efforts are focused on the Colusa subbasin.
Butte County is working through their process. The three GSA eligible agencies within the Butte County portion of the Vina subbasin will likely sign a letter agreeing to co-manage that portion of the subbasin.
C) Sacramento Valley Subsidence Network Resurvey DWR is in the process of resurveying the GPS subsidence monitoring network, which was initially surveyed in 2008. Public Works staff will participate in the resurveying of the subsidence monitoring network in May and June.
D) SGMA Technical Support Contract
Staff is working with a consultant to develop a contract to provide a high-level sustainable groundwater management act risk assessment of the six undesirable results and develop a work plan and budget.
Commissioner Fleharty asked who the consultant is and if the consultant is just advising staff or completing some of the tasks identified in the work plan. Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert stated the consultant is Grant Davids. The consultant is working closely with surrounding counties and looking at the six undesirable results providing groundwater quality and various other needed information. The consultant will provide an overview of existing data in relation to the undesirable results, detailing our plan for how we should develop our groundwater Plan focusing on the budget. Commissioner Fleharty asked if the consultant would be capable of doing the required work for the hydraulic modeling in the water budget, or would another consultant be hired for that task. Staff has not yet selected a consultant for developing a water budget. This task will go through the formal bidding process.
4. DWR PRESENTATION ON TEHAMA COUNTY AQUIFERS
This item was removed from the agenda.
3.1.b
Packet Pg. 8
Att
ach
men
t: A
pri
l 201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Minutes Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission April 26, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 3
5. UPDATE ON GROUNDWATER LEVELS AND DROUGHT CONDITIONS
Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert presented the spring groundwater levels and current drought conditions.
Tehama County’s groundwater monitoring information is available on the District’s website.
6. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD FEE SCHEDULE
Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert reviewed the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) fee schedule for Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. This fee schedule covers those areas not in compliance with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. The base filing fee is $300 per well for all extractors required to report. Those that extract for domestic purposes of two acre feet or less per year could pay $100 per well. Late fees can be 25% of the total fee amount per month if fee is late. Commissioners were given a copy of the Fact Sheet, which further explains the proposed fees. Commissioner Bonner questioned how the State Water Board proposed to collect the fees; staff did not know at this time. Commissioner Lamkin replied the State Board has a Civil Administrative Liability, similar to filing a civil suit, to collect fees; they are currently doing this on the Irrigated Lands Program. Commissioner Hal Crain questioned if SGMA compliant districts could impose fees on their complaint members. Ryan stated it is up to the individual GSAs if they want to impose fees, it is not something the State is putting on those in compliance with the Act at this time.
Commissioner Parker emphasized these fees do not apply to Tehama County since we are in compliance.
7. DISCUSSION ON FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS
Flood Control/Water Resources Manager Ryan Teubert requested suggestions from the Commissioners on future agenda topics. Staff is working with DWR on Commissioner Hamer’s request for recharge zones and aquifer descriptions Staff also requested input from the Commissioners on creating a timeline detailing the next steps in the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan.
Executive Director Gary Antone suggested a few Commissioners meet with Ryan to discuss the issues; Commissioners Parker, Lester, Fleharty, and Crain volunteered. Commissioner Lamkin requested information on Best Management Practices for groundwater management
3.1.b
Packet Pg. 9
Att
ach
men
t: A
pri
l 201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
Minutes Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission April 26, 2017
Tehama County Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission Page 4
Commissioner Todd Hamer asked for an update on the AB3030 Technical Advisory Committee and their accomplishments to date. Ryan stated he plans to present information on the Integrated Regional Water Management process to the Commission at a future meeting.
Supervisor Burt Bundy requested the Environmental Health Department present information on the well permitting process.
8. PRESENTATION OF DOCUMENTS FOR COMMISSIONER REVIEW
With the cancellation of the May meeting, Commissioners were given information to review prior to the June 28, 2017 meeting.
9. ADJOURN
With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:38 PM.
3.1.b
Packet Pg. 10
Att
ach
men
t: A
pri
l 201
7 M
inu
tes
(10
434
: A
pp
rova
l of
Min
ute
s)
(ID # 10418)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Presentation on the Tehama County Well Permitting Process
Requested Action(s) Informational Presentation by the Environmental Health Department on the Tehama County Well Permitting process. Background Information: Tim Potanovic, Director of the Tehama County Environmental Health Department will provide a general overview of the County's well permitting process. Attachment List: Well Permit (PDF)
4.1
Packet Pg. 11
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 633 Washington St., Room 36
Red Bluff, California 96080
527-8020
APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT OR DESTROY A WELL
Application No. W------
Application for: Public Water Well O Individual Well O Well Destruction O Agricultural Well O Export O Onsite 0 Monitoring Well O Cathodic Protection Well O Other O
Type of Construction: New Construction O Repair or Deepen O Replacement a
Owner's Name: ____________________ Assessor's Parcel No. ______________ _
Mailing Address: --......... ---------------------- Phone No.: _____________ _
City: ______________________ State: _________ Zip Code: _________ _
Applicant's Name: ________________________ Phone No.: _____________ _
Site Address: _____________________ Lot No:. ____ T.R.S. _____________ _
NAME OF WELL DRILLER CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE NUMBER
BUSINESS ADDRESS
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE
I AM AWARE OFTHE PROVISION OF SECTION 37000F THE CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE WHICH REQUIRES EVERY EMPLOYER TO BE INSURED AGAINST LIABILITY FOR WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION.
