groundwater quality management plan · pdf filegroundwater quality management plan buena vista...

Groundwater Quality Management Plan Buena Vista Coalition – Southern High Vulnerability Area

September 2016

Buena Vista Water Storage District 525 N. Main Street

P.O. Box 756 Buttonwillow, CA 93206

Components of the Groundwater Quality Management Plan

Item No. Required Component

Location in GQMP

Introduction and Background

1 Provide a discussion of the constituents of concern (COCs) that are the subject of the GQMP.

2 Provide a discussion of the water quality objective(s) or trigger(s) requiring preparation of the management plan.

3 Identification (both narrative and in a map form) of the boundaries (geographic and groundwater basin[s] or portion of a basin) to be covered by the GQMP including how the boundaries were delineated.

4 Provide a summary of previous work conducted to identify the occurrence of the COCs (e.g., studies, monitoring conducted) for the GQMP area.

Physical Setting and Information

5 Provide land use maps which identify the crops being grown in the GQMP area (these maps may already be presented in the GAR). Map(s) must also be provided in electronic format as ArcGIS shapefiles.

6 Provide soil types and other relevant soils data as described by the NRCS soil survey or other applicable studies. The soil unit descriptions and a map of their aerial extent within the study area must be included.

7

Identification of the potential irrigated agricultural sources of the COC(s) for which the management plan is being developed. If the potential sources are not known, a source identification study may be designed and implemented.

8 Provide a list of the designated beneficial uses as identified in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin, Second Edition, revised January 2004 (Basin Plan).

9

Provide a baseline inventory of identified existing management practices in use within the management plan area that could be affecting the concentrations of COCs in groundwater and locations of the various practices.

10

Provide a summary, discussion, and compilation of available groundwater quality data for the parameters addressed by the management plan. The GAR developed for the Coalition’s area, and groundwater quality data compiled in that document, may serve as a reference for these data.

Geology and Hydrogeology

11 Provide regional and area specific geology, including stratigraphy and existing published geologic cross-sections.

12

Provide information on groundwater basin(s) and sub-basins contained within the GQMP area, including a discussion of their general water chemistry as known from existing publications, including the GAR (range of EC, concentrations of major cations and anions, nutrients, TDS, pH, dissolved oxygen, and hardness). The discussion should reference and provide figures of existing Piper Diagrams, Stiff Diagrams and/or Durov Diagrams for the GQMP area.

Page 2

Page 2

Page 3

Page 3

Page 3

Page 4

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 6

Page 8

13

Provide information regarding known water bearing zones, areas of shallow and/or perched groundwater, as well as areas of discharge and recharge to the basin/sub-basin in the GQMP area (rivers, unlined canals, lakes, and recharge or percolation basins).

14 Identification of which water bearing zones within the GQMP area are being utilized for domestic, irrigation, and municipal water production

15 Aquifer characteristics such as depth to groundwater, groundwater flow direction, hydraulic gradient, and hydraulic conductivity, as known or estimated based on existing information.

16

Identification, where possible, of irrigation water sources (surface water origin and/or groundwater) and their available general water chemistry (range of EC, concentrations of major cations and anions, nutrients, TDS, pH, dissolved oxygen, and hardness).

Management Plan Strategy

17

Provide a description of the approach to be utilized by the management plan (e.g., multiple COC’s addressed in a scheduled priority fashion, multiple areas covered by the plan with a single area chosen for initial study, or all areas simultaneously [area wide]). Any prioritization included in the management plan must be consistent with the requirements in section XII of the General Order, Time Schedule for Compliance.

18 Provide a description of actions to be taken in order to achieve compliance with the receiving water limitations of the General Order (section III).

19

Provide a description of how the Coalition plans to educate Members about the sources of the water quality exceedances in order to promote prevention, protection, and remediation efforts that can maintain and improve water quality.

20 Provide a description of how the Coalition will identify, validate, and implement management practices to reduce loading of COCs to surface water or groundwater, as applicable, thereby improving water quality.

21 Identification of key individuals involved in major aspects of the project (e.g., project lead, data manager, sample collection lead, lead for stakeholder involvement, quality assurance manager).

22 Provide a discussion of each individual’s responsibilities.

23 Provide an organizational chart with identified lines of authority.

24 Identification of the entities or agencies that will be contacted to obtain data and assistance.

25

Identification of management practices used to control sources of COCs from irrigated lands that are 1) technically feasible; 2) economically feasible; 3) proven to be effective at protecting water quality, and 4) will comply with sections III.A and B of the General Order. Practices that growers will implement must be discussed, along with an estimate of their effectiveness or any known limitations on the effectiveness of the chosen practice(s). Practices identified may include those that are required by local, state, or federal law. Where an identified constituent of concern is a pesticide that is subject to DPR’s Groundwater Protection Program, the GQMP may refer to DPR’s regulatory program for that pesticide and any requirements associated with the use of that pesticide provided that the requirement(s) are sufficient to meet water quality objectives.

Page 10

Page 11

Page 12

Page 12

Page 14

Page 14

Page 14

Page 15

Page 16

Page 16Page 17

Page 17

Page 17

26

Identification of outreach that will be used to disseminate information to participating growers. This discussion shall include: the strategy for informing growers of the water quality problems that need to be addressed, method for disseminating information on relevant management practices to be implemented, and a description of how the effectiveness of the outreach efforts will be evaluated. The third-party may conduct outreach efforts or work with the assistance of the County Agricultural Commissioners, U.C. Cooperative Extension, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Resource Conservation District, California Department of Food and Agriculture, or other appropriate groups or agencies.

27

Provide a specific schedule and milestones for the implementation of management practices and tasks outlined in the management plan. Items to be included in the schedule include: time estimated to identify new management practices as necessary to meet the Order’s surface and groundwater receiving water limitations (section III of the Order); a timetable for implementation of identified management practices (e.g., at least 25% of growers identified must implement management practices by year 1; at least 50% by year 2).

28

Establish measureable performance goals that are aligned with the elements of the management plan strategy. Performance goals include specific targets that identify the expected progress towards meeting a desired outcome.

Monitoring Methods

29

The monitoring system must be designed to measure effectiveness at achieving the goals and objectives of the GQMP and capable of determining whether management practice changes made in response to the management plan are effective and can comply with the terms of the General Order.

30

The third-party’s Management Practice Evaluation Program and Groundwater Quality Trend Monitoring shall be evaluated to determine whether additional monitoring is needed in conjunction with the proposed management strategy(ies) to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy(ies). This may include commodity-based representative monitoring that is conducted to determine the effectiveness of management practices implemented under the GQMP. Refer to section IV of the MRP for groundwater monitoring requirements.

Data Evaluation

31 Methods to be utilized to perform data analysis (graphical, statistics, modeling, index computation, or some combination thereof).

32

Identify the information necessary to quantify program effectiveness going forward, including the tracking of management practice implementation. The approach for determining the effectiveness of the management practices implemented must be described. Acceptable approaches include field studies of management practices at representative sites and modeling or assessment to associate the degree of management practice implementation to changes in water quality. The process for tracking implementation of management practices must also be described. The process must include a description of how the information will be collected from growers, the type of information being collected, how the information will be verified, and how the information will be reported.

Page 19

Page 21

Page 21

Page 24

Page 24

Page 24

Page 25

Groundwater Quality Management Plan – Southern High Vulnerability Area

Buena Vista Coalition Page I 1

GQMP Responsible Party and Plan Organization Responsible Party

Preparation and implementation of this Groundwater Quality Management Plan (GQMP, Plan) have been triggered by nitrate exceedances observed in two wells, Deep Well 3 (DW-3) and Deep Well (DW-6). The location of these wells suggests that these exceedances are likely to have resulted from agricultural activity on lands lying within both the Buena Vista Coalition (BVC) and the Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority (KRWCA), however the wells where the exceedances have been detected are owned by the Buena Vista Water Storage District (BVWSD, District). As the BVC represents the interests of the District and in-district landowners in matters regarding the ILRP, the BVC will be the Coalition Group which develops and implements the GQMP, and the District and in-district growers in the High Vulnerability Area covered by the Plan will be the participants. Table 1, below, summarizes the participating parties and their corresponding responsibilities for implementation of the Plan.

Table 1 – Groundwater Quality Management Plan Implementation Tasks and Responsibilities

Management Plan Tasks Responsible Party Management Plan Schedule BVC

Management Plan Development and Submittal BVC Management Plan Review and Acceptance Regional Board

Management Plan Implementation BVC Management Plan Updates and Meetings BVC/Regional Board

Provide Progress Updates/Reports to Subwatershed BVC MRP Reporting to Regional Board BVC

Plan Organization

The GQMP is organized to respond to each of the 32 items listed in the Components of the Groundwater Management Plan included at the beginning of this document. This list of components is based on the requirements contained in Appendix MRP-1 of the Monitoring and Reporting Program for General Order R5-2013-0120 and was provided by the Regional Board to the BVC for use as a framework for organizing the GQMP. This Plan provides the information requested in the list of components in the sequence presented. To aid the review process, each section of the Plan is introduced by the number and description of the required item followed by a narrative addressing the request. In instances where a single numbered item covers more than one specific type of information, subheadings are included to organize the response in a way that specifically addresses each of the types of information requested.



Introduction and Background

Item 1: Provide a discussion of the constituents of concern (COCs) that are the subject of the GQMP.

Buena Vista Water Storage District owns and operates wells located within the territory covered by the Buena Vista Coalition in the Kern River watershed approximately 20 miles west of Bakersfield. Water quality samples taken from two wells, Deep Well 3 (DW-3) and Deep Well 6 (DW-6) have yielded nitrate exceedances and therefore require a Groundwater Quality Management Plan as a response to these confirmed exceedances. A third well, Deep Well 5 (DW-5), is located between DW-3 and DW-6 but did not report an exceedance. Although no exceedances are associated with DW-5, data from this well are included in this Plan.

Water quality samples taken from DW-3 on July 2, 2007 showed a nitrate concentration of 48.8 mg/L and on May 1, 2013 showed a concentration of 45.3 mg/L. A sample taken from DW-6 on July 16, 2014 showed a nitrate nitrogen concentration of 46.0 mg/L. Please see Appendix A for tables displaying water quality data from DW-3, DW-5, and DW-6.

Item 2: Provide a discussion of the water quality objective(s) or trigger(s) requiring preparation of the management plan.

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Monitoring and Reporting Program Order No. R5-2013-0120 for Growers within the Tulare Lake Basin Area requires that:

“A GQMP shall be developed by the third-party where: (1) there is a confirmed exceedance (considering applicable averaging periods) of a water quality objective or applicable water quality trigger limit… in a groundwater well and irrigated agriculture may cause or contribute to the exceedance; (2) in high vulnerability groundwater areas to be determined as part of the Groundwater Assessment Report process…; (3) the Basin Plan requires development of a groundwater quality management plan for a constituent or constituents discharged by irrigated agriculture; or (4) the Executive Officer determines that irrigated agriculture may be causing or contributing to a trend of degradation of groundwater that may threaten applicable Basin Plan beneficial uses.”

Preparation of this Plan is triggered by the confirmed exceedance of a water quality objective or applicable water quality trigger.

Items 3: Identification of the boundaries to be covered by the GQMP including how the

boundaries were delineated. The boundaries of the GQMP cover a high priority area lying in the southeastern part of the Buttonwillow Service Area (BSA) of the BVWSD as shown in Appendix B, Figures B-1 and B-2.



