DOCSLIB.ORG

Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Santa Clara Subbasin This Page Is Intentionally Left Blank REVISED FINAL SALT and NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN: SANTA CLARA SUBBASIN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Santa Clara Subbasin This Page Is Intentionally Left Blank REVISED FINAL SALT and NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN: SANTA CLARA SUBBASIN NOVEMBER 2014 Salt and Nutrient Management Plan Santa Clara Subbasin This page is intentionally left blank REVISED FINAL SALT AND NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PLAN: SANTA CLARA SUBBASIN Originally posted online in November, 2014; Revised in June 2016 to add San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board comments and Santa Clara Valley Water District responses ACKNOWLEDGMENTS PREPARED BY: Thomas Mohr, P.G., H.G. Senior Hydrogeologist UNDER THE DIRECTION OF: James Fielder Chief Operating Officer, Water Utility Enterprise Garth Hall Deputy Operating Officer Water Supply Division Behzad Ahmadi Unit Manager,Groundwater (retired) CONTRIBUTORS: Chanie Abuye, Civil Engineer Randy Behrens, Geologist Ellen Fostersmith, Geologist (retired) Ardy Ghoreishi, Engineering Technician Robert Siegfried, Soil Scientist (retired) Miguel Silva, Associate Civil Engineer Xiaoyong Zhan, Civil Engineer GRAPHICS DESIGN: Benjamin Apollo BOARD OF DIRECTORS: John L. Varela, District 1 Barbara Keegan, District 2 (Chair) Richard Santos, District 3 Linda J. LeZotte, District 4 Nai Hsueh, District 5 Tony Estremera, District 6 Gary Kremen, District 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................... x EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .............................................................. 5 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5 1.2 State Water Resources Control Board 2009 Recycled Water Policy ......................... 5 1.3 Stakeholder Participation .......................................................................................... 7 1.4 Related Plans and Policies ....................................................................................... 8 1.4.1 Anti-Degradation Policy....................................................................................... 8 1.4.2 Regional Water Quality Control Plan ................................................................... 8 1.4.2.1 Beneficial Uses ............................................................................................. 8 1.4.2.2 Water Quality Objectives ............................................................................... 8 1.4.3 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Objectives ................................... 9 1.4.4 District Board Ends Policies ...............................................................................10 1.4.5 Groundwater Management Plan Basin Management Objectives ........................10 1.5 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................11 1.5.1 Waste Discharge Permitting Program ................................................................11 1.5.2 Total Maximum Daily Loads ...............................................................................13 1.5.3 Local Regulations ..............................................................................................13 1.5.4 Goals and Objectives for Recycled Water and Stormwater ................................14 CHAPTER 2: GROUNDWATER SUBBASIN CHARACTERIZATION ..................................... 15 2.1 Groundwater Basin ..................................................................................................16 2.1.1 Santa Clara Plain Hydrogeology ........................................................................16 2.1.2 Santa Clara Plain Pumping and Recharge .........................................................17 2.1.3 Santa Clara Plain Groundwater Elevation Trends ..............................................24 2.1.4 Santa Clara Plain Storage Capacity ...................................................................24 2.1.5 Santa Clara Plain Water Budget ........................................................................24 2.1.6 Santa Clara Plain Groundwater Quality ..............................................................25 2.2 Coyote Valley Hydrogeology ....................................................................................27 2.2.1 Coyote Valley Pumping ......................................................................................28 2.2.2 Coyote Valley Groundwater Pumping Trends ....................................................28 2.2.3 Coyote Valley Storage Capacity .........................................................................29 2.2.4 Coyote Valley Water Budget ..............................................................................29 Santa Clara Subbasin Salt and Nutrient Management Plan i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2.2.5 Coyote Valley Groundwater Elevation Trends ....................................................30 2.2.6 Coyote Valley Groundwater Quality ...................................................................31 2.3 Sources of Supply....................................................................................................31 