· NOTE: 1. Provide a minimum twelve (12) hour notice prior to instamng or placing annular seal.2. A satisfactory inspection or waiver by 1he Health Department and receipt of a Driller's report and a disinfection statement is required for final approval of work.3. Contact this Department within 7 days of completion of the well.4. Scaled Plot Plan is to be furnished for au applications, and shall show all septic tanks, leachlines, pits and other contamination hazards within 200 feet.
I hereby state that the information above and on plot plan is correct and true to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the plot plan must be approved, obtained and be on site BEFORE any construc:tlon is begun. I further state, u nder penalty of perjury, that I am the owner of 1he property, the owner's aothorized representative, or a Licensed Well DriUing Contractor. I lllderstand approval of the Water Well construction does not indicate whether this property is suitable for an individual sewage disposal system or that an approval to nstaa such a system is granted.
Date: _______________________ _ Signed: ________________ _
THE APPL ICANT IS RESPONSIBLE F OR MAINTAINING REQUIRED SETBACKS
- OFFICIAL USE ONLY -
Received by: ____________ Date: ______ , Fee Received D Cash O Check O Receipt no .. _____ _
Application Denied By: __________________ {See Separate Report)
Well Inspection: Annular Seal _____________ Waived D Final _______________ Waived 0 Sign & Dale Sign & Dale
Surface Pad O Annular Seal: ____ _ ----------------:-__________ Well ,Yield ____ gpm Type & Procedure
Drilling fluids and other drilling materials used in connection with this work shall be safely and appropriately handled and disposed of. Other .Conditions: --------------------------------------------
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO __________________ for the above well work in accordance with all State and County Laws, and conditions as set forth. on the approved plot plan.
Additional.conditions attached __________ _
Effective date ________________ _
Granted by: __________________ _ Expiration date _______________ _
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 12
Att
ach
men
t: W
ell P
erm
it (
1041
8 :
Wel
l Per
mit
tin
g P
rese
nta
tio
n J
un
e 20
17)
(ID # 10417)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Presentation on Tehama County Aquifers
Requested Action(s) Informal Presentation by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) on Tehama County Aquifers. Background Information: Michelle Dooley, Senior Engineering Geologist for DWR's Northern Region Office will provide a general overview of the groundwater aquifers within Tehama County and discuss which geology types are best suited for recharge.
5.1
Packet Pg. 13
(ID # 10419)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Update on Spring Groundwater Levels
Requested Action(s) Informational presentation on spring groundwater levels. Background Information: Presentation on spring groundwater levels. Tehama County groundwater monitoring information can be viewed on the District's website.
6.1
Packet Pg. 14
(ID # 10420)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act - Update
Requested Action(s) Informational update regarding the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
A. SGMA timeline and upcoming tasks. B. Update on GSA status in surrounding counties C. Sacramento Valley Subsidence Network Resurvey D. Update on State Water Resources Control Board Fee Schedule E. Questions on reviewed documents
Background Information: A. Staff will be presenting an overview of important Groundwater Sustainability
Agency (GSA) tasks that need to be accomplished over the next year. These tasks include developing a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) work plan, and budget, developing a SGMA Grant application and associated grant contract, developing consultant bid documents and contracts, possible submission of Basin Boundary Modifications, and developing a GSP development timeline.
B. Brief update on the status of Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) in
surrounding counties: Shasta County - Six eligible GSA's within Shasta County have formed the
Enterprise-Anderson Groundwater Sustainability Agency and submitted a Notice of Intent to become the GSA on May 11, 2017.
Glenn County -Continues working with a facilitator to coordinate the multiple agencies within the Glenn County portions of the Colusa and West Butte subbasins into multi-agency GSA’s. Glenn County is also working with the Glenn Colusa Irrigation District (GCID) to come to an agreement on their overlap concerns within the Glenn County portion of the Corning subbasin. The Tehama County GSA will need to coordinate with both the County and GCID on management of the Corning subbasin.
Butte County - Potential GSA’s are still working to resolve their overlap issues, allowing them to meet the June 30, 2017 deadline in the West and East Butte subbasins. The overlap issues in the Vina subbasin have been resolved. The Tehama County GSA will now need to coordinate with Butte County, the Rock Creek Reclamation District, and the City of Chico on how to best manage the Vina subbasin.
C. County staff has recently participated in the resurvey of the Sacramento Valley
Subsidence monitoring network. The survey should be completed by the end of
7.1
Packet Pg. 15
(ID # 10420)
this month and DWR anticipates processing the data and releasing a report sometime this fall.
D. Briefly review the State Water Resources Control Boards (SWRCB) fee schedule which has been established to recover costs associated with their management of those subbasins out of compliance with the SGMA regulations. The Tehama County GSA has received a letter from the SWRCB stating that all of the subbasins within the County are currently compliant with the regulations.
E. Staff wanted to offer the opportunity to discuss and answer any questions on the
three SGMA related documents that the Commissioners were asked to review during the April meeting.
Attachment List: SGMA UPDATE (PDF) SWRCB_Letter (PDF)
7.1
Packet Pg. 16
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT (SGM) PROGRAM NEWS
June 14, 2017
The California Department of Water Resources provides bi-weekly updates regarding SGM Program information
to its stakeholders and interested parties.
