COUNTY OF GLENN BOARD REPORT. Submitted by Department of Agriculture

Transcription

1

2 COUNTY OF GLENN BOARD REPORT Submitted by Department of Agriculture EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: There are three subbasins in Glenn County required to be managed under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The subbasins are defined by the Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118. A process has been developed through regulations that allow for a request to modify those boundaries based on a scientific or jurisdictional basis. The basin boundary modification submission period is open from January 1 to March 31, RECOMMENDATION(S): 1. Hold discussion and provide direction to staff regarding the potential exploration of a basin boundary modification(s) in Glenn County. 2. Consider providing comments to the Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation regarding the proposed Butte Basin Boundary Modification by February 15, HISTORY AND BACKGROUND: The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 became effective January 1, The groundwater basins requiring management under SGMA are listed in DWR s Bulletin 118, and identified as high or medium priority basins. A process has been developed to request basin boundary modifications. The request period is open from January 1 to March 31, The request period will open periodically to coincide with the Bulletin 118 updates (in years ending with 0 or 5 ). The next submission period is scheduled for 2019 for the 2020 update. There may be an addition request period in 2018 depending on demand from local agencies and approval by DWR. There are three high or medium priority basins located within Glenn County as currently depicted in DWR s Bulletin 118 including the Colusa subbasin, the Corning subbasin, and the West Butte subbasin of the Sacramento Valley groundwater basin. Additionally there are six basins that are low/very low priority which are not required to be managed under SGMA at this time. FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT(S): None at this time, although, it is anticipated that implementation of SGMA will require additional staff time and funding over the next several years. ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION: There are two types of boundary modifications identified by DWR: scientific and jurisdictional. More detailed information regarding boundary modification types can be found in the attached Basin Boundary Modification Frequently Asked Questions. Several options exist for Glenn County including, but not limited to: 1. No change to the existing basin boundaries for this submission period. Page 1

3 COUNTY OF GLENN BOARD REPORT 2. Consolidate all three subbasins into a single subbasin that ends at the County boundary. 3. Consolidate the two subbasins on the western side of the Sacramento River into a single subbasin that terminates at the County boundary, leaving the West Butte Subbasin boundary as is. Coordination within and between subbasins is a mandatory component of SGMA, but the level of coordination differs between Intra-basin and Inter-basin. The proposed differences, while subject to change, are shown in the attached presentation provided by DWR, on pages 2 and 3. A change in subbasin boundaries also has the potential to change governance options and agencies directly involved. It has the potential to cause streamlined coordination for some agencies. In other cases, it may cause some agencies to have to participate in multiple subbasin discussions and the creation of water budget accounting in more than one subbasin. If an agency decides to explore a basin boundary modification, the agency must submit a notification to the DWR within 15 days of making that decision. The initial notification requires general information regarding the proposed modification to be submitted. A formal request requires formal outreach, a public hearing, as well as more detailed information supporting the modification including how the modification would promote sustainable groundwater management in the subbasin and technical information. See the attached checklist for more information. More information regarding the Basin Boundary Modification process, including the Frequently Asked Questions and the checklist provided as attachments, can be found at: Butte County has submitted a notification to DWR to explore basin boundary modifications to consolidate the four subbasins within Butte County and to adjust the boundary to coincide with the county border. The notification, including a map outlining the changes, is attached. Butte County has requested comments including resolutions of support, opposition, or modification be submitted to the Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation by February 15, Page 2

4 Basin Boundary Modification Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) General 1. Is it mandatory to participate in Basin Boundary Modifications requests? a. No, basin boundary modifications are voluntary. However, the emergency regulations create a process that provides a mechanism to modify basins or subbasins to improve coordination and promote statewide sustainable groundwater management. 2. How can I be notified when Basin Boundary Modifications related actions happen? a. Subscribe to DWR's listserv here: 3. Does DWR provide maps that may assist with Basin Boundary Modifications? a. Yes, DWR has developed a web-based application to inform local agencies and the Public about the existing Bulletin 118 groundwater basins and other relevant geologic and geographic data. BBAT - Basin Boundary Assessment Tool 4. What are the types of basin modifications? a. There are two primary types of modifications; scientific and jurisdictional. i. Scientific Modifications: A scientific modification to a basin or subbasin boundary involves the addition, deletion, or relocation of a boundary based on the geologic or hydrologic conditions that define a groundwater basin or subbasin.

5 1. External Boundary Modification: A scientific modification involving the modification of external boundaries due to geologic or hydrologic conditions. 2. Internal Boundary Modification: A basin or subbasin boundary may be modified, deleted, or added based on the presence or absence of a hydrogeologic barrier. ii. Jurisdictional Modifications: A jurisdictional modification involves the addition, deletion, or relocation of a basin or subbasin boundary that is not a scientific modification but promotes sustainable groundwater management. 1. Internal Boundary Revision refers to any boundary modification that would adjust the location of a boundary between subbasins, within a basin, or the shared boundary between adjacent basins. 2. County Basin Consolidation means the consolidation of all contiguous basins or subbasins within a county into a single basin or subbasin whose boundaries do not extend beyond those of the county. 3. Basin Consolidation refers to any boundary modification that would reduce the number of subbasins within a basin, or merge two or more adjacent basins, but would change only shared boundaries and would not change the external boundary of any basin or subbasin. 4. Basin Subdivision refers to any boundary modification that would increase the number of subbasins within a basin or subbasin. Definitions 1. How is a local agency defined?

