ENGINEER'S REPORT ON WATER SUPPLY AND REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit 2011-2012

Prepared for

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

May 2011

5/24/2011

File: 0643.533

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

ENGINEER'S REPORT ON

WATER SUPPLY AND REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT

LOWER WHITEWATER RIVER SUBBASIN AREA OF BENEFIT

2011-2012

Prepared by Environmental Services Division Engineering Department May 2011

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Peter Nelson ...... President

John Powell ...... Vice President

Patricia A. "Corky" Larson ...... Director

Debi Livesay ...... Director

Franz De Klotz ...... Director

OFFICERS & COUNSEL

Steve Robbins...... General Manager-Chief Engineer

Jim Barrett ...... Assistant General Manager

Gerry Shoaf ...... Redwine and Sherrill

Julia Fernandez ...... Board Secretary

ENGINEERING

Mark L. Johnson ...... Director of Engineering

Steve Bigley ...... Environmental Services Manager

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

GROUNDWATER BASIN DESCRIPTIONS ...... 2 Geology ...... 2 Mission Creek Subbasin ...... 5 Desert Hot Springs Subbasin ...... 5 Garnet Hill Subbasin...... 5 Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin ...... 6 Palm Springs Subarea ...... 7 Thermal Subarea ...... 7 Thousand Palms Subarea ...... 9 Oasis Subarea ...... 9 Summary ...... 9

WATER SUPPLY ...... 10 Groundwater Storage ...... 10 Groundwater Levels ...... 1 1 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Boundary...... 15 Groundwater Production ...... 18 Groundwater Inflows and Outflows ...... 18 Overdraft ...... 19

REPLENISHMENT PROGRAM ...... 20 Current Recharge Activities ...... 20 Monitoring Wells ...... 21 Recharge Facilities ...... 21 Future Recharge Activities ...... 26 Coachella Valley Water Management Plan ...... 26 Recharge Model Projections...... 26 Other Replenishment Activities ...... 30

REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT ...... 30 State Water Code ...... 30 Replenishment Water Costs ...... 31 Previous Replenishment Costs ...... 31 Proposed Replenishment Costs ...... 31 Assessed Production ...... 34 Methods for Determining Production ...... 34 Replenishment Assessment Charge ...... 35

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 38

BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 39

Appendix 1: Historical Well Depth to Water Measurements ...... 41

ii

FIGURES

Figure 1 Coachella Valley Groundwater Subbasins ...... 4 Figure 2 Historical Groundwater Levels in Indio Area (5.3 Miles from TEL) ...... 12 Figure 3 Historical Groundwater Levels in La Quinta Area (2.4 Miles from TEL) ...... 12 Figure 4 Historical Groundwater Levels in Thermal Area (4.0 Miles from TEL) ...... 13 Figure 5 Historical Groundwater Levels in Valerie Jean Area (4.3 Miles from TEL) ...... 13 Figure 6 Historical Groundwater Levels in Mecca Area (9.6 Miles from TEL) ...... 14 Figure 7 Historical Groundwater Levels in Oasis Area (12.4 Miles from TEL) ...... 14 Figure 8 Historical Groundwater Levels at County Line (16.0 Miles from TEL) ...... 15 Figure 9 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit ...... 16 Figure 10 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit ...... 17 Figure 11 Groundwater Levels Downstream of TEL Recharge Facility ...... 22 Figure 12 Historic Groundwater Levels at TEL Recharge Facility Monitoring ...... 23 Figure 13 Historic Groundwater Levels North of TEL Recharge Facility ...... 24 Figure 14 Historic Groundwater Levels Northeast of TEL Recharge Facility ...... 24 Figure 15 Historic Groundwater Levels Southeast of TEL Recharge Facility ...... 25 Figure 16 Whitewater River Subbasin - Change in Water Levels from 1999 to 2035 ...... 27 Figure 17 Increased Water Levels Due to Recharge, Year 2015 ...... 28 Figure 18 Increased Water Levels Due to Recharge, Year 2040 ...... 29

TABLES

Table 1 Estimated Groundwater Storage Capacity ...... 10 Table 2 Estimated Groundwater Production ...... 18 Table 3 Calculation of Overdraft in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin ...... 19 Table 4 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Annual Recharge Deliveries ...... 20 Table 5 Replenishment Assessment Charge (RAC) for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 ...... 32 Table 6 Estimated Producer Replenishment Costs for 2011 ...... 36

iii

COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

INTRODUCTION

This is the eighth annual Engineer’s Report on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit managed by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). This program began in the 2004-2005 fiscal year and has replenished the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin with a cumulative total of approximately 97,222 acre-feet (AF) of supplemental water. CVWD serves an area of approximately 1,000 square miles in the Coachella Valley (Valley) within the counties of Riverside, Imperial and San Diego. The Valley is situated in the northwesterly portion of California's Colorado Desert. The Valley is bordered on the west and north by high mountains, which provide an effective barrier against coastal storms, and which greatly reduce the contribution of direct precipitation to recharge the Valley's groundwater basin. The bulk of natural groundwater recharge comes from runoff from the adjacent mountains. The need to enhance the Valley’s water supply has been recognized for many years. The formation of CVWD in 1918 was a direct result of the concern of residents over a plan to export water from the Whitewater River to Imperial Valley. The early residents of the Valley also recognized that action was needed to stem the decline of the water table, which was occurring as a result of their pumpage. This caused CVWD to enter into an agreement for construction of the Coachella Branch of the All American Canal (Coachella Canal or Canal) to bring Colorado River water to the Valley. Since 1949, the Coachella Canal has been providing water for irrigation use in an area generally from Indio and La Quinta southerly to the Salton Sea. After providing supplemental water in the southeastern part of the Valley and with the onset of recreational development, the need for supplemental water in the northwestern part of the Valley was recognized. As a result, CVWD and the Desert Water Agency (DWA) entered into separate contracts with the State of California (State) to ensure that water from the State Water Project (SWP) would be available. A direct connection from the SWP to the Valley does not currently exist. Therefore, CVWD and DWA entered into an agreement with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) to obtain water from the MWD Colorado River Aqueduct, which crosses the upper portion of the Valley near Whitewater, in exchange for CVWD and DWA SWP water. Since 1973, CVWD and DWA have been releasing Colorado River water near Whitewater to replenish groundwater in the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin of the Valley. As of December 2002, CVWD and DWA also began recharge activities at the Mission Creek recharge facilities overlying the Mission Creek Subbasin. In addition, CVWD, recognized the need for other sources of water and entered the water reclamation field in 1967 and currently operates six water reclamation plants (WRPs) in the Valley. Recycled water from two of these facilities (WRP 9 and WRP 10) has been used for golf course and greenbelt irrigation in the Palm Desert area for many years, thereby reducing -1- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

demand on the groundwater basin. A third facility (WRP 7), located north of Indio, began providing recycled water for golf course and greenbelt irrigation in 1997. In the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin, groundwater levels have been declining since 1980. In response to this, CVWD has implemented a groundwater replenishment program to recharge the Subbasin at two sites in the Lower Valley. Groundwater recharge began in 1997 using pilot groundwater recharge facilities. The pilot project at the Dike 4 site became the fully operational Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility in June 2009. The Martinez Canyon site began operating in 2004 and is expected to be expanded in the future. The combined cumulative total recharge at these sites was 97,222 AF at the end of 2010. CVWD expects the full-scale capacity of each of these recharge facilities to be 40,000 AF/year. Groundwater recharge is one of the elements of the preferred alternative described in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). The preferred alternative also includes water conservation and source substitution elements to effectively manage the Valley’s groundwater basin. The State Water Code requires completion of an Engineer’s Report regarding the Replenishment Program before CVWD can levy and collect groundwater replenishment assessment charges (RACs). The report shall include the condition of groundwater supplies, the need for groundwater replenishment, the Area of Benefit, water production within said area, and RACs to be levied upon said water production. It shall also contain recommendations regarding the replenishment program including the source and amount of replenishment water and related costs. The first Engineer’s Report for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit was completed in April 2004. The purpose of this report is to update the groundwater supply conditions and current replenishment program and to establish a RAC for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit for the upcoming fiscal year.

GROUNDWATER BASIN DESCRIPTIONS

Geology

The Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, as described by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is bounded on the north and east by non-water bearing crystalline rocks of the San Bernardino and Little San Bernardino Mountains and on the south and west by the crystalline rocks of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains. At the west end of the San Gorgonia Pass, between Beaumont and Banning, the basin boundary is defined by a surface drainage divide separating the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin from the Beaumont Groundwater Basin of the Upper Santa Ana drainage area. The lower boundary is formed primarily by the watershed of the Mecca Hills and by the northwest shoreline of the Salton Sea running between the Santa Rosa Mountains and Mortmar. Between the Salton Sea and Travertine Rock, at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, the lower boundary roughly coincides with the Riverside/Imperial County Line.

-2- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Southerly of the lower boundary, at Mortmar and at Travertine Rock, the subsurface materials are predominantly fine grained and low in permeability; although groundwater is present, it is not readily extractable. A zone of transition exists at these boundaries; to the north, the subsurface materials are coarser and more readily yield groundwater. Although there is interflow of groundwater throughout the groundwater basin, fault barriers, constrictions in the basin profile and areas of low permeability limit and control movement of groundwater. Based on these factors, the groundwater basin has been divided into Subbasins and Subareas as described by DWR in 1964 and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) in 1971. The Subbasins present in the Valley are Mission Creek, Desert Hot Springs, Garnet Hill, and Whitewater River (also known as Indio). The Subbasins, with their groundwater storage reservoirs, are defined without regard to water quantity or quality. They delineate areas underlain by formations which readily yield the stored water through water wells and offer natural reservoirs for the regulation of water supplies. The boundaries between Subbasins within the groundwater basin are generally based upon faults that are effective barriers to the lateral movement of groundwater. Minor Subareas have also been delineated, based on one or more of the following geologic or hydrologic characteristics: type of water bearing formations, water quality, areas of confined groundwater, forebay areas, groundwater divides and surface drainage divides. The following is a list of the Subbasins and associated Subareas, based on the DWR and USGS designations: • Mission Creek Subbasin • Desert Hot Springs Subbasin • Garnet Hill Subbasin • Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin

o Palm Springs Subarea o Thermal Subarea o Thousand Palms Subarea o Oasis Subarea

Figure 1 shows the locations of these Subbasins. This report presents brief descriptions of the Mission Creek Subbasin, Desert Hot Springs Subbasin, and Garnet Hill Subbasin as they are located outside the area of interest for this report. A more detailed description of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is provided in this report.

-3- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 1 Coachella Valley Groundwater Subbasins

-4- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

The following are areas within the Valley where a supply of potable groundwater is not readily available: • Indio Hills area • Mecca Hills area • Barton Canyon area • Bombay Beach area • Salton City area

Mission Creek Subbasin

Water bearing materials underlying the Mission Creek upland comprise the Mission Creek Subbasin. The Subbasin is bounded on the south by the Banning Fault and on the north and east by the Mission Creek Fault. It is bordered on the west by non-water bearing rocks of the San Bernardino Mountains. To the southeast of the Subbasin are the Indio Hills. The area within this boundary reflects the estimated limit of effective storage within the Subbasin. Both the Mission Creek Fault and the Banning Fault are effective barriers to groundwater movement, as evidenced by offset water levels, fault springs, and changes in vegetation. Water level differences across the Banning Fault, between the Mission Creek Subbasin and Garnet Hill Subbasin, are on the order of 200 to 250 feet. Similar water level differences exist across the Mission Creek Fault between the Mission Creek and Desert Hot Springs Subbasins.

Desert Hot Springs Subbasin

The Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is bounded to the north by the Little San Bernardino Mountains and to the southeast by the Mission Creek and San Andreas faults. The San Andreas Fault separates the Desert Hot Springs Subbasin from the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin and serves as an effective barrier to groundwater flow. The Subbasin has been divided into three Subareas: Miracle Hill, Sky Valley and Fargo Canyon. The Desert Hot Springs Subbasin is not extensively developed except in the area of Desert Hot Springs. Relatively poor groundwater quality has limited the use of this Subbasin for groundwater supply. The Miracle Hill Subarea is characterized by hot mineralized groundwater, which supplies a number of spas in the area.

Garnet Hill Subbasin

The area northeast of the Garnet Hill Fault and the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin, named the Garnet Hill Subarea by DWR (DWR1964), was separated as a distinct Subbasin by the USGS because of the effectiveness of the Banning and Garnet Hill faults as barriers to groundwater movement. This is illustrated by a difference of 170 feet in groundwater level elevation in a horizontal distance of 3,200 feet across the Garnet Hill Fault, as measured in the spring of 1961. The fault does not reach the surface and is probably effective as a barrier to groundwater movement only below a depth of about 100 feet. -5- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Although some recharge to this Subbasin may come from Mission Creek and other streams that pass through during periods of high flood flows, the chemical character of the groundwater plus its direction of movement indicate that the main source of recharge to the Subarea comes from the Whitewater River through the permeable deposits which underlie Whitewater Hill. Based on groundwater level measurements, this area is influenced by artificial recharge activities at the Whitewater Spreading Facilities at Windy Point.

Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin

The Whitewater River Subbasin, known also as the Indio Subbasin, comprises the major portion of the floor of the Valley and encompasses approximately 400 square miles. Beginning approximately one mile west of the junction of State Highway 111 and Interstate 10, the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin extends southeast approximately 70 miles to the Salton Sea. The Subbasin is bordered on the southwest by the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains, and is separated from Garnet Hill Subbasin, Mission Creek Subbasin and Desert Hot Springs Subbasin to the north and east by the Garnet Hill and San Andreas faults. For purposes of managing the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin, it can also be delineated by an upper and lower portion as described in the Water Supply section. The lower portion is the subject of this report. The limit of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin along the base of the San Jacinto Mountains and the northeast portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains coincides with the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin boundary. The Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin in this vicinity includes only the recent terraces and alluvial fans. The Garnet Hill fault, which extends southeastward from the north side of San Gorgonio Pass to the Indio Hills, is a relatively effective barrier to groundwater movement from the Garnet Hill Subbasin into the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin. The San Andreas Fault, extending southeastward from the junction of the Mission Creek and Banning faults in the Indio Hills and continuing out of the basin on the east flank of the Salton Sea, is also an effective barrier to groundwater movement. The Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is divided into four Subareas: Palm Springs, Thermal, Thousand Palms, and Oasis Subareas. The Palm Springs Subarea is the forebay or main area of recharge to the Subbasin, and the Thermal Subarea comprises the pressure or confined area within the basin. The other two Subareas are peripheral areas having unconfined groundwater conditions where recharge to the Subbasin occurs. The historical fluctuations of water levels within the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin indicate a steady decline in the levels throughout the Subbasin prior to 1949. After 1949, levels in the lower Thermal Subarea (south of Point Happy), where imported Colorado River water is used for irrigation, rose sharply, although water levels continued to decline elsewhere in the Subbasin. With the use of Colorado River water from the Coachella Canal, the demand on the groundwater basin declined in the lower Valley (generally east and south of Washington Street below Point Happy). Water levels in the deeper aquifers rose from 1950 to 1980. However,

-6- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

water levels in this area have again declined, due to increasing urbanization and groundwater usage. Palm Springs Subarea

The triangular area between the Garnet Hill Fault and the east slope of the San Jacinto Mountains southeast to Cathedral City is designated the Palm Springs Subarea, and is an area in which unconfined groundwater occurs. The Valley fill materials within the Subarea are essentially heterogeneous alluvial fan deposits exhibiting little sorting and with little fine grained material content. The thickness of these water bearing materials is not known; however, it exceeds 1,000 feet. Although no lithologic distinction is apparent from well drillers’ logs, the probable thickness of recent deposits suggests that Ocotillo conglomerate underlies Recent fanglomerate in the Subarea at depths ranging from 300 to 400 feet. Natural recharge to the aquifers in the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin occurs primarily in the Palm Springs Subarea. The major natural sources include infiltration of stream runoff from the San Jacinto Mountains and the Whitewater River, and subsurface inflow from the San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin to the west. Deep percolation of direct precipitation on the Palm Springs Subarea is considered negligible as it is consumed by evapotranspiration. Before the current artificial recharge program began at Whitewater, the depth to water in the Subarea ranged from 200 feet below the ground surface near Cathedral City to nearly 500 feet at the northwestern end of the Subbasin near the spreading works downstream of Windy Point. Thermal Subarea

Groundwater of the Palm Springs Subarea moves southeastward into the interbedded sands, silts, and clays underlying the central portion of the Valley. The division between the Palm Springs Subarea and the Thermal Subarea is near Cathedral City. The permeabilities parallel to the bedding of the deposits in the Thermal Subarea are several times the permeabilities normal to the bedding and, therefore, movement of groundwater parallel to the bedding predominates. Confined or semi-confined groundwater conditions are present in the major portion of the Thermal Subarea. Movement of groundwater under these conditions is present in the major portion of the Thermal Subarea and is caused by differences in piezometric (pressure) level or head. Unconfined or free water conditions are present in the alluvial fans at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains, as in the fans at the mouth of Deep Canyon and in the La Quinta area. Sand and gravel lenses underlying this Subarea are discontinuous and clay beds are not extensive. However, two aquifer zones separated by a zone of finer-grained materials were identified from well logs. The fine grained materials within the intervening horizontal plane are not tight enough or persistent enough to restrict completely the vertical interflow of water, or to assign the term “aquiclude” to it. Therefore, the term “aquitard” is used for this zone of less permeable material that separates the Upper and Lower aquifer zones in the southeastern part of the valley. Capping the Upper aquifer at the surface are tight clays and silts with minor amounts of sands. Semi-perched groundwater occurs in this capping zone, which is up to 100 feet thick.

-7- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

The Lower aquifer zone, composed of part of the Ocotillo conglomerate, consists of silty sands and gravels with interbeds of silt and clay. It is the most important source of groundwater in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin but serves only that portion of the valley easterly of Washington Street. The top of the Lower aquifer zone is present at a depth ranging from 300 to 600 feet below the surface. The thickness of the zone is undetermined, as the deepest wells present in the Valley have not penetrated it in its entirety. The available data indicate that the zone is at least 500 feet thick and may be in excess of 1,000 feet thick. The aquitard overlying the Lower aquifer zone is generally 100 to 200 feet thick, although in small areas on the periphery of the Salton Sea it is in excess of 500 feet in thickness. North and west of Indio, in an arcuate zone approximately one mile wide, the aquitard is apparently lacking and no distinction is made between the Upper and Lower aquifer zones. The Upper aquifer zone in the Thermal Subarea is similar in lithology to the Lower aquifer zone, although it is not as thick. Subsurface inflow to the upper aquifer zone is less than that to the Lower aquifer zone. When water levels in the Palm Springs Subarea drop, the cross-sectional area of the Upper aquifer zone available for recharge at Point Happy is reduced, thereby reducing groundwater movement to the southeast. Capping the Upper aquifer zone in the Thermal Subarea is a shallow fine-grained zone in which semi-perched groundwater is present. This zone consists of Recent silts, clays, and fine sands and is relatively persistent southeast of Indio. It ranges from zero to 100 feet thick and is generally an effective barrier to deep percolation. However, north and west of Indio, the zone is composed mainly of clayey sands and silts and its effect in retarding deep percolation is limited. The low permeability of the materials southeast of Indio has contributed to the irrigation drainage problems of the area. Semi-perched groundwater has been maintained by irrigation water applied to agricultural lands south of Point Happy necessitating the construction of an extensive subsurface tile drain system. The Thermal Subarea contains the division between the upper and lower portions of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin and their respective groundwater tables. Primarily due to the application of imported water from the Coachella Canal, and an attendant reduction in groundwater pumpage, the water table in the area southerly from Point Happy (in La Quinta) rose until the early 1970’s, while the water table in the area northerly from Point Happy was dropping. This division forms the lower (southern) boundary of the management area of the Joint Water Management Agreement between CVWD and DWA. Water table measurements have shown no distinction between the Palm Springs Subarea and the Thermal Subarea. The only distinction has been the hinge effect in the Thermal Subarea at Point Happy, where groundwater levels until recently were stabilized, neither rising nor falling significantly. As discussed elsewhere, this is changing, as increased pumpage is again lowering the groundwater levels in the lower portion of the Whitewater River (Indio)Subbasin. CVWD recently completed a study to evaluate the entire groundwater basin. This led to the development and adoption of the valley-wide Coachella Valley Water Management Plan in 2002. Using state of the art technology, the District developed and calibrated a peer-reviewed, three-dimensional groundwater model (Fogg 2000) that is based on over 2,500 wells, and includes an extensive database of well chemistry reports, well completion reports, electric logs, -8- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

and specific capacity tests. This model improved on previous groundwater models and incorporates the latest hydrological evaluations from previous studies (DWR 1964, 1979; USGS 1971, 1973, 1977, 1992) to gain a better understanding of the hydrogeology in this subbasin and the benefits of water management practices identified in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). Thousand Palms Subarea

The small area along the southwest flank of the Indio Hills is named the Thousand Palms Subarea. The southwest boundary of the Subarea was determined by tracing the limit of distinctive groundwater chemical characteristics. Whereas a calcium bicarbonate water is characteristic of the major aquifers of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin, water in the Thousand Palms Subarea is sodium sulfate in character. The quality differences suggest that recharge to the Thousand Palms Subarea comes primarily from the Indio Hills and is limited in supply. The relatively sharp boundary between chemical characteristics of water derived from the Indio Hills and groundwater in the Thermal Subarea suggests there is little intermixing of the two waters. The configuration of the water table north of the community of Thousand Palms is such that the generally uniform, southeast gradient in the Palm Springs Subarea diverges and steepens to the east along the base of Edom Hill. This steepened gradient suggests a barrier to the movement of groundwater, or a reduction in permeability of the water-bearing materials. A southeast extension of the Garnet Hill Fault would also coincide with this anomaly. However, there is no surface expression of such a fault, and the gravity measurements taken during the 1964 DWR investigation do not suggest a subsurface fault. The residual gravity profile across this area supports these observations. The sharp increase in gradient is therefore attributed to lower permeability of the materials to the east. Most of the Thousand Palms Subarea is located within the upper portion of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin. Oasis Subarea

Another peripheral zone of unconfined groundwater that is different in chemical characteristics from water in the major aquifers of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is found underlying the Oasis Piedmont slope. This zone, named the Oasis Subarea, extends along the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Water bearing materials underlying the Subarea consist of highly permeable fan deposits. Although groundwater data suggest that the boundary between the Oasis and Thermal Subareas may be a buried fault extending from Travertine Rock to the community of Oasis, the remainder of the boundary is a lithologic change from the coarse fan deposits of the Oasis Subarea to the interbedded sands, gravel and silts of the Thermal Subarea. Little information is available as to the thickness of waterbearing materials, but it is estimated to be in excess of 1,000 feet. Summary

The Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin consists of four Subareas: the Palm Springs, Thermal, Thousand Palms and Oasis Subareas. The Palm Springs Subarea is the forebay or main area

-9- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

of recharge to the Subbasin, and the Thermal Subarea comprises the pressure or confined area within the basin. The Thousand Palms and Oasis Subareas are peripheral areas having unconfined groundwater conditions, which would support groundwater recharge. From a management perspective, the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is commonly divided into an upper and lower portion, with the dividing line extending from Point Happy in La Quinta to the northeast, terminating at the San Andreas Fault and the Indio Hills at Jefferson Street. For the purpose of this report, the lower portion of the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is defined generally as that portion of the Thermal Subarea east of this line, and the Oasis Subarea.

WATER SUPPLY

Groundwater Storage

In 1964, DWR estimated that the Subbasins in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin contained, in the first 1,000 feet below the ground surface, approximately 39,200,000 AF of water. The capacities of the Subbasins are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Estimated Groundwater Storage Capacity of the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin Area Storage(1) (AF) San Gorgonio Pass Subbasin 2,700,000 Mission Creek Subbasin 2,600,000 Desert Hot Springs Subbasin 4,100,000 Garnet Hill Subbasin 1,000,000 Subtotal 10,400,000 Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin Palm Springs Subarea 4,600,000 Thousand Palms Subarea 1,800,000 Oasis Subarea 3,000,000 Thermal Subarea 19,400,000 Subtotal Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin 28,800,000 Total all Subbasins 39,200,000 (1) First 1,000 feet below ground surface. CA Dept. of Water Resources estimate (DWR, 1964). Currently, the Whitewater River (Indio) Subbasin is developed to the point where significant groundwater production occurs. The natural supply of water to the northwestern part of the valley is not keeping pace with the basin outflow due mainly to large consumptive uses created by the resort-recreation economy and permanent resident population. The imported Colorado River supply through the Coachella Canal is used mainly for irrigation. Annual deliveries of Colorado River water through the Coachella Canal of approximately 300,000 AF are a significant component of southeastern valley hydrology. -10- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Groundwater Levels

Historical water level declines and conditions producing those declines have been extensively described by the USGS and DWR and are documented in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). Although water levels have been declining throughout most of the Subbasins since 1945, water levels in the southeastern portion of the Valley had risen until the early 1970s because of the use of imported water from the Coachella Canal and the resulting decreased pumpage in that area. The rate of groundwater level decline has increased since the early 1980s due to increasing urbanization and increased groundwater use by domestic water purveyors, local farmers, golf courses and fish farms. The historic declining water table in the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin led to the determination that a management program is required to stabilize water levels and prevent other adverse effects such as water quality degradation and land subsidence. Coachella Valley Water District’s Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Groundwater Replenishment Program became effective in 2005. Since then, groundwater levels in wells throughout most of the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin have stabilized or are rising. Water surface elevations in the northwestern area of the valley are highest at the northwest end of each Subbasin, illustrating that regional groundwater flow is from the northwest to the southeast in the center of the Valley. Figure 2 through Figure 8 depict the groundwater levels for 7 wells that are representative of the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin. Values shown are depth to water from the ground surface; negative values indicate water levels are above ground surface. Appendix 1 provides individual measurements for these wells. The distance of these 7 wells from the Thomas E. Levy (TEL) Groundwater Recharge Facility is also provided.

-11- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 2 Historical Groundwater Levels in Indio Area (5.3 Miles from TEL)

Figure 3 Historical Groundwater Levels in La Quinta Area (2.4 Miles from TEL)

-12- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 4 Historical Groundwater Levels in Thermal Area (4.0 Miles from TEL)

Figure 5 Historical Groundwater Levels in Valerie Jean Area (4.3 Miles from TEL)

-13- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 6 Historical Groundwater Levels in Mecca Area (9.6 Miles from TEL)

Figure 7 Historical Groundwater Levels in Oasis Area (12.4 Miles from TEL)

-14- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 8 Historical Groundwater Levels at County Line (16.0 Miles from TEL)

Management Area CVWD manages groundwater in the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin as a separate unit from the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin. This management area consists of the southerly portion of the Thermal Subarea and the Oasis Subarea that have experienced declining groundwater levels since 1980. The Area of Benefit for this management program coincides with the management area. Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Boundary

Figure 9 presents the boundary of the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit. This boundary is defined as follows: That lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin within the boundaries of CVWD, beginning at the northerly extension of Jefferson Street located on the San Andreas Fault, south to Avenue 40, west to Adams Street, south to Fred Waring Drive (Avenue 44), west to Washington Street, south to the Santa Rosa Mountains near Point Happy. The area’s western boundary continues south along the foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains to the southwest corner of section 25, township 7 south, range 7 east, thence to the southwest corner of section 36, township 8 south, range 8 east, which is approximately 3 miles due west of Travertine Rock. The boundary continues east along the Riverside County line to the southeast corner of section 34, township 8 south, range 9 east, which is inundated by the Salton Sea. The boundary continues northeasterly across the Salton Sea to the northeast corner of section 34, township 7 south, range 10 east, thence northwesterly along the San Andreas Fault to the point of beginning.

-15- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 9 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

-16- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 10 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

-17- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Groundwater Production

As presented in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002), groundwater production within the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit was estimated to be 168,300 AF per year (AF/yr) during 1999. Table 2 presents the estimated 2010 groundwater production for the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin. When the Replenishment Assessment was adopted in June 2004, the CVWD Board of Directors required groundwater producers to report their groundwater production. The reported production for 2010 was 111,529 AF. CVWD estimates that 38,471 AF of production was not reported by groundwater producers as required by the State Water Code. The total estimated production for 2010 is 150,000.

Table 2 Estimated Groundwater Production Within the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area Benefit Year Acre-feet 1999(1) 168,300 2002(2) 166,700 2003 199,800 2004 172,300 2005 172,000 2006 172,000 2007 172,000 2008 172,000 2009 160,000 2010 150,000(3) (1) From the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan, Table 3-2 Summary of Historical Water Supplies in 1936 and 1999. (2) 2002 through 2009 based on Table 2, Engineer’s Report on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment, Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit 2010-2011. (3) Assessable groundwater production estimated from reported and projected unreported groundwater production.

Groundwater Inflows and Outflows

Total inflows and outflows to the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit for the year 2010 are summarized in Table 3. The natural inflow of 33,700 AF/year includes natural recharge and flow across Subbasin boundaries. The nonconsumptive return of applied water is estimated at 140,918 AF, which is the sum of 35 percent of the estimated annual groundwater production and 35 percent of Colorado River water applied for irrigation within the Area of Benefit during 2010. The total inflow includes the natural inflow, the nonconsumptive return, and the 37,401 AF of actual water recharged by CVWD at the recharge facilities. The total outflow is the groundwater production estimate plus 69,477 AF/year of subsurface drainage. The annual

-18- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

balance is the total inflow less the total outflow for a loss of 7,457 AF of water in storage from the Subbasin.