2017 Draft Proposal Solicitation for Groundwater Sustainability Plans and Projects The Department of Water Resources (DWR) is pleased at the turnout for its public meetings this week to review its 2017 Draft Proposal Solicitation Package for Groundwater Sustainability Plans and Projects and to receive public comments. Today’s meeting in Irvine will be the last prior to the close of the public comment period June 19, 2017.
Meeting location Meeting time
Irvine Ranch Water District 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue, Sand Canyon Room
Irvine, CA 92618 June 14, 2017, 1:00 PM
The Sustainable Groundwater Planning (SGWP) grant program is funded by Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond overwhelmingly approved by California voters in 2014. Proposition 1 authorized the Legislature to appropriate $100 million for competitive grants for development of sustainable groundwater plans and projects, of which $86.3 million is available in fiscal year 2017-18. The grants are intended to support groundwater management that furthers the goals of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, a historic 2014 law that requires local agencies to bring stressed groundwater basins into sustainable patterns of pumping and recharge. Groundwater supplies a third or more of California’s water supply.
DWR will solicit proposals to award funding on a competitive basis in two funding categories: projects that serve severely disadvantaged communities and Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs). GSPs have two tiers: Tier 1 is for critically overdrafted basins and Tier 2 is for all other high- and medium- priority basins. The draft materials are available on the SGWP Grant Program webpage. The public comment period will close June 19, 2017.
Contact: Heather Shannon [email protected] or (916) 651-9212
Facilitation Support Services DWR’s Facilitation Support Services (FSS) aim to help local agencies work through challenging water management situations. Professional facilitators are sometimes needed to help foster discussions among diverse water management interests and local agencies as they strive to implement the
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Att
ach
men
t: S
GM
A U
PD
AT
E (
1042
0 :
Su
stai
nab
le G
rou
nd
wat
er M
anag
emen
t A
ct U
pd
ate)
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). From April 2015 to June 2017, DWR’s FSS resources were primarily allocated to assist with Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) formation. After July 1, 2017, DWR will be focusing its available FSS resources on supporting the development of Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs). Under the requirements of SGMA, all beneficial uses and users of groundwater must be considered in the development of GSPs. The goal of the FSS is to assist local agencies in reaching consensus on potentially contentious topics arising from the diverse beneficial uses and users of groundwater and assisting governance under the newly formed governance structures in an effort to develop GSPs. Priorities of this funding are given to the critically overdrafted basins. Services Offered through DWR funded Professional Facilitators
Stakeholder identification and engagement
Meeting facilitation
Interest-based negotiation/consensus building
Public outreach facilitation
Who is Eligible? GSAs developing GSPs, or other groups coordinating with the GSAs in developing GSPs, are eligible to apply if they meet all the following obligations,
Agree to work in an open, inclusive, and collaborative manner toward the development of a
GSP.
Support an inclusive process that seeks, promotes, encourages, and welcomes the involvement
of all stakeholders and interested parties.
Commit to meet regularly and work diligently toward a clear and defined goal.
Commit to providing a meeting space that is suitably located and sized.
Applications for FSS will be evaluated on a continuous basis as funding allows. For more information, or to start a FSS application, contact [email protected].
Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) Formation As of June 13, 2017:
224 local agencies (including coordinated efforts by a combination of local agencies) have submitted GSA formation notifications.
o Many local agencies have submitted multiple notifications in multiple basins.
The 224 local agencies account for 344 separate areas in 127 basins.
Of the 344 separate areas:
o 156 are exclusive GSA areas; o 88 have a non-overlapped notification within a 90-day period; and o 100 have overlap to resolve.
Of the 127 basins that are partially or completely covered by GSA notifications: o 32 basins are low or very-low priority.
o 95 basins are medium or high priority and are subject to SGMA requirements.
Most of the overlapping GSA notifications are expected to resolve the overlap prior to June 30, 2017.
Most counties have messaged to DWR that they will become the GSA in the unmanaged areas of a high- or medium-priority basin if needed, per Water Code Section 10724.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Att
ach
men
t: S
GM
A U
PD
AT
E (
1042
0 :
Su
stai
nab
le G
rou
nd
wat
er M
anag
emen
t A
ct U
pd
ate)
o Counties that have opted-out of being the presumed GSA for the unmanaged area of a basin are listed here: http://water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm/gsa_archive.cfm
o The State Intervention Compliance Map for areas that are currently considered unmanaged is available on the State Water Board’s website: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gmp/
All GSA notifications can be submitted, viewed, and managed within DWR’s SGMA Portal: http://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/#gsa
Contact: Mark Nordberg [email protected] or (916) 651-9673
State Water Resources Control Board Notice The State Water Resources Control Board has published the Notice of Proposed Emergency Rulemaking for Implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 that was considered by the State Water Resources Control Board at its May 16, 2017 meeting. The notice is provided as an attachment to this newsletter. Additional information is available at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gmp/fees.shtml
A Newsletter about Funding and Technical Assistance In line with DWR’s commitment to support Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and stakeholders throughout SGMA implementation, DWR will be providing periodic SGMA Implementation Assistance Updates. The Spring 2017 issue of Implementation Assistance Update is available on the DWR website. Contact: Hong Lin [email protected] or (916) 653-6353
California Department of Fish and Wildlife's (CDFW)Prop 1 Restoration Grant Program CDFW’s Proposal Solicitation Notice is now open for Fiscal Year 2017-18. GSAs may find groundwater recharge projects that restore floodplain connectivity and improve fish habitat eligible for funding. For more information visit their Restoration Grant Programs.
