DOCSLIB.ORG

Gillibrand Basin Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gillibrand Basin Study Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea Ventura County, California Prepared for: RBF Consulting and County Waterworks District No. 8 City of Simi Valley September 13, 2006 GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. Tel: (909) 920-0707 Fax: (909) 920-0403 Mailing: P. O. Box 220, Claremont, CA 91711 1326 Monte Vista Ave., Suite 3, Upland, CA 91786 email: [email protected] Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 RBF CONSULTING / VENTURA COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 8 GEOHYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF MAXIMUM PERENNIAL YIELD TAPO CANYON TRIBUTARY SUBAREA – VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Purpose and Scope......................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Project Location............................................................................................................. 6 2.3 Previous Investigations.................................................................................................. 6 2.4 Sources of Data.............................................................................................................. 7 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA........................................................................ 8 3.1 Physiography and Topography ...................................................................................... 8 3.2 Climate........................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.1 Precipitation..................................................................................................... 9 3.2.2 Evaporation.................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Existing Water Purveyors and Wells........................................................................... 10 3.4 Ground Water Production............................................................................................ 11 4.0 GEOLOGY........................................................................................................................ 13 4.1 Regional Geology........................................................................................................ 13 4.2 Study Area Geology.....................................................................................................13 4.2.1 Bedrock.......................................................................................................... 14 4.2.2 Quaternary Alluvial Deposits........................................................................ 16 GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting i Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 5.0 GEOHYDROLOGY......................................................................................................... 17 5.1 Surface Water .............................................................................................................. 17 5.2 Ground Water .............................................................................................................. 17 5.2.1 Aquifer Characteristics.................................................................................. 19 5.2.2 Ground Water Movement.............................................................................. 19 5.2.3 Historical Ground Water Level Trends ......................................................... 20 5.2.4 Ground Water Quality................................................................................... 21 6.0 ANALYSIS OF MAXIMUM PERENNIAL YIELD - METHODOLOGY ................ 22 6.1 Ground Water Level and Production Analysis............................................................ 23 6.2 Watershed Model......................................................................................................... 23 6.2.1 Conceptual Watershed Model........................................................................ 24 6.2.1.1 Initial Abstraction............................................................................... 25 6.2.1.2 Infiltration and Interflow..................................................................... 25 6.2.1.3 Overland Flow.................................................................................... 26 6.2.1.4 Ground Water Recharge..................................................................... 26 6.2.2 Model Input................................................................................................... 27 6.2.2.1 Model Subunits................................................................................... 27 6.2.2.2 Precipitation ........................................................................................ 27 6.2.2.3 Potential Evapotranspiration............................................................... 28 6.2.2.4 Streamflow.......................................................................................... 28 6.2.3 Model Output................................................................................................. 28 6.2.3.1 Surface Runoff.................................................................................... 28 6.2.3.2 Evapotranspiration .............................................................................. 29 6.2.3.3 Ground Water Recharge..................................................................... 30 6.2.4 Model Calibration.......................................................................................... 30 GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting ii Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 7.0 FINDINGS......................................................................................................................... 31 7.1 Estimate of Maximum Perennial Yield Based on Ground Water Level and Production History ......................................................................................................................... 31 7.2 Estimate of Average Annual Ground Water Recharge Based on the Watershed Model.. 