2.4 Santa Clara Groundwater Subbasin Water Budget ..................................................31 2.5 Groundwater Quality – Salts and Nutrients ..............................................................33 2.5.1 Total Dissolved Solids ........................................................................................33 2.5.2 Nitrate ................................................................................................................34 2.5.3 Trends in TDS and Nitrate .................................................................................35 2.5.4 TDS Trends in Monitoring Wells, for 1998–2012 ................................................36 2.5.5 Nitrate Trends in Monitoring Wells, for 1998–2012 .............................................36 CHAPTER 3: ESTIMATING CURRENT AND FUTURE SALT AND NUTRIENT LOADING AND ASSIMILATIVE CAPACITY ................................................................ 39 3.1 Sources of Salts and Nutrients.................................................................................39 3.2 Fate and Transport of Salts and Nutrients ...............................................................40 3.3 Methodology for Estimating Salt and Nutrient Loading and Removal .......................42 3.3.1 Wet Loading Categories.....................................................................................43 3.3.1.1 Rainfall Recharge .........................................................................................43 3.3.1.2 Mountain-front Recharge ..............................................................................44 3.3.1.3 Basin Inflow and Saline Intrusion .................................................................46 3.3.1.4 Managed Recharge in Streams ....................................................................49 3.3.1.5 Managed Recharge in Percolation Ponds ....................................................50 3.3.1.6 Agricultural Irrigation ....................................................................................50 3.3.1.7 Landscape Irrigation – Municipal and Domestic Water Sources ...................51 3.3.1.8 Landscape Irrigation – Recycled Water ........................................................53 3.3.1.9 Conveyance Losses .....................................................................................54 3.3.1.10 Drainage Losses ..........................................................................................55 3.3.2 Dry Loading .......................................................................................................57 3.3.2.1 Agricultural Fertilizer and Lawn Fertilizer ......................................................57 3.3.2.2 Atmospheric Deposition ...............................................................................59 3.3.3 Salt and Nutrient Removal .................................................................................60 3.3.3.1 Groundwater Pumping .................................................................................60 3.3.3.2 Basin Outflow ...............................................................................................61 3.3.3.3 Gaining Reaches of Streams........................................................................61 3.3.3.4 Groundwater Infiltration into Sewer Lines and Storm Drains ........................61 Santa Clara Subbasin Salt and Nutrient Management Plan ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3.3.3.5 Storm Drain Infiltration..................................................................................61 3.3.4 Overall Salt and Nitrate Balance ........................................................................62 3.4 Assimilative Capacity ...............................................................................................64 3.4.1 Ambient Groundwater Quality ............................................................................64 3.4.2 Volume-Weighted Average Basin Concentrations ..............................................67 3.4.3 Estimated Basin Assimilative Capacity ...............................................................68 3.4.4 Projecting Future Assimilative Capacity .............................................................68 3.4.4.1 Assumptions for Future Loading ...................................................................68 3.4.4.2 Methodology and Assumptions for Mixing Calculation ..................................71
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José
    Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José Last Revised: December 2018 (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José MC14104 December 2018 Executive Summary—Joint Emergency Action Plan Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José MC14104 ii December 2018 Executive Summary—Joint Emergency Action Plan Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José MC14104 iii December 2018 (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response in City of San José MC14104 iv December 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 A. Purpose of the Joint Emergency Action Plan ...................................................... 1 B. Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 1 C. Structure of This Emergency Action Plan ............................................................ 2 D. Relationship to Other Plans ................................................................................ 2 E. Definition of a Multi-Agency Coordination Group ................................................. 2 F. Intention of the Organization and Protocols Noted in the Emergency Action Plan.........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Type of Services Current Conditions Soils, Geology, and Geologic Hazards Envision San José 2040 General Plan Update