Table 3 Calculation of Overdraft in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin(1) Item Annual Calculation (AF) Total Overdraft (AF) Overdraft through 2009(2) 4,490,152 Production Estimate -150,000 Non-consumptive return(3) 140,918 Natural inflow(4) 33,700 Flows to drains(5) -69,477 Groundwater replenishment(6) 37,401 Annual balance(7) -7,457 Cumulative overdraft through 2010 4,497,609 (1) Based on 65% consumptive use and some flow to drains. (2) Engineer’s Report on Water Supply and Replenishment, Lower Whitewater River Subbasin, April 2010. (3) Based on 35% of production plus Colorado River water applied for irrigation in the AOB. (4) Includes natural recharge and flow across Subarea boundaries. (5) Subsurface drainage. (6) TEL Recharge Facility received 35,196 AF and Martinez Canyon received 2,205 AF. (7) This is a decrease in stored groundwater, equal to 0.03 percent of the Subbasin’s storage capacity and 0.17 percent of the cumulative overdraft at the beginning of the year.

Overdraft

Groundwater overdraft is manifested not only as a prolonged decline in groundwater storage but also through secondary adverse effects including decreased well yields, increased energy costs, water quality degradation, and land subsidence. The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) defined overdraft as the loss of freshwater storage. The California Department of Water Resources 2005 California Water Plan Update (2005) defines overdraft as the condition of a groundwater basin in which the amount of water withdrawn by pumping exceeds the amount of water that recharges the basin over a period of years during which water supply conditions approximate average conditions. The Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit’s groundwater supply is overdrawn and will remain so even with the Replenishment Program recharge. Overdraft of the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin will continue because it is not being replenished sufficiently to fully recover. In effect, the groundwater Subbasin is being mined. Based on the water balance information presented, the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin experienced a loss of 7,457 AF of water storage during 2010. It should be noted that overdrafting the groundwater basin may allow poor quality water from irrigation return and the Salton Sea to replace fresh water storage. Since 1936, the cumulative overdraft of the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin has been approximately 4.5 million AF. -19- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

An ongoing groundwater replenishment program is needed to reduce declining groundwater levels and to avoid any detrimental conditions that would otherwise occur.

REPLENISHMENT PROGRAM

Current Recharge Activities

Two direct recharge programs are currently operating in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit. The TEL Recharge Facility is located just south of Lake Cahuilla at Dike 4, a major flood control dike, near Avenue 62 and Madison Street. This location appears to be ideally suited for a large-scale recharge facility for the Thermal Subarea, given its proximity to Lake Cahuilla and its relative freedom from aquitards. In 2009 the facility was named the Thomas E. Levy Groundwater Replenishment Facility, or TEL Recharge Facility. In 2010, CVWD recharged 35,196 AF/year at this location. Since 1997, 82,734 AF of water has been recharged at the TEL Recharge Facility. CVWD completed construction of a pilot recharge facility and several monitoring wells on the Martinez Canyon alluvial fan in March 2005. This facility is designed to recharge approximately 4,000 AF/year and received 2,205 AF of recharge water in 2010. The annual amounts of water delivered for recharge at TEL and Martinez Canyon are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Annual Recharge Deliveries Calendar Year Recharge Delivery (AF/year) 1997 415 1998 1,364 1999 2,802 2000 1,813 2001 3,572 2002 2,360 2003 1,671 2004 3,450 2005 4,743 2006 2,648 2007 5,775 2008 7,473 2009 21,735 2010 37,401

Total 97,222

Reference: CVWD billing records.

-20- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Monitoring Wells

Nine monitoring wells were installed near TEL Recharge Facility in 1995 and are monitored quarterly for water quality and changes in water table elevation. Of these nine wells, four are shallow (176-315 feet), five are deep (543-740 feet), and are located both up and down- gradient of the original pilot ponds along Avenue 62. Nine new monitoring wells were installed near TEL Recharge Facility in 2009. Six wells are nested together in groups of two (one shallow and one deep) down-gradient of the facility, parallel to Dike 4. Three additional shallow monitoring wells are installed down-gradient of the facility at existing CVWD sites. The new monitoring wells are used to evaluate water quality and depth to water table, along with the original monitoring wells. Monitoring wells at the Pilot Martinez Canyon Recharge Facility were installed in 2001-2002 and are used to collect quarterly water quality and water table elevation data. These wells range from a depth of 380 to 420 feet and are located down-gradient of the pilot ponds along Avenue 72. Monitoring wells are also used to evaluate intrusion into the fresh water aquifer by water from the Salton Sea. CVWD has been studying this potential problem since 1996 using a multiple zone monitoring well near Lincoln Street on the northwest end of the Salton Sea. This well allows the evaluation of water level and quality at four different depths below the ground surface. During 2002, CVWD completed construction of two additional multiple zone monitoring wells near Avenue 78 on the west side of the Salton Sea. Each monitoring well allows measurements from two aquifer zones in the Oasis area. Monitoring data for these wells show that the shallower aquifers generally have water levels ranging from 25 to 70 feet below the elevation of the Salton Sea. This elevation difference can provide the hydraulic pressure to induce salt-water intrusion into the groundwater basin. Data from these monitoring wells also show that the depth to groundwater in the primary production aquifers is 40 to 100 feet below the ground surface. Many areas of the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit have shallow semi-perched groundwater conditions. Since groundwater levels in this perched aquifer are typically 8 to 10 feet below ground surface (controlled by agricultural drains), there is a downward vertical gradient between the perched aquifer and the primary production zone. Salts that accumulate in the semi-perched zone from irrigation use can migrate slowly through the aquitard into the deeper aquifers thereby degrading the water quality. As groundwater levels in the deeper aquifers decline due to overdraft, there is an increased potential for vertical migration of this poor quality water and degradation of the deeper groundwater quality.

Recharge Facilities

CVWD brought the TEL Recharge Facility on-line in June, 2009. The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) indicates this facility should be able to recharge approximately 40,000 AF/year. CVWD recharged 35,196 AF at this location in 2010.

-21- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

The 7 hydrographs in the “Groundwater Levels” section, above, are some of 258 wells monitored in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit by CVWD staff. The average rise in water levels observed in the monitored wells during last year was 7.2 feet. Early benefits of recharge from TEL Recharge Facility to the lower aquifer are observed in measurements collected from monitoring wells near the facility. The 18 monitoring wells located at the TEL Recharge Facility provide representative monitoring of the preliminary effects of the recharge efforts. The nine original monitoring wells at the TEL Recharge Facility show an average water level increase of 31.1 feet during 2010. Eight of nine new monitoring wells installed in mid 2009 show an average water level increase of 41.0 feet from the time of installation through December 2010, and a 30.4 foot average increase in 2010. One of the nine new monitoring wells installed in 2009 was installed into the upper perched aquifer. Water levels observed in this well increased less than 2 feet in 2010. Figure 11, below, plots water levels in this shallow well, SWN 06S07E34A02S, water levels in a deep well at the same location, SWN 06S07E34A02S (CVWD-W 6728), and the amount of recharge at TEL Recharge Facility. The shallow monitoring well seems unaffected by recharge to the deep aquifer.

Figure 11 Groundwater Levels Downstream of TEL Recharge Facility (1.3 Miles from TEL)

-22- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

In Figure 12, one of the original TEL Recharge Facility deep monitoring wells’ hydrographs shows an increase in water levels during the same period as recharge deliveries. The annual average water level in this well increased from 128 feet below ground surface in 2009 to 94 feet in 2010.

Figure 12 Historic Groundwater Levels at TEL Recharge Facility Monitoring Well “4 West” Deep (0.3 Miles from TEL)

In addition to the TEL Recharge Facility monitoring wells, the benefits of recharge are observed in historic water level readings at production wells around the TEL Recharge Facility. Figures 13, 14, and 15 provide water levels at representative wells. Appendix 1 contains all measurements collected for these wells. State Well 06S07E16A02S (CVWD-W 6723), Figure 13, is located about three miles north of the TEL Recharge Facility in the PGA West area of the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit. The annual average water level in this well increased from 150 feet below ground surface in 2009 to 139 feet in 2010.

-23- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 13 Historic Groundwater Levels North of TEL Recharge Facility (2.9 Miles from TEL)

State Well 06S08E19C02S (CVWD-W 6805), Figure 14 below, is located about four miles northeast of the TEL Recharge Facility. The annual average water level in this well increased from 64 feet below ground surface in 2009 to 63 feet in 2010.

Figure 14 Historic Groundwater Levels Northeast of TEL Recharge Facility (4.1 Miles from TEL)

-24- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

State Well 07S08E10P01S, Figure 15, is located about six miles southeast of the TEL Recharge Facility. The annual average water level in this well increased from 21 feet below ground surface in 2009 to 14 feet in 2010.

Figure 15 Historic Groundwater Levels Southeast of TEL Recharge Facility (6.5 Miles from TEL)

If the Martinez Canyon pilot recharge program is successful, CVWD plans to construct a full- scale recharge facility on the Martinez Canyon alluvial fan. The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) indicates this facility should be able to recharge approximately 40,000 AF/year. The first phase of the larger facility is anticipated to be fully operational in about 5 years. In addition to the direct recharge facilities described above, CVWD plans to provide imported or recycled water to replace groundwater pumping as identified in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). These programs include construction of a Canal water distribution system in the Oasis area that will serve users located within CVWD’s Improvement District No. 1 (ID-1), the contractually designated area that is eligible to receive Canal water. CVWD will also work with groundwater users such as farms, golf courses and other users to encourage the use of Canal water and/or recycled water. These programs are in the development stage and will be implemented over the next thirty years.

-25- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Future Recharge Activities

Coachella Valley Water Management Plan

CVWD’s goal is to ensure a dependable long-term supply of high quality water for all Valley water users. To this end, CVWD developed the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002), which addresses the long-term water supply needs of the entire groundwater basin south of the San Andreas Fault. A final Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) for the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) and State Water Project Entitlement Transfer was certified by CVWD Board of Directors in October 2002. The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) recognizes the need for additional conservation, groundwater recharge and source substitution in order to achieve long-term stability in the Valley’s water supply. The Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) and PEIR can be found on CVWD’s web site at www.cvwd.org. The Water Management Plan 2010 Update draft document is currently available for review at CVWD’s web site. The Final Water Management Plan 2010 Update document is expected to be approved during 2011.

Recharge Model Projections

The extent of the Area of Benefit for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Management Area was determined during the course of preparation of the recent Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) and its associated PEIR that required extensive computer modeling of the Whitewater River Subbasin. The groundwater model allowed CVWD to gain a better understanding of water conditions in this subbasin and the benefits of water management practices identified in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). Figure 16 presents the projected change in groundwater levels between No Project conditions (without replenishment) and the adopted Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002) (Preferred Alternative 4) in the year 2035. The map and water level contours for the year 2035 reflect the benefits of implementing the preferred alternative. Implementation of this alternative results in water levels that are 145 to160 feet higher in the La Quinta area, and about 160 feet higher in the Oasis area, compared to water levels without implementing the elements of the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). Figure 17 uses the groundwater model to show the benefits of replenishment. In this case, water levels are projected to the year 2015 in response to recharge at both the TEL Recharge Facility and Martinez Canyon recharge facility. Projected water levels in the Indio area increase 2 to 17 feet and water levels in the Oasis area increase about 10 feet when compared to no recharge at these facilities. In the year 2040, shown in Figure 18, benefits of both recharge facilities operating at projected capacities result in water level increases in the Indio area of 35-75 feet when compared to projected water levels without this recharge. Water levels in the Oasis area show an increase of 95 feet when compared to water levels without recharge from these two facilities.

-26- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 16 Whitewater River Subbasin - Change in Water Levels from 1999 to 2035

Without Replenishment With Replenishment Positive numbers indicate a drop in water level.

-27- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 17 Increased Water Levels Due to Recharge at TEL Recharge Facility and Martinez Canyon Recharge Facilities, Year 2015

-28- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Figure 18 Increased Water Levels Due to Recharge at TEL Recharge Facility and Martinez Canyon Recharge Facilities, Year 2040

-29- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Other Replenishment Activities

Replenishment programs are also under way in the Mission Creek Subbasin and the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin. These programs are described in separate Engineer’s Reports.

REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT

State Water Code

Sections 31630 through 31639 of the State Water Code authorize CVWD to levy and collect water replenishment assessments for the purpose of replenishing groundwater supplies within CVWD boundaries. The code defines production, producer, and minimal pumper for replenishment purposes as follows:

“Production” or “produce” means the extraction of ground water by pumping or any other method within the boundaries of the district or the diversion within the district of surface supplies which naturally replenish the ground water supplies within the district and are used therein. “Producer” means any individual, partnership, association or group of individuals, lessee, firm, private corporation, or any public agency or public corporation, including, but not limited to, the Coachella Valley Water District. “Minimal pumper” means any producer who produces 25 or fewer AF in any year. The replenishment assessment is based on groundwater production within the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin within the boundaries of CVWD and is limited to the Area of Benefit. Production by minimal pumpers is exempt from assessment. The number of minimal pumpers in the Area of Benefit is currently unknown. CVWD will conduct a thorough field investigation of the use of all wells. Minimal pumpers predominantly pump water from small wells that are used for domestic or limited irrigation purposes. The code defines “replenishment assessment” and it states that assessments may be levied upon all water production within the Area of Benefit, provided the assessment charge is uniform throughout said Area of Benefit. The Replenishment Assessment Charge is a monetary charge authorized by the State Water Code and uniformly applied to extractions of groundwater within certain specified geographic boundaries of CVWD for payments of an imported or recycled (reclaimed) water supply purchased to supplement naturally existing water supplies. Charges for the water supply are limited to certain specified costs. In the initial twelve years of the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin replenishment program, only certain portions of the SWP costs could be included in the Replenishment Assessment Charge calculation. However, in 1991 the legislature passed and the governor signed into law AB 1070. This bill allowed additional costs including the cost of importing and recharging water from sources other than the SWP and the cost of treating and distributing -30- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

recycled water. The Replenishment Assessment Charge considered in this report is based on the most recent and reliable information available with respect to applicable costs or charges. CVWD has incurred additional costs associated with the replenishment program, which include previous engineering studies and monitoring well construction, maintenance and monitoring. These costs and the cost of treating and distributing recycled water are not currently included in determining the RAC.

Replenishment Water Costs

SWP water (Table A Amount) is not currently used for recharge in the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin as all of the existing Table A Amount is used for replenishment of the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin and the Mission Creek Subbasin. There is no conveyance facility to directly deliver SWP water to the lower valley. Replenishment water for the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin groundwater replenishment program comes from CVWD’s Colorado River water contract and the Quantitative Settlement Agreement. Colorado River Water available for groundwater recharge includes the following block amounts:

Base Allotment 321, 000 AF IID to CVWD-First Transfer 50,000 AF IID to CVWD-Second Transfer 53,000 AF MWD Transfer 35,000 AF Total 459,000 AF The Colorado River Water cost varies as to which block the water is derived. Agricultural customers have the first priority of the base allotment. Groundwater replenishment water will then come from any remaining base allotment and the subsequent blocks. Previous Replenishment Costs

Since the establishment of the replenishment assessment program for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit in June 2004, CVWD has incurred costs for development and operation of the TEL Recharge Facility and the Martinez Canyon Recharge Facilities as indicated in its financial records. These costs consist of: (1) canal water costs, (2) power costs, (3) engineering, construction, operation and maintenance of the TEL recharge pilot facility, (4) engineering for the development of the full-scale TEL Recharge Facility and (5) engineering, construction, operation and maintenance of the Martinez Canyon Pilot Recharge Facility. These costs are included in the calculation of the RAC for Fiscal Year 2011-2012. Proposed Replenishment Costs

Historical capital and operating costs are utilized to develop the proposed RAC for Fiscal Year 2011-2012 and are described below and presented in Table 5.