32 8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................... 34 8.1 Conclusions.................................................................................................................. 34 8.2 Recommendations........................................................................................................ 35 9.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 37 FIGURES, TABLES, APPENDICES GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting iii Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 FIGURES No. Description 1 Study Area Location 2 Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 3 Precipitation and Cumulative Departure from Mean Precipitation – Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 4 Well Locations 5 Ground Water Production – Tapo Canyon Ground Water Basin 6 Geology of the Tapo Canyon Area 7 Geologic Cross-Section 8 Tapo Canyon Tributary Subunits 9 Static Ground Water Elevations – Tapo Canyon Ground Water Basin 10 Water Quality Trilinear Diagram – Wells in the Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 11 Schematic Diagram of Watershed Model 12 Precipitation, Production and Ground Water Elevations – Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 13 Potential Future Well Locations GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting iv Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 TABLES No. Description 1 Summary of Annual Precipitation – Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 2 Summary of Wells Within the Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea 3 Tapo Canyon Ground Water Basin Annual Ground Water Production 4 Selected Water Quality – Tapo Canyon Wells GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting v Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 APPENDICES Ltr. Description A Driller’s Logs B Ground Water Elevations GEOSCIENCE Support Services, Inc. RBF Consulting vi Geohydrologic Evaluation of Maximum Perennial Yield Tapo Canyon Tributary Subarea, Ventura County, California 13-Sep-06 GEOHYDROLOGIC EVALUATION OF MAXIMUM PERENNIAL YIELD TAPO CANYON TRIBUTARY SUBAREA VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the methodology, analysis, and findings of an evaluation of the maximum perennial yield of the ground water basin within the Tapo Canyon area of the Santa Susana Mountains immediately north of Simi Valley, California. Evaluation of the maximum perennial yield was conducted in order to assess potential future increase of ground water production from the area. The scope of the evaluation included: • Data collection and review, • Delineation of the drainage area encompassing Tapo Canyon, • Identification of the limits of the ground water basin, • Analysis of historical geohydrological data, • Estimation of the maximum perennial yield of the ground water basin using multiple methods, • Identification of potential future well
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LOST CANYONS Final EIR Volume IV of V
    City of Simi Valley Whiteface Specific Plan Amendment 6: LOST CANYONS Final EIR Volume IV of V SCH #2008061111 Whiteface Specific Plan Amendment 6: Lost Canyons Draft EIR Prepared for: City of Simi Valley Department of Environmental Services 2929 Tapo Canyon Road Simi Valley, California 93063 Prepared by: IMPACT SCIENCES, INC. 803 Camarillo Springs Road, Suite A Camarillo, California 93012 (805)437-1900 Fax: (805)437-1901 November 2010 Would you make a June 2009 admin draft appendix CD label for Lost Canyons? Whiteface Specific Plan Amendment 6: Lost Canyons Final Environmental Impact Report Volume IV Comments on the Draft EIR and Responses SCH #2008061111 Prepared for: City of Simi Valley Department of Environmental Sciences 2929 Tapo Canyon Road Simi Valley, California 93063 Prepared by: Impact Sciences, Inc. 803 Camarillo Springs Road, Suite A Camarillo, California 93012 November 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Volume I Section Page I Introduction to the Final EIR................................................................................................................... I-1 1.0 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1.0-1 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 2.0-1 3.0 Project Description ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Tongva/Gabrielino Tribe 39 Chapter 5 - Names and Titles 41 Kika Quiqua
    Appendices Appendix FEIR-A Draft EIR Comment Letters .""',. .• , .. ' ::~:. .-i..: . .!, , ", ... " STAT EOF CAL I FOR N I A Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit"· Edmiuld G. Brown Jf. .Governor . ':::'." July 26, 2016 Sergio Ibarra City of Los Angeles -200 N.Spring Street,Room750- ----, ------- _. __ . -- " .. _- .. " ~- - -. __ .... Los J\ngeles, CA 90012 . Subject: McCadden Project . SCH#: 2015101001 . Dear Sergio Ibarra: The State Clearinghouse sub~itted the ah·ove named Draft EIR to selected state agencies· for review.. On . the enclosed Document Details Report-please note that the Clearinghouse.has listed t.he state agencies that _.. i . reviewed your document. The review period closed. on July 25,20 16~ and the cOmlnents from the .. responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. Ifthis coniment package is not in order, -please notify the State. Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the pr9ject'sJ~tt~digit state Clearinghouse nump.er in future correspondence sothatwe .ma.YresI?~_n~ 1?.\'<:'I?-.I'tly: . .... ,.... Please note that Section211 04( c) ofthe Ca,lifornia Public.Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those .. activities involved in a project which are within an area ofexpertise of the agency or whiph.are':. required to be carried out or approved by the agency .. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation:" These cqmments are forwarded for use in-preparing your final envir.onmental document. Should you need more information or. clarification of the. enclosed comments, werecommend that you contac;t the COll).ill.enting agency.directlY.. ... .. ::._.'. ..... ,'. This letter acknowledges that you liavectilliplied ~iththeStateClearinghouse review requirements for .