Physical Setting and Information Item 4: Provide a summary of previous work conducted to identify the occurrence of the COCs

for the GQMP area. This Plan references a number of reports that discuss groundwater management and groundwater quality within the GWMP area. These reports include the:

• 2014 BVWSD Groundwater Management Plan; • 2012 BVWSD Main Drain Water Quality Plan; • 2015 Buena Vista Coalition Ground Water Quality Assessment Report, and • 2015 BVWSD Agricultural Water Management Plan.

These reports, together with others listed in the references section at the end of this document, offer a comprehensive representation of the Coalition’s understanding of groundwater quality within its boundaries. Item 5: Provide land use maps which identify the crops being grown in the GQMP area. Appendix C presents information on cropping within this area and throughout the district. This appendix includes Figure C-1, a crop map drawn from the Buena Vista Coalition’s Groundwater Assessment Report (GAR) showing cropping in 2013, figures C-2 and C-3 display cropping during 2014 and 2015, and Table C-1 presents cropping during 2016. Item 6: Provide soil types and other relevant soils data as described by the NRCS soil survey or

other applicable studies. The Buttonwillow Service Area lies within the lower Kern River watershed where historic runoff created heavy clay soils from former swamp and overflow lands along the northern fringe of Buena Vista Lake. These soils are derived mostly from mixed granitic and sedimentary rocks, are characterized as saline-alkaline, and consist primarily of the Buttonwillow Clay and the Granoso Loamy Sand series (Soil Survey of Kern County, California, Southwest Part - NRCS, September 2009). The Buttonwillow series is found in areas where high water tables and frequent flooding restricted agricultural usage. However, installation of drainage has reclaimed these lands, and they are now classified as prime farmland when irrigated with no restrictions on usage. Granoso soils are formed from alluvial material, also have no restrictions for agricultural usage and are classified as soils of statewide importance. DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 are all located in an area dominated by Buttonwillow Clay with nearby areas of the Granoso series. Neither soil type has identifiable impacts or restrictions on water operations and management. Appendix D, Figure D-1 is a map of soil types in the vicinity of the three wells. Figure D-2 is a map of soil types present over the entire BVC. This map is included in response to a request made for soil survey information in the Board’s Conditional Approval of Buena Vista Coalition Groundwater Quality Assessment Report,



dated September 7, 2016. Both maps were developed from shapefiles downloaded from the NRCS SSURGO data base. Item 7: Identification of the potential irrigated agricultural sources of the COC(s) for which

the management plan is being developed. The constituent of concern (COC) observed in DW-3 and DW-6 is nitrate nitrogen as shown in the table of constituent concentrations presented in Appendix A. Potential sources of this COC include the percolation of nitrates to groundwater from irrigated lands, and possibly, percolation of nitrates from a sewage treatment plant located near DW-6. In addition to percolation through soils, it is possible that there is preferential flow of nitrates to groundwater as a result of inadequate wellhead protection. Due to the lack of clear evidence to the contrary, this GQMP presumes that agricultural practices are the source of the observed nitrate exceedances. Based on this presumption, the GQMP focuses on implementing nitrate management and wellhead protection measures intended to reduce nitrate loading to groundwater and on monitoring nitrogen concentrations at DW-3, DW-5, DW-6 and at a domestic well serving four households selected to determine whether changes in agricultural practices, both on-going and resulting from implementation of this Plan, succeed in reducing nitrate concentrations to levels that meet water quality objectives. See Appendix B, figures B-1 and B-2 for maps showing the locations of these wells. The wells that are the focal point of this GQMP lie immediately east of irrigated fields enrolled in the BVC and immediately west of fields within the Kern River Watershed Coalition Authority (KRWCA) with lands in both coalitions often owned and managed by the same growers. As irrigated lands in both coalitions continue to be converted from row crops to permanent crops, leaching of nitrates is expected to decline because of the shift from flood irrigation to drip and micro-sprinkler systems associated with the change in cropping. The GQMP will identify and encourage implementation of supplemental management practices to further reduce leaching of nitrates from lands in permanent crops while emphasizing improvements in irrigation and nitrogen management on lands that remain in row crops. Item 8: Provide a list of the designated beneficial uses as identified in the Water Quality

Control Plan for the Tulare Later Basin. Based on the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin, groundwater within the boundaries of the BVC has the following designated beneficial uses:

• Agricultural; • Municipal; • Industrial, and • Wildlife.

Within the area covered by this GQMP, the beneficial use designations are Agricultural and Municipal.



Item 9: Provide a baseline inventory of identified existing management practices in use within

the management plan areas that could be affecting the concentrations of the COCs in groundwater and locations of various practices.

Inventory of Existing Management Practices

Due to the close association between crop type and on-farm irrigation and nutrient management practices, the cropping data presented in Appendix C serves as a surrogate for a baseline inventory of existing management practices. In addition, as crop maps are updated annually by the BVWSD, changes in irrigation system type, applied water volumes and other management factors can be inferred by analysis of a series of maps. Data displayed on or inferred from cropping maps, supplemented by data extracted from Nutrient Management Plans submitted to the BVC, will provide a functional inventory of existing management practices that will be updated annually. Information derived from these sources can be verified using the BVC’s observations of historical cropping and irrigation practices including:

• Furrow irrigation of cotton; • Border strip irrigation of alfalfa and grains; • Drip tape irrigation of tomatoes, and • Drip irrigation of permanent crops.

Current Management Practices

District facilities Approximately 35,000 acres of land within the BVWSD’s boundaries are enrolled in the ILRP with the BVC serving as the third party. The District is served by the California Aqueduct and the Kern River and distributes water from these sources throughout the district. The district’s conveyance system has historically generated a volume of canal seepage that recharged local aquifers and enabled Buena Vista’s growers to supplement deliveries of surface water with groundwater pumped either from district-owned or private wells. Until recently, district operations have emphasized maintaining and gradually improving the district’s original infrastructure as these facilities distributed water by gravity in a way that satisfied the requirements of the historical grain- and cotton-based cropping pattern. To better serve its growers, the District now is implementing a capital improvement program to upgrade infrastructure and to separate facilities used for groundwater recharge from those used for delivery of irrigation supply. These improvements will enhance the accuracy of water measurement and facilitate flexible, responsive irrigation service with the goal of delivering irrigation water year-round. On-farm facilities A major driver of the changes being made to District facilities and management practices is the ongoing shift in cropping and on-farm irrigation techniques. At the time of the District’s formation, the service area was devoted almost exclusively to grains and other annual crops with



this cropping pattern later shifting to cotton, the predominant crop for many years. As with neighboring districts, there has been a further shift in recent years from row crops to permanent crops. For example, between 2008 and 2016 the percentage of land planted in permanent crops in Buena Vista has grown from 9 percent to 42 percent, a conversion fueled by the shift from cotton to the current predominant crop, pistachios. The shift to permanent crops has been accompanied by a shift from gravity irrigation methods to low-volume systems including drip and micro-sprinklers. This conversion in irrigation practices has, in turn, increased the usage of fertigation and greatly reduced the volume of deep percolation flowing from irrigated fields to groundwater. Item 10: Provide a summary, discussion, and compilation of available groundwater quality

data for the parameters addressed by the management plan. The GAR developed for the Coalition’s area, and groundwater quality data compiled in that document, may serve as a reference for these data

The groundwater quality data used in this Plan are from samples collected by District staff on a semi-annual basis and analyzed by a third party laboratory for a range of constituents including the COC, nitrate nitrogen. The data relevant to this Plan are presented in Appendix A and include Table A-1, a summary table, and Tables A-2 through A-4 which report water quality data from DW-3, DW-5, and DW-6. Tables A-2 through A-4 display water quality data for the constituents shown below in Table 2. Table 2 – List of Water Quality Constituents Analyzed from Monitoring Program

Constituents Total alkalinity Fluoride (F) Potassium (K)

Bicarbonate (HCO3) Hardness as CACO3 Sodium (Na) Boron (B) Iron (Fe) Sodium adsorption (SAR)

Calcium (Ca) Magnesium (Mg) Electrical conductivity (EC) Carbonate (CO3) Manganese (Mn) Sulfate (SO4)

Chloride (Cl) Nitrate (NO3) Total dissolved solids (TDS) Copper (CU) pH Zinc (Zn)

Water quality data on domestic wells is not available from public sources as domestic wells are not required to report this information. Geology and Hydrogeology Item 11: Provide regional and area specific geology, including stratigraphy and existing

published geologic cross-sections.

Regional Geology

The affected wells lie within the Kern County Subbasin (DWR Basin No. 5-22.14) which comprises the entire southern end of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The Subbasin covers about 1,500 square miles and is bounded on the east, south and west by the topographic slope break between the valley fill and the surrounding dissected foothills. To the



north, the subbasin is delineated by the boundary between Kern, Kings, and Tulare counties, a political boundary which does not define a change in geological or flow conditions. Area Specific Geology

The area covered by this Plan lies in the southeastern portion of the Buttonwillow Service Area. The BSA is a 24-mile long, 3- to 5-mile wide strip that overlies a part of the Kern County Groundwater Subbasin, which is contained within the flanks of the doubly-plunging Buttonwillow Syncline and is geologically separated from the main subbasin to the east by the doubly-plunging Buttonwillow Anticline (PGA, 1991). The surface expression of these geologic features, the Buttonwillow Ridge, is about 30 feet higher in elevation than the surrounding land. The Buttonwillow Subbasin exhibits groundwater behavior consistent with the structural features described above (Sierra Scientific, 2013). Stratigraphy

The Pleistocene sediments beneath the BSA are composed of inter-bedded material of non-marine origin which originated from separate sediment sources to the east and to the west. These sediments, which inter-finger under the District, are the thin, distal terminations of thicker deposits of differing textures and compositions and are characteristic of their separate sources. The Pleistocene alluvial, fluvial and lacustrine sediments from the east are part of the Kern River Formation and are characteristic of sediments derived from the igneous granitic bedrock of the Sierra Nevada range. The Pleistocene alluvial sediments from the west are part of the Tulare Formation and are characteristic of reworked marine sediments derived from the ranges to the west. A veneer of recent alluvium deposited by swamps, rivers, and lakes covers the Pleistocene deposits over most of the southern San Joaquin Valley producing a depositionally-complex and laterally-discontinuous stratigraphy that influences the movement and the chemistry of groundwater. Published Cross Sections

Please refer to Appendix E which includes Figure E-1, a map of regional geology and figures E-2 and E-3, respectively, a longitudinal and a transverse cross section of the Buttonwillow Service Area.



Item 12: Provide information on groundwater basin(s) and sub-basins contained within the GQMP area, including a discussion of their general water chemistry as known from existing publications, including the GAR (range of electrical conductivity [conductivity at 25oC, EC], concentrations of major anions and cations, nutrients, total dissolved solids [TDS], pH, dissolved oxygen and hardness). The discussion should reference and provide figures of existing Piper (tri-linear) diagrams, Stiff diagrams and /or Durov Diagrams for the GQMP area.