    Type of Services Current Conditions Soils, Geology, and Geologic Hazards Envision San José 2040 General Plan Update Client David J. Powers & Associates Client Address 1885 The Alameda, Suite 204 San José, CA 95126 Project Number 118-13-2 Date March 20, 2009 Prepared Scott E. Fitinghoff, P.E., G.E. by Principal Geotechnical Engineer Philip A. Frame, C.E.G. Senior Engineering Geologist Laura C. Knutson, P.E., G.E. Principal Geotechnical Engineer Quality Assurance Reviewer Table of Contents SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 PURPOSE ......................................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2: SOILS AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ..................................................... 1 2.1 GEOLOGIC OVERVIEW OF SAN JOSÉ ......................................................... 1 2.2 LANDSLIDES ................................................................................................... 2 2.3 WEAK/EXPANSIVE SOILS .............................................................................. 3 2.4 NATURALLY-OCCURRING ABESTOS (NOA) ............................................... 4 2.5 EROSION .......................................................................................................... 4 2.6 ARTIFICIAL FILL .............................................................................................. 4 2.7 GROUND SUBSIDENCE DUE TO GROUND WATER REMOVAL ................. 4 2.8 MINERAL RESOURCES
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Santa Cruz Mountains
    33 3. Field Trip to Lexington Reservoir and Loma Prieta Peak Area in the Southern Santa Cruz Mountains Trip Highlights: San Andreas Rift Valley, Quaternary faults, Stay in the right lane and exit onto Alma Bridge Road. Follow landslide deposits, Franciscan Complex, serpentinite, stream Alma Bridge Road across Lexington Reservoir Dam and turn terrace deposits, Lomitas Fault, Sargent Fault, Cretaceous fos- right into the boat dock parking area about 0.6 mile (1 km) sils, deep-sea fan deposits, conglomerate from the exit on Highway 17 north. A Santa Clara County Parks day-use parking pass is required to park in the paved lot. This field trip examines faults, landslides, rocks, and The park day use pass is $5. Vehicles can be left here for the geologic features in the vicinity of the San Andreas Fault and day to allow car pooling (the park is patrolled, but as always, other faults in the central Santa Cruz Mountains in the vicinity take valuables with you). of both Lexington Reservoir and Loma Prieta Peak (fig. 3-1). Detailed geologic maps, cross sections, and descriptions The field trip begins at Lexington Reservoir Dam at the boat featuring bedrock geology, faults, and landslide information dock parking area. To get to Lexington Reservoir Dam, take useful for this field-trip area are available on-line at theUSGS Highway 17 south (toward Santa Cruz). Highway 17 enters San Francisco Bay Region Geology website [http://sfgeo. Los Gatos Creek Canyon about 3 miles (5 km) south of the wr.usgs.gov/]. McLaughlin and others (2001) have produced intersection of highways 85 and 17.
    [Show full text]
  • Coast Dairies Long Term Resource Protection and Access Plan
    COAST DAIRIES LONG-TERM RESOURCE PROTECTION T HE TRUST AND ACCESS PLAN F O R PUBLIC LAND February 2004 COAST DAIRIES LONG-TERM RESOURCE PROTECTION T HE TRUST AND ACCESS PLAN F O R PUBLIC LAND February 2004 Prepared by The Trust for Public Land for the Future Stewards of the Coast Dairies Property 225 Bush Street 8950 Cal Center Drive 710 Second Avenue 2685 Ulmerton Road Suite 1700 Building 3, Suite 300 Suite 730 Suite 102 San Francisco, CA 94104 Sacramento, CA 95826 Seattle, WA 98104 Clearwater, FL 33762 (415) 896-5900 (916) 564-4500 (206) 442-0900 (727) 572-5226 436 14th Street 4221 Wilshire Boulevard 1751 Old Pecos Trail 5850 T.G. Lee Boulevard Suite 600 Suite 480 Suite O Suite 440 Oakland, CA 94612 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Santa Fe, NM 87505 Orlando, FL 32822 (510) 839-5066 (323) 933-6111 (505) 992-8860 (407) 851-1155 200071 A READER’S GUIDE TO THE COAST DAIRIES PLAN Coast Dairies Long-term Resource Protection and Access Plan RG-1 been a simple, straight-line trajectory from Swiss-owned dairy and A Reader’s Guide to the Coast farmland to public park. The Coast Dairies Plan is complete and stands by itself as land management guidance, but its future use and Dairies Plan the multiplicity of appendices spawned by the process require some explanation. The Trust for Public Land, in its role as first steward, had responsibilities that stretched backward to the funding entities and The document in your hands is the result of a comprehensive planning forward to the ultimate managers of the land.
