Groundwater Management in Central Valley California

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Groundwater Management in Central Valley California Representing Groundwater Management in California’s Central Valley: CALVIN and C2VSIM By PRUDENTIA GUGULETHU ZIKALALA B.E. (City University of New York-City College) 2006 THESIS Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Civil Engineering in the OFFICE OF GRADUATE STUDIES of the UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS Approved: ______________________________________________________ Jay Lund ______________________________________________________ Timothy Ginn _______________________________________________________ Graham Fogg _______________________________________________________ Charles Brush Committee in Charge 2013 i Abstract Updates were made to CALVIN, a hydro-economic optimization model of California’s intertied water delivery system, to improve groundwater representation in the Central Valley. Revisions are based on the Department of Water Resources C2VSIM numerical groundwater model. Additionally, updates are made on the constraints of Delta Exports from major pumping plants as well as constraints on the required Delta Outflows based on current CALSIM II model. The updated CALVIN model is used to examine economical pumping and surface water deliveries with two overdraft management scenarios for 2050 projected land use. Finally a C2VSIM simulation with optimized CALVIN water allocations – surface diversions and pumping – is used to study the Central Valley aquifer responses with these management cases as well as the role of pumping and artificial recharge in the conjunctive use of water for reliable supplies. Although improvements in CALVIN and Central Valley groundwater modeling are considerable, in some regions CALVIN, C2VSIM and CVHM differ substantially. ii Dedication For Dr. Megan Wiley-Rivera, who introduced me to science research and whose generosity and love of teaching I should like to replicate. iii Acknowledgements The completion of this thesis as well as the knowledge I have gained in this process would not be possible without Heidi Chou, Josué Medellín-Azuara, Christina Buck and Kent Ke. They were present to meet, to skype to get clarifications on things and pushed to make sure all work necessary to set up model was done and made their time available to edit most of this work. Thanks also to Michelle Lent who was recruited into this effort much later but worked with incredible efficiency and positivity and helped us get things done. I would like to thank Prof. Jay Lund for his guidance, encouragement, enthusiasm and suggestions through the project that helped us get unstuck without whom this thesis would not have been completed, as well as his editorial assistance in preparing this document. Thanks to Charles Brush for his assistance with running the C2VSIM model, providing information and assistance with understanding the model. I will like to thank Prof. Tim Ginn and Prof. Graham Fogg for their ideas and comments while serving on my committee. iv Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... ii Dedication .................................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................... iv Figures ........................................................................................................................................................ viii Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ x Chapter One: Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter Two: C2VSIM and Central Valley Groundwater ............................................................................. 6 2.1 Description of C2VSIM .................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Geology of the Central Valley Geology and Flow Parameters in C2VSIM .................................. 13 2.2.1 Hydrogeologic Layers ................................................................................................................. 15 2.2.2 Rootzone Characterisation......................................................................................................... 19 2.2.3 Unsaturated Zone Characterisation ........................................................................................... 20 2.3 Water Budgets ............................................................................................................................ 21 2.3.1 Water Use (Surface Water & Groundwater for Agriculture and Urban Demands) ................... 22 2.3.2 Evapotranspiration ..................................................................................................................... 23 2.3.3 Deep Percolation of Precipitation and Irrigation Return Flows ................................................ 26 2.3.4 Reuse of Irrigation Water ........................................................................................................... 26 2.3.5 Stream flow and Stream-Aquifer Interaction ............................................................................ 26 2.3.6 Lake-Aquifer Interaction ............................................................................................................ 29 2.3.7 Diversion Losses ......................................................................................................................... 30 2.3.8 Tile Drain Outlows ...................................................................................................................... 30 2.3.9 Artificial Recharge ...................................................................................................................... 31 2.3.10 Boundary Inflow ....................................................................................................................... 31 2.3.11 Interbasin Inflow ...................................................................................................................... 32 2.3.12 Subsidence ............................................................................................................................... 