6 a. A public agency is defined as any agency that has water supply, water management, or land use responsibilities within a groundwater basin. 2. What is considered the definable bottom of a basin or subbasin? a. Where the alluvial material in an aquifer or stacked series of aquifers contacts crystalline bedrock or at the base of freshwater. 3. What are the key components required to have in a qualified map? a. A qualified map is a geologic map of a scale no smaller than 1:250,000 that is published by the U.S. Geological Survey or the California Geological Survey, or is a map published as part of a geologic investigation conducted by a state or federal agency, or is a geologic map prepared and signed by a professional geologist that is acceptable to the department. 4. How is a basin defined in Bulletin 118? a. The term "basin" shall refer to an area specifically defined as a basin or "groundwater basin" in Bulletin 118, and shall refer generally to an aquifer or stacked series of aquifers with reasonably well-defined boundaries in a lateral direction, based on features that significantly impede groundwater flow, and a definable bottom, as further defined or characterized in Bulletin 118. In general the basins define areas where porous media flow is the dominant groundwater flow type, as opposed to fracture flow conditions. Required Dates and Timeline 1. When will the next basin boundary modification period occur? a. There will be subsequent basin boundary modification periods, which will remain open for a minimum 60 days, but the dates of these periods, have yet to be determined. It is anticipated that basin boundary modification submission periods will be based on demand and coordinated with 5-year updates to Bulletin 118

7 2. What if DWR determines a submitted basin boundary modification request is incomplete after the closing period? Do submitting agencies have a grace period to fix the deficiency? a. Due to the limited time constraints with this initial submission period no extensions will be granted. 3. When is the first submission period for basin boundary modifications request? a. January 1, 2016 through March 31, Public or DWR Notification 1. How is proof of notification, concerning a completed request, to other local agencies and public water systems submitted to DWR? a. The requesting agency should submit a copy of the notification and a list of names and addresses of local agencies and public water system that the notification was submitted. The notice should describe the procedural requirements to provide public input to a request, including the deadlines to submit public input, the form in which public input must be submitted, and the address to which public input must be submitted. submissions will be made electronically through the Basin Boundary Modification Request System. 2. How soon, following DWR updating submission status to Complete, should local agencies and interested parties be notified? a. Within five working days after the requesting agency receives notice that a request is complete. The Department will also be sending notifications on a bi-weekly basis of status changes within basins submitting modification requests. 3. What methods are acceptable when identifying and providing information about a proposed basin boundary modification request to affected agencies and affected systems within the basin or adjacent basins?

8 a. DWR does not require specific methods. However, during initial notification the requesting agency is encouraged to post relevant information to their Internet Website, include a brief a description and preliminary map of the proposed boundary modification, and when any public meetings will be held pertaining to the modification request. 4. Are published notices required for public meetings at which the proposed boundary modification will be discussed or considered? If so what should the notices include? a. Published notices for public meetings are not required per the basin boundary regulations. However, requesting agencies shall include information demonstrating consultation with affected agencies and affected systems and published notices for public meetings held in compliance with other State law requiring notification of meetings. 5. When should I notify DWR once my agency decides to explore boundary modifications? a. Within 15 days of decision to explore a basin boundary modification. Ideally the exploration of basin boundary modifications would occur prior to any agendized meeting requiring notice of hearing by a governing board or body. Initial Notification and Basin Boundary Modification Request Submittal Tool 1. Will DWR provide an instructional meeting to cover the basin boundary modification request submittal system? a. Yes, DWR will conduct a Basin Boundary Modification Instructional Webinar on December 17, The webinar was recorded and is posted on the Basin Boundary Website. 2. How accurate must the approximate delineation using the interactive map be during initial notification?

9 a. The lines should be drawn approximately but sufficient enough as to inform the general idea of what the modification includes. 3. How will I know if my Modification Request or Initial Notification was accepted by the Basin Boundary Modification Request System? a. notifications are sent immediately to the point of contact (request manager) confirming, establishing a user account, submission of initial notification, and status changes to the modification request. These notifications are sent to the request manager and appropriate DWR staff. 4. Who can I contact for assistance with the Basin Boundary Modification Request System? a. Please the administrator at Timothy.Godwin@water.ca.gov for assistance. Basin Boundary Modification Request Submittal 1. Who is eligible to submit a basin boundary modification request? a. Only local agencies are eligible to submit a basin boundary modification request for the potential modification of a Bulletin 118 defined groundwater basin or subbasin. 2. What if a request meets multiple types of modification? Must I submit the information required for both in one request or submit two requests for the same area? a. Combine all potential basin boundary modifications and submit as a singular request. DWR may consider and approve all or any of the proposals submitted. If multiple requests are being made for the same basin but discrete regions; the request manager can use the save as function in the modification request system to stream line submissions of this nature. 3. What is the procedure if a request has already been submitted in the basin of interest? Must the requests be combined or may separate requests be submitted?