-31- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Table 5 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Replenishment Assessment Charge (RAC) for Fiscal Year 2011-2012

-32- Engineer’s Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

CVWD conducted land acquisition, engineering, design and initiated construction of the full- scale TEL Recharge Facility in 2008. Capital expenditures of approximatley $26 million that were previously deferred are included in the amount listed for calendar year 2008. Calendar year 2009 includes captial expenditures for construction costs, monitoring wells, telemetry, and environmental monitoring. Calendar year 2010 includes no captial expenditures. The following capital expenditures have been included in the assessment rate calculation: Year 2005 $1,283,666 Year 2006 $1,597,657 Year 2007 $0 Year 2008 $34,427,011 Year 2009 $12,976,680 Year 2010 $0 Total $50,285,013

Construction of the Martinez Canyon Pilot Recharge Project was completed in March 2005. The following capital expenditures have been included in the RAC calculation.

Year 2004 $5,500,000 Year 2005 $340,947 Year 2006 $61,655 Year 2007 $0 Year 2008 $0 Year 2009 $0 Year 2010 $0_ Total $5,902,602

The above-referenced capital expenditures for 2005 and 2006 are being amortized over a 20 year period, whereas capital expenditures for 2008 and 2009 are being amortized over a 30 year period. The amortized portion for 2011 is $2,181,053. The operating costs for the TEL Recharge Facility and Martinez Canyon Recharge Facility during 2010 totaled $401,025 and include spreading area operations and maintenance (O&M) costs based on a historical five year average.

-33- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

The cost for Colorado River water used for recharge during 2010 totaled $3,413,3931 for 37,401 AF of total recharge plus gate charges. The cost of power used for recharge during 2010 was $1,073,606. In 2010, CVWD incurred $248,156 for engineering and administrative costs for the implementation of water management activities in the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit. These costs include personnel and materials for meter reading, billing, groundwater monitoring and report preparation. The replenishment assessment program was imposed effective July 1, 2004; however, collection of assessments did not begin until January 1, 2005. Consequently, no assessments were collected on one-half of the estimated Fiscal Year 2004-2005 production (86,000 AF). This delayed assessment for the first year amounted to $417,960 at the adopted rate of $4.86 per acre-foot and has been amortized over 10 years. The amount for 2011 is $46,209.

Assessed Production

As indicated in the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002), individual production within the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit is not known with certainty. However, total estimated production was developed as part of the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). This estimated production was based on data developed from metered production records and evaluations of consumptive use by crops and other irrigation uses of groundwater for the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan (2002). Estimated production reflected in Table 2 is based on reductions in reported 2010 production and projected reductions attributed to groundwater production not yet reported. The assessed production for 2011 is estimated to be 150,000 AF/year. Producers within the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin are listed in Table 6, together with their estimated production and their total estimated replenishment assessment.

Methods for Determining Production

In accordance with Section 31638.5 of the California Water Code, Producers are required to have water-measuring devices installed on all wells or other water producing facilities within one year following the levy of a replenishment assessment. Minimal pumpers are exempt from this provision. Producers shall submit a water production statement on a CVWD approved form with their RAC payment each month or enter into a Water Production Metering Agreement with CVWD to have CVWD staff measure and report groundwater production. If no statment of production is furnished, CVWD will calculate production based on energy consumption records (in kilowatt-hours) and the results of well pump tests indicating unit energy consumption per acre-foot of production (in kilowatt-hours per acre-foot).

1. Estimate includes Coachella Canal Quagga Mussel Control Emergency Chlorination Project fee of $5.00/AF. -34- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

If no energy consumption records are available, CVWD will compute the groundwater pumping based on consumptive use of water. Consumptive use will be computed by multiplying the irrigated acreage for each crop type using CVWD’s zanjero maps of cropping patterns (conducted semi-annually) by a water consumption factor for each crop. The water consumption factor will be based on published crop evapotranspiration requirements, an allowance for leaching and an irrigation efficiency of 70 percent. Other water consumption factors will be used to compute production not used for irrigation. Production will be computed by subtracting any metered deliveries of Canal water or recycled water. If the total metered, estimated or computed annual amount of production for any producer is 25 AF or less, that entity will be designated a minimal pumper and will be exempt from the RAC for that year. Minimal pumpers will be re-evaluated as necessary.

Replenishment Assessment Charge

The RAC per acre-foot is based on the calculations in Table 5. The RAC for Fiscal Year 2011- 2012 is based on the replenishment costs of $7,682,100. The calculated Replenishment Assessment Charge is $51.21 per acre-foot. This charge includes $46,209 to recover charges from Fiscal Year 2004-2005 that were deferred to future years. The Fiscal Year 2011-2012 calculated RAC is 66 percent higher than the RAC for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. Costs associated with the construction and operation of future facilities will be recovered in the assessment when those costs are incurred. The Joint Water Policy Advisory Committee (JWPAC) for the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit, which includes representatives from groups of stakeholders within the Area of Benefit, recommends limiting the increase of the RAC for the period beginning July 1, 2011 to $31.00 per acre-foot, 29 percent higher than the RAC for Fiscal Year 2010-2011. Actual costs not recovered by this reduced RAC will be amortized and recovered during future years to provide a more gradual increase in the rate over time. It is expected that the Lower Whitewater River Subbasin RAC will stabilize now that the TEL Recharge Facility is in full operation. Future cost increases will likely only reflect inflation and the costs associated with collecting RAC for past non-reported production.

-35- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Table 6 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Estimated Producer Replenishment Costs for 2011 Estimated Estimated Production Assessment Producer's Name Acre Feet(1) Dollars(2) 53 & JACKSON 277.3 $8,596.30 AMEZCUA, OSCAR 43.2 $1,339.20 ANDALUSIA GOLF CLUB AT 908.0 $28,148.00 ANTHONY VINEYARDS/FLAME KING 4,004.1 $124,127.10 AQUA FARMING TECHNOLOGY 846.7 $26,247.70 ARTESIAN ACRES INC. 189.6 $5,877.60 ARZ, INC. 426.3 $13,215.30 BARAJAS, JOHN H. 80.2 $2,486.20 BARAQUIA, NELSON 532.6 $16,510.60 BERMUDA DUNES AIRPORT 55.0 $1,705.00 BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB 1,520.4 $47,132.40 BERMUDA PALMS MOBILE PARK 68.1 $2,111.10 BOE DEL HEIGHTS WATER COMPANY 141.4 $4,383.40 BREECH TRUST 1,658.2 $51,404.20 BRIGHTON DISTRIBUTING, INC. 346.8 $10,750.80 C.V. PUBLIC CEMETERY DISTRICT 264.5 $8,199.50 CAL-SUNGOLD INC. 189.5 $5,874.50 CARLAU, LLC 91.4 $2,833.40 CARVER TRACT MUTUAL WATER CO 103.7 $3,215.63 CENTRAL COAST GREENHOUSES, INC 297.5 $9,222.50 CHAC CHUO FARMS INC/AAA FARMS 613.6 $19,021.60 CITY OF COACHELLA 8,134.9 $252,181.90 CITY OF INDIO/INDIO WATER AUTH 21,491.6 $666,239.91 CITY OF INDIO/MUNICIPAL GOLF 30.8 $954.80 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 27,961.4 $866,803.40 COCOPAH NURSERIES INC 1,225.7 $37,997.63 COLDWATER RANCH DUCK CLUB INC 244.3 $7,573.30 COLORAMA WHOLESALE NURSERY 66.6 $2,064.60 CRYSTAL ORGANIC FARMS LLC 1,283.7 $39,794.70 DASHUN FISHERIES 572.6 $17,750.60 DESERT DIAMOND LLC 62.5 $1,937.50 DESERT MIST FARMS/MECCA III 1,185.2 $36,741.20 DORSEY FAMILY GROVES LLC 432.5 $13,407.50 EAST OF MADISON LLC 1,370.1 $42,473.10 EMPIRE II, LLC 103.6 $3,211.29 FAJARDO, GERARDO D. 39.3 $1,218.30 FISH A BIT RANCH SOUTH, LLC 27.0 $837.00 GIDDYUP PROPERTY 60.0 $1,860.00 -36- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Table 6 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Estimated Producer Replenishment Costs for 2011 Estimated Estimated Production Assessment Producer's Name Acre Feet(1) Dollars(2) GOLD COAST GROWERS, LLC 347.4 $10,769.40 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 175.3 $5,434.30 HERB THYME FARMS, INC. 117.6 $3,645.60 HERITAGE PALMS MASTERS H.O.A. 146.0 $4,526.00 INDIAN PALMS COUNTRY CLUB 1,362.8 $42,246.80 INDIAN SPRINGS GOLF CLUB 684.6 $21,222.60 JCM FARMING 123.0 $3,813.00 JEULE I, LLC/HOWARD MARGULEAS 224.1 $6,947.10 KARAHADIAN RANCHES INC. 262.9 $8,149.90 KENT SEATECH CORPORATION 25.5 $790.50 KSL 11 MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS 2,430.0 $75,330.00 LA QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB 739.4 $22,921.40 LAGUNA DE LA PAZ HOA 283.0 $8,773.00 LANE, DONA K. 53.8 $1,667.80 LANE, STEVEN L. 388.1 $12,031.10 LEJA FARMS 56.4 $1,748.40 LO, ERNEST AND TRACY 92.0 $2,852.00 LONG LIFE FARMS INC./VONG, KEN 2,372.0 $73,532.00 MALI BASTA RANCH 744.0 $23,064.00 MECCA LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. 307.7 $9,538.70 MOTORCOACH COUNTRY CLUB 168.7 $5,229.70 MOUNTAIN VIEW COUNTRY CLUB 295.1 $9,148.10 MRBL, LTD. 257.5 $7,982.50 MYOMA DUNES WATER COMPANY 4,250.3 $131,759.30 NI CHING HSIANG FISH FARMS 90.0 $2,790.00 NORTH SHORE GREENHOUSES, INC. 626.3 $19,415.30 NORTH SHORE RANCH, LLC 250.7 $7,771.70 OASIS DATE GARDEN 96.1 $2,978.79 OASIS GARDENS, LLC 270.5 $8,385.50 OASIS PALMS RV PARK 26.1 $809.10 OLE FO RANCH 437.4 $13,559.40 PALM ROYALE COUNTRY CLUB HOA 529.5 $16,414.50 PETER RABBIT FARMS 1,714.6 $53,152.60 PLANTATION GOLF CLUB 201.5 $6,246.50 PRIME TIME INTERNATIONAL 81.1 $2,514.10 RANCHO CASA BLANCA HOA 187.1 $5,800.10 RANCHO LEMUS 76.6 $2,374.60 RANCHO TEN 309.6 $9,597.60 RED GLOBE 1,426.8 $44,230.80 -37- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

Table 6 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit Estimated Producer Replenishment Costs for 2011 Estimated Estimated Production Assessment Producer's Name Acre Feet(1) Dollars(2) SHADOW HILLS GOLF CLUB 123.0 $3,813.00 SUN WORLD INTERNATIONAL LLC 1,474.0 $45,694.00 SUNRISE MARSH LLC 472.2 $14,638.20 SUNSET RANCH LLC 204.0 $6,324.62 SWEET DESERT LEMONS 217.0 $6,727.00 TD DESERT DEV/RANCHO LA QUINTA 968.0 $30,008.00 THE HIDEAWAY 52.5 $1,627.50 THE PALMS GOLF CLUB 763.8 $23,677.80 THE QUARRY AT LA QUINTA 1,220.3 $37,829.30 THERMALCULTURE MGMT LLC 2,304.0 $71,424.00 TLQ PARTNERS, INC. 303.7 $9,414.70 TRADITIONS GOLF CLUB 844.0 $26,164.00 TRI COLOR FARMS, LLC 162.4 $5,034.40 UNIVERSITY CALIF OF RIVERSIDE 3,008.3 $93,257.30 VONG, SI SAP/SS VONG FISH FARM 803.0 $24,893.00 WALLER TRACT MUTUAL WATER 109.3 $3,388.30 WESTERN AQUATIC ENTERPRISES 764.4 $23,696.40 YONEMITSU PROPERTIES LP 210.7 $6,531.70 YOUNG'S NURSERY, LLC 112.7 $3,493.70

Total Reported Assessable Production 113,298.4 $3,512,249.47 Total Non-Reported Assessable Production (3) 36,701.6 $1,137,750.53 Total Projected Assessable Production 150,000.0 $4,650,000.00 (1) Estimated production based on preceding calendar year reported production. (2) Production times $31.00 per acre foot. Totals are rounded to the nearest dollar. (3) The Projected Assessable Production less the Reported Assessable Production.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

Because the average natural water inflow into the lower portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin is less than the production, the replenishment program using imported water must be continued and enhanced. Therefore, it is recommended that the RAC of $31.00/AF be levied upon all producers within the Area of Benefit in accordance with the State Water Code.

-38- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The following is a partial bibliography of material related to the water supply in the Coachella Valley that was used in preparing this report.

1. Bechtel Corporation, Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, March 1967

2. California Department of Water Resources, Coachella Valley Area Well Standards Investigation, 1979

3. California Department of Water Resources, Coachella Valley Investigation, Bulletin 108, July 1964

4. California Department of Water Resources, Management of the California State Water Project, Bulletin 132-92, September 1992

5. California Department of Water Resources, California Water Plan Update 2005, Bulletin 160-05, Glossary page G-7. December 2005.

6. Coachella Valley Water District, Engineers Report on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit, 2010-2011, April 2010

7. Fogg, Graham E., Geral T. O’neill, Eric M. LaBolle, David J. Ringel, Groundwater Flow Model of Coachella Valley, California: An Overview, November 2000.

8. Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., Hydrogeologic Investigation of Ground Water Basin Serving Palm Springs, 1978

9. Huberty-Pillsbury, Hydrologic Studies in Coachella Valley, California, 1948

10. Krieger and Stewart, Coachella Valley Groundwater Management Plan for the Coachella Valley Planning Area of the West Colorado River Basin, 1979

11. Krieger and Stewart, Groundwater Recharge Potential Within Mission Creek Subbasin, 1980

12. MWH, Final Coachella Valley Water Management Plan, 2002

13. MWH, Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Coachella Valley Water Management Plan and State Water Project Entitlement Transfer, 2002.

