Document Modesto_doc_35e58ec6bb

Integrated Regional Water Management Plan East Stanislaus Region December 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 i Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction 1‐1 1.1 IRWMP Overview 1‐1 1.2 Regional Water Management Group 1‐2 1.3 IRWMP Development 1‐2 1.4 IRWMP Adoption 1‐4 Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region 2‐1 2.1 Region Description 2‐1 2.1.1 Region Boundaries 2‐1 2.1.2 Climate 2‐4 2.1.3 Watersheds and Water Systems 2‐4 2.1.4 Wastewater and Recycled Water 2‐14 2.1.5 Stormwater and Flooding 2‐19 2.1.6 Natural Resources 2‐25 2.1.7 Social and Cultural Composition 2‐25 2.2 Water Resource Status 2‐29 2.2.1 Water Supplies and Demands 2‐29 2.2.2 Water Quality 2‐47 Chapter 3 Climate Change 3‐1 3.1 Introduction 3‐1 3.2 Statewide Observation and Projections 3‐1 3.2.1 Temperature and Precipitation Changes 3‐2 3.2.2 Sea‐level Rise, Snowpack Reduction, and Extreme Events 3‐3 3.3 Legislative and Policy Context 3‐3 3.4 Regional Climate Change Projections and Impacts 3‐8 3.4.1 Recent Regional Studies and 3‐8 3.4.3 Climate Change Impacts on Surface Water 3‐9 3.4.5 Climate Change Impacts on Groundwater 3‐17 3.5 Regional Water Resource Vulnerabilities 3‐17 3.5.1 Water Demand 3‐19 3.5.2 Water Supply and Quality 3‐20 3.5.3 Flood Management 3‐23 3.5.4 Ecosystem and 3‐24 3.5.5 Hydropower 3‐25 3.5.6 Other 3‐25 3.5.7 Prioritized Vulnerabilities 3‐25 3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation 3‐26 3.6.1 Adaptation Strategies 3‐27 3.6.2 No Regret Strategies 3‐36 3.6.3 Mitigation/GHG Reduction Strategies 3‐38 3.7 Plan for Further Data 3‐41 Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach 4‐1 4.1 Governance 4‐1 4.1.1 Organization 4‐1 4.1.2 RWMG Composition 4‐5 4.1.3 Decision Making 4‐8 4.2 Stakeholder Involvement and Outreach 4‐10 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 ii 4.2.1 Stakeholders 4‐11 4.3 Public Forums 4‐15 4.3.1 Outreach to Disadvantaged Communities 4‐16 4.3.2 Outreach to Native Americans 4‐17 4.4 Coordination with Other/Neighboring IRWM Regions 4‐17 4.5 Coordination with State/Federal Agencies 4‐19 Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives 5‐1 5.1 Regional Conflicts and Issues 5‐2 5.2 Region’s Vision for Water Resources Management 5‐2 5.3 Region Goals & Objectives 5‐2 5.3.1 Goals and Objectives 5‐2 5.3.2 Prioritizing Objectives 5‐5 5.4 Resource Management Strategies 5‐11 5.5 Relation to Statewide Priorities 5‐19 5.6 Relation to Regulatory Programs 5‐25 5.7 Relation to Local Water Planning 5‐25 5.7.1 Groundwater Management Planning 5‐26 5.7.2 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring/CASGEM 5‐27 5.7.3 Groundwater Quality Monitoring 5‐27 5.7.4 Salt & Nutrient Management Planning 5‐28 5.7.5 Water Planning Efforts 5‐29 5.7.6 Wastewater Planning Efforts 5‐29 5.8 Relation to Local Flood Control Planning 5‐30 5.9 Relation to Local Land Use Planning 5‐31 Chapter 6 The Projects 6‐1 6.1 Project Solicitation 6‐1 6.2 Project Review and Integration 6‐2 6.3 Project Prioritization 6‐3 6.3.1 Prioritization Process Development 6‐3 6.3.2 Prioritization Application and Results 6‐7 6.4 Impacts and Benefits 6‐7 6.4.1 Plan Implementation Benefits and Impacts 6‐11 6.4.2 Project/Program Impacts and Benefits 6‐13 Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management 7‐1 7.1 Technical 7‐1 7.3 Data Management 7‐11 7.3.1 Data Needs within the Region 7‐12 7.3.2 Data Collection and Storage 7‐13 7.3.3 Data Dissemination 7‐15 Chapter 8 Plan Implementation 8‐1 8.1 Implementation Process 8‐1 8.2 Financing Plan 8‐2 8.2.1 Funding for Development of IRWMP 8‐2 8.2.2 Funding for Projects that Implement the IRWMP 8‐5 8.3 Plan Performance and Monitoring 8‐5 8.4 Plan Updates 8‐9 Chapter 9 References 9‐1 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 iii List of Figures Figure 2‐1: Boundaries of the East Stanislaus Region 2‐2 Figure 2‐2: Major Cities Located in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐3 Figure 2‐3: Watersheds Within and Around the East Stanislaus Region 2‐5 Figure 2‐4: Surface Water and Groundwater Features in and adjacent to the East Stanislaus Region 2‐11 Figure 2‐5: Primary Water Services Areas in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐11 Figure 2‐6: 100‐Year Flood Plain Maps for Water Bodies within the East Stanislaus Region 2‐24 Figure 2‐7: Land Use in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐27 Figure 2‐8: Disadvantaged Communities Located in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐28 Figure 2‐9: City of Modesto Water Service Area 2‐32 Figure 2‐10: MID Service Area 2‐35 Figure 2‐11: City of Turlock Water Service Area 2‐36 Figure 2‐12: TID Service Area 2‐39 Figure 2‐13: City of Ceres Water Service Area 2‐41 Figure 2‐14: City Hughson Water Service Area and Facilities 2‐43 Figure 2‐15: Oakdale Irrigation District Service Area and Facilities 2‐45 Figure 2‐16: Eastside Water District 2‐46 Figure 3‐1: IPCC Climate Change Scenarios 3‐2 Figure 3‐2: Projected Snowpack Changes in the Sierra Nevada 3‐3 Figure 3‐3: West‐slope Sierra Nevada Watersheds 3‐10 Figure 3‐4: Average Centroid Timing by Watershed and Climate Scenario (north to south) 3‐12 Figure 3‐5: Average Annual LFD by Watershed and Climate Scenario (north to south) 3‐13 Figure 3‐6: Relative Vulnerability Based on Total Water Storage and Change in MAF 3‐14 Figure 3‐7: Relative Vulnerability Based on Total Available Hydropower and Change in CT 3‐15 Figure 3‐8: Relative Vulnerability Based on Meadow Area Per Square Kilometer and Change in LFD 3‐16 Figure 3‐9: DACs within 100‐year Floodplain 3‐24 Figure 4‐1: East Stanislaus Region Governance Structure 4‐5 Figure 4‐2: Member Agencies 4‐6 Figure 4‐3: Development Process 4‐9 Figure 4‐4: Surrounding IRWM Regions 4‐18 Figure 5‐1: Relationship between Vision, Goals, and Objectives 5‐1 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 iv List of Tables Table 1‐1: Plan Standards Addressed in the East Stanislaus IRWMP 1‐4 Table 2‐1: Average Temperatures and ETo in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐4 Table 2‐2: Watershed and Reservoir Characteristics in the San Joaquin River Basin 2‐6 Table 2‐3: Major Water System Facilities in East Stanislaus Region 2‐12 Table 2‐4: City of Modesto Wastewater and Treatment, AFY 2‐16 Table 2‐5: City of Turlock Wastewater Collection and Treatment, AFY 2‐16 Table 2‐6: City of Ceres Wastewater Collection and Treatment, 2‐17 Table 2‐7: DACs in the East Stanislaus Region 2‐28 Table 2‐8: City of Modesto Projected Water Demand, AFY a 2‐30 Table 2‐9: City of Modesto Current and Future Water Supplies, AFY 2‐30 Table 2‐10: City of Turlock Water Demand, AFY a 2‐37 Table 2‐11: Current and Project Water Supplies, AFY 2‐37 Table 2‐12: City of Ceres Projected Water Demands, AFY a 2‐40 Table 2‐13: City of Ceres Future Water Supplies, AFY 2‐40 Table 2‐14: City of Hughson Water Demand, AFY 2‐42 Table 2‐15: Monitoring by Member Agencies of Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers GBA 2‐51 Table 3‐1: Physical Characteristics of Watersheds within Region 3‐10 Table 3‐2: Watersheds’ Water Resource Benefits 3‐11 Table 3‐3: MAF by Climate Alternative and Watershed 3‐11 Table 3‐4: East Stanislaus Region Climate Change 3‐19 Table 3‐5: Applicability of RMS to Climate Change Adaptation 3‐28 Table 3‐6: No Regret Strategies in the East Stanislaus Region 3‐37 Table 3‐7: Applicability of CWP Resource Management Strategies to GHG Mitigation 3‐40 Table 3‐8: Preliminary Data Collection and Management Approach for Vulnerability Assessment 3‐ 42 Table 4‐1: Representatives and Alternates 4‐2 Table 4‐2: Steering Committee Representatives and Alternates 4‐3 Table 4‐3: Public Advisory Committee Representatives and Alternates 4‐4 Table 4‐4: Member Agencies’ Water Management Responsibilities 4‐6 Table 4‐5: Other Identified Participants in IRWM Planning Effort 4‐14 Table 4‐6: Contact Information 4‐16 Table 5‐1: Measures for Regional Goals and Objectives 5‐6 Table 5‐2: RMS Incorporated into East Stanislaus IRWMP 5‐11 Table 5‐3: East Stanislaus Regional Objectives’ Relation to RMSs 5‐20 Table 5‐4: East Stanislaus Regional Objectives’ Relation to Statewide Priorities 5‐23 Table 6‐1: Project Prioritization Process Weights 6‐6 Table 6‐2: Potential Impacts and Benefits by Project Type 6‐8 Table 7‐1: Key Documents Used to Prepare East Stanislaus IRWMP 7‐1 Table 7‐2: East Stanislaus IRWMP Project Technical Feasibility 7‐7 Table 7‐3: Data Collection for the Member Agencies 7‐14 Table 8‐1: Potential Funding Sources Available for IRWMP Development, Project Implementation, and O&M Costs 8‐3 Table 8‐2: Example of Monitoring Table included in Project‐Specific Monitoring Plan 8‐7 Table 8‐3: Example Project‐Specific Monitoring Report 8‐8 Table 8‐4: Summary of Long‐Term East Stanislaus IRWMP Maintenance 8‐9 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 v Appendices Appendix A – East Stanislaus Regional Water Management Partnership Memorandum of Understanding Appendix B – List of members Appendix C – List of Steering Committee (SC) Members and SC Roles and Responsibilities Appendix D – List of Public Advisory Committee (PAC) Members and PAC Roles and Responsibilities Appendix E – Outreach and Communications Plan Appendix F – Notice of Intent to Prepare an IRWMP and Publication Documentation Appendix G – East Stanislaus IRWM Stakeholder List Appendix H – Public Workshop Materials Appendix I – Project Solicitation Form Appendix J – Summary of Submitted Projects, June 2012 Appendix K – Project Prioritization Scoring Sheet Appendix L – Secondary (Greenhouse Gas Emissions) Scoring Sheet Appendix M – Infrastructure Life Spans Appendix N – Summary of Benefit‐Cost Analysis on Submitted Projects, July 2012 Appendix O – Submitted Projects by Project Type, June 2012 Appendix P – Results of Project Prioritization, July 2012 Appendix Q – Potential Funding Sources for East Stanislaus IRWMP Projects Appendix R – Notices of Intent to Adopt and Adopting Resolutions ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 vi List of Abbreviations AB Assembly Bill ACS American Community Survey AF acre‐feet AFY acre‐feet per year AWMC Agricultural Water Management Council AWMP agricultural water management plan B/C benefit‐cost ratio BMO basin management objective BMP best management practice BNR biological nutrient removal CAAP Climate Adaptation Advisory Panel CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CARB California Air Resources Board CAS climate adaptation strategy CASGEM California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program CAT Climate Action Team CCR consumer confidence report CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDPH California Department of Public Health CEDEN California Environmental Data Exchange Network CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CERES California Environmental Resources Evaluation System cfs cubic feet per second CII commercial, industrial and institutional CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System CIP capital improvement plan CREAT Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool CSD community services district CT centroid timing Central Valley Flood Protection Plan CVP Central Valley Project CV‐SALTS Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long‐Term Sustainability CWC California Water Code CWP California Water Plan DAC disadvantaged community Delta Sacramento‐San Joaquin Delta DER Department of Environmental Resources DFA Dairy Farms of America DMM Demand Management Measure DPWD Del Puerto Water District DSOD Division of Safety of Dams DWR California Department of Water Resources EID Eastside Irrigation District EIR environmental impact report EIS environmental impact statement EO Executive Order ESIRWM East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management East Stanislaus Regional Water Management Partnership ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 vii ET evapotranspiration EWMP efficient water management practice FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map GAMA Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program GCM global climate models GHG greenhouse gas GIS geographic information system gpcd gallons per capita per day gpm gallons per minute GWMP groundwater management plan HCP habitat conservation plan ICM initial conceptual model IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IRWM integrated regional water management IRWMP integrated regional water management plan JPA joint powers authority LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission LFD low flow deviation LID low impact development MAF mean annual flow M&I municipal and industrial MDWP Modesto Domestic Water Project MG million gallons mgd million gallons per day MHI median household income MID Modesto Irrigation District mL milliliter MOU memorandum of understanding MPO metropolitan planning organization Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plan MSR small municipal storm sewer system MSR municipal service review MW megawatt NEPA National Environmental Protection Act NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System NPS Non‐point source North Valley Regional Recycled Water Project O&M operations and maintenance QA/QC quality assurance and quality control OCAP operations criteria and planning OID Oakdale Irrigation District OPR Office of Planning and Research PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company PAC Public Advisory Committee ppm parts per million PRC Public Resources Code Prop proposition RAP Regional Acceptance Process RD reclamation district ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Table of Contents December 2013 viii RFMP Mid‐San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan RM river mile RMS resource management strategy Regional Surface Water Supply Project RTP ready to proceed RWMG regional water management group Regional Water Quality Control Board Turlock Regional Water Quality Control Facility SB Senate Bill SC Steering Committee SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition State Water Resources Control Board SDMP storm drain master plan San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge SNMP salt and nutrient management plan SOI sphere of influence SRF State Revolving Fund SRWA Stanislaus Regional Water Authority SSJID South San Joaquin Irrigation District StanCOG Stanislaus Council of Governments Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association SWAMP Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program SWMP storm water management plan SWP State Water Project TDS Total Dissolved Solids TGBA Turlock Groundwater Basin Association TID Turlock Irrigation District TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load UC University of California USBR U.S. Bureau of Reclamation USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey UWMP urban water management plans WAS waste activated sludge WDL Water Data Library WEAP Water Evaluation And Planning Model WMI water management initiative WSMP water supply master plan WWTP wastewater treatment plant ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 1 Introduction December 2013 1-1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 IRWMP Overview In 2002, the Integrated Regional Water Management Act was created when Senate Bill 1672 was passed. The purpose of the Act was to encourage local agencies to coordinate and collaboratively manage water resources to improve water quality, quantity and reliability. Following creation of the Act, in November 2002, the voters of the State of California recognized and codified the need for integrated regional planning for the management of water resources with the passage of Proposition (Prop) 50, the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act. Central to Prop 50 was the preparation of Integrated Regional Water Management Plans define planning regions and identify strategies that allow for the regional management of water resources in what began as four main areas: water supply, groundwater management, ecosystem restoration, and water quality. Prop 50 provided $500 million to fund competitive grants for preparing and for implementing projects that were consistent with Since its inception, the IRWM program has evolved. In November 2006, California voters passed Prop 84, the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality, and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act, providing $1 billion for planning and implementation grant funding through the IRWM program. Prop 1E, referred to as the Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act, was also passed at that time, providing $300 million for IRWM Stormwater Flood Management. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) administers the IRWM grant programs as currently funded by Props 50, 84, and 1E. As part of that program administration, DWR released the Proposition 84 & Proposition 1E Integrated Regional Water Management Guidelines (Guidelines) in November 2012, a set of guidelines for IRWM implementation and planning grants, including descriptions of what must be included in an IRWMP to be eligible for the grant program. The IRWMP is intended to be a living plan that is to be updated regularly. The Plan summarizes regional goals and objectives for water resources management, and identifies strategies, projects, and programs intended to fulfill those goals and objectives. Projects and programs included in the IRWMP are designed to integrate multiple resource management strategies (RMSs) and projects to provide multiple‐benefit solutions and beneficiaries, both locally and regionally. Program Preferences are developed as part of the IRWM Program, equating to a number of criteria that and associated grant proposals should address. The Program Preferences, as included in the Prop 84 Guidelines, are to:  Include regional projects or programs  Effectively integrate water management programs and projects within a hydrologic region identified in the California Water Plan; the Regional Water Quality Control Board region or subdivision; or other region or sub‐region specifically identified by DWR  Effectively resolve significant water‐related conflicts within or between regions  Contribute to attainment of one or more of the objectives of the CALFED Bay‐Delta Program  Address critical water supply or water quality needs of disadvantaged communities within the region  Effectively integrate water management with land use planning  To provide for non‐State funded flood control or flood prevention projects (pursuant to PRC §5096.824 or §75034) to provide multiple benefits, including, but not limited to, water quality improvements, ecosystem benefits, reduction of in‐stream erosion and sedimentation, and groundwater recharge.  Address Statewide priorities [for water resource management] which include: ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December This IRW with the resources 1.2 Re The East Water Ma Ceres an Managem have stat who may requirem Memoran approved have stat formed th The ESRW the Regio and its as to foster supply co 1.3 IR The State must be construct organizat documen documen  G IR d re th th islaus Integrat 2013 o Droug o Use an o Climat o Expan o Practi o Protec o Impro o Ensur WMP has bee Prop 84 Gui s and environ egional W t Stanislaus anagement G nd Turlock. ment Group ( tutory autho y be necess ments of CW ndum of Un d by the gove tutory author P members si he WMP initiate on Acceptanc ssociated RW regional co onflicts in the RWMP Dev e of Californi addressed i ted to meet tion of the P nted and ad ntation of: Governance – RWMP dev escription of esponsible f he Plan and he Plan. ted Regional W ght Prepared nd Reuse Wa te Change Re nd Environm ce Integrated ct Surface Wa ove Tribal Wa e Equitable D en prepared idelines, the nment. Water Man Regional W Group for the According RWMG) is a rity over wa sary for the C §10540 an nderstanding erning bodies rity over wat igned an MO . ed developm ce Process (R WMG, are rel mmunication e Region. velopmen ia has establi n each IRW or surpass e Plan is such ddressed. T The govern velopment f the Regiona for developm the project Water Manage ness ater More Eff esponse Actio ental Stewar d Flood Man ater and Gro ater and Natu Distribution for the East priorities an nagement Water Manage e region, is p to Californ “group in wh ater supply o e developme nd §10541, g (MOU), or s of those loc ter supply or U dated Aug ment of the E RAP) applica atively new n and coope nt ished IRWM WMP. This IR each of those h that each P The Plan Sta ance structu and impl al Water Man ment and im proponents ement Plan ficiently ons rdship agement oundwater Qu ural Resourc of Benefits t Stanislaus I nd objective t Group ement Partn resently com nia Water C hich three or or water man ent and imp participate r other writ cal agencies. r managemen gust 23, 2011 ast Stanislau ation to beco and were re eration and Plan Standa RWMP has b e standards. Plan Standar andards inc ure for a regi lementation. nagement Gr mplementatio who will a uality ces IRWM (ESIR s for regiona nership (ESR mprised of th Code (CWC) r more local a nagement, as plementation by means o tten agreem ” For the ES nt in their re 1 (included in us Region an ome an offici ecently devel to cooperat ards or Guide been The rd is clude ion’s A roup on of dopt “IRW used be in be u Imp appl ‐ Pro Guid Page Cha RWM) region al planning, RWMP), the he Cities of M §10539, a agencies, at l s well as tho n of a plan of a joint po ment, as app SIRWM regio espective jur n Appendix A nd spearhead ial IRWM reg loped, beginn ively resolve elines that d WM Plan Stan d to describe n an IRWM P used as criter lementation lications.” oposition 84 & delines, Nove e 18 apter 1 Introdu n. It is consi and reflects official Reg Modesto, Hug Regional W least two of w ose other pe n that meet owers agreem propriate, th n, all four en risdictions, an A) which for ded completi gion. This Re ning in July 2 e potential w efine aspects ndards are e what must Plan and can ria in Grant & 1E IRWM mber 2012, uction 1-2 istent local gional ghson, Water which rsons s the ment, hat is ntities nd all mally ion of egion, 2010, water s that ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 1 Introduction December 2013 1-3  Region Description – The watersheds and water systems within the Region; internal boundaries; and water supplies and demands, including potential effects of climate change. Comparison of current and future water quality conditions in the Region. Description of social and cultural makeup of the regional community. Description of major water related objectives and conflicts. Explanation of how the IRWM regional boundary was determined and why it is appropriate. Identification of neighboring and/or overlapping IRWM efforts and explanation of planned/working relationships.  Objectives – Objectives of the IRWMP that are measurable, and the process used to develop them. Explanation of prioritization of objectives if they are prioritized or the reasons they are not prioritized.  Resource Management Strategies – Resource management strategies considered to meet IRWM objectives and which strategies were incorporated into the Plan. Effects of climate change on the region’s water resources.  Integration – Structures and processes that provide opportunities to develop and foster integration.  Project Review Process – Procedures for submitting a project to the RWMG. Procedures for review of projects considered for inclusion into the Plan. Displaying the lists of selected projects.  Impact and Benefit – Discussion of potential impacts and benefits of implementation of the IRWMP.  Plan Performance and Monitoring – Performance measures and monitoring methods to ensure the objectives of the IRWMP are met.  Data Management – Process of data collection, storage, and dissemination to IRWM participants, stakeholders, public, and the State.  Finance – Possible funding sources, programs, and grant opportunities for the development & ongoing funding of the IRWMP. Funding mechanisms (e.g. rate structures) for projects that implement the IRWMP. Explanation of the certainty and longevity of known or potential funding for the IRWMP and projects included. Explanation of how O&M costs for projects would be covered.  Technical Analysis – Data and technical analyses that were used in the development of the IRWMP.  Relation to Local Water Planning – A list of local water plans used in the IRWMP. Discussion of how the IRWMP related to planning documents and programs established by local agencies. Description of the dynamics between the IRWMP and local planning documents.  Relation to Local Land Use Planning – Current relationship between local land use planning, regional water issues, and water management objectives. Future plans to further a collaborative, proactive relationship between land use planners and water managers.  Stakeholder Involvement – Description of the public process that provides outreach and an opportunity to participate in the IRWMP development and implementation. Process used to identify, inform, invite and involve stakeholder groups in the IRWM process. Discussion of how the RWMG will endeavor to involve DACs and Native American trivial communities in the IRWM planning effort. Description of the decision making process. Discussion regarding how stakeholders are necessary to address the objectives and resource management strategies. Discussion of how collaborative processes will engage a balance of the interest groups regardless of their ability to contribute financially to the IRWMP’s development or implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 1 Introduction December 2013 1-4  Coordination – Identification of the process to coordinate water management projects and activities of participating local agencies and stakeholders to avoid conflicts and take advantage of efficiencies. Identification of neighboring IRWM efforts and how cooperation/coordination with these efforts will be accomplished. Identification of areas where a State agency may be able to assist in communication, cooperation, or implementation of IRWMP components, processes, projects, etc.  Climate Change – Discussion of the potential effects of climate change on the IRWM region, including an evaluation of the IRWM region’s vulnerabilities to the effects of climate change and potential adaptation responses. Process that discloses and considers greenhouse gas emissions when choosing between project alternatives. As described in the Guidelines, although the Plan Standards name specific topics the IRWMP should cover, they do not constitute an outline for the Plan. The following table shows which sections of the IRWMP address the Plan Standards previously described. All of the Plan Standards are addressed which helps ensure the creation of a high quality, implementable IRWMP. Table 1‐1: Plan Standards Addressed in the East Stanislaus IRWMP Plan Standard East Stanislaus IRWMP Chapter to Reference Governance 3.1, 3.2 Region Description 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 Objectives 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.5 Resource Management Strategies 4.4 Integration 5.2 Project Review Process 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 Impacts and Benefits 5.4 Plan Performance and Monitoring 7.1, 7.3, 7.4 Data Management 6.2 Finance 7.2 Technical Analysis 6.1 Relation to Local Water Planning 4.7, 4.8 Relation to Local Land Use Planning 4.9 Stakeholder Involvement 3.2 Coordination 3.3, 3.4 Climate Change 2.3, 5.2 Ongoing information about the development and implementation of this IRWMP can be found on the East Stanislaus IRWM Region’s website at www.eaststanirwm.org. 1.4 IRWMP Adoption member agencies and project proponents are expected to adopt the IRWMP upon completion, and any stakeholder entities can choose to accept or adopt the completed Plan to demonstrate support and commitment to implementation. Upon completion of the East Stanislaus IRWMP, the following entities adopted this Plan at meetings of their governing boards which were open to the public: ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 1 Introduction December 2013 1-5  City of Modesto on January 28, 2014  City of Turlock on January 28, 2014  City of Ceres on January 27, 2014  City of Hughson on January 13, 2014 Appendix R contains the notices of intent to adopt and the adopting resolutions. As described in Chapter 7.4, Plan Updates, the East Stanislaus IRWMP will be updated periodically to reflect changing conditions and IRWMP project implementation. When the IRWMP is updated, it will be re‐adopted by the participating agencies. There may, however, be interim changes to the IRWMP that will be administrative in nature; for example, the project list may be updated prior to a grant proposal solicitation. This IRWMP does not require re‐adoption of this Plan for interim or administrative changes. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte 2.1 Re are prese become i Stanislau and have related is Stanislau for integ collabora Managem as shown resources Merced, E with som IRWM re California neighbor An IRWM managed Wat Inte Wat year Curr regi Soci Maj 4.1 o An e was Neig ‐ Proposi Pages 19 islaus Integrat 2013 er 2 ES egion Des ent as agricu mpacted, an us IRWM Reg e practiced th ssues, seekin us IRWM regi gration, pro ation. In res ment Partner n in Figure 2 s manageme Eastern San me local agen egions as a s a that lacke ing IRWM re MP must inclu d by the RWM tersheds and ernal bounda ter supplies a r planning ho rent and futu ion. ial and cultur or water rela of this Plan). explanation o s determined ghboring and ition 84 & 1E 9 to 20 ted Regional W SIRWM R scription ultural and u d as the regi gion underst hose princip ng solutions ion, they stro ject and pr sponse to t ship (ESRWM in an effo ent. The Ea Joaquin, Tu ncy and envi tarting poin ed integrated egions. ude a descrip MG. This sect d water syste aries within t and demands orizon. ure water qu ral makeup o ated objectiv . of how the IR d. d/or overlap E IRWM Guide Water Manage Region urban deman on continues tand the imp ples in the pa together rat ove to formal rogram effic his current MP) was form ort to create ast Stanislau olumne‐Stan ironmental b t, the East S d regional w ption of the r tion should d ems within th the region. s for a minim uality conditio of the regiona ves and confl RWM regiona ping IRWM e elines, Novem ement Plan nds collide, g s to grow. Th portance of ast by worki ther than in lize their pas ciencies, an environmen med and the a regional m us IRWM Re nislaus and W boundaries. Stanislaus Re water plann region being describe: he region. mum of a 20‐ on in the al communit licts (in Secti al boundary efforts. mber 2012, 2.1. The plan and Integ Man most view Regi was over Hugh betw regio refer Mari Joaq and with Valle groundwater he agencies t integrated w ing together a piecemeal st relationshi d benefits nt, the East e East Stanisl management egion has co Westside‐San By using th egion was fo ning and to ty. ion Chapter .1 Region need for in nning in St therefore t grated Re nagement (IR t easily note wing DWR’s ional Map. A a void in r the Citie hson, Turloc ween the foll ons: Central rred to iposa), Merc quin, Tuo Westside‐S h other area ey, water r r and surface to be encomp water resour to evaluate l fashion. In ips to maxim through sh t Stanislaus laus IRWM R t solution for ommon bou n Joaquin IR he boundarie ormulated to avoid majo r 2 ESIRWM R n Boundari tegrated reg tanislaus Co the need fo egional W RWM) regio ed visually w s 2010 I At the time, IRWM cov es of Mod ck, and Cere lowing five I l California as Yose ced, Eastern olumne‐Stani San Joaquin as of the Ce esource con e water reso passed in the rces manage water resou forming the mize opportu hared vision Regional W Region devel r long‐term w ndaries with RWM regions es of neighb cover an ar or overlaps Region 2-1 ies gional ounty, or an Water on, is when RWM there erage desto, es, in RWM (now emite‐ n San islaus n. As entral nflicts urces e East ement urces‐ e East nities n and Water oped, water h the s, and boring rea of with ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December The boun jurisdicti North Bo River, Mo boundary natural w exclusion region be this area South Bo District ( IRWM Re creates a developm boundari planning overlap a overlap a islaus Integrat 2013 ndaries of th onal bounda oundary: Th odesto Grou y also aligns water bounda n of north‐ea ecause it can are invited t oundary: Th (TID) bound egion. The so a small ove ment proces ies. At prese process, and area in the area or a ne ted Regional W Figure 2‐1 e East Stanis aries and geo he north bou ndwater Sub s with the E aries and no astern portio nnot be justi to participate e Merced Riv aries were u outhern boun erlap. The s and have ent, it has be d as such, the planning eff eed arise tha Water Manage 1: Boundarie slaus IRWM graphical an undary of th bbasin, and astern San J ot solely polit n of Stanisla fied from a w e in the East ver, the Turlo used to deli ndary of the R two IRWM e discussed een agreed t e East Stanisl forts curren at further co ement Plan es of the East Region resu nd environme e East Stani also a porti Joaquin IRW tical or juris aus County. T watershed p Stanislaus Re ock Groundw neate the so Region is loc regions ha the overlap that each reg laus Region i tly underwa oordination w Stanislaus R ult from a co ental conside slaus Region ion of the St WM boundary dictional bou This area wa perspective. H egion. water Subbas outhern bou cated within t ave been co p during de gion will add is including i ay. Should a with the Me Chapter Region mbination o erations, and n is defined tanislaus Co y. Importanc undaries. Th as not chosen However, th sin, and the T undary of th the Merced I oordinating evelopment dress its ent its entire reg a project be rced Region r 2 ESIRWM R f IRWM and d are as follow by the Stani unty border ce was place his resulted i n to be part o e communit Turlock Irrig he East Stani IRWM Regio during the of each reg tire region i gion, includin identified i n be required Region 2-2 d local ws: islaus r. The ed on in the of the ies in gation islaus n and plan gion’s n the ng the n the d, the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December and both Eastern the easte neighbor managem that the Region. Western boundari boundary therefore The East major cit also comp as well a IRWM pr Quality C islaus Integrat 2013 P will do so a are willing t Boundary: ern boundar ing IRWM re ment strategi Turlock and n Boundary ies were us y of both th e the East Sta t Stanislaus ies located w prise the ESR as neighborin rocess. The e ontrol Board F ted Regional W accordingly. B to cooperate. The existing ry of the Eas egion’s boun ies can still b d Modesto G y: The San ed for the he Turlock a anislaus Regi Region inco within the Re RWMP (Figu ng counties, entire East S d’s jurisdictio Figure 2‐2: Ma Water Manage Both IRWM r . g Tuolumne‐S st Stanislaus ndary, unnec be employed Groundwate Joaquin Riv western bou and Modesto ion fully enco orporates po gion are the re 2‐2); how have been, Stanislaus Re on. ajor Cities Lo ement Plan regions recog Stanislaus IR s Region. By cessary confu d. The locati r Subbasins ver and th undary of t o Groundwa ompasses the ortions of bo Cities of Mod wever, all citie and will con egion is locat ocated in the E gnize coordi RWM Region y aligning th usion is avoi ion of the ea s are located e Westside‐ the East Sta ater Subbasin ese groundw oth Stanislau desto, Hughs es within Sta ntinue to be, ted within C East Stanisla Chapter nation in thi n boundary w he region bo ided and int astern bound d within the ‐San Joaqui anislaus regi ns is the Sa water subbasi us and Merc son, Turlock, anislaus and , invited to p Central Valley aus Region r 2 ESIRWM R is area is req was used to oundary wit er‐regional w dary also en e East Stani n IRWM R ion. The we an Joaquin R ins. ced counties , and Ceres, w Merced Cou participate i y Regional W Region 2-3 quired form h the water sures islaus Region estern River; s. The which unties, in the Water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-4 2.1.2 Climate The East Stanislaus Region has a Mediterranean climate with hot, dry summers and cool winters, with most of the annual precipitation occurring between November and April. The average annual maximum temperature is 74.6 degrees Fahrenheit (oF), as shown in the following table, but it is not uncommon for summer temperatures to exceed 100oF. Extreme winter lows can reach the teens with the first freeze usually in December and the last in February. Table 2‐1: Average Temperatures and ETo in the East Stanislaus Region Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Average ETo (in)a 0.87 1.71 3.43 5.24 6.70 7.40 7.85 6.75 4.93 3.37 1.66 0.87 50.78 Average Total Precipitation (in)b 2.47 2.08 1.91 1.03 0.46 0.12 0.02 0.04 0.18 0.63 1.23 2.06 12.22 Average Max Temperature (oF) b 53.8 60.9 67.0 73.3 81.2 88.4 94.3 92.2 87.6 77.9 64.6 54.3 74.6 Average Min Temperature b 37.6 40.8 43.5 46.8 51.8 56.6 59.9 58.8 55.9 49.5 41.7 37.7 48.4 a. Data from California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) Station#71. b. Data from Western Regional Climate Center for Modesto, CA. Period of record is March 1, 1906 to July 31, 2010. 2.1.3 Watersheds and Water Systems Watersheds Within the Central Valley, three major watersheds were delineated – the Sacramento River Basin, the San Joaquin River Basin, and the Tulare Lake Basin. The East Stanislaus Region is within the San Joaquin River Basin, which is bound by the crest of the Sierra Nevada on the east and the Klamath Mountains on the west. The San Joaquin River Basin covers about 15,880 square miles and includes the San Joaquin River and its larger tributaries – the Cosumnes, Mokelumne, Calaveras Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced, Chowchilla, and Fresno Rivers. The San Joaquin River Basin can be further divided into other watersheds and sub‐watersheds 2004). The Merced, Stanislaus and Tuolumne River watersheds are three watersheds within the San Joaquin River Basin and these are the primary surface water watersheds that drain to the Middle San Joaquin‐ Lower Merced‐Lower Stanislaus Watershed in which the East Stanislaus region is almost entirely located (Figure 2‐3). The Merced, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers are approximately 145, 149, and 96 miles long, respectively. Table 2‐2 summarizes the key characteristics of the four rivers in the East Stanislaus Region. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December islaus Integrat 2013 Figure ted Regional W e 2‐3: Waters Water Manage sheds Within ement Plan n and Around d the East Stan Chapter nislaus Regio r 2 ESIRWM R on Region 2-5 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-6 Table 2‐2: Watershed and Reservoir Characteristics in the San Joaquin River Basin Characteristic Lower San Joaquin River Upper San Joaquin River Stanislaus River Tuolumne River Merced River Median Annual Unimpaired Flow (1923‐2008) 1.08 MAF 1.72 MAF 0.85 MAF 1.44 MAF (upstream of Friant Dam) Drainage Area of Tributary at Confluence with San Joaquin (and percent of tributary upstream of mouth)1 1.195 square miles (82% upstream of Goodwin) 1.870 square miles (82% upstream of LaGrange) 1.270 square miles (84% upstream of Merced Falls) 1.675 square miles (100% upstream of Friant Dam) Total River Length 161 miles 155 miles 135 miles 330 miles Miles of Major Dam New Melones: 62 miles Goodwin: 59 miles New Don Pedro: 55 miles LaGrange: 52 miles New Exchequer: 63 miles Crocker‐Huffman: 52 miles Friant: 266 miles Confluence with LSJR River Miles (RM) Upstream of Sacramento River Confluence RM 75 RM 83 RM 118 RM 266 Number of Dams 28 DSODa 27 DSOD 8 DSOD 19 DSOD Total Reservoir Storage 2.85 MAF 2.94 MAF 1.04 MAF 1.15 MAF Most Dam (with year built and capacity) Goodwin, 59 miles upstream of SJR (1912, 500 AF) LaGrange, 52 miles upstream of LSJR (1893, 500 AF) Crocker‐Huffman, 52 miles upstream of LSJR (1910, 200 AF) Friant, 260 miles upstream of the Merced confluence (1942, 520 TAF) Major Dams (with year built and reservoir capacity) New Melones (1978, 2.4 MAF) Tulloch, Beardsley, Donnells “Tri‐ dams project” (1958, 203 TAF) New Don Pedro (1971, 2.03 MAF) New Exchequer (1967, 1.02 MAF) McSwain (1966, 9.7 TAF) Friant (1942, 520 TAF) Major Upstream Dams (with year built and reservoir capacity) New Spicer Meadows (1988, 189 TAF) Hetch Hetchy (1923, 360 TAF) Cherry Valley (1956, 273 TAF) None Shaver Lake (1927, 135 TAF) Thomas Edison Lake (1965, 125 TAF) Mammoth Pool (1960, 123 TAF) Source: Evaluation of San Joaquin River Flow and Southern Delta Water Quality Objectives and Implementation, ICF, December 2012. a. DSOD dams are those greater than 50 ft. in height and/or greater than 50 AF in capacity, with some exceptions. MAF – million acre‐feet RM – river mile DSOD – Division of Safety of Dams AF – acre‐feet TAF – thousand acre‐feet ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-7 San Joaquin River The San Joaquin River Basin covers approximately 32,000 square miles in the northern part of the San Joaquin Valley, roughly from Fresno to Stockton (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). The San Joaquin River is 330 miles in length, from its headwaters to its confluence with the Sacramento River. The portion of the river in the East Stanislaus Region is located north along the western edge of the Region. The primary sources of surface water to the basin are rivers that drain the western slope of the Sierra Nevada Range. Each of these rivers (the San Joaquin, Merced, Tuolumne, Stanislaus, Calaveras, Mokelumne and Cosumnes Rivers) drains large areas of high elevation watershed that supply snowmelt runoff during the late spring and early summer months. Historically, peak flows occurred in May and June, and flooding occurred in most years along all the major rivers. However, construction and operation of the numerous water supply, hydroelectric, and flood control efforts during the 20th century have modified the historic flows (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). The Lower San Joaquin River is defined as the river’s confluence with the Merced River, north to the Delta. This stretch of the river is characterized by the combination of flows from tributary streams, major rivers, groundwater accretions and agricultural drainage water (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). Overall, the San Joaquin River is the second longest river in California, and habitats along the river have been heavily affected by the river’s control upstream at Friant Dam and by adjacent land uses. One primary river habitat within the East Stanislaus Region is the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge The Refuge is located west of Modesto, within the historic floodplain of the confluences of the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Rivers. The Refuge was established in 1987 because of the importance of the area as habitat for the Aleutian Canada goose. Refuge lands consist of oak‐cottonwood‐willow riparian forest, pastures, agricultural fields, and wetlands, with habitats for a diversity of wildlife including numerous special species such as Swainson's hawks, herons and cormorants, and the endangered riparian brush rabbits. The Refuge presently encompasses more than 6,500 acres; expansion of the refuge is currently consideration with expansions to the north, south and east along the San Joaquin River, Stanislaus River and Tuolumne River corridors. In December 2012, the issued a Draft Substitute Environmental Document (SED) in Support of Potential Changes to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Bay‐Delta: San Joaquin River Flows and Southern Delta Water Quality. The preferred alternative identified in the SED called for 35 percent unimpaired flows from February through June within the Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers to support spring fish populations. This proposed action has the potential to significantly change water management on all three rivers, restricting water purveyors’ ability to divert surface water and conjunctively manage the rivers and their underlying groundwater subbasins. Additionally, the proposed action has the potential to negatively impact fall‐run Chinook as the changes will likely lead to increased temperatures of releases from reservoirs Stanislaus River The Stanislaus River watershed is approximately 578,000 acres, located in the central Sierra Nevada, and is one of the largest tributaries to the San Joaquin River in the Central Valley. Snowmelt runoff contributes the largest portion of the flows in the Stanislaus River, with the highest flows in May and June (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). Within the Stanislaus River watershed, there are 18 dams and 10 powerhouses. The lower Stanislaus River also has 16 parks or river access areas. There are 11 riverside parks between Knight’s Ferry and the confluence with the San Joaquin River that are managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The parks provide camping, fishing, and boating access to the River. The Stanislaus River at Highway 99 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-8 and includes Caswell Memorial State Park, as well as smaller parks such as Modesto’s Oak Grove Park. The Army Corps of Engineers developed a plan for a series of access parks along the Stanislaus River called the “String of Pearls” (ESA, 2013). Flow control in the lower Stanislaus River is provided by the New Melones Reservoir, which has a capacity of 2.4 million acre‐feet (AF) and is operated by the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Releases from New Melones Reservoir are re‐regulated at Tulloch Reservoir. The main water diversion point on the Stanislaus River is Goodwin Dam, which provides deliveries to Oakdale Irrigation District and the South San Joaquin Irrigation District in San Joaquin County. Goodwin Dam is also used to divert water into the Goodwin Tunnel for deliveries to Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District and the Stockton East Water District, also in San Joaquin County (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). The major habitat type along the lower Stanislaus River is valley foothill riparian, primarily bordering the river. This habitat is characterized by a canopy layer of cottonwoods, California sycamores and valley oaks. Annual grassland is also found in this area, within reach of the river. This habitat is characterized as an open habitat dominated by annual grasses. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife conducted surveys along 59 miles of the Stanislaus River from the confluence with San Joaquin River upstream to Goodwin Dam. Some of the identified species of concern in the watershed include fall‐run Chinook salmon (species of concern), steelhead trout (threatened), California tiger salamander, California red‐legged frog, riparian brush rabbit, and riparian woodrat (California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 1995). Tuolumne River The headwaters of the Tuolumne River begin in Yosemite National Park in the Sierra Nevada at an elevation of about 13,000 feet. The Tuolumne River’s two primary sources begin on Mount Dana and Mount Lyell, the tallest peak in the Park. The Dana and Lyell tributaries meet at the eastern edge of Tuolumne Meadows forming the Tuolumne River. From Tuolumne Meadows, the river descends 4,000 feet to the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir. Other creeks also enter Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, including Return, Paiute, Rancheria, and Falls Creeks above the O’Shaughnessy Dam. At the dam, approximately 33% of the river’s flow is diverted through Canyon Tunnel, and ultimately to the San Francisco Bay Area, where it provides water to nearly 2.5 million people. Below O’Shaughnessy Dam, the Tuolumne River exits Yosemite National Park and enters the Stanislaus National Forest. Between Kirkwood Powerhouse and Don Pedro Reservoir, the Tuolumne River is known for its world‐class whitewater rapids for recreation. The various reaches of the Tuolumne River are described below:  The Middle Tuolumne River begins at an elevation between 7,000 and 8,000 feet inside Yosemite National Park and joins the South Fork of the Tuolumne River outside the Park.  The South Fork of the Tuolumne River’s headwaters is between White Wolf and Yosemite Valley, at an elevation of about 8,000 feet. The South Fork exits the park north of Hodgdon Meadow and upstream of its confluence with the main Tuolumne River.  The North Fork of the Tuolumne River begins near Dodge Ridge, south of Highway 108 in Stanislaus National Forest. It joins the Tuolumne River above Don Pedro Reservoir.  Dry Creek is the largest tributary to the Tuolumne River, beginning north of La Grange and entering Tuolumne River in the City of Modesto. Flows in the lower portion of the Tuolumne River are controlled primarily by the operation of New Don Pedro Dam, which was constructed in 1971 jointly by TID and MID with participation by the City and County of San Francisco. The 2.03 million AF reservoir stores water for irrigation, hydroelectric generation, fish and wildlife enhancement, recreation, and flood control purposes. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-9 The districts divert water to the Modesto Main Canal and the TID Main Canal a short distance from New Don Pedro Dam at La Grange Dam (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). The Tuolumne watershed has an area of approximately 980,000 acres and provides wildlife habitat supporting many species of wildlife, including bald eagles, spotted owls, prairie falcons, and trout. The lower Tuolumne River is a site to which thousands of Chinook salmon return every fall to spawn. Within the Tuolumne River itself, a diverse assortment of animals seek food, water and shelter, including many special‐status species. Some of these species include fall‐run Chinook salmon (species of concern), steelhead trout (threatened), Riparian Brush Rabbit (endangered), Riparian Wood Rat (endangered), Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (threatened), Least Bell’s Vireo (threatened), and Swainson’s Hawk (species of concern) (Tuolumne River Trust, 2009). The Tuolumne River Regional Park (TRRP), near Highway 99 and the cities of Modesto and Ceres, is being developed by the two cities and Stanislaus County. It is being developed on 500 acres of public land along seven miles of the Tuolumne River in a series of separate parks. Upon completion, it will include 150 acres of park lands, pedestrians/bike trails, and over 350 acres of land designated for riparian habitat conservation and restoration. Five of the parks have been fully or partially developed to date, and one more will be completed in the future. Other river‐oriented County parks are also located along the Tuolumne River (e.g. Riverdale Park). The Tuolumne River Trust has an active Lower Tuolumne River Parkway initiative, working with a larger coalition of interests to accomplish an array of goals (ESA, 2013). Merced River The Merced River watershed is also located in the central Sierra Nevada with its upper reaches in Yosemite National park. The watershed encompasses about 663,000 acres from its headwaters near Triple Divide Peak to a major hydroelectric project at the New Exchequer Dam that impounds 1 million AF at Lake McClure. Releases from Lake McClure pass through a series of power plants and small diversions, and are re‐regulated at McSwain Reservoir. Below McSwain Dam, water is diverted to Merced Irrigation District at the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) Merced Falls Dam and further at the Crocker Huffman Dam (San Joaquin River Group Authority, 1999). A large portion of the Merced River watershed lies within Yosemite National Park, while another large portion falls under National Forests and Bureau of Land Management jurisdiction. Much of the watershed is considered alpine climate; the upper portion receives heavy snowfall during winter months which is usually enough to feed the Merced River and its tributaries the remainder of the year. The middle and lower portions of the watershed are considered to have Mediterranean or semi‐desert climates. Like the Tuolumne River, the Merced River provides habitat to many wildlife species. A study was conducted in 2006 which identified 37 species of fish, 127 bird species, and 140 insect and invertebrate species within the Merced River watershed. Of the 37 species of fish, 26 species were found in the lower Central Valley portion of the river. The Chinook salmon, Pacific lamprey, and striped bass are three anadromous fish species found in the lower Merced River. Water Systems The interior of the East Stanislaus Region includes Dry Creek, the Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne Rivers, as well as Modesto Reservoir and Turlock Lake. The Region overlies the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, which is divided into nine subbasins including the Turlock, Modesto and Delta‐Mendota Subbasins. The Region overlies the entire Turlock and Modesto ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-10 Groundwater Subbasins, as shown in Figure 2‐4, and also includes a portion of the Delta‐Mendota Groundwater Subbasin. Percolation of water used for irrigation on lands overlying the groundwater subbasins is the largest inflow to the groundwater subbasins and provides an important role in maintaining groundwater storage and sustaining recharge. Additional information about the Turlock and Modesto Groundwater Subbasins is included in Section 2.2.1, below. The East Stanislaus Region encompasses the service areas of multiple local agencies and maximizes opportunities for integrated water management activities. The four members have jurisdiction over water supply and quality, wastewater, recycled water, stormwater, and watershed/habitat in their respective service areas. The other entities that have water management responsibilities within the Region include other cities and communities, irrigation and water districts, and Stanislaus and Merced Counties. Other local agencies within the Region include:  City of Riverbank  City of Waterford  City of Oakdale  Keyes Community Services District  Denair Community Services District  Community of Del Rio  Community of Grayson  Community of Hickman  Community of Empire  Community of Riverdale  Turlock Irrigation District (TID)  Modesto Irrigation District (MID)  Eastside Water District  Oakdale Irrigation District (OID)  Merced Irrigation District  Ballico‐Cortez Water District  Delhi County Water District  Hilmar County Water District  Stanislaus County  Merced County  Monterey Park Tract CSD Figure 2‐5 shows the locations of the primary water services areas within the East Stanislaus Region. Water system facilities in the Region are summarized in Table 2‐3. Because critical groundwater basins, surface water supplies, habitat features and the agencies managing these resources are all located within the East Stanislaus Region, water supply reliability, water quality, environmental and flood protection can be effectively integrated through the development of the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Figure 2 islaus Integrat 2013 2‐4: Surface W Figure ted Regional W Water and Gr e 2‐5: Primar Water Manage roundwater F ry Water Serv ement Plan Features in a vices Areas in and adjacent t n the East Sta Chapter to the East St anislaus Regio r 2 ESIRWM R tanislaus Reg on Region 2-11 gion ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-12 The water system facilities owned and operated by the entities are summarized in the following table. Additional facilities (such as groundwater wells) are owned by other regional stakeholders such as the irrigation districts and community services districts. Table 2‐3: Major Water System Facilities in East Stanislaus Region Water System Facility Owner Description Modesto Reservoir MID and Stanislaus County A raw water reservoir completed in 1911 that is owned and operated by MID. It has a gross capacity of 28,000 acre‐feet (AF) and serves as a regulating reservoir for irrigation and domestic water. It is also a recreational area operated by Stanislaus County. New Don Pedro Reservoir MID & TID A raw water reservoir located 4 miles northeast of La Grange in the Sierra Nevada foothills, completed in 1971, and owned and operated by MID and TID. It provides recreation, water storage, power production for MID and TID, and flood control for the Army Corps of Engineers. It has a capacity of 2.03 million AF. Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant MID The and associated storage/delivery facilities were completed in 1995. It treats Tuolumne River water from MID’s Modesto Reservoir, which is then conveyed to the City of Modesto’s service area for use. Since 1995, it has provided the City of Modesto 30 million gallons per day (mgd) of treated water. Phase 2, to expand the plant by an additional 30 mgd, is under construction and anticipated to be completed in 2015. La Grange Dam MID & TID The La Grange Dam diverts water for MID and TID. It was completed in 1894. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-13 Water System Facility Owner Description Groundwater wells Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale; The City of Modesto has 110 groundwater wells located throughout its entire water service area with a total production capacity of 110 mgd. The wells are located in the Modesto, Turlock, and Delta‐Mendota subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The City of Turlock operates 24 active potable groundwater wells and a handful of non‐potable wells used for irrigating landscape in City parks. The City of Ceres pumps groundwater from 15 active municipal supply wells which obtain water from the Turlock Subbasin, part of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. The wells can produce a total of 14,500 gallons per minute (gpm), but the current firm groundwater pumping capacity is 12,700 gpm. The City of Ceres also has 3 inactive wells that are out of service due to water quality concerns. The City of Hughson’s water supply source is derived from five groundwater wells scattered throughout the City. Each well has a capacity ranging from 1,000 to 1,200 gpm. The City of Oakdale operates seven deep groundwater supply wells while the City of Riverbank currently operates 10 municipal supply wells. Transmission and Distribution Pipelines Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres and Hughson The City of Modesto’s contiguous water service area has about 940 miles of pipelines. A portion of the transmission pipelines within the City is owned by MID. The City of Turlock maintains over 270 miles of water lines to deliver water to users (17,382 water connections to its potable water system) in a single pressure zone. The City of Ceres’ water distribution system consists of a single pressure zone with approximately 140 miles of water pipelines. The City of Hughson conveys water from the wells to consumers via the distribution system that has pipe sizes ranging from 2‐ to 16‐inches in diameter. The City of Riverbank conveys water from the wells to its users via a 44 mile distribution system with pipe sizes ranging from 4 to 12 inches in diameter. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-14 Water System Facility Owner Description Storage Tanks Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres and Hughson The City of Modesto has 8 at‐grade storage tanks with a combined total storage capacity of 12.1 million gallons (MG). Each storage tank has a booster pump station to pump water from the tank to the distribution system. There are also two 5 MG reservoirs that MID owns. The only outlying portion of the City of Modesto’s service area that has a storage tank (0.22 MG capacity) is Grayson. The City of Turlock has two at grade reservoirs each with a capacity of one million gallons. East reservoir has a booster pump station to pump water to the water distribution system. A third at grade, one million gallon reservoir will be constructed in 2013. The City of Ceres has two at‐grade reservoirs with a combined storage capacity of 3.5 MG. The reservoirs have a booster pump station to pump water to the water distribution system. The City of Hughson has a storage reservoir within the distribution system with a capacity of 750,000 gallons. The City of Riverbank maintains two above‐grade reservoirs with a combined storage capacity of 2 MG. The City of Oakdale currently maintains one 0.5 MG reservoir but is planning the addition of a second, 0.6 MG tank. Notes: MID – Modesto Irrigation District TID – Turlock Irrigation District 2.1.4 Wastewater and Recycled Water Each of the four partner cities (Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, and Hughson) operates a wastewater treatment plant or plants, providing services to their respective service areas. Additionally, the Salida Sanitary District operates a wastewater treatment plant and provides wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal for the unincorporated community of Salida. The influent is currently one half of the plant design capacity (1.2 mgd of 2.4 mgd capacity). The City of Turlock produces tertiary‐treated recycled water, and the City of Modesto recently upgraded its secondary plant to tertiary treatment and is now also producing recycled water. The Cities of Hughson and Ceres treat wastewater to secondary standards and therefore do not produce recycled water meeting Title 22 standards for unrestricted reuse. Recycled water is recognized as a beneficial water supply due to its many advantages – adding a reliable water source that is consistently available regardless of droughts or climate change, offsetting potable water for other uses, and diversifying agencies’ and cities’ water supply portfolios. Three of the four members of the have historically worked together to identify regional opportunities for wastewater treatment and recycled water production. An example of a recent cooperative project under consideration is the North Valley Regional Recycled Water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-15 Program an effort to regionalize recycled water use in Stanislaus County. As presently envisioned, the could produce and deliver up to 30,600 acre‐feet per year (AFY) of disinfected tertiary treated recycled water to western Stanislaus County by 2018. By 2045, could deliver up to 59,900 AFY of recycled water. The source of recycled water includes treated wastewater from the Cities of Turlock, Ceres, and Modesto. As part of the project, the City of Turlock would install an additional 5.7 miles of conveyance pipeline to convey water directly from its Regional Water Quality Control Facility’s tertiary treatment plant to the Delta‐Mendota Canal (DMC). The Canal would be used to convey the blended canal‐recycled water to users in the west side of the County (City of Turlock, 2011). Funding from the USBR has been pursued for completion of feasibility studies related to the however, no funding has been secured to date. Information regarding the can be found on the project website at http://www.nvr‐ recycledwater.org/. City of Modesto Treatment of the City of Modesto’s raw wastewater occurs at the Sutter Avenue Primary Treatment Plant and Jennings Road Treatment Plant, located on two sites with the City of Modesto. The Sutter Avenue Primary Treatment Plant provides pumping, screening, grit removal, flow measurement, primary clarification and sludge digestion. The primary effluent is then conveyed to the secondary treatment plant, the Jennings Road Treatment Plant, where it is treated further and either discharged or stored until it can be discharged. The City currently disposes of the secondary treated effluent in two ways: through irrigation to land that it owns (namely, a 2,526 acre ranch), and through seasonal discharge to the San Joaquin River, both of which are pursuant to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CA0079103. The Jennings Road Treatment Plant has recently been upgraded to a tertiary treatment system with the implementation of Phase 1A of its Tertiary Treatment Project, providing up to 2.3 mgd of tertiary‐ treated water. Phase 2 of the project is currently under construction and will add 12.6 mgd of tertiary treatment, allowing for compliance with the City’s NPDES Permit and permitting year‐ round discharge to the San Joaquin River. Solids handling at the Jennings Road Treatment Plant was analyzed in the 2008 Wastewater Treatment Master Plan Update (Carollo, 2007e). The biological nutrient removal (BNR)/tertiary facilities constructed during Phase 1A produce waste activated sludge (WAS) that needs to be properly disposed of. The alternative to process the WAS in the recirculation channel and ponds was determined to be the most economical approach in the Wastewater Treatment Master Plan Update. It also has low energy requirements and does not require WAS thickening. The dried solids are then beneficially applied to the City’s ranch lands (Carollo, 2008). Historically, about 20 mgd of cannery wastewater with high concentrations of organic vegetable solids were sent to the primary treatment plant, causing the treatment plant to operate inefficiently. To address this problem, in the late 1990’s, the Cannery Segregation Project was implemented such that now, up to 40 mgd of wastewater from seasonal canneries is segregated and bypasses treatment. These cannery discharges are applied directly to city‐owned ranchlands as a soil supplement. Current and projected wastewater flows for the City of Modesto are presented in Table 2‐4. The wastewater treatment plants serve the City’s sanitary service area and a small portion of Ceres, as described later in this section. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-16 Table 2‐4: City of Modesto Wastewater and Treatment, AFY 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Wastewater Collected and Treated a 29,100 27,100 28,900 32,500 36,400 40,300 44,400 Source: West Yost, 2011b. a. Wastewater collected and treated is equivalent to recycled water produced and available for beneficial reuse. The City analyzed opportunities to reuse the tertiary recycled water with the completion of a feasibility study in 2005. The feasibility study assessed recycled water markets, reviewed regulatory requirements, and developed and evaluated alternatives for regional water recycling and wastewater treatment. As part of the study, stakeholder workshops were conducted to discuss and gain input on the recycled water opportunities. Seventeen local communities and agencies were invited to participate in the workshops and nine cities and agencies participated. This work has been refined, and the City is currently considering supplying tertiary treated recycled water to Del Puerto Water District (DPWD), as well as other potential users in western Stanislaus County, with the implementation of the Although the would not provide a potable water offset directly to the City of Modesto service area, the treated wastewater would be used beneficially and would provide water supply reliability, public safety, enhanced property values and increased educational opportunities (West Yost Associates, 2011b). City of Turlock In 2006, the City of Turlock’s Regional Water Quality Control Facility (WQCF) was upgraded to tertiary treatment, producing recycled water compliant with Title 22 requirements for unrestricted reuse. All existing and future treated wastewater flows will be treated to recycled water standards, potentially available for beneficial reuse. Table 2‐5 presents the wastewater collected and treated in the City’s service area. The City is currently permitted to use the recycled water for industrial cooling (2 mgd) and landscape irrigation at Pedretti Baseball Park (up to 20 MG/year) as part of the City’s Recycled Water Program, which was approved by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) in 2006. The recycled water for industrial cooling is delivered to Turlock Irrigation District for use at the Walnut Energy Center, a 250 megawatt (MW) natural gas power plant located in Turlock. Table 2‐5: City of Turlock Wastewater Collection and Treatment, AFY 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Wastewater Collected and Treateda 14,482 12,935 14,636 16,557 18,733 21,194 23,980 Source: City of Turlock, 2011. a. Wastewater collected and treated is equivalent to recycled water produced and available for beneficial reuse. The City of Turlock currently discharges recycled water that is not used to the San Joaquin River via the Harding Drain, a man‐made agricultural drain. The City plans to build a pipeline as part of the that will bypass Harding Drain to allow for recycled water delivery to DPWD, who provides irrigation water to about 11,000 acres of farmland in western Stanislaus County. The City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) Update assumes the City would begin selling 4,000 MG/year of recycled water to DPWD in 2020. The City will continue to use 400 MG/year of recycled in its service area. In the City’s 2005 UWMP, the City predicted using a larger volume of recycled water in its service area than amounts actually delivered. Multiple factors explain why the use of recycled water has not met the previous projections: ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-17  Regulatory Approval ‐ the approval process required approval from three separate State agencies (State Water Resources Control Board Regional Water Quality Control Board and CDPH).  Water Quality Requirements ‐ at first, the newly constructed tertiary treatment processes at the City’s WQCF did not meet all water quality standards required for recycled water use. The City has since modified the treatment processes to gain compliance.  Infrastructure Construction ‐ implementation and construction of a recycled water distribution system has taken longer than anticipated.  Economic Downturn ‐ the overall economic decline limited customer growth and dampened demand for recycled water. In 2010, the City worked with ECO:LOGIC to complete a recycled water pricing analysis and develop a price for recycled water that would provide significant incentive to industrial customers to switch to recycled water. The cost of recycled water is cheaper than potable water, but the City lacks the necessary recycled water distribution facilities, and customers that are further from the one existing recycled water distribution line are faced with significant construction costs to extend recycled water distribution lines. The expansion of a recycled water distribution system within the City would allow for more recycled water use and potable water offsets (City of Turlock, 2011). City of Ceres The City of Ceres does not currently produce or deliver recycled water, but in recent years, it has evaluated the potential to develop recycled water to offset potable water use and assist with wastewater disposal. Presently, the City collects and treats wastewater for customers within city boundaries, except the northwest portion of the city. The City manages collection in the northwest portion of the city, but currently exports about 1.3 mgd of wastewater to the City of Modesto’s trunk sewer system. The City also exports a significant portion of its treated wastewater from its wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) to the City of Turlock’s WQCF. The City of Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant has been at its existing location since before 1970, and treats 3.1 mgd of wastewater on average. No treated wastewater is discharged to a surface water body; instead, treated effluent is either discharged into on‐site ponds for evaporation and incidental groundwater recharge (up to 2.5 mgd) or exported to the Cities of Turlock or Modesto (up to 1 mgd to each location). Wastewater treatment and disposal at the City’s WWTP is regulated by Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order no. 93‐237. Current and projected wastewater flows are presented in Table 2‐6 (West Yost Associates, 2011a). Table 2‐6: City of Ceres Wastewater Collection and Treatment, AFY 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Wastewater Collected and Treated 4,800 5,800 6,700 7,700 8,600 9,600 Source: West Yost, 2011a. The City’s wastewater flow projections, as shown in Table 2‐6, exceed currently available disposal capacity, so the City has explored disposal options. Tertiary treatment and water recycling is currently not being considered due to significantly higher costs than other disposal options resulting from required upgrades. (Areas that could potentially use recycled water in the City’s service area have been identified, but it was determined not to be cost effective to add tertiary treatment and install dual piping.) Other disposal options include increased exports to the City of Turlock and increased exports to the City of Modesto, both of which will be explored further. The City of Ceres is in the process of buying another 1 mgd of capacity of Turlock’s WQCF in order to export up to 2 mgd of its wastewater flows. The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-18 Board is reluctant to add another discharger to the San Joaquin River. Under current policy, regionalization is preferred whenever feasible. Regionalizing the Cities of Modesto and Turlock wastewater treatment facilities would provide greater economies of scale than the City of Ceres constructing its own treatment and/or disposal facilities (West Yost, 2011a). City of Hughson The City of Hughson operates the Hughson Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), located adjacent to the Tuolumne River, north of the city. Most of the flows to the WWTP come from residential users except for a creamery owned by the Dairy Farmers of America (DFA) which is permitted specific flows and wastewater characteristics. The City is approximately 70% built out within the City limits, with agricultural land use dominating the areas surrounding the City boundary. The City’s original WWTP was constructed in 1947 by the Hughson Sanitary District. The City took over the function of the Sanitary District in 1972, and in 1983, constructed the existing WWTP which began operation in 1986. Over the years, the WWTP has had a number of improvements, at times necessitated by violations issued by the and operational issues. In 2003, the City’s Hatch Road Pump Station broke down, and the issued a Notice of Violation calling for improvements. Although repairs were made, this critical lift station continues to experience more problems. The existing treatment processes at the WWTP include screening, grit removal, denitrification, extended aeration, secondary clarification, and chlorine disinfection, and the effluent is discharged to 10 evaporation and percolation ponds. In 2004, a Peer Review and Preliminary Design Report Technical Memorandum was prepared which noted that the WWTP, as originally designed, was having difficulty meeting plant effluent and groundwater limits as stated in the City’s WDR Order No. 5‐00‐024 and a Notice of Violation was issued in July 2003. More capacity at the plant was also required, so an interim upgrade project was designed and constructed in 2005 and 2006. The WWTP Interim Upgrades Project added two treatment ponds, a pump station and other peripherals. In December 2005, the renewed its Notice of Violation for issues that were not addressed by the interim updates to the WWTP. In response to the Notice of Violation, the City prepared its 2007 Wastewater Treatment Plant Master Plan to develop an approach to upgrade the WWTP based on projected flows and loadings through the year 2025 while also meeting current and anticipated discharge requirements from the Central Valley The improvements identified in the Master Plan were analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), prepared in 2007. The EIR included environmental review of new headworks at the existing WWTP, including course and fine screens, a Parshall flume, and biofilters for odor control, as well as two new trapezoidal oxidation ditches to the west of the plant, two 70‐foot diameter secondary clarifiers and three percolation ponds. Other improvements analyzed were a RAS/WAS pump station, two new gravity belt filter presses for dewatering, upgrades to the operations center, and a supervisory control and data acquisition system. Additionally, the Hatch Road influent pump station and associated force main were to be removed and a new 36‐inch gravity sewer and influent pump station added. Upon completion of the EIR, the improvements and upgrades were constructed at the City’s WWTP. Overall plant capacity was increased from 1 mgd to 1.9 mgd (Quad Knopf, 2007). Recycled water is not produced at the City’s WWTP, as tertiary treatment has not been constructed. Therefore, no recycled water is delivered within City limits. City of Riverbank The City of Riverbank owns and operates its own wastewater collection and treatment system. The City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) is located north of Riverbank across the Stanislaus River and borders the north side of Jacob Myers Park. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-19 Recycled water is not produced at the City’s WWTP, as tertiary treatment has not been constructed. Therefore, no recycled water is delivered within City limits. City of Oakdale The City of Oakdale owns and operates its own sewage collection system and Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The City’s WWTP is designed to treat up to 2.4 mgd of domestic and industrial wastewater. The facility uses two aerated lagoons for primary treatment. Effluent from the lagoons flow by gravity to a single secondary clarifier, and treated effluent is discharged to one of 11 evaporation/percolation ponds. At present, the City is looking to upgrade its WWTP to add a second secondary clarifier, a new disinfection facility, and a new or expanded biosolids treatment facility Recycled water is not produced at the City’s WWTP, as tertiary treatment has not been constructed. Therefore, no recycled water is delivered within City limits. 2.1.5 Stormwater and Flooding Stormwater Management Flood management consists of flood prevention, response, and recovery, generally provided by flood control infrastructure, operation and maintenance (O&M) of that infrastructure, non‐ structural flood control such as land use decisions that do not place assets in areas with a high probability of flooding, and providing financial assistance, counseling, and assistance after flood events (ESA, 2013). Storm drainage systems are used to reduce the chance of flooding and to meet regulatory requirements regarding stormwater runoff. A Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) was prepared for Stanislaus County in 2004. As an operator of a Small Municipal Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) that serves urbanized areas, the County filed a Notice of Intent to participate in the General Permit. To comply with State and Federal requirements, also referred to as Phase II Stormwater Requirements, designated MS4s must develop a plan to implement measures to control stormwater quality, develop a 5‐year plan for implementation and an associated budget. The SWMP for the County covers the County’s unincorporated communities, including Empire, Keyes, Salida, Crow’s Landing, Denair, Diablo Grande, Del Rio, Grayson, Hickman, Knight’s Ferry, La Grange, Sunset Oaks Estates, Valley Home and Westley, as well as the industrial area known as Beard Tract between Modesto and Empire. The Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Oakdale, Patterson, and Riverbank are also subject to Phase II Stormwater Requirements. Ceres, Oakdale, Patterson, and Riverbank prepared a joint‐Stormwater Management Program in 2003. The Cities of Modesto, Turlock, and Hughson have each prepared individual In most rural parts of Stanislaus County, stormwater runoff is handled by field percolation or through roadside ditches which then drain to Dry Creek, Tuolumne River, Stanislaus River, or San Joaquin River. While the majority of agricultural lands on the valley floor do not require drainage, there are some lands in the rolling hills to the east which generate runoff. For example, runoff from Mustang Creek and Sand Creek drain to the TID canal system, and runoff from McDonald Creek eventually drains to Turlock Lake where flows are routed through the TID canal system to the river. There are few storm drain facilities constructed in rural areas. The Beard Tract covers about 5,000 acres and the streets have curb/gutter storm drains that discharge to Tuolumne River. Unincorporated communities in the County typically have constructed storm drain facilities that are owned, operated, and maintained by the County (Stanislaus County, 2004). Some rural systems pump stormwater to the TID canal system which is used to convey runoff to the river system. In 2008, the City of Modesto prepared Storm Drainage Master Plan (SDMP) to identify major storm drainage infrastructure improvements that are needed or would be needed in the future. The City ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-20 also prepared a Stormwater Management Plan in August 2009 to comply with Phase II requirements. Historically, the City has used a rockwell system, a positive storm drainage system, or no system. The City’s Public Works Department operates and maintains 77 miles of storm drain lines, 21 pump stations, 24 drainage basins, and about 10,500 rockwells. The rockwells are used to percolate stormwater runoff into the ground, but these can lead to groundwater quality concerns. In addition to potentially impacting water quality, the rockwells are expensive to maintain and overall, the City’s system is deficient in its ability to drain stormwater runoff and minimize localized flooding in many areas. In some areas of the City, it uses a positive storm drainage conveyance system that discharges to the Tuolumne River, Dry Creek, detention basins, and irrigation facilities owned and operated by MID and TID. Some of these systems are in need of retrofit and repair to properly serve the areas (Stantec, 2008). In the areas of the City of Modesto where there are no permanent storm drain systems, the City uses the sanitary sewer to drain stormwater runoff and reduce flooding. There are a total of 52 storm drain cross‐connections, most of which are located in the downtown area. These can cause a dramatic increase in Peak Wet Weather Flow at the City’s wastewater treatment plant, so the City is interested in removing the cross‐connections from the wastewater collection system (Carollo, 2007f). In order for the City of Turlock to comply with the Waste Discharge Requirements for Stormwater Discharges from MS4s, in 2003, it prepared a Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). The City of Turlock owns and operates its own stormwater system that includes 28 active storm lift stations, 66 storm ponds totaling 140 acres, 1,300 stormwater catch basins and 102 miles of storm drain pipe. Stormwater runoff is transferred through storm pipes to a storm basin where it either percolates to the groundwater basin or is pumped to a larger storm basin or canal. Stormwater runoff that reaches the larger storm basin percolates to and recharges the groundwater basin, If excess stormwater is pumped to a canal, it is discharged to the San Joaquin River. To protect water quality, the City of Turlock implements Best Management Practices (BMPs) as required by its MS4 permit (Turlock, 2003). Additionally, the City of Turlock implemented an environmental stewardship program called “Go Green” that has a stormwater pollution prevention component in it, and is also heavily related to water conservation (City of Turlock, 2011). The City of Hughson provides positive storm drainage for its service area; the system includes pipelines, four stormwater pump stations, rockwells, and detention and retention basins. Stormwater is discharged to TID via three discharge points to its irrigation canal, and the Ceres Main Canal. Currently, stormwater is discharged from the detention basins to the TID canal once a significant portion is in the basin. Most of the stormwater runoff in the City goes through storm basins, while some is discharged directly to the canal. In 2007, the City of Hughson also completed a Storm Drainage Master Plan to help plan, develop, and finance the storm drainage system facilities. The report recommended a number of improvements to the existing system including upsizing many of the pipelines, constructing new pipelines, and constructing a new basin. Overall, the City’s storm drainage system is in good condition. The City maintains, cleans and repairs lift stations and pipelines as needed. Some areas within the City have localized flooding problems due to the lack of positive drainage facilities; City crews typically eliminate any storm inlet plugging and street flooding/ponding within a half‐day. During a major storm in 1997 (a 170‐year storm event) the most significant issue was the high inflow of stormwater runoff into the sanitary sewer system which then caused problems at the wastewater treatment plant (Carollo, 2007b). In 2003, the Cities of Ceres, Oakdale, Patterson, and Riverbank adopted a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to jointly apply for permit compliance. They prepared a Stormwater Management Program that described their positive storm drainage services they provide to their communities. The City of Ceres stormwater system includes 33 detention/retention basins, about 100 rockwells, 33 stormwater pump stations, pipelines, and 27 discharge points to receiving ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-21 streams and canals. Stormwater is discharged to detention basins for percolation, to TID canals, or the Tuolumne River. Oakdale has 22 detention / retention basins, 8 stormwater pump stations, about 200 rockwells, pipelines, and 9 discharge points to streams and canals. Stormwater is disposed of by percolation, and/or discharged to the Stanislaus River and OID canal. Some of the stormwater is discharged directly to the river, while some enters a stormwater basin prior to discharge. Patterson has 14 detention/retention basins, 5 stormwater pump stations, pipelines, and multiple discharge points to Salado Creek, Patterson Irrigation District canals, and San Joaquin River. There is a portion of Stanislaus County development that discharges to Black Gulch, a tributary to Salado Creek above Patterson’s service area. Runoff from the developed County area impacts stream hydrology in Salado Creek through Patterson. Storm drainage master plans were prepared in 1992 and 2001 to address the flooding along Salado Creek and Black Gulch. The study recommended $20 million of improvements to the storm drainage system be constructed. Some of the improvements have been constructed while other improvements have not as they require cooperation from other agencies such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In the past, Patterson’s wastewater treatment plant received infiltration from stormwater runoff during storms, but the City has been eliminating infiltration through infrastructure improvements. Riverbank’s storm drainage system consists of pipelines, 6 detention/retention basins, about 100 rockwells, 7 pump stations, and 8 discharge points to Stanislaus River and the MID Main Canal. The Cities of Ceres, Oakdale, Patterson, and Riverbank have a few stormwater quality incidents each year. Dumping of chemicals into storm drains may occur and a few illegal connections of house sewers to storm drains were found, but eliminated. The cities do not conduct routine stormwater quality monitoring and new storm drainage infrastructure will be constructed by developers as the City grows (Tulloch, 2003). Flooding During storms, there is occasional flooding in Stanislaus County because of a combination of factors: high groundwater, low percolation soils, and topography (Stanislaus County, 2004). The flood management system in the San Joaquin Valley includes reservoirs to regulate snowmelt from elevations greater than 5,000 feet, bypasses at lower elevations, and levees that line major rivers. Typically, snowmelt floods are more frequent in the San Joaquin Valley than rain floods, but rain floods do occur and generally have higher peak flows than snowmelt floods. The following table shows the discharge‐frequency relationships for some of the rivers and creeks in the East Stanislaus Region as described by FEMA (ESA, 2013). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-22 Table 2‐7: Discharge Frequency Relationships for Rivers Peak Discharges (cubic feet per second) Location Drainage Area (square miles) 10‐year 50‐year 100‐year 500‐year Tuolumne River at Modesto 1,884 10,500 32,000 70,000 154,000 Tuolumne River at Waterford 1,640 9,000 10,000 42,000 225,000 Stanislaus River at Oakdale 1,020 7,600 8,000 8,000 41,300 Dry Creek at Modesto 192.3 4,730 9,300 11,800 18,100 Source: ESA, 2013 The San Joaquin River, upstream of the Tuolumne River and down to the Merced River confluence, has a design capacity of 45,000 cfs, but a current capacity estimated to be 22,000 cfs to 35,000 cfs. of Tuolumne River to Stanislaus River, the design capacity of the river is 46,000 cfs, while the current capacity is only 25,000 cfs. The lowest reaches of Stanislaus River have a design capacity of 12,000 cfs, but its current capacity is 23,000 cfs. The lowest 0.6 miles of the Tuolumne River have a design capacity of 15,000 cfs; the current capacity is not estimated, but landowners along the river report flood damages when flows exceed 8,200 cfs. In 1983, four levees broke in the San Joaquin River Basin. One of the levees that broke was within the Mid‐San Joaquin River Region, an area generally described as the floodplain corridor extending along the mainstem San Joaquin River, from its confluence with the Merced River to its confluence with the Stanislaus River, and the lower reaches of the Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers that are within the State Plan of Flood Control. This levee break occurred on March 5th of 1983 along the left bank of the San Joaquin River, just of its confluence with the Tuolumne River and along the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge. The break resulted in the inundation of 500 acres, causing $12 million of losses in agricultural damages in Stanislaus County. In 1986, there were a series of storms from February 11th to the 19th in which several precipitation records were set. Precipitation in a 300 mile wide band from San Francisco to Sacramento to Lake Tahoe ranged from 100 to 200% of normal. While this caused flooding and damage, there were no damages sustained in Stanislaus County. (ESA, 2013). Some older areas of Stanislaus County have problems with flooding during storms that exceed ½‐inch per hour due to inadequate drainage. During the 170‐year storm of 1997, the County experienced flooding in some areas surrounding Tuolumne River due to the release of excess water from Don Pedro Dam and Reservoir into the Tuolumne River channel. The second wettest December on record in the Sierra Nevada occurred in 1997 which contributed to the flooding. Additionally, there were three tropical storms that hit Northern California on December 29, 30, and 31, 1996. Within three days, more than 30 inches of rain fell in the upper watersheds of the Sierra Nevada. Record flows were a result in the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. In mid‐December, a cold storm brought snow to the Sierra Nevada foothills which melted during the three warm storms at the end of December. Approximately 15% of the total runoff volume was from the snowmelt. Millerton Lake and Don Pedro Reservoir both exceed their design capacity. Flooding occurred along the Merced River ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-23 Tuolumne River, and San Joaquin River. Areas within Modesto, Ripon, Waterford, and La Grange were inundated. Multiple levees failed on the San Joaquin River, or were breached, leading to further flooding in nearby areas. Flooding did not occur in the Cities of Patterson, Newman or Turlock. Then in 1998, during 35 days of above average rainfall, upland areas of Stanislaus County experience sheet flooding in a number of new subdivisions near saturated rural areas (Stanislaus County, 2004). Some low‐lying areas of the lower reaches of the Tuolumne River, some near the confluence with Dry Creek are subject to occasional flooding. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) delineates 100‐year floodplains for FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). A majority of the San Joaquin River’s 100‐year flood plain (in this stretch of the San Joaquin River) is within the Region, but overall, not much of the East Stanislaus Region is described as being within a 100‐year floodplain (Figure 2‐6). FEMA prepared the approximate floodplain mapping, but did not conduct detailed floodplain analysis. The City of Modesto performed detailed floodplain analyses to map the 100‐year floodplain. According to the Stanislaus County Multi‐Hazard Mitigation Plan prepared in 2010, an estimated 2,400 people live within the 100‐year floodplain of the San Joaquin River within Stanislaus County. The estimated total property value, including private property, in that same area is approximately $150 million. Flood hazards in the region are areas that are naturally flood‐prone, along major rivers, and potentially near levees that are in poor condition. The cities of Modesto, Newman, Patterson and the communities of Westley and Grayson are exposed to flood risk during large runoff events. Flooding occurs in Modesto at the confluence of the Tuolumne River and Dry Creek during intense storms and especially when releases from Don Pedro reservoir are high. Agricultural areas along the San Joaquin, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers are also exposed to flood risk, as well as lands managed to preserve habitat along the San Joaquin, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers (ESA, 2013). Some development in the region is planned within the 100‐year floodplain, but development will be restricted by the City’s floodplain zoning ordinance. If areas within the 100‐year floodplain are to be developed, properties are usually constructed on fill (Stantec, 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Fig The East developm potential initiated statewide decisions prepare d following  D op re  P fo op  P fo islaus Integrat 2013 gure 2‐6: 100 Stanislaus R ment of a Re projects tha a comprehe e and inform s over the ne in June 201 detailed Reg g: Describe flood perations an esponse plan ropose poten or the region perations an ropose finan or implemen ted Regional W ‐Year Flood P Region, as pa egional Floo at may impr ensive Statew m developm ext 10 to 15 12, which ca ional Flood M d manageme nd maintenan ns. ntial solution n, projects’ co nd maintenan ncial strategie tation of the Water Manage Plain Maps fo art of its IRW d Manageme rove flood m wide Flood M ment of the 5 years. DW alls for DWR Management ent challenge nce practices ns/projects i osts, and prio nce, emergen es that ident projects. ement Plan or Water Bod WM planning ent Plan for management. Management State’s floo WR prepared R to work w t Plans that, s and deficie s, levee and c dentified by oritization of ncy response ify benefits o dies within th g process, is r the Mid‐Sa . As part o t Planning P d managem the Central with local flo at a minimu encies at the channel inspe local public f the solution e, and floodpl of the project Chapter he East Stanis currently pa an Joaquin R f FloodSAFE Program to a ment policies Valley Flood ood managem um, identify a regional leve ection, and e agencies and ns/projects e lain managem ts and source r 2 ESIRWM R slaus Region articipating i Region to ide E California, assess flood s and invest d Protection ment agenci and articulat el including mergency d interest gro nhanced ment. es of the fund Region 2-24 in the entify DWR risks tment n Plan ies to te the oups ding ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-25 The Mid‐San Joaquin River Region planning area lies within the East Stanislaus IRWM Region, along its western boundary. Also, because flood concerns related to the San Joaquin River and its tributaries extend beyond the specific area, the geographic extent of the Mid‐San Joaquin Region (the area covered in the Mid‐San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan) is the Reclamation Districts identified in the Draft Regional Atlas, as well as the Cities of Modesto, Ceres, Turlock, Patterson, and Newman; the communities of Grayson, West Stanislaus, and El Solyo; Del Puerto Water District; Modesto and Oakdale Irrigation Districts; Newman Drainage District; and all the areas between the Merced/San Joaquin River confluence and the Stanislaus/San Joaquin River confluence with a nexus to flood management. Preparation of the Mid‐San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan (RFMP) began in March 2013 and is expected to be complete in December 2014. It is one of six regional Central Valley to be developed (ESA, 2013). 2.1.6 Natural Resources The East Stanislaus Region, as with most of California, is rich with natural resources. Most land in Stanislaus County has been cultivated, and very limited mineral was found within its boundary. In the early 1900’s, some quicksilver, manganese, and magnesite were found, as well as silica, sand and clays. Gravel from the Stanislaus River near Oakdale was used for roads. In La Grange, mining for gold was successful (Perazzo, 2011). Stanislaus County is primarily agricultural, except for the urban areas. Up until about 1960, most of the County’s population lived on farms. In the early 1990’s, when Stanislaus County prepared its General Plan, the population of the nine incorporated cities was nearly three times that of the unincorporated area of the County. In its General Plan, the County applies agriculture land use to areas suitable for open space and recreational use. Regional parks are valuable in preserving natural resources, such as river and riparian areas. River corridors and floodplains are some of the most ecologically valuable areas in the landscape, especially in an area like the Central Valley of California that has an arid climate. The rivers and floodplains are important for fish species, including anadromous species such as salmon and steelhead, and also provide wintering areas for migratory birds on the Pacific Flyway. The San Joaquin, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers are characterized as Critical Habitat for steelhead trout, as designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Other Critical Habitats in the Region include those for the vernal pool tadpole shrimp and vernal pool fairy shrimp. Riparian and wetland sensitive species within the San Joaquin River and the lower reaches of the Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers include Delta button‐celery, valley elderberry longhorn beetle, riparian woodrat, riparian brush rabbit, wading bird rookeries, least Bell’s vireo, tricolored blackbirds, Swainson’s hawk, pallid bat, and western red bat. The Stanislaus River National Wildlife Refuge covers nearly 8,000 acres; approximately three‐ quarters of this area was specifically acquired to allow floodwater to temporarily move out onto the floodplain, now in flood‐compatible land use. Extensive riparian vegetation is present within the Wildlife Area and there are small swaths of riparian vegetation along the San Joaquin River from the confluence with the Merced River to the confluence with the Stanislaus River. Similarly, the Dos Rios Ranch is a 1,600 acre area managed by the Tuolumne River Trust and River Partners located at the confluence of the Tuolumne and the San Joaquin Rivers provides six miles of river frontage and is managed for habitat and attenuation of flood flows (ESA, 2013). 2.1.7 Social and Cultural Composition The East Stanislaus County IRWM Region encompasses most of Stanislaus County and a portion of Merced County. Based on the 2010 Census data, Stanislaus County had a 2010 population of 514,453, an increase of 15.1% from 2000. The County’s population is approximately 65% white, ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-26 approximately 42% of which are of Hispanic or Latino origin. Asians provide the next largest demographic population, composing approximately 5% of the county’s population. Native Americans compose approximately 1% of the county’s population. Merced County is smaller than Stanislaus County (with a total population of 255,793 in 2010, a 21.5% increase from 2000); however, its population demographics are similar. Approximately 58% of Merced County’s population is white, though unlike Stanislaus County, approximately 55% of this population is of Hispanic or Latino origin. Approximately 7.5% of the county’s population is Asian, while Native Americans compose approximately 1.4% of the county’s population. The cities within the East Stanislaus Region had all been experiencing extremely rapid growth within the last decade, up until the most recent economic downturn. As previously noted, Stanislaus County’s population increased by 15% between 2000 and 2010 while Merced County’s population increased by 21.5% in that same period, as compared to a 10% growth rate for the State as a whole. This trend is also seen locally. For example, according to the 2000 U.S. Census, there were 3,980 people living in the City of Hughson in the year 2000, resulting in a 22% increase since 1990, equivalent to an average annual growth rate of 2.2%. In 2005, Hughson’s population was estimated at 5,942, resulting in an annual growth of 10%. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, population in the City of Hughson in 2010 was 6,640 (a 67% increase in population between 2000 and 2010). Although the City continued to grow, growth slowed down as demonstrated by the 12% increase from 2005 to 2010, which equates to annual average growth rate of 2.4%, much lower than the previous 10% annual growth rate. Agriculture is the primary industry in the East Stanislaus Region, except in urban centers (city limits). The region includes all or portions of five irrigation districts, providing water to over 300,000 acres. Figure 2‐7 shows land uses in the East Stanislaus Region. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December The East in the IRW California Househol U.S. Cens Based on East Sta Shackelfo Turlock, by repres solicited the needs data defi generally Region an islaus Integrat 2013 Stanislaus R WM process a (California ld Income (M sus Bureau’s n this data, a nislaus Reg ord, West M Denair, Hugh sentatives of and encoura s of minority ned at the c y containing nd their asso ted Regional W Figure 2 Region is also will be essen a Water Cod MHI) less tha s American C community gion, the co odesto, Rive hson, Oakdal f these comm aged to help y and/or low census block between 600 ociated MHIs Water Manage 2‐7: Land Use o home to m ntial. A Disad de (CWC), S an 80 percen Community with an MH ommunities erdale Park, le, Waterford munities dur understand ‐income com k group level 0 and 3,000 . ement Plan in the East S many disadva dvantaged Co ection 7950 nt of the Calif Survey (ACS HI of $48,706 of Keyes, B Cowan, Par d, and Ceres ring the Eas the issues c mmunities. F l. A census b people. Tabl Stanislaus Reg antaged com ommunity (D 05.5(a)), is a fornia statew S) data for 6 or less is c Bret Harte, rklawn, Rous are DACs. I t Stanislaus confronted b Figure 2‐8 ide block group le 2‐7 lists th Chapter gion mmunities, wh DAC), accord a community wide MHI. D the period o considered a E se, and port nvolvement IRWM plann y DACs and entifies the D is a cluster he DACs in th r 2 ESIRWM R hose involve ding to the St y with a M DWR compile of 2006 to 2 DAC. Withi Empire, Gra tions of Mod and particip ning process to better ad DACs based o of census bl he East Stani Region 2-27 ement ate of edian ed the 2010. in the ayson, desto, pation s was dress on the locks, islaus ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December /g islaus Integrat 2013 Figure 2‐8 1. Based 2. Source grants/resource ted Regional W 8: Disadvanta Table C R W on the ACS dat e: DWR ACS dat eslinks.cfm. Water Manage aged Commu 2‐8: DACs in Community1 Bret Harte Cowan Empire Grayson Keyes Parklawn Riverdale Park Rouse Shackelford West Modesto ta for Census De ta from 2006 to ement Plan nities Locate n the East Stan k esignated Place o 2010, availabl ed in the East nislaus Regio MHI $38,087 $34,464 $31,063 $32,198 $39,567 $35,130 $32,902 $37,656 $30,504 $19,302 $30,767 es. e here: http://w Chapter t Stanislaus R on www.water.ca.g r 2 ESIRWM R Region gov/irwm Region 2-28 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-29 2.2 Water Resource Status 2.2.1 Water Supplies and Demands The Cities of Modesto, Turlock, and Ceres have each prepared a 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The City of Hughson is not considered an urban water supplier (as they deliver less than 3,000 AFY) and therefore is not required to prepare an UWMP. The 2010 UWMPs prepared were updates to each city’s 2005 UWMP and were prepared in compliance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act, which was originally established by Assembly Bill 797 in 1983. The law requires water suppliers who provide water to more than 3,000 customers or supply more than 3,000 AFY to prepare and adopt an UWMP every five years. In 2009, Senate Bill x7‐7 (SBx7‐7), also referred to as the Water Conservation Act of 2009, was passed which required each urban water supplier to include in the 2010 UWMP per capita water use targets to be met by 2015 and 2020. The statewide objective of SBx7‐7 is to reduce per capita water use by the year 2020 by 20%. The water demand projections each city developed for inclusion in its UWMP assume the 2020 urban water use targets will be met. Water supplies and demands for each city are described in the following sections. This section includes the demand information/projections that are currently available. Some water demands, such as the agricultural demands, are not currently publicly available and therefore are not included in this description. City of Modesto The City of Modesto is the largest retail water supplier in Stanislaus County and has been providing potable water service to its urban area since 1895 through the acquisition/purchase of multiple water companies. Until 1995, the sole water supply source was groundwater from the Modesto and Turlock Groundwater Subbasins. In the early 1990s, the City of Modesto, MID, and the former Del Este Water Company formed a partnership to use a portion of MID’s surface water supplies for municipal uses, resulting in the Modesto Domestic Water Project (MDWP). The MDWP includes a 30 mgd surface water treatment plant plus storage and delivery facilities. The surface water treatment plant, referred to as the Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant and the associated facilities were completed in January 1995 and the City started delivery of treated surface water in addition to groundwater. In July 1995, the City of Modesto acquired the Del Este Water Company. The City of Modesto’s service area includes one large contiguous area and several outlying, non‐ contiguous areas. The service area is shown in Figure 2‐9. The contiguous portion of the service area consists of the City’s current sphere of influence (SOI), Salida, North Ceres and some unincorporated Stanislaus County “islands.” The non‐contiguous portion of the service area includes Grayson, Hickman, Del Rio, Waterford, a part of north Ceres, and portions of Turlock. Approximately 264,000 people within the service area received water services from the City of Modesto. Historically, the City has been among the fastest growing areas in the State of California. Beginning in 2007, growth began slowing at a significant rate due to the economic downturn. The service area population of 264,000 is approximately 20,000 less than what was projected for 2010 in the City’s joint 2005 UWMP with MID. The 2010 Joint (Modesto and MID) UWMP assumes a growth rate of 1.9% with an estimated population of 375,000 in 2030. Projected water demand is presented in Table 2‐9. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-30 Table 2‐9: City of Modesto Projected Water Demand, AFY a 2010 (actual) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 64,464 82,900 80,500 87,900 96,000 104,800 Source: West Yost, 2011b. Table ES‐1. Footnotes: a. Includes unaccounted for water which is estimated to be about 15% of total production. As previously noted, the City of Modesto relies on conjunctive use to meet demands with its water supplies from two sources – groundwater and Tuolumne River surface water that is purchased wholesale from MID. Groundwater and surface water will continue to be the primary sources of water for the City, and although the City is pursuing recycled water, it would be to provide a more reliable and cost‐effective water supply for agricultural use rather than to act as a potable water offset. The provides water to municipal customers within the City of Modesto city limits north of the Tuolumne River, including the communities of Salida and Empire, while the customers south of Tuolumne River in the Turlock Irrigation District (TID) service area are served by groundwater from both north and south of the river. In 2010, the City of Modesto pumped 33,800 AFY with groundwater constituting 52% of the City’s total water supply. In the future, groundwater pumping is expected to be reduced with the expansion of surface water supplies with the implementation of the Phase 2 (anticipated to be completed in 2015). The City of Modesto currently has 33,602 AFY in available treated surface water supplies from MID. In 2010, the City purchased 30,647 AFY of additional surface water from MID. Once the Phase 2 is operational, available treated surface water from MID will increase up to 67,204 AFY, adding to the City of Modesto’s water supply and replacing some groundwater pumping. Anticipated future water supplies are shown in Table 2‐10. Table 2‐10: City of Modesto Current and Future Water Supplies, AFY Supply 2010 (actual) 2015 a 2020 2025 2030 2035 Surface Water (Purchased from MID) 30,647 67,200 67,200 67,200 67,200 67,200 Groundwater 33,817 15,700 13,300 20,700 28,800 37,600 Total 64,464 82,900 80,500 87,900 96,000 104,800 Source: West Yost, 2011b. Table ES‐2. Footnotes: a. In late 2015, when the Phase 2 is completed, an additional 33,602 AFY of demand will be met with treated surface water supplies. b. Build‐out demand for the Modesto Water Service Area is 104,800 AFY which includes the anticipated reductions in water use to comply with SBx7‐7. The City of Modesto may also participate in a potential third phase of the and/or the Regional Surface Water Supply Project a proposed project to provide treated surface water for municipal use in South Modesto. Either project would result in greater supplies of treated surface water from MID and TID, respectively. The Stanislaus Regional Water Authority is pursuing the Regional Surface Water Supply Project. TID would provide raw surface water to the Authority to treat and sell to the three participating cities (Turlock, Modesto, and Ceres). Hughson may purchase treated water from the Authority, but that would be determined during a potential future phase of plant expansion. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-31 The City of Modesto has adequate water supplies to meet projected water demands through 2035 during all hydrologic conditions. Other water supply options (such as desalination) for the City of Modesto are not necessary nor are they economical (West Yost, 2011b). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December islaus Integrat 2013 Source: W ted Regional W West Yost, 2011 Water Manage 1b. ement Plan Figure 2‐9: City of Modesto Water Servic ce Area Chapter 2 EESIRWM Regio 2-32 on ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-33 Modesto Irrigation District In 1887, MID was formed as the second irrigation district in California (after TID), and predominantly provides agricultural irrigation water from the Tuolumne River and the underlying groundwater basin. Surface water is diverted from the Tuolumne River at La Grange Dam, constructed in 1893 to divert water to MID north of the river and to TID south of the river. Don Pedro Reservoir is the District’s primary water storage facility, while Modesto Reservoir is a small holding reservoir. The MID service area is shown in Figure 2‐10. MID is primarily an agricultural water supplier and provides irrigation water to 57,000 acres, typically between mid‐March and late October each year. MID can also serve approximately 9,000 acres of additional lands based on customer demands. This water is used for dairy, chickens, turkeys, cattle, almonds, grapes, walnuts, tomatoes and peaches. In summary, MID serves approximately 3,000 irrigation accounts with an average of 20 acres per account. As previously noted, MID also provides treated surface water to the City of Modesto for domestic delivery, but it does not directly serve any domestic water users. In 1992, when MID, the City of Modesto, and the former Del Este Water Company formed a partnership, the agencies signed the Treatment and Delivery Agreement Among the Modesto Irrigation District, City of Modesto, and Del Este Water Company which controlled the delivery of domestic treated water from MID to the City of Modesto. This agreement obligated MID to deliver up to 33,602 AFY (30 mgd) to the City of Modesto each year (May 1st through April 30th), during normal years. The agreement contains a formula to determine reductions of water supplies during dry years. In September 2005, the approved a long‐term transfer of 67,204 AFY of water from MID to the City of Modesto through the year 2054. In October 2005, the original 1992 agreement was amended to include the second phase of the (an additional 30 mgd) (West Yost, 2011b). MID distributes a combination of Tuolumne River water and groundwater via a network of storage facilities, canals, pipelines, pumps, drainage facilities and control structures. The District operates approximately 90 groundwater wells with a combined pumping capacity of approximately 250 cubic feet per second (cfs) (MID, 2012). MID, in conjunction with TID, also operates the New Don Pedro Reservoir with a maximum storage capacity of 2,030,000 AF. Together, the Districts are responsible for maintaining regulated fish flows in the Tuolumne River to comply with FERC licensing requirements. MID’s median annual diversion is 315,756 AF (MID, 2012). Of that amount, approximately 35,000 AF is diverted to the for treatment and delivery to the City of Modesto (MID, 2012). The MID on‐farm water delivery system was originally designed to deliver irrigation water by gravity, with very large flows (10‐20 cfs) on a predetermined rotation (typically every 10‐20 days). However, as irrigators have converted their on‐farm application practices from flood to pressurized systems, the requests for irrigation water have shifted from rotation to arranged‐demand (MID, 2012). MID has an irrigation water allocation policy which established the allocation and cost of water to landowners. Factors affecting water allocation include land within the service area, reservoir storage, riparian rights, water year type, amount of land owned, and predicted runoff (MID, 2012). MID uses a variety of devices and methods to measure water within its delivery system (including orifices, propeller meters, weirs, flumes, venture meters and pumps), and it has a water rate schedule based on budget requirements and board policy. MID’s water rates are an increasing block rate (tiered) pricing structure for water users who exceed the base amount of allocated water. The block rate structure is established annually, but typically contains two to three blocks of water with increasing price rates (MID, 2012). As the developed areas of the City of Modesto and other communities within the MID service area expand, irrigated land is being replace by urban land uses. This continuing shift in land uses drives ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-34 projected changes in water use. MID delivered 30,034 AF of treated water to the City of Modesto in 2009 (MID, 2012). The joint UWMP produced by MID and the City of Modesto projects that this supply will increase to 67,200 AFY by 2015 and remain constant until 2035. Future changes in agricultural water use will be driven by changes in cropping, irrigation practices, climate change and fluctuations in Tuolumne River hydrology. Although the irrigated area within the MID service area is expected to remain relatively stable, changes in the availability of surface water will continue to include the annual allocation of water (MID, 2012). City of Turlock The City of Turlock is the second largest city in Stanislaus County, situated midway between Modesto (to the northwest) and Merced (to the southeast). The City of Turlock’s population has grown steadily from 13,992 in 1970 to almost 70,000 in 2010. The City provides water to its service area through about 18,500 service connections. Turlock began installing water meters in 2007, and meter‐based (i.e. volumetric) billing for all water users began on January 1, 2011. With the installation of water meters and volumetric billing, the recent drought, and the education/outreach efforts the City has implemented, there has been a significant reduction in water use. The City of Turlock’s peak water use occurred in 2007 at 8,359 MG; in 2010 water use decreased to 7,093 MG. The City of Turlock overlies the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin, a subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. DWR’s Bulletin 118 estimated a 160,000 AF increase of groundwater overdraft in this subbasin from 1990 to 1995, but from 1994 to 2000, groundwater water levels in the Turlock Subbasin rose about seven feet. The rising groundwater levels suggested that the groundwater basin had started to recover, but again, beginning in 2000, groundwater production increased, reaching its peak in 2007 when 8.359 billion gallons were pumped. Combined with below average rainfall, increased agricultural pumping and urbanization, groundwater pumping for urban water has adversely impacted groundwater levels. Conservation efforts and increase rainfall have helped the groundwater basin to begin recovering once again. Groundwater is an unreliable water supply source for the City of Turlock in the long‐term because the quantity that can be pumped depends on the amount available in the groundwater basin, the ability of the City’s wells to pump, and pumping by other users. There is a significant cone of depression about five miles east of Turlock due to agricultural pumping; but even so, overdraft conditions have not occurred under the City of Turlock. The City of Turlock’s sole water supply is groundwater, and it anticipates meeting all water demands in its service area in the next five years with groundwater and supplementing supplies (recycled and non‐potable water) as needed. As previously discussed, the City’s wastewater treatment facility was recently upgraded to tertiary treatment, and the City is permitted to use the recycled water for industrial cooling and landscape irrigation at Pedretti Baseball Park. Water extracted from the shallow groundwater aquifer typically does not meet drinking water standards, but it can be used for landscape irrigation. Also, the City uses excess runoff from residential watering to supply irrigation water to Summerfaire Park. Potable water from the groundwater basin can support annual production of up to 8 billion gallons per year. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December islaus Integrat 2013 Source ted Regional W e: West Yost, 20 Water Manage 011b. ement Plan Figure 2‐10: MID Service Area Chapter 2 EESIRWM Regio 2-35 on ---PAGE BREAK--- E D East Stanislaus In December 2013 ntegrated Regional Water Managem Fi ent Plan igure 2‐11: City of Turlock Water r Service Area Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region 2-36 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-37 A population growth rate of 2.5% was used to estimate future water demand in the City of Turlock’s service area in its 2010 UWMP. The demand projections are based on the preferred land use plan outlined in the Draft 2030 City of Turlock General Plan Update. Table 2‐11 presents current and projected future water demands for the City of Turlock. Table 2‐11: City of Turlock Water Demand, AFY a 2010 (actual) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 21,768 26,957 29,280 33,129 37,216 42,108 Source: City of Turlock, 2011. Tables 4 through 7. Footnotes: a. Does not include recycled water Turlock delivers to TID for industrial cooling or recycled water used for irrigation. The City of Turlock intends to enter into an agreement with TID for delivery of 16,802 AFY of TID surface was to the City. TID has acknowledged that this volume of water is available and, for planning purposes, it expected to be available in 2020. Therefore, current and future water supplies for the City of Turlock are shown in Table 2‐12. Table 2‐12: Current and Project Water Supplies, AFY Water Supply Source 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Water Purchased from TID a 0 0 16,802 16,802 16,802 16,802 Groundwater 21,771 26,957 12,478 16,327 20,414 25,306 Recycled Water 1,129 1,228 1,228 1,228 1,228 1,228 Total 22,900 28,185 30,508 34,357 38,444 43,336 Source: City of Turlock, 2011. Table 16. Footnotes: a. Assumes the TID’s surface water treatment plant (the will be operational in 2020. Turlock Irrigation District Turlock Irrigation District (TID) was established in 1887 as the first publicly owned irrigation district in the State. Organized under the Wright Act, the District operates under provisions of the California Water Code as a special district. At present, TID covers a service area of 197,261 gross acres, with 157,800 acres that can currently be irrigated with surface water (TID, 2012). TID services over 4,900 irrigation customers, with irrigation water used to grow alfalfa, almonds, beans, corn, grapes, grain, oats, peaches, sweet potatoes and walnuts. The Tuolumne River is the District’s primary source of water. Water for irrigation and hydroelectric power generation is kept at Don Pedro Reservoir, about 50 miles east of the Turlock. The TID irrigation service area is generally bounded on the north by the Tuolumne River, on the south by the Merced River, and on the west by the San Joaquin River. The communities of Turlock, Ceres, Keyes, Denair, Hughson, Delhi, South Modesto, Hickman, and Hilmar are within the boundaries of the TID irrigation service area. As previously noted, the Tuolumne River is the principal water supply for TID, although the District does supplement surface water supplies with drainage wells and rented wells and jointly operates New Don Pedro Reservoir with MID. Rented wells are private or Improvement District wells that are rented by TID to supplement irrigation supplies, especially in dry years (TID, 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-38 In addition to La Grange Dam, the District’s diversion dam, and Don Pedro Reservoir (its storage reservoir), TID owns and maintains more than 250 miles of canals and laterals, about 90% of which are concrete‐lined to curb seepage and erosion. TID typically delivers irrigation water between mid‐March and mid‐October of each year. Customers irrigate their lands through a variety of means, including flood irrigation, drip and micro systems. TID works cooperatively with other local agencies to promote the long‐term sustainability of its water supplies. TID actively manages its groundwater supplies conjunctively with its surface water supplies, and participates in local groundwater management and planning. The District has a long‐ standing program of groundwater level monitoring and cooperates with other state and local entities to monitor the larger Turlock Subbasin area. TID is a member of the Turlock Groundwater Basin Association and has adopted the Turlock Groundwater Management Plan. In 1996, TID was one of the first to develop an Agricultural Water Management Plan (AWMP) as a member of the Agricultural Water Management Council (AWMC), a non‐profit organization consisting of water suppliers, public agencies, and members of the farming, academic and environmental communities. In compliance with new laws regarding Agricultural Water Management Planning, TID adopted an updated AWMP at the end of 2012 and remains committed to developing and implementing sound planning practices through its AWMP and to continue support agricultural irrigation efficiency. TID uses a restricted arranged demand system of water ordering and delivery. Water deliveries are measured by a combination of SCADA, pressure transducers, sidegates, velocity meters, and electrical usage data. The TID Board of Directors establishes baseline water allotments each year, depending on projected runoff and including the possibility of the occurrence of consecutive dry years, carryover storage, flows required to be delivered to the lower Tuolumne River, and the availability of rented pumps. In addition, the TID Board of Directors has adopted a new volumetric pricing structure which utilizes a three‐tiered increasing block rate structure combined with a fixed charge. In recent years, several local community water systems, including those in Hughson, Ceres, Turlock and the southern portion of Modesto, have been studying the possibility of using TID surface water from the Tuolumne River to supplement urban groundwater supplies. While such a project would be within current irrigation boundaries, it would result in resumed water service to those areas (TID, 2012). Over the last five years, total TID water supply averaged about 614,000 AF, approximately 82% from surface water, 16% from groundwater and 2% from other supplies such as subsurface drainage, tailwater, spill recovery, and recycled wastewater (TID, 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- E D East Stanislaus In December 2013 ntegrated Regional Water Management Plan Figure 2‐12: TID Service A Area Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region 2-39 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-40 City of Ceres The City of Ceres provides water to almost all residential, commercial, industrial and institutional (CII) users, and governmental water users within its city limits. The City of Ceres water service area is concurrent with the city limits, except in the northwest portion of the city where the City of Modesto serves water to approximately 1,200 customers. The City of Ceres also serves some customers outside its city limit, but within its primary sphere of influence (SOI). The City’s water service area is shown in Figure 2‐13. Since 1992, the City of Ceres has been installing water meters on all new residential units. In 2012, the City completed installation of meters on pre‐1992 residential connection, multi‐family housing, and CII users, and established rates for volumetric billing. Additionally, the City installed an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) system which includes fixed infrastructure to collect meter information. A metered rate structure was implemented to encourage conservation of water. The City of Ceres’ future water demands are driven by compliance with SBx7‐7 and the associated urban water use reductions. The City’s projected water demands are presented in Table 2‐13. Table 2‐13: City of Ceres Projected Water Demands, AFY a 2010 (actual) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 8,284 10,700 12,300 14,800 17,300 19,800 Source: West Yost, 2011a. Table ES‐1. Footnotes: a. Includes unaccounted for water, estimated to be 15% of total production in 2015; after 2015 it is assumed unaccounted for system losses decrease to 10%, accounting for improved leak detection and repair when the City is fully metered. The City of Ceres’ sole water supply source is groundwater pumped from the Turlock Subbasin. Since 1980, the City of Ceres’ groundwater production has increased from 3,300 AFY to approximately 10,000 AFY. Anticipated future water supplies are presented in Table 2‐14. Non‐ potable groundwater is also pumped from shallow wells and used to irrigate several parks within the City. The non‐potable water that is pumped is not included in the groundwater estimates in Table 2‐14. The City of Ceres is a member of the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority and is working with TID to implement the Regional Surface Water Supply Project and supplement its current water supply with surface water. The City of Ceres future water supplies, shown below, assume the is completed in 2018 and will supply the City with an additional 6 mgd. Table 2‐14: City of Ceres Future Water Supplies, AFY Supply Source 2010 (actual) 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Groundwater a 8,284 10,700 5,600 8,100 10,600 13,100 TID Surface Water b 0 0 6,700 6,700 6,700 6,700 Total 8,284 10,700 12,300 14,800 17,300 19,800 Source: West Yost, 2011a. Table ES‐2. Footnotes: a. Groundwater quantity calculated by subtracting future water demand from surface water supply amount. b. The is anticipated to be operational in 2018. 6,700 AFY will be provided to the City of Ceres. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Source: We islaus Integrat 2013 est Yost, 2011a. ted Regional Water Management Plan Figure 2‐13: City of Ceres Water Service e Area Chapter 2 E ESIRWM Regio 2-41 on ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-42 Because the City of Ceres’ sole source of water supply is groundwater, it is vulnerable to climatic variability and water quality. The primary sources of groundwater recharge in the Turlock Subbasin are infiltration from the Tuolumne River and incidental recharge from applied irrigation water. Drought conditions can reduce groundwater recharge and during a multi‐year drought, groundwater levels can decline. By diversifying the City’s water supply portfolio and adding a second source of water, surface water from the overall water supply reliability will increase. The addition of surface water to the City’s supply portfolio will help protect the groundwater basin from overdraft and water quality degradation. Surface water is expected to be even more vulnerable to climatic variations than groundwater, so the City of Ceres’ water supply projections presented in Table 2‐14 assume groundwater will continue to be the primary source of water (West Yost, 2011a). City of Hughson The City of Hughson provides potable water services to residential and CII customers in its service area. Currently, the sole water supply source for the City is groundwater extracted from the Turlock Subbasin using five groundwater wells. The City’s existing water distribution system and water facilities are shown in Figure 2‐14. Water is distributed to its customers through 20 miles of pressurized pipe. The City’s five wells each have a minimum capacity of 1,000 gpm, up to a maximum of 1,200 gpm. The combined well capacity is 8.1 mgd, which is adequate to meet estimated future water demands under most scenarios. In January 2007, the City of Hughson prepared a Water System Master Plan (Carollo, 2007a) with the purpose of effectively planning for future growth and identified Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The annual average water production in 2005 for the City of Hughson service area was 541 MG or 1.5 mgd. This equates to an average daily per capita water use of about 250 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) (Carollo, 2007a). The City of Hughson’s future water demands are shown below in Table 2‐15. These demands are estimated based on the general plan land use and applied water demand factors. The City’s updated General Plan was adopted in December 2005 and defines the City’s land use plan at build out. Population is expected to increase from 5,942 (in 2005) to 15,074 (at build out in 2025), equating to an annual increase of 4.75%. Table 2‐15: City of Hughson Water Demand, AFY 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2,466 3,363 4,260 5,157 5,157 Source: Carollo, 2007a. Table ES.2. ---PAGE BREAK--- E D S East Stanislaus In December 2013 Source: Carollo, 200 ntegrated Regiona 07a al Water Managem Figure 2 ent Plan 2‐14: City Hughson Water Service e Area and Facilities Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region 2-43 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-44 Oakdale Irrigation District Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) is located in Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties, on the eastern side of the region. Approximately three‐fifths of OID’s service area lies south of the Stanislaus River and overlying the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin; this areas is within the East Stanislaus IRWM Region. The remaining two‐fifths of the service area lies north of the Stanislaus River, overlying the Eastern San Joaquin Groundwater Subbasin. OID was formed in 1909, and in 1910, purchased certain Stanislaus River water rights and facilities from two existing water companies. Together with the South San Joaquin Irrigation District (SSJID), OID holds pre‐1914 water rights for diversion of 1,817.7 cfs from the Stanislaus River at Goodwin Dam (Davids Engineering, 2012). In addition to Goodwin Dam, OID and SSJID also share a joint main canal, extending four miles from Goodwin Dam to the Joint Diversion Works. This canal carries 28% OID water and 72% SSJID water. OID’s facilities also include main canals on each side of the river (the North Main Canal and the South Main Canal), plus approximately 250 miles of lateral and sublateral ditches. Historically, OID shared Melones Reservoir (a storage reservoir) with SSJID, plus 25 deep wells used to augment water supply as needed. The Tri‐Dam Project (jointly owned with SSJID and PG&E) was subsequently added. This project consists of three reservoirs with a combined storage capacity of 230,400 AF, plus combined power generation facilities capable of producing 81,000 KW of power. An additional 93,000 KW of generation capacity is provided by the Sand Bar Hydroelectric Powerhouse. In 1979, New Melones Dam was completed, providing a reservoir capacity of 2.4 million AF and effectively submerging the original Melones project. New Melones Dam was constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and transferred to the USBR; the dam and reservoir were subsequently incorporated into the Central Valley Project. Following completion, OID and SSJID entered into an operational agreement with the USBR allowing the District to divert a combined supply of 600,000 AF of water annually, subject to availability (OID, 2012). Releases from New Melones Dam are now the principal source of water for OID, along with groundwater from 25 operating wells. These wells produce an average of about 6,300 AFY. OID also operates 43 drainage and several reclamation pumps, used to discharge around 13,000 AFY. OID actively participates in groundwater management activities in the basins it overlies. OID’s service area currently encompasses approximately 72,345 acres of land supporting four major crop groups (irrigated pasture, oats/corn (double crop), rice, fruits/nuts) plus several rural communities (including the Cities of Oakdale and Riverbank, located within OID’s service area). In addition, OID has short‐term water transfers with the California American Water Company (Stockton District), and provides water to two rural water areas outside of the City of Oakdale. Water diverted from the Stanislaus River into the District’s canals is measured by gauging stations operated by the Tri‐Dam Authority. Releases from the canals to laterals are measured by various means, including pressure transducers, ultrasonic water level sensors, weir sticks, measuring tapes, Clausen rules and stilling wells with staff gauges. As with the other water districts, water rates are established annually by the Board of Directors, with water deliveries to OID customers on a flat rate, per‐acre basis (OID, 2012). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December islaus Integrat 2013 ted Regional Water Management Plan Figure 2‐15: Oakdale Irrigation District Service Ar rea and Facilities Chapter 2 EESIRWM Regio 2-45 on ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Eastside Eastside approxim agricultu The only purchase District a within Di of about other use overdraft Demand There are afore‐me their wat who also related to land are n domestic provide w located o areas tha increasin islaus Integrat 2013 e Water Dis Water Distri mately 54,000 ral and is ir y other sourc es in wet yea and from rip istrict appear 80,000 acre ers of the und ts. ds and Supp e areas with ntioned pub ter supplies. determines o their land. not part of a c wells have b water for ir outside of th at have had ng reliance up ted Regional W strict ict was form 0 acres in M rrigated with ce of supply ars from the parian water rs to be decli e‐feet. The D derlying Turl F plies Outsi in the East S blic water age Privately‐ow the water s Unless a per larger land u been installe rrigation and he local wate significant c pon groundw Water Manage med in 1985 t Merced and St h groundwat y is a very l Turlock and r rights alon ining at abou istrict partic lock Subbasi Figure 2‐16: E de Establis Stanislaus Re encies. Thes wned prope upply use, ir rmit is acqui use planning ed throughou d supplies to er agency bo conversions water (TGBA, ement Plan to address w tanislaus Co ter; the Distr imited amou d Merced Irr ng the Tuolu ut two feet p cipates in loc in, and is acti Eastside Wate shed Public egion that ar se areas are rties are ma rrigation me ired to insta g process. Pr ut the Modest o rural hom oundaries tha from non‐ir , 2008). water needs unties. Most rict pumps o unt of surfac rigation Dist umne and M er year, crea cal groundw ively workin er District c Service Ar re located ou dependent p anaged by th ethod, croppi ll a building rivately‐own to and Turlo mes and bus at are using rrigated land Chapter in the area a t of the land on the order ce water trict’s canals Merced River ating an aver water manage ng towards re reas utside the se primarily on he individual ing patterns, or well, mo ed irrigation ock Groundw inesses. In a g groundwate ds to irrigat r 2 ESIRWM R and encomp within Distr r of 160,000 ~2,000 AFY) lying adjace rs. Groundw age annual d ement along ectifying the rvice areas o n groundwate l property o , and other i difications o n supply well water Subbas addition to er, there are ted lands, fu Region 2-46 passes rict is AFY. from ent to water deficit g with basin of the er for owner ssues on the ls and ins to areas e also urther ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-47 Possible Future Changes to Water Supplies In December of 2012, the issued its Public Draft, Substitute Environmental Document in Support of Potential Changes to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay‐ Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta Estuary: San Joaquin River Flows and Southern Delta Water Quality. In this document, the evaluated potential impacts from proposed amendments to the 2006 Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento‐San Joaquin Delta Estuary (2006 Bay‐Delta Plan). The amendments would establish:  New flow objectives on the Lower San Joaquin River and its three eastside tributaries, the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers (all of which are located within the East Stanislaus IRWM Region), for the protection of fish and wildlife beneficial uses; and  New water quality (salinity) objectives for the protection of agricultural beneficial uses in the southern portion of the Sacramento‐San Joaquin Delta (Delta). The San Joaquin River flow proposal would establish February through June flow requirements of 35% of unimpaired flow for the three salmon‐bearing tributaries. (Unimpaired flow is the flow that would occur if all runoff from the watershed remained in the river, without storage in reservoirs or diversions.) Achieving this proposal would require increased flows of 21% and 20% in the Tuolumne and Merced Rivers, respectively, with the increased flows resulting from decreases in diversions of 132,000 AFY from the Tuolumne River and 67,000 AFY from the Merced River. Loss of these diversions would significantly impact water supplies in the East Stanislaus Region. The proposed amendments are currently under consideration. Concurrently, expansion of the San Joaquin River National Wildlife Refuge is being considered. As described in the Draft Environmental Assessment, released in 2012, the proposed expansion would add up to 22,156 acres of land to the Refuge. This expansion may require additional water to establish and maintain riparian habitats. 2.2.2 Water Quality Water quality within a watershed can be affected by a mix of point and nonpoint source discharges, and groundwater and surface water interactions. Water quality can affect water supplies for the East Stanislaus Region and overall water supply reliability. Much of the Region relies predominantly on groundwater and/or surface water. In California, the and the are responsible for contributing to the development of a Strategic Plan for water resource protection. In December 2002, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board prepared a Watershed Management Initiative (WMI) chapter for its watersheds to integrate surface and groundwater regulatory programs. It was then revised in October 2004. The divided its region into the Sacramento River Basin, the San Joaquin River Basin, and the Tulare Lake Basin 2004). As previously described in Chapter 2.1.2, the East Stanislaus Region is within the San Joaquin Basin which is then further divided into the Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus watersheds. Each is also required to prepare a Basin Plan (also referred to as a Water Quality Control Plan) to be used as a basis for regulatory actions to protect water quality. The Basin Plans describe beneficial uses, identify water quality objectives, and define an implementation program consisting of actions to be taken to meet those objectives. Region 5, the Central Valley Region, has two Basin Plans, one for Tulare Lake Basin and one for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. The latter Basin Plan is pertinent to the East Stanislaus Region and was originally adopted in 1975, then updated and revised in 1984, 1989, 1994, 1998 and 2011 2011). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-48 Beneficial uses of water resources as identified in the Basin Plan are critical in water quality management. The existing and potential beneficial uses of the surface waters within the East Stanislaus Region include:  Municipal and Domestic Supply  Cold Freshwater Habitat  Migration of Aquatic Organisms  Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development  Hydropower Generation  Recreation  Freshwater habitat  Wildlife Habitat  Agricultural Supply Beneficial uses of groundwater identified in the Basin Plan for groundwater in groundwater basins underlying the East Stanislaus Region include:  Municipal and Domestic Supply  Agricultural Supply  Industrial Service Supply (e.g. cooling water supply)  Industrial Process Supply 2011) Surface Water Quality Pesticides have been found within the San Joaquin River at concentrations that are toxic to sensitive aquatic organisms. Two multi‐year studies were conducted; one study in the early 1990’s found a 43‐mile reach of the San Joaquin River, between the confluence of the Merced and Stanislaus River, to be toxic about half of the time to invertebrate components of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) three species test. This portion of the river is the portion within the East Stanislaus Region as the Stanislaus River coincides with the northern regional boundary and the Merced River coincides with the southern regional boundary. The toxicity in the river was caused by pesticides, specifically diazinon and chlorpyrifos, in storm and irrigation runoff from crops. A year later, follow‐up testing was conducted that found that water in the San Joaquin River was toxic to invertebrate species about 6% of the time. As with the first study, diazinon and chlorpyrifos in winter storm runoff from crops and summer irrigation return flows were identified as the primary source of the toxins. Urban runoff has also been identified as a significant source in and around the City of Modesto. The has also found elevated levels of Group A Pesticides in fish in the Tuolumne, Merced, and Stanislaus Rivers and the main stem of the San Joaquin River. Group A Pesticides include chlordane, toxaphene, endosulfan, and other pesticides, many of which are no longer used or are heavily regulated. These chemicals tend to bind to sediment and move into water systems as sediment moves off site 2004). The San Joaquin, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers are on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list for Group A pesticides and various other constituents. Water quality objectives were identified in the Basin Plan for inland surface waters and groundwater in the San Joaquin Basin. Examples of these objectives are as follows:  Bacteria – In waters designated for contact recreation, the fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100 milliliter (mL) from five samples over a 30‐day ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-49 period, nor shall more than 10% of the total number of samples taken during the 30‐day period exceed 400/100 mL.  Chemical Constituents – Water shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. For domestic and municipal water supply, the concentrations of chemical constituents must not be in excess of the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) specified in the California Code of Regulations, and state and federal drinking water regulations.  Color – Water shall be free of discoloration that adversely affects beneficial uses.  Floating Materials, Oil and Grease – Water shall not contain floating materials, oils, greases, waxes or other materials that cause nuisance or affect beneficial uses. Other water quality objectives were identified in the categories of biostimulatory substances, dissolved oxygen, mercury, pH, pesticides, radioactivity, salinity, sediment, settleable material, suspended material, tastes and odors, temperature, toxicity, and turbidity. A more comprehensive description of the water quality objectives is included in the Basin Plan. 2011). The is also in the process of updating the Water Quality Plan for the San Francisco Bay‐ Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay‐Delta Plan). The Bay‐Delta Plan was developed in 2006 to protect water quality in the region and includes water quality objectives to protect municipal and industrial, agricultural, and fish and wildlife beneficial uses. The Delta Stewardship Council (DSC), as part of the Bay‐Delta Plan, directed the to adopt and implement updated flow objectives for the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta) to achieve the coequal goals of ecosystem protection and a reliable water supply by June 2, 2014. To implement this policy, the Bay‐Delta Plan is being updated by the through a phased process. As part of Phase 1, a draft Substitute Environmental Document (SED) was prepared in December 2012 in support of potential changes to San Joaquin River flow and southern Delta water quality objectives and an implementation program to be included in the Bay‐Delta Plan. The SED proposes to balance the use of water for fishery protection against competing uses of water such as municipal, agricultural, and hydropower. Amendments to the 2006 Bay‐Delta Plan will establish the following:  Flow Objectives – New flow objectives on the Lower San Joaquin River (LSJR) and its three eastside tributaries (the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced Rivers) for the protection of fish and wildlife beneficial uses.  Water Quality Objectives – New water quality (salinity) objectives for the protection of agricultural beneficial uses in the southern portion of the Delta.  Implementation Program – An implementation program to achieve those objectives The amendments have the potential to impact the East Stanislaus Region, predominantly through reduced diversions from the Tuolumne River. As the SED and amendments progress forward, the East Stanislaus Region will track the flow objectives and water quality objectives that may be relevant to the region, and will plan response actions needed to adjust regional water use. Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality in the Region is variable and has been impacted by overlying land uses in many locations. The Basin Plan identified water quality objectives for groundwater in the San Joaquin River Basin, over which the East Stanislaus Region lies. Objectives for bacteria, chemical constituents, tastes and odors, toxicity, and radioactivity are defined in the Basin Plan for groundwater. Extracted groundwater from both the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins has contained concentrations of multiple constituents in excess of drinking water regulatory requirements, ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-50 including arsenic, uranium, PCE, TCE, DBCP and nitrate. As a result, many of the Region’s groundwater wells have been taken out of service (for example, the City of Modesto has had 21 wells removed from service in recent years due to groundwater quality impacts) and several disadvantaged communities within Stanislaus County have been identified as having small community water systems with known violations of the arsenic and/or nitrate drinking water standards (CDPH, 2013). High salinity, nitrates, iron, manganese, boron, arsenic, radionuclides, bacteria, pesticides, trichloroethylene and other trace organics have been detected in groundwater in the Turlock Subbasin. In the last 20 years, the City of Turlock has had to discontinue use of five wells due to contamination. Two of the well closures were a result of nitrate contamination, which is a major threat to wells in the City of Turlock. Average nitrate levels have increase from 12 parts per million (ppm) to 21 ppm (as NO3) over the last 20 years. Arsenic has also been a problem for some wells. Some of the contaminants found in the groundwater occur naturally while others have been introduced by manmade sources, such as from industrial solvents, septic tanks, pesticides and herbicides. The City of Ceres too has had water quality concerns related to specific contaminants in the groundwater. These include many of the same that concern the City of Turlock and Modesto (such as nitrate, uranium, arsenic, and manganese) and nearly all of the City’s active wells are impacted by a combination of inorganic contaminants. Wellhead treatment and blending are used to reduce levels of contaminants and in the future, the City of Ceres may replace older wells and/or install new wells and in such a way that the need for wellhead treatment is minimized (West Yost, 2011a). Groundwater Management Plans have been prepared for both the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins. The Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan for the Modesto Subbasin was prepared in 1994 by six agencies forming the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association The final draft of the Modesto Subbasin GWMP was completed in June 2005 and was adopted by all member agencies. The Turlock Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Plan was drafted in 2008 by the Turlock Groundwater Basin Association (TGBA). Similarly, this plan was adopted by the member agencies comprising the TGBA. Both outlined methods for groundwater monitoring both for groundwater levels and groundwater quality. Local cities and small community water systems conduct water quality monitoring using drinking water supply wells. The data collected are then made available to the public in each municipal water supplier’s Consumer Confidence Report (CCR). CDPH regulates the type of monitoring and frequency of data collection to ensure the water meets required standards. During development of the Turlock Basin GWMP, the TGBA developed Basin Management Objectives, one of which is monitoring groundwater extraction to reduce the potential for land subsidence, indicating how important it is for the TGBA to monitor groundwater quality and levels. Other groundwater monitoring is conducted by other agencies. For example, DWR has a network of wells throughout the valley that are used to monitor groundwater level on an annual or semi‐ annual basis. Local agencies have a similar program to monitor groundwater levels at local supply wells. The Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources (DER) also monitors water quality very closely. There are 61 contamination sites within the Stanislaus County portion of the Turlock Subbasin; the County monitors groundwater quality at these sites quarterly. Most of the water quality data collected from the contaminated sites can be viewed on the Geotracker‐ GAMA website, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov. The TBGA has also participated in the GAMA study, conducted by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), CDPH, DWR, and Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. The GAMA study has yielded baseline water quality conditions and has allowed for early detection of contamination (TGBA, 2008). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 2 ESIRWM Region December 2013 2-51 In the Modesto Subbasin, groundwater levels have been measured in about 230 wells by DWR and others. USGS has also partnered with member agencies of the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers GBA to monitor 17 wells in the area for the National Water Quality Assessment Program. The Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers GBA plans to expand the network of monitoring wells in partnership with the USGS. If detections occur in the monitoring wells, the GBA will facilitate meetings between responsible parties and impacted agencies to determine strategies to minimize spread of contaminants. Groundwater monitoring for levels and quality will continue in order to ensure a balanced state of the groundwater basin (Bookman‐Edmonston, 2005). Table 2‐16: Monitoring by Member Agencies of Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers GBA Member Agency Total Number of Wells No. of Wells Groundwater Levels are Measured No. of Wells where Samples are Analyzed for Groundwater Quality Modesto Irrigation District 104 96 104 Oakdale Irrigation District 17 17 City of Modesto 110a 14 Ceres 4 Walnut Manor 1 Salida 7 Del Rio 3 1 Waterford 7 Hickman 2 1 City of Oakdale 7 City of Riverbank 7 Total 221 113 135 Source: Bookman‐Edmonston, 2005. Table 5‐1. a. Total number of wells provided by City of Modesto staff. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-1 Chapter 3 Climate Change 3.1 Introduction There is mounting scientific evidence that global climate conditions are changing and will continue to change as a result of the continued build‐up of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the Earth’s atmosphere and other issues. Changes in climate can affect municipal water supplies through modifications in the timing, amount, and form of precipitation, as well as water demands and the quality of surface runoff. These changes can affect all elements of water supply systems, from watersheds to reservoirs, conveyance systems, and treatment plants. Planning for and adapting to anticipated changes in climate will be essential to ensuring water supply reliability for all users and to protecting sensitive infrastructure against potentially more frequent and extreme precipitation and wildfire events. This chapter summarizes possible climate change impacts on the State of California and the East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) region, evaluates the potential impacts of those changes with regard to water resource management, assesses the vulnerability of the region to anticipated climate change impacts, and provides recommended adaptation and mitigation strategies to address uncertainty and reduce GHG emissions. In addition, a plan for ongoing data collection to fill data gaps and monitor the frequency and magnitude of local hydrologic and atmospheric changes is provided. 3.2 Statewide Observation and Projections Indications of climate change have been observed over the last several decades throughout California and are apparent in long‐term historic analysis. Statewide average temperatures have increased by about 1.7oF from 1895 to 2011, with the greatest warming in the Sierra Nevada (Moser et al., 2012). Although the State’s weather has followed the expected pattern of a largely Mediterranean climate throughout the past century, no consistent trend in the overall amount of precipitation has been detected, except that a larger proportion of total precipitation is falling as rain instead of snow (Moser et al., 2012). Multiple models have been developed and run to evaluate global and regional climate change impacts. Global Climate Models (GCMs) have been used to simulate a range of potential future GHG emission scenarios, reflecting possible population increases and human behavioral patterns. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has established the A2 and B1 scenarios, which represent a middle range of possible emissions. The A2 scenario is characterized by an increasing population, regionally‐oriented economic development and independently operating, self‐reliant nations. In the A2 scenario, economic growth is uneven, leading to a growing income gap between developed and developing parts of the world. The B1 scenario assumes a more integrated and ecologically friendly future, and reflects a high level of environmental and social consciousness combined with global cooperation for sustainable development. This scenario is characterized by rapid economic growth and movement toward a service and information economy. It also assumes reductions in materials intensity and the introduction of clean and resource‐efficient technologies combined with an emphasis on global solutions to economic, social and environmental stability. Since the IPCC released these scenarios in 2000, the world has followed a “business as usual” emissions pathway (Figure 3‐1). This most closely resembles the A2 scenario, although temperature changes over the next 30 to 40 years will be largely determined by past emissions. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 3.2.1 T While Ca are not u in the su experienc increases GCMs pro California 10.8oF by felt unifo in the su warming reasons t While his precipita increasin precipita precipita 2012), le summer, increased habitat d While te emission Taken to California 2009). W results ar islaus Integrat 2013 Temperatu lifornia’s ave uniform acros ummer, like ced the high s in peak flow oject that in a will increas y the end of t rmly across ummer than than coasta that regional storical tren tion over th ng annual p tion through tion pattern ading to incr when water d risks of flo estruction. emperature s scenarios, ogether, dow a before 205 While little ch re considerab ted Regional W Figu Source: IPC ure and Pr erage tempe ss the state. ely due to a est tempera ws in the last n the first 30 se by 0.9 to 3 this century California. M in the wint al areas (CN approaches nds in precip he last centu precipitation hout Souther s has been m reased strea r demands ar ooding, leve projections projected ch wnscaled GCM 50 (DWR, 20 hange in pre bly varied. T Water Manage ure 3‐1: IPCC C CC 2007 recipitatio rature has in The Central an increase ture increas t 50 years (DW 0 years of th 3.6oF (CAT, 2 (Cayan et al Models gener ter (CAT, 20 NRA, 2009). to addressin pitation do n ury (DWR, in Norther rn California more winter amflow in the re the greate e failure, sa exhibit high hanges in pr M results sh 006), with a ecipitation is he models in ement Plan Climate Chan on Changes ncreased by Valley has a in irrigatio es (DWR, 20 WR, 2008). he 21st centu 009) and ave 2006). Incr rally project 09) and inla These non‐u ng climate ch not show a s 2006), regio rn California over the las r precipitatio e winter and est. This incre aline water i h levels of ecipitation a ow little, if drying trend s projected b naccuracies l nge Scenarios s 1oF in the la actually expe on (CEC, 20 008). Many o ury, overall s erage tempe reases in tem that warmin and areas w uniform war hange are imp statistically s onal precipit a (DWR, 20 t 30 years (D on falling as d decreased eased stream intrusion an agreement are uncertain any, change d emerging a by the GCMs leave uncerta Chapte s ast one hund erienced a sli 08). Higher of the state’s summertime eratures will mperature ar ng will be gre will experien rming trend portant. significant c tation data 006) and de DWR, 2008). rain instead streamflow mflow variab nd flood‐ or across vari n, and theref e in average after 2050 (B s as a group ainty in the f er 3 Climate Ch dred years, tr ight cooling elevations s rivers have e temperatur increase by re not likely eater in Calif ce more ext ds are amon hange in av show a tren ecreasing an . A key chan d of snow (C in the spring bility could le drought‐ind ious models fore more va precipitatio BOR, 2011; C p, individual future projec hange 3-2 rends trend have e seen res in 3.6 to to be fornia treme g the erage nd of nnual nge in CNRA, g and ead to duced s and aried. on for CCSP, GCM ctions ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December regarding future pr 3.2.2 S In the las average A (Howat a more wid As the cli water sup Nevada s warming Additiona droughts most of average p more com expected 2009) wi 3.3 L In order t California IRWM Pl consider involves policies t and polic islaus Integrat 2013 g precipitatio ecipitation c ea‐level R st century, th April 1st sno and Tulaczyk despread (CC imate warms pply) is antic snowpack is scenarios ally, extreme , and heat w California (C precipitation mmonplace impacts on th wildfires e Fi Legislative to address cu a Departmen lans describ reducing GH framing the that have bee cies that were ted Regional W on trends. Cli onditions. Rise, Snowp he California owpack in th k, 2005; CCS CSP, 2008). s, the Sierra N cipated to co s projected t putting tha e events are waves. In con CNRA, 2009 n moving into (CBO, 2009 n water supp expected to c igure 3‐2: Pro Sou e and Pol urrently‐pre nt of Water R e, consider HG emissions IRWM anal en formed to e considered Water Manage imate projec pack Redu a coast has se he Sierra Ne P, 2008), an Nevada’s sno ontinue to sh to shrink by at number a e expected to ntrast, freezi While GC o the future, The comb plies and ec continue to i ojected Snow urce: Hopmans e icy Conte edicted clima Resources’ (D and address s when devel ysis and res address clim d as part of th ement Plan ctions therefo uction, and een a sea lev evada region nd wildfires a owpack (a pr hrink. Based y 30% betw as high as o become m ng spells are M projectio extreme pre bination of cosystems in ncrease in bo wpack Change et al. 2008 ext ate change im DWR’s) IRW s the effects loping and im sponse action mate change. his IRWM Pla ore imply an d Extreme vel rise of se n has decrea are becomin rimary stora d on simulati ween 2070 a 80% (Kahr more frequen e expected t ns may indi ecipitation ev drier and w n the Southw oth frequenc es in the Sier mpacts to Cal WM Grant Pro s of climate mplementing ns in the co . The followin an. Chapte increase in t e Events ven inches ( ased in the ng more freq age mechanis ions conduct and 2099, w rl and Rola nt, including to decrease i icate little, i vents are exp warmer wea western Unit cy and severi rra Nevada lifornia’s wa ogram Guide change on g projects. Pa ntext of Stat ng summariz er 3 Climate Ch the uncertain (DWR, 2008) last half ce quent, longer sm for Califor ted to date, S with drier, h and‐Holst, 2 wildfires, fl in frequency if any, chan pected to be ather compo ted States ( ity (CCSP, 20 ter resource lines require their region art of this pr te legislation zes the legisl hange 3-3 nty of The ntury r, and rnia’s Sierra higher 2008). loods, y over nge in ecome ounds CCSP, 009). es, the e that n, and rocess n and lation ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-4 Executive Order (EO) S‐3‐05 (2005) EO S-3-05, signed on June 1, 2005 by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, is a key piece of legislation that has laid the foundation for California’s climate change policy. This legislation recognized California’s vulnerabilities to the impacts of climate change, including vulnerabilities of water resources. EO S-3-05 established three GHG reduction targets for California:  By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 California levels  By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 California levels  By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 California levels In addition to establishing GHG reduction targets for California, EO S-3-05 required the head Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to establish the Climate Action Team (CAT) for State agencies to coordinate oversight of efforts to meet these targets. As laid out in the EO, the CAT submits biannual reports to the governor and State legislature describing progress made toward reaching the targets. There are currently 12 sub-groups within CAT, one of which is the Water-Energy group (also known as WET-CAT). WET-CAT was tasked with coordinating the study of GHG effects on California’s water supply system, including the development of GHG mitigation strategies for energy consumption related to water use. Since the adoption of the Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan (see the following section), WET- CAT has been working on the implementation and analyses of six water-related measures identified in the Scoping Plan: 1. Water Use Efficiency 2. Water Recycling 3. Water System Energy Efficiency 4. Reuse Urban Runoff 5. Increase Renewable Energy Production 6. Public Goods Charge for Water Assembly Bill 32: The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (2006) Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, laid the foundation for California’s response to climate change. In 2006, AB 32 was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger to codify the mid-term GHG reduction target established in EO S-3-05 (reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020). AB 32 directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop discrete early actions to reduce GHG emissions by 2007, and to adopt regulations to implement early action measures by January 1, 2010. Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008) AB 32 required CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan to identify and achieve reductions in GHG emissions in California. The Climate Change Scoping Plan, adopted by CARB in December 2008, recommends specific strategies for different business sectors, including water management, to achieve the 2020 GHG emissions limit. Senate Bill 97 (2007) Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) recognized the need to analyze greenhouse gas emissions as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. SB 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop, and the Natural Resources Agency to adopt, amendments to the CEQA Guidelines to address the analysis and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. On December 31, 2009, the Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines and sent them to the California Office of Administrative Law for approval and filing with the Secretary of State ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-5 (http://www.ceres.ca.gov /ceqa/guidelines/). The CEQA Guidelines are not prescriptive; rather they encourage lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis, and maintain discretion with lead agencies to make their own determinations based on substantial evidence. Managing an Uncertain Future: Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for California’s Water (2008) DWR, in collaboration with the State Water Resources Control Board other state agencies, and numerous stakeholders, has initiated a number of projects to begin climate change adaptation planning for the water sector. In October 2008, DWR released the first state-level climate change adaptation strategy for water resources in the United States, and the first adaptation strategy for any sector in California. Entitled Managing an Uncertain Future: Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for California’s Water, the report details how climate change is currently affecting the state’s water supplies, and sets forth ten adaptation strategies to help avoid or reduce climate change impacts to water resources. Central to these adaptation efforts will be the full implementation of IRWM plans, which address regionally-appropriate management practices that incorporate climate change adaptation. These plans will evaluate and provide a comprehensive, economical, and sustainable water use strategy at the watershed level for California. Executive Order S‐13‐08 (2008) Given the potentially serious threat of sea level rise to California's water supply and coastal resources, and the subsequent impact it would have on our state's economy, population, and natural resources, Governor Schwarzenegger issued EO S-13-08 to enhance the state's management of climate impacts from sea level rise, increased temperatures, shifting precipitation, and extreme weather events. This order required the preparation of the first California Sea Level Rise Assessment Report (by the National Academy of Sciences) to inform the State as to how California should plan for future sea level rise; required all state agencies to consider a range of sea level rise scenarios for the years 2050 and 2100 in order to assess potential vulnerabilities of proposed projects and, to the extent feasible, reduce expected risks and increase resiliency to sea level rise; and required the Climate Action Team to develop state strategies for climate adaptation, water adaptation, ocean and coastal resources adaptation, infrastructure adaptation, biodiversity adaptation, working landscapes adaptation, and public health adaptation. California Climate Adaptation Strategy (2009) In response to the passage of EO S-13-08, the Natural Resource Agency wrote the report entitled 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy (CAS) to summarize the best known science on climate change impacts in the state, to assess vulnerability, and to outline possible solutions that can be implemented within and across the state agencies to promote climate change resilience. The document outlined a set of guiding principles that were used in developing the strategy, and resulted in the preparation of 12 key recommendations as follows: 1. Appoint a Climate Adaptation Advisory Panel (CAAP) to assess the greatest risks to California from climate change and to recommend strategies to reduce those risks, building on the Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. 2. Implement the 20x2020 water use reductions and expand surface and groundwater storage; implement efforts to fix Delta water supply, quality and ecosystems; support agricultural water use efficiency; improve statewide water quality; improve Delta ecosystem conditions; and stabilize water supplies as developed in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. 3. Consider project alternatives that avoid significant new development in areas that cannot be adequately protected from flooding, wildfire, and erosion due to climate change. 4. Prepare, as appropriate, agency-specific adaptation plans, guidance or criteria. 5. For all significant state projects, including infrastructure projects, consider the potential impacts of locating such projects in areas susceptible to hazards resulting from climate change. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-6 6. The CAAP and other agencies will assess California’s vulnerability to climate change, identify impacts to state assets, and promote climate adaptation/mitigation awareness through the Hazard Mitigation Web Portal and My Hazards Website, as well as other appropriate sites. 7. Identify key California land and aquatic habitats that could change significantly during this century due to climate change. 8. The California Department of Public Health will develop guidance for use by local health departments and other agencies to assess mitigation and adaptation strategies, which include impacts on vulnerable populations and communities, and assessment of cumulative health impacts. 9. Communities with General Plans and Local Coastal Plans should begin, when possible, to amend their plans to assess climate change impacts, identify areas most vulnerable to these impacts, and develop reasonable and rational risk reduction strategies using the CAS as guidance. 10. State firefighting agencies should begin immediately to include climate change impact information into fire program planning to inform future planning efforts. 11. State agencies should meet projected population growth and increased energy demand with greater energy conservation and an increased use of renewable energy. 12. New climate change impact research should be broadened and funded. GHG Reporting Rule (2009) While California has taken the lead in climate change policy and legislation, there have been several recent developments at the federal level affecting climate change legislation. On September 22, 2009, USEPA released the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule (74FR56260, Reporting Rule), which requires reporting of GHG data and other relevant information from large sources and suppliers in the United States. Starting in 2010, facility owners that emit 25,000 metric tons of GHGs or more per year are required to submit to the USEPA an annual GHG emissions report with detailed calculations of facility GHG emissions. These activities will dovetail with the AB 32 reporting requirements in California. Senate Bill 375 (2008) The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill [SB] 375) was passed to enhance the State’s ability to reach its AB 32 goals by promoting good planning with a goal of more sustainable communities. SB 375 required the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles and 2020 and 2035 GHG emission targets for each region covered by one of the State’s 18 California’s metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). Each of the MPOs then prepares a sustainable communities strategy that demonstrates how the region will meet its GHG reduction target through integrated land use, housing and transportation planning. Once adopted, these sustainable communities strategies are incorporated into the region’s federally enforceable regional transportation plan. California Water Plan Update (2009) The California Water Plan (CWP) provides a collaborative planning framework for elected officials, agencies, tribes, water and resource managers, businesses, academia, stakeholders, and the public to develop findings and recommendations and make informed decisions for California's water future. The plan, updated every five years, presents the status and trends of California's water-dependent natural resources, water supplies, and agricultural, urban, and environmental water demands for a range of plausible future scenarios and evaluates different combinations of regional and statewide resource management strategies to reduce water demand, increase water supply, reduce flood risk, improve water quality, and enhance environmental and resource stewardship. Last updated in 2009, the CWP Update provided statewide water balances for eight water years (1998 through 2005), demonstrating the state’s water demand and supply variability. The updated plan built on the framework and resource management strategies outlined in the CWP Update 2005 promoting IRWM and improved statewide water and flood ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-7 management systems. The CWP Update 2009 provided the following 13 objectives to help achieve the CWP goals: 1. Expand integrated regional water management 2. Use and reuse water more efficiently 3. Expand conjunctive management of multiple supplies 4. Protect surface water and groundwater quality 5. Expand environmental stewardship 6. Practice integrated flood management 7. Manage a sustainable California Delta 8. Prepare Prevention, Response and Recovery Plans 9. Reduce energy consumption of water systems and uses 10. Improve data and analysis for decision-making 11. Invest in new water technology 12. Improve tribal water and natural resources 13. Ensure equitable distribution of benefits The plan projects an uncertain future with respect to population, land use, irrigated crop area, environmental water and background water conservation, water demands, and climate variability. The CWP Update 2009 presents 27 resource management strategies to provide a range of choices and building blocks in addressing future uncertainty. Finally, the CWP Update 2009 provided regional reports that summarized water conditions, provided a water balance summary, described regional water quality, and described water/flood planning and management on a hydrologic region basis. The regional summaries then provided a summary of challenges facing each of the hydrologic regions and provided future scenarios for the region. Climate Ready Utilities (2010) In the fall of 2009, the USEPA convened a Climate Ready Water Utilities (CRWU) Working Group under the National Drinking Water Advisory Council (NDWAC). This working group prepared a report that documented 11 findings and 12 recommendations relating to the development of a program enabling water and wastewater utilities to prepare long‐range plans that account for climate change impacts. The report, delivered to USEPA in 2010, also included an adaptive response framework to guide climate readiness activities, and the identification of needed resources and possible incentives to support and encourage utility climate readiness. This report resulted in the preparation of the USEPA’s Climate Ready Water Utilities Program and the development of tools and resources to support water and wastewater utilities in their planning. These tools and resources include:  Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (CREAT) – a software tool to assist utility owners and operators in understanding potential climate change impacts and in assessing the related risks to their utilities.  Climate Ready Water Utilities Toolbox – a searchable toolbox that contains resources that support all states of the decision process, from basic climate science through integration of mitigation and adaptation into long‐term planning.  Adaptation Strategies Guide – an interactive guide to assist utilities in gaining a better understanding of what climate‐related impacts they may face in their region and what adaptation strategies can be used to prepare their system for those impacts.  Climate Ready Water Utilities and Climate Ready Estuaries – USEPA initiative working to coordinate their efforts and support climate change risk assessment and adaptation planning. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-8 National Water Program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change (2012) The USEPA has prepared and released its Draft National Water Program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change to address climate change impacts on water resources and the USEPA’s water programs. The report identifies core programmatic elements of the strategy in the form of programmatic visions, goals and strategic actions, with each long‐term vision (or outcome) documented with an identified set of goals that reflect the same long‐term timeframe as the vision and several strategic actions to be implemented in the next three to eight years to pursue the longer‐term goals and visions. The draft report also includes ten guiding principles for implementing the strategy outlined in the vision, goals and strategic actions and recommendations for cross‐cutting program support. 3.4 Regional Climate Change Projections and Impacts The East Stanislaus IRWM region lies within the San Joaquin River Hydrologic Region and contains the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and San Joaquin Rivers and Dry Creek. The Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced Rivers are all tributaries to the San Joaquin River with the Tuolumne having the largest watershed in the San Joaquin River system (Epke, et al., 2010). Modesto Irrigation District and Turlock Irrigation District operate one hydroelectric facility (the Don Pedro Hydroelectric Project) with an online capacity of 203 MW on the Tuolumne River. The New Don Pedro Reservoir has a capacity of 2.03 million AF. Merced Irrigation District operates three hydroelectric facilities in the region with an online capacity of 108 MW, as well as two dams (New Exchequer Dam and McSwain Dam) with a total water storage capacity of over 1 million AF. There is hydroelectric generation on the North Fork of the Stanislaus River, however this facility is operated by Calaveras County Water District and is outside the East Stanislaus Region. New Melones Reservoir is the major water supply reservoir on the Stanislaus River with a capacity of 2.4 million AF. 3.4.1 Recent Regional Studies and Research At present, all major tributaries to the San Joaquin River are being studied with respects to anticipated impacts from climate change. Studies currently underway include:  Changes in snow cover patterns in the Sierra Nevada (University of Washington);  The role of atmospheric rivers in extreme events in the Sierra Nevada (USGS);  Impacts of climate changes on soil properties and habitats in the Sierra Nevada (UC‐Merced and USGS); and  Study of the effects of climate change on hydrology and stream temperatures in the Merced and Tuolumne River watersheds (Santa Clara University). In general, these studies are multi‐year endeavors and are either in progress or have yielded data that are currently being evaluated. While preliminary study reports appear to support other climate change impact observations and modeling simulations, the final published conclusions of these studies are, for the most part, not currently available. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-9 3.4.3 Climate Change Impacts on Surface Water East Stanislaus Region Relation to Local Rivers The East Stanislaus Region is bound on the north by the Stanislaus River and on the south by the Merced River. Dissecting the region are Dry Creek and the Tuolumne River, and toward the western edge of the regional boundary is the San Joaquin River. Multiple cities and agencies/districts rely on surface water as part of their overall supply portfolio. The City of Modesto relies on Tuolumne River surface water purchased wholesale from Modesto Irrigation District (MID), and the proposed expanded and Regional Surface Water Supply Project will expand this reliance for the cities of Modesto, Turlock, and Ceres. MID and Turlock Irrigation District (TID) rely predominantly on their Tuolumne River water rights to provide irrigation to their customers as well as (currently for MID) potable water for retail providers. Oakdale Irrigation District depends predominantly on their surface water rights on the Stanislaus River, while Merced Irrigation District similarly relies on water from the Merced River. And just as importantly, all these rivers flow to the San Joaquin River and to the Sacramento‐San Joaquin Delta, a resource that much of California relies on. Potential Effects of Climate Change on the Rivers A study was completed in mid‐2010 to evaluate the potential impact of climate change on California’s major rivers. As described in Hydrologic Response and Watershed Sensitivity to Climate Warming in California’s Sierra Nevada (Null, et. al., 2010), the differential hydrologic responses of 15 west‐slope Sierra Nevada watersheds in California to climate change were evaluated. The Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced River Watersheds were three of the watersheds included in this analysis; Figure 3‐3 shows the watersheds evaluated in the 2010 study. The Sierra Nevada mountain range is a water source for much of California, including the East Stanislaus Region. Snowmelt from the mountains feed the Stanislaus and Merced Rivers, as well as the Tuolumne River, one of the primary water supply sources for the region. The Water Evaluation and Planning System (WEAP21) model, developed by the non‐profit Stockholm Environmental Institute, was used by the University of California, Davis, Center for Watershed Sciences to develop an unimpaired hydrologic model of the Sierra Nevada to explicitly simulate intra‐basin hydrologic dynamics to better understand localized sensitivity to climate warming. The model is a climate‐ forced rainfall‐runoff model that covers the area from the crest of the Sierra Nevada to the floor of the Central Valley. Incremental climate warming alternatives were developed with uniform increases in air temperature of 2oC, 4oC, and 6oC to evaluate impacts on regional water systems. During these evaluations, only air temperatures were increased while other variables remain the same. Due to uncertainty regarding the change of precipitation in the future due to climate change, historic hydrology was used with a modeled period of 1981 to 2001. The modeled period covers a wide range of climatic variability including the wettest year on record, the flood year of record and a prolonged drought, 1983, 1997, and 1988‐1992, respectively. The WEAP21 model was used to determine changes in mean annual flow (MAF), centroid timing (CT) and low‐flow duration (LFD) for each of the studied watershed. The results concluded, in general, that the anticipated hydrologic changes from climate change to the watersheds on the western edge of the Sierra Nevada mountains are not uniform and therefore risks to water resources are not uniform and are watershed‐specific. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December The Sierr from Ma thunders with the inches a The aver Tuolumn watershe watershe islaus Integrat 2013 Source: N ra Nevada ge ay to Octobe torms, while snowline at year, but it rage rainfall e and Merc ed, is present eds are show Ta Watersh Stanisla Tuolum Merce Source: N ted Regional W Figure 3 ull et al, 2010. nerally has a er. The dry e the wet sea t approximat can be highl l in the thr ed River wa ted in Table 3 n in Table 3‐ ble 3‐1: Phys hed Area (acres aus 578,22 mne 980,83 d 663,19 ull et al, 2010. T Water Manage 3‐3: West‐slop a cool, wet se season has ason is chara tely 3,200 fe ly dependen ree watersh atersheds), i 3‐1. Water r sical Characte a s) Me Precip (inches 27 45 37 43 95 41 Table 1. ement Plan pe Sierra Nev eason from N infrequent acterized as h eet. During th t on elevatio eds within in addition t resource ben eristics of Wa ean itation s/year) Pre (i 5.6 25 3.3 17 1.1 19 vada Watersh November to precipitatio having precip he wet seaso on, latitude a the East St to other phy efits (i.e. hyd atersheds wit ecipitation Range in/year) 5.5 – 66.2 7.1 – 68.0 9.7 – 62.7 Chapte heds April and a w on, except fo pitation fall on, precipita and local we tanislaus Re ysical chara droelectric ge thin Region Elevation Ra (ft.) 692 – 11,54 803 – 13,08 803 – 13,08 er 3 Climate Ch warm, dry se or high elev as snow and ation averag eather condi egion (Stani cteristics of eneration) fo ange 46 84 87 hange 3-10 eason vation d rain, es 43 tions. slaus, each or the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-11 Table 3‐2: Watersheds’ Water Resource Benefits Watershed Hydropower Facilities FERC Relicenses (next 40 years) Total Water Storage Capacity (TAF) No. of Dams ( > 1TAF) Wild and Scenic Rivers Stanislaus 12 7 2,842 12 ‐ Tuolumne 6 1 2,717 9 134 Merced 3 2 1,042 2 197 Source: Null et al, 2010. Table 2. Mean Annual Flow was the first parameter modeled using the WEAP21 model. MAF from the Sierra Nevada is vital to future water supply for the region, as well as to hydropower generation and aquatic ecosystems. Due to the increases in temperature and evapotranspiration associated with climate change, the overall trend in the watersheds modeled is a reduction of MAF as a result of increased air temperatures. Results of the modeling of the 15 watersheds indicated that for 2oC, 4oC, and 6oC temperature increases, MAF would be reduce by an average and respectively. A summary of the reduction in average annual flow for the three watersheds within the East Stanislaus Region due to the varied temperature increases modeled are presented in Table 3‐3. Overall, watersheds in the northern portion of the Sierra Nevada had greater reductions in MAF than other regions of the Sierra Nevada. Reductions in MAF will impact water supplies for urban, agricultural and environmental water uses. Table 3‐3: MAF by Climate Alternative and Watershed Watershed Annual Average Flow (TAF) % Reduction from Baseline Baseline 2oC 4oC 6oC 2oC 4oC 6oC Stanislaus 1,266 1,235 1,201 1,163 2.4% 5.1% 8.1% Tuolumne 1,982 1,946 1,908 1,868 1.8% 3.7% 5.8% Merced 1,093 1,031 1,031 1,003 3.0% 5.6% 8.2% Source: Null et al, 2010. Table 5. TAF – Thousand Acre‐Feet Runoff centroid timing (CT), the date at which the total annual runoff at the outlet of each watershed has passed, was also simulated for the 15 studied watersheds using the WEAP21. CT is mostly driven by snowmelt such that watersheds with lower elevations that do not reach the crest of the Sierra Nevada (e.g. Bear, Cosumnes, Calaveras Rivers) experience small changes in runoff CT as they receive less precipitation in the form of snow fall and therefore have less snowmelt. The watersheds with very high elevations (e.g. Kern River) maintain cooler air temperatures later in the year, so although there would be reduced snowfall as a result of climate warming (due to increased temperatures), the snowmelt continued late into the spring resulting in a minimal change to runoff CT. The Stanislaus River had the greatest change in CT from the baseline conditions of all watersheds in the ES IRWM Region. Under baseline conditions, CT was estimated to occur on March 27th, but under 2oC, 4oC, and 6oC temperature increases, timing was estimated to occur March 10th, February 24th, and February 14th, respectively (see Figure 3‐4). The San Joaquin, Mokelumne, Kings, and Merced Rivers also had shifts in timing of about five to six weeks earlier in the year with a 6oC temperature increase. In general, for every 2oC increase in temperature, average CT occurred nearly ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 2 weeks River. In in snowm Fig Source: Nul Base case – T2 – 2oC tem T4 – 4oC tem T6 – 6oC tem The final (LFD), or discharge water ye weeks. The Mok changes i week of watershe islaus Integrat 2013 earlier. The summary, th melt and CT. gure 3‐4: Ave ll et al, 2010 – F – baseline scena mperature incr mperature incr mperature incr parameter m r the numbe e divided by ar. Also, in o kelumne, Tuo in average LF LFD for each ed for the thr ted Regional W average tim he Stanislaus rage Centroid Figure 6, page 8 ario ease ease ease modeled for w er of weeks total dischar order to qua olumne, Ame FDs from ba h 2oC increa ree temperat Water Manage ming for the T s, Tuolumne d Timing by W 8 FEA – Fe YUB – Y BAR – B AMR – A COS – Co watersheds with low fl rge for the w alify as LFD, erican and S seline condit se in temper ure increase ement Plan Tuolumne Ri and Merced Watershed an eather Yuba Bear American osumnes in the study low conditio ater year is l , there has t Stanislaus Ri tions with ea rature. The s modeled ar iver was abo watersheds nd Climate Sc MOK – Mokelu CAL – Calaver STN – Stanislau TUO – Tuolum MER – Merced using the W ons. Low fl less than 1% to be at leas iver watersh ach experien changes in re shown in Chapte out the same may have si cenario (nort umne SJN as KN us KAW mne TUL d KRN WEAP21 was l low weeks a % of the total st three cons heds had the ncing approx average ann Figure 3‐5. er 3 Climate Ch e as the Stani ignificant cha th to south) – San Joaquin NG – Kings W – Kaweah L – Tule N – Kern low flow dur are when w discharge fo secutive low e most signif imately one nual LFD for hange 3-12 islaus anges ration weekly r that w flow ficant more r each ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December F Source: Nul Base case – T2 – 2oC tem T4 – 4oC tem T6 – 6oC tem A numbe watershe external, Unimpair to total h comparis results of The wate MAF, so w were plac had more quadrant shown th quadrant acre‐feet could like islaus Integrat 2013 Figure 3‐5: A ll et al, 2010 – F – baseline scena mperature incr mperature incr mperature incr er of compar eds, which w natural, and red change in hydropower sons made fo f which are p ersheds on t were determ ced on the m e water stora t are those th he figure bel t (and theref (TAF) of tot ely affect irri ted Regional W verage Annu Figure 6, page 8 ario ease ease ease risons were was defined i d anthropoge n MAF (per s capacity, and or each wate presented in the right side mined to be m median values age capacity hat are valua low, the Stan fore conside al water stor gation and u Water Manage ual LFD by Wa 8 made in or n the study enic impacts square kilom d unimpaire rshed under Figure 3‐6, F e of the grap most vulnera s for all of th y and reducti able for wate nislaus wate ered vulnera rage and the urban water s ement Plan atershed and rder to meas as the in that affect it meter) to tota d change in r the 2oC, 4oC Figure 3‐7, an phs shown in able to climat e watershed ion in MAF. r storage an ershed is one able to clima model exhib storage as w d Climate Scen sure the intr nherent abilit ts state and al water stor LFD to mou C, and 6oC cli nd Figure 3‐8 n Figure 3‐6 te warming. s so that half The waters d most vulne e of three w ate changes) bited a signifi ell as aquatic Chapte nario (north rinsic vulner ty of the sys character in rage, unimpa untain meado imate warm 8, respective had the grea Value and v f of the rema heds that ar erable to clim watersheds in since it has ficant reducti c and riparia er 3 Climate Ch to south) rability of th stem to cope n space and t ired change ow area wer ing scenario ly. atest reducti vulnerability aining waters re in the top mate warmin n the upper s 2,282 thou ion in MAF, w an ecosystem hange 3-13 he 15 e with time.” in CT re the s, the ion in y axes sheds right ng. As right usand which ms. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Sour T2 – T4 – T6 – Changes Figure 3‐ changes watershe Figure 3‐ vulnerab and Stani these wat islaus Integrat 2013 Figure 3‐6: R rce: Null et al, 2 – 2oC temperatu – 4oC temperatu – 6oC temperatu to runoff CT Watershe in runoff ti eds. Therefo ‐7 are those le to runoff t islaus water tersheds bot ted Regional W Relative Vuln 2010 – Figure 11 ure increase ure increase ure increase T were comp eds that hav iming with ore, similar t e that are va timing chang sheds both g th exhibited s Water Manage nerability Bas 1, page 12 pared with h ve a high hy climate war to the MAF a aluable for h ges associate generate a su significant ch ement Plan sed on Total W ydropower c ydropower c rming repre analysis, wat hydropower ed with clim ubstantial am hanges in CT Water Storag capacity for capacity and sent the mo tersheds in r generation ate change. A mount of hyd . Chapte ge and Chang each waters d may exper ore valuable the upper r and have b As seen belo dropower an er 3 Climate Ch e in MAF shed, as show rience substa e and vulne ight quadran been found ow, the Tuolu nd simulation hange 3-14 wn in antial erable nts of to be umne ns for ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Fig Sou T2 T4 T6 LFD was evaluate environm reducing water qu are deple The resul with the valuable islaus Integrat 2013 gure 3‐7: Rela urce: Null et al, – 2oC temperat – 4oC temperat – 6oC temperat compared to the potentia mental and e flood in the uality. The st eted from me lts of the LFD previous co to ecosystem ted Regional W ative Vulnera 2010 – Figure 1 ture increase ture increase ture increase o mountain m al ecological ecosystem b e winter, pro tudy assume eadows, redu D analysis we omparisons, m benefits ( Water Manage ability Based 12, page 13 meadow area impacts that benefits such oviding aqua ed that as LF ucing downst ere graphed the watersh (based on p ement Plan on Total Ava a, used as a r t may result h as mainta atic and ripa FD increases, tream benefi in a manner heds in the resence of m ailable Hydro representativ t from climat aining summ arian habitat, , groundwat its of meadow r similar to th upper right mountain m Chapte opower and C ve for monta te change. M mer flow dur t, and improv er reserves a ws. hose previou quadrant ar meadows) an er 3 Climate Ch Change in CT ane ecosystem Meadows pr ring dry per ving downst and soil moi usly presente re those tha d which are hange 3-15 ms, to ovide riods, tream isture ed. As at are e also ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December considere Merced, a Figure 3 Sou T2 T4 T6 islaus Integrat 2013 ed vulnerabl and Tuolumn 3‐8: Relative urce: Null et al, – 2oC temperat – 4oC temperat – 6oC temperat ted Regional W le to lengthe ne watershed Vulnerability 2010 – Figure 1 ture increase ture increase ture increase Water Manage ened LFD as ds are all pre y Based on M 13, page 14 ement Plan s a result o esent in the u Meadow Area f the model upper right q Per Square K Chapte l simulations quadrant of F Kilometer an er 3 Climate Ch s. The Stani Figure 3‐8. nd Change in L hange 3-16 slaus, LFD ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-17 3.4.5 Climate Change Impacts on Groundwater East Stanislaus Region Relation to Groundwater Basins The East Stanislaus Region is underlain by the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. Many of the cities and water agencies/districts in the East Stanislaus Region depend solely or partly on groundwater as part of their water supply. The City of Modesto relies on groundwater, along with surface water purchased wholesale from Modesto Irrigation District, for its supplies, while the Cities of Ceres, Hughson and Turlock rely solely on groundwater. TID, MID, and OID use groundwater to augment their surface water supplies, while younger districts, such as the Eastside Water District, and areas outside major water service areas rely heavily on groundwater to meet their demands. Potential Effects of Climate Change on the Groundwater Basins Climate change impacts include more frequent and more severe droughts in the future. The droughts will equate to less precipitation and less recharge of the groundwater basins. With the lack of diversified water supplies in the region, the groundwater supplies may not be adequate to meet water demands and the greater the likelihood of overdrafting the groundwater basins and ultimately impacting water quality in the Modesto and Turlock subbasins. Currently, the East Stanislaus Region’s water supplies are not very diversified. Users in the region rely mostly on groundwater with some surface water, which is to be expanded in the future, but should more frequent droughts occur, the region’s water supplies may not be drought resistant. All of the impacts within the watersheds to the surface waters in the region will lead to similar impacts to the groundwater basins. The conjunctive management of groundwater and surface water in the future will be ever more important in the future and as climate change impacts increase. 3.5 Regional Water Resource Vulnerabilities Climate change is adding new uncertainties to already existing challenges in water resources planning within the East Stanislaus IRWM planning region. There is not a widely‐diversified water supply portfolio in the region. Water supplies are derived from multiple subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin (Modesto and Turlock Subbasins) and primarily from the Tuolumne River. Climate change will impact groundwater and surface water differently, but the Region’s vulnerabilities are the same regardless of the source:  Reduced surface water availability.  Reduced water supply reliability as a result of reduced groundwater recharge and runoff.  Potential increase in groundwater overdraft.  Declining water quality.  Loss of riparian habitat, wetlands and other sensitive natural communities.  Reduced hydroelectric generation capacity. The 2006 Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature examined the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) data and determined that climate change could affect California in the following ways, among others: 1. Rising sea levels along the California coastline, including the San Francisco and San Joaquin Delta due to ocean expansion. 2. Extreme heat conditions, such as heat waves and high temperatures and associated increases in frequency and duration. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-18 3. A reduction in the snowpack and stream flow from the Sierra Nevada, affecting water supplies. 4. An increase in the severity of winter storms, modifying peak stream flows and flooding. These changes will occur concurrently with significant population increases. Population in California is expected to increase from 34 million to 59 million people by 2040 (ICF Jones & Stokes, 2009). Historically, cities within the East Stanislaus Region have seen extremely rapid growth, so it is expected the regional population will see more population increases at a fast rate. Primary water users in the East Stanislaus IRWM region include urban users, agriculture, and the environment. Water supplies include both groundwater and surface water, with groundwater coming from the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin and surface water being diverted primarily from the Tuolumne Rivers. Declining Sierra Nevada snowpack, earlier runoff, and reduced spring and summer streamflows will likely affect surface water supplies and shift reliance to groundwater resources, which are already on the verge of being overdrafted in some places. This will, in turn, affect critical natural resource issues in the region, such as agricultural land conversion, population growth, air, water and soil quality concerns, and loss of habitat land. Other anticipated regional impacts resulting from climate change (increased air temperatures and variable precipitation) include changes to water quality; increased flooding, wildfires and heat waves; and impacts to ecosystem health. Earlier springtime runoff will increase the risk of winter flooding as capturing earlier runoff to compensate for future reductions in snowpack would take up a large fraction of the available flood protection space, forcing a choice between winter flood prevention and maintaining water storage for summer and fall dry‐period use. Under the ‘business‐as‐usual’ climate change scenario (A2), wildfires could increase by 100% or more by the end of the century (CNRA, 2009). Some of these impacts on water resources management are already being observed within the region. The identified vulnerabilities within the East Stanislaus Region are summarized in Table 3‐4 and further described in the following sections. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-19 Table 3‐4: East Stanislaus Region Climate Change Vulnerabilities Vulnerability Description Water Demand Vulnerable to increased agricultural demands due to longer growing season, increased temperatures and evapotranspiration rates, and more frequent/severe droughts. Vulnerable to increased urban and commercial, industrial, and institutional (CII) demand due to increased outside temperatures. Water Supply and Quality Vulnerable to decreased snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, shifts in timing of seasonal runoff, increased demands creating groundwater overdraft, degraded surface and groundwater quality resulting from lower flows, exaggerated overdraft conditions, a reduction of meadows which can provide contaminant reduction, and more frequent/severe droughts and storm events increasing turbidity in surface supplies. Flood Management More severe/flashier storm events and earlier springtime runoff leading to increased flooding, and a reduction of meadows which help reduce floods in the winter. Hydropower Vulnerable to increased customer demand combined with changes in timing of seasonal runoff and flashier storm systems affecting reservoir storage. Ecosystem and Habitat Vulnerable to decreased snowpack, more frequent/severe droughts and wildfires, shift in seasonal runoff, increased low flow periods and increased water temperatures (degraded water quality). 3.5.1 Water Demand Land use patterns in the East Stanislaus Region are dominated by agricultural uses, including animal confinement (dairy and poultry), grazing, forage, row crops, and nut and fruit trees, all of which rely heavily on water purveyors/districts and private groundwater and surface water supply sources. In general, irrigation water demand varies based on precipitation, and may or may not increase under future climate change conditions. Groundwater pumping is anticipated to increase as more irrigators and agricultural water users turn to groundwater to meet crop water requirements and farming needs (depending on surface water availability), and groundwater salinity increases with decreasing precipitation percolating to groundwater as a result of flashier and more variable precipitation events (Schoups et al., 2005). The effects of increased air temperatures on agriculture will include faster plant development, shorter growing seasons, changes to reference evapotranspiration (ET) and possible heat stress for some crops. In addition, fruit crops are more climate‐sensitive than other crop types and may require additional water as the climate warms. Therefore, more water may be necessary to maintain yield and quality in future years of apricot or peach crops, for example, in the East Stanislaus Region. If more water is required to maintain yield, and combined with potentially reduced supplies, the agricultural community may respond to these climate‐induced changes primarily by increasing the acreage of land fallowing and retirement, augmenting crop water requirements by groundwater pumping, improving irrigation efficiency, and shifting to high‐value and salt‐tolerant crops (Hopmans et al., 2008). However, agricultural impacts resulting from climate changes are anticipated to be significant as Stanislaus County agricultural production had a value of around $9 billion in 2011 (Stanislaus County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office, 2011). An example of potential impacts is on dairy production. Heat stress can have a variety of effects on livestock, including reduced milk production and reproduction in dairy cows (Valtorta, 2002). Based on modeling conducted by Hayhoe et al. and presented in their paper entitled Emissions pathways, climate change and impacts on California (Hayhoe et al., 2004), rising temperatures were found to ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-20 reduce milk production by as much as 7 to 10% under the B1 scenario and by 11 to 22% under the A1 scenario. With the exception of the City of Modesto, all urban users in the East Stanislaus Region depend solely on groundwater for their potable supplies. As noted above, climate change conditions may result in increased groundwater pumping by agricultural water users, and on a smaller scale for landscape irrigation, putting greater stress on the underlying groundwater subbasins and increasing competition for limited supplies. Additionally, increased variability in precipitation events and higher temperatures are expected to reduce groundwater recharge by reducing the amount of snowpack recharge that may occur and by increasing evaportranspiration (Dettinger and Earman, 2007). These too will result in greater completion for limited groundwater resources. Other seasonal water uses, such as cooling demands, are also expected to increase as a result of climate change (DWR, 2008; CNRA, 2009). Identification of industrial cooling towers and similar facilities will help the region gain better understanding of the potential increases in seasonal demands. In general, groundwater demands are highest during dry years, likely due to the fact that groundwater is primarily used for agricultural and landscape irrigation and as urban suppliers shift to groundwater as surface water supplies decrease; and these effects will be greater in Regions heavily dependent on groundwater for water supply. The seasonal variability of water demands is projected to increase with climate change as droughts become more common and more severe (DWR, 2008). 3.5.2 Water Supply and Quality The East Stanislaus IRWM Region’s water supplies include groundwater, local surface water, and imported surface water from the Central Valley Project (CVP). In general, impacts on urban users will be a function of behavioral response of individuals and organizations as well as hydrology (Hayhoe et al., 2004). Additional water storage will be required to ensure water supply reliability. Without additional storage, it will be difficult to capture and retain the extra runoff for use after April 1st without reducing the amount of flood storage space left in reserve. Both the need for empty storage for flood protection and the need for carryover storage for drought protection reflect the uncertainty about future weather conditions and the level of regional risk aversion (Hayhoe et al., 2004). Currently, approximately 75% of total water use statewide currently occurs between April and September when lawns and crops are being irrigated (Hayhoe et al., 2004). Decreased summertime flows will likely result in increased groundwater pumping (and potential overdraft conditions) due to increased groundwater to offset surface water shortages. Additionally, rising temperatures are projected to increase the frequency of heat waves, which could also lead to increased water use and further exacerbate low flow conditions (Hayhoe et al., 2004). Changes in water availability and timing will also affect the value of water rights statewide, as mid‐ and late‐season natural stream flow water rights become less valuable and the value of rights to stored water (which has a higher degree of reliability) increase in value. Senior users without access to storage could face unprecedented shortages due to reduced summertime flows (Hayhoe et al., 2004). These same changes would also affect the level of hydropower generation on the Merced River, especially in the summer, when hydropower generation is needed most to meet peak demand (Moser et al., 2012). Finally, climate change impacts may affect water quality in a multitude of ways.  Water quality can be impacted by both extreme increases and decreases in precipitation. Increases in storm event severity may result in increased turbidity in surface water supplies ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-21 while decreases in summertime precipitation may leave contaminants more concentrated in streamflows (DWR, 2008).  Higher water temperatures may exacerbate reservoir water quality issues associated with reduced dissolved oxygen levels and increased algal blooms (DWR, 2008). Water quality concerns not only impact drinking water supplies, but also environmental uses and wastewater treatment processes. The altered assimilative capacity of receiving waters may increase treatment requirements, and collection systems could be inundated in flooding events. More prevalent wildfires could result in aerial deposition and runoff of pollutants into water bodies, impacting surface water quality. Declining Sierra Nevada snowpack, earlier runoff and reduced spring and summer stream flows will likely affect surface water supplies and shift reliance to groundwater resources, which are already overdrafted in many places. Groundwater Supply and Quality The East Stanislaus Region overlies two groundwater subbasins within the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins. The Modesto Groundwater Subbasin is the primary source of water for many of the urban and private, rural domestic water systems overlying the groundwater basin. Groundwater levels in the subbasin decreased in the eastern and central Modesto area until the 1990s when a series of wet years occurred and the regional surface water treatment plan was completed, transferring a portion of the City’s demand to surface water. In recent years, groundwater levels in the subbasin have recovered and generally remain steady. Municipal (City of Modesto service area) and agricultural groundwater use (MID service area) in 2009 was estimated to be 55,779 acre‐feet per year or AFY (MID, 2012). This number is likely higher due to reliance on groundwater for supply in areas outside the public water system service area. Groundwater quality in the Modesto Subbasin ranges from mostly good in the unconfined aquifer to poor in some areas of the confined aquifer (MID, 2012). Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in groundwater in the eastern two‐thirds of the basin is generally less than 500 mg/L, with a range from 90 mg/L to 700 mg/L. High TDS (2,000 mg/L) groundwater is present beneath the MID service area at a depth of about 400 feet in the west to about 800 feet in the east. This degraded water originates in marine sediments underlying the San Joaquin Valley. The shallowest high TDS groundwater (TDS greater than 1,000 mg/L) occurs around 120 feet below ground within a 5‐ to 6‐ mile zone parallel to the San Joaquin River. (MID, 2012). The Turlock Groundwater Subbasin is also the primary source of water from most of the urban and private, rural domestic water systems overlying the subbasin. Municipal groundwater use for 2006, the last year the cumulative municipal pumping data were available for the subbasin, was approximately 46,000 AFY (TGBA, 2008), all of which was extracted from the confined aquifer. In addition, rural and small private residential groundwater use is estimated at 5,500 AFY while TID groundwater extractions are estimated to be 84,174 AFY (TID, 2012), and private pumping within TID is approximately 22,000 AFY (TGBA, 2008). Agricultural lands to the east of TID’s irrigation service area rely entirely on groundwater for water supply. Farmers within Eastside and Ballico‐ Cortez Water Districts typically use an estimated 180,000 AFY of groundwater for irrigation (TGBA, 2008). Agricultural lands located along the river margins and east of Eastside and Ballico‐Cortez Water Districts typically pump an estimated 115,000 AFY. However, similar to the Modesto Subbasin, the overall volume of groundwater extracted in a given year is likely higher than estimated pumpage due to reliance on groundwater for supply in areas outside the public water system service areas. Historically, groundwater elevations have been relatively steady throughout the Turlock Subbasin, which relies on surface water supplies from the Tuolumne River for recharge. The subbasin has ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-22 historically experienced seasonal fluctuations in groundwater levels and declines occurring during dry cycles, with groundwater levels rebounding in wetter years. On the eastern side of the basin, where surface water supplies are not available, a cone of depression began forming in the 1970s, resulting in groundwater declines on the eastern side of TID. The cone of depression appeared to have stabilized in the 1990s and early part of this century as growers on the east side converted to more advanced irrigation practices, reducing runoff and improving irrigation efficiencies. However, groundwater level declines appear to have resumed in the area in recent years. Local agencies are concerned that groundwater levels will continue to decline as additional range land is converted to groundwater irrigated agriculture in the foothill areas (TGBA, 2008). In terms of groundwater quality, shallow groundwater in the Turlock Subbasin does not meet drinking water standards but can be used for non‐potable uses. Groundwater from deeper aquifers is generally of high quality (TGBA, 2008). For both subbasins, the variation in precipitation and streamflow in the future will influence how and when the groundwater subbasins are recharged in the East Stanislaus Region. Surface Water Supply and Quality The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board compiled the 303(d) list of impaired water bodies within the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins that suffer significant water quality impairments from a variety of pollutants and must be addressed through the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads The Lower Stanislaus River, the Lower Tuolumne River (from Don Pedro Reservoir to the San Joaquin River), and the Lower Merced River (from McSwain Reservoir to the San Joaquin River) are included on this list. Irrigated agriculture has been identified as an anthropogenic source of pesticides, nitrate and sediment loading in surface water bodies. Additional sources of sediment loading include erosion, mining, and grazing, among others. Current climate change scenarios project lower stream flows and higher agricultural water use that would pose significant challenges in implementing the defined and meeting water quality goals. As the occurrence of wildfires increases, additional sediment would be deposited into water bodies, and turbidity would likely become more of a concern. Sediment and pollutants collected from upstream could be concentrated leading to water quality issues and the disturbance of critical habitats. In addition, earlier snowmelt and more intense precipitation events will likely increase turbidity in source waters. Shifts in the timing of runoff have already been observed; over the last one hundred years the fraction of total annual runoff occurring between April and July has decreased by 23% in the Sacramento Basin and by 19% in San Joaquin Basin (CEC, 2008). Increased flooding may lead to sewage overflows, resulting in higher pathogen loading in the source waters. Increased water temperatures and shallower reservoirs may result in more prevalent eutrophic conditions in storage reservoirs, increasing the frequency and locations of cyanobacterial blooms. These potential changes could result in challenges for surface water treatment plants and require additional monitoring to quantify changes in source water quality and better control of finished water quality (CUWA, 2007). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-23 Imported Surface Water Supply Imported supplies from the Central Valley Project (CVP) are delivered to users in Stanislaus County through contracts with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) (Stene, 1994). Much of this water is delivered via the Delta‐Mendota Canal to users outside the East Stanislaus IRWM Region though a small portion is utilized by Oakdale Irrigation District. Due to delivery reductions by the USBR, the long‐term average annual available CVP supply for agricultural and municipal and industrial (M&I) usage is estimated to be 53% and 83% of the contracted amount, respectively. On December 15, 2008, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) released its final Biological Opinion on CVP and State Water Project (SWP) Operations Criteria and Plan (OCAP); the results of this study could also impact the long‐term availability of CVP supplies. As a result of the increased temperature, DWR anticipates a 20% to 40% decrease in the state’s snowpack by mid‐century (DWR, 2008). This reduction in snowpack impacts the SWP, CVP and water systems that rely on the Colorado River. The SWP 2009 Delivery Reliability Report (DWR 2010c) indicates that Delta exports may be reduced by up to 25% by the end of the century. 3.5.3 Flood Management Sea level rise is not a direct potential climate change impact to the East Stanislaus Region, but if sea level rise occurs, the salinity of the Delta may increase, impacting reservoir operations in the Region and resulting in the potential need for freshwater releases from tributaries of the Lower San Joaquin River, including the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced Rivers. In addition to increased coastal flooding resulting from sea level rise, severity of non‐coastal flooding will also increase in the future due to climate change. Extreme precipitation events will become more common, increasing the likelihood of extreme weather events and floods. Rising snowlines will also increase the surface area in watersheds receiving precipitation as rain instead of snow (DWR, 2008), thereby increasing storm‐related runoff. Flooding has been a major problem throughout the history of Stanislaus County, particularly with the encroachment of urban growth into flood plains. Major floods have occurred in 1861, 1938, 1950, 1966 and 1969. Significant flooding also occurred in 1983 along the San Joaquin River, in isolated stretches of the Tuolumne River, and on smaller creeks such as Salado Creek (Stanislaus County, 2013). These events could increase under anticipated future conditions. In general, a majority of the San Joaquin River’s 100‐year floodplain (in this stretch of the San Joaquin River) is within the East Stanislaus Region, but overall, not much of the East Stanislaus Region is described as being within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated 100‐year floodplain. Low‐lying disadvantaged communities (DACs) will be particularly vulnerable to flooding damages causing temporary and/or permanent displacement. Some of the DACs within the East Stanislaus Region lie within the 100‐year floodplain as shown in the following figure. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 3.5.4 E The San juncture located w diversity of the Ale is Dos Ri Partners, federal, s floodplain Tuolumn droughts Climate c in vegeta declines evergreen et al., 20 capacity and allow freshwate cause sha Valley su islaus Integrat 2013 Ecosystem Joaquin Rive of the San Jo west of the Ea encompasse of wildlife n eutian cacklin ios Ranch. T and is a c state and lo n, including e River. The , and floodin change impac ation distrib in alpine/su n conifer for 004). Increa to resist pes wing them t er temperat arp reductio bpopulation ted Regional W Figur and Habit er National W oaquin, Tuolu ast Stanislau es over 7,000 native to Calif ng geese. Loc This historic ollaborative ocal partners three miles e habitats, an ng and may b cts on the en bution and ubalpine for rests to mixe sing stress st attacks wh to expand th ures which, ons in salmon s (Ackerman Water Manage e 3‐9: DACs w tat Wildlife Refu umne and St us Region, a p 0 acres of rip fornia’s Cent cated adjace property w restoration s. Dos Rios s of riverfron nd the speci e in danger ( nvironment w increases ec rests are ex ed evergreen on ecosyste hile increasin heir range. along with n population n and Stanton ement Plan within 100‐ye uge anislaus Rive portion of the parian woodl tral Valley an nt to the Ref as acquired project hea s Ranch con nt on the Sa ies that inha (CCSP, 2009) within the Ea cosystem st xpected to o n conifer fore ems resultin ng pest survi Increasing t changes in ns and incre n, 2011). ear Floodplai WR) is located ers. Although e refuge is lo ands, wetlan nd has played fuge and with by the Tuol aded by the nsists of 1,6 an Joaquin R abit them, ar ast Stanislau tress. Speci occur, in ad ests and exp g from risin ival rates, ac temperatures seasonal str ased risks o Chapte in d in Stanisla h the majori ocated within nds and gras d a major ro hin the East lumne River e two non‐p 00 acres of River and th re susceptib s Region also ifically, tem ddition to m ansion of gr ng temperat ccelerating th s will also r ream flows, of extinction er 3 Climate Ch aus County a ty of the refu n the Region slands that h le in the reco Stanislaus R r Trust and rofits with f biologically hree miles o le to heat w o include cha mperature‐ind major shifts asslands (Ha tures will re heir develop result in wa are project for some Ce hange 3-24 at the uge is . The host a overy Region River other y rich n the waves, anges duced from ayhoe educe pment armer ted to entral ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-25 Projected hotter and possibly drier future conditions will also increase the frequency and extent of wildfires, worsen pest outbreaks, and stress precarious sensitive populations. Wildfires will play a significant role in converting woodlands to grassland as decreases in moisture shift the competitive balance in favor of the more drought‐tolerant grasses and increases in grass biomass provide more fine fuels to support more frequent fires. Increased wildfires also favor grasses, which re‐establish more rapidly than slower growing woody life forms after burning (Hayhoe et al., 2004) Finally, should there be decreases in precipitation, both surface water and groundwater quality could be affected. Warmer surface water would result in lower dissolved oxygen concentrations, which can directly impact aquatic and riparian habitats. Decreased precipitation and associated decreased groundwater percolation would result in increased dissolved concentrations of constituents in groundwater. 