    [Show full text]
  • Cycling Team About Us Join Us! Our Sponsors Clothing Giving Events Local Routes FAQ Contact
    Cycling Team About Us Join Us! Our Sponsors Clothing Giving Events Local Routes FAQ Contact Our favorite cycling routes near Stanford Local Routes (Road) Shorter Flat Options The mini-loop: This is the route you want to take on a day when your legs are screaming and your body is aching and anything more than half hour will kill you. Take Old Page Mill to Arastradero and right on Arastradero to Alpine and right on Alpine to Campus. Ideal addition to get your extra half hour in on your base training days when you miscalculated a longer ride. [Aerial Photo] The Loop: Ideal option for a flat route with no stop lights on a recovery day. The standard route normally starts o by heading up Alpine to Portola and taking Portola to Sand Hill. The reverse direction is popular with the tailwind speedsters dashing along the downward slant of Alpine Rd. The benchmark 15 mile route can be enhanced by further additions like Arastradero; going to the gate at the end of Alpine; adding the "maze" to it in Woodside. The "maze" is short for: taking Tripp on 84E to Kings, R on Kings, L on Manuella, L on Albion and R on Olive Hill to Canada (or the reverse direction). Time: 45 mins to 1 hr + (depending on additions) [Aerial Photo (B/W)] Foothill: Reserved for days when all you want to do is recover as frequent stop lights make any steady eort quite impossible. The turnaround points for 45 mins (Grant), 1 hr (Homestead), 1:15 (if the route parallel to foothill is taken on way back), 1:30 (Stevens Creek Blvd).
    [Show full text]
  • Protect Wildlife from Super-Toxic Rat Poisons
    Protect Wildlife From Super-toxic Rat Poisons August 31, 2020 Dear Governor Newsom, We, the 4,812 undersigned, urge you to place an immediate moratorium on the use of second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides in California, except in cases of public health or ecosystem emergencies, to protect the state's wildlife from imminent harm. Right now dozens of species are being hurt by these super-toxic rat poisons, including golden eagles, Humboldt martens, San Joaquin kit foxes and spotted owls. And more than 85 percent of California mountain lions, bobcats and Pacific fishers have been exposed to these rodenticides. Mountain lions in Southern California are in especially grave danger, as their populations are already isolated and close to extinction. Several mountain lions were recently found dead with multiple super-toxic rat poisons in their bloodstreams. Immediate action by the state is critical to prevent these populations' extinctions. In 2014 the state of California did act by pulling this class of rodenticides from consumer shelves. Unfortunately there hasn't been a decrease in the rate of wildlife poisoning from these products because licensed pest-control applicators continue to use them throughout the state. Stronger prohibitions are necessary. There's a wide range of safer, cost-effective alternatives on the shelves today. Strategies that prevent rodent infestations in the first place, by sealing buildings and eliminating food and water sources, are a necessary first step. Then, if need be, lethal strategies can be used that involve snap traps, electric traps and other nontoxic methods. Please — move forward with a statewide moratorium on the use of these super-toxic rat poisons, pending the passage of A.B.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix D: Recreation and Education Report Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Space Ridge Open Skyline