10 a. Separate requests may be submitted. However, DWR encourages requesting agencies, to the greatest extent practicable, combine all basin boundary modification requests that affect the same basin or subbasin and to coordinate with other affected agencies and affected systems to present the information as a single request. DWR will require consolidation of requests in the case of coincident or conflicting requests. Required Supporting Information 1. Do DAC/DUC have to a sign a resolution of support of a basin boundary modification request? a. A DAC/DUC would be covered by the city or county in which they are located; so a letter of support would not be required directly from a DAC/DUC but rather the agency representing them. 2. Are letters of support for a basin boundary modification required by all affected agencies? a. No, letters of support are not required by all affected agencies. However, if you are submitting a request for a basin subdivision it is required to submit evidence of threefourths support from the local agencies and public water systems within the affected basin. 3. What information is required to be included in the resolution adopted by the requesting agency? a. No specific requirements are defined in the regulations; however, the resolution should comply with local standards and requirements of the local agency forming the request. 4. If the request involves basin subdivision and the requesting agency does not receive threefourths support is the basin boundary modification request automatically denied? a. Yes, three-fourths support is a requirement to subdivide an existing basin by the local agencies or public water systems within the affected basin. 5. What coordinate system should GIS files use?

11 a. The Basin Boundary Modification Request System provides a downloadable copy of the basins identified in the request. The request requires use of these files as they have standardized the file parameters to streamline incorporation. The line work provided also serves to inform the requesting agency of the administrative adjustments made by the department. 6. Does a technical study need to be completed by a specific agency or may private studies be submitted? a. A technical study must be a geologic or hydrologic report prepared and published by a state or federal agency, or a study published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, or a report prepared and signed by a professional geologist or by a professional engineer. The study does not need to be conducted specifically for the request. 7. How many years of historical groundwater level data are required to show historical groundwater level trends? a. The requesting agency should provide the data necessary to demonstrate that the principle aquifers in the basin have not experienced long-term declines in groundwater levels. 8. Is CEQA applicable to requesting agencies? If so, what are the requirements of the CEQA for requesting agencies? a. The requesting agency shall satisfy requirements of CEQA, including, if necessary, information to enable DWR to satisfy the requirements of a responsible agency. The requesting agency must determine if the modification request is defined as a project and subject to CEQA. 9. What kind of information will the requesting agency be required to provide as part of the basin boundary modification request?

12 a. The requesting agency will have to provide all supporting information required for the type of basin boundary modification that is being requested. This supporting information is outline in Article 5 of the basin boundary regulations. The Basin Boundary Modification Request System also provides guides to identify the required information based upon the type selected. A checklist is provided on the Basin Boundary website to also guide local agencies on the required information. Evaluation Criteria and Cause for Denial 1. What would be the basis for denial of a basin boundary modification? a. Basis for denial is outlined in "Article 6. Methodology and Criteria for Evaluation, Section 345.2" in the basin boundary regulations. However, each of these items will be considered as they affect the whole of the request. Substantial compliance with the regulation will be determined based upon the scope of each modification request. 2. What kind of criteria will be used in the evaluation of the basin boundary modification requests? a. Criteria that will be used in the evaluation of a basin boundary modification request are listed in "Article 6. Methodology and Criteria for Evaluation, Section 345.4" in the basin boundary regulations. Approved Basin Boundary Modification Requests 1. Can a basin boundary modification request be withdrawn? a. A requesting agency may withdraw a boundary modification request at any time before the request is finalized by providing written notice to DWR. 2. May the department reverse an approved basin boundary modification at a later time?

13 a. Yes, if after revising the basin boundaries of a basin or subbasin, or establishing a new subbasin, DWR determines, based on substantial evidence, that assumptions regarding the sustainable management of the new basin or subbasin were incorrect, and that as a result the boundary modification should not have been adopted, DWR may, after consultation with the requesting agency, either restore the boundaries that existed before the boundary modification or revise the boundaries. 3. If a basin boundary modification is accepted by DWR, when will it be published and take effect? a. A basin boundary modification once accepted by DWR will officially take effect when the Bulletin Interim Update is published. Public Input 1. Can public input for a basin boundary modification request still be submitted past the 90 day window? a. Public input must be submitted to DWR within 30 days after DWR posts a notice that the request in complete. This period may extend past the March 31, day submittal period deadline. 2. Will the submitting agency be able to rebut any opposition to the proposed boundary modification? a. Yes, any evidence the requesting agency believes will rebut any opposition to the proposed boundary modification or otherwise assist the Department in its evaluation should be included in the Request for Boundary Modification. The Basin Boundary Modification Request System will provide space for comments and rebuttals.

14 DWR Adjustments 1. Can DWR make adjustments to basin boundaries without being requested to do so? a. DWR does have the authority in Water Code to investigate the state's basins and identify/modify basin boundaries. However, consistent with the intent of SGMA, local agencies can request modification to the basin definitions based upon local knowledge of the resource. 2. What did DWR's Administrative Adjustments to Bulletin 118 Basin Boundaries entail? a. Administrative adjustments to current bulletin 118 boundaries are being performed by the department where 1) The groundwater basin boundary is unambiguously described in Bulletin 118 (2003) written description, 2) delineation of the boundary line is possible on the Geologic Atlas of California Series (250k scale, pre 1981) map series or CGS Regional Geologic Maps Series (250k scale, post 1981) map series, and 3) The administrative edit does not require revision of the Bulletin 118 written description. These changes were made to improve the current line work.