33 2.3.13 Pumping ................................................................................................................................... 35 Chapter Three: Updating CALVIN based on C2VSIM .................................................................................. 39 3.1 Groundwater Conceptualization and goals of CALVIN ............................................................... 39 3.2 Location of Groundwater Reservoirs .......................................................................................... 42 v 3.3 Groundwater Conceptualization and Interaction with Other Elements in CALVIN .................... 45 3.4 Update of Groundwater Representation in CALVIN ................................................................... 47 3.4.1 Split Agricultural Return Flows to Surface Water and Ground Water (Terms 1a and 1b) ......... 48 3.4.2 Amplitude for Internal Reuse (Term 2) ...................................................................................... 51 3.4.3 Amplitude for Agricultural Return Flow of total applied water (<1) – Agricultural Areas (Term 3) ......................................................................................................................................................... 53 3.4.4 Net External Inflows to Groundwater (Term 4) ........................................................................ 55 3.4.5 Groundwater Basin Storage Capacity (Term 5) ......................................................................... 61 3.4.6 Minimum & Maximum Pumping Constraints (Term 6 & 7) ....................................................... 63 3.4.7 Representative Depth to Groundwater and Pumping Cost - Extracted from DWR Well Monitoring Data for year 2000 (Term 8) (by Christina Buck) ............................................................. 64 3.4.8 Surface Water Losses including Evaporation & Diversion losses to GW (Term 9) .................... 69 3.4.9 Artificial Recharge Operation Costs (Term 10) and Infiltration Fraction of Artificial Recharge (Term 11) ............................................................................................................................................. 69 3.4.10 Urban Return Flow to groundwater (Term 12) ........................................................................ 72 3.5 Calibration Process for Updated Base Case CALVIN ................................................................... 73 3.5.1 Description of the network representation of California’s intertied water system .................. 76 3.5.2 Base Case Calibration ................................................................................................................. 80 3.5.3 Calibrated Base Case CALVIN with new CALSIM II Delta Outflow Requirements and Constraints to Delta Exports .................................................................................................................................. 87 3.6 Limitations and Concluding Remarks ..............................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Gazetteer of Surface Waters of California
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTI8 SMITH, DIEECTOE WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 296 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA PART II. SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OP JOHN C. HOYT BY B. D. WOOD In cooperation with the State Water Commission and the Conservation Commission of the State of California WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1912 NOTE. A complete list of the gaging stations maintained in the San Joaquin River basin from 1888 to July 1, 1912, is presented on pages 100-102. 2 GAZETTEER OF SURFACE WATERS IN SAN JOAQUIN RIYER BASIN, CALIFORNIA. By B. D. WOOD. INTRODUCTION. This gazetteer is the second of a series of reports on the* surf ace waters of California prepared by the United States Geological Survey under cooperative agreement with the State of California as repre­ sented by the State Conservation Commission, George C. Pardee, chairman; Francis Cuttle; and J. P. Baumgartner, and by the State Water Commission, Hiram W. Johnson, governor; Charles D. Marx, chairman; S. C. Graham; Harold T. Powers; and W. F. McClure. Louis R. Glavis is secretary of both commissions. The reports are to be published as Water-Supply Papers 295 to 300 and will bear the fol­ lowing titles: 295. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part I, Sacramento River basin. 296. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part II, San Joaquin River basin. 297. Gazetteer of surface waters of California, Part III, Great Basin and Pacific coast streams. 298. Water resources of California, Part I, Stream measurements in the Sacramento River basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Control Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. Amendments to the 1994 Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins The Third Edition of the Basin Plan was adopted by the Central Valley Water Board on 9 December 1994, approved by the State Water Board on 16 February 1995 and approved by the Office of Administrative Law on 9 May 1995. The Fourth Edition of the Basin Plan was the 1998 reprint of the Third Edition incorporating amendments adopted and approved between 1994 and 1998. The Basin Plan is in a loose-leaf format to facilitate the addition of amendments. The Basin Plan can be kept up-to-date by inserting the pages that have been revised to include subsequent amendments. The date subsequent amendments are adopted by the Central Valley Water Board will appear at the bottom of the page. Otherwise, all pages will be dated 1 September 1998. Basin plan amendments adopted by the Regional Central Valley Water Board must be approved by the State Water Board and the Office of Administrative Law. If the amendment involves adopting or revising a standard which relates to surface waters it must also be approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) [40 CFR Section 131(c)].