    TAB1 Appendix D TAB2 TAB3 Liv Ames TAB4 TAB5 TAB6 Appendix D: Recreation and Education Report Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Space Ridge Open Skyline TAB7 Appendix D-1: Vision Plan Existing Conditions for Access, Recreation and Environmental Education Prepared for: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022 October 2013 Prepared by: Randy Anderson, Alta Planning + Design Appendix D: Recreation and Education Report CONTENTS Existing Access, Recreation and Environmental Education Opportunities by Subregion ........... 3 About the Subregions ............................................................................................................ 3 Subregion: North San Mateo County Coast ................................................................................... 5 Subregion: South San Mateo County Coast ................................................................................... 8 Subregion: Central Coastal Mountains ....................................................................................... 10 Subregion: Skyline Ridge ....................................................................................................... 12 Subregion: Peninsula Foothills ................................................................................................ 15 Subregion: San Francisco Baylands ........................................................................................... 18 Subregion: South Bay Foothills ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City of San Jose
    Table of Contents Section 19 City of San Jose ....................................................................................................... 19-1 19.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 19-1 19.2 Internal Planning Process ......................................................................................... 19-7 19.3 Capability Assessment ........................................................................................... 19-15 19.3.1 Mitigation Progress .................................................................................... 19-15 19.3.2 Staff and Organizational Capabilities ........................................................ 19-18 19.3.3 National Flood Insurance Program ............................................................ 19-26 19.3.4 Resource List: ............................................................................................. 19-27 19.4 Vulnerability Assessment ...................................................................................... 19-27 19.4.1 Critical Facilities ........................................................................................ 19-27 19.4.2 Exposure Analysis ....................................................................................... 19-34 19.5 Mitigation Actions ................................................................................................. 19-71 19.5.1 Primary Concerns ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NON-AGENDA January 24, 2020 Board Policy EL-7 Communication and Support to the Board the Baos Shall Inform and Support the Board in Its Work
    NON-AGENDA January 24, 2020 Board Policy EL-7 Communication and Support to the Board The BAOs shall inform and support the Board in its work. Page CEO BULLETIN & NEWSLETTERS 3 CEO Bulletin: 01/17/20 – 01/23/20 BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 7 BMR/IBMR Weekly Reports: 01/23/20 Memo from Ngoc Nguyen, DOO, to Norma Camacho, CEO, dated 1/17/20 8 providing Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Report of Rental Property Income and Expenses. Memo from Michele King, COB, to the Board, dated 1/21/20, responding to 10 IBMR-20-0001 (Kremen) – Providing a list of Public Records Act requests received during 2019. Memo from Rachael Gibson, DOO, to Rick Callender, CEA, dated 1/22/20 71 provide a list of 2020 Community Events and Festival List. INCOMING BOARD CORRESPONDENCE 74 Board Correspondence Weekly Report: 01/23/20 Email from Dhruv Khanna to the Board dated 1/16/20 conveying questions 76 about the proposed November 2020 Ballot Measure and groundwater production water charges (C-20-0014). Letter from Richard McMurtry to Director Estremera, dated 1/21/20 requesting 77 his political assistance with the City of San Jose to help with a solution to the Single Road Crossing Dilemma (C-20-0015). OUTGOING BOARD CORRESPONDENCE Letter from Chair Hsueh to Shawn Storm dated 1/17/20 responding to his 79 letter about water conservation (C-20-0003). Email from Chair Hsueh to Dale Tibbils dated 1/22/20 responding to his email 80 regarding Valley Water becoming a political entity in reference to a newsletter article about flood protection and climate change (C-20-0002).