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24 CA Code of Regulations Article 1 - Introductory Provisions Draft Basin Boundary Regulations Required Components 1 Type of Modification Action 340. Authority and Purpose These regulations specify the information a local agency is required to provide when requesting that the Department revise the boundaries of a basin or subbasin, including the establishment of new subbasins, and the methodology and criteria used by the Department to evaluate a modification to existing basin or subbasin boundaries. Article 4 - Procedures for Modification Request and Public Input 343. Introduction to Procedures A request for boundary modification may be initiated by a local agency whose jurisdiction lies within or borders the existing or proposed basin or subbasin for which boundary modification is sought Initial Notification (a) Status of Request Requesting agencies shall, to the greatest extent practicable, combine all boundary modification requests that affect the same basin or subbasin and coordinate with other affected agencies and affected systems, as necessary, to present the information as a single request. The Department may require the combination of boundary modification requests to avoid duplicative or conflicting requests, and may consider and adopt all or any proposals contained in a combined boundary modification request. Within 15 days of local agency's decision to explore boundary modification, the relevant local agency shall notify the Department by written notice of its interest in exploring a boundary modification and make general information about its process publicly available by posting relevant information to the local agency's Internet Web site or by other suitable means. The initial notification shall include a brief description and preliminary map of the proposed boundary modification. Procedural (d) The requesting agency shall, upon receiving notice that the request is complete, within five (5) working days notify all interested local agencies and public water systems in the affected basins and any other person or entity who has made a written request for notification of the proposed modification to the requesting agency. The notice from the requesting agency shall describe the procedural requirements to provide public input to a request pursuant to Section , including the deadlines to submit public input, the form in which public input must be submitted, and the address to which public input must be submitted. Procedural Public Input (a) Any person may provide information to support or oppose a proposed boundary modification request as follows: Public input must be submitted by written notice to the Department within 30 days after the Department (a)(1) posts a notice that the request is complete pursuant to Section (C), and provide the requesting agency a duplicate copy of that information the same day (a)(2) Public input must include the name, address, and electronic mail address of the person or entity providing that input (a)(3) Public input must include a clear statement of the basis for the support of or opposition to the proposed boundary modification (a)(4) The level of detail provided by public input need not be as comprehensive as that contained in the request, but must rely on similar scientific and technical information as the particular boundary modification request to which it is addressed, and will be evaluated by the Department using the same criteria. Article 5 - Supporting Information 344. Introduction to Supporting Information...describes the type of information provided by a requesting agency to support a boundary modification request Requesting Agency Information Each request for boundary modification shall include the following information: (a) The name and mailing address of the requesting agency (b) A copy of the statutory or other legal authority under which the requesting agency was created with specific citations to the provisions setting forth the duties and responsibilities of the agency (c) A copy of the resolution adopted by the requesting agency formally initiating the boundary modification request (d) The name and contact information, including phone number, mailing address and address, of the request manager Notice and Consultation Each request for boundary modification shall include information demonstrating that the requesting agency consulted with affected agencies and affected systems including but not limited to, the following: (a) A list of all local agencies and public water systems in the affected basins with the subset of affected agencies and affected systems specifically identified (b) An explanation of the methods used to identify affected agencies and affected systems (c) Information regarding the nature of consultation, including copies of correspondence with affected agencies and affected systems and any other persons or entities consulted, as appropriate. A summary of all public meetings at which the proposed boundary modification was discussed or considered (d) by the requesting agency, including copies of meeting agendas or minutes, if prepared, and any notices published. A copy of all comments regarding the proposed boundary modification received by the requesting agency and (e) a summary of any responses made by the requesting agency Description of Proposed Boundary Modification (a) Each request for boundary modification shall include a concise description of the proposed modification, including an overview of the request and a description or explanation of the following: (a)(1) The category of boundary modification proposed. Updated November 19, 2105 Page 1 of 3