Subbasin Description

The Kern County Groundwater Subbasin has been classified by DWR as a critically overdrafted groundwater basin (Bulletin 118). However, as described above, data on local geology and groundwater conditions suggest that the Buttonwillow Subbasin is substantially isolated from much of the Kern County Groundwater Subbasin and that this isolation, coupled with the BVWSD’s access to surface water, leads to groundwater conditions that differ from those characteristic of many other locations within Kern County. Appendix B, Figure B-3 displays the boundaries of the Kern County Groundwater Subbasin. Groundwater Chemistry

Most of the groundwater in the Kern County Groundwater Subbasin is one of three types:

• high-very high TDS, Na-Cl water; • moderate-high TDS, Na/Ca-SO4 water, and • low-moderate TDS, Ca-HCO3 water.

The areas and zones where these distinct types of groundwater come into contact with each other are characterized by waters of intermediate TDS and mixed chemistry. The chemistry of the low TDS, Ca-HCO3 type groundwater is similar to the chemistry of Kern River water, which is the main source of recharge for most of the subbasin. This type of water is referred to as east-side water because it is characteristic of the surface waters which drain from the granitic Sierra Nevada Range to the east. This water recharges the subbasin along the Kern River recharge mound and along Poso Creek and is widespread across the interior of the subbasin down to depths ranging from 600 to 700 feet below ground surface (bgs). The chemistry of the moderate-high TDS, Na/Ca-SO4 type groundwater is similar to the chemistry of surface water runoff that drains from outcrops of Miocene-Pliocene marine sediments and is primarily found in a strip along the west subbasin margin for more than 60 miles. This type of water is referred to as west-side water because it is characteristic of the surface waters which drain from the hills of the Temblor Range to the west of the subbasin. There is far less runoff from the west side than from the east side, so there is far less SO4

groundwater than HCO3 groundwater in the subbasin.



The high-TDS, Na-Cl type groundwater is generally found in the deeper parts of the subbasin, regardless of what type of groundwater it underlies. No unique geological association has been established for this water type. In the Buttonwillow Service Area, wells have encountered groundwater of all three of the main water types plus mixed waters with associated TDS values which range from 500 to 5,000 mg/L. The distribution of TDS concentrations is consistent with the theory that the saline waters are derived from sources to the west and are diluted and ion-exchanged as they progressively mix with Sierra-Nevada derived waters in the subbasin interior. This band of high-salinity water, together with its associated basinward decrease in salinity, can be followed for more than 60 miles along the western subbasin margin. The theory that the Miocene and younger marine sediments of the Coast Ranges are the source of saline groundwaters which are observed along the western margin of the Kern County Subbasin was originally proposed in the early 1960s by workers from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Water quality data collected by the BVWSD are consistent with the USGS theory of origin. Appendix B, Figure B-7 is a map from the Coalition’s GAR showing nitrate levels in the vicinity of the Coalition. Figure B-8, also from the GAR, shows groundwater electroconductivity measured within the Coalition’s boundaries. The following Piper diagrams for DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 are highly clustered, indicating the groundwater source is not changing significantly over time. In addition, the plots for the three wells are similar to one another, indicating the source of groundwater is the same at the three locations.



Figure 1 – Piper Diagrams

Item 13: Provide information regarding known water bearing zones, areas of shallow and/or

perched groundwater, as well as areas of discharge and recharge to the basin/sub-basin in the GQMP area.

Water Bearing Zones

As described above, the BSA occupies the partially-isolated Buttonwillow Subbasin northwest of the Kern River. The area covered in this GQMP is in the southern portion of the BSA and lies south of 7th Standard Road. This road marks a division between the northern BSA, an area characterized by the presence of a perched aquifer, and the southern BSA where the perched aquifer is largely absent. The water table under the southern half of the BSA is 200 - 250 feet deep and exhibits fluctuations which mimic the hydrology of the climatic wet/dry cycle. There is southward flow of perched water from the northern part of the BSA which serves to recharge the aquifer in the southern part via a sloping water table. However, within the area covered by this GQMP, soils remain unsaturated down to the deeper aquifer. The aquifer materials under the area covered by the GQMP are unconsolidated sediments which are classified by grain size as sands, silts, or clays. Although perched groundwater is prevalent in the northern part of the BSA, perched conditions are not evident in the area covered by this GQMP.



Areas of Recharge and Discharge

The major sources of natural recharge, east-side water including infiltration from the Kern River and west-side water from the Temblor Range, are described above in the discussion of groundwater chemistry. The other important source of recharge derives from the irrigation operations of the BVWSD. Data from the 2013 irrigation season (due to the drought, the latest year when the district used its conveyance system to deliver surface water) shows that approximately 16,600 acre-feet are estimated to have seeped from district-owned unlined canals to recharge groundwater along with 5,220 acre-feet of deep percolation to groundwater attributed to on-farm practices (2015 Agricultural Water Management Plan, BVWSD). This total contribution to recharge of 21,820 acre-feet occurred over an irrigated area of 36,912 acres and is equivalent to a recharge volume of 0.6 acre-foot/acre. As the irrigation practices employed in the area covered by the GQMP are typical of practices used district-wide, this recharge volume is representative of recharge generated within the boundaries of the Plan area. The District is now in the process of designing spreading ponds to recharge groundwater at the southern end of the Buttonwillow Service Area (the Palms Project), where the soils and groundwater quality are favorable to recharge. Engineering studies performed during development and operation of this project will contribute to the understanding of the hydrogeology in this area. Recharge from this and other dedicated recharge facilities will more than compensate for the reduction in recharge resulting from the replacement of unlined canals with pipelines. Item 14: Identification of which water bearing zones within the GQMP area are being utilized

for domestic, irrigation, and municipal water production.

Reports summarized above describe an aquifer that consists of a sequence of interbedded, laterally discontinuous, quaternary sandy and silty sediments of non-marine origin. Silty sediments tend to predominate to a depth of 200 feet but from 200 to 600 feet sandy and silty sediments occur in approximately equal proportion. The sandy strata constitute the groundwater aquifer now being exploited with the majority of wells for domestic, irrigation and municipal users being completed to depths approaching 600 feet to attain satisfactory production rates and to tap good quality water. The local irrigation wells have 200 to 300 foot-long completion intervals within this depth range and are capable of delivering 3.9 to 5.3 cfs sustained flow at discharge/drawdown ratios in the range of 0.04 to 0.09 cfs/foot. Details on the utilization of domestic wells and on the quality of water supplied through these wells is not available from public sources. Data on wells operated by publicly-owned or PUC-regulated water systems is available at https://sdwis.waterboards.ca.gov/PDWW/index.jsp. However, no publicly-owned or PUC-regulated facilities lie within the area covered by this GQMP.

https://sdwis.waterboards.ca.gov/PDWW/index.jsp



Item 15: Aquifer characteristics such as depth of groundwater, groundwater flow direction, hydraulic gradient, and hydraulic conductivity, as know or estimated based on existing information.

The most complete assessment of aquifer characteristics was performed between late 2009 and early 2010. During this period, URS conducted aquifer tests on seven irrigation wells located within about 1.2 miles of the intersection of 7th Standard Rd and Main Drain Rd. URS designed the well-testing program to obtain transmissivity and storativity values to validate the assumptions of their 2009 computer model of the potential drawdown impacts of a proposed well field. URS also designed the program to obtain water chemistry data on the distribution of higher- and lower-TDS waters known to exist within the aquifer (URS, 2010). On the basis of these tests, the aquifer transmissivity ranges from 15,000 to 25,000 feet/day, and the average transmissivity in the central BSA is 18,200 ± 4,400 feet/day. Using the aquifer net sand thickness from E-logs of the tested wells, analysis of the well test data gives hydraulic conductivities in the range of 30 to 80 feet/day with an average K-value of 77± 31 feet/day. The groundwater gradient, which is generally flat along a north-south alignment north of 7th Standard Road, steepens south of this boundary with a gradient of 5 to 6 feet per mile extending almost the entire distance to the southeast end of the District. Appendix B, figures B-4 through B-6 are maps from the Buena Vista Coalition’s GAR showing groundwater elevation contours in the spring of 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively. Item 16: Identification, where possible, of irrigation water sources (surface water origin

and/or groundwater) and their available general water chemistry (range of EC, concentrations of major anions and cations, nutrients, TDS, pH, dissolved oxygen and hardness).

The District receives irrigation water from the Kern River and the State Water Project, and groundwater is also used to meet crop demands. The entirety of the District's surface water supply is used for agricultural and environmental uses with no urban deliveries. Typical irrigation cycles occur during the winter months of January and February (pre-irrigation) and the summer period of late May through August (irrigation season). Groundwater pumping takes place both within the irrigation season to supplement surface water deliveries and during the off-season when the canal system is out of operation and groundwater is pumped to meet the requirements of permanent crops such as orchards and vineyards. The TDS of the District’s SWP supply typically ranges between 130 mg/L and 450 mg/L while water from the Kern River has TDS concentrations ranging from 90 mg/L to 160 mg/L. The TDS of groundwater pumped from agricultural wells in the southern portion of the BSA generally ranges from 300 to 1,000 mg/L.



Water quality parameters for the Kern River for 2012, 2014 and 2015 are presented in Table 3 below:

Table 3 – Water Quality Parameters for the Kern River SWP Water Quality Constituents Units 2012 2014 2015

Specific Conductance μS/m 171 248 245

Chloride mg/L 5.04 9.68 9.6

Sulfate mg/L 13.9 25.5 9.6

Calcium mg/L 16 19.6 21.6

Magnesium mg/L 2.77 3.76 3.7

Sodium mg/L 14.3 23.7 22.8

Nitrite + Nitrate mg/L as N ND ND ND

Total Phosphorous mg/L NR NR NR

TDS mg/L 104 126 152

Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 51.4 64.4 69.2 Source: Improvement District No. 4, Report on Water Conditions, 2009-2012, 2014-2015

ND – Not Detected NR – Not Reported

Water quality parameters for the SWP for the period from 2011 through 2013 are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 – Water Quality Parameters for the State Water Project SWP Water Quality Constituents Units 2011 2012 2013

Specific Conductance μS/m 247 477 504

Chloride mg/L 28 74 75

Sulfate mg/L 22 37 43

Calcium mg/L 14 21 23

Magnesium mg/L 7.4 12 12

Sodium mg/L 25 54 62

Nitrite + Nitrate mg/L as N 0.42 0.54 0.6

Total Phosphorous mg/L 0.09 0.08 0.07

TDS mg/L 141 265 284

Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 66 100 109 Source: DWR Bulletins 132-12, 132-13, and 132-14. Data collected at Checkpoint 29 near HWY 119



Management Plan Strategy Item 17. Provide a description of the approach to be utilized by the management plan (e.g.,

multiple COC’s addressed in a scheduled priority fashion, multiple areas covered by the plan with a single area chosen for initial study, or all areas addressed simultaneously [wide area]).

As the Plan responds to only one COC, there is no need for a Plan design that addresses COCs in a scheduled priority fashion. In addition, the entire area covered by this GQMP will be addressed simultaneously as management practices within the area are relatively uniform. While approaching the area in a uniform fashion is well suited to the scale of this Plan, the results of grower surveys may lead to management practices being targeted to specific land uses. Item 18. Provide a description of actions to be taken in order to achieve compliance with the

receiving water limitations of the General Order.