14. MWH, Engineer’s Report on Water Supply and Replenishment Assessment Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit, 2005-2006.

15. United States Geological Survey, Analog Model Study of the Groundwater Basin of the Upper Coachella Valley, California, 1971

16. United States Geological Survey, Artificial Recharge in the Whitewater River Area, Palm Springs, California, 1973 -39- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

17. United States Geological Survey, Predicted Water Level and Water Quality Effects of Artificial Recharge in the Upper Coachella Valley, California, Using a Finite Element Digital Model, 1977

18. United State Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4142, Evaluation of a Ground-water Flow and Transport Model of the Upper Coachella Valley, California, 1992

-40- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

APPENDIX 1: HISTORICAL WELL DEPTH TO WATER MEASUREMENTS State Well Number 05S07E09L02S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1982-06-24 51.6 1982-10-08 48.5 1983-05-11 51.9 1983-08-05 54.6 1984-01-06 51.8 1984-05-10 54.2 1984-09-18 58.0 1984-12-06 54.2 1985-03-21 52.5 1985-06-27 56.5 1985-11-26 54.2 1986-04-03 58.5 1986-06-13 62.1 1986-10-30 57.5 1987-02-28 57.9 1987-08-31 63.5 1987-11-20 58.5 1988-02-29 60.2 1988-08-23 61.9 1988-12-06 61.6 1989-03-01 63.2 1989-05-02 63.5 1989-07-25 66.5 1989-10-13 63.9 1990-02-02 64.2 1990-07-31 66.8 1990-11-14 68.9 1991-04-18 66.9 1991-07-11 71.0 1991-12-06 70.2 1992-03-26 69.0 1992-06-19 69.5 1992-10-22 67.0 1993-02-23 68.9 1993-10-12 75.0 1994-02-09 71.1 1994-06-23 74.2 1994-11-08 74.6 1995-03-17 78.6 1995-09-25 79.8 1995-12-28 79.6 1996-02-22 78.2 1996-11-25 83.5 1997-01-14 81.5 1997-04-08 84.2 1997-09-03 87.9 1997-09-26 84.9 1998-01-16 84.3 1998-02-20 82.6 1998-07-29 88.8 1998-10-05 87.8 1999-03-05 88.9 1999-08-30 90.0 1999-09-22 89.9 1999-10-25 89.4 2000-08-01 90.6 2000-10-20 92.6 2001-03-14 88.7 2001-10-02 92.9 2002-04-23 91.6 2002-08-07 95.4 2003-01-17 94.7 2003-10-29 98.4 2004-01-05 97.9 2004-11-23 102.5 2005-01-07 101.0 2005-06-07 103.4 2005-12-02 107.8 2006-03-17 103.9 2006-10-17 107.7 2007-02-08 107.2 2007-06-04 114.6 2007-11-03 110.4 2008-02-02 110.6 2008-06-24 111.5 2008-09-12 113.9 2009-01-02 110.5 2009-05-01 110.7 2009-09-29 112.5 2010-01-19 118.7 2010-05-25 116.2 2010-09-07 115.7

State Well Number 05S07E10E01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft)

1939-10-11 36.8 1940-02-08 35.6 1940-08-09 43.3 1940-12-09 38.3 1941-07-18 43.9 1942-01-16 39.2 1942-08-04 46.3 1942-11-04 40.5 1943-02-03 38.1 1943-05-06 43.1 1943-11-09 42.6 1945-01-03 44.4 1945-09-04 46.3 1946-06-04 50.9 1946-07-17 55.3 1946-08-14 51.9 1947-01-16 49.1 1947-06-27 55.2 1949-01-27 48.9 1949-09-12 55.0 1950-09-11 53.2 1951-02-13 48.8 1951-04-09 52.7 1951-06-28 55.5 -41- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1951-09-24 51.7 1952-02-04 45.9 1952-04-17 61.2 1952-06-23 54.3 1952-09-23 52.6 1953-01-12 44.5 1953-07-24 58.2 1953-10-30 47.1 1954-03-19 49.2 1954-06-18 53.5 1954-09-16 51.7 1955-01-14 42.7 1955-04-22 49.9 1955-08-02 51.5 1955-10-04 54.1 1956-02-20 43.5 1956-05-08 50.4 1956-06-27 52.3 1956-08-22 55.6 1956-12-17 43.9 1957-04-09 50.2 1957-07-18 53.7 1957-10-15 44.6 1958-01-24 44.9 1958-04-29 50.3 1958-07-14 51.8 1958-10-22 50.8 1958-12-11 40.6 1959-02-13 41.1 1959-07-02 51.6 1959-12-17 37.4 1960-01-15 37.3 1960-03-18 44.9 1960-06-30 54.0 1960-12-28 39.5 1961-01-25 39.5 1961-05-10 44.2 1961-09-05 45.7 1962-01-31 36.9 1962-05-05 46.0 1962-09-28 44.8 1963-01-08 34.0 1963-05-01 43.2 1963-08-28 47.3 1964-01-13 39.7 1964-08-31 39.6 1964-12-11 31.8 1965-05-21 42.8 1965-10-04 37.3 1966-01-24 31.0 1966-06-01 35.6 1966-08-30 40.1 1966-09-27 37.7 1966-11-30 32.2 1967-02-09 35.6 1967-05-05 35.8 1967-08-30 36.1 1967-10-19 34.9 1967-11-29 29.9 1968-01-30 32.5 1968-03-28 35.9 1968-05-03 38.6 1968-08-01 35.0 1968-10-03 32.8 1969-02-19 32.5 1969-05-29 37.3 1969-09-09 39.9 1970-01-08 33.8 1970-06-04 35.7 1970-09-23 39.9 1971-01-26 33.4 1971-05-20 37.7 1971-09-10 35.6 1972-01-20 34.7 1972-05-10 39.1 1972-09-01 40.7 1973-02-01 34.7 1973-09-14 42.2 1974-01-24 33.1 1974-05-30 39.4 1974-09-19 46.1 1975-02-14 33.9 1975-06-04 37.4 1975-09-26 44.6 1976-02-05 36.9 1976-06-04 38.8 1976-10-22 37.2 1977-02-18 37.4 1977-06-07 39.9 1977-09-08 39.9 1978-02-28 37.4 1978-06-29 41.1 1978-09-29 46.5 1979-01-10 35.1 1979-06-13 44.7 1979-09-10 46.9 1980-03-12 36.7 1980-05-30 39.5 1980-10-31 39.7 1981-03-06 35.1 1981-03-06 35.1 1982-02-09 48.2 1982-06-11 42.5 1982-10-08 43.9 1983-02-11 37.1 1983-08-05 48.7 1984-01-13 39.5 1984-09-18 49.0 1984-12-06 47.4 1985-03-21 44.8 1985-06-27 49.7 1985-11-26 43.9 1986-03-14 45.5 1986-06-13 52.1 1986-10-30 50.2 1987-02-28 48.5 1987-08-31 55.8 1987-12-10 50.0 1988-02-29 53.4 1988-08-16 54.6 1988-12-09 52.4 1989-02-28 52.8 1989-05-02 57.1 1989-07-24 54.8 1989-09-28 60.1 1990-02-07 54.3

-42- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1990-07-03 57.5 1990-07-06 57.9 1990-11-09 56.5 1991-04-17 57.6 1991-07-11 59.0 1991-11-19 57.7 1992-03-25 56.3 1992-06-19 59.0 1992-12-23 59.7 1993-02-23 56.5 1993-06-30 61.3 1993-10-07 60.4 1994-02-09 59.1 1994-05-26 63.9 1994-10-18 67.1 1995-02-23 61.7 1995-07-13 64.9 1995-09-25 66.9 1996-02-23 63.2 1996-08-01 67.4 1996-11-26 65.5 1997-02-25 63.9 1997-07-09 70.5 1997-09-04 68.4 1997-10-10 69.0 1998-02-26 67.6 1998-07-21 71.9 1998-10-13 71.9 1999-03-10 70.9 1999-08-18 74.4 1999-10-25 73.4 2000-03-22 70.2 2000-07-07 75.0 2000-10-18 77.2 2001-03-14 72.5 2001-07-10 77.1 2001-11-06 77.9 2002-08-01 79.5 2002-10-30 80.1 2003-04-16 79.9 2003-10-30 84.5 2004-01-22 81.9

State Well Number 06S07E02D02S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1985-09-12 69.2 1985-11-06 66.0 1986-04-23 66.7 1986-07-31 74.0 1987-04-29 74.2 1987-12-15 67.7 1988-05-11 74.3 1988-12-09 73.8 1989-03-15 77.5 1989-10-10 82.7 1990-02-28 76.1 1990-08-24 89.3 1990-12-13 86.9 1991-04-17 80.8 1991-09-11 90.9 1992-04-13 77.9 1992-09-03 89.7 1992-10-29 88.0 1993-03-10 77.9 1993-07-28 97.0 1993-12-01 92.0 1994-03-02 84.2 1994-05-26 94.1 1994-09-29 97.8 1995-04-11 91.8 1995-08-09 107.4 1995-11-01 100.7 1996-04-04 95.8 1996-08-20 109.1 1996-11-27 103.3 1997-04-11 101.1 1997-07-25 109.7 1997-11-26 102.4 1998-03-23 96.6 1998-08-13 113.9 1998-11-23 105.2 1999-03-19 102.8 1999-08-27 116.9 1999-11-04 109.5 2000-04-19 113.3 2000-08-15 122.9 2000-12-27 115.2 2001-04-12 109.2 2001-09-06 126.4 2001-12-12 112.0 2002-04-25 118.0 2002-09-04 131.1 2002-11-27 115.5 2003-12-12 122.9 2004-03-24 124.6 2004-08-26 141.6 2004-12-06 137.5 2005-12-08 132.1 2006-05-04 139.4 2006-10-21 156.0 2007-03-07 132.9 2007-07-16 153.8 2007-11-03 135.4 2008-03-19 115.2 2008-10-03 124.4 2008-07-03 124.9 2009-01-09 101.5 2009-06-30 120.5 2010-01-29 108.2 2010-06-01 109.8 2010-10-28 109.2

State Well Number 06S07E16A02S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft)

-43- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1987-11-19 74.1 1988-05-11 83.2 1988-12-09 82.7 1989-03-15 82.4 1989-10-10 88.7 1990-02-27 85.5 1990-08-23 95.4 1990-12-14 88.3 1991-04-12 90.3 1991-08-28 98.3 1992-04-03 86.0 1992-04-13 86.0 1992-08-27 101.4 1992-10-27 94.2 1993-03-09 86.2 1993-07-27 105.1 1993-11-07 99.0 1994-03-01 92.1 1994-05-20 103.6 1994-10-20 103.8 1995-04-11 99.0 1995-08-08 116.5 1995-10-20 108.6 1996-04-03 104.8 1996-08-14 117.2 1996-11-25 115.5 1997-04-10 106.4 1997-07-23 113.1 1997-11-14 111.4 1998-03-20 103.1 1998-08-13 117.9 1998-11-20 112.3 1999-03-18 110.2 1999-08-26 125.8 1999-11-12 117.3 2000-04-19 124.3 2000-08-10 128.5 2000-12-28 121.0 2001-04-04 120.5 2001-08-15 131.5 2001-12-10 128.2 2002-04-22 129.7 2002-08-22 133.4 2003-05-16 141.3 2003-12-04 129.4 2004-02-24 126.3 2004-08-25 158.0 2004-12-07 130.3 2005-06-20 158.9 2005-12-05 140.3 2006-05-04 147.5 2006-10-25 165.2 2007-03-09 144.1 2007-09-07 161.0 2008-03-08 140.7 2008-08-01 167.2 2008-10-08 154.8 2009-02-05 138.0 2009-06-30 162.0 2009-10-06 150.3 2010-03-05 127.1 2010-06-07 141.4 2010-10-28 148.9

State Well Number 06S07E22B01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1926-09-21 17.4 1926-11-30 13.0 1927-01-19 8.6 1927-06-16 17.4 1927-07-20 17.0 1927-10-12 12.9 1927-11-23 12.0 1927-12-29 8.3 1928-01-14 7.6 1928-02-22 8.9 1928-04-21 16.2 1928-09-28 17.3 1928-10-29 15.3 1928-11-28 12.8 1929-01-29 11.8 1929-03-28 15.5 1929-04-29 17.6 1929-05-27 17.6 1929-07-25 18.8 1929-08-13 19.9 1929-09-26 16.9 1929-10-29 15.5 1929-11-28 14.0 1929-12-27 12.8 1930-01-31 10.9 1930-04-24 19.2 1930-09-12 19.5 1930-12-30 13.9 1931-03-11 14.4 1933-12-21 14.6 1934-02-02 16.2 1934-03-01 15.3 1934-04-04 17.1 1934-05-07 19.3 1934-06-26 18.9 1934-07-21 19.5 1934-08-31 18.7 1934-09-30 19.3 1934-10-30 17.4 1934-11-26 16.3 1934-12-27 15.0 1935-01-28 14.3 1935-02-21 15.6 1935-03-28 15.8 1935-05-03 17.2 1935-08-12 20.0 1935-10-06 19.8 1935-11-15 19.7 1935-12-18 18.7 1936-02-19 16.0 1936-03-18 18.2 1936-04-13 19.9 1936-05-15 21.3 1936-09-18 22.2 1937-03-31 17.8 1937-06-02 20.4 1937-08-01 22.9 1937-10-01 23.9 1937-12-02 20.3 1938-02-08 19.0 1938-04-05 20.6 1938-05-28 24.7 1938-08-04 25.2