    [Show full text]
  • Do Impassable Dams and Flow Regulation Constrain the Distribution
    Journal of Applied Ichthyology J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25 (Suppl. 2) (2009), 39–47 Received: December 1, 2008 No claim to original US government works Accepted: February 21, 2009 Journal compilation Ó 2009 Blackwell Verlag GmbH doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01297.x ISSN 0175–8659 Do impassable dams andflow regulation constrain the distribution of green sturgeon in the Sacramento River, California? By E. A. Mora1, S. T. Lindley2, D. L. Erickson3 and A. P. Klimley4 1 Joint Institute for Marine Observations, UC Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA; 2Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, Santa Cruz, CA, USA; 3Pew Institute for Ocean Science, Rosenstiel School ofmarine and Atmospheric Science, University ofMiami, Miami, FL, USA; 4Department ofWildlife, Fish, & Conservation Biology, University ofCalifornia, Davis, CA, USA Summary 2006), green sturgeon are ofconservation concern. The species Conservation of the threatened green sturgeon Acipenser as a whole is covered by the Convention on International medirostris in the Sacramento River of California is impeded Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora by lack of information on its historical distribution and an (CITES; Raymakers and Hoover, 2002) and is categorized as understanding of how impassable dams and altered hydro- Near Threatened by the IUCN (St. Pierre and Campbell, graphs are influencing its distribution. The habitat preferences 2006). The northern distinct population segment (NDPS) that ofgreen sturgeon are characterized in terms ofriver discharge,
    [Show full text]
  • Basin Plan Amenment Implementing Control of Salt and Boron
    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. AITACHMENT 2 AITACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. RS-2004-0108 AMENDING THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE SACRAMENTO RIVER AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASINS FOR THE CONTROL OF SALT AND BORON DISCHARGES ~NTO THE LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER Following are excerpts from Basin Plan Chapters I and IV shown similar to how they will appear after the proposed amendment is adopted. Deletions are indicated as strike­ through text (deleted te~) and additions are shown as underlined text (added text). Italicized text (Notation Text) is included to locate where the modifications will be made in the Basin Plan. All other text changes are shown accurately, however, formatting and pagination will change. 1 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. R5-2004-0108 AMENDING THE WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE SACRAMENTO RIVER AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASINS FOR THE CONTROL OF SALT AND BORON DISCHARGES INTO THE LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER Under the Chapter I heading: “Basin significant quantities of water to wells or springs, it can Description” on page IV-28, make the be defined as an aquifer (USGS, Water Supply Paper following changes: 1988, 1972). A ground water basin is defined as a hydrogeologic unit containing one large aquifer or several connected and interrelated aquifers (Todd, Groundwater Hydrology, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Friant Dam Fact Sheet
    MP Region Public Affairs, 916-978-5100, http://www.usbr.gov/mp, December 2017 Mid-Pacific Region, Friant Dam Division Background The capacity of the spillway is 83,020 cubic feet per second (cfs) at elevation 578.0 feet. Friant Dam is located on the San Joaquin The gates float open or close based on level River, 16 miles northeast of downtown in the Reservoir. The watertight gates are Fresno, California. Completed in 1942, the located in the recess of the spillway section dam is a concrete gravity structure, 319 feet forming a portion of the crest when lowered. high with a crest length of 3,488 feet. The Due to frequent drought cycles in central dam controls San Joaquin River flows and California over the past 50 years, water provides for: downstream releases to meet seldom spills at Friant. water delivery requirements above Mendota Pool; flood control, conservation storage and water diversions into Madera and Friant- Kern canals; and, water deliveries to a million acres of agricultural land in Fresno, Kern, Madera, and Tulare counties in the San Joaquin Valley. An additional function of Friant Dam began in October 2009 as the first experimental water releases were made for the San Joaquin River Restoration Program, a long- The Friant Dam and Friant-Kern Canal term effort to restore salmon populations in the San Joaquin River. Friant-Kern Canal Millerton Lake, the reservoir behind Friant The Friant-Kern Canal carries water about Dam, first stored water Feb. 21, 1944. It has 152 miles in a southerly direction from a total capacity of 520,500 acre-feet, a Millerton Lake to the Kern River, near surface area of 4,900 acres, and is Bakersfield.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8. Sacramento-San Joaquin System
    Chapter 8. Sacramento-San Joaquin System F. Thomas Griggs and Stefan Lorenzato Introduction The Great Central Valley of California occupies 22,500 square miles (58,000 square kilometers) in the interior of northern and central California. At the time of the Gold Rush in 1849, nearly 1 million acres (1,600 square miles, 4,000 square kilometers) of riparian vegetation covered the Central Valley floor along with approximately an equal area of wetlands. The riparian area flourished in the large river basins and along river channels (Katibah 1984; Thompson 1961). The Central Valley is partly defined by the Sacramento River in the north, the San Joaquin River in the south, and the Delta where the two rivers meet and turn westward toward San Francisco Bay (figs. 27a and 27b). The valley is made up of a series of basins connected by the rivers, which form a distributary floodway. Before development, heavy winter and spring runoff would flow out of the river channels and drain to the basins until waters were deep enough to continue their flow to the Delta. As flows subsided, water would sit in the basins until evaporated or it seeped into the ground. The wetland and riparian lands were nourished by these flows and extended across the low-lying areas in the valley trough and basin sinks. The land surface consisted of shallow undulating ridges and swales, creating complex soil-water-plant interactions that provided a great diversity of hydrology, vegetation, water depth and velocities, and timing. The result was a rich and dynamic system that dependably provided a mix of microhabitats and physical features (Kelley 1989; Thompson 1961).