Implementation of the GQMP will not introduce practices that will conflict with measures in place to achieve compliance with the receiving water limitations of the General Order. Item 19. Provide a description of how the Coalition plans to educate Members about the

source of the water quality exceedances in order to promote prevention, protection, and remediation efforts that can maintain and improve water quality.

Although it is possible that sources other than agriculture have contributed to the exceedances of nitrate nitrogen observed in DW-3 and DW-6, there is no clear evidence to document the contribution of other sources. For this reason, the approach taken in this Plan is to presume that agricultural activity is the source of the elevated nitrate readings and to base proposed management actions on the assumption that changes in agricultural practices will enable the BVC to meet its water quality objectives. The management practices covered in this Plan include both practices already being put in place as farmland is converted from row crops to permanent crops and targeted practices to be implemented as a result of deficiencies in nitrogen management identified from grower surveys. One of the challenges of this experimental design is that the benefits of implementation of management practices recommended by the GQMP are likely to be intermingled with the benefits of on-going changes in nitrogen and irrigation management. Therefore, benefits that are detected through water quality monitoring are likely to result from a combination of actions and not be directly attributable to a particular recommended practice. The outreach program proposed for the GQMP will be conducted through the outreach channels already established by the BVC. The program will emphasize the following:

• Grower awareness of the purpose of the GQMP, the exceedances that triggered the Plan, the schedule for Plan implementation, and the outcomes of extended operation under the Plan.



• Background information on nutrient and irrigation management practices that have been used in the past in the GQMP area and those now prevalent. This activity involves a grower survey to better identify practices now in use.

• Grower training on recommended nitrogen and irrigation management practices. These practices will be specific to combinations of crop type and irrigation technology now used by coalition members as revealed by the grower survey.

• Should monitoring results indicate that nitrate concentrations are not responding to ongoing changes in irrigation and nutrient management practices and implementation of recommended practices, consideration will be given to development of a pilot program of more intensive management practices to identify practices that will enable the BVC to succeed in meeting its water quality objectives?

Item 20. Provide a description of how the Coalition will identify, validate, and implement

management practices to reduce loading of COCs to surface water or groundwater, as applicable, thereby improving water quality.

Nitrate loading to groundwater is determined by the concentrations of nitrate and the amount of water passing below the root zone, two factors influenced by agricultural systems and their management. Because of the difficulty of measuring the amount of water that passes through the root zone and the corresponding loading of nitrates conveyed by deep percolation, it is not feasible to use direct measurements to determine nitrate loadings (Letey, 2013). In the absence of measured data on nitrate loadings, the progression of nitrate loadings to groundwater in the proximity of the DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 can be characterized using data developed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the University of California. Average nitrogen application rates for a variety of crops are available from sources such as the National Agricultural Statistics Service Surveys: Agricultural Chemical Use Program (NASS, 2010) and from the 2010 Cost and Return Studies (UC Davis ARE, 2010). These data can be used to estimate the acreage-weighted mass of nitrogen that would be recommended for application to crops grown under cropping patterns typical of the area covered by this Plan. For purposes of illustration, the approach described above results in an average annual nitrogen application rate of 174 lbs/acre/year for cotton and 159 lbs/acre/year for pistachios. Data from the study Nitrogen Source and Loading to Groundwater – Technical Report 2 Assessing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water (Center for Watershed Sciences, UC Davis 2012) can be used to determine the proportion of nitrogen removed from fields in harvested crops relative to the proportion of nitrogen applied. Again for the purposes of illustration, these data indicate that for cotton 45% of the applied nitrogen is removed by the harvested crop while the remaining 55% remains available to follow pathways including denitrification, mineralization, and infiltration to groundwater. The corresponding values for pistachios are 52% of applied nitrogen being removed in the harvested crop while 48% remains in the field. These data suggest that a shift from cotton to pistachios would reduce the quantity of nitrogen remaining in the field after harvest by approximately 20%. In addition to reducing the quantity of nitrogen available for



leaching to groundwater, a shift from row crops irrigated by furrow irrigation to tree crops irrigated by drip or micro-sprinkler systems greatly increases the on-farm efficiency of the irrigation applications and reduces the volume of water available to leach nitrates to groundwater. The approach taken in this Plan is to use the theoretical underpinning described above as an element of the outreach program that would present the need for preparation of a GQMP and demonstrate how targeted implementation of recommended practices would function to protect groundwater quality and to achieve the objectives of the Plan. The grower outreach program, including grower surveys, would provide information needed to identify farming practices likely to be contributing to COC exceedances and to shape a program of best management practices targeted to fields where current management practices are determined to be problematic. Implementation of the Plan also entails monitoring water quality parameters in DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 to identify trends and to determine whether there is a continuing pattern of exceedances. In addition to monitoring the three agricultural wells, the Plan also calls for monitoring of a fourth well, which, although outside of the high vulnerability area, is a source of drinking water for four households and better represents first encountered groundwater. The location of each of these wells is show in figures B-1 and B-2. Item 21. Identification of key individuals involved in major aspects of the project (e.g., project

lead, data manager, sample collection lead, lead for stakeholder involvement, quality assurance manager).

The duties of the Buena Vista Coalition are carried out by a small group of key individuals who work closely with the Coalition’s grower-members. The Coalition’s small size enables these key individuals to become acquainted with the farming operations of each of the grower-members and results in a familiarity which simplifies collection of data and access to farming operations. Project Lead - Tim Ashlock, Assistant Manager, BVC Data Manager - Andrew Bell, BVWSD Sample Collection Lead - Andrew Bell, BVWSD Stakeholder Involvement Lead - Tim Ashlock, BVC Quality Assurance Manager - Tim Ashlock, BVC/Brad Meadows, BSK Item 22. Provide a discussion of each individual’s responsibilities

Program Lead – Responsible for overall program management and coordination Data Manager – Manage collection of monitoring data, and interpretation and documentation of

laboratory analyses and results from grower surveys Sample Collection Lead – Supervise collection of samples and maintain compliance with

sampling protocols



Stakeholder Involvement Lead – The Program Lead will also be responsible for managing the stakeholder involvement program. The small size of the BVC makes sharing these responsibilities practical

Quality Assurance Manager – Responsibility for overall program quality control and quality assurance will be shared by the Program Lead and the individual responsible for laboratory analyses.

Item 23. Provide an organizational chart with identified lines of authority Figure 2 – Organization Chart

Program Lead Tim Ashlock

Item 24. Identification of the entities or agencies that will be contacted to obtain data and assistance

In addition to District staff responsible for conducting outreach, collecting samples and reporting on implementation of the GQMP, the following entities will be engaged for laboratory analysis of water quality samples and interpretation of results:

• BSK Laboratories – Water sample analysis. • Sierra Scientific Services – Geology and groundwater hydrology

Item 25. Identification of management practices used to control sources of COCs from

irrigated lands that are 1) technically feasible; 2) economically feasible; 3) proven to be effective at protecting water quality, and 4) will comply with Section III.A and B of the Order. Practices that growers will implement must be discussed, along with an estimate of their effectiveness or any known limitations on the effectiveness of the chosen practice(s). Practices identified may include those that are required by local, state, or federal law.

Recommended nutrient and irrigation management practices will be identified and targeted to lands where grower surveys and other information available to the Coalition indicate that existing practices may be deficient. Recommended practices will be drawn from sources such as Technical Report No. 3: Nitrate Source Reduction to Protect Groundwater Quality (Center for

Sample Collection Lead

Andrew Bell

Stakeholder Involvement Lead

Tim Ashlock

Quality Assurance Manager

Tim Ashlock /Brad Meadows

Data Manager Andrew Bell



Watershed Sciences, UC Davis, 2012). This report groups recommended practices into the following four categories:

• Design and operate irrigation and drainage systems to reduce deep percolation; • Manage crop plants to capture more N and decrease deep percolation; • Manage N fertilizer and manure to increase crop N use efficiency, and • Improve storage and handling of fertilizers and manure to decrease off-target discharge.

The continuing conversion from surface irrigated row crops to drip- and micro-sprinkler irrigated permanent crops aligns squarely with the first of these categories. The requirement that growers within the BVC submit nutrient management plans which focus on application of nitrogen is also supportive of these recommendations. Other selected nitrogen management practices described in the above-cited report include:

• Use “nitrogen scavenger” crop species in annual crop rotations; • Improve rate, timing and placement of nitrogen fertilizers; • Adjust nitrogen fertilizer rates based on soil nitrate testing; • Adjust timing of nitrogen fertilization based on plant tissue analysis, and • Develop a nitrogen budget that includes crop nitrogen harvest removal, supply of

nitrogen from soil and other inputs. In addition to these published measures, growers will be encouraged to avoid deep ripping where practical as experience within the Coalition has shown that ripping through clay layers opens an unobstructed path for nitrate migration to groundwater. Should the water quality monitoring program identify a source other than agriculture to be a significant contributor to nitrate exceedances, the GQMP will be modified to address the newly identified source(s) as appropriate. Possible, non-agricultural sources are the sewage treatment plant near DW-6, inadequate wellhead protection measures and inadequate practices for abandoning wells. Should inadequate wellhead protection be identified as providing pathways for nitrates to travel to groundwater, common remedies include:

• Air gap (for non-pressurized systems); • Backflow prevention/ check valves, and • Sloping ground away from wellhead.



Item 26. Identification of outreach that will be used to disseminate information to participating growers. This discussion shall include: the strategy for informing growers of the water quality problems that need to be addressed, method for disseminating information on relevant management practices to be implemented, and a description of how the effectiveness of the outreach efforts will be evaluated. The third-party may conduct outreach efforts or work with the assistance of the County Agricultural Commissioners, U.C. Cooperative Extension, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Resource Conservation District, California Department of Food and Agriculture, or other appropriate groups or agencies.

This Plan assumes that the nitrate exceedances that triggered development of the GQMP reflect movement of nitrates from agricultural land to groundwater. Therefore, the outreach channels of the BVC are the appropriate avenue for communicating with the Coalition’s grower-members steps to be taken in developing and implementing measures protective of groundwater quality. The BVC has had success with its outreach program. The District has created a newsletter with a portion devoted to the BVC and IRLP. Grower lunches are held regularly as well as meetings of small groups of growers. With the BVC office located in the middle of the Coalition area, growers can schedule appointments or drop in to meet with staff to discuss Coalition issues. The BVC staff meets with at least half of the Coalitions’ growers annually one on one to discuss the IRLP and how it affects their farming operations. One-on-one contact is possible because of the BVC’s small size and the staff’s familiarity with lands farmed by individual Coalition members. During these conversations, growers are encouraged to ask questions they might not feel at liberty to discuss in larger meetings. In this way, the programmatic discussions that take place during the group meeting can be supplemented by discussions specific to individual farms. The steps of the outreach program are summarized below:

• Documented outreach including:

o number of meetings between the BVC and its growers o number of workshops o mailed and emailed communications o advisory assistance for management practice development and implementation

• Distribution and return of grower surveys; • Documentation of baseline inventory of management practices from grower surveys; • Development of targeted management practices by the BVC and its advisors; • Implementation of targeted management practices by grower-members who have not

already adopted these or comparable measures, and • Continued groundwater monitoring to determine whether the Coalition is meeting water

quality objectives at a rate consistent with the schedule presented in the GQMP Progress Reports.