25 CA Code of Regulations Article 1 - Introductory Provisions Draft Basin Boundary Regulations Required Components 1 Type of Modification Action (a)(2) The identification of all affected basins or subbasins, including Bulletin 118 basin or subbasin names and numbers (a)(3) A proposed name for each new subbasin or consolidated basin, if applicable (b) Each request for a jurisdictional boundary modification pursuant to Section shall also include the following: Jurisdictional (b)(1) An explanation of how the proposed boundary modification would promote sustainable groundwater management in the proposed basin or subbasin. Jurisdictional (b)(2) An explanation of how the proposed boundary modification would affect the ability of adjacent basins or subbasins to sustainably manage groundwater in those basins or subbasins. Jurisdictional (b)(3) A historical summary of groundwater management in the proposed basin or subbasin. Jurisdictional (b)(4) An explanation of how the proposed boundary modification may affect state programs, including, but not limited to the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (Water Code Section et seq.), Groundwater Management Plans developed pursuant to AB 3030 (Water Code Section et seq.), Groundwater Sustainability Plans or alternatives developed pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (Water Code Section et seq.), any applicable state or regional board plans, and other water management and land use programs. Jurisdictional (c) Any other information deemed appropriate by the requesting agency, including but not limited to, an explanation of opportunities that would arise from or obstacles that would be overcome by the boundary modification request Local Agency Input (a) Each request for boundary modification shall include the following: (a)(1) (a)(2) (a)(3) (b) (b)(1) (b)(2) (c) Evidence that the requesting agency provided information to affected agencies and affected systems regarding the proposed boundary modification as required by Section and provided those affected agencies and affected systems an opportunity to comment in support or opposition. Copies of all comments and documents from affected agencies and affected systems in support of or opposition to the proposed modification. Any evidence the requesting agency believes will rebut any opposition to the proposed boundary modification or otherwise assist the Department in its evaluation. Any affected agency or affected system that elects to support or oppose the proposed boundary modification shall provide the requesting agency with one of the following: A copy of a resolution formally adopted by the decision-making body of the affected agency or affected system. A letter signed by an executive officer or other official with appropriate delegated authority who represents the affected agency or affected system. The level of detail provided by an affected agency or affected system in support or opposition to a proposed boundary modification need not be as comprehensive as that contained in the request, but the support or opposition must rely on similar scientific and technical information as the particular boundary modification request to which it is addressed, and will be evaluated by the Department using the same criteria. Affected Agencies / System Affected Agencies / System Affected Agencies / System Affected Agencies / System Procedural (d) General Information A request that involves basin subdivision pursuant to Section 342.4(c) shall provide information demonstrating that the proposed boundary modification is supported by at least three-fourths of the local agencies and public water systems in the affected basins. Each request for boundary modification shall include the following general information: Basin Subdivison (a) A description of the lateral boundaries and definable bottom of the proposed basin or subbasin that is in clear and definite terms, based on authoritative sources, and of sufficient detail to allow a map of the proposed lateral basin or subbasin boundaries to be plotted from that description (b) A graphical map of adequate scale and GIS files showing the proposed basin or subbasin boundary in relation to the existing Bulletin 118 basin or subbasin boundary and the affected agencies and affected systems that are within or bordering the existing and proposed basin or subbasin Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model (a) Each request for boundary modification shall include a clearly defined hydrogeologic conceptual model demonstrating the following for the proposed basin or subbasin: (a)(1) Principal aquifers (a)(2) Lateral boundaries, including: (a)(2) Geologic features that significantly impede or impact groundwater flow (a)(2) Aquifer characteristics that significantly impede or impact groundwater flow. Significant geologic and hydrologic features and conditions of the principal aquifers, as appropriate, including (a)(2) information regarding the confined or unconfined nature of the aquifers, facies changes, truncation of units, the presence of faults or folds that impede groundwater flow, or other groundwater flow restricting features (a)(2) Key surface water bodies, groundwater divides and significant recharge sources (a)(3) Recharge and discharge areas within or adjacent to the basin or subbasin (a)(4) Definable bottom of the basin or subbasin (b) The Department may waive the requirement of this section for an internal boundary modification pursuant to Section 342.4(a) if the requesting agency is able to demonstrate that the proposed boundary modification is unlikely to affect sustainable groundwater management Technical Studies for Scientific Modifications (a) Each request for a scientific modification pursuant to Section shall include information that demonstrates the extent of the aquifers, including the following: Internal Scientific - Procedural Updated November 19, 2105 Page 2 of 3

26 CA Code of Draft Basin Boundary Regulations Required Components 1 Type of Modification Action Regulations Article 1 - Introductory Provisions (a)(1) A qualified map that depicts the lateral boundaries of the aquifers that define the basin or subbasin. Scientific (a)(2) A technical study that provides subsurface data demonstrating the vertical thickness and relevant physical properties of the aquifers, such as hydrogeologic cross section(s), if available. Scientific (b) (b)(1) (b)(2) In addition to the information required in Section (a), each request for scientific modification involving a hydrogeologic barrier pursuant to Section 342.2(b) shall demonstrate the presence or absence of impediments to subsurface groundwater flow, such as impermeable material, a fault, or groundwater divide, based on the following information: A qualified map depicting geologic structures or features that could significantly impact or impede groundwater flow. A technical study that provides geologic and hydrologic evidence of groundwater conditions including, as appropriate: Historical and current potentiometric surface maps, groundwater levels, groundwater recharge and discharge (b)(2) areas of the aquifers within the vicinity of proposed boundary modification. Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier (b)(2)Aquifer testing results demonstrating boundary condition response. Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier Water quality information of the aquifers including but not limited to general water quality parameters and (b)(2) isotopic analysis. Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier (b)(2)Geophysical investigations and supporting data. Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier (b)(2)Other information that the requesting agency considers relevant to the boundary modification request. Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier (c) Other technical information required by the Department that is necessary to evaluate a boundary modification request made pursuant to Section A request for a scientific modification to an external boundary pursuant to Section 342.2(a) may utilize any of (d) the information in Section (b) if the requesting agency believes it may assist the Department in its evaluation Technical Studies for Jurisdictional Modifications (a) Each request for a boundary modification that involves a jurisdictional modification pursuant to Section shall include the following: (a)(1) A water management plan that covers all or a portion of the proposed basin or subbasin and contributes to meeting the requirements of Water Code Sections (a) or 10727, including any of the following: Scientific - Hydrologic Barrier Scientific - External Jurisdictional - Jurisdictional - An adopted groundwater management plan, a basin wide management plan, or other integrated regional (a)(1) water management program or plan that meets the requirements of Water Code Section (a). Jurisdictional (a)(1) Management pursuant to an adjudication action. Jurisdictional (a)(1) One or more technical studies that cover the relevant portion of a basin or subbasin. Jurisdictional - A valid Groundwater Sustainability Plan adopted pursuant to the Act or an alternative approved by the (a)(1) Department in accordance with Water Code Jurisdictional (a)(2) A Statement of the existing and planned coordination of sustainable groundwater management activities and responsibilities where required by the Act. Jurisdictional (b) (b)(1) (b)(2) (b)(3) Each request for a boundary modification that involves a basin subdivision pursuant to Section 342.4(c) shall provide, where applicable, a description and supporting documentation of historical and current conditions and coordination within the existing and proposed basin or subbasin related to the following: Groundwater level monitoring programs, historical and current groundwater level trends, and areas of significant groundwater level declines. Groundwater quality issues that may impact the supply and beneficial uses of groundwater, including a map of known impacted sites and areas, mitigation measures planned or in place, and a description of impact to water budget. Inelastic land surface subsidence including a map of known land subsidence areas, historical trends within known land subsidence areas, and a description of impacts to the water budget. Jurisdictional - Subdivision Jurisdictional - Subdivision Jurisdictional - Subdivision Jurisdictional - Subdivision (b)(4) Groundwater-surface water interactions, which may be demonstrated by a map identifying significant surface water bodies, and a groundwater elevation contour map or detailed written description of the direction of groundwater movement relative to the water bodies, the location and nature of seeps and springs, and known water quality issues within the basin or subbasin and in hydraulically connected adjacent basins or subbasins. Jurisdictional - Subdivision (b)(5) A map identifying the recharge areas in the proposed and existing basin. Jurisdictional - Subdivision CEQA Compliance The requesting agency shall satisfy requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections et seq.), including, if necessary, information to enable the Department to satisfy the requirements of a responsible agency. 1 Basin Boundary Regulation Required Component column content may be paraphrased and the Basin Boundary Regulations will always be used as the official legal requirements Updated November 19, 2105 Page 3 of 3