Technical Assistance Providing technical assistance to GSAs will be crucial to enabling their success in sustainably managing their groundwater basins. The goal of the technical assistance program is to comply with requirements in SGMA (10729 and 10733.2) and the GSP regulations (353.2, 354.8, 354.16, and 354.18) for DWR to provide education, data, and tools at both regional and statewide scales to aid GSAs with development and implementation of GSPs and inform water resource planning decisions. DWR’s update on technical assistance can be found on the California Water Commission website .
Contact: Steven Springhorn [email protected] or (916) 651-9273
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 19
Att
ach
men
t: S
GM
A U
PD
AT
E (
1042
0 :
Su
stai
nab
le G
rou
nd
wat
er M
anag
emen
t A
ct U
pd
ate)
Basin Boundary Modification Pursuant to SGMA, DWR developed regulations for a process to modify Bulletin 118 groundwater basin boundaries. In November 2016, DWR reviewed the requests and finalized the boundary modifications, which are posted on the Basin Modification Boundary web page at http://water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm/basin_boundaries.cfm.
Tentative Schedule
July 1, 2017 – Initial Notification period opens – Basin Boundary Modification Request System
(BBMRS)
o This period allows GSAs or local agencies to begin the required meetings and
coordination to support modifications.
o Please reach out to DWR during this period for any assistance with the process, we want
to help.
January 1, 2018 – Submission Period opens
o During this 3 month window, GSAs and local agencies can submit the required
information to support a Basin Boundary Modification in the BBMRS on the SGMA
Portal http://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/#intro.
March 31, 2018 – Submission Period Closes and 30-day Public Comment Period opens
o All information to support a boundary modification should be submitted to the BBMRS
April 30, 2018 – Public Comment Period Closes
o DWR begins boundary modification requests and public comments
Approximately July 2018 – Draft Basin Boundary Modifications released
Approximately August 2018 – Final Basin Boundary Modifications released
Contact: Tim Godwin [email protected] or (916) 651-9223
Land Subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley This free briefing will highlight the array of technologies available for subsidence measurement and monitoring, including information and technical support being provided by DWR. Wednesday, August 16, 2017, Alice Peters Auditorium (PB 191) in the University Business Center at Fresno State. For more information and registration, visit http://www.watereducation.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/dwr_sjv_subsidence_aug16_flye.pdf
SGMA Definitions and Groundwater Glossary SGMA provided California with a roadmap for sustainably managing our groundwater, and it also came with its own lexicon. Looking for the definition of “Undesirable result” or “De minimis extractor”? It’s right here. Additional important groundwater terms and definitions are included in the Groundwater Information Center's Groundwater Glossary.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 20
Att
ach
men
t: S
GM
A U
PD
AT
E (
1042
0 :
Su
stai
nab
le G
rou
nd
wat
er M
anag
emen
t A
ct U
pd
ate)
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 21
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 22
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
5-21.57VINA
BASIN
5-21.56 LOSMOLINOS
BASIN
5-21.55DYE CREEK
BASIN
5-21.54ANTELOPE
BASIN
5-21.50 REDBLUFF BASIN
5-06.01BOWMAN
BASIN
5-21.51CORNING
BASIN
Corning
Red Bluff
Tehama
Legend
Area Outside High/Medium Priority Basin
Basin/Subbasin Boundary
Managed Areas*
Unmanaged Areas
City
TEHAMA COUNTY Groundwater Basins with Unmanaged Areas as of
April 6, 2017
0 2 4 6 8 10
Miles
*Managed areas include GSA notificationsposted within the last 90 days; managementstatus may change. Additional informationavailable at www.waterbaords.ca.gov/gmp.
This map is non-binding and is for advisory informational purposes only.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 23
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
State Intervention – The State Backstop
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
Page 1 of 2
SGMA and State Intervention
SGMA requires the formation of local groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) in California’s high- or
medium-priority groundwater basins. GSAs are required to develop groundwater sustainability plans (plan)
that make basins sustainable within 20 years of implementation. If locals are unable or unwilling to
sustainably manage their basin or subbasin, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board
or Board) can step in to protect groundwater using a process called state intervention. State intervention is
triggered by one of the following events:
Date Event
July 1, 2017 Entire basin is not covered by GSA(s).
Feb. 1, 2020 Basin is in critical overdraft and there is either 1) no plan or 2) the Department of Water
Resources (DWR) fails the plan.
Feb. 1, 2022 There is either 1) no plan or 2) long-term overdraft and DWR fails the plan.
Feb. 1, 2025 DWR fails plan and basin has significant surface water depletions.
For general SGMA information, visit: www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gmp/sgma.shtml.
Levels of Intervention
Unmanaged Area
An unmanaged area is a part of a basin not within the management area of a GSA before July 1, 2017.
Anyone that extracts groundwater from an unmanaged area must submit an extraction report to the State
Water Board each year. The first extraction reports are due by Dec. 15, 2017, and must include well
location and capacity, where the water was used, purpose of use, and monthly extraction volumes.