Advisory groups the Coalition may engage to assist in outreach and in selection of targeted management practices include:

• University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) • Kern County Department of Agriculture and Measurement Standards • Irrigation Training and Research Center (ITRC) • North West Kern Resource Conservation District (NWKRCD) • Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) • Certified Crop Advisors/Pest Control Advisors (ASA/CAPCA)

The Grower Survey Form, shown below, will be used to engage growers who farm land within the High Vulnerability Area covered by this GQMP. This form, coupled with follow up interviews, will provide a detailed understanding of current farming techniques and enable the BVC to formulate management practices designed to correct deficiencies in existing practices. Grower-members identified by the outreach program as not having already implemented sound management practices will be encouraged to adopt suitable recommended practices. Implementation will be tracked through submission of Nutrient Management Plans, which enable growers to report adoption of new practices. Figure 3 – Grower Survey Form

GROWER SURVEY FORM Type of Crop(s) Grown: Row I Field I Orchard I Vineyard I Pasture I Other

Nutrient Management: Lab Analysis I Periodic/Timing I Book Values I Tissue Samples

Where Does Fertilizer Loading Occur: Impervious Pad I Bare Soil I Off-site

Mixing/Loading Management Practices: Backflow Prevention I Air Gap I Operator Present At All Times

Spray Equipment Management: Use of Correct Nozzles I Calibration I Outside Nozzle Shut-off

Irrigation: Optimize Efficiency I Tailwater Return I Scheduling/Instruments I Lab Analysis



If, during the course of Plan implementation, it becomes apparent that additional directed actions to reduce nitrate loadings are needed to meet Plan objectives, the Coalition will collaborate with the advisory groups listed above to identify appropriate supplemental measures beginning with grower outreach to determine the applicability, reasonableness and feasibility of additional management practices and in tracking and inspection of measures already in place to confirm that these practices are being properly implemented. Item 27. Provide a specific schedule and milestones for the implementation of management

practices and tasks outlined in the management plan. Items to be included in the schedule include: time estimated to identify new management practices as necessary to meet the Order’s groundwater receiving water limitations, a timetable for implementation of identified management practices.

The general schedule for GQMP implementation is presented in Appendix F. The schedule presents when recommendations for new management practices will be ready for implementation. The implementation schedule is based on the assumption that, to avoid interfering with crops under production, windows for implementation of new practices will be limited and will be spread across a two-year period. As management practices will be developed to respond to deficiencies in irrigation and nitrogen management identified through grower surveys and other sources, the number of measured to be installed and the acreage targets for implementation are not yet known. The GQMP anticipates that 50% of the targeted practices will be implemented during the first year, with the remaining 50% implemented during the second year. Monitoring of management practices will commence immediately after their installation. Item 28. Establish measureable performance goals that are aligned with the elements of the

management plan strategy. Performance goals include specific targets that identify the expected progress towards meeting a desired outcome.

The successful completion of the GQMP will be determined by the Executive Officer of the Regional Board. Generally, there are four possible pathways for successful completion of a Plan. The four pathways are:

• Agriculture is confirmed not to be a source of the exceedances, and the issue is referred to Regional Board Staff for other appropriate actions;

• Agriculture is confirmed as a potential source, the source is eliminated or controlled, and compliance with water quality objectives is demonstrated;

• Agriculture is a potential source, but compliance with water quality objectives is not achievable by reasonable and economically feasible agricultural management practices;

• No conclusion can be reached regarding the probable sources of exceedances, and reasonable efforts to identify the sources have been exhausted.



This Plan is intended to follow the second of these pathways by assuming that agriculture is the potential source and that measures designed to control this source will result in attainment of water quality objectives. GQMP effectiveness will be evaluated based on the following metrics:

• full implementation of the outreach program, • documented implementation of targeted management practices, and • attainment of the BVC’s water quality objectives as quantified through the monitoring

program. All activities will be quantified and reported in the annual Progress Reports. The following diagram is a flow chart of GQMP implementation actions.



Figure 4 – Management Plan Completion Flow Chart



Monitoring Methods Item 29. The monitoring system must be designed to measure effectiveness at achieving the

goals and objectives of the GQMP and capable of determining whether management practice changes made in response to the management plan are effective and can comply with the terms of the General Order.

Determining the success of GQMP implementation will rely on an effective water quality monitoring program. In the area covered by this GQMP, the frequency of sampling performed by the Coalition will be increased from the current semi-annual basis to monthly sampling during the period when the wells are in operation, with a minimum semi-annual sampling frequency during years when the wells are not operated or are operated on a limited basis. Water quality analyses will be performed for nitrate nitrogen, the COC, as well as TDS, EC, pH, anions and cations. DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 will be monitored with the objective of determining the effectiveness of management practices implemented under the GQMP in reducing nitrate concentrations at the wells where exceedances have been observed. Monitoring of the domestic water supply well will be used to determine whether implementation of the GQMP is protective of areas of the production zone that are a source of drinking water. Item 30. The third-party’s Management Practice Evaluation Program and Groundwater

Quality Trend Monitoring shall be evaluated to determine whether additional monitoring is needed in conjunction with the proposed management strategy(ies) to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy(ies).

No monitoring other than the water quality monitoring program presented in this Plan has been determined to be needed at this time.

Data Evaluation

Item 31. Methods to be utilized to perform data analysis (graphical, statistics, modeling, index computation, or some combination thereof)

Statistical analyses will be performed to identify and interpret trends in the water quality data, and analytical information will be displayed using standard graphical techniques. A central objective of data analysis will be to interpret water quality data to determine trends or response to management practices. However, the efficacy of particular management practices will be difficult to determine given the changing agricultural landscape within the BVC. The domestic supply well selected for monitoring was chosen as it may provide a degree of experimental control by lying outside of the High Vulnerability Area and therefore, apart from lands where management practices will be implemented under this Plan. Although, the characteristics of this well are not known at this time, it is also likely to be more representative of first encountered groundwater.



Item 32. Identify the information necessary to quantify program effectiveness going forward, include the tracking of management practice implementation. The approach for determining the effectiveness of the management practices implement must be described. The process for tracking implementation of management practices must also be described.

The procedures for quantifying program effectiveness and for tracking management practice implementation will be based on the procedure for tracking delivery of the outreach program described above in Section 26. There will be four avenues for tracking implementation of management practices:

• Grower survey forms: These forms will be delivered on an annual basis to the BVC and are designed to enable grower-members to describe management practices they have implemented

• Grower meetings: Meetings will be structured as workshops to introduce management practices and to provide a forum for discussion of growers’ experiences in implementation of practices.

• One-on-one grower meetings: As noted previously, one-on-one meetings between key BVC personnel and grower members are an important part of the BVC’s outreach program. These meetings are possible because of the Coalition’s small size and the close working relation between Coalition staff and grower-members.

• Site visits: Either as the setting for one-on-one meetings or on separate occasions, key members of Coalition staff will request meetings on farms where improved management practices have been installed. These meeting will be devoted to discussion of the growers’ experiences with the practices and to determining how the practices have altered nitrogen and irrigation management.

As illustrated by the photographs in Appendix G and by Figures B-1 and B-2 showing the boundaries of the BVC, much of the land where farming activities have the potential to impact water quality in DW-3, DW-5 and DW-6 lie outside the boundaries of the BVC and within the boundaries of the neighboring KRWCA. Therefore, any correlation between management practice implementation and program effectiveness will be influenced by grower activities in nearby areas of the KRWCA which are not covered by the GQMP. Quantification of program effectiveness will be based on the results of the water quality sampling program. Although not conclusive, other indications of program effectiveness include changes in the amount and timing of nitrogen applications, changes in the amount and timing of irrigations and changes in cropping which alter the proportion of applied nitrogen removed from the field at harvest. Each of these factors provide some insight into the likelihood of program success. However, because nitrogen is a biologically and chemically active substance, it is not possible to quantify program effectiveness in protecting water quality based solely on changes in nitrogen loadings to a field and rates of removal from the field. The District will meet with Regional Board Staff on a quarterly basis to discuss GQMP implementation including any mid-course adjustments to the implementation program that may aid in accomplishing the objective of protection of water quality. Written reports and supporting



documents will be provided following the same quarterly schedule. Please see Appendix F for the GQMP implementation schedule.

The Annual Monitoring Report will supply timely information pertaining to achievement of performance goals. This report will focus on interpretation of the water quality data collected and reported during the preceding year and observations of changes in water use, cropping patterns and farming practices within the area covered by the GQMP. The reporting will also assess the effectiveness of management plan implementation and identify deficiencies and recommended modifications to the Plan to improve its effectiveness. Data reports will continue to be submitted on a quarterly schedule.



References Buena Vista Water Storage District (BVWSD), 2016. Agricultural Water Management Plan. Buena Vista Water Storage District, 2012. Water Quality Management Plan – Main Drain. Buena Vista Water Storage District, 2014, Groundwater Management Plan California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 2004. California’s Groundwater. Bulletin

118 – Update 2003. Center for Watershed Sciences University of California, Davis, 2012. Technical Report 2:

Nitrogen Sources and Loading to Groundwater, Davis, California. Center for Watershed Sciences University of California, Davis, 2012. Technical Report 3:

Nitrogen Sources Reduction to Protect Groundwater Quality, Davis, California. Clark N, University of California, Davis Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2010. 2010 Cost

and Return Studies. Crewdson, Robert, A., 20 May, 2013. The Geology and Groundwater Hydrology of the Buena

Vista Water Storage District, Buttonwillow, Ca, including Descriptions of Relevant Facilities and Operations, Sierra Scientific Services.

Dale R.H., J.J. French, G.V. Gordon, 1966. Ground-water geology and hydrology of the Kern River alluvial fan area, California, U.S. Geol. Surv. Water Res. Div. Open-File Report.

GEI. (2014). Kings River Watershed Coalition Authority Groundwater Assessment Report. November.

Letey J, P Vaughan, 2013. Soil Type, Crop, and Irrigation All Influence Optimal Nitrogen Management, University of California Center for Water Resources.

National Agricultural Statistics Service Surveys, 2010. Agricultural Chemical Use Survey, Washington DC.

Pacific Geotechnical Associates, 20 September, 1991. Study of the Regional Structure Related to Ground Water Aquifers in the Southern San Joaquin Valley Ground Water Basin, Kern County, California.

Provost and Pritchard, 2013. Groundwater Management Plan, Buena Vista Water Storage District.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. September 2009. Soil survey of Kern County, California, southwest part. Accessible online at: http://soils.usda.gov/survey/printed_surveys/.