3.5.5 Hydropower Modesto Irrigation District and Turlock Irrigation District has been generating and delivering wholesale electric power from the Don Pedro Hydroelectric Project since 1923, with TID as the majority owner and operating partner. The powerhouse can generate up to 203 MW of electrical power from its four generators. Oakdale Irrigation District is a partner on the Tri‐Dam Project, which manages the Tulloch, Beardsley and Donnells Reservoirs on the Stanislaus River. The combined storage capacity of the three reservoirs is 230,400 AF, with a combined power generation of 81,000 kilowatts. New Melones Reservoir on the Stanislaus, New Don Pedro Reservoir on the Tuolumne and New Exchequer Reservoir on the Merced River, along with their reservoirs) are supplied primarily by snowmelt from the Sierra Nevada. Changing volumes of snowfall and snowpack in the Sierra Nevada and the changing seasonal melting patterns may require changes in dam operation. As the timing of snowmelt shifts in the spring, hydroelectric power generation may also shift to accommodate enhanced flood control operations. Additionally, increasing temperatures will also increase energy demands, especially during peak demand times (DWR, 2008). As previously described, the modeling completed as described in the Hydrologic Response and Watershed Sensitivity to Climate Warming in California’s Sierra Nevada, showed that runoff centroid timing (CT) on the Merced River was 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 6 weeks earlier given the respective 2oC, 4oC, and 6oC increases in air temperature, respectively. Change in seasonal runoff timing may affect electrical generation capabilities, flood protection, water storage and deliveries. Hydropower is often generated during high demand periods, which may be compromised if facilities are forced to spill due to higher magnitude flows or to accommodate early arrival of flows (Null, et. al., 2010). 3.5.6 Other Climate change will also affect the Region in other ways, including impacting recreation and tourism industries (and therefore the Region’s economy). The Tuolumne River, along with the Merced River, is prominent waterways in Yosemite National Park, and communities of the park rely on this industry as part of its economy. Stressed environments and increased wildfire will put these natural resources at risk. Projections of decreased snowpack have the potential to affect the ski industry as the State’s 34 ski resorts are based between 6,500 and 8,200 feet, well into the elevations impacted by temperature increases. These same temperature increases will also delay the start of ski season and impact the economic viability of the industry (Hayhoe et al., 2004). 3.5.7 Prioritized Vulnerabilities The East Stanislaus Region’s vulnerabilities to anticipated climate changes were prioritized based on discussions with the East Stanislaus IRWM Steering Committee (SC) and Public Advisory ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-26 Committee (PAC) and considering regional understanding and sensitivities and identified regional goals and objectives. The prioritized vulnerabilities for the Region were as follows: 1. Water Supply/Water Quality 2. Flood Management Secondary priorities included ecosystems and habitat, water demand, and hydropower. The rationale behind the prioritization acknowledges that, while the groundwater basin appears to be relatively stable, it could easily slip into overdraft conditions, and that additional water supply reductions could induce this condition. Similarly, flooding and flood management is a major issue for the portion of the Region adjacent to the San Joaquin River, and flashier river/stream systems is only going to worsen this condition, create new flooding conditions at other locations, and significantly impact hydropower operations (as would significant changes in river flows resulting from earlier springtime runoff and/or lower annual flows). Increasing water demands will also make the water supply conditions worse. And finally, while ecosystem and habitat issues are important, they derive from the other issues/vulnerabilities water supply and quality, which is exacerbated by demand and flood issues), therefore ranking a lower vulnerability. 3.6 Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Global climate modeling carries a significant degree of uncertainty resulting from varying sensitivity to changes in atmospheric forcing (e.g. CO2, aerosol compounds), unpredictable human responses, and incomplete knowledge about the underlying geophysical processes of global change. Even though current scenarios encompass the “best” and “worst” cases to the greatest degree possible based on current knowledge, significant uncertainty associated with future global GHG emission levels remains, especially as timescales approach the end of the century. The historical data for calibrating GCMs is not available worldwide, and is spatially biased towards developed nations. Considering the great deal of uncertainty associated with climate change projections, a prudent approach to addressing climate change incorporates a combination of adaptation and mitigation strategies. Climate adaptation includes strategies (policies, programs or other actions) that bolster community resilience in the face of unavoidable climate impacts (CNRA and CEMA, 2012), where mitigation strategies include best management practices (BMPs) or other measures that are taken to reduce GHG emissions. The Prop 84 IRWM Guidelines require consideration of the California Water Plan (CWP) resource management strategies (RMSs) in identifying projects and water management approaches for the region. RMSs are being considered in the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process to meet the region’s objectives. Application of various RMSs diversifies water management approaches, and many of the RMSs apply to climate change adaptation and mitigation. Categories of applicable RMSs include:  Reduce Water Demand  Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers  Increase Water Supply  Improve Water Quality  Urban Runoff Management  Practice Resource Stewardship  Improve Flood Management  Other Strategies ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-27 Within each RMS category listed above, a variety of specific RMSs have been identified for the region. For example, reducing water demand can be accomplished through agricultural water use efficiency and/or urban water use efficiency. As described in the Climate Change Handbook for Regional Planning (CDM, 2011), not all of the RMSs directly apply to climate change adaptation or mitigation, but are directed at overall system resiliency, which improves a system’s resilience to the uncertain conditions climate change could bring. 3.6.1 Adaptation Strategies The following table summarizes the ability of individual RMSs to aid in climate change adaption. The application of the RMS that are applicable within the East Stanislaus Region as climate change adaptation strategies are described in the following sections. Reduce Water Demand Reducing existing and future water demands can reduce pressure on water sources of limited supply and help adapt to the potential climate change impacts of less precipitation, shifting of springtime snowmelt, and overall uncertainty. The Reduce Water Demand RMS includes both agricultural and urban water use efficiency. Opportunities for increased water conservation and water use efficiency measures for urban and agricultural water use are identified in multiple documents including the CWP Update, the Agricultural Efficient Water Management Practices, the California 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan (20x2020 Plan), and by the California Urban Water Conservation Council. These recommendations could potentially be incorporated into the existing framework already developed by cities and water agencies within the East Stanislaus Region. Performance metrics that could be used to measure the effectiveness of Reduce Water Demand adaptation include average water demand reduction per year and peak water demand reduction per month (CDM, 2011). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-28 Table 3‐5: Applicability of RMS to Climate Change Adaptation Resource Management Strategies Habitat Protection Flood Control Water Supply Reliability Additional Water Supply Water Demand Reduction Sea Level Rise Water Quality Protection Hydropower Reduce Water Demand Agricultural Water Use Efficiency    Urban Water Use Efficiency    Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers Conveyance‐Delta*       Conveyance‐Regional/Local      System Reoperation     Water Transfers   Increase Water Supply Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage     Desalination*   Precipitation Enhancement*   Recycled Municipal Water   Surface Storage‐CALFED*       Surface Storage‐Regional/Local       Improve Water Quality Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution    Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation    Matching Quality to Use    Pollution Prevention    Salt and Salinity Management     Urban Runoff Management    Practice Resource Stewardship Agricultural Lands Stewardship     Economic Incentives         Ecosystem Restoration      Forest Management     Land Use Planning and Management     Recharge Area Protection     Water‐dependent Recreation     Watershed Management        Improve Flood Management Flood Risk Management      Other Strategies Crop Idling for Water Transfers*    Dewvaporation or Atmospheric Pressure Desalination*  Fog Collection*  Irrigated Land Retirement*   Rainfed Agriculture*  Waterbag Transport/Storage Technology*      * RMS deemed inappropriate for the East Stanislaus IRWM Region at this time. See Chapter 5 of this IRWMP for more detail. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-29 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency The East Stanislaus Region is already implementing many agricultural water use efficiency efforts. For example, both MID and TID, the Region’s primary agricultural water suppliers, have identified and are currently implementing efficient water management practices (EWMPs) as part of their Agricultural Water Management Plan. The Agricultural Water Management Council (AWMC) suggests several EWMPs that include infrastructure upgrades and operational improvements in order to reduce water demand and maintain productivity. While many of these EWMPs may have already been implemented in the Region, there may be opportunities to further implementation of EWMPs such as:  Infrastructure Upgrade: Evaporation loss from irrigation ditches and canals is a function of temperature and other climate variables. Depending on different emission scenarios, the operation of these facilities may be impacted by climate change, leading to increased water loss. One of the AWMC EWMPs is to convert irrigation canals and ditches to piping. This water conservation method prevents evaporative losses, which will only increase as temperatures rise. This approach could help the East Stanislaus Region adapt to climate change by expanding water supplies and making existing water supplies less vulnerable to climate change impacts. Canal lining is identified as a less capital‐intensive method to reduce seepage into the ground, although it does not reduce water evaporation and does reduce groundwater recharge that occurs as a result of this seepage. Canal automation can increase water supply reliability and flexibility to deliver water at the time, quantity, and duration required by the grower, and can facilitate conversion to more efficient irrigation methods such as micro‐irrigation.  Water Management: Water suppliers and users must take advantage of new technologies and hardware to optimize management of water‐related infrastructure. Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems enable water managers to collect data to a centralized location and operate automated canals to achieve desired water levels, pressures or flow rate, and also increase the efficiency in reservoir operation. In addition, automated control will free water system operators from manual operation and allow them to plan, coordinate system operations, and potentially reduce costs. Such systems improve communications and provide for flexible water delivery, distribution, measurement, and accounting. On‐farm practices can also be improved. Furrow, basin, and border irrigation methods have been improved to ensure that watering meets crop water requirements while limiting runoff and deep percolation. Using organic or plastic mulch can reduce non‐ essential evaporation of applied water. Advanced irrigation systems include GIS, GPS and satellite crop and soil moisture sensing systems and can all improve overall farm water management. As previously noted, agricultural irrigation has been linked to groundwater recharge in the East Stanislaus Region; reductions in irrigation could result in a reduction in basin recharge. This linkage must be considered in the implementation of any management practice that may result in the reduction of agricultural irrigation. Urban Water Demand Reduction The 20x2020 Plan includes urban water conservation measures that can be employed to improve water use efficiency. According to the 20x2020 Plan, approximately one third of urban water use is dedicated to landscape irrigation; as such, the greatest potential for urban water use reduction is in reduced landscape irrigation. New landscapes could be designed to be efficient and suitable for the local climate, and existing high‐water‐using landscapes could be transformed into lower, more efficient alternatives. Weather‐based irrigation is a cost‐effective measure to improve landscape ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-30 watering efficiency. Irrigation restrictions can limit landscape irrigation to two days per week or less, encouraging climate‐appropriate landscapes and reducing over‐irrigation. The 20x2020 Plan also recommends mandating the landscape irrigation BMPs and requiring water‐efficient landscapes at all state‐owned properties (DWR, 2010b). Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers Water supply system operations need to be optimized in order to maximize efficiency. Existing infrastructure for regional and local conveyance, including facilities that connect to the CVP system, must be maintained and improved as their useful lives are reached. Well‐maintained conveyance infrastructure improves water supply reliability and enhances regional adaptability to climate change impacts. Addressing aging infrastructure, increasing existing capacity, and/or adding new conveyance facilities can improve existing conveyance systems and operational efficiency. Through changes in water supply system operations, the East Stanislaus Region may be able to adapt to less reliable water supplies and/or increased water demands by maintaining conveyance infrastructure, as well as adapting to climate change impacts on hydropower production, flooding, habitat, and water quality. The Region is currently investigating and implementing water transfers and interagency sales. Specifically, the City of Modesto and MID have an MOU formalizing sale of treated surface water to the City for use in lieu of groundwater. Additionally, the Cities of Modesto and Turlock are looking to develop and program to sell tertiary‐treated wastewater effluent to Del Puerto Water District for use in lieu of surface water supplies for irrigation. This will help the Region adapt to climate change by providing additional climate resilient water supplies. As such, transfers and sales can improve supply reliability when other supplies are projected to have reduced reliability due to climate change impacts. An example of a performance metric to quantify this RMS, Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers, includes amount of new supply created through regional water transfers and sales (CDM, 2011). Increase Water Supply As water demands increase due to longer growing seasons, higher temperatures, and longer droughts, and the future of existing water supplies sources becomes less certain, the East Stanislaus Region will need to enhance existing water supplies to meet demands. Increasing water supply can be accomplished through the implementation of conjunctive management of surface and groundwater supplies as well as through groundwater storage, recycled water use, and increased surface water storage, as appropriate. Diversifying the region’s water supply portfolio and adding drought‐resistant sources is an adaptation measure that will help address increased water demands and/or decreased supply reliability. Performance metrics for measuring the effectiveness of the Increase Water Supply RMS could include additional supply created, amount of potable water offset, and supply reliability (CDM, 2011). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-31 Conjunctive Management and Surface and Groundwater Storage Turlock Groundwater Basin Association (TGBA) developed and has been implementing the Turlock Groundwater Basin Draft Groundwater Management Plan, which promotes conjunctive surface water and groundwater management to improve the long‐term sustainability of the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin. The Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association has also recommended groundwater management and conjunctive use as a strategy in its Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan for the Modesto Subbasin for ensuring the long‐ term sustainability of the Modesto Groundwater Subbasin. Members of the are active members of both the TGBA and and as such, have recognized the potential benefits regional planning would create when considering surface water and groundwater management in the basin. The East Stanislaus Region should continue to investigate conjunctive management to increase surface and groundwater use, improve groundwater quality, and adapt to climate change. Increased storage and conjunctive use may increase resilience to shifting runoff patterns, providing more storage for early runoff, reducing or eliminating the potential climate change impacts on flooding and hydropower production, and offsetting decreases in snowpack storage. This strategy is valuable as weather patterns change in frequency and timing and more extreme events occur. Developing a project to provide additional local surface storage is a possible adaptation strategy for climate change impacts on water supply and associated reliability. Storage provides a way of adjusting a water system to altered peak streamflow timing resulting from earlier snowpack melting. Additional storage capacity could also help the East Stanislaus Region adapt to the anticipated increased precipitation variability. Increased surface storage could allow water managers to make real‐time decisions that are not available otherwise. It would also facilitate water transfers between basins from upstream reservoirs to receiving regions that have additional storage for the transferred water. Added storage provides greater flexibility for capturing surface water runoff, managing supplies to meet seasonal water demands, helping manage floods from extreme storm events, and adapt to extreme weather conditions such as droughts. In addition to new storage, agencies could continue considering developing additional water purchasing agreements to buy water from other agencies that own existing storage reservoirs with substantial water supplies. Rehabilitation and possible enlargement of existing dams and infrastructure can potentially eliminate the need for new reservoir storage. Finally, implementing conjunctive management and groundwater storage can provide benefits similar to additional surface storage, in addition to increased water management flexibility while also reducing groundwater overdraft. There is the potential to bank imported water, flood flows, runoff, recycled water, and/or desalinated water for dry seasons in groundwater basins. Conjunctive management is highly dependent on how well surface water and groundwater are managed as a single source to adapt to the climate system. Desalination Because the East Stanislaus Region is not a coastal region, desalinating seawater is not an option and therefore not a reasonable climate change adaptation strategy. Desalination of deep connate groundwater is a possibility; however, the potential for land subsidence and brine discharge pose significant challenges to implementing this as a cost‐effective adaptation strategy. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-32 Recycled Water Use The California Recycled Water Policy, developed by the State Water Resource Control Board in 2009, includes a goal of substituting as much recycled water for potable water as possible by the year 2030. Recycled water is a sustainable, climate resilient local water resource that could significantly help the East Stanislaus Region meet water management goals and objectives, and assist in meeting the seasonal water demands of agriculture. Water recycling also provides a local supply that generally uses less energy than other water supplies, helping to mitigate climate change impacts through associated GHG emissions. Recycled water could be used for agricultural and urban landscape irrigation in lieu of surface water and groundwater supplies. Improve Water Quality Improving drinking water treatment and distribution, groundwater remediation, matching water quality to use, pollution prevention, salt and salinity management, and urban runoff management can help improve surface and ground water quality. These strategies may help a region adapt to drinking water and ecosystem‐related water quality impacts from climate change. They may also contribute to providing additional supplies; for example, stormwater capture and reuse would reduce pollution and also provide a seasonal source of irrigation water for urban landscaping or groundwater recharge. Similarly, improved treatment of wastewater effluent discharges will minimize the water treatment needs for diversions. Water quality performance metrics for this RMS could include stream temperature, dissolved oxygen content, and pollutant concentrations (CDM, 2011). Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Climate change impacts can pose challenges for surface water treatment plants in a number of ways, including increased monitoring and treatment flexibility necessary to quantify and treat for source water quality changes in order to maintain finished water quality. Continued growth statewide will result in increased stress on the limited water resources available for domestic, agricultural, and industrial uses. Improving water treatment technologies and matching quality to end use can provide the flexibility required to meet uncertain future conditions. Groundwater Remediation Removing contaminants and pollutant plumes in current groundwater sources will provide additional water supply by allowing an otherwise unusable source to become usable. Combined with matching water quality and quantity to water demand type, this adaptation strategy will help reduce the need for imported water supplies with higher capital costs and greater associated GHG emissions. Local government and agencies with land use responsibility should limit potentially contaminating activities in areas where recharge takes place (recharge zone protection) and work together with entities currently undergoing long‐term groundwater remediation to develop a sustainable, long‐ term water supply for beneficial reuse. Pollution Prevention In recent years, as point sources of pollution have become regulated and controlled, “non‐point source” (NPS) pollution has become a primary concern for water managers. NPS pollution is generated from land use activities associated with agricultural development, forestry practices, animal grazing, uncontrolled urban runoff from development activities, discharges from marinas ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-33 and recreational boating activities, and other land uses that contribute pollution to adjacent surface and groundwater sources. Pollution prevention and management of water quality impairments should incorporate a watershed approach. DWR recommends the following approach to reduce NPS pollution to existing surface and groundwater sources: 1. Establish drinking water source and wellhead protection programs to shield drinking water sources and groundwater recharge areas from contamination. 2. Identify communities that rely on groundwater contaminated by anthropogenic sources as their drinking water source and take appropriate regulatory or enforcement action against the responsible party. 3. Address improperly destroyed, abandoned, or sealed wells in these communities that may serve as potential pathways for contaminants to reach groundwater. Protecting water supply sources will help to ensure the long‐term sustainability of those supplies. Salt and Salinity Management Accumulation of salts in soil can impair crop productivity, making salinity management a critical concern for the Region’s highly productive agricultural industry. Salinity management strategies establish or improve salinity management in the Region based on an understanding of salt loading and transport mechanisms. Several potential benefits of establishing or improving salt and salinity management include protecting water resources and improving water supplies, securing, maintaining, expanding, and recovering usable water supplies, and avoiding future significant costs of treating water supplies and remediating soils. Salt and salinity management strategies identified by the California Water Plan Update 2009 include:  Developing a regional salinity management plan, and interim and long‐term salt storage, salt collection, and salt disposal management projects;  Monitoring to identify salinity sources, quantifying the level of threat, prioritizing necessary mitigation action, and working collaboratively with entities and authorities to take appropriate actions;  Reviewing existing policies to address salt management needs and ensure consistency with long‐term sustainability; and  Collaborating with other interest groups to optimize resources and effectiveness;  Identifying environmentally acceptable and economically feasible methods for closing the loop on salt. The Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long‐term Sustainability initiative (CV‐SALTS), a collaborative effort initiated in 2006 by the Central Valley Salinity Coalition, was created to find a solution to the rising salt levels in the Central Valley that have the potential to impact drinking water quality and productive crops throughout the basin. It is the Salt and Nutrient Planning effort in the Central Valley region as indicated by the The City of Modesto has been participating in CV‐SALTS and plan on continuing its membership. The Region continues managing salt and applying this RMS through participation in CV‐SALTS, as well as other methods. The CV‐SALTS effort will identify specific salt and salinity challenges within the region and strategies to help adapt to climate change by mitigating potential salinity increases associated with climate change. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-34 Urban Runoff Management Urban runoff management, including Low Impact Development (LID), encompasses a broad range of activities to manage both stormwater and dry weather runoff. Stormwater capture and reuse projects can reduce the burden on wastewater treatment plants and potable water supplies, helping a region adjust to climate change impacts on water quality and water supply (CDM, 2011). The East Stanislaus Region should investigate and implement LID techniques and opportunities where appropriate and integrate urban runoff management with other RMSs. Improve Flood Management Increased frequency and severity of storm events will require the East Stanislaus Region to collaborate on and accelerate flood protection projects in order to adapt to increased flooding risks due to climate change. Flood management involves emergency planning, general planning activities, and policy changes. Improving flood management can help a region adapt to not only potential flooding, but many other climate change impacts, including ecosystem and water quality vulnerabilities. Performance metrics could include acres of meadows restored or volume of natural flood storage provided (CDM, 2011). The East Stanislaus Region, as part of its IRWM planning process, is currently participating in the development of a Regional Flood Management Plan for the Mid‐San Joaquin Region to identify potential projects that may improve flood management. This plan is scheduled to be completed in the end of 2014. The Regional Flood Management Plan will formulate feasible projects, assess the performance of the projects, and develop a plan that reflects the vision of local entities in reducing flood risks in their region. The Plan will help identify strategies to implement to contribute to this RMS and will aid the region in adapting to climate change impacts. Structural Improvement One possible approach to providing flood protection will be for local flood jurisdictions to establish long‐term buyback programs to acquire properties immediately adjacent to levees and other structural facilities to facilitate the eventual removal or relocation of these structures, and enhance the potential for setback levees and floodplain restoration where feasible. Possible structural projects should be integrated into a comprehensive integrated flood management program that takes a watershed approach (DWR 2009). This RMS is something the Region may consider in the future as part of a larger flood management program. Land Use Management General plans should be updated to reflect increased future flood risks; these should be updated as hydrologic projections change. Land use elements should identify and review flood‐prone areas established by FEMA or DWR. Also, revised general plans and regulations should reflect an integrated flood management approach and consider future development on tribal lands. Local land use agencies should not allow new critical public facilities to be constructed within the 200‐year floodplain. Existing critical facilities located in flood‐prone areas should be noted in the Emergency Plans prepared by local agencies, with evacuation routes clearly identified. Promoting the preservation of existing floodplains, restoration of natural floodplain functions where feasible, and careful analysis of the interface between natural floodplains and flood management structures can help prevent erosion and debris deposition from creating undue hazards to facilities and property (DWR, 2009). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-35 Disaster Preparedness, Response, and Recovery The vulnerability assessment previously described helps identify the resources that are most susceptible to climate change impacts. Flood control districts and other relevant jurisdictions should analyze potential flood risks and make this information publicly available. The public should be provided with sufficient information about potential flood risks to make informed decisions that safeguard their lives, property, and critical facilities. Flood control districts should also incorporate the potential effects of climate change into planning for future flood events. Until more refined projections are developed, DWR recommends using a 20% higher peak flow reference for planning purposes (DWR, 2009). Practice Resource Stewardship Resource stewardship includes overseeing and protecting land, wildlife, and water by way of conservation and preservation, coordination of compatible land uses, ecosystem management and restoration, watershed management, flood attenuation, and water‐dependent recreation. Restoring and preserving habitat and wetlands has multiple benefits, including promoting biodiversity and habitat enhancement as well as improved flood management as the natural storage provided by riparian wetlands can serve as buffers that absorb peak flows and provide slow releases after storm events (DWR, 2008). Coordination of land uses can promote multi‐faceted land stewardship by identifying and encouraging compatible land uses such as agriculture, natural resource management, open space and outdoor recreation. Because the scope of resource stewardship includes all resources, these strategies can help adapt to climate change impacts in various ways, depending on project‐specific details (CDM, 2011). Agricultural Resource Stewardship The Stanislaus County General Plan provides policies for the protection and management of agricultural lands, including policies to ensure that lands designed for agriculture are restricted to compatible uses such as natural resource management, open space, outdoor recreation and scenic beauty (Stanislaus County, 2013). Counties should adopt agricultural general plan elements and designate supportive agricultural districts that enhance agricultural land stewardship on high priority, productive agricultural lands. The focus of these districts should be for:  Regulatory assistance through county agricultural ombudsmen;  Local agricultural infrastructure investment, marketing assistance, and the development of agricultural lands stewardship practices and strategies in cooperation with local, State and federal agricultural conservation entities;  Land protection instruments, such as the Williamson Act and agricultural conservation easements; and  Engagement of resource organizations such as resource conservation districts, the American Farmland Trust, and Ag Futures Alliances (via Ag Innovations Network), and be integrated with and habitat conservation plans where appropriate. This recommendation should be implemented over the long‐term as each county general plan is updated (CDM, 2011). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-36 Ecosystem Restoration Climate change is predicted to further fragment and shrink California’s ecosystems. Appropriate corrective actions should be designed to protect and/or expand and reconnect them, minimizing these effects. As water managers in the region identify adaptation strategies for water and flood management, they should consider strategies that will also benefit ecosystems as follows. 1. Establish large biological reserve areas that connect or reconnect habitat patches. 2. Promote multidisciplinary approaches to water and flood management. 3. Expand financial incentives for farmers to grow and manage habitat. 4. Improve instream flow needs (CDM, 2011). Improved and enhanced aquatic and riparian habitats can provide significant water resource benefits through promoting groundwater recharge, protecting and improving water quality, and contributing to flood protection. Forest Management Although the cities that comprise the East Stanislaus Region’s RWMG do not have responsibility to manage the upland forested areas that drain to the Region, protection of those lands is important for ensuring high quality surface runoff supplies. Proper forest management would improve water quality, help reduce wildfires, and improve ecosystem and habitat within the Region. Additional stream gages and precipitation stations upstream of the Region (as well as within the Region itself) could help establish and confirm climate trends and evaluate hydroclimatic and geologic conditions. Water quality and sediment monitoring stations would allow quantification of the effects of climate change as well as forest management activities on surface water quality (CDM, 2011). Other Strategies Additional conservation and demand reduction measures, such as crop idling, irrigated land retirement, and rainfed agriculture could be implemented as adaptive management strategies under this RMS. As previously noted, however, these strategies could have significant economic impacts on the region and would be implemented after all other strategies have been considered and/or implemented. 3.6.2 No Regret Strategies No regret adaptation strategies are those that make sense for current day conditions and the existing water management context, while also helping regions adapt to climate change and anticipated future conditions. The following table presents the No Regrets adaptation strategies for the East Stanislaus Region. The region either is already implementing or planning to implement the following No Regret strategies. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-37 Table 3‐6: No Regret Strategies in the East Stanislaus Region Resource Management Strategies No Regrets Strategy Agricultural Water Use Efficiency  Urban Water Use Efficiency  Conveyance‐Delta Conveyance‐Regional/Local System Reoperation Water Transfers/Sales  Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage  Recycled Municipal Water  Surface Storage‐Regional/Local Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution  Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation  Matching Quality to Use  Pollution Prevention  Salt and Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management  Agricultural Lands Stewardship  Economic Incentives  Ecosystem Restoration  Forest Management Land Use Planning and Management  Recharge Area Protection  Watershed Management  Flood Risk Management  ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-38 3.6.3 Mitigation/GHG Reduction Strategies The East Stanislaus Region recognizes the importance and value of mitigating climate change by reducing energy use and associated GHG emissions. Water distribution can require significant amounts of energy. In California, 19% of the state’s electricity and 30% of its natural gas is used for water‐related activities (DWR, 2010a). As the East Stanislaus Region solicits and prioritizes projects for inclusion in its IRWM Plan, it must consider GHG emissions from the projects and ways to potentially mitigate climate change. As described in Section 3.2, increasing GHG concentrations in the Earth’s atmosphere contribute to warming trends and climate change impacts. Because the water industry is a significant contributor to GHG emissions and the overall increasing concentrations in the atmosphere, reducing GHGs generated in the conveyance, treatment, and distribution of water and wastewater poses a significant opportunity to help to achieve the GHG emission goals set by AB32 and reduce GHG emissions generated by water management. The variation in temperature and precipitation projections from different emissions scenarios illustrates the importance of implementing mitigation measures now to address climate impacts already taking place. GHG emission reductions must be achieved through cooperation at global, national and regional levels to prevent or mitigate continued climate change impacts later in the century. Major components of climate change mitigation strategies include: 1. Improve Energy Efficiency 2. Reduce Emissions 3. Carbon Sequestration Almost all resource management strategies identified by the 2009 CWP Update can potentially reduce GHG emissions and mitigate climate change impacts. A list of applicable mitigation strategies is included in Table 3‐7. GHG emissions and climate change mitigation was considered in the project prioritization methodology, described in Chapter 6 of this IRWMP. Project‐related GHG emissions were evaluated on a qualitative basis, and the results used as a secondary sorting criteria in the project prioritization process. Chapter 6 describes this process in more detail. The following briefly summarizes how the applicable RMS could contribute to climate change mitigation in the East Stanislaus Region.  Reduce Water Demand – implementing water use efficiency measures will help save water and energy by reducing the volume of water treated and distributed (pumped) throughout regional water systems.  Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers – optimizing water system operations will maximize efficiency and potentially reduce energy use. Reducing system losses will also reduce emissions by reducing the volume of water treated and distributed (pumped) throughout regional water systems.  Increase Water Supply – depending on the method used to increase water supply (e.g. desalination versus increased storage), there may be a net increase or decrease in GHG emissions. Increasing storage could have GHG emissions associated with construction, but relatively low operational emissions.  Improve Water Quality – GHG emissions depend on the specific project implemented to improve water quality. Matching quality to use generally has lower emissions than using ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-39 potable water for non‐potable uses. Additionally, protecting water sources from future water quality degradation may offset the future need for water treatment.  Improve Flood Management – where flood management encourages vegetation growth (e.g. ecosystem or floodplain restoration), carbon sequestration may help reduce net carbon emissions.  Practice Resource Stewardship – implementing ecosystem restoration or forest management, for example, can contribute to carbon sequestration and potentially reduce net emissions.  Other Strategies – some of the strategies included under this RMS could reduce GHG emissions by conserving water crop idling, irrigated land retirement), whereas others may be more energy‐intensive and increase emissions dewvaporation, fog collection, and waterbag transport, which were not considered feasible RMSs for the East Stanislaus Region). ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-40 Table 3‐7: Applicability of CWP Resource Management Strategies to GHG Mitigation Resource Management Strategies Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Energy Efficiency Emissions Reduction Carbon Sequestration Reduce Water Demand Agricultural Water Use Efficiency   Urban Water Use Efficiency   Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers Conveyance‐Regional/Local   System Reoperation   Water Transfers * * Increase Water Supply Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage * * Recycled Municipal Water * * Surface Storage‐Regional/Local *  Improve Water Quality Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution   Groundwater Remediation/Aquifer Remediation * * Matching Quality to Use * * Pollution Prevention  Salt and Salinity Management  Urban Runoff Management   Improve Flood Management Flood Risk Management  Practice Resource Stewardship Agricultural Lands Stewardship  Economic Incentives    Ecosystem Restoration  Forest Management  Land Use Planning and Management    Recharge Area Protection  Water‐dependent Recreation  Watershed Management    Other Strategies Crop Idling for Water Transfers   Irrigated Land Retirement   Rainfed Agriculture    Source: modified from CDM 2011 Key:  indicates that in general this will provide a beneficial effect X indicates that in general this will provide an adverse effect * indicates that this may provide beneficial or adverse effects ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-41 3.7 Plan for Further Data Gathering Identifying and implementing appropriate adaptation strategies requires data necessary to understand the magnitude of climate change impacts and associated vulnerabilities, and plan for strategy implementation in a timely manner. To aid in this understanding, the East Stanislaus Region has developed a data gathering and analysis approach to collect and assimilate data related to the prioritized climate changed vulnerabilities and to facilitate future water resource management. A preliminary data collection plan is summarized in the table on the following pages. The preliminary data collection plan presented below represents a high‐level overview of the types of data that may be collected, possible methods and frequency for data collection, and recommended responsible monitoring entities. In determining a final approach to data collection, the will need to determine how this preliminary plan aligns with existing monitoring programs and where new monitoring programs should be implemented. Additionally, as part of IRWM project implementation, numerous types of data will be collected to meet project performance and monitoring program requirements. These data will significantly contribute to the data collection described herein for further vulnerability assessment and will also need to be aligned with available resources and ongoing programs to minimize duplication of efforts. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-42 Table 3‐8: Preliminary Data Collection and Management Approach for Vulnerability Assessment Vulnerability Measurement Tools & Methods Vulnerability Vulnerability Indicators Measure Method Frequency Responsible Entity Adaptation Goal(s) Possible Near‐Term Adaptation Actions Water Demand Increased urban demand Water meter data Flow meters Water agencies ‐ Minimize urban demand ‐ Sufficient storage to meet unexpected needs Participate in community planning and regional collaborations relating to climate change adaptation Develop programs to encourage installation of advanced irrigation equipment Develop water conservation and demand management programs through water metering and rebate programs Demand management through public education on conservation Establish a relationship with local power utility and work jointly on strategies to reduce seasonal or peak water and energy demand Groundwater use reporting (unmetered systems) Individual reporting to basin management authority Annual Basin management group Evaluation of meter records Electronic data compilation Every five years RWMG Increased agricultural demand Water meter data Flow meters Water agencies & irrigation districts ‐ Minimize agricultural demand ‐ Sufficient storage to meet unexpected needs Participate in community planning and regional collaborations relating to climate change adaptation Reduce agricultural water demand by working with irrigators to install advanced irrigation equipment Develop water conservation and demand management programs through water metering and rebate programs Establish a relationship with local power utility and work jointly on strategies to reduce seasonal or peak water and energy demand Model agricultural water demand under future scenarios of climate change and projections of cropping types Groundwater use reporting (unmetered systems) Individual reporting to basin management authority Annual Basin management group Evaluation of meter records Electronic data compilation Every five years RWMG Increased CII demand Water meter data Flow meters Water agencies ‐ Minimize CII demand ‐ Sufficient storage to meet unexpected needs Participate in community planning and regional collaborations relating to climate change adaptation Demand management through public education on conservation Develop water conservation and demand management programs through water metering and rebate programs Work with power companies to evaluate feasibility of using recycled water or alternative cooling methods to meet power plant needs Optimize operations by restricting some energy‐ intensive activities during the summer to times of reduced electricity demand and work with energy utility on off‐peak pricing Groundwater use reporting (unmetered systems) Individual reporting to basin management authority Annual Basin management group Evaluation of meter records Electronic data compilation Every five years RWMG ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-43 Vulnerability Measurement Tools & Methods Vulnerability Vulnerability Indicators Measure Method Frequency Responsible Entity Adaptation Goal(s) Possible Near‐Term Adaptation Actions Increased demand for firefighting (wild and other) Public records compared with meter records; statistical analyses Electronic data compilation Every five years RWMG ‐ Minimize likelihood of wildfires through land management ‐ Plan and managed supplies to meet firefighting needs Use fire models and develop fire management plans for water supply sources in fire‐prone watersheds Practice fire management plans in watersheds Water Supply and Quality More frequent droughts Historical data tracking with statistical analyses Electronic data compilation Every five years RWMG ‐ Minimize urban, agricultural and CII demands ‐ Sufficient storage to cover drought periods Conduct climate change impacts and adaptation training for staff Participate in community planning and regional collaborations relating to climate change adaptation Expand current resources through developing regional water connections for sharing during shortages Reduced surface water availability Streamflow measurements Stream gages or weirs Continuously California Department of Water Resources (CDEC), U.S. Geological Survey, water agencies, irrigation districts ‐ Minimize urban, agricultural and CII demands ‐ Sufficient storage to cover drought periods Use hydrologic models to project runoff and incorporate model results in water supply planning Diversify water portfolio to include drought‐proof supplies like recycled water Practice conjunctive use and construct or expand infrastructure to support such use Construct infrastructure for additional surface and/or ground water storage (i.e. recharge facilities) Increase water storage capacity (i.e. silt removal from reservoirs) Retrofit intakes to accommodate lower water levels in reservoir and decreased late season flow Water stage at dam sites Water level gages Continuously Irrigation districts Increased groundwater salinity Groundwater samples (Specific Conductance, Total Dissolved Solids) Laboratory and in‐field analyses As needed – quarterly, annually, or every few years Water agencies, groundwater management organizations ‐ Track and mitigate groundwater quality impacts through basin management activities Simulate climate change scenarios/projections in groundwater models Increased groundwater overdraft Groundwater elevations Elevation monitoring data or Seasonally Water agencies, groundwater management organizations ‐ Track and mitigate groundwater overdraft through basin management activities Simulate climate change scenarios/projections in groundwater models Diversify water portfolio to include drought‐proof supplies like recycled water Practice conjunctive use and construct or expand infrastructure to support such use Construct infrastructure for additional surface and/or ground water storage (i.e. recharge facilities) Promote the use of LID techniques to encourage infiltration on the local level ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-44 Vulnerability Measurement Tools & Methods Vulnerability Vulnerability Indicators Measure Method Frequency Responsible Entity Adaptation Goal(s) Possible Near‐Term Adaptation Actions Decreased surface water quality Water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen, total suspended solids, etc. Laboratory and in‐field analyses Seasonally Water agencies, resource conservation districts, volunteers ‐ Track and mitigate surface water quality impacts through watershed management activities Manage reservoir water quality by investing in practices such as lake aeration Monitor surface water conditions, including water quality in receiving bodies Implement watershed practices to limit pollutant runoff to surface water Increase capacity for wastewater and storm water collection, treatment and discharge Ability of surface water treatment plants to treat diverted water Number of violations Annual California Department of Public Health ‐ Maintain ability to treat surface water to drinking water standards Develop models to understand potential water quality changes and costs of resultant changes in treatment Increase or modify treatment capabilities to address treatment needs of marginal water quality Implement or retrofit source control measures at treatment plants to deal with altered influent flow and quality Increased cost of imported supplies (indicator of regional and statewide demand) Average market value of one acre‐foot of water Market survey Periodic, as needed RWMG, water agencies, irrigation districts ‐ Minimize the need for imported water Flood Management Increased frequency of high flow events / shift in timing of snowmelt Streamflow measurements Stream gage Continuously California Department of Water Resources (CDEC) ‐ Plan for sufficient flood storage space under a variety of hydrologic conditions Increase water storage capacity (i.e. silt removal from reservoirs) Develop plans for reoperation of reservoirs Monitor flood events and drivers that may impact flood and water quality models Set aside land for future flood‐proofing needs (e.g. berms, dikes) Use land use planning to limit development in the flood plain Implement or retrofit source control measures that address altered influent flow and quality at treatment plants Build flood barriers, flood control dams, levees and related structures Increase channel capacity along lower river stretches to eliminate constrictions and enable higher flows ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-45 Vulnerability Measurement Tools & Methods Vulnerability Vulnerability Indicators Measure Method Frequency Responsible Entity Adaptation Goal(s) Possible Near‐Term Adaptation Actions Increased areas of inundation Area flooded during storm events Insurance reports Annual California Department of Insurance ‐ Plan for and minimize potential flood‐ related damage Participate in community planning and regional collaborations relating to climate change adaptation Develop and implement emergency response plans to deal with natural disasters Implement strategies on site and in municipalities to reduce runoff and associated pollutant loads into waterways Integrate flood management and modeling into land use planning Conduct extreme precipitation events analysis with climate change to understand the risk of impacts to water and wastewater infrastructure Plan for alternative power supplies to support operations in case of loss of power Establish mutual aid agreements with neighboring utilities Identify and protect vulnerable facilities Use land use planning and zoning to limit development in flood plains Integrate climate change risks, including flooding, into CIPs to build facility resilience against current and potential future risks Implement policies and procedures for post‐flood repairs Monitor and inspect the integrity of existing infrastructure Set aside land for future flood‐proofing needs (e.g. berms, dikes) Implement or retrofit source control measures that address altered influent flow and quality at treatment plants Build flood barriers, flood control dams, levees and related structures Relocate facilities to higher ground Study response of nearby wetlands to storm surge events Ecosystem and Habitat Impacted fisheries and other habitats Fish count Field studies Seasonally California Department of Fish and Game ‐ Track and mitigate fisheries impacts through watershed management activities Monitor vegetation changes in watersheds Degradation of surface water quality Water quality parameters such as dissolved oxygen, total suspended solids, etc. Laboratory and in‐field analyses Seasonally Water agencies, resource conservation districts, volunteers ‐ Track and mitigate surface water quality impacts through watershed management activities Develop models to understand potential water quality changes Monitor surface water conditions, including water quality in receiving bodies Implement watershed practices to limit pollutant runoff to surface water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 3 Climate Change December 2013 3-46 Vulnerability Measurement Tools & Methods Vulnerability Vulnerability Indicators Measure Method Frequency Responsible Entity Adaptation Goal(s) Possible Near‐Term Adaptation Actions Increased water temperatures Water temperature Thermometer Water agencies, resource conservation districts, volunteers ‐ Track and mitigate surface water quality impacts through watershed management activities Develop models to understand potential water quality changes Monitor surface water conditions, including water quality in receiving bodies Hydropower Decrease in power generation Number of kilowatt hours produced Data generation records Annual Modesto Irrigation District; Turlock Irrigation District Pacific Gas and Electric Company California Public Utilities Commission ‐ Reduce energy demand ‐ Maximize hydroelectric generation Develop plans for changing reservoir and hydropower operations Work with power companies to coordinate energy conservation programs (such as rebate programs) Establish a relationship with local power utility and work jointly on strategies to reduce seasonal or peak water and energy demand Work with power companies to evaluate feasibility of using recycled water or alternative cooling methods to meet power plant needs Optimize operations by restricting some energy‐ intensive activities during the summer to times of reduced electricity demand and work with energy utility on off‐peak pricing Increase in power demands Number of kilowatt hours delivered Data transmission and metering records Modesto Irrigation District; Turlock Irrigation District Pacific Gas and Electric Company California Public Utilities Commission ‐ Reduce energy demand Other Increased frequency of wildfires Historical data tracking with statistical analysis Electronic data compilation Annual California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection ‐ Land management to minimize wildfire Monitor current weather conditions Use fire models and develop fire management plans for water supply sources in fire‐prone watersheds Practice fire management plans in watersheds Reduced snowpack Snowpack survey (depth of snowpack) Snowpack measurements (depth and water content) Seasonal California Department of Water Resources ‐ Sufficient surface and/or ground water storage to replace lost snowpack storage Monitoring current weather and hydrologic conditions Use hydrologic models to project snowpack and runoff, and incorporate results into planning ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte Coordi 4.1 Go The Gov provides for gover Water M governan water m both now region is stakehold water m benefit r stewards of a pers the East engages processes Integrate 4.1.1 O The prim East Sta Water Ma and the g the need Members represen Turlock). (RWMG) authority necessary §10540 Understa governin authority members the ESRW and signi each MOU will be a each City islaus Integrat 2013 er 4 ES ination a overnance vernance Str the basis fo rnance of th Management nce structur anagement w and into t s inclusive der process anagement egional solu ship to imple son’s or enti Stanislaus I them throu s as describe ed Regional W Organizatio mary groups c nislaus Reg anagement G general publ arises. s of the ESR tatives from . According t is a “group y over water y for the dev and §10541 anding (MOU g bodies of t y over water s signed an M WMP. Additio ng of the MO U signatory representati y are shown i P is included ted Regional W SIRWM G and Outre e ructure des or relationsh he East Stan t (ESIRWM) e helps fac and the ass he future. T and utilize that provide issues and utions that i ement future ty’s ability t RWM plann ugh public o ed in Chapter Water Manag on composing th gional Wate Group, plus th ic. In the fut RWMP are a the four ES to California in which th r supply or w velopment an 1, participat or other those local a r supply or MOU dated A onal member OU. One repr has also des ive for each in Table 4‐1 in Chapter 4 Water Manage Governan each cribed in t ips within an islaus Integr ) planning cilitate susta sociated IRW The East Sta es a collabo es mechanis develop inte ncorporate e IRWM plan to contribute ing process, outreach an r 4.3, Public gement Plan he East Stani er Managem he Steering C ture, addition mix of elec RWMP mem Water Code ree or more water manag nd implemen te by mean r written ag gencies.” Fo managemen August 23, 2 rs can be add resentative fr ignated one member. A l and are deta .1.2, RWMG ement Plan nce, this docume nd procedur rated Region region. T ained region WM processe anislaus IRW orative, mul ms to addre egrated mul environment ns. Regardle e financially , the ESRWM nd stakehold Forums of th (IRWMP). islaus IRWM ment Partne Committee (S nal committe cted officials mber agencies (CWC) §105 e local agenc gement, as w ntation of a p ns of a join greement, as or the ESIRW nt in their r 011 (include ded to the ESR rom each MO alternate su list of the ES ailed in Appe Composition ent res nal The nal es, WM lti‐ ess lti‐ tal ess to MP der his M Region gov ership (ESR SC), the Publ ees or sub‐c s, board of d s (Cities of M 539, a Region cies, at least well as those plan that me nt powers a s appropriat WM region, a espective ju ed in Append RWMP with OU signatory uch that at ev RWMP repre endix B. A mo n. The Go IRWM N fo im IR D th § In an a D st th im g ‐ Prop Guidel 18 to 1 Chapter 4 ES Coordin vernance stru RWMP), the lic Advisory C committees m director mem Modesto, Hug nal Water Ma two of whic e other pers eets the requ agreement, te, that is a all four entiti urisdictions, dix A) which approval of e y participates very ESRWM esentatives a ore detailed overnance se M Plan must: Name the RW or developm mplementati RWMP. Define how th he definition 10539. nclude a list o nd project pr dopted the P Describe the g tructure and he Plan will b mplemented rant program osition 84 & lines, Novem 19 SIRWM Govern nation and Out ucture includ official Reg Committee ( may be form mbers, and ghson, Ceres anagement G ch have stat sons who ma uirements of Memorandu approved by ies have stat and all ESR h formally fo existing mem s on the ESRW MP meeting, and alternate description o ection of the WMG respons ent and ion of the he RWMG me n of CWC of the RWMG roponents w Plan. governance d how it ensu be updated a beyond Stat ms. 1E IRWM ber 2012, Pa nance, treach 4-1 de the gional PAC), med as other s, and Group tutory ay be f CWC um of y the tutory RWMP ormed mbers WMP; there es for of the ible eets G who ures and te ages ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-2 Table 4‐1: Representatives and Alternates City Category Name Contact Info City of Modesto Representative David Geer [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Dave Cogdill [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Turlock Representative Forrest White [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Amy Bublak [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Ceres Representative Chris Vierra [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Bret Durossette [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Hughson Representative Jill Silva [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Matt Beekman [EMAIL REDACTED] The ESIRWM region operates primarily on a consensus basis. The acts as the lead voice in the IRWMP development and implementation as there are multiple agencies, stakeholders, and members of the public involved in the process. The also acts as the ultimate decision maker in the rare case that the other supporting committees cannot come to a consensus. The facilitates communication, cooperation and education between member agencies; facilitates implementation of the IRWMP and overall planning process; provides oversight to both the Steering Committee and Public Advisory Committee; finalizes the prioritization methodologies based on Committees’ input; approves the screening and ranking of submitted projects; and ultimately determines the methodology for inclusion of projects in grant applications. meetings are held, as needed, at the discretion of the group. Each member agency is represented on the ESIRWMP by one person and one alternate (generally someone from within the agency’s management structure with decision‐making authority). The meetings are open to the public, and the public may provide comment on agendized items. The Steering Committee (SC) leads preparation and implementation of the IRWMP and future amendments and updates of the Plan (as described further in Chapter 7 of this plan), and generally manages the work. Representatives of the SC are generally those that are actively managing projects. Responsibilities of the SC include:  Manage contracts, information/databases, reporting  Manage the IRWM Plan development and implementation  Provide guidance to consultants and manage contracts  Manage budgets and schedule  Coordinate with the Public Advisory Committee  Present unresolved issues/work tasks to the Public Advisory Committee  Coordinate and implement the public outreach process  Manage the East Stanislaus IRWMP website  Ensure meetings are announced and posted in advance  Coordinate distribution and posting of materials  Convey Public Advisory Committee’s recommendations to the  Manages and formally submits IRWM‐related grant applications The SC representatives report back to the representatives throughout the planning process to brief them regarding specifics for plan implementation and to gain approval for the Plan’s content. The governance structure allows for effective communication among the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-3 committees, and consultant, as well as between the SC, regional stakeholders and the public. Similar to the each agency or organization participating on the SC is represented by one person and one alternate; current representatives are shown in Table 4‐2. SC members may remain engaged in the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process for the length of their affiliation with their representative agency and as long as they remain active in their role (per the SC Roles and Responsibilities). Additional SC members may be added at any time, provided the existing SC members do not object and the proposed member agrees to follow the Roles and Responsibilities adopted by the SC (Appendix SC meetings are open to the general public and the SC directly engages the public as needed, such as when public input is solicited on project/planning deliverables. During the SC meetings, the public may provide comments on agendized and non‐ agendized items. Table 4‐2: Steering Committee Representatives and Alternates City Category Name Contact Info City of Modesto Representative Jack Bond [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Jim Alves [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Turlock Representative Dan Madden [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Michael Cooke [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Ceres Representative Mike Brinton [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Toby Wells [EMAIL REDACTED] City of Hughson Representative Thom Clark [EMAIL REDACTED] Alternate Dominique Spinale [EMAIL REDACTED] The Public Advisory Committee (PAC) is a stakeholder committee that provides input and recommendations to the and SC, and is comprised of governmental and non‐ governmental organizations (NGOs), environmental groups, community organizations, disadvantaged communities and other special interest groups and parties. The PAC is the first tier of decision making and provides recommendations for developing project prioritization methodologies to the SC, helps screen, integrate and rank projects, contributes to development of the methodology for inclusion of projects in grant applications, provides direct public communication and seeks public feedback and input, and conducts other actions as directed. Similar to the each agency or organization participating on the PAC is represented by one person and one alternate. When multiple applications are received for a single organization, the SC works with that organization to identify a single representative and an alternate for each organization, thereby providing equal representation by all interested parties. PAC members may remain engaged in the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process for the length of their affiliation with their representative agency and as long as they remain active in their role (per the PAC Roles and Responsibilities). PAC meetings, as well as public meetings, are open to all stakeholders and the general public, and the application of a collaborative process helps to engage a balance of interest groups throughout the East Stanislaus Region. Any interested party is invited to participate in the PAC and/or participate during public comment periods and periodically during the planning process when public input is solicited. The meetings are meant to encourage discussion and collaboration among all parties. Generally, anyone who wants to participate in the IRWM planning and implementation process can, at a minimum, participate in the PAC. An open call for applicants for the PAC was placed on March 16, 2011 and was followed up by direct participation solicitation by member agencies. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-4 Additional PAC members may be added at any time, provided the existing PAC members do not object and the proposed member agrees to follow the Roles and Responsibilities adopted by the PAC (Appendix Current members of the PAC are shown in Table 4‐3. Table 4‐3: Public Advisory Committee Representatives and Alternates Name Affiliation Contact Info Garner Reynolds a City of Newman [EMAIL REDACTED] Felipe Casas DAC representative [EMAIL REDACTED] Laura Jensen The Nature Conservancy [EMAIL REDACTED] Mike Willett Turlock citizen, City of Patterson Staff [EMAIL REDACTED] Patrick Koepele Tuolumne River Trust [EMAIL REDACTED] Daniel Padilla Ceres area citizen [EMAIL REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Julie Rentner River Partners [EMAIL REDACTED] Jason Preece California Department of Water Resources [EMAIL REDACTED] a. Although Garner Reynolds represented the City of Newman throughout preparation of the East Stanislaus IRWMP, as of October 2013, he no longer does due to relocation. PAC meetings are open to the general public, who may provide comment on any meeting item, whether it is included on the meeting agenda or not. In fact, the Region has a large group of interested stakeholders who are unable to commit to the PAC meeting schedule but who participate in the process in an external manner (see Chapter 4.2.1, below, regarding stakeholders). The members on the stakeholder list are interested parties that receive updates of the IRWM planning process via email and are encouraged to provide comments electronically on draft East Stanislaus IRWMP‐related documents. Subcommittees to the PAC are formed, as necessary, to discuss specific water management activities/goals or to assume specific tasks as designated by the PAC. These subcommittees have the same procedures and policies as the PAC. The governance structure for the ESIRWM region is organized as shown in Figure 4‐1. In general, the PAC and SC work on plan development and implementation in a concurrent manner, with information passed between the two committees through key participant attendance at both and through participation on subcommittees. The PAC then conveys information to the through the SC for final decision, as needed. Members of the and SC can attend the PAC meetings as they wish. This structure helps to ensure the long‐term implementation of the IRWM program by ensuring the continuing participation of members, clearly defining the anticipated roles and responsibilities of each participating member, and by allowing for modifications and adaptations to meet changing future conditions. Governance‐related Documents: Appendix A – East Stanislaus Regional Water Management Partnership MOU Appendix C – Steering Committee Roles & Responsibilities Appendix D – Public Advisory Committee Roles & Responsibilities Appendix E – Outreach and Communications Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Because organizat matures. the ESRW participa considera signing th the SC an members MOU is n 4.1.2 R As previo Regional agencies: are relat communi Region. over wat Stanislau to partici They will a minimu As it is cu Region. T islaus Integrat 2013 the East St tions and/or If an agency WMP is first te. The ESR ation and ac he Region’s nd/or PAC, ho s must repre ot required f RWMG Com ously noted, Water Man the Cities of tively new a ication and c Although th ter supply o us IRWM plan ipate as part l continue to um and will b urrently stru These are sum ted Regional W Figure 4‐1: tanislaus Re r forums may /entity/city t notified of RWMP will t cceptance. O MOU is a ma owever exist esent organiz for participat mposition the official R nagement P f Modesto, Ce and were r cooperation a ere are othe r water man nning proces t of the RWM be encourag be provided w uctured, the R mmarized in Water Manage East Stanisla egion is stil y be added to would like to their intere then coordin Organization andatory req ting SC/PAC zations not c tion on the S RWMG for th Partnership eres, Turlock ecently dev and to coope er local agen nagement an ss, some have MG at this tim ged to partic with meeting RWMG mem Table 4‐4. ement Plan aus Region Go ll relatively o the govern o participate est and the nate with the representat quirement. A members mu current parti C or PAC. he East Stani k, and Hughso eloped, beg eratively reso ncies within nd who have e shown inte me or are sti ipate in the P g notices and ber agencies overnance St new, it is nance structu e in some for committee o e tives may be Additional me ust approve icipating on islaus IRWM currently on. This Reg inning in Ju olve potentia the region t e been invit erest while ot ill considerin PAC or withi d other releva s cover vario Chapter 4 ES Coordin tructure possible th ure in the fut m of the Reg on which th SC and/or P e added to t embers may the addition the PAC. Sig Region is th comprised ion, and its a uly 2010, to al water supp that have st ted to partic ther agencie ng their leve in the genera ant informat ous responsib SIRWM Govern nation and Out hat new me ture as the R gion’s govern hey would li PAC member the y also be add n and the new gning the Reg he East Stani of four me associated RW o foster reg ply conflicts i tatutory auth cipate in the s have chose el of participa al public foru tion. bilities withi nance, treach 4-5 ember egion nance, ke to rs for P, but ded to w PAC gion’s islaus ember WMG, gional in the hority e East en not ation. um, at in the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Me Ci C Ci Each of t multiple the four under CW islaus Integrat 2013 Tab ember Agenc ity of Modesto City of Ceres City of Turlock ity of Hughson the four citi diverse aspe cities is gra WC Section 14 ted Regional W ble 4‐4: Memb cy Wate Supply Qualit o   k  n  ies is locate ects of water nted statuto 460. The Citi Fig Water Manage ber Agencies’ W er y & ty Wastew     d within th resources th ory authority ies’ associate gure 4‐2: ESR ement Plan ’ Water Mana ater Managem water Recy Wa     e East Stani hroughout th y to manage ed boundarie RWMP Membe agement Resp ment Respon ycled ater Stor F     islaus region he East Stanis e and deliver es are shown er Agencies Chapter 4 ES Coordin ponsibilities nsibility rmwater/ Flood W     nal boundar slaus Region r water with n in Figure 4‐ SIRWM Govern nation and Out Watershed/ Habitat     ries and man n. Further, ea hin their pur 2. nance, treach 4-6 nages ach of rview ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-7 The City of Modesto provides drinking water, wastewater services, and storm drain and sewer maintenance to the city and surrounding communities. The City of Modesto supplies water to the City of Waterford and the communities of Salida, Empire, Hickman, Del Rio, Grayson, parts of the City of Turlock, a northern part of the City of Ceres, as well as other unincorporated County areas contiguous to the City of Modesto. Modesto pumps and delivers groundwater from 96 operating groundwater wells throughout its service area, and receives treated surface water through a long‐ term agreement with Modesto Irrigation District (MID) from Modesto Reservoir, which is operated by MID. Modesto also operates two wastewater treatment facilities; the Sutter Avenue Primary Treatment Plant and the Jennings Road Water Quality Control Plant, which was recently upgraded to provide tertiary treatment. There is potential for the City of Modesto to provide recycled water to users in the future; a feasibility study is currently underway by Del Puerto Irrigation District to further explore this option and identify new facilities that would be required for recycled water delivery and use. The Cities of Turlock and Ceres are also involved in this effort, referred to as the North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program Under the up to 46,900 acre‐ feet per year of recycled water produced by the Cities of Modesto, Ceres, and Turlock would be delivered to Del Puerto Irrigation District and other potential users for agricultural irrigation. Groundwater is the only source of potable water for the City of Ceres. The Ceres Water Services Division maintains the City’s ten groundwater wells, two reservoirs providing a total of 4 million gallons (MG) of storage, and associated pipelines and pump stations. Ceres also manages storm drainage services to handle internal storm runoff and flood protection. The City of Ceres Sanitary Services Division manages, operates and maintains the Ceres Wastewater Treatment Plant and wastewater collection system. One million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater from the City of Ceres is sent to and treated at the City of Turlock’s Regional Water Quality Control Facility. Wastewater from Turlock’s residents and commercial and industrial dischargers, as well as wastewater from Denair and Keyes Community Service Districts, is also treated at the Turlock Regional Water Quality Control Facility. For water supplies, the City of Turlock relies solely on groundwater. Turlock serves a population of over 70,000 residents using 24 active groundwater wells and more than 230 miles of water distribution lines. The wells can produce a maximum of 53 million gallons of water per day. At present the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority, comprised of the Cities of Turlock, Modesto, and Ceres is developing the Regional Surface Water Supply Project. This project consists of a new Tuolumne River diversion, a 29 mgd water treatment plant and transmission mains that would divert, treat, and deliver surface water supplied from TID to the Authority for treatment and use, providing a conjunctive use strategy and reducing reliance on groundwater sources. Turlock also provides recycled water for irrigation, and 2 mgd of recycled water is provided to TID for cooling purposes at its Walnut Energy Center. The Utility Maintenance Division of the City of Turlock provides safe and effective water, wastewater and storm distribution system and related services to its service area. Similar to Ceres and Turlock, the City of Hughson manages the water, stormwater and wastewater systems within its city boundaries, relying solely on groundwater for its raw water. The City’s water system consists of five groundwater wells scattered through the City, pumping from Turlock Groundwater Subbasin, and a distribution system with pipes ranging from 2‐ to 16‐inches in diameter, as well as a storage tank with a capacity of 750,000 gallons. As previously described in Section 4.1.1, Organization, the member agencies signed a MOU dated August 23, 2011 committing to the purpose of coordinating water resources planning efforts and developing an integrated regional water management plan (IRWMP) for the East Stanislaus Region. The MOU outlines the overall goals of the IRWM planning effort, the roles each city has as an member, as well as indicating that they are expected to adopt the completed ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-8 IRWMP. Any stakeholder entity that chooses to accept or adopt the East Stanislaus IRWMP will be asked to demonstrate support and commitment to implementation of the IRWMP once the plan is finalized. 4.1.3 Decision Making Decisions within the East Stanislaus Region are made using a consensus‐based approach. The East Stanislaus Region is still a relatively new IRWM region and thus far, only IRWM plan‐related decisions have been made. The has developed a protocol for other decision‐making processes as described herein. Any decision being made by the is done so based on a vote; each member representative in the gets one vote and all actions require a simple majority vote. Regional decision‐ making and management processes may be revised as the Region matures and the IRWMP is developed and implemented. Methods to establish IRWMP goals and objectives, prioritize projects, implement the IRWMP, and revise and update the IRWMP in the future are discussed in other sections of this plan. Each is briefly summarized here:  Establish IRWM Plan Goals & Objectives. Issues and Conflicts within the East Stanislaus Region have been identified and were presented to DWR in East Stanislaus’ Region Acceptance Process application. The SC and PAC jointly develop draft goals and objectives based on the identified Regional issues and conflicts; these are discussed in Chapter 4 of this IRWMP.  Prioritize Projects. A prioritization process was developed for ranking submitted projects based on the degree to which they meet the IRWM Plan goals & objectives, in addition to any other parameters the and committees decide upon (e.g. IRWM Program Preferences). The process developed for this project prioritization is documented in Chapter 5 of this IRWMP.  Implement the IRWM Plan. The SC will be the lead in ensuring the IRWM Plan is implemented. Based on the MOU signed by each member agency, it is the personnel and financial resources of each member that facilitated the development and implementation of this IRWM Plan. The IRWM Plan will be implemented through the implementation of a series of short‐term projects and long‐term projects and programs.  Revise and Update the IRWM plan. The East Stanislaus IRWM Plan is a planning tool, and will require updates in response to emerging water management challenges and new project needs, and to ensure the Plan appropriately addresses the East Stanislaus Region’s evolving needs. Similar to the implementation of the Plan, the SC will lead the effort to update and revise this Plan, as necessary, while the will provide the staff and financial support, as necessary to achieve this goal. This structure will help ensure the long‐ term sustainability of the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan and continual implementation of the Plan into the future. Chapter 7 of this document describes the process by which the East Stanislaus IRWMP is managed and updated. As described above and shown in Figure 4‐3 below, the East Stanislaus Region developed a specific, but flexible, method for decision making and a general framework for developing and implementing an IRWM Plan. The Region began by identifying specific goals and objectives to meet the identified water management issues and conflicts within the Region. These goals and objectives formed the basis for identifying and integrating the Plan’s projects, prioritizing those projects, and completing an IRWM Plan. All decisions required for preparation of the IRWMP, including development of the goals and objectives, identification, integration and prioritization of projects, and development of the IRWM ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Plan, we formulate East Stan portfolio As descri discussed include:  W  L  G  M re In the pa issues fac may be o Groundw Merced I County W and Ball coordinat coordinat studies, u basin. T islaus Integrat 2013 re complete ed at the SC P for accepta nislaus Regio prioritized b ibed in Chapt d and agree Water supply ocalized floo roundwater Management ecreation. ast, the cities cing the Reg overdrafted r water Basin A rrigation Di Water Distric ico‐Cortez W ting on issue tion and ide updated the he agencies ted Regional W ed in a colla C and PAC le ance. The d n thus facilit based on mee Figur ter 4 of this I d upon by reliability fo oding and sto overdraft an and protecti s and agenci gion. For exa requiring ev Association strict, the Ci ts, the comm Water Distr es related to entification o GWMP, and involved in Water Manage aborative ma evel (in a co decision‐mak tates the dev eting the reg re 4‐3: ESRW IRWMP, conf the ESRWM or both agricu ormwater qu nd contamina on of surface ies in the are mple, recent ven closer co (TGBA) mem ities of Cere munity servic icts, and th o the groundw of the overd d has develop the East Sta ement Plan anner. Initia ollaborative king process elopment of gional goals a WMP Developm flicts and iss MP, SC and P ultural and u ality issues; ation; and e water resou ea have wor t studies hav ollaboration mber agenci es, Turlock, M ces districts o he Counties water basin draft conditio ped projects anislaus IRW al decisions/ manner), an and overall a single, coll and objective ment Process ues within th PAC. These urban users; urces as both rked togethe ve shown the and plannin ies, includin Modesto and of Keyes, De of Merced since the m ons, the TGB s to aid the WM region h Chapter 4 ES Coordin /initiative de nd were the governance laborative w es. s he Region w regional con h water supp er to develop e Turlock Gr ng for the Ba ng Turlock Ir d Hughson, enair, and Ba and Stanis mid‐1990’s. T BA has cond recovery of have a histor SIRWM Govern nation and Out evelopment en brought t e structure o water manage ere identified nflicts and i plies and p solutions t roundwater asin. The Tu rrigation Dis Hilmar and allico, the Eas slaus, have Through this ducted addit the groundw ry of succes nance, treach 4-9 were to the of the ement d and ssues to the Basin urlock strict, Delhi stside been early tional water sfully ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December working on a volu East Stan objective In additio communi IRWM pl stakehold and cons Further, facilitate For exam Region. T Stanislau the East been form participa programs Region w neighbor projects a 4.2 Sta An IRWMP A publ oppor and im stakeh A proc stakeh mecha involv develo A desc involv comm A desc includ stakeh partic A desc addre they a A disc balanc to con ‐ Propositio Pages 22 an islaus Integrat 2013 together, and ntary basis, b nislaus IRWM s. on to the ES ities, the pub anning proc ders have be idered for in the ESRWM coordination mple, ESRWM The ESRWM us Region on Stanislaus R med. For its te in its pl s that can ma will strive to ing IRWM R and program akeholde P must contai lic process to rtunities to p mplementatio holders. cess used to i holder group anisms and p vement and c opment / imp cription of ho ve DACs and N munities. cription of th ding IRWM co holders can o ipate withou cription of ho ss objectives are involved. ussion of col ce of interest ntribute finan on 84 & 1E IR nd 23 ted Regional W d this is refle building com M effort will and blic at large, ess. The Reg een, and will nclusion in th MP has alrea n of solution MP members a P has also en developmen Region is rela part, the ES anning proc aximize bene o be inclusiv Regions as th ms to create m er Involve in: o provide out articipate in on to approp identify, info ps in the plan processes to f communicati plementation ow the RWM Native Amer he decision m ommittees, r occupy and h ut contributin ow stakehold s and RMS of llaborative p t groups rega ncially. RWM Guidelin Water Manage ected in the mmitment thr be sustained d its commit and adjacent gion has esta continue to his plan. Th ady begun co ns to inter‐re are participa ngaged in dis nt of Letters atively new, will cess and wi efits and ben ve rather th he multi‐benefit ement and treach and IRWMP dev priate local ag orm, invite an nning process facilitate stak on during IR n. G will endea rican tribal making proce oles, or posit how a stakeho ng financially ders are nece f the IRWMP rocess that e ardless of the nes, Novemb ement Plan way the ESR rough develo d through the ttees, genera t IRWM regi ablished an o be, contacte his process is oordinating egional issue ating in meet scussions wi of Cooperati relationship ensure the n ill endeavor neficiaries fo han exclusiv recognizes t opportunitie d Outreac elopment gencies / nd involve s including keholder RWMP avor to ss tions that older can y. essary to and how engage a eir ability er 2012, RWMP opera opment of sh e ongoing ef al stakeholde ons also hav outreach pro ed, and their s described i with severa es and to adv tings of the a ith the Merce ion with thes ps with other neighboring to identify r all regions ve, not only the effectiven es. ch The E understan engaging public managem process. finalized Communi identified to ensure informatio