    [Show full text]
  • Redacted for Privacy R
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF DAVID WAYNE HANSON for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in GEOLOGY presented on June 1, 1981 Title: SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE GEOLOGY OF THE SIMI VALLEY AREA, VENTUR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Abstract approved: Redacted for Privacy r. Robertt'. Yeats Surface and subsurface mapping are combined to deter- mine the structure and geologic history of the eastern half of the Simi fault in the Simi Valley area. Upper Cretaceous rocks exposed south and east of the Simi Valley are overlain unconformably by the nonmarine Simi Conglomer- ate of Paleocene age. The Marine Paleocene unit conform- ably overlies and is locally interbedded with the Simi Conglomerate; it is composed of Simi Conglomerate clasts that were reworked during a marine transgression. Silt- stone of the Santa Susana Formation conformably overlies the Marine Paleocene unit, disconforntably overlies the Simi Conglomerate, and was deposited in a deepening marine basin. The overlying Liajas Formation was deposited dur- ing a marine regressive-transgressive-regressive cycle. The latter regression continued in late Eocene time with deposition of the overlying nonmarine Sespe Formation. Extension and normal faulting followed deposition of the Sespe, with the early Miocene Vaoueros Formation being deposited unconformably over the Sespe. Formation of the Sirni anticline and Sirni fault occurredafter deposi- tion of the Vaqueros and prior to the depositionof the Conejo Volcanics, and resulted in 3850 feet(1173 m) of separation along the Simi fault in thewestern part of the study area. The Conejo Volcanics were erupted into a structurally controlled marine basin in the Santa Monica Mountains-Conejo Hills area during the middleMiocene.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Mitigation Plan for Ventura County, California
    Flood Mitigation Plan for Ventura County, California Prepared for Ventura County Watershed Protection District 800 S. Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009-1600 March 1, 2005 URS Corporation Flood Mitigation Plan for Ventura County, California Prepared for Ventura County Watershed Protection District On Behalf of County of Ventura Special Thanks to the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Governor's Office of Emergency Services for Providing Grant Funding and Other Support to Enable the Development and Implementation of This Plan. URS Corporation 1333 Broadway, Suite 800 Oakland, CA 94612-1924 Tel: 510.893.3600 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 ONE Introduction.....................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of Plan ........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Community Description........................................................................... 1-2 1.2.1 Ventura County............................................................................ 1-2 1.2.2 Ventura County Watershed Protection District ........................... 1-2 Section 2 Planning Process ...........................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Overview of the Planning Process ........................................................... 2-1 2.2 Planning Committees............................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Inter-Agency Coordination
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8. Natural Resources
    Chapter 8 Natural Resources Natural Resources 2040 General Plan 8 8 NATURAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION This chapter summarizes the natural resources for the County of Ventura. It is organized into the following sections: . Air Quality (Section 8.1) . Biological Resources (Section 8.2) . Scenic Resources (Section 8.3) . Mineral Resources (Section 8.4) . Energy Resources (Section 8.5) . Cultural, Historical, Paleontological, and Archaeological Resources (Section 8.6) . Appendices (Section 8.7) SECTION 8.1 AIR QUALITY Introduction This section summarizes the existing air quality conditions and regulatory framework within Ventura County. Air quality is described as the concentration of various pollutants in the atmosphere for a specific location or area. Air quality conditions at a particular location are a function of the type and amount of air pollutants emitted into the atmosphere, the size and topography of the regional air basin, and the prevailing weather conditions. Air quality is an important natural resource that influences public health and welfare, the economy, and quality of life. Air pollutants have the potential to adversely impact public health, the production and quality of agricultural crops, native vegetation, visibility, buildings, and other structures and materials. Regarding public health impacts from poor air quality, some people are more sensitive to poor air quality than others. These people include children, the elderly, and persons with asthma and other respiratory conditions. Land uses where these people are likely to be located are termed “sensitive receptors.” as sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include long-term healthcare facilities, hospitals, rehabilitation centers, retirement homes, convalescent homes, residences, schools, childcare centers, and playgrounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethnohistoric Overview for the Santa Susana Pass State Historic Park Cultural Resources Inventory Project