27

28

29 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: Initial Notification of a Proposed Basin Boundary Modification

30 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Proposed Boundary Modification The Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation has submitted to the Department of Water Resources (DWR) an initial notification to explore a basin boundary modification. The proposed basin boundary modification is a jurisdictional modification involving a consolidation of the Vina ( ), West Butte ( ), East Butte ( ) and North Yuba ( ) subbasins that lie within Butte County and a boundary adjustment along the Butte County line except for the portion of the Yuba County Water Authority that extends into Butte County. The modification would create a new subbasin called the Butte subbasin or Butte Basin (Figure 1). The Butte subbasin includes the water bearing units of the Tuscan, Laguna, Riverbank and Modesto formations. The Groundwater Sustainability Agencies in the Butte Basin include Butte County, the City of Chico, the City of Biggs, the City of Gridley, the City of Oroville, Western Canal Water District, Richvale Irrigation District, Biggs West Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, Thermalito Water and Sewer District and Butte College. Background The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) went into effect on January 1, There are 127 Bulletin 118 subbasins designated by the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) program as high or medium priority. In these subbasins, Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) must be formed and take responsibility to develop and implement a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). A GSA can be formed by a single local public agency, or combination of agencies. If a GSA is not formed by June 30, 2017, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) will intervene, impose fees and assume management of the basin. There are four subbasins (Vina, West Butte, East Butte and North Yuba) subject to SGMA that are within the boundaries of Butte County. Butte County and most of the other local public agencies in these subbasins have elected to be a GSA. While many decisions lie ahead on governance and GSP development, one of the near-term decisions facing local agencies is whether to request a modification to basin boundaries. In anticipation of the basin boundary modification review, on March 25, 2015, the Butte County Board of Supervisors directed the Department of Water and Resource Conservation (Department) to evaluate whether basin boundaries should be adjusted in a manner that will improve the likelihood of achieving sustainable groundwater management (Resolution ). The Department is proposing a modification to the four subbasins by combining them into a single subbasin that would be bounded within Butte County. The Department is providing initial notice of the proposed basin boundary modification pursuant to Section of DWR s Groundwater Basin Boundaries Regulations (Code of California Regulations Title 23, Division 2, Chapter 1.5, Subchapter 1). P a g e 1

31 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Near-term decision: Modify Basin Boundaries The Bulletin 118 subbasins were a reasonable starting point for managing groundwater. However, it is well-recognized that many of the basin boundaries do not reflect hydrogeology or would not foster sustainable groundwater management. As a remedy, SGMA provided local agencies with the ability to request that DWR modify basin boundaries according to regulations [Water Code ]. DWR adopted regulations in November 2015 that prescribe the types of basin boundary modifications, the information required, local agency consultation and the criteria for approval. Local agencies have a variety of options for basin boundary modifications. However, modification requests must be supported by information, justification and meet the criteria for approval. The deadline to submit requests to DWR is March 31, DWR will evaluate requests to determine whether it will promote sustainable groundwater management. DWR may deny a request if it would limit: sustainable groundwater management in the proposed or other basins groundwater storage or recharge in the proposed or adjoining subbasins the coordination of management activities and the sharing of data and information across subbasin boundaries. The formal request to modify a basin boundary must include specific information, data and a demonstration of consultation with local agencies and affected water systems [Groundwater Basin Boundaries Regulations 344]. Additionally, SGMA requires that the GSA consider the interests of all beneficial uses and users of groundwater [Water Code ]. To facilitate coordination and consultation with local agencies and affected systems, the Groundwater Basin Boundaries Regulations ( 343.9) has a process for local agencies to explore possible basin boundary modifications. This paper describes the proposed basin boundary modification and the opportunity to provide input. Providing Input The purpose of the initial notification of a basin boundary modification is to solicit discussion and the opportunity to provide input. The decision of Butte County to formally request a basin boundary modification will be made by the Butte County Board of Supervisors. As part of the Board of Supervisors consideration will be a potential recommendation from the Butte County Water Commission. To meet the March 31, 2016 deadline, a decision by the Board of Supervisors will have to be made by their March 22, 2016 meeting. P a g e 2