Probationary Basin
If local agencies fail to form a GSA, fail to develop an adequate sustainability plan, or fail to implement the
plan successfully, the State Water Board may designate the entire basin probationary. Anyone who
extracts groundwater from a probationary basin, including extractors under the management of a GSA,
must file extraction reports with the Board unless the Board decides to exclude certain types of extractions.
The Board may require the use of a meter to measure extractions and reporting of additional information.
Interim Plan
The State Water Board will allow local agencies time to fix the issues in the basin that led to probation.
If local agencies are unable to fix those issues, the Board will develop an interim plan to directly manage
groundwater extractions. An interim plan will contain corrective actions, a timeline to make the basin
sustainable, and a monitoring plan to ensure corrective actions are working.
Extraction Reports
Well owners must ensure extraction reports are submitted to the State Water Board by Dec. 15 of each
year for extractions made during the previous water year (Oct. 1 – Sep. 30). An extraction report is
required for each well and must include monthly pumping data. Extractions must be measured by a
method satisfactory to the Board. Extraction reports must be submitted online through the Board’s
website. For more information about extraction reports, visit
www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gmp/reporting.shtml.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 24
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
Page 2 of 2
Intervention Fees Each extraction report must be accompanied by a fee to cover State Water Board intervention costs. The draft fees for state intervention are detailed below.
Fee Category* Annual Fee Applicable Parties
Base Filing Fee $300 per well All extractors required to report.
Unmanaged Rate $25 per acre-foot Extractors in unmanaged areas. If extractors use a meter to
measure extractions the rate is $10 per acre-foot. Probationary Rate $40 per acre-foot Extractors in probationary basins.
Interim Plan Rate $55 per acre-foot Extractors in probationary basins where the Board
determines an interim plan is required.
De minimis Fee $100 per well A well owner that extracts two acre-feet or less per year for domestic purposes in a probationary basin, if the Board decides these extractions are significant.
Late Fee 25% of total fee per month Extractors that do not file reports by the due date.
*Draft fees are subject to change. Additional information available at waterboards.ca.gov/gmp.
Meters and Groundwater Management The State Water Board can require the installation of meters in a probationary basin. The need for meters will depend on local conditions and the level of intervention required in the basin. The State Water Board is likely to require meters in the development of an interim plan, in order to develop corrective actions and verify compliance with pumping restrictions. Extractors will be responsible for installing and maintaining meters and paying the related costs – although it is unlikely that the Board would require meters for de minimis users (see below).
De minimis Users A well owner who extracts two acre-feet or less per year from a parcel for domestic purposes is a de minimis user. Domestic purposes do not include commercial activities. A well owner that extracts more than two acre-feet per year from a parcel is not a de minimis user. De minimis users in unmanaged areas are exempt from reporting. However, the State Water Board can require reporting by de minimis users in probationary basins if necessary to manage the basin.
Interim Plans and Groundwater Sustainability Plans State intervention is intended to temporarily protect groundwater. An interim plan is not intended to permanently manage a basin and is not designed to replace a groundwater sustainability plan. To regain local control, local agencies will have to demonstrate their ability and willingness to manage groundwater sustainably and address the issues that caused state intervention.
For More Information Additional information on SGMA and state intervention is available at the State Water Board website: www.waterboards.ca.gov/gmp or the DWR website: www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 25
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
Updated March 22, 2017 Frequently Asked Questions on Groundwater Sustainability Agencies State Water Resources Control Board The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires the formation of groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) in high- and medium-priority groundwater basins and subbasins (basins) by June 30, 2017. The following provides general guidance on some frequently asked questions about GSA formation, and will be updated as necessary. This document offers non-binding, advisory opinions. It is not a declaratory decision and does not bind the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board or Board) in any future decision. The information provided here supplements additional frequently asked questions about GSAs that the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has responded to (available on DWR’s Sustainable Groundwater Management website: http://www.water.ca.gov/groundwater/sgm/gsa.cfm). Contents: 1. Must the county provide notice if it is accepting its presumed status as the groundwater
sustainability agency for an unmanaged area? ................................................................... 1 2. How can a county prevent an unmanaged area from being subject to reporting of
extractions and payment of fees to the State Water Board if the county cannot determine which areas will be unmanaged as of July 1, 2017? ............................................................ 4
3. Can a county file a notice to be the GSA for unmanaged areas or opt-out of being the GSA for unmanaged areas, prior to July 1, 2017? ....................................................................... 5
4. Must a local agency become the GSA for a basin if a local agency has submitted an alternative plan pursuant to Water Code section 10733.6? ................................................. 5
5. How will the State Water Board respond regarding GSA overlap that occurred prior to Senate Bill 13 (SB 13) becoming effective? ........................................................................ 5
6. Which local agencies are eligible to be GSAs? ................................................................... 6 7. How can a water corporation regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission or a
mutual water company participate in a GSA? ...................................................................... 6 8. What happens if the 90-day waiting period to become an exclusive GSA has not expired by
June 30, 2017? .................................................................................................................... 7 1. Must the county provide notice if it is accepting its presumed status as the
groundwater sustainability agency for an unmanaged area? Yes. Water Code Section 10724 establishes a presumption that the county is the groundwater sustainability agency (GSA) for unmanaged areas of a basin. Unmanaged areas are the non-adjudicated portions of high- or medium-priority basins where, as of June 30, 2017, either no
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 26
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 2 - March 22, 2017 local agency has filed a GSA formation notice with the Department of Water Resources (DWR), or multiple local agencies filed overlapping notices such that none of the agencies become the GSA1. A county that does not opt out of its status as the presumed GSA must notify DWR of its intent to be the GSA in the unmanaged areas. The county’s decision to become a GSA is effective upon acceptance of a complete GSA formation notice by DWR. The current status of posted GSA notices are shown on DWR’s SGMA Portal website: http://sgma.water.ca.gov/portal/#gsa The county’s presumptive role can be summarized as follows:
If an area is unmanaged, a county should notify DWR whether it wants to be the GSA by July 1, 2017, or soon thereafter.