-44- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1938-09-26 24.2 1939-01-25 19.0 1939-04-28 25.3 1939-08-04 26.4 1939-10-05 20.5 1939-12-11 20.3 1940-04-17 25.2 1940-08-10 26.9 1940-12-04 23.9 1941-04-15 24.4 1941-07-17 27.7 1941-10-14 24.6 1942-11-04 24.5 1943-02-04 22.4 1943-08-02 27.5 1943-12-07 25.5 1944-01-03 22.3 1944-07-27 29.7 1946-01-23 25.0 1946-08-15 33.0 1947-01-15 27.9 1947-04-14 30.8 1947-06-26 36.7 1947-09-19 35.3 1948-04-26 34.2 1948-05-21 35.7 1948-07-26 37.3 1949-01-23 32.4 1949-04-22 36.3 1949-06-24 41.0 1949-09-12 40.7 1950-09-15 42.0 1951-02-16 35.6 1951-04-09 34.9 1951-06-28 36.0 1951-09-27 35.7 1952-01-31 32.0 1952-04-11 31.8 1952-06-24 41.2 1952-06-26 33.6 1952-09-19 36.7 1953-01-16 31.6 1953-04-24 30.4 1953-07-28 31.4 1953-12-08 29.6 1954-03-16 29.0 1954-06-28 28.8 1954-09-20 27.9 1955-01-13 24.4 1955-04-12 23.7 1955-08-02 24.3 1955-10-28 23.7 1956-02-27 21.0 1956-06-25 21.7 1956-08-29 21.3 1956-11-27 19.7 1957-04-02 17.6 1957-07-16 18.9 1957-10-04 19.0 1958-02-10 15.0 1958-04-25 15.2 1958-07-16 16.7 1958-10-17 16.4 1959-01-30 13.9 1959-04-28 14.0 1959-08-13 14.9 1959-12-18 12.0 1960-01-14 11.1 1960-03-18 10.3 1960-05-13 11.5 1960-07-29 12.3 1960-12-01 10.0 1961-03-01 8.6 1961-08-31 10.4 1962-01-30 7.0 1962-05-05 7.4 1962-09-11 9.1 1963-01-03 8.0 1963-05-02 6.4 1963-08-16 8.5 1964-01-07 5.0 1964-08-26 6.9 1964-12-07 5.5 1965-05-21 5.3 1965-10-04 6.8 1966-01-10 4.5 1966-06-01 4.8 1966-09-13 6.1 1966-09-27 5.5 1966-11-30 5.7 1966-12-19 4.7 1967-01-10 4.8 1967-01-25 4.2 1967-05-04 4.1 1967-09-01 6.3 1967-10-20 6.2 1967-12-15 4.1 1968-01-03 4.8 1968-01-12 4.5 1968-03-25 4.4 1968-05-01 5.0 1968-06-04 5.3 1968-08-07 3.4 1968-12-18 6.2 1969-01-08 5.7 1969-01-10 5.7 1969-01-14 5.6 1969-01-17 5.3 1969-02-07 5.4 1969-02-21 5.3 1969-06-06 6.2 1969-09-14 7.9 1969-12-16 6.7 1970-01-05 6.4 1970-01-12 6.3 1970-01-19 6.1 1970-01-26 6.0 1970-02-02 6.0 1970-05-21 6.5 1970-09-23 9.0 1970-12-28 8.2 1971-05-20 8.0 1971-09-14 10.2 1972-01-25 8.7 1972-05-11 9.7 1972-09-11 11.4 1973-02-06 9.4 1973-05-29 10.4 1973-09-21 10.0 1974-01-25 10.0 1974-06-06 11.0 1974-09-20 13.9 1975-01-20 10.8 1975-05-29 10.9 1975-09-29 13.0 1976-02-11 11.3 1976-06-04 13.7 1976-10-27 12.8

-45- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1977-02-23 5.6 1977-06-17 13.0 1977-10-04 14.0 1978-02-10 12.5 1978-06-28 13.4 1978-10-10 15.4 1979-01-12 13.9 1979-09-26 17.0 1980-03-07 14.0 1980-10-08 19.2 1981-03-06 14.2 1982-02-25 15.0 1982-10-28 19.1 1983-04-06 17.8 1983-12-06 19.9 1984-06-12 21.0 1984-09-28 21.8 1985-04-03 21.8 1985-11-06 27.0 1986-03-31 25.6 1986-08-15 32.0 1987-03-31 28.0 1987-11-12 28.6 1988-05-18 34.2 1988-12-15 33.8 1989-01-19 36.5 1989-03-22 36.7 1989-10-30 43.7 1990-03-30 40.7 1990-09-14 46.2 1990-12-04 46.2 1991-04-23 42.5 1991-09-10 55.2 1992-04-29 42.7 1992-06-24 47.0 1992-11-03 52.1 1993-03-17 44.3 1993-12-01 51.7 1994-03-15 48.9 1994-07-27 53.3 1994-11-03 55.0 1995-03-30 52.8 1995-08-18 53.6 1995-12-18 58.9

State Well Number 06S07E23F01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1965-09-09 19.5 1966-01-28 12.8 1966-08-05 21.0 1966-09-27 18.8 1966-11-30 13.2 1967-02-06 12.6 1967-05-19 19.7 1967-09-05 18.0 1967-12-15 15.6 1968-01-11 14.7 1968-01-18 14.4 1968-03-25 16.3 1968-05-03 20.7 1968-06-04 19.6 1968-08-14 18.6 1968-12-24 15.0 1969-02-07 16.4 1969-06-06 20.2 1969-09-20 21.0 1969-12-16 15.8 1970-05-21 18.9 1970-09-23 19.0 1971-01-21 15.2 1971-05-20 18.4 1971-09-14 20.5 1972-01-25 16.2 1972-05-11 21.3 1972-09-11 19.6 1973-02-06 15.9 1973-02-06 15.9 1973-06-05 21.1 1973-09-21 20.4 1974-01-25 14.6 1974-06-06 20.4 1974-09-20 22.7 1975-02-20 15.4 1975-05-29 20.1 1975-09-29 19.6 1976-02-11 14.6 1976-06-04 19.0 1976-12-27 16.2 1977-06-17 22.1 1977-10-04 20.4 1978-02-10 19.4 1978-06-27 22.8 1978-10-10 21.6 1979-01-12 17.3 1979-09-25 22.4 1980-03-07 17.3 1980-11-19 20.6 1981-03-06 19.4 1982-02-25 19.9 1982-10-28 24.3 1983-04-06 22.2 1983-12-06 23.2 1984-06-12 25.2 1984-09-28 24.0 1985-04-03 22.4 1985-11-06 30.4 1986-03-31 29.6 1986-08-15 36.4 1987-03-31 32.4 1987-11-12 38.0 1988-05-16 41.7 1988-12-12 38.6 1989-03-22 41.4 1989-10-31 46.9 1990-03-29 44.5 1990-09-14 49.7 1990-12-04 44.3 1991-04-23 46.1 1991-08-30 54.6 1992-04-29 47.9 1992-06-24 53.4 1992-11-03 50.9 1993-03-17 45.4 1993-08-03 59.9 1993-12-01 52.9 1994-03-15 50.3 1994-07-27 57.8 1994-11-03 58.9

-46- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1995-03-30 54.6 1995-08-18 60.3 1995-12-18 57.9 1996-03-07 57.0 1996-08-27 70.2 1996-12-13 60.3 1997-04-11 63.5 1997-12-03 69.1 1998-03-26 60.4 1998-08-06 75.6 1998-11-30 64.5 1999-04-09 65.6 1999-09-01 75.4 1999-12-02 68.4 2000-04-26 69.9 2000-08-22 80.4 2000-12-22 71.1 2001-04-18 70.8 2001-08-24 83.9 2001-12-14 73.6 2002-04-24 75.6 2002-08-21 88.2 2003-05-28 91.4 2003-12-08 82.2 2004-02-06 80.7 2004-08-05 108.3 2004-12-01 85.3 2005-04-20 92.6 2005-12-13 86.5 2006-05-12 99.8 2006-12-08 98.2 2007-03-08 92.2 2007-08-09 94.7 2007-11-14 103.2 2008-03-06 90.5 2008-08-05 104.3 2008-09-12 106.2 2009-01-02 90.0 2009-05-01 100.7 2009-09-30 101.2 2010-01-19 81.9 2010-05-28 89.82 2010-09-28 98.2 2010-11-02 90.7

State Well Number 06S08E19C02S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1996-04-16 32.8 1996-08-22 42.7 1996-12-13 35.8 1997-04-15 36.8 1997-08-29 44.5 1997-12-30 33.3 1998-03-27 31.8 1998-08-11 46.9 1998-11-30 36.2 1999-03-26 34.8 1999-09-01 45.9 1999-12-02 39.1 2000-04-28 41.5 2000-08-23 50.9 2000-12-22 40.2 2001-04-17 38.4 2001-08-24 53.5 2001-12-14 43.6 2002-05-02 46.0 2002-08-21 55.8 2002-12-09 50.5 2003-05-28 54.7 2003-12-08 51.3 2004-02-06 46.5 2004-08-09 73.1 2004-11-29 55.4 2005-04-20 54.4 2005-12-06 56.8 2006-05-05 63.0 2006-12-08 68.9 2007-03-08 66.6 2007-08-08 68.9 2007-11-14 76.4 2008-04-04 73.7 2008-07-03 74.7 2008-10-08 72.4 2009-01-09 58.7 2009-06-03 67.3 2009-11-25 66.9 2010-01-22 50.9 2010-06-11 70.6 2010-10-29 67.7

State Well Number 06S08E19R01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1926-09-21 -8.5 1926-11-30 -15.4 1926-12-11 -21.1 1927-01-12 -24.6 1927-02-10 -21.1 1927-03-19 -17.7 1927-04-02 -13.0 1927-04-23 -13.0 1927-05-07 -15.3 1927-05-28 -10.7 1927-06-12 -8.9 1927-06-19 -15.9 1927-07-06 -13.3 1927-08-09 -12.3 1927-09-16 -8.5 1927-09-30 -6.2 1927-10-14 -9.6 1927-10-21 -8.4 1927-11-17 -13.1 1927-11-28 -11.5 1927-12-24 -13.1 1927-12-31 -14.3 1928-01-07 -17.7 1928-01-14 -16.6 -47- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1928-01-21 -16.6 1928-02-25 -15.4 1928-03-03 -10.7 1928-03-10 -13.1 1928-03-17 -6.1 1928-04-07 -12.0 1928-04-14 -12.6 1928-04-28 -11.9 1928-05-12 -12.5 1928-05-19 -11.8 1928-06-02 -10.8 1928-06-09 -11.7 1928-06-16 -11.8 1928-06-23 -11.3 1928-07-07 -11.3 1928-08-04 -8.7 1928-09-20 -7.5 1928-09-27 -7.7 1928-10-20 -9.9 1928-10-29 -12.8 1928-11-17 -12.8 1928-12-29 -14.1 1929-01-05 -17.5 1929-01-12 -18.7 1929-03-30 -13.1 1929-06-04 -7.7 1929-07-19 -7.8 1929-07-25 -6.9 1929-08-13 -7.4 1929-09-20 -8.2 1929-10-19 -10.0 1929-11-23 -13.2 1929-12-28 -16.6 1930-01-04 -17.0 1930-01-25 -15.8 1930-02-01 -16.6 1930-02-27 -13.9 1933-12-19 -12.3 1934-02-02 -13.1 1934-03-02 -12.8 1934-07-17 -7.3 1934-09-30 -8.9 1934-11-26 -12.2 1934-12-27 -17.7 1935-01-26 -17.7 1935-02-20 -17.7 1935-03-25 -8.7 1935-05-02 -6.1 1935-06-11 -5.7 1935-08-09 -1.8 1935-10-06 -5.0 1935-11-15 -10.8 1935-12-18 -12.0 1936-01-14 -14.3 1936-02-27 -10.7 1936-03-13 -9.6 1936-04-18 -6.1 1936-05-15 -3.6 1936-09-18 0.5 1936-10-14 -6.1 1937-06-02 -1.3 1937-12-02 -7.3 1938-02-08 -9.7 1939-01-27 -13.1 1939-10-05 -13.1 1939-12-11 -12.6 1940-02-07 -14.3 1940-08-20 -1.5 1940-12-04 -7.3 1941-04-15 -3.2 1942-01-21 -9.5 1942-08-05 -3.1 1942-11-05 -4.4 1943-02-04 -12.0 1943-05-07 -7.5 1943-08-03 -3.5 1943-12-08 -8.4 1944-01-04 -10.7 1944-07-28 -1.1 1944-10-05 -4.0 1945-02-28 -6.5 1945-09-05 0.2 1946-04-24 0.3 1946-06-06 1.7 1947-01-20 -6.5 1951-02-21 3.3 1951-06-29 4.1 1951-09-27 4.2 1952-05-06 0.3 1952-07-02 3.2 1952-09-22 2.9 1953-08-03 0.1 1962-01-26 -29.6 1962-05-08 -27.2 1962-09-06 -23.4 1963-01-22 -27.7 1963-04-26 -24.1 1963-08-23 -27.6 1964-01-08 -30.1 1964-09-16 -25.2 1964-12-09 -31.1 1965-01-14 -35.1 1965-03-22 -27.9 1965-05-19 -27.7 1965-10-06 -26.0 1965-12-21 -32.8 1966-06-02 -32.2 1966-09-02 -27.6 1967-02-01 -33.2 1967-05-04 -33.1 1967-10-18 -31.6 1967-12-13 -35.9 1967-12-21 -33.3 1967-12-29 -34.3 1968-01-11 -33.9 1968-01-18 -34.4 1968-03-26 -34.2 1968-05-01 -32.0 1968-08-07 -29.5 1968-09-17 -30.0 1969-02-11 -28.9 1969-09-23 -29.4 1970-01-06 -33.3 1970-01-28 -30.7 1970-05-21 -27.1 1970-09-25 -29.0 1971-05-26 -31.7 1971-09-22 -29.1 1972-01-21 -30.7 1972-05-12 -26.4 1972-09-14 -21.6 1973-01-31 -30.6 1973-06-12 -28.2 1973-09-20 -23.6 1974-01-30 -28.2 1974-06-12 -24.8 1974-09-24 -24.8 1975-02-07 -29.1

-48- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1975-05-21 -27.4 1975-09-25 -23.2 1976-02-17 -28.2 1976-06-08 -23.2 1976-11-02 -28.2 1977-02-23 -29.4 1977-06-21 -27.1 1977-10-03 -25.7 1978-02-09 -30.0 1978-06-22 -28.0 1978-10-12 -30.7 1979-06-15 -24.8 1979-09-25 -24.8 1980-03-06 -31.7 1980-10-10 -24.8 1981-03-29 -29.4 1982-02-12 -29.4 1982-11-02 -29.4 1983-02-15 -27.1 1984-06-11 -20.3 1984-10-03 -17.9 1985-01-28 -17.9 1985-04-24 -20.1 1985-11-08 -15.6 1986-04-18 -17.7 1986-08-15 -13.2 1987-03-31 -13.2 1987-12-15 -15.6 1988-05-17 -4.6 1989-01-11 1.7 1989-10-12 15.0 1990-09-14 18.0 1990-12-04 13.3 1991-04-24 8.6 1991-09-30 12.8 1992-04-30 15.0 1992-06-23 21.1 1992-12-04 15.7 1993-03-11 11.7 1993-08-25 29.0 1994-03-14 18.7 1994-05-27 26.8 1995-04-20 25.8 1995-11-22 28.8 1996-04-16 29.2 1996-12-26 27.3 1997-04-08 29.1 1997-08-14 34.7 1997-12-05 26.5 1998-04-08 25.6 1998-08-25 37.6 1998-12-09 27.4 1999-04-20 29.2 1999-08-31 39.9 1999-12-10 32.1 2000-08-30 41.1 2001-05-11 35.2 2001-09-07 45.3 2003-12-12 42.1 2004-09-25 49.2 2005-05-13 53.9 2005-12-16 45.9 2006-03-01 44.1 2007-04-04 50.5 2007-12-05 54.9 2008-03-11 47.0 2008-08-06 66.4 2008-09-12 64.0 2009-01-06 48.1 2009-05-01 52.2 2009-09-30 58.0 2009-10-09 56.3 2010-01-19 42.4 2010-03-11 39.4 2010-11-03 40.3