APPENDICES

List of Figures and Tables for Appendices Appendix A: Water Quality Data

Table A‐1: Summary of Exceedances Table A‐2: Water Quality Data ‐ Deep Well 3 Table A‐3: Water Quality Data ‐ Deep Well 5 Table A‐4: Water Quality Data ‐ Deep Well 6

Appendix B: Project Maps

Figure B‐1: Buena Vista Coalition Boundaries Figure B‐2: Southern High Vulnerability Area Figure B‐3: Kern Groundwater Subbasin Figure B‐4: Groundwater Elevation Contour Map (Spring 2013) Figure B‐5: Groundwater Elevation Contour Map (Spring 2014) Figure B‐6: Groundwater Elevation Contour Map (Spring 2015) Figure B‐7: Nitrate Level in BVC Area Figure B‐8: Groundwater Electroconductivity (May 2014)

Appendix C: Cropping Data

Figure C‐1: Map of 2013 District Cropping Figure C‐2: May 2014 Crop Data Figure C‐3: May‐June 2015 Crop Data Table C‐1: 2016 Crop Acreage

Appendix D: Soils Data

Figure D‐1: Soil Types Figure D‐2: Buena Vista Coalition Soils Map

Appendix E: Geologic Section

Figure E‐1: Regional Geology Figure E‐2: North‐South Cross Section G‐G¹ Figure E‐3: East‐West Cross Section D‐D¹

Appendix F: Implementation Schedule

Appendix G: Photographs of District Wells

Appendix A

Water Quality Data

Sample Date mg/L NO3 Sample Date mg/L NO3 Sample Date mg/L NO3

7/22/2005 33.6 3/15/2004 10.6 7/31/2001 9.67/2/2007 48.9 7/2/2007 16 7/6/2004 175/1/2013 45.3 1/28/2008 15 7/2/2007 196/5/2014 47 6/18/2009 18.9 8/5/2008 23.2

12/18/2014 24 5/1/2013 24.5 6/18/2009 26.14/10/2015 34 6/4/2014 24 7/16/2014 46

4/10/2015 24 4/10/2015 39

DW3DW5DW6

Table A-1Summary of Exceedances

Well # Location ID TypeDeep Well 3

Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Total Alkalinity mg/l 110 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 HCO3 mg/l 130 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Ca mg/l 61 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Cl mg/l 75 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Hardness mg/l 152 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 NO3 mg/l 9.6 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 pH (Lab) su 7.7 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 Na mg/l 130 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 SAR 4.6 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 EC umhos/cm 956 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 SO4 mg/l 238 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 9.4 Total Anions me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 8.7 Total Cation me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/31/2001 TDS 644 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Total Alkalinity mg/l 110 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 HCO3 mg/l 140 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 B mg/l 0.4 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Ca mg/l 86 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Cl mg/l 99 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Hardness mg/l 220 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Fe mg/l 0.48 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Mg mg/l 1 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 NO3 mg/l 17 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 pH (Lab) su 7.3 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Na mg/l 147 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 SAR 4.3 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 EC umhos/cm 1110 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 SO4 mg/l 266 Sulfate (SO4) mg/L

Table A-2 Water Quality Data



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 10.9 Total Anions me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 10.8 Total Cation me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 TDS 760 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/6/2004 Zn mg/l 0.07 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Total Alkalinity mg/l 120 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 HCO3 mg/l 150 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 B mg/l 0.39 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Ca mg/l 80 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Cl mg/l 104 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Hardness mg/l 200 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Mg mg/l 1 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 NO3 mg/l 19 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 pH (Lab) su 7.3 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Na mg/l 159 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 SAR 4.8 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 EC umhos/cm 1100 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 SO4 mg/l 260 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 TDS 770 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/2/2007 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Total Alkalinity mg/l 100 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 HCO3 mg/l 120 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 B mg/l 0.4 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Ca mg/l 96 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Cl mg/l 156 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Alpha pCi/L 34.8 Gross Alpha pCi/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Hardness mg/l 244 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Mg mg/l 1 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 NO3 mg/l 23.2 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 pH (Lab) su 7.6 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Na mg/l 149 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 SAR 4.2 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 EC umhos/cm 1250 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 SO4 mg/l 360 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 TDS 905 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 8/5/2008 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Total Alkalinity mg/l 24 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 HCO3 mg/l 150 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 B mg/l 0.5 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Ca mg/l 112 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Cl mg/l 150 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Hardness mg/l 288 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 NO3 mg/l 26.1 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 pH (Lab) su 7.5 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Na mg/l 199 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 SAR 5.1 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 EC umhos/cm 989 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 TDS 1400 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

Table A-2 Water Quality Data Deep Well 3

Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 6/18/2009 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Total Alkalinity mg/l 170 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Arsenic ug/L 0 Arsenic ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 HCO3 mg/l 170 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 B mg/l 0.77 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Ca mg/l 200 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 CO3 mg/l 0 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Cl mg/l 250 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Flouride mg/l 0 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Mg mg/l 3.4 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 NO3 mg/l 46 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 pH (Lab) su 7.6 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 K mg/l 0 Potassium (K) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 Na mg/l 260 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 SAR 5 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 EC umhos/cm 2000 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 SO4 mg/l 520 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 22 Total Anions me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 21 Total Cation me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 7/16/2014 TDS 1300 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Arsenic ug/L 0 Arsenic ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 HCO3 mg/l 210 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 B mg/l 0.79 Boron ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Ca mg/l 160 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 CO3 mg/l 0 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Cl mg/l 190 Chloride mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Hardness mg/l 420 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 OH mg/l 0 Hydroxide (as OH) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Mg mg/l 3.6 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 NO3 mg/l 39 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 NO2 ug/l 8.9 Nitrite as Nitrogen (N) ug/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 pH (Lab) su 7.91 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 K mg/l 0.83 Potassium (K) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 Na mg/l 260 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 SAR 5.5 Sodium Absorption RatioDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 SAR Adjust 12 Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) AdustDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 EC umhos/cm 1760 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 SO4 mg/l 430 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 19 Total Anions me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 20 Total Cation me/LDW03 29S-24E-29A District Well 4/10/2015 TDS 1200 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Total Alkalinity mg/l 130 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 HCO3 mg/l 160 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 B mg/l 0.4 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Ca mg/l 100 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Cl mg/l 148 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Hardness mg/l 260 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 NO3 mg/l 10.6 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 pH (Lab) su 7.2 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Na mg/l 192 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 SAR 5.2 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 EC umhos/cm 1380 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 SO4 mg/l 319 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 TDS 930 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 3/15/2004 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Total Alkalinity mg/l 110 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 HCO3 mg/l 140 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 B mg/l 0.44 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Ca mg/l 107 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Cl mg/l 186 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Hardness mg/l 280 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 NO3 mg/l 16 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 pH (Lab) su 7.2 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Na mg/l 217 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 SAR 5.7 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 EC umhos/cm 1470 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 TDS 1000 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 7/2/2007 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Total Alkalinity mg/l 100 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 HCO3 mg/l 120 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 B mg/l 0.4 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Ca mg/l 102 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Cl mg/l 174 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Hardness mg/l 263 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 NO3 mg/l 15 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 pH (Lab) su 7.7 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Na mg/l 191 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 SAR 5.1 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 EC umhos/cm 1430 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 TDS 954 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 1/28/2008 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Total Alkalinity mg/l 70 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 HCO3 mg/l 90 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 B mg/l 0.5 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Ca mg/l 108 Calcium (Ca) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Cl mg/l 189 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Hardness mg/l 278 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 NO3 mg/l 18.9 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 pH (Lab) su 7.6 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Na mg/l 213 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 SAR 5.6 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 EC umhos/cm 1460 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 SO4 mg/l 360 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 TDS 981 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/18/2009 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 HCO3 mg/l 120 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Ca mg/l 108 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Cl mg/l 219 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Alpha pCi/L 28.5 Gross Alpha pCi/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Hardness mg/l 278 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 NO3 mg/l 24.5 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 pH (Lab) su 7.6 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 Na mg/l 208 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 EC umhos/cm 1580 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 SO4 mg/l 360 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 16 Total Anions me/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 14.6 Total Cation me/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 5/1/2013 TDS 1040 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Arsenic ug/L 0.86 Arsenic ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 HCO3 mg/l 130 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/L



Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 B mg/l 0.54 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Ca mg/l 120 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Cl mg/l 220 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Hardness mg/l 300 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Mg mg/l 2.1 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 NO3 mg/l 24 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 pH (Lab) su 7.7 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 K mg/l 0.71 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 Na mg/l 230 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 SAR 11 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 EC umhos/cm 1590 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 16 Total Anions me/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 16 Total Cation me/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 6/4/2014 TDS 1000 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Arsenic ug/L 0 Arsenic ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 HCO3 mg/l 240 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 B mg/l 0.79 Boron ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Ca mg/l 160 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 CO3 mg/l 0 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Cl mg/l 180 Chloride mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Hardness mg/l 420 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 OH mg/l 0 Hydroxide (as OH) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Mg mg/l 59 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 NO3 mg/l 24 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 NO2 ug/l 5.5 Nitrite as Nitrogen (N) ug/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 pH (Lab) su 7.98 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 K mg/l 0.71 Potassium (K) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 Na mg/l 260 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 SAR 13 Sodium Absorption RatioDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 SAR Adjust 13 Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) AdustDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 EC umhos/cm 1740 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 SO4 mg/l 420 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 18 Total Anions me/LDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 20 Total Cation me/L

Table A-3 Water Quality DataDeep Well 5

Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW05 29S-24E-19J District Well 4/10/2015 TDS 1200 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

Deep Well 6Table A-4 Water Quality Data

Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Total Alkalinity mg/l 160 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 HCO3 mg/l 190 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 B mg/l 1 Boron ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Ca mg/l 166 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Cl mg/l 423 Chloride mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Hardness mg/l 430 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Fe mg/l 0.05 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Mg mg/l 4 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 NO3 mg/l 33.6 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 pH (Lab) su 7.4 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Na mg/l 346 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 SAR 7.3 Sodium Absorption RatioDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 EC umhos/cm 2510 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 SO4 mg/l 422 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 TDS 1600 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/22/2005 Zn mg/l 0.11 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Total Alkalinity mg/l 120 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 HCO3 mg/l 140 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 B mg/l 0.9 Boron ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Ca mg/l 130 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 CO3 mg/l 10 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Cl mg/l 430 Chloride mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Cu mg/l 0.01 Copper (Cu) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Flouride mg/l 0.1 Fluoride (F) (Natural-Source) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Hardness mg/l 330 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Fe mg/l 0.07 Iron (Fe) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/L


Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Mn ug/l 0.01 Manganese (Mn) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 NO3 mg/l 48.9 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 pH (Lab) su 7.2 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 K mg/l 1 Potassium (K) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Na mg/l 368 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 SAR 8.8 Sodium Absorption RatioDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 EC umhos/cm 2230 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 TDS 1500 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 7/2/2007 Zn mg/l 0.02 Zinc (Zn) ug/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 8/5/2008 pH (Lab) su 7.6 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 8/5/2008 SAR 6.7 Sodium Absorption RatioDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 8/5/2008 EC umhos/cm 2010 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 8/5/2008 TDS 1360 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/18/2009 pH (Lab) su 7.5 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/18/2009 EC umhos/cm 2060 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/18/2009 TDS 1330 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Total Alkalinity mg/l 100 Alkalinity, (Total) (as CaCO3 equivalents) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 HCO3 mg/l 120 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 B mg/l 0.7 Boron ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Ca mg/l 125 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Cl mg/l 420 Chloride mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Alpha pCi/L 43.1 Gross Alpha pCi/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Hardness mg/l 320 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Mg mg/l 2 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 NO3 mg/l 45.3 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 pH (Lab) su 7.7 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 Na mg/l 298 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 EC umhos/cm 2110 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/L


Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 21.8 Total Anions me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 19.4 Total Cation me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 5/1/2013 TDS 1360 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Arsenic ug/L 1.4 Arsenic ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 HCO3 mg/l 130 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 B mg/l 0.87 Boron ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Ca mg/l 130 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Cl mg/l 370 Chloride mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Hardness mg/l 320 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Mg mg/l 1.9 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 NO3 mg/l 47 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 pH (Lab) su 7.82 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 K mg/l 1.3 Potassium (K) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 Na mg/l 300 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 SAR 14 Sodium Absorption RatioDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 EC umhos/cm 2060 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 SO4 mg/l 290 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 19 Total Anions me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 20 Total Cation me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 6/5/2014 TDS 1200 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 12/18/2014 NO3 mg/l 24 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/L