If two or more local agencies overlap, the combined area will be deemed unmanaged as of July 1, 2017, and the county can become the exclusive GSA by filing a notice with DWR.
If a county is creating or contributing to the overlap, the county does not become the presumptive GSA. SGMA requires the agencies to resolve the conflict. Until they do so, the area will be deemed unmanaged.
Below are four examples applying the presumption and notice provisions of Water Code section 10724 in different scenarios: Example A: An area in which no local agency has filed to be the GSA. If, as of June 30, 2017, no local agency has filed a notice with DWR of its intent to be the GSA, the area is unmanaged. The county is presumed to be the GSA for the unmanaged area. The county must either opt-out of its presumptive role or file a GSA formation notice with DWR. The notification of intent to be the GSA must include all of the information required by Water Code section 10723.8, subdivision (a). Upon acceptance of the complete notice by DWR, the county becomes the exclusive GSA for the unmanaged area. There is no 90-day waiting period for the county’s intent to become the GSA to take effect. Alternatively, the county may opt-out of its presumptive role by notifying DWR that it will not be the GSA for the unmanaged area. Unless the county becomes the GSA for an unmanaged area by filing a GSA formation notice with DWR, groundwater extractors in the unmanaged area will be required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board pursuant to Water Code Section 5202. Example B: A local agency and a county have filed to be a GSA and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap. If a local agency and a county both file notices with DWR to be a GSA for a basin, and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap as of June 30, 2017, neither the local agency nor the county become a GSA. As a result, the proposed management areas of the county and the local agency are unmanaged. In this situation, the county cannot immediately act upon the presumption that it is the GSA for the unmanaged area. The county has two alternatives. The county and the local agency may
1 Please see question below pertaining to Senate Bill 13 (SB 13) and overlap that occurred prior to January 1, 2016.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 27
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 3 - March 22, 2017 resolve their conflict and, if necessary, file a new notice with non-overlapping boundaries. Otherwise, the county can withdraw its posted notice so that it may file an amended notice, expressing its intent to be the GSA pursuant to Water Code section 10724. Upon withdrawal or modification of the county’s original posted notice, however, overlap with the local agency is eliminated and the local agency will become the exclusive GSA for the area that it proposed to manage if the 90-day waiting period set by Water Code section 10723.8, subdivision (c), has expired. The county may file a new or amended notice with DWR of its intent to manage any remaining unmanaged areas pursuant to Water Code section 10724. Upon acceptance of the county’s new or amended notice by DWR, the county becomes the exclusive GSA for the unmanaged area. There is no 90-day waiting period for the county’s intent to become the GSA to take effect. If the overlap is not resolved through withdrawal or amendment of either agency’s notice, extractors in the unmanaged area will be required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board pursuant to Water Code Section 5202. Example C: Two local agencies have filed to be a GSA and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap. If two local agencies file notices with DWR to be a GSA for the basin, and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap as of June 30, 2017, neither of the local agencies will become a GSA. As a result, the proposed management areas of both local agencies will be unmanaged. The county is presumed to be the GSA for the unmanaged area. The county must either opt-out of the presumption or file a GSA formation notice with DWR. The notification of intent to be the GSA must include all of the information required by Water Code section 10723.8, subdivision (a). Upon acceptance of the complete notice by DWR, the county becomes the exclusive GSA for the unmanaged area. There is no 90-day waiting period for the county’s intent to become the GSA to take effect. Alternatively, the county may opt-out of the presumption by notifying DWR that it will not be the GSA for the unmanaged area. Unless the county becomes the GSA for an unmanaged area by filing a GSA formation notice with DWR, extractors in the unmanaged area will be required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board pursuant to Water Code Section 5202. Example D: Two local agencies and a county have filed to be a GSA and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap. If two local agencies and a county file notices with DWR to be a GSA for the basin, and all or a portion of their proposed management areas overlap as of June 30, 2017, neither of the local agencies nor the county will become a GSA. As a result, the proposed management areas of both local agencies and the county will be unmanaged. In this situation, the county cannot immediately act upon the presumption that it is the GSA for the unmanaged area as it already has a notice posted. If the county intends to exercise its presumption pursuant to Water Code section 10724 as the GSA for unmanaged areas, it must first withdraw its posted notice. Because the overlap of the other local agencies is not eliminated by the county’s withdrawal, any area within their proposed GSA management areas remains unmanaged as described in Example C.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 28
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 4 - March 22, 2017 Unlike Example B, once the county has withdrawn its posted overlapping notice, it is presumed to be the GSA for the unmanaged area and must either opt-out of its presumptive role as the GSA for the area or file a notice with DWR of its intent to be the GSA. The GSA formation notice must include all of the information required by Water Code section 10723.8, subdivision (a). Upon acceptance of the notice by DWR, the county becomes the exclusive GSA for the unmanaged area. There is no 90-day waiting period for the county’s intent to become the GSA to take effect. Alternatively, the county may opt-out of its presumptive role by notifying DWR that it will not be the GSA for the unmanaged area. As in Example C, if the overlap is not resolved through withdrawal or amendment of either agency’s notice and the county opts out, extractors in the unmanaged area will be required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board pursuant to Water Code Section 5202. Recommendation: SGMA is written to encourage counties to become the GSA for unmanaged areas in their basin, but it does not require them to do so. Accordingly, a county should notify DWR whether or not it intends to become the GSA for any unmanaged areas within its jurisdiction prior to July 1, 2017, or as soon as possible thereafter. 2. How can a county prevent an unmanaged area from being subject to reporting of
extractions and payment of fees to the State Water Board if the county cannot determine which areas will be unmanaged as of July 1, 2017?