    [Show full text]
  • Development Activity Highlights and Five-Year Forecast (2021-2025)
    Development Activity Highlights and Five-Year Forecast (2021-2025) Prepared by: City of San Jose Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement February 2020 Development Activity Highlights and Five-Year Forecast (2021-2025) For more information, please contact: City of San José Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Planning Division 200 East Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA 95113 (408) 535-3555 This report in color and other information can be found on the Planning Division website at: http://www.sanjoseca.gov/index.aspx?NID=2050 Development Activity Highlights and Five-Year Forecast (2021-2025) TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page I Purpose ................................................................................... 1 II Summary ................................................................................ 1 III Five-Year Forecast (2019-2023) ........................................... 4 IV Construction Taxes and Exemptions .................................. 6 V Major Development Activity Data ....................................... 7 Residential ............................................................................... 8 Commercial ............................................................................. 11 Industrial ................................................................................. 13 VI Major Development Activity Maps (Planning Areas) ....... 15 Alum Rock ............................................................................... 16 Alviso ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bluebird Volunteers Outdo Themselves
    TheNewsletter of the SantaClara Valley Audubon Society April 2000 Bluebird Volunteers Outdo Themselves by Garth Harwood There's every reason to believe that were of species whose populations are All over California in springtime, spe­ we' 11have yet another banner year out on declining in California at a greater rate cies after species of songbird breaks into the bluebird trails in 2000. Initiated by than that of the bluebird (compared to breeding song. And no one is more SCV AS in 1996, the Santa Clara County 48% in 1998 and 27% in 1997). keenly attuned to the onset of the breed­ volunteer network now monitors 21 ac­ At the outset of the bluebird program, ing season than our local "bluebirders," tive trails and more than 338 nestboxes. little direct effort was made to encourage those devoted volunteers who set up and The 731 birds of 10 species successfully other, less well-known cavity nesters such monitor nestboxes for native birds in raised in our boxes in the 1999 breeding as 1the Violet-green Swallow, although local back yards, parks and open spaces. season slightly exceeded the previous these birds weren't actively discouraged, As all that birdsong adds color to the high mark of 697 birds set in the 1998 either. Then we learned that this swal­ air throughout Santa Clara County, some season, despite setbacks ranging from low, for example, has declined at nearly 30 Audubon volunteers have already be­ the partial loss of our largest trail, to twice the rate of the bluebird across the gun making weekly treks to their gluttonous raccoons and even a murder­ state over the past 30 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Around Downtown and the Bay Area San Jose
    Visit sanjose.org for the Taste wines from mountain terrains and cooled by ocean Here is a partial list of accommodations. Downtown is a haven for the SAN JOSE EVENTS BY THE SEASONS latest event information REGIONAL WINES breezes in one of California’s oldest wine regions WHERE TO STAY For a full list, please visit sanjose.org DOWNTOWN DINING hungry with 250+ restaurants WEATHER San Jose enjoys on average Santa Clara County Fair Antique Auto Show There are over 200 vintners that make up the Santa Cruz Mountain wine AIRPORT AREA - NORTH Holiday Inn San Jose Airport Four Points by Sheraton SOUTH SAN JOSE American/Californian M Asian Fusion Restaurant Gordon Biersch Brewery 300 days of sunshine. LEAGUE SPORTS YEAR ROUND MAY July/August – thefair.org Largest show on the West coast appellation with roots that date back to the 1800s. The region spans from 1350 N. First St. San Jose Downtown 98 S. 2nd Street Restaurant Best Western Plus Clarion Inn Silicon Valley Billy Berk’s historysanjose.org Mt. Madonna in the south to Half Moon Bay in the north. The mountain San Jose, CA 95112 211 S. First St. (408) 418-2230 – $$ 33 E. San Fernando St. Our average high is 72.6˚ F; San Jose Sabercats (Arena Football) Downtown Farmer’s Market Summer Kraftbrew Beer Fest 2118 The Alameda 3200 Monterey Rd. 99 S. 1st St. Japantown Farmer’s Market terrain, marine influences and varied micro-climates create the finest (408) 453-6200 San Jose, CA 95113 (408) 294-6785 – $$ average low is 50.5˚ F.
    [Show full text]