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and Its Alteration by Dams
    UC Davis San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science Title Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and Its Alteration by Dams Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1ss794fc Journal San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 4(1) ISSN 1546-2366 Authors Lindley, Steven T. Schick, Robert S. Agrawal, Aditya et al. Publication Date 2006 DOI 10.15447/sfews.2006v4iss1art3 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 4.0 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and its Alteration by Dams STEVEN T. LINDLEY1, ROBERT S. SCHICK1, ADITYA AGRAWAL2, MATTHEW GOSLIN2, THOMAS E. PEARSON2, ETHAN MORA2, JAMES J. ANDERSON3, BERNARD MAY4, SHEILA GREENE5, CHARLES HANSON6, ALICE LOW7, DENNIS MCEWAN7, R. BRUCE MACFARLANE1, CHRISTINA SWANSON8 AND JOHN G. WILLIAMS9 ABSTRACT Effective conservation and recovery planning for Central Valley steelhead requires an understanding of historical population structure. We describe the historical structure of the Central Valley steelhead evolutionarily significant unit using a multi-phase modeling approach. In the first phase, we identify stream reaches possibly suitable for steelhead spawning and rearing using a habitat model based on environmental envelopes (stream discharge, gradient, and temperature) that takes a digital elevation model and climate data as inputs. We identified 151 patches of potentially suitable habitat with more than 10 km of stream habitat, with a total of 25,500 km of suitable habitat. We then measured the dis- tances among habitat patches, and clustered together patches within 35 km of each other into 81 dis- tinct habitat patches. Groups of fish using these 81 patches are hypothesized to be (or to have been) independent populations for recovery planning purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Damage Reduction Technical Appendix Flood Damage Reduction
    Flood Damage Reduction Technical Appendix Flood Damage Reduction UPPER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN STORAGE INVESTIGATION Initial Alternatives Information Report Flood Damage Reduction Technical Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. 1-1 STUDY AREA .........................................................................................................................1-2 SURFACE WATER STORAGE MEASURES CONSIDERED IN THE IAIR ...........................1-3 OBJECTIVE OF THIS TECHNICAL APPENDIX ....................................................................1-5 ORGANIZATION OF THIS TECHNICAL APPENDIX.............................................................1-5 CHAPTER 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 2-1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF FLOOD PROTECTION IN THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN ......................................................................................................................2-1 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FLOOD MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ...................................2-3 Friant Dam and Millerton Lake ............................................................................................2-3 Hidden Dam and Hensley Lake...........................................................................................2-4 Buchanan Dam and H. V. Eastman Lake............................................................................2-4 Chowchilla Canal Bypass and Eastside
    [Show full text]
  • Central Valley Project Final Cost Allocation Study, March 2018
    RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West Draft Central Valley Project Final Cost Allocation Study CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT '\ Central Valley Project Service Areas . --~ -- Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region January 2019 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Table of Contents Page Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................9 Chapter 2. Overview of the Central Valley Project .......................................................................13 Chapter 3. Project Facilities and Costs ..........................................................................................19 Chapter 4. Cost Allocation Methodology ......................................................................................27 Chapter 5. Key Concepts and Assumptions ...................................................................................33 Chapter 6. Hydrological Modeling ................................................................................................43
    [Show full text]
  • Public Safety Element