The Board recognizes the timing constraints associated with publicly noticing a meeting of the county board of supervisors and ensuring the public is appropriately informed. The Board also acknowledges that information on the extent of unmanaged areas may not be available until July 15, 2017 – the date when DWR is required to have posted all the notices it has received to its internet website. The Board will work with DWR to identify unmanaged areas as soon as possible after July 1, 2017. The Board intends to send a letter to each county notifying it of the presence of unmanaged areas within its jurisdiction. The letter may include a date after which the Board will enforce reporting requirements if the county has not filed a notice pursuant to Water Code Section 10723.8, subdivision (a) of its intent to be the GSA. The Board may also investigate whether to begin proceedings to declare the basin probationary pursuant to Water Code section 10735.2, subdivision (a)(1). To become the GSA for an unmanaged area, the county must provide notification to DWR that includes the information required by Water Code section 10723.8, subdivision (a). This information includes the county’s service area boundaries, the boundaries of the basin or the portion of the basin that the county intends to manage, other agencies managing groundwater within the basin, a copy of any new bylaws, ordinances, or new authorities adopted by the county related to the management of groundwater in the basin, and a list of interested parties with an explanation of how their interests will be considered in the development and operation of the GSA and the development and implementation of the groundwater sustainability plan. This information may require several months to compile, and the State Water Board urges any county that may be the presumptive GSA to begin the process early. Lack of preparation by a county will not prevent the Board from beginning its intervention process. These actions are
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 29
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 5 - March 22, 2017 being described to ensure counties and local agencies can begin appropriate actions to form GSAs in a timely fashion. 3. Can a county file a notice to be the GSA for unmanaged areas or opt-out of being the
GSA for unmanaged areas, prior to July 1, 2017? The presumption in Water Code 10724 does not take effect until July 1, 2017, but the county can file a notice expressing its intent to be the GSA for unmanaged areas prior to July 1, 2017. If the county files a notice expressing its intent to be the GSA for unmanaged areas prior to July 1, 2017, the county will become the exclusive GSA on July 1, 2017 for those areas for which either: 1) no local agency has filed a notice of intent to be the GSA or 2) more than one local agency has filed a notice of intent to manage all or a portion of the same area. The county may later withdraw its notice and submit a new or amended notice if the county decides to alter the boundaries of the area that it intends to manage, for example, if the county decides to allow another local agency to be the GSA for all or a portion of the area the county was managing. The county may also file a notice of its intent not to be the GSA for any unmanaged areas prior to July 1, 2017. Extractors in unmanaged areas within the county will be required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board pursuant to Water Code Section 5202. The county may withdraw its notice if it later decides to be the GSA for an unmanaged area. 4. Must a local agency become the GSA for a basin if a local agency has submitted an
alternative plan pursuant to Water Code section 10733.6? SGMA allows an area to forego formation of a GSA if an alternative plan is submitted and approved as meeting the objectives of SGMA. If an alternative is approved by DWR, extractors in the basin are not subject to reporting pursuant to Water Code section 5202. If an alternative is disapproved by DWR or withdrawn and the area is not within the management area of a GSA, the county is presumed to be the GSA for the unmanaged area. The county must either opt-out of the presumption or file a notice with DWR of its intent to be the GSA. Unless the county becomes the GSA for the area by filing a GSA formation notice with DWR, extractors in the unmanaged area will be subject to extraction reporting requirements and fees pursuant to Water Code Section 5202 upon withdrawal or disapproval of an alternative. The Board may also designate the basin as probationary 180 days after the date the alternative was disapproved. (Wat. Code sect. 10735.2(a)(1)(C)). 5. How will the State Water Board respond regarding GSA overlap that occurred prior to
Senate Bill 13 (SB 13) becoming effective? Prior to January 1, 2016, SGMA did not clearly identify when a local agency’s decision to become a groundwater sustainability agency took effect and whether more than one local agency could become a groundwater sustainability agency for the same area. As amended by Senate Bill 13, effective January 1, 2016, Water Code section 10723.8 clarifies that a local agency’s decision to become a groundwater sustainability agency does not take effect if, within the 90-day notice period, another local agency submits an overlapping notification of intent to undertake groundwater management in all or a portion of the same area.