DW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Arsenic ug/L 0.71 Arsenic ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 HCO3 mg/l 240 Bicarbonate (as HCO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 B mg/l 1.1 Boron ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Ca mg/l 130 Calcium (Ca) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 CO3 mg/l 0 Carbonate (as CO3) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Cl mg/l 340 Chloride mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Hardness mg/l 360 Hardness, (Total) as CACO3 mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 OH mg/l 0 Hydroxide (as OH) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Mg mg/l 7.4 Magnesium (Mg) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 NO3 mg/l 34 Nitrate (as NO3) mg/L


Well # Location ID Type Sample Date Parameter + Units Result Parameter UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 NO2 ug/l 7.7 Nitrite as Nitrogen (N) ug/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 pH (Lab) su 8.03 pH, Laboratory Std UnitsDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 K mg/l 0.74 Potassium (K) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 Na mg/l 370 Sodium (Na) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 SAR 8.6 Sodium Absorption RatioDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 SAR Adjust 19 Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) AdustDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 EC umhos/cm 2140 Specific Conductance (E.C.) umhosDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 SO4 mg/l 350 Sulfate (SO4) mg/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 21 Total Anions me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 23 Total Cation me/LDW06 29S-23E-24A District Well 4/10/2015 TDS 1400 Total Dissolved Solids, Sum (TDS) mg/L

Appendix B

Project Maps

##

##

Main Drain Canal

East Side Canal

West Side Canal

Goose Lake Canal

Semitropic Canal

·|}þ58

·|}þ33

·|}þ46

·|}þ58California Aqueduct

§̈¦5

Wasco

Wild

woo

d R

d

Paso Robles Hwy

Reserve Rd

W Lerdo Hwy

Reward RdE St

Dai

ry R

d

Bell A

veBe

ll R

d

Main St

Delfino Rd

Mor

ris R

d

Orange Ave E

Miraso

Station Rd

Vlasnik Rd

Mc

Kib

ben

Rd

Gromer Ave

Imperial St

W Tulare Ave

Burbank St

McC

oy A

ve

Poso Ave

7th St

Cord Rd

Sullivan Rd

Main

Drain Rd

Rosedale Hwy

Adohr Rd

Cen

tral A

ve

Dai

ry A

ve

Carmel Rd

Delfern Rd

Skyline Rd

Poso Ave

Brite Rd

Jackson Ave

Seventh Standard Rd

McCombs Rd

Co r

nC

amp

Rd

Dresser Ave

Bellevue Rd

Buerkle RdLe

onar

d Av

e

Merced Ave

Lokern Rd

Riverside St

McKittrick Hwy

Hwy 58M

agno

lia A

ve

Butto

nwillo

w D

rR

owle

e R

d

McCombs Ave

Scof

ield

Rd

7th Standard Rd

WSide

Hw

y

Mila

n R

d

F ran coW

estern

Rd

Flores Ave

Trac

y Av

e

Was

co W

ay

Tupm

an R

d

Jum

per S

t

Elk

Hills

Rd

Wes

tern

Ave

Mai

n D

rain

Rd

StKern River Flood Control Channel

DW06DW05

DW03Domestic Well

®2 0 21

Miles

Southern High Vulnerability AreaGroundwater Quality Management Plan

Buena Vista Coalition SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE B-1

Buena Vista Coalition High Vulnerability Areas

14-S

ep-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

lliste

r\Dee

pWel

l_G

QM

P_B

VC

.mxd

R

S

# Deep Well

High Vulnerability

Buena Vista CoalitionBoundary

#

#

##

Main Drain Canal

West Side Canal

East Side Canal

ArizonaCanal

·|}þ58

California Aqueduct

§̈¦5

Was

co W

ay

Delfern Rd

W 2nd St

Trac

y Ln

Jumper Ave

Old

Trac

yA v

e

Station Rd

Free

born

Rd

Dai

ry R

d

Dun

ford

Rd

Elk

Gro

ve R

d

Canal Rd

Imperial St

Wild

woo

d R

d

Mag

nolia

Ave

Miraso

Sullivan Rd

Rosedale Hwy

Mira

sol A

ve

Seventh Standard Rd

Palo

mas

Rd

7th Standard Rd

Adohr Rd

Seventh Standard Rd

Brite Rd

Snow Rd

Bellevue Rd

Buerkle Rd

Butto

nwillo

w D

r

McKittrick Hwy

Butto

nwillo

w D

r

EightyFoot D

itch

Tupm

an R

d

Flores Ave

Trac

y Av

e

Wasco Way

Elk

Hill s

Rd

St

Kern River Flood Control Channel

DW06

DW05

DW03DomesticWell

®2 0 21

Miles



Southern High Vulnerability Area

14-S

ep-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

lliste

r\Dee

pWel

l_G

QM

P.m

xd

RS

# Deep Well

High Vulnerability


KERNCOUNTY

SAN LUISOBISPOCOUNTY

KERN COUNTYSUBBASIN

(5-22.14)

TULARE LAKESUBBASIN

(5-22.12)

TULE SUBBASIN(5-22.13)

PLEASANTVALLEY

SUBBASIN(5-22.10)

CARRIZO PLAIN

§̈¦5

§̈¦5

§̈¦5

·|}þ46

·|}þ166

·|}þ58

·|}þ223

·|}þ33

·|}þ178

·|}þ43

·|}þ204

·|}þ184

·|}þ99

·|}þ155

·|}þ166

·|}þ65

·|}þ41

·|}þ58

·|}þ119

Kern River Channel

Cuyama River

SodaLake

Kern River

Sisquoc River

White River

Poso Creek

Deer Creek

Frian

t-Kern

Cana

l

Arvin-Edison Canal

Arvin-Edison Canal

California Aqueduct

California Aqueduct

Coast

alAq

uedu

ct

California Aqueduct

Cross Valley Canal

California Aqueduct

West Side Canal East Side Canal

Main Canal

Goose Lake Canal

Maples

Semitropic Canal

Main Drain Canal

®8 0 84

Miles



Kern County Groundwater Subbasin

26-J

ul-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

llist

er\D

eepW

ell_

GQ

MP_

Ker

nCoS

ubba

sin.

mxd

R

S

Buena VistaCoalition Boundary

Figure B-4 Source: Buena Vista Coalition GAR

Appendix C

Cropping Data

Figure C-1 Source: Buena Vista Coalition GAR

May 2014 Crop Map

Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp.,GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, OrdnanceSurvey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and the GIS UserCommunity

Trees

Grapes = 2273 Acres

Olive = 80 Acres

Pistachio = 7048 Acres

Pomegranate = 1725 Acres

Prep for Trees = 377 Acres

Cherry = 105 Acres

*Other Crops are Forage Mix; 141 Acres, Corn; 146 Acres and Oat; 26 Acres

Legend

Alfalfa = 7749 Acres

Cotton = 9455 Acres

Forage Mix = 45 Acres

Water Melon = 251 Acres

Tomato = 1069 Acres

Onion = 715 Acres

No Crop = 7580 Acres

Wheat = 1444 Acres

Others* = 269 Acres

³0 1.5 30.75 Miles

Figure C-2Source: Buena Vista WSD

³0 1.5 30.75 Miles

Conservation Easements

Maples Service Area

BUENA VISTA WATER STORAGE DISTRICTMAY-JUNE 2015 CROP MAP

SHEET1 of 1

Legend

Proposed Ponds - 983 AC

Walnut - 596 AC

Corn - 646 AC

Future Permanent Crop - 3722 AC

Alfalfa - 6652 AC

Cherry - 105 AC

Cotton - 8182 AC

Forage Mix - 45 AC

Grapes - 2575 AC

No Crop - 1630 AC

Olive - 80 AC

Onion - 573 AC

Pistachio - 8589 AC

Pomegranate - 1725 AC

Tomato - 1534 AC

Wheat - 1135 AC

Figure C-3Source: Buena Vista WSD

2016

WaterCLASSIFICATION (ET) (acres) Use NOTES

DT Walnuts 3.89 - - DT Immature Walnuts 2.09 530 1,106 DT Pistachio 3.08 - - DT Pistachio w/ covercrop 4.19 - - DT Immature Pistachio 2.19 - - DT Pistachio 4.11 3,462 14,214 DT Immature Pistachio 1-4 Years 1.59 3,777 5,996 DT Immature Pistachio 5-8 Years 2.82 2,185 6,167 DT Misc. Deciduous 3.34 1,910 6,384 Pomegranites, Olives, CherriesDT Immature Misc. Deciduous 1.80 93 168 Pomegranites, Olives, CherriesG Grain and Grain Hay 2.07 - - C Cotton 2.71 8,662 23,452 SF Safflower and Sunflower 2.23 - - SF Corn and Grain Sorghum 2.95 511 1,505 SF Misc. Field Crops 2.09 45 94 Dry cropsaf Alfalfa Hay and Clover 4.10 5,568 22,838 PA Pasture and Misc. Grasses 4.13 1,298 5,359 Wheat, Barley, Milo, Oats, Sudan GrassSV Small Vegetables 1.62 - - SV Tomatoes and Peppers 2.03 - - SV Tomatoes and Peppers - Drip Tape 2.26 1,850 4,173 SV Tomatoes and Peppers - Sprinkler/Furrow 2.51 - - PO Potatoes, Sugar beets, Turnip etc. 3.07 - - PO Potatoes 1.98 - - SB Sugar Beets 3.29 - - SV Turnips, etc. 1.62 - - M Melons, Squash, and Cucumbers 1.46 - - PumpkinsSF Onions and Garlic 1.70 821 1,393 GR Grape Vines with 80% or more canopy 2.38 - - GR Grape Vines with cover crop (80%+ canopy) 3.11 - - GR Immature Grapes Vines (50% or less canopy) 1.89 - - GR Grape Vines - Narrow Trellis 2.81 - - GR Grape Vines - Full Cover Trellis 4.41 - - GR Grape Vines - Wine 2.18 1,024 2,229 GR Immature Grapes Vines (50% or less canopy) 1.89 2,111 3,981

Idle 9,897 - Open, Ground in Prep, No District ServicesUplands, Wetlands 4,248 - Uplands, WetlandsPalms 982 Non-Service Lands 1,586 - Total 1.96 50,560 99,059 Excl Idle, Palms, Non-Service Lands 38,095 Crops & Uplands/WetlandsDouble-cropped -