State Well Number 07S07E03C01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1995-06-02 95.0 1995-07-06 97.7 1995-07-13 97.9 1995-07-18 98.0 1995-07-19 98.1 1995-07-20 98.3 1995-07-21 98.3 1995-07-24 98.1 1995-07-25 98.0 1995-07-26 98.0 1995-07-27 98.2 1995-07-28 98.3 1995-07-31 98.2 1995-08-01 98.3 1995-08-02 98.4 1995-08-03 98.4 1995-08-04 99.4 1995-08-07 98.3 1995-08-08 98.4 1995-08-10 98.4 1995-08-11 98.4 1995-08-14 98.8 1995-08-18 98.8 1995-08-25 98.8 1995-09-01 99.2 1995-09-08 99.0 1995-09-15 99.2 1995-09-22 99.4 1995-09-29 99.4 1995-10-06 99.5 1995-10-13 99.3 1995-10-20 99.3 1995-10-27 99.3 1995-11-03 99.4 1995-11-09 99.6 1995-11-17 99.4 1995-11-22 99.4 1995-12-01 99.4 1995-12-08 99.5 1995-12-15 99.3 1995-12-21 99.5 1995-12-29 99.2 1996-01-03 98.8 1996-01-12 99.0 1996-01-19 98.9 1996-01-26 98.8 1996-02-02 98.7 1996-02-08 98.8 1996-02-09 98.6 1996-02-16 98.8 1996-02-23 98.8

-49- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1996-03-01 98.8 1996-03-08 98.8 1996-03-15 98.9 1996-03-22 99.0 1996-03-28 99.1 1996-04-05 99.3 1996-04-12 99.3 1996-04-19 99.4 1996-04-26 99.6 1996-05-03 100.0 1996-05-10 100.0 1996-05-17 100.7 1996-05-24 101.0 1996-05-31 101.0 1996-06-07 101.5 1996-06-14 102.0 1996-06-21 102.0 1996-07-10 102.5 1996-08-07 103.0 1996-09-10 104.0 1996-10-02 103.1 1996-11-06 103.5 1996-11-22 103.6 1997-01-08 103.0 1997-02-05 102.7 1997-04-08 102.7 1997-05-29 102.8 1997-06-11 104.2 1997-07-09 105.3 1997-08-12 105.8 1997-09-10 106.2 1997-11-21 105.4 1997-12-10 105.3 1998-01-08 104.6 1998-03-10 103.5 1998-04-16 103.6 1998-05-13 104.6 1998-06-09 105.0 1998-07-09 105.7 1998-08-05 106.6 1998-09-09 106.6 1998-10-06 106.7 1998-11-24 106.4 1998-12-08 106.4 1999-01-15 105.9 1999-02-10 105.5 1999-03-09 105.8 1999-04-08 105.9 1999-05-12 105.1 1999-06-30 106.0 1999-07-28 106.6 1999-08-26 107.3 1999-09-14 107.3 1999-10-13 106.4 1999-11-10 106.9 1999-12-14 106.1 2000-01-10 105.8 2000-02-09 105.5 2000-03-14 105.7 2000-04-05 105.5 2000-05-09 106.1 2000-06-20 107.5 2000-07-21 108.1 2000-08-21 109.0 2000-09-12 109.3 2000-10-11 110.8 2000-11-10 111.2 2000-12-13 110.0 2001-01-10 108.7 2001-02-07 108.5 2001-03-13 107.2 2001-04-11 106.7 2001-05-09 108.6 2001-06-12 109.6 2001-07-11 109.6 2001-08-09 109.2 2001-09-11 110.7 2001-10-12 110.4 2001-11-07 110.1 2001-12-11 109.8 2002-01-18 109.2 2002-02-26 107.2 2002-03-20 106.8 2002-04-04 106.3 2002-05-16 109.9 2002-06-18 111.1 2002-07-11 111.2 2002-08-08 112.1 2002-09-14 112.3 2002-10-16 129.9 2002-11-14 113.5 2002-12-10 113.7 2003-01-09 113.2 2003-03-20 112.7 2003-04-16 114.3 2003-05-16 115.3 2003-06-17 116.1 2003-07-10 118.4 2003-08-07 119.1 2003-09-16 119.2 2003-10-09 117.7 2003-11-14 117.3 2003-12-10 117.0 2004-01-08 116.4 2004-01-12 115.8 2004-03-11 115.5 2004-03-23 115.6 2004-04-08 115.5 2004-05-13 116.8 2004-06-15 118.3 2004-07-15 119.1 2004-08-13 119.8 2004-09-14 120.3 2004-10-14 121.0 2004-11-23 120.4 2004-12-14 120.1 2005-01-20 118.6 2005-02-08 118.5 2005-03-10 117.7 2005-04-14 117.7 2005-05-19 118.5 2005-06-21 121.3 2005-07-21 122.7 2005-08-18 123.1 2005-09-20 123.2 2005-11-10 123.4 2006-01-19 122.4 2006-02-22 122.0 2006-03-16 123.0 2006-04-20 124.1 2006-05-18 125.0 2006-06-20 126.4 2006-07-13 127.3 2006-08-10 128.2 2006-09-19 129.7 2006-10-12 129.8 2006-10-26 129.6 2006-11-16 129.1

-50- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

2006-12-12 128.6 2007-01-11 129.1 2007-02-21 128.4 2007-03-15 129.5 2007-04-19 130.6 2007-05-17 131.6 2007-06-14 132.9 2007-07-19 133.1 2007-08-17 135.7 2007-09-11 136.0 2007-10-16 135.8 2007-11-14 135.9 2007-12-12 134.8 2008-01-24 133.4 2008-02-26 131.5 2008-03-20 131.6 2008-04-17 131.7 2008-05-29 133.2 2008-06-10 138.4 2008-07-17 134.6 2008-08-28 135.6 2008-09-09 135.7 2008-09-18 135.4 2008-10-16 135.9 2008-11-21 135.8 2008-12-09 134.8 2008-12-18 134.9 2009-01-16 134.0 2009-02-10 133.5 2009-02-19 132.8 2009-03-20 132.3 2009-04-23 132.5 2009-05-21 134.0 2009-06-11 134.6 2009-07-16 132.1 2009-08-20 130.3 2009-09-23 126.5 2009-10-22 119.7 2009-11-20 114.7 2009-12-17 111.3 2010-01-21 106.1 2010-02-18 104.3 2010-02-24 103.8 2010-04-01 101.3 2010-04-15 98.6 2010-05-20 95.8 2010-06-08 93.7 2010-07-15 92.3 2010-08-19 90.5 2010-09-14 88.7 2010-10-14 86.0 2010-10-15 86.8 2010-11-05 85.9 2010-12-03 84.1 2010-12-14 83.9

State Well Number 07S08E07R01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1926-04-27 41.6 1926-11-26 44.3 1926-12-10 43.4 1926-12-22 43.8 1927-01-08 43.6 1927-03-16 43.9 1927-04-15 44.0 1927-06-09 45.1 1927-07-05 44.9 1927-08-09 45.4 1927-09-20 44.8 1927-10-14 44.7 1927-11-08 44.2 1927-12-08 44.9 1928-01-12 44.2 1928-02-17 43.9 1928-03-15 45.3 1928-04-05 44.3 1928-05-04 44.4 1928-06-08 43.7 1928-08-03 51.0 1928-09-19 46.4 1928-10-10 46.5 1928-11-16 45.9 1928-12-13 46.0 1929-01-12 46.3 1929-02-13 46.0 1929-03-21 46.4 1929-04-10 52.2 1929-06-05 47.8 1929-07-08 47.4 1929-08-09 51.8 1929-09-24 51.8 1929-12-28 48.2 1930-01-30 49.5 1933-11-24 50.3 1933-12-19 50.5 1934-03-02 51.3 1934-04-03 51.6 1934-05-04 52.1 1934-09-30 52.3 1934-10-25 53.1 1934-11-26 52.5 1934-12-26 52.1 1935-01-26 51.1 1935-03-25 52.2 1935-06-12 52.3 1935-12-18 50.9 1936-01-14 53.0 1936-04-18 52.7 1937-06-02 54.0 1938-02-09 38.9 1939-01-27 38.5 1939-04-28 55.6 1939-08-10 57.2 1939-12-11 55.4 1940-04-15 56.2 1940-06-03 57.1 1940-08-10 58.0 1941-04-15 57.8 1941-07-17 59.0 1941-10-14 59.2 1942-01-16 57.7 1942-04-16 59.0 1942-05-01 60.3 1942-08-05 60.3

-51- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1943-02-04 60.0 1943-08-03 61.0 1944-07-28 62.4 1945-02-28 60.7 1945-06-06 63.0 1945-09-05 63.6 1946-01-24 62.5 1946-04-24 64.0 1946-06-06 65.2 1946-07-17 65.9 1946-08-14 66.1 1947-01-20 65.7 1947-04-15 67.2 1947-06-27 69.0 1947-09-17 72.2 1948-05-21 71.7 1949-01-28 72.0 1949-04-26 73.6 1949-06-22 75.5 1949-09-13 76.2 1950-09-15 76.9 1951-02-26 75.3 1951-04-10 76.0 1951-07-05 76.4 1951-09-27 76.4 1952-02-05 72.7 1952-04-23 72.7 1952-06-25 74.3 1952-09-17 72.7 1953-01-19 69.7 1953-04-28 71.0 1953-07-28 70.8 1953-12-09 68.0 1954-03-15 67.6 1954-06-28 68.1 1954-09-21 66.5 1955-01-10 63.9 1955-04-22 64.0 1955-07-28 63.9 1955-11-14 61.0 1956-02-28 60.1 1956-06-25 61.2 1956-08-22 60.0 1956-11-27 56.6 1957-04-01 55.4 1957-07-15 55.9 1957-10-07 54.6 1958-02-05 52.3 1958-04-23 52.5 1958-07-10 51.7 1958-10-02 50.7 1959-02-04 48.9 1959-04-28 48.3 1959-07-24 48.4 1959-12-18 43.9 1960-01-14 44.3 1960-03-22 43.6 1960-05-13 44.5 1960-07-27 43.2 1960-12-14 39.7 1961-02-17 39.6 1961-09-06 36.0 1962-01-25 36.7 1962-05-08 35.8 1962-09-05 34.3 1963-01-03 34.9 1963-04-30 33.7 1963-08-07 32.0 1964-01-07 31.0 1964-08-21 30.7 1964-12-07 30.3 1965-05-21 30.8 1965-10-04 29.7 1966-01-25 30.0 1966-06-01 29.8 1966-08-26 29.3 1966-09-26 29.6 1966-12-28 27.8 1967-01-11 27.7 1967-01-25 27.8 1967-05-04 27.5 1967-09-01 27.8 1967-10-20 27.6 1967-12-26 27.5 1968-01-03 27.3 1968-03-18 28.0 1968-04-30 27.7 1968-06-06 28.6 1968-08-02 28.5 1968-12-05 28.4 1969-02-07 28.3 1969-06-12 29.8 1969-09-24 28.0 1969-12-18 39.2 1970-05-27 29.7 1970-10-06 30.4 1971-01-05 29.5 1971-05-25 29.2 1971-09-16 28.9 1972-01-25 28.5 1972-05-17 30.7 1972-09-19 28.8 1973-02-03 28.9 1973-06-12 29.9 1973-09-25 30.4 1974-01-31 31.3 1974-06-13 32.2 1974-09-25 32.8 1975-02-06 31.3 1975-05-20 32.1 1975-09-29 32.6 1976-02-23 30.7 1976-06-11 32.7 1976-10-29 31.2 1977-03-01 31.2 1977-06-23 31.9 1977-10-05 36.4 1978-02-10 35.9 1978-06-27 39.2 1978-10-10 39.7 1979-01-24 37.7 1979-09-14 38.7 1980-05-16 36.1 1980-11-20 37.7 1981-03-12 37.2 1982-01-28 33.9 1982-11-03 34.4 1983-05-11 35.8 1983-12-09 35.2 1984-05-30 34.8 1984-10-11 38.7 1985-04-18 37.2 1985-11-08 39.7 1986-03-13 42.4 1986-07-31 44.5 1986-10-24 44.7 1987-04-02 45.7 1987-12-04 44.1

-52- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1988-05-20 50.5 1988-12-08 52.4 1989-01-23 52.3 1989-03-23 53.3 1989-10-26 56.3 1990-03-28 55.6 1990-09-14 59.0

State Well Number 07S08E07R03S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1990-12-31 64.1 1991-04-25 63.7 1991-07-12 66.9 1991-09-26 69.7 1992-03-31 64.7 1992-07-01 69.4 1992-11-05 70.5 1993-03-22 67.9 1993-08-25 72.5 1993-12-02 71.4 1994-03-16 72.0 1994-07-01 77.1 1994-11-29 75.8 1995-04-25 72.8 1995-08-24 81.5 1995-12-12 80.0 1996-04-18 81.5 1996-08-28 84.9 1997-04-16 84.2 1997-08-26 86.7 1997-12-19 84.7 1998-04-02 84.0 1998-08-14 86.7 1998-12-10 86.2 1999-04-27 86.1 1999-09-13 88.3 1999-12-10 88.6 2000-04-28 86.3 2000-08-25 97.1 2000-12-18 89.5 2001-05-02 90.3 2001-08-24 98.3 2001-12-20 90.8 2002-09-04 101.5 2003-12-22 82.9 2004-04-30 87.4 2004-08-25 96.3 2004-11-30 95.5 2005-04-21 93.4 2005-12-16 94.4 2006-11-15 95.9 2007-04-30 97.3 2007-08-28 81.5 2007-12-04 99.0 2008-04-03 97.6 2008-08-29 82.0 2008-09-12 80.4 2009-01-02 98.9 2009-05-01 97.2 2009-09-29 97.7 2010-01-19 95.8 2010-04-01 90.7 2010-05-25 89.8 2010-09-07 98.8

State Well Number 07S08E10P01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1991-12-31 8.5 1992-07-29 6.3 1992-11-12 6.9 1993-03-22 8.1 1993-08-26 21.6 1993-12-02 21.6 1994-04-27 15.8 1994-09-20 28.6 1994-11-22 25.3 1995-01-24 20.1 1995-03-28 22.0 1995-07-26 32.0 1995-09-20 35.6 1995-11-28 27.4 1996-01-31 26.2 1996-03-19 33.6 1996-05-15 31.9 1996-07-16 32.8 1996-09-26 35.6 1996-11-20 33.2 1997-01-15 25.0 1997-03-19 22.3 1997-05-21 29.2 1997-07-23 28.5 1997-09-23 32.3 1997-11-18 21.2 1998-01-27 16.3 1998-05-27 15.8 1998-07-29 22.2 1998-09-29 21.9 1998-11-13 18.1 1999-01-28 14.9 1999-03-23 17.4 1999-07-23 23.6 1999-09-15 23.4 1999-11-18 24.2 2000-01-27 15.2 2000-03-30 19.5 2000-05-26 18.6 2000-09-28 25.2 2001-01-19 18.8 2002-03-29 28.6 2002-06-06 20.7 2003-07-23 27.0 2003-09-25 27.9 2003-12-17 25.7 2004-02-25 23.5 2004-12-15 26.3 2005-03-30 19.4 2005-06-22 28.9 2005-09-28 32.5