    Public Safety Element The Public Safety Element identifies and describes potential public safety challenges that can and may affect the City, as well as the requirements and resources available to respond when a public safety incident or emergency occurs. This Element sets forth objectives, policies and implementation measures to address foreseeable public safety challenges. The overall purpose of this Element is to identify and outline proactive measures to minimize public safety challenges as well as enable the City to expediently and efficiently respond in the event of a public safety challenge. Public safety challenges can be divided into two broad categories – environmental hazards (e.g., earthquake, flood) and human - error caused accidents (e.g., chemical spill). Most people are familiar with the police and fire services that response to an accident or emergency incident. In addition to providing police and fire emergency services, the City of Chowchilla is responsible for administering and implementing building codes, emergency response plans, airport management plan and hazardous materials management plans, all of which are crucial public safety programs aimed at protecting the community from potential environmental hazards and human – error caused accidents. SEISMIC ACTIVITY The California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act requires the California State Geologist to identify and map seismic hazard zones. Development in seismic hazard areas is subject to policies and criteria standards established by the California State Mining and
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix I Surface Water Hydrology
    APPENDIX I SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY Andrew J. Draper October 15, 2000 INTRODUCTION CALVIN models California’s inter-connected water supply system. In Northern California, this consists of all inflows to the Central Valley originating from the Trinity-Cascade, Sierra Nevada and Coastal Mountain ranges. It also includes many small streams that result from direct runoff within the Valley floor. Much of Southern California is arid or semi-arid and is dependent on imports from the Central Valley, Owens Valley and the Colorado River for majority of its water supply. Local surface water supplies are available only in the South Coast Hydrologic Region, where coastal range streams represent approximately six percent of supply (DWR 1994, Vol. II, p103). CALVIN represents surface water supplies as a time series of monthly inflows. In HEC-PRM terminology, these inputs are referred to as “external flows”, and represent an inflow from the “super source” to a model node USACE (1999). The external flows can be divided into two categories: q Rim flows; and q Local water supplies. Rim flows represent streams that cross the boundary of the physical system being modeled. Typically they represent inflows to surface water reservoirs located in either the Sierra Nevada foothills or the Trinity/Cascade Mountain range. Local water supplies represent surface water that originates within the boundary of the region being modeled, either from direct runoff or through surface water-groundwater interaction. In some models, these local water supplies are called gains or accretions and depletions. The distinction between rim flows and local water supplies is made as two different sources of data have been used for estimating external flows in the Central Valley: one for rim flows, the other for local water supplies.
    [Show full text]
  • EIR Notice of Determination
    DocuSign Envelope ID: DDB64D0B-7D9F-4740-9F12-2266A1057D42 Notice of Determination - 1 -_____ To: From: Office of Planning and Research Department of Fish and Wildlife For U.S. Mail: Central Region 1234 East Shaw Avenue P.O. Box 3044 Fresno, California 93710 Sacramento, California 95812-3044 Contact: Jared Paul Phone: (559) 243-8138 Street Address: 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Lead Agency: California High-Speed Rail Authority 770 L Street, Suite 800 Sacramento, California 95814 Contact: Serge Stanich SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21108 State Clearinghouse Number: 2009091125, 2009091126 Project Title: California High-Speed Train Project: Merced to Fresno Permitting Phase 1 and Fresno to Bakersfield Section, CP1C Permitting Phase 1 (Amendment No. 18 to Master Streambed Alteration Agreement No. 1600-2013-0060-R4). Project Location: The Project will begin at the intersection of Avenue 19 in Madera County, California (Latitude 37°01'31.61"N, Longitude -120°04'41.51"W). It will continue south along the west side of the BNSF Railway until south of Avenue 15, where the alignment will transition westward toward the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). Near Avenue 9, the alignment will follow along the east side of the UPRR, before crossing the San Joaquin River and entering the City of Fresno. The Project will end south of the City of Fresno, approximately 1,000 feet south of American Avenue in Fresno County, California (Latitude 36°38.29"N, Longitude -119°45'32.3"W). Project Description: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has executed Amendment No.
    [Show full text]