Buena Vista WSD

Table C-12016 Crop Acreage

Source: Buena Vista WSD

Appendix D

Soils Data

#

#

#Main Drain Canal

West Side Canal

East Side Canal

Arizona Canal

·|}þ58

California Aqueduct

§̈¦5

§̈¦5

Was

co W

ay

E 1st StW 1st St

W 3rd St

Willow

Dr

Milo Ave

Jum

per A

ve

W 2nd St

Bran

dt R

d

Trac

y Ln

Free

born

Rd

Old

T ra c

yAv

e

Free

born

Rd

Sullivan Rd

ElkHills R

d

Dun

ford

Rd

Wasco Way

Mira

sol A

ve

Butto

nwillo

w D

r

Sullivan Rd

Stockdale Hwy

Buerkle Rd

Brite Rd

McKittrick Hwy

Tracy Ave


DW06

DW05

DW03

®3,000 0 3,0001,500

Feet

Buena Vista Coalition


SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE D-1

Soil Types

21-J

ul-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

llist

er\D

eepW

ell_

GQ

MP_

Soi

l.mxd

R

S

# Deep Well

High Vulnerability Area


Soil Type (SSURGO, 2016)Buttonwillow clay, drained

Granoso loamy sand, 0 to2 percent slopes

Garces silt loam

Garces silt loam, hardsubstratum

Kimberlina fine sandyloam, 0 to 2 percentslopes MLRA 17

Lokern clay, drained

Lokern clay, saline-alkali,drained

Milham sandy loam, 0 to 2percent slopes MLRA 17

Calflax clay loam, saline-sodic, 0 to 2 percentslopes, MLRA 17

·|}þ58

·|}þ166

·|}þ58

·|}þ223

·|}þ58

·|}þ46

·|}þ65

·|}þ166

·|}þ46

·|}þ99

·|}þ99

·|}þ58

·|}þ119

·|}þ43

·|}þ33

§̈¦5

§̈¦5

CrossCanal

Canal 17

Main Canal

West Side Canal

Outlet Canal

Kern River

Poso CreekCalifornia Aqueduct


Wild

woo

d R

d Paso Robles Hwy

S Lake Rd

WSide Hwy

Reserve Rd

Millux Rd

W Lerdo Hwy

Bill Kirby Rd

Reward Rd

Maricopa Hwy

Kerto Rd

B St

E St

Buen

a Vi

sta

Rd

Rd I

JS

t

Bear Mountain Blvd

R 344

Merced Ave

Nob

le S

t

Mas

t Ave

Poso Ave

Ash St

Bell

Rd

Sh ale

Rd

Cap

pello

Noriega Rd

Beec

h Av

e

Rd 5039Lerdo Hwy

Pen

tland

Rd

Hill

Rd

Adohr Rd

Bran

dt R

dR

icar

do S

t

Buss

ell R

d

Jew

etta

Ave

Mc

Coy

Ave

Cen

tral A

ve

Gre

eley

Rd

TupmanRd

Delfern Rd

McCombs Rd

Brite Rd

Jackson Ave

Herring Rd

McCombs Rd

Driv

er R

d

Sherwood Ave

Madera Ave

Cadet Rd

Wal

lace

Rd

Dresser Ave

Rosedale Hwy

Ming Ave

Olive Dr

Weg

is A

ve

Ren

fro R

dImperial St

White Ln

Gromer Ave

Bellevue Rd Stockdale Hwy

San Diego St

Basi

c Sc

hool

Rd

Valpredo Ave

Elkhorn

Rd

Buerkle Rd

Midoil Rd

Rud

d Av

e

Che

rry A

ve

Lerdo Hwy

Midway Rd

W Los Angeles St

Phillips Rd

Kyte

Ave

Leon

ard

Ave

Kyte

Rd

Roo

t Ave

Lost

Hill

s R

d

Hea

th R

d

W Tulare Ave

Snow Rd

Nor

d R

d

Hanawalt Ave

Mar

tin

Ave

Famoso-Woody RdHw

y 58

Mag

nolia

Ave

Dai

ry A

ve

Soda Lake Rd

Gardner FieldRd

Lokern Rd

Gun

Clu

b R

d

Orange St

Row

lee

Rd

Ashe

RdPanama Ln

Simmler Soda Lake Rd

Elmo Hwy

Seventh Standard Rd 7th Standard Rd

Burbank St

Whisler Rd

McCombs Ave

Copus Rd

Riverside St

Scof

ield

Rd

Palm

Ave

Peterson Rd

Kimberlina Rd

Airp

ort R

d

Porte

rvi l l

eH

wy

D S

tFrancoW

ester nR

d

Enos

Ln

Men

dota

St

Man

nel A

ve

Grif

fith

Ave

Alle

n R

d

Shaf

ter A

ve

Norris Rd

May

er A

ve

Trac

y Av

e

Was

co W

ay

Supe

rior R

d

J ump erSt

Frui

tval

e Av

e

Zach

ary

Ave

WSide

Canal

Blankenship Ave

Can

non

St

HonoluluRd

PetroleumClub

Rd

Wes

tern

Ave

Fresno Ave

Zerk

er R

d

Gos

ford

Rd

Elk

Hill

sR

d

MainD

rainRd

Old

Riv

er R

dTaft Hwy

KERNCOUNTY

SAN LUISOBISPOCOUNTY

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community®

4 0 42

Miles



SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE D-2

Buena Vista Water Storage District Soils

20-S

ep-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

lliste

r\Sou

ther

nHVA

_Soi

ls.m

xd

RS/

DLF


Hydrologic GroupA - High Infiltration Rate

C - Slow Infiltration Rate

D - Very Slow InfiltrationRate

C/D - Slow Infiltration Rate(Drained); Very SlowInfiltration Rate (Undrained)

Water

Appendix E

Geologic Sections

J

J

J

J

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !

!!

!

!!

TULARE LAKE

BED

G

D

G'

D'

®8 0 84

Miles



SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE E-1

Regional Geology

14-S

ep-2

016

Z

:\Pro

ject

s\12

6580

_McA

lliste

r\Dee

pWel

l_G

eolo

gy.m

xd

DLF

SOURCES: Background geology image from USGS 1986 Structures and Faults from USGS 2010 Cross Section Locations from USGS (1974) and Western Oil and Gas Association (1983), respectively

! USGS Cross Section WellJ

J Cross Section

F Anticline, certain

F Anticline, concealed

M Syncline, certain

M Syncline, concealed

Fault, certain

Fault, approximately located

Fault, concealed

Project Boundary

BVWSD Boundary

600

400

200

SeaLevel

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

600

400

200

SeaLevel

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

North

G

South

G’

Hig

hw

ay 4

6

7th

Sta

nd

ard

Ro

ad

BSD

So

uth

Bo

un

dar

y

26S/

22E-

5P1

26S/

22E-

4P (c

ore

ho

le)

(pro

ject

ed)

26S/

22E-

20A

26S/

22E-

27Q

2

27S/

22E-

23D

3se

ctio

n D

-D’

27S/

22E-

26E

27S/

22E-

33J2

28S/

22E-

9D1

(co

re h

ole

)

28S/

22E-

22D

1

29S/

23E-

21J

30S/

24E-

5M(p

roje

cted

)30

S/24

E-4C

1(c

ore

ho

le)

?

? ??

??

? C-clayQTf

Approximate Project Area

Source: Adapded from USGS Water Supply Paper 1999-H (Croft 1972)

Faul

t

A-clay

E-clay

North-South Cross SectionG-G’

SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE E-2


Buena Vista Water Storage District

40,000 feet

ApproximateHorizontal Scale

Ground Surface

ANTELOPE HILLS

LOST HILLS

GETTYIslais #46

SEC.16 27S/21EEL.424

ARCOBelridge #1SEC.21 27S/20E

EL.654

GETTYCarleton Investment

Fee #1-13SEC.13 27S/19E

EL.752

SHELLUnit #15

SEC.9 27S/19EEL.900'

CHEVRONLost Hills Extension

#11-25SEC.25 27S/21E

EL.311

TEXACOMiller & Lux, Robinson #1SEC.22 27S/22E

EL.238 '

E-CLAY

TD?

700

TD?

500

BASE TULARE FORMATION

?

?

Marine Deposits

Tulare Formation

600

400

200

1000

800

Sea Level

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

600

400

200

1000

800

Sea Level

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

West

D

East

D’

SEMITROPIC RIDGE

27S/

23E-

1R1

(cor

e ho

le)

27S/

23E-

8J

27S/

23E-

18H

2

27S/

22E-

22F

27S/

22E-

23D

3 (S

ectio

n G

-G')

27S/

24E-

1L2

(cor

e ho

le)

Sect

ion

H-H

'27

S/25

E-1N

1 (c

ore

hole

)

27S/

24E-

7J

(pro

ject

ed)

C-clayC-clay??

E-clay

Rector, 1983USGS, 1972

Faul

t

A-clay

? ?

SEPTEMBER 2016 FIGURE E-3Buena Vista Water Storage District

Southern High Vulnerability Area Groundwater Quality Management Plan

West-East Cross SectionD-D’

Sources: Adapted from a combination of USGS Water Supply Paper 1999-H (Croft 1972) and Cross section 27S fromWestern Oil and Gas Association Westside Groundwater Study (Rector 1983)

40,000 feet

ApproximateHorizontal Scale

Wes

t Si

de

Can

al

Approx. Project

Area

Appendix F

Implementation Schedule

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish

1 Submit draft GQMP 0 days Tue 9/20/16 Tue 9/20/16

2 RWQCB review and comments 60 days Tue 9/20/16 Wed 11/16/16

3 Grower Outreach Program 106 days Mon 12/5/16 Fri 3/17/17

4 Baseline management practice surveys 90 days Mon 12/5/16 Wed 3/1/17

5 Identify additional practices and establish goals and schedule for management practice implementation

40 days Mon 2/6/17 Thu 3/16/17

6 Management Practice Implementation and Assessments 814 days Mon 3/20/17 Tue 5/14/19

7 Implement improved management practices 730 days Mon 3/20/17 Fri 2/22/19

8 Assessment of effectiveness 365 days Mon 3/19/18 Wed 3/6/19

9 Evaluation report 60 days Mon 3/18/19 Tue 5/14/19

10 Monitoring Program 1034 days Mon 12/5/16 Fri 8/30/19

11 Monitoring Plan 60 days Mon 12/5/16 Tue 1/31/17

12 Monthly Monitoring Schedule* 886 days Thu 4/27/17 Fri 8/30/19

13 September monitoring 378 days Thu 9/28/17 Thu 9/27/18

16 October monitoring 378 days Thu 10/26/17 Thu 10/25/18

19 April monitoring 755 days Thu 4/27/17 Thu 4/25/19

23 May monitoring 755 days Thu 5/25/17 Thu 5/23/19

27 June monitoring 763 days Thu 6/22/17 Fri 6/28/19

31 July monitoring 755 days Thu 7/27/17 Thu 7/25/19

35 August monitoring 755 days Thu 8/31/17 Thu 8/29/19

39 Annual Progress Reports 784 days Wed 10/4/17 Wed 10/30/19

40 Annual report ‐ 1 30 days Wed 10/4/17 Wed 11/1/17



9/20Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4

016 2017 2018 2019

Task

Split

Milestone

Summary

Project Summary

Inactive Task

Inactive Milestone

Inactive Summary

Manual Task

Duration-only

Manual Summary Rollup

Manual Summary

Start-only

Finish-only

External Tasks

External Milestone

Deadline

Baseline

Baseline Milestone

Baseline Summary

Progress

Manual Progress

Slippage

Buena Vista CoalitionSchedule for Southern High Vulnerability Area GQMP

*Includes assumed months of district well operation Page 1

Project: BVWSD GQMP_DWDate: Fri 9/16/16

Appendix G

Photographs of District Wells

groundwater quality management plan · pdf filegroundwater quality management plan buena vista...

Documents