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 30
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 6 - March 22, 2017 Because the statute was not clear prior to its amendment, the State Water Board will consider areas with GSA overlap that occurred prior to the effective date of SB 13 on January 1, 2016, to be groundwater sustainability agencies for the areas identified in notices submitted to DWR. The reporting requirements of Water Code section 5202, subdivision (a)(2), will not apply to a person who extracts groundwater within the management areas of these agencies. Uncoordinated planning and management of the same area by multiple groundwater sustainability agencies may be the basis for designation of the basin as probationary pursuant to Water Code section 10735.2, subdivision (a)(1)(B). Multiple plans for the same basin that are implemented by multiple groundwater sustainability agencies are also required to be coordinated pursuant to a single coordination agreement to satisfy Water Code section 10727, subdivision (b).
6. Which local agencies are eligible to be GSAs?
Any local public agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within a groundwater basin can decide to become a GSA. A single local agency can decide to become a GSA, or a combination of local agencies can decide to form a GSA by using a joint powers agreement, a memorandum of agreement (MOA), or other legal agreement. The State Water Board has sent several letters to entities who requested clarification on GSA eligibility; these letters are available on the State Water Board’s website at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/gmp/eligibility.shtml. Wat. Code, §§ 10721, 10723, 10723.6, 10723.8, & 10726.8.
7. How can a water corporation regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission
or a mutual water company participate in a GSA?
Only local public agencies can become or form a GSA. However, a water corporation regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission or a mutual water company may participate in a GSA through a MOA or other legal agreement. The structure of an agreement that allows participation by private water entities is up to the GSA to determine, but that agreement must be in compliance with applicable laws governing agreements between public and private entities. SGMA does not confer any additional powers to a nongovernmental agency. Some mutual water companies have proposed to participate in a GSA by entering a joint powers agreement with other local agencies. Unlike water corporations, mutual water companies may enter into a joint powers agreement with one or more public agencies for the purpose of jointly exercising any power common to the contracting parties. (Gov. Code, § 6525.) However, only local public agencies are authorized by Water Code section 10723.6 to form a GSA using a joint powers agreement. Furthermore, an agency created by a joint powers agreement holds only those powers that are common to its signatory members. Because a mutual water company does not have the independent authority to become a GSA, a JPA that includes a mutual water company as a signatory member also lacks the authority to become a GSA. This does not foreclose a mutual water company from participating in a GSA that has been formed by a joint powers agreement. Although it cannot be a signatory member, a mutual water company may participate in the governance of a GSA if the members agree to grant it a seat on the governing board. An example of a joint powers authority that includes representatives of
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 31
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
- 7 - March 22, 2017 local mutual water companies on its governing board is the Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority, whose joint powers agreement is available here: http://www.scgah2o.org/documents/Sacramento%20Central%20JPA.pdf. Note that groundwater extractors not located within a valid GSA as of July 1, 2017, are required to report extractions and pay fees to the State Water Board.
Wat. Code, §§ 5202, 10723 & 10723.6; Gov. Code, § 6525.
8. What happens if the 90-day waiting period to become an exclusive GSA has not expired by June 30, 2017?
The State Water Board will not intervene in a basin in which the entire basin is within the management area of a GSA, even if the 90-day notice period for a GSA to become the exclusive GSA for that area has not expired by June 30, 2017. If another local agency files a notification of decision to become a GSA for all or a portion of the same area within a basin, such that neither decision to become a GSA will take effect after the 90-day notice period, the basin is subject to state intervention. Wat. Code, §§ 10723.8, subd. (c) & 10735.2(a).
7.1.b
Packet Pg. 32
Att
ach
men
t: S
WR
CB
_Let
ter
(10
420
: S
ust
ain
able
Gro
un
dw
ater
Man
agem
ent
Act
Up
dat
e)
(ID # 10422)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Grant Application and Basin Boundary Adjustment Ad-Hoc Committees
Requested Action(s) Discussion and possible action on forming two ad-hoc Committees to assist with development of the SGMA Grant application and Basin Boundary Adjustments. Background Information: Staff is requesting the Commission establish two ad-hoc Committees. The first committee will assist staff with development and review of a SGMA Grant proposal before it is brought before both the Commission and Board of Directors for further discussion and possible action. This Grant application will likely need to be developed between August and October 2017. The second committee will assist staff with developing recommendations on groundwater subbasin boundary changes and possible creation of management areas. Recommendations will be brought before both the Groundwater Commission and Board of Directors for further discussion and possible action. The next basin boundary modification period will reopen between January and March 2018. Attachment List: Sustainable Groundwater Planning Grant Program website Basin Boundary Modification website
8.1
Packet Pg. 33
(ID # 10421)
Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Commission
Meeting Date: June 28, 2017 Prepared By: Ryan Teubert
Preparer Phone: 530-385-1462 Preparer Email: [email protected]
Regular Item
Groundwater Commission Meeting Schedule Change
Requested Action(s) Discuss combining the July and August Groundwater Commission meetings into a single meeting on August 9th. Background Information: Staff is requesting that the July and August Groundwater Commission meetings be combined into a single meeting on August 9th. This will allow Davids Engineering to present a SGMA Risk Assessment, draft work plan, and budget they are currently developing. Information collected at this meeting will be incorporated into the final work plan. The final work plan, budget, and assessment will be useful in development of both the Groundwater Sustainability Plan and the SGMA grant application which will be submitted in October.
9.1
Packet Pg. 34