-53- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

2005-12-29 25.9 2006-03-29 22.7 2006-06-28 30.3 2006-09-14 35.0 2006-12-28 28.5 2007-03-29 26.7 2007-06-20 29.6 2007-09-20 34.5 2008-01-16 29.1 2008-03-26 26.1 2008-06-25 34.1 2008-09-24 32.3 2008-12-12 26.7 2009-02-19 20.7 2009-03-25 19.6 2009-06-25 21.6 2009-09-23 23.0 2009-12-18 20.5 2010-04-01 11.4 2010-06-24 16.1 2010-12-17 14.4

State Well Number 08S08E24A01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1939-12-12 18.7 1940-12-06 20.4 1941-04-15 20.4 1942-01-16 23.9 1942-04-23 28.2 1943-02-04 25.0 1943-08-03 32.5 1943-12-07 30.5 1947-01-21 35.9 1949-01-27 39.0 1950-09-01 42.6 1951-02-27 38.7 1951-04-12 43.6 1951-07-10 42.3 1951-10-01 40.5 1952-02-06 36.7 1952-05-06 38.4 1952-06-26 41.0 1952-09-16 39.3 1953-01-22 34.8 1953-05-05 36.5 1953-08-04 36.5 1953-11-09 34.7 1954-03-09 34.8 1954-06-18 35.3 1954-09-21 34.2 1955-01-10 30.2 1955-04-08 31.3 1955-07-28 30.4 1955-11-11 27.5 1956-02-29 26.7 1956-06-25 25.9 1956-08-22 26.3 1956-11-26 21.6 1957-04-01 21.7 1957-07-15 22.6 1957-09-05 22.1 1957-10-07 22.0 1958-02-12 18.7 1958-04-28 18.1 1958-07-08 17.9 1958-10-02 16.8 1959-02-04 14.9 1959-08-07 14.1 1959-12-17 10.8 1960-01-08 10.6 1960-05-11 11.3 1960-07-20 10.7 1961-02-17 9.6 1961-08-29 10.5 1962-01-22 8.2 1962-05-10 8.4 1962-08-28 8.6 1963-01-04 7.9 1963-07-23 6.4 1964-01-06 4.0 1964-08-21 5.3 1964-12-07 2.2 1965-10-06 2.1 1966-01-06 0.7 1966-06-22 3.2 1966-10-20 1.0 1967-01-11 0.0 1967-01-23 -0.4 1967-05-15 0.9 1968-01-10 -0.5 1968-01-11 0.2 1968-03-14 -0.7 1968-04-26 0.1 1968-05-29 0.6 1968-09-20 0.9 1969-01-16 -1.0 1969-06-11 -0.4 1969-09-04 -1.6 1970-10-02 0.9 1971-09-21 1.3 1973-02-07 1.4 1973-06-14 5.6 1973-06-26 7.6 1974-02-14 3.6 1974-06-17 6.5 1974-10-02 8.3 1975-02-20 5.9 1975-05-15 6.7 1975-10-01 8.4 1976-02-24 4.4 1976-06-24 6.0 1976-10-28 4.0 1977-03-02 4.5 1977-06-30 3.6 1977-10-06 5.7 1978-02-10 5.5 1978-06-20 6.6 1978-09-22 7.4 1979-01-22 2.5 1979-06-07 8.8 1979-09-13 9.0 1980-02-15 3.5 1980-06-11 8.5 1980-10-06 11.7 1981-03-10 5.7 1982-01-28 10.5 1982-11-10 13.4 1983-02-16 11.1 1983-12-20 14.2

-54- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1984-05-17 24.7 1984-10-19 27.4 1985-04-02 26.2 1985-09-25 35.5 1986-04-18 32.5 1986-08-08 45.9 1986-09-25 37.6 1987-05-07 40.0 1987-12-03 36.0 1988-05-26 43.2 1989-01-06 42.1 1989-01-23 42.1 1989-03-29 43.7 1989-11-16 49.9 1990-03-29 49.4 1990-09-27 57.0 1990-12-28 55.5 1991-04-24 53.1 1991-09-25 57.6 1992-04-09 53.0 1992-07-08 62.0 1992-11-19 59.2 1992-11-20 58.3 1993-03-19 57.0 1993-08-06 65.9 1993-12-07 63.9 1994-03-16 64.4 1994-07-29 71.1 1994-12-01 72.3 1995-04-26 70.4 1995-04-30 79.0 1995-09-07 76.0 1995-12-19 75.5 1996-08-28 83.0 1996-12-11 81.2 1997-04-18 82.0 1997-08-29 83.2 1997-12-22 86.0 1998-04-15 83.7 1998-08-20 85.6 1998-12-17 86.4 1999-04-30 84.9 1999-09-16 84.9 1999-12-22 86.2 2000-04-28 85.5 2000-08-25 87.8 2000-12-19 91.5 2001-05-02 88.1 2001-08-24 89.0 2001-12-21 94.3 2002-05-10 89.8 2003-06-24 91.6 2003-12-23 98.6 2004-04-22 92.0 2004-09-03 91.3 2004-12-10 100.9 2005-03-17 97.3 2005-05-06 93.2 2005-12-16 102.9 2006-11-29 102.3 2007-02-07 101.2 2007-09-01 101.9 2007-12-06 100.9 2008-03-25 94.6 2008-08-26 89.7 2008-09-12 90.2 0229-01-01 86.9 2009-01-02 86.9 2009-05-01 90.2 2009-09-29 77.4 2010-01-20 83.5 2010-05-25 78.2 2010-09-03 83.0

State Well Number 08S09E33N01S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1952-02-04 64.8 1952-04-30 66.8 1952-06-25 67.1 1952-09-16 67.5 1953-01-22 65.8 1953-04-30 65.7 1953-08-05 65.5 1953-11-09 64.8 1954-03-09 63.4 1954-06-18 63.3 1954-09-21 61.5 1955-01-10 59.9 1955-04-08 59.1 1955-07-27 58.2 1955-11-11 56.8 1956-03-12 56.0 1956-06-26 55.1 1956-08-30 56.2 1956-11-26 53.8 1957-04-01 52.2 1957-07-16 51.5 1957-09-05 50.9 1957-10-07 50.5 1958-02-11 49.1 1958-04-23 48.4 1958-07-08 48.0 1958-10-02 46.6 1958-12-04 47.6 1959-02-04 47.0 1959-08-07 44.9 1959-12-17 43.5 1960-01-13 43.3 1960-05-19 42.8 1960-06-30 42.8 1960-07-13 42.6 1961-02-17 41.0 1961-08-29 42.9 1962-01-22 41.7 1962-05-10 41.1 1962-08-28 40.6 1963-01-14 39.9 1964-01-15 38.3 1964-07-19 39.4 1964-08-26 37.8 1964-12-07 36.7 1965-10-06 36.4 1966-01-13 35.3 1966-06-02 35.5 1966-09-26 36.4 1967-01-12 35.3 1967-05-18 35.3

-55- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1968-01-10 34.4 1968-03-14 33.9 1968-04-30 33.8 1968-09-20 34.8 1968-12-04 33.4 1969-01-16 33.0 1969-06-11 33.3 1970-01-08 31.7 1970-05-27 31.5 1970-10-02 32.0 1971-01-28 31.6 1971-05-04 31.4 1971-09-21 32.1 1972-05-17 33.0 1972-06-26 31.6 1972-09-20 32.5 1973-02-08 31.3 1973-06-14 32.6 1973-09-26 38.6 1974-02-14 38.4 1974-06-17 34.8 1974-10-03 40.1 1975-02-20 39.4 1975-05-19 33.5 1975-10-01 33.8 1976-02-23 39.2 1976-06-24 33.6 1976-10-28 39.8 1977-03-02 40.8 1977-06-30 39.5 1977-10-06 39.7 1978-02-10 38.5 1978-06-20 38.9 1978-09-27 39.8 1979-01-30 39.9 1979-09-13 40.8 1980-02-15 40.5 1980-06-12 41.0 1980-10-06 41.1 1981-02-26 41.8 1982-02-11 42.4 1982-11-08 46.2 1983-02-16 42.9 1983-12-20 52.4 1984-05-15 53.8 1984-10-05 58.1 1986-03-13 66.0 1986-08-08 73.3 1986-09-22 73.5 1987-03-23 70.7 1987-11-09 74.7 1988-05-26 80.0 1989-01-05 80.0 1989-03-29 80.8 1989-11-16 86.7 1990-03-29 88.4 1990-09-25 91.8 1990-12-14 89.6 1991-04-24 91.3 1991-07-12 96.5 1991-09-20 94.4 1992-04-16 92.7 1992-07-08 97.7 1992-11-19 94.0 1993-03-24 95.4 1993-08-09 99.4 1993-12-07 97.5 1994-03-22 99.3 1994-08-30 105.9 1994-12-01 103.5 1995-04-25 107.2 1995-09-12 109.9 1995-12-19 109.2 1996-04-30 112.5 1996-08-30 117.5 1996-12-13 116.0 1997-04-24 116.1 1997-09-18 117.6 1997-12-28 117.3 1998-04-22 118.5 1998-08-20 121.0 1998-12-16 117.8 1999-04-30 118.3 1999-09-16 118.0 1999-12-22 116.9 2000-04-28 118.6 2000-08-24 121.4 2000-12-19 118.5 2001-04-26 122.8 2001-08-31 124.3 2001-12-21 120.6 2002-05-02 122.7 2002-09-09 123.1 2003-06-25 124.8 2003-12-26 124.1 2004-04-16 125.3 2004-09-07 125.5 2004-12-07 125.8 2005-03-17 127.7 2005-05-06 127.7 2005-12-16 127.0 2006-05-25 128.7 2006-11-29 128.7 2007-03-16 129.3 2007-08-30 126.4 2007-12-06 125.3 2008-03-25 126.8 2008-08-27 124.3 2008-09-12 124.0 2009-01-02 124.1 2009-05-01 123.8 2009-09-29 120.7 2010-01-20 121.9 2010-02-08 122.0 2010-05-25 120.8 2010-09-30 118.9

State Well Number 07S09E07H02S Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Dtw: Reading Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) Date (date) Depth (ft) 1965-07-13 -16.3 1966-01-12 -22.1 1966-07-19 -14.9 1966-10-11 -11.7 1967-01-19 -19.8 1967-05-23 -16.0 1968-01-09 -11.4 1968-01-12 -11.7 1968-03-27 -12.4

-56- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

1968-06-03 -9.1 1968-09-19 -7.4 1969-02-06 -12.3 1969-06-09 -3.6 1969-09-20 -8.2 1969-12-31 -10.5 1970-05-25 -3.5 1970-09-30 -0.4 1971-01-27 -12.3 1971-05-04 -9.4 1971-09-23 -5.4 1972-01-26 -10.0 1972-05-15 -2.5 1973-02-06 -15.8 1974-02-13 -13.4 1974-05-28 0.2 1975-02-24 -14.6 1975-05-14 -11.1 1975-10-02 -6.8 1976-02-20 -19.2 1976-06-15 -10.0 1976-09-28 -13.4 1977-03-02 -11.1 1977-06-29 -8.8 1977-10-01 -10.0 1978-02-09 -19.6 1978-06-22 -9.4 1978-10-04 -5.4 1979-01-25 -20.4 1979-06-05 -4.2 1979-09-12 -4.2 1980-02-28 -20.4 1980-06-12 -1.4 1980-09-24 -1.9 1981-03-10 -2.0 1982-02-10 -11.1 1982-11-04 -8.8 1983-05-12 -12.0 1983-12-20 -8.8 1984-06-07 -1.8 1984-10-18 4.9 1984-12-20 -11.8 1985-04-25 -8.8 1985-10-24 5.1 1985-12-30 -7.7 1986-02-27 -8.8 1986-10-10 0.0 1987-02-04 -8.8 1987-11-30 0.3 1988-05-18 11.1 1989-01-11 2.3 1989-03-22 5.6 1989-11-02 9.4 1990-03-27 2.3 1990-09-12 17.7 1990-12-07 11.2 1991-04-23 5.5 1992-05-06 14.2 1992-07-24 28.3 1992-11-12 24.7 1993-03-18 26.0 1993-08-25 44.7 1993-12-09 40.6 1994-03-18 32.2 1994-06-14 49.8 1994-07-19 52.9 1994-09-20 55.7 1994-11-09 50.4 1994-11-22 51.2 1995-01-24 40.4 1995-03-28 43.8 1995-05-24 53.6 1995-07-28 58.2 1995-09-19 57.8 1995-11-28 52.6 1996-01-30 46.3 1996-03-19 47.0 1996-05-14 56.2 1996-07-16 58.2 1996-09-26 58.0 1996-11-20 55.8 1997-01-15 44.9 1997-03-19 41.9 1997-05-21 44.1 1997-07-22 48.4 1997-09-23 48.2 1997-11-18 39.9 1998-01-27 32.1 1998-03-24 27.4 1998-05-26 27.1 1998-07-28 35.2 1998-09-29 37.0 1998-11-12 32.6 1999-01-28 23.1 1999-03-23 21.5 1999-07-22 31.6 1999-09-15 33.5 1999-11-18 31.9 2000-01-26 21.4 2000-03-30 19.6 2000-05-26 27.3 2000-07-28 32.7 2000-09-28 36.3 2000-11-22 30.9 2001-01-19 26.3 2001-03-29 23.8 2001-05-04 32.4 2001-07-31 35.6 2001-09-21 37.5 2001-11-15 33.3 2002-01-24 28.3 2002-03-29 25.1 2002-06-06 34.7 2002-10-08 38.3 2003-07-24 37.5 2003-09-25 38.6 2003-12-17 34.8 2004-02-25 31.6 2004-05-27 40.7 2004-10-01 43.1 2004-12-15 33.0 2005-03-30 22.5 2005-06-22 32.9 2005-09-28 45.0 2005-12-28 33.3 2006-03-29 29.7 2006-06-28 41.6 2006-09-14 42.1 2006-12-28 36.0 2007-03-29 33.3 2007-06-20 38.1 2007-09-20 43.4 2008-01-16 36.6 2008-03-26 32.2 2008-06-25 39.1 2008-09-12 35.1 2008-09-24 37.0 2008-12-12 32.4

-57- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit

2009-01-02 25.0 2009-02-19 16.5 2009-03-25 15.4 2009-05-01 13.8 2009-06-25 18.9 2009-09-23 19.1 2009-12-18 15.0 2010-01-20 2.4 2010-05-25 6.6 2010-06-24 13.1 2010-09-30 14.9 2010-12-17 11.3

-58- Engineer's Report 2011-2012 Lower Whitewater River Subbasin Area of Benefit