32 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 The input provided by other local agencies, affected systems and interested parties will be a valuable part of the Water Commission and Board of Supervisors consideration. To facilitate local agency consultation and public participation, the Department has: Established a webpage specifically for the basin boundary modification process that can be accessed from the Department s main webpage at: Notified Local Agencies and Affected Systems. The notification is in addition to discussions and meetings held with local agencies and affected systems. Informed interested parties through the January 2016 edition of the WaterSolutions newsletter. Conducted an assessment of local agencies and various stakeholder groups. The assessment report will provide valuable input a range of SGMA implementation topics including basin boundary modification options. Presented the proposed basin boundary modification to the Water Commission at their January 6, 2016 meeting. It is anticipated that the Water Commission will discuss the proposed basin boundary modification options at their February and March meetings. The Department requests that comments including resolutions of support, opposition or modification be submitted by February 15, 2016 by either (BCWater@buttecounty.net) or by mail to Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation, 308 Nelson Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965, Attn: Basin Boundaries. Regulatory Effect of Basin Modification Basin boundary modifications can be beneficial to SGMA implementation. However, basin boundary modifications will not change the foundational requirements of SGMA or the necessity to coordinate with adjoining subbasins. Whether basins or subbasins are modified, GSAs will have complex decisions regarding how to best develop, coordinate and implement one or more GSPs for their subbasin or portion of a subbasin. What s required in a subbasin? Establish one or more GSAs. Local agencies have options on how they may structure their GSA within their subbasin. A local public agency or combination of agencies may establish a GSA. For example, if a subbasin includes one or more public agencies (water districts, city and county), they could form a GSA using a joint powers agreement or memorandum of agreement and submit one GSP for all or a portion of a subbasin. Alternatively, each local public agency could designate itself as a GSA and take responsibility for their portion of the subbasin. P a g e 3

33 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Develop one or more GSPs. The primary obligation of GSAs is to develop, implement and enforce the GSP. Subbasins could be covered by a single GSP submitted by one GSA, a single GSP submitted by multiple GSAs or multiple GSPs submitted by multiple GSAs. A subbasin is not in compliance until the entire subbasin is covered by one or more GSPs. A subbasin covered by more than one GSP must have a Coordinated Agreement. Under a Coordinated Agreement, the GSAs must coordinate and utilize the same data and methodologies (e.g., groundwater elevation data, groundwater extraction data, surface water supply, total water use, change in groundwater storage, water budget, sustainable yield) for their GSP. Although Coordination Agreements are not required for adjoining subbasins, the regulations governing GSPs will likely have requirements for coordination between adjoining subbasins. Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) Requirements GSPs for the subbasins in Butte County must be submitted to DWR by January 31, Some of the elements of GSPs include a water budget, measurable objectives and interim milestones (every 5 years) that will lead to sustainability in 20 years of adoption and progress reports to DWR and the State Water Board every five years. GSPs must address undesirable results that include chronic lowering of groundwater levels, significant and unreasonable reduction in groundwater storage, significant and unreasonable degradation of water quality, significant and unreasonable land subsidence that significantly interferes with surface land uses and surface water depletions that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water. An annual report must be submitted to DWR by April 1 st. The specific requirements of GSPs will be subject to regulations DWR is currently developing that will become effective in June, Justification The proposed basin boundary modification is a jurisdictional modification involving a consolidation of the portions of the Vina ( ), West Butte ( ), East Butte ( ) and North Yuba ( ) subbasins that lie within Butte County and a boundary adjustment along the Butte County line except for the portion of the Yuba County Water Authority that extends into Butte County which would be excluded. The modification would create a new subbasin called the Butte subbasin or Butte Basin. The Butte subbasin includes the water bearing units of the Tuscan, Laguna, Riverbank and Modesto formations. Modifying basin boundaries to create the Butte subbasin would promote sustainable groundwater management. The Butte subbasin would provide greater consistency with existing water resource programs (e.g., Groundwater Management Plans, water budgeting, monitoring, CASGEM and public outreach) among the local agencies that have a history of water resource management. A summary of the advantages to the basin modification include: P a g e 4

34 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Improving Efficiency Maintaining the existing subbasins presents governance and programmatic complexities for local agencies compared to the proposed modification. Butte County and most of the other eligible local public agencies have elected to be GSAs. In each subbasin, the respective GSAs would have to decide on a governance strategy to implement at least one GSP. There would have to be at least 4 GSP and as many as 27. four subbasins extend into adjoining counties, not only adding to the number of GSAs, but also requiring new relationships (Figure 2). The result may lead to four unique governance structures that require administration, duplication of data, and redundant public participation processes. The basin modification proposal could result in having one GSP for the Butte Basin. Although maintaining the existing subbasins could work, it would be a departure from nearly a two decade approach on how the local agencies in Butte County have collaborated on water resource management. A preferred approach would be to have a subbasin that builds upon the existing local agency technical and programmatic relationships in Butte County. This approach would reduce the number of distinct GSA governance structures and commensurate GSP planning processes. Some of the specific challenges addressed by the basin boundary modification include: Vina -The Vina subbasin extends into Tehama County. Tehama County has eleven subbasins of which eight are subject to SGMA. Six of the eight SGMA subbasins lie exclusively in Tehama County. The Vina subbasin represents the only subbasin in Tehama County that extensively extends into another county. A very small portion of the Colusa subbasin extends into Tehama County. City of Chico -The City of Chico lies in both the Vina and West Butte subbasins. Without any modification, the City of Chico would have to participate in two different GSP processes. Additionally, the corresponding GSPs could face technical challenges in differentiating the water budget for the City of Chico between the two subbasins. Combining the Vina and West Butte subbasins would put the City of Chico in a single subbasin. Western Canal Water District - The Western Canal Water District (WCWD) overlies the West Butte and East Butte subbasins. WCWD extends into Glenn County. Without any modification to basin boundaries, WCWD would have to be involved in two GSP processes. Their water budget would have to be accounted for separately on a subbasin basis. The proposed basin boundary modification would not resolve having WCWD extend into the basin adjoining the Butte subbasin. A solution could involve retaining the WCWD boundary in the Butte subbasin. This would bring WCWD into one GSP planning unit. P a g e 5