    Ethnohistoric Overview for the Santa Susana Pass State Historic Park Cultural Resources Inventory Project June 2006 Prepared for Southern Service Center State of California Department of Parks and Recreation In fulfillment of Agreement for Services No. A05E0023 Ethnographic Study Services Prepared by John R. Johnson, Ph.D. Department of Anthropology Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History 2559 Puesta del Sol Santa Barbara, California 93105 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 2 San Fernando Mission Register Research .................................................................................... 3 3 The Ranchería of Momonga and Its Interaction Sphere........................................................... 15 4 John Harrington’s Ethnographic Research Pertaining to the Western End of the San Fernando Valley................................................................................................................... 25 5 Mission San Fernando’s Descendant Indian Communities..................................................... 47 References Cited....................................................................................................................................... 48 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I: Momonga Genealogical Diagrams Appendix II: Lineal Descendants of Momonga Listed in the Mission Register Database Santa Susana Pass Ethnohistoric Study iii iv Santa Susana Pass Ethnohistoric
    [Show full text]
  • Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan
    Dudek, "Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan: Wildlife Habitat Buffers and Connectivity White Paper" (November 2008; 2008C) Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan Wildlife Habitat Buffers and Connectivity White Paper SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION This paper reviews scientific information regarding wildlife habitat buffers and habitat connectivity (i.e., landscape habitat linkages, wildlife corridors, and wildlife crossings) and relates this information to the Newhall Ranch Resource Management and Development Plan (RMDP). General concepts related to wildlife habitat, the efficacy of buffers, and wildlife movement and dispersal are reviewed to provide the background for a discussion of the RMDP regarding wildlife use of the Newhall Ranch area after implementation of the RMDP and build- out of the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (Specific Plan), Valencia Commerce Center (VCC), and the Entrada Village (Entrada) planning area (hereafter collectively referred to as the Project area) (Figure 1). The effects of implementing the RMDP and build-out of the Specific Plan, VCC, and Entrada planning area on wildlife species are assessed by grouping species into “guilds” relating to their common habitat requirements, role in the ecological setting, and ability to move (i.e., vagility or mobility) through their environment. Particular focus is given to literature regarding urban edge effects on wildlife corridor and habitat linkage use by special-status species (e.g., federally or state-listed threatened or endangered species or California Species of Special Concern) that have been documented or have the potential to occur in the Project area and are addressed in the RMDP Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR).
    [Show full text]
  • Rim of the Valley Corridor
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Rim of the Valley Corridor Draft Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment April 2015 We are pleased to provide you with this copy of the draft Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study and Environmental Assessment. The public comment period for this draft report will extend through June 30, 2015. We welcome your comments on the report, as well as your thoughts on how best to conserve the significance resources associated with the Rim of the Valley Corridor. Please sent your comments to: National Park Service Rim of the Valley Corridor Special Resource Study 570 W. Avenue 26 #175 Los Angeles, CA 90065 Email: [email protected] Website: www.nps.gov/pwro/rimofthevalley We also will be hosting a series of public meetings in various locations during during the comment period. At each of these meetings, we will present the key findings of the draft study report and environmental assessment, answer your questions, and provide opportunities for you to submit your comments. Check the study website: www.nps.gov/pwro/ rimofthevalley for specific meeting dates, times, and locations. A limited number of additional copies of this report are available from the address above. In addition, the Executive Summary and the full report are both posted on the website (see above for web address). We appreciate your contributions to the study process so far, and we look forward to your comments on this draft report. Photo credits Front Cover: Oat Mountain area in the Santa Susana Mountains. Photo: Steve Matsuda. Back Cover: Left: Burro Flats Painted Cave pictograph; Photo: NPS.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F. Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Cultural Resources Technical Report
    Appendix F Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Cultural Resources Technical Report Draft EIR – Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Appendix F. Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Cultural Resources Technical Report March 2021 Appendix F Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Cultural Resources Technical Report Draft EIR – Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project This page is intentionally blank. March 2021 Cultural Resources Technical Report Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project March 2021 This page is intentionally blank. Cultural Resources Technical Report Simi Valley Double Track and Platform Project Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Overview ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................ 11 2 Natural Setting ................................................................................................................................... 13 2.1 Climate .................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 Flora
    [Show full text]