35 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 West Butte - The West Butte subbasin extends into Glenn and Colusa Counties and is bounded in the west by the Sacramento River. The portion of the West Butte subbasin in Glenn County includes part of the WCWD and unincorporated land. The portion of the West Butte subbasin in Colusa County includes RD 1004 and unincorporated land. The modification along the county line would allow the local agencies in Butte, Glenn and Colusa counties to participate on their respective GSPs. Butte Creek represents the boundary between the West Butte and East Butte subbasins. However, these two subbasins are hydrogeologically connected. Developing a GSP for each subbasin would be highly inefficient. East Butte - The East Butte subbasin extends into Sutter County. It includes unincorporated portions of Sutter County. A small portion of the Biggs West Gridley Water District (BWG) extends into Sutter County. About one third of the Butte Water District extends into Sutter County. Without any changes, the East Butte subbasin would include Sutter County, Sutter Extension Water District and the City of Live Oak. Water management, programs and county ordinances differ between Butte and Sutter Counties. Modifying the basin boundary along the county line will avoid unnecessary conflict and challenges in forming a governance structure. North Yuba - The North Yuba subbasin extends into Yuba County. Honcut Creek is the boundary between Butte and Yuba Counties. The Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA), the Cordua Water Agency and the City of Marysville are the GSAs in the Yuba County portion of the North Yuba subbasin. A small portion of three members of the YCWA extend into Butte County. Water management for these districts is led by YCWA, however, the parcels in Butte County fall under Butte County land use and well permitting jurisdiction. The proposed basin modification would follow the county line bisecting the North Yuba subbasin except where portions of the YCWA member agencies extend into Butte County. In this area, the new basin boundary would follow the YCWA member agencies jurisdictional boundary excluding them from the newly created Butte subbasin. Groundwater Management Plans For over a decade, Butte County, the water districts and the urban water suppliers have administered their respective Groundwater Management Plans, Agricultural Water Management Plans and/or Urban Water Management Plans. The agencies have collaborated on the development and implementation of their respective plans. These plans cover the jurisdictional boundaries of the agencies in a manner consistent with the proposed basin modification. As described in the following section, the basin modification would be consistent with the Basin Management Objective program administered by Butte County on behalf of the entire county. The Basin Management Objective program is not structured by the existing subbasins but rather by the Butte Basin. P a g e 6

36 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Butte Basin Groundwater Model/Water Budgets - The basin modification would allow for an efficient utilization of the Butte Basin Groundwater Model (BBGM) for the continued development of water budgets and analysis of basin conditions. In the early 1990s, the Butte Basin Water Users Association (BBWUA) developed the BBGM. The BBGM domain includes the full extent of the four subbasins: Vina, East Butte, West Butte and North Yuba. The BBGM can be a useful planning tool for developing GSPs within these four subbasins. Recent updates to the BBGM include extending the model time period to 2014 to produce water budgets for Butte County. In addition, the updated model uses recent versions of the modeling code, IWFM-2015 and IDC v.4.0. The BBGM provides a technical framework to analyze the four subbasin area as a whole or any defined combination or subset(s) of them. Currently, the BBGM has 34 specified subregions for which water budgets and model outputs can be analyzed. These largely correspond to the County s Basin Management Objectives sub-inventory units. They generally correspond to water district boundaries or areas having similar land or water management characteristics. From the standpoint of governance, this supports analysis and potential reporting requirements based on existing jurisdictional boundaries. Since the model domain encompasses the entire four subbasin area, with minimal effort, the model can be used to analyze any revised subset of the model domain. It can also be used to understand groundwater dynamics between defined sub-regions. This has value for understanding and quantifying groundwater flows between defined subbasins. In addition, data from Urban Water Management Plans are incorporated into the BBGM and distinct sub-regions of the model area corresponding to municipality jurisdictions could be defined. In summary, the BBGM organizes data and provides a framework for the integrated groundwater-surface water system for the four subbasin area. For analysis and reporting purposes, the model domain could be carved up in any number of ways to produce water budgets for newly defined or existing subbasins. Providing Input The Department requests that comments including resolutions of support, opposition or modification be submitted by February 15, 2016 by either (BCWater@buttecounty.net) or by mail to Butte County Department of Water and Resource Conservation, 308 Nelson Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965, Attn: Basin Boundaries. P a g e 7

37 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Figure 1: Butte Basin Butte Basin GSAs: Butte County, the City of Chico, the City of Biggs, the City of Gridley, the City of Oroville, Western Canal Water District, Richvale Irrigation District, Biggs West Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, Thermalito Water and Sewer District and Butte College Potential Number of GSPs: 1-11 P a g e 8

38 Butte Basin Boundary Modification December 2015 Figure 2: Existing Subbasins and GSAs P a g e 9