preparatio East Stan public and Plan inclu and obje outreach, outreach communit inter‐regio of the Communi collaborat balance o the East interested Chapter 4 ES Coordin ates. By form hared goals a fforts to mee ers, disadvan ve a role in th ocess by whi r concerns an in Chapter 4 al adjacent I vance inter‐ adjacent Wes ed Region an se regions. H r IRWM regi IRWM regio y inter‐regio involved. Th within the ness of deve East Stan nds the stakeholders throughout ment planni In Octobe a Stakehold cations Plan methodolog e the timely on asso on and imple islaus IRWM d stakeholde udes identif ectives spe discussion to ties (DACs), onal coordin Stakeholder cations Plan tive process of interest gr Stanislaus d party SIRWM Govern nation and Out ming the ESR and objective et those goal ntaged and he East Stani ich many of nd ideas sol .2 of this IRW IRWM regio regional pro stside‐San Joa nd the Tuolu However, bec ions have no ons are invit onal projects he East Stani Region but eloping integ nislaus R importance s and the ge t the w ing and I er 2011, th der Outreach n to specify gy and appr disseminati ociated ementation o MP to the ge ers. The Outr fication of ecific to p n of tar disadvant and method nation. The i r Outreach n is to crea s and enga roups throug Region. is invited nance, treach 4-10 RWMP es, the s and tribal islaus these icited WMP. ns to ojects. aquin umne‐ cause ot yet ted to s and islaus with grated Region e of eneral water RWM he SC h and y the roach on of with of the eneral reach goals public geted taged ds for intent and ate a age a ghout Any d to ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-11 participate in the planning process but it is important for stakeholders to participate in all aspects of the Plan preparation, from developing the Region description to identifying goals and objectives to identifying projects and appropriate resource management strategies and programs to be implemented. Stakeholder input is vital to understanding the variety of interest parties’ value in the Plan objectives and the Resource Management Strategies applied. Gaining a variety of differing opinions creates conversation and collaboration in all aspects of IRWM planning process. The Outreach Plan is included as Appendix E. DACs were identified in the East Stanislaus Region through a Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis as discussed in Chapter 2; no tribal communities have been identified within the Region. In order to engage stakeholders, including disadvantaged communities, the East Stanislaus Region conducts various meetings that are open to the public. The SC provides notice of all meeting types by posting the agenda, notices, and minutes on the East Stanislaus IRWM planning website, as well as posting on a public announcement board and direct mailings and/or emails to members on the stakeholder contact list. The SC ensures all meeting notices are posted with ample time for the public to participate. Additionally, the SC has issued notices in local newspapers. For example, a public notice (in English) announcing the first public workshop in March 2011 was featured in the Turlock Journal, Modesto Bee, Ceres Courier. The same notice, but in Spanish, was published in the Vida en el Valle, a newspaper focused on the Latino community of the central San Joaquin Valley that is published weekly in five cities, including Modesto. The notices were also printed and placed in local libraries and city offices. Other notices published in newspapers were to announce the Notice of Intent to prepare the IRWMP. Copies of these notices and publications are included in Appendix F. The governance structure developed for the East Stanislaus Region allows for the flow of information between committees and groups in the region. As with any agency or organization, there are overlaps and methods for communicating from the staff level to management level and above. The tends to be comprised of management level staff at the Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres and Hughson; the SC includes staff level members from the cities; and the PAC is made of volunteering stakeholders from other cities and agencies. The governance structure is set‐ up so that members of the SC can attend PAC meetings and relay information to members of the regarding information and communication from the SC and PAC. Members of the SC often attend PAC meetings. Additionally, PAC members and general public can attend open meetings to provide comments and actively participate in development and implementation of the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan. 4.2.1 Stakeholders On March 16, 2011, the conducted an initial public workshop to announce the creation of the East Stanislaus Region and the IRWM planning process within the Region. A primary purpose of the public meeting was to provide an early opportunity for stakeholders interested in participating in the planning process to do so and to become aware of the overall project, its associated schedule, and the ways that public input and participation would be sought throughout the planning process. At this meeting, contact information of all meeting attendees was compiled and a stakeholder list was created. The stakeholder contact list is continually updated as new persons, entities, and organizations express interest in the IRWM planning process. The most recent version of this stakeholder list is included in Appendix G. Materials from the meeting including the PowerPoint presentation, handouts, and sign‐in sheets are included in Appendix H. In addition to providing general information about the IRWM planning process at the initial public meeting, a call for applications for participation in the Public Advisory Committee (PAC) was conducted in which stakeholders who wanted to become a member of the PAC could voice their ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-12 interest in doing so, understanding that they will attend regularly scheduled meetings and are committing to a designated person or alternate in attendance. The PAC serves as one venue for conveying stakeholders input, comments, interests and ideas to the planning process. Unfortunately, no one signed up for the PAC at the March 16th initial public meeting, so a direct solicitation for participants followed and the initial PAC members were identified. As previously noted, it is anticipated that membership in the PAC will continue to expand as interest in the IRWMP grows. In the interim, direct outreach to the public and local agencies and organizations is continuing to encourage stakeholders to participate in the PAC. Several other public meetings and workshops have been held subsequent to the March 2011 public meeting. These workshops were held at key junctures in the IRWMP development process and were held as follows:  April 12, 2012 ‐ public workshop to announce the call for (solicitation of) projects for inclusion in the IRWMP.  September 11, 2013 – public workshop to present the draft IRWMP and its contents.  January 13, 2014 – public meeting in conjunction with the IRWMP adoption by the City of Hughson.  January 27, 2014 – public meeting in conjunction with the IRWMP adoption by the City of Ceres.  January 28, 2014 – public meetings in conjunction with the IRWMP adoption by the Cities of Turlock and Modesto. The public outreach process for the East Stanislaus Region provides stakeholders with two general options for involvement: general public participation at the Steering Committee, and PAC meetings and public meetings, and involvement through participation in the PAC. This format ensures both a balanced and diverse collection of stakeholders due to the flexibility in the level of commitment and involvement for those interested. The following methods are used to not only disseminate information to stakeholders, disadvantaged and tribal communities and the general public, but also can be used by them to provide input, ask questions, and participate in the planning process and IRWM Plan development process:  Steering Committee, and PAC meetings  Public meetings  East Stanislaus IRWM planning website  Handouts, newsletters, advertisements The East Stanislaus IRWM website allows for an even and effective exchange of information between the regional stakeholders and the public, while the newsletters and handouts ensures information access for all. The recognizes the significance of stakeholder input and therefore provides these various avenues for participation. Public input is further described in greater detail in Chapter 4.3, Public Forums. As previously noted, there are other local agencies within the Region with statutory authority over water supply and/or water management; these agencies have been invited to participate in the IRWM planning and implementation process, but some have declined at this time. Many of the local agencies have a history working with the member agencies; for example, the City of Modesto and the Modesto Irrigation District (MID) have a water supply relationship (wholesaler‐retailer) and have prepared joint‐Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) due to the overlap in water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-13 resources management and shared water resources. The cooperates with these other agencies and districts through various planning processes and implementation of projects, and will continue to do so into the future. Other participants that will be involved in the IRWM planning and implementation process within the East Stanislaus Region are summarized in Table 4‐5. Some of the stakeholders that are currently not participating have been contacted directly, and it is expected some will begin to participate as the IRWM process progresses. The Stakeholder Contact List (included in Appendix G) includes contact information for most of the identified stakeholders, and meeting updates, handouts, and announcements are mailed or sent electronically to these organizations to keep stakeholders informed and up to speed on ways to participate in the East Stanislaus IRWM process. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-14 Table 4‐5: Other Identified Participants in IRWM Planning Effort Category Participant Name Working Relationship Wastewater Empire Sanitary District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Salida Sanitary District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Irrigation / Water Districts Modesto Irrigation District Stakeholder Turlock Irrigation District Stakeholder Eastside Water District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Oakdale Irrigation District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Merced Irrigation District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Del Puerto Water District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Ballico‐Cortez Water District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Delhi County Water District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Hilmar County Water District Stakeholder (not currently participating) Cities Riverbank Stakeholder Patterson Stakeholder Waterford Stakeholder Oakdale Stakeholder Other Communities Grayson Stakeholder (not currently participating) Denair Stakeholder (not currently participating) Del Rio Stakeholder (not currently participating) Monterey Park Track Stakeholder Electrical Corporation Pacific Gas & Electric Stakeholder (not currently participating) Counties Merced Stakeholder (not currently participating) Stanislaus Stakeholder (not currently participating) Federal, State and Local Agencies Turlock State Park Stakeholder (not currently participating) County Farm Bureau Stakeholder Disadvantaged Communities Keyes Stakeholder (not currently participating) Bret Harte Stakeholder (not currently participating) Stakeholder (not currently participating) Hickman Stakeholder (not currently participating) Shackleford Stakeholder (not currently participating) Grayson Stakeholder (not currently participating) Newman Stakeholder West Modesto Stakeholder (not currently participating) Empire Stakeholder (not currently participating) Riverdale Park Stakeholder (not currently participating) Friends of Tuolumne Stakeholder (not currently participating) Environmental Groups Tuolumne River Trust Stakeholder River Partners Stakeholder ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-15 Note for Table 4‐5: The has been, and will continue, contacting these stakeholder organizations directly to solicit participation in the East Stanislaus IRWMP. 4.3 Public Forums The formation of the East Stanislaus RWMG and conception of the Region were announced to the public through a workshop on March 16, 2011. This workshop identified stakeholders and solicited for participants, agencies, and other entities that wanted to receive meeting announcements and updates. Contact information was collected, and an email distribution list was developed. This list continues to be updated with new additions as interest in involvement increases. Additional public involvement continues throughout the development of the East Stanislaus IRWMP and through implementation of the Plan, as described herein. These efforts have helped the region provide balanced access and opportunities for participation in regional planning. In order to make the public both aware of and a part of the regional water management planning and IRWM planning efforts within the Region, various methods have been applied to reach a varied audience. Public meetings have been conducted to introduce the IRWM process and, as needed, to update the public at key junctures in the regional water management process and to allow for public input. As discussed in the governance structure section, the conducts meetings for themselves, the Steering Committee, and the Public Advisory Committee. The public is allowed and encouraged to attend Steering Committee and Public Advisory Committee meetings and provide comments on both agendized and non‐agendized items. The public is also welcome to attend open sessions of meetings to provide comments on agendized items only (similar to the way City Council meetings are conducted). The Steering Committee provides notice of all meeting types by posting the agenda, notices, and minutes on the East Stanislaus IRWM planning website (found at www.eaststanirwm.org), as well as posting on a public announcement boards and direct mailings to a mailing list of interested stakeholders. The Steering Committee ensures the meeting notices are posted with ample time for the public to participate in the meetings. Additionally, as documents are developed and public review is solicited, copies are placed in public libraries for public access and on the Region’s website. Other mechanisms used to ensure public awareness of the East Stanislaus IRWM process include the development and distribution of brochures, fact sheets and brief updates. Hard copies are available at meetings and electronic copies are sent to the email distribution list and posted on the Region’s website. The website allows the to disseminate information to a wide audience. The website is updated on a basis, at a minimum, to maintain current meeting information and past project updates, press releases, meeting materials and other items of interest. The website domain is hosted by the City of Modesto, and each member agency has a link to the East Stanislaus IRWMP website on its respective agency‐specific website. The website also allows for stakeholders to enter comments and questions, and provides contact information should they want to speak to an East Stanislaus Region representative. The website acts as a forum for the and stakeholders to exchange information throughout the IRWM planning process. There are multiple ways for the public to gain access to the and IRWM process. The makes information available to the general public, including the status of the IRWM process and upcoming decisions to be made, through the handouts and website. If a member of the general public or a stakeholder has questions and comments, they are directed to a designated contact, Jim Alves at the City of Modesto (the designated ESIRWMP representative); his contact information is provided in Table 4‐6. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-16 Table 4‐6: Contact Information City of Modesto Point of Contact Jim Alves Title Associate Civil Engineer Mailing Address 1010 10th Street Modesto, CA 95354 Phone Number 209‐571‐5557 Fax Number 209‐522‐1780 Email Address [EMAIL REDACTED] The public can provide input to the by attending the meetings, calling the provided contact, or emailing the contact with comments and questions. The designated contact discusses the questions and comments received with the Steering Committee, who takes the public input into consideration and responds to each call or email, as appropriate. If the receives public comment directly, the group evaluates the issues raised, and provides the comments/input to the Steering Committee to consider and respond to as appropriate. In order to address the diversity of water management issues, geographical representation and stakeholder interests within the East Stanislaus Region, the has identified, and directly invited, key parties to participate in meetings and committees. Additionally, the plans to partner with local colleges, such as Modesto Junior College, California State University‐Stanislaus, Humphreys College, and San Joaquin Valley College to encourage participation from younger participants, between the ages of 18 and 25. There is also the potential to combine participation in meetings with classes and/or class projects and studies. By performing specific outreach to local colleges, a wide range of ideas and energy can be accessed. 4.3.1 Outreach to Disadvantaged Communities A Disadvantaged Community (DAC), according to the State of California (CA Water Code, Section 79505.5(a)), is a community with a Median Household Income (MHI) less than 80 percent of the California statewide median household income. DWR compiled the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS) data for the period of 2006 to 2010. Based on this data, a community with an MHI of $48,706 or less is considered a DAC. Within the East Stanislaus Region, the communities of Keyes, Bret Harte, Empire, Grayson, Shackelford, West Modesto, Riverdale Park, Newman, and portions of Modesto, Turlock, Denair, Hughson, Oakdale and Ceres are DACs. Involvement and participation by representatives of these communities during the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process was solicited and encouraged to help understand the issues confronted by DACs and better address the needs of minority and/or low‐income communities. This outreach included discussions and meetings with representatives from the communities of Newman and Keyes. Objectives of specific outreach to DACs include:  Solicit involvement by individual representatives from DACs within the East Stanislaus Region and encourage participation by those representatives as members of the PAC.  For DACs which do not have designated community representatives on the PAC, encourage other PAC members to specifically advocate and represent the interests of those DACs which may lie within a PAC member’s jurisdiction or area of special interest.  Inform representatives and residents of DACs via flyers and newspaper notices about opportunities to get involved with the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process and participate in development, integration, and prioritization of projects. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 4.3.2 O The City Native Am Quality C chairpers Nation, a Valley Yik the East with poss American stakehold locate an outreach 4.4 Co The East and West IRWM co natural w adjacent have been Eastern S northern interface these two Merced Region in San Joaqu and was r The Merc border a boundary southern b River, Tu Turlock difference slight ove Region an is an u Stanislaus cooperatio required i Tuolumn Tuolumn border County l Tuolumn islaus Integrat 2013 Outreach to of Turlock a merican Her Control Facili son for the T a Chairperso kuts Tribe. B Stanislaus I sible ties to a n community der processe nd contact N efforts. oordinatio Stanislaus I tside‐San Joa overage in th watershed, g IRWM regio n approved. San Joaquin border of th of the Mode o regions. Region: T ncludes the e uin Valley w revised in th ced Region d as the Merc while the Ea boundary is d urlock Irrigat groundwater es in bound erlap exists nd East Stani nderstanding s and Me on and co n the overlap ne‐Stanislau e‐Stanislaus is defined ine. The int e‐Stanislaus ted Regional W o Native A acquired a lis itage Commi ity Upgrade a Tule River In n for the So Based on the RWM Region areas within y member m es previously Native Amer on with O RWM Region aquin IRWM his part of Ca groundwater ns participat The regions n Region: Th he East Stanis esto and Eas The Merced astern portio ithin Merced he 2011 RAP defined its n ced River w st Stanislaus defined as the tion District, basin. Due dary delinea between the islaus Region between t erced Regio oordination m area. us Region Region’s as the Tu terface betw and East St Water Manage Americans st of Native A ission as par and Expansi ndian Tribe, outhern Sierr results of th n. Formal l the Region, b may, however y described. rican interes Other/Nei n borders th Regions. The alifornia, as r basins and ted in either adjacent to t he Eastern Sa slaus region. st San Joaqu d IRWM on of the d County process. northern watershed Region’s e Merced and the e to the ations, a Merced n. There the East ons that may be n: The western uolumne ween the tanislaus T ‐ ement Plan American Co rt of the CEQ on in 2009. two Spiritua ra Miwuk N his assessmen etter commu but no respo r, participate Continued sts within t ghboring he Eastern Sa e Region’s bo well as to b d political a r the 2009 or the East Stan an Joaquin R This border in groundwa This Coordin Identific water m particip to avoid efficienc Identific efforts a coordin A discus manage efforts. Identific or other commu implem process federal before i ‐ Proposition 2010, Page 2 ontacts withi QA process fo The Native al Leaders fo Nation, and a nt, there are unications w nse has been e in the IRWM efforts of va the Region g IRWM R an Joaquin, oundaries we alance the n nd jurisdict r 2011 Regio nislaus Regio Region shares r is marked b ater basins. nation Plan S cation of a pr management pating local a d conflicts an cies. cation of oth and the way nation will be ssion of any ement conflic cation of are r agencies m nication, coo mentation of I ses, or projec regulatory d implementin n 84 & 1E IRW 24 Chapter 4 ES Coordin in Stanislaus or the Turloc American co or the Southe a representa no tribal com were conduc n received to M process th arious mean through ong Regions Merced, Tuo ere identified need for bou ional bound on Acceptanc on are describ s its southern by the Stanisl There is no Standards inc rocess to coo projects and agencies & sta nd take advan her neighbori cooperation e accomplish ongoing wat cts with adja eas where a S may be able to operation or IRWMP comp cts, or where decisions are ng the project WM Guideline SIRWM Govern nation and Out s County from ck Regional W ontacts inclu ern Sierra M tive of the N mmunities w ted to two t o date. Any N hrough any o ns will be us going and f olumne‐Stani d to fill the vo undaries base daries. All kn ce Process an bed herein. n border wit laus River an overlap bet cludes: ordinate d activities of akeholders ntage of ing IRWM / hed. ter cent IRWM State agency o assist in ponents, State or required ts. es, August nance, treach 4-17 m the Water ded a Miwuk North within tribes Native of the sed to future islaus oid in ed on nown nd all th the nd the tween f ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Regions i regions. Westside East Stan Joaquin R river. The by the We As shown Region, th and is ad were bei Region) Region. B condition 2010 RAP remained avoids ov islaus Integrat 2013 is the border e‐San Joaqu nislaus Regi Region using e western bo estside‐San J n in Figure 4 he Westside‐ djacent to th ing develope overlapped Because of t nally approv P to eliminat d unchanged verlaps with ted Regional W r of Stanislau uin: The We on’s wester g the San Joa oundary of th Joaquin Regi 4‐4, the East ‐San Joaquin he Yosemite‐ ed in 2010, with the M the major o ved by DWR te its overlap . The East Sta all other sur Fig Water Manage us and Tuolu estside‐San J rn boundary aquin River; he East Stan on, such that t Stanislaus n Region, the ‐Mariposa Re the Yosemit Merced Regio overlap the R. The Yosem p with the M anislaus ther rounding IRW gure 4‐4: Surr ement Plan mne Countie Joaquin Regi y. This boun ; however, th islaus Regio t there is no Region shar Merced Reg egion. When te‐Mariposa on and shar Yosemite‐M mite‐Maripos Merced Regio refore has a s WM regions. rounding IRW es. There is n ion’s eastern ndary was d he boundary n simply foll overlap. res borders w gion, and the n the East St Region (for red boundar ariposa and sa boundarie on, while the small overlap . WM Regions Chapter 4 ES Coordin no overlap b n boundary i defined by t y does not s lows the bou with the Eas Tuolumne‐S tanislaus reg rmerly the C ries with the d Merced Re es were mo e Merced reg p with the M SIRWM Govern nation and Out etween thes is adjacent t the Westsid strictly follow undary as de stern San Joa Stanislaus Re gional bound Central Calif e East Stani egions were dified durin gional bound Merced Region nance, treach 4-18 e two to the e‐San w the efined aquin egion, daries fornia islaus only g the daries n, but ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 4 ESIRWM Governance, Coordination and Outreach December 2013 4-19 As previously noted, the East Stanislaus Region was developed to fill in the obvious void in IRWM coverage in the Central Valley. When determining the boundaries for the Region, however, natural water boundaries were also important so that the Region would make sense from a watershed perspective, given the region’s use of surface water as part of its supply and distinct features. This criterion resulted in a triangular area in the north‐eastern portion of Stanislaus County being left uncovered by the East Stanislaus Region. This area is not in the Modesto groundwater basin, which was used to determine the northern boundary, and its surface water drains into the East San Joaquin Region. This area overlies the Eastern San Joaquin groundwater basin, an area mostly covered by the Eastern San Joaquin IRWM Region. The East Stanislaus Region plans to discuss the triangular gap with the bordering Eastern San Joaquin Region and the Tuolumne‐Stanislaus Region to ensure that stakeholders in that area are not neglected. The East Stanislaus Region has begun coordinating with surrounding regions. The has an ongoing relationship with members of the Westside‐San Joaquin IRWM Region in which members of the have attended meetings with the Westside‐San Joaquin Region and participated in the planning process. The Tuolumne‐Stanislaus and the East Stanislaus Regions have established an interim coordination and communication protocol. Because development of the East Stanislaus Region is relatively new, relationships with other IRWM regions are in initial stages or have not yet materialized. The plans to discuss water management strategies that have or will be employed by each of the neighboring IRWM Regions to identify opportunities for inter‐regional collaboration and to optimize management strategies. 4.5 Coordination with State/Federal Agencies The governance structure allows for any interested party to participate in the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process including members from State and federal agencies in the same manner as any other regional stakeholder. The other opportunity for the East Stanislaus Region to interface with State and federal agencies is through funding secured from State and federal agencies, as well as during permit acquisition for specific projects in the IRMWP and preparation of environmental documentation. If funding were secured from a State or federal agency to implement projects included in the IRWMP, on‐going coordination would be required during project implementation and after. Similarly, projects that are implemented will require certain State and federal approvals including various permits and/or environmental approvals. Projects will be compliant with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), as necessary. Completion of CEQA/NEPA documentation would require coordination with various State and federal agencies. At present, the East Stanislaus Region is coordinating indirectly with the Department of Water Resources. This coordination is occurring through both the IRWM process and through the Regional Flood Management program. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte In order manage regional w to be re Water Ma develope of water Goals we Region w These go (Figure 5 goal. Eac measurea move the and ultim that path follow to The iden address t discussed islaus Integrat 2013 er 5 V for the East its water re water resour esolved thro anagement P d a shared v managemen re then deve would like to als are steps Finally, o ch objective able and atta e region forw mately, its v hway that th achieve its o tified conflic the conflicts, d in this secti Fi ted Regional W ision, Go Stanislaus R esources, it rces‐related ough this I Plan (IRWMP vision, outlin nt will look eloped, defini o achieve in s required to objectives w e was fram ainable and ward towards vision. This he East Stan objectives, go cts, and goal as well as th ion. igure 5‐1: Rel Water Manage oals, and Region to eff first identif conflicts and ntegrated R The Regi ning what the like for the ing what exa meeting its o achieve th were defined f med to be s once achiev s achieving it IRWMP rep nislaus Regi oals and visio ls and objec he process u lationship be ement Plan Objectiv fectively fied the d issues Regional on then e future region. actly the s vision. e vision for each specific, ved, will ts goals, presents ion will on. ctives to sed, are etween Vision T p p P w w o s o T t c p o ‐ N ves n, Goals, and The IRWM Pl plan objectiv process used Plan objectiv water‐related within the re objectives mu some practica of objectives The objective the region. Th contain an ex prioritization objectives we Proposition November 20 Chap Objectives lan must clea ves and descr d to develop t ves must addr d issues and gion. In addi ust be measu al means so a can be moni es may be pr he IRWM Pla xplanation of n or reason th ere not prior 84 & 1E IRW 012, Page 20 pter 5 Vision, G and Obje arly present ribe the the objective ress major conflicts ition, ureable by achievement itored. ioritized for an must f the hey the ritized. WM Guidelines Goals, ectives 5-1 es. t s, ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-2 Regional Conflicts and Issues Regional conflicts, as well as the goals and objectives described in Section 5.1, were brainstormed and discussed at several Steering Committee (SC) and Public Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings held between September 2011 through December 2011. Each committee revised an initial list of identified regional conflicts and issues; the list was finalized in January 2012. The primary water resources‐related issues and conflicts identified within the East Stanislaus Region include:  Water supply reliability  Drinking water quality  Water quality protection  Groundwater overdraft, contamination, and recharge  Protection and enhancement of aquatic, riparian, and watershed resources  Water‐related needs for disadvantaged communities  Flood protection  Recycled water use  Water conservation  Aging infrastructure These shared conflicts and interests within the East Stanislaus Region led to cooperatively‐ developed regional goals and objectives. 5.1 Region’s Vision for Water Resources Management After reviewing the identified conflicts and issues, the East Stanislaus Regional Water Management Partnership established a vision for the Region to act as a guiding principal throughout the IRWM planning process and establish what future regional water management will achieve. The East Stanislaus region’s vision for IRWM planning is to: Integrate projects to provide multiple benefits, resolve identified issues and conflicts, and meet the regional goals and objectives to achieve water reliability and sustainability and flood protection while protecting and enhancing the environment and regional economies and culture. 5.2 Region Goals & Objectives 5.2.1 Goals and Objectives Identifying the Region’s issues and conflicts allowed the SC and PAC to develop goals that, if achieved, would help resolve the issues in the Region and achieve its vision. Through application of the governance structure, as described in Section 4.1, and using a collaborative process to reach consensus, the SC and PAC met multiple times and discussed the region’s conflicts and issues and developed objectives related to the conflicts. Information provided and discussed during this process included recent data regarding groundwater elevations, experiences in managing groundwater quality and publically available information and opinions as published in local newspapers and websites. For example, the committees identified drinking water quality, water quality protection, and groundwater overdraft and contamination as issues in the region. To address these, a water quality‐focused goal was developed – Protect and improve water quality for beneficial uses consistent with regional interests and the Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan in cooperation with local, state, and federal agencies, and regional stakeholders. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-3 Then, for the identified goal, a number of measureable objectives were developed (again, via consensus) that would enable the region to determine if the goal is being achieved. Goals were identified in the categories of Water Supply, Flood Protection, Water Quality, Environmental Protection and Enhancement, Regional Communication and Cooperation, and Economic and Social Responsibility. Water Supply Goals and Objectives Goal: Protect existing water supplies and water rights, and improve regional water supply reliability. Objectives:  Provide a variety of water supply sources, including recycled water, to meet all current and future demands (urban, agricultural and the environment) under various hydrologic conditions.  Promote the use of groundwater storage and conjunctive use options to reduce groundwater overdraft.  Protect existing water rights.  Implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses.  Support monitoring and research to improve understanding of water supplies and needs.  Address conveyance infrastructure needs. Flood Protection Goals and Objectives Goal: Ensure flood protection strategies are developed and implemented through a collaborative process, utilizing both local and watershed‐wide approaches designed to maximize opportunities for comprehensive water resource management. Objectives:  Develop outlines of regional projects and plans necessary to protect infrastructure from flooding and erosion from the 100‐year event.  Work with stakeholders to preserve existing flood attenuation by implementing land management strategies throughout the watershed.  Develop approaches for adaptive management that minimize maintenance requirements and protect water quality and availability while preserving and enhancing ecologic and stream functions, as appropriate.  Provide community benefits beyond flood protection, such as public access, open space, recreation, agricultural preservation, and economic development.  Protect, restore, and enhance the natural ecological and hydrologic functions of rivers, creeks, streams and their floodplains. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-4 Water Quality Goals and Objectives Goal: Protect and improve water quality for beneficial uses consistent with regional interests and the Basin Plan in cooperation with local, state and federal agencies and regional stakeholders. Objectives:  Meet or exceed all applicable water quality regulatory standards.  Deliver agricultural water to meet water quality guidelines established by stakeholders.  Aid in meeting Total Maximum Daily Loads established, or to be established, for the Tuolumne River watershed.  Protect surface waters and groundwater basins from contamination and threat of contamination.  Manage existing land uses while preserving or enhancing environmental habitats.  Minimize impacts from storm water through implementation of Best Management Practices, Low Impact Development or other similar projects.  Promote programs and projects to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of urban and agricultural runoff.  Promote and support regional monitoring to further understanding of water quality issues. Environmental Protection and Enhancement Goals and Objectives Goal: Protect the environmental resources of the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and San Joaquin River watersheds by identifying, promoting and implementing opportunities to assess, restore and enhance natural resources of these watersheds. Objectives:  Identify and incorporate (where possible and reasonable) opportunities to assess, protect, enhance, and/or restore natural resources when developing water management strategies.  Minimize adverse effects on biological and cultural resources, including riparian habitats, habitats supporting sensitive plant or animal species, and archaeological sites when implementing strategies and projects.  Identify opportunities for open spaces, trails and parks along creeks and other recreational projects in the watershed to be incorporated with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.  Contribute to the long‐term sustainability of agricultural, commercial, industrial, and urban land uses and activities within the basin.  Identify opportunities to protect, enhance, or restore habitat to support all watersheds in the Region in conjunction with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.  Support projects to understand, protect, improve and restore the region’s ecological resources. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-5 Regional Communication and Cooperation Goals and Objectives Goal: Implement and promote this IRWM Plan through regional communication, cooperation, and education. Objectives:  Develop a forum for consensus decision‐making and IRWM Plan implementation by regional entities.  Build relationships with State and Federal regulatory agencies and other water forums and agencies to facilitate permitting of water‐related projects and ensure continued consistency with state water plans.  Facilitate dialogues between regional and inter‐regional entities to reduce inconsistencies and conflicts in water management and to maximize benefits from water‐related projects.  Maintain avenues of communication with the general public and offering opportunities to provide feedback on the IRWM and water‐related projects through the regional websites and other public forums.  Identify opportunities for public education about water supply, water quality, flood management, and environmental protection. Economic and Social Responsibility Goals and Objectives Goal: Promote development and implementation of projects, programs and policies that are socially impartial and economically sound. Objectives:  Support the participation of disadvantaged communities in the development, implementation, monitoring and long‐term maintenance of water resource projects.  Develop cost‐effective multi‐benefit projects.  Consider disproportionate community impacts to ensure environmental justice.  Maximize economies of scale and governmental efficiencies.  Protect cultural resources.  Reduce energy use and/or use renewable resources where appropriate. 5.2.2 Prioritizing Objectives The regional IRWM planning participants chose to prioritize the Region’s goals, and therefore the associated objectives, for use in project prioritization. The planning participants felt that by prioritizing the Region’s goals and objectives, along with the Statewide priorities and other relevant factors, that the resulting ranking of projects would help to identify those projects that, when implemented, would have the greatest impact in addressing the identified conflicts and issues and would best help the Region achieve its vision for regional water resource management. The participants chose to use a weighting schema to prioritize the projects, allowing for flexibility in future changes to the prioritized objectives as regional water resources issues change. Table 5‐1 summarizes the measurements for each objective. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-6 Table 5‐1: Measures for Regional Goals and Objectives Goal/Objective Possible Measure(s) Water Supply Provide a variety of water supply sources to meet all current and future demands under various hydrologic conditions Acre‐feet of water supply by water type; Percent demand met in any given year; Comparison of projected demand to existing water supplies Promote the use of groundwater storage and conjunctive use options to reduce groundwater overdraft Number of local conjunctive use programs; Acre‐feet of water stored (directly and/or in‐lieu); groundwater elevations Protect existing water rights Acre‐feet of water delivered compared to perfected water rights Implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses Number of Demand Management Measures (DMMs) implemented regionally; Acre‐feet of conserved water annually; 2015 and 2020 per capita water use rates Support monitoring and research to improve understanding of water supplies and needs Ongoing and new monitoring programs; Regional demand estimates Address conveyance infrastructure needs Acre‐feet of water lost through leakage; Percent demand met Flood Protection Develop outlines of regional projects and plans necessary to protect infrastructure from flooding and erosion from the 100‐year event Project list from Regional Flood Management Plan (RFMP); Incorporate RFMP project list into IRWMP project list Work with stakeholders to preserve existing flood attenuation by implementing land management strategies throughout the watershed Coordinate with Regional Flood Management Plan effort Develop approaches for adaptive management that minimizes maintenance requirements and protects water quality and availability while preserving and enhancing ecologic and stream functions, as appropriate Coordinate with Regional Flood Management Plan to ensure adaptive management element; Incorporate RFMP elements into IRWMP Update Provide community benefits beyond flood protection, such as public access, open space and recreation Number of multi‐benefit projects identified and/or implemented providing flood protection and other benefits ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-7 Flood Protection (cont’d) Protect, restore, and enhance the natural ecological and hydrologic function of rivers, creeks, streams and their floodplains Number of acres of riparian habitat/floodplain restored or protected Water Quality Meet or exceed all applicable water quality regulatory standards Basin Plan Water Quality Objectives (narrative and numerical); water quality Deliver agricultural water to meet water quality guidelines established by stakeholders Water quality monitoring data Aid in meeting established, or to be established, for the Tuolumne River watershed Constituent concentrations (for specific Protect surface waters and groundwater basins from contamination and threat of contamination Surface and groundwater water quality monitoring data Manage existing land uses while preserving or enhancing environmental habitats Number of acres of habitat protected/maintained Minimize impacts from storm water through implementation of BMPs, LID and other similar projects Number of projects implemented incorporating storm water BMPs, LID or the like Promote programs and projects to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of urban and agricultural runoff Storm water monitoring data Promote and support regional monitoring to further understanding of water quality issues Participation in state and federal monitoring programs such as CASGEM; monitoring data Environmental Protection and Enhancement Identify and incorporate (where possible and reasonable) opportunities to assess, protect, enhance, and/or restore natural resources when developing water management strategies Number of acres of habitat restored, enhanced or protected Minimize adverse effects of biological and cultural resources when implementing strategies and projects Measurement and monitoring of biological and cultural resources before and after project development Identify opportunities for open spaces, trails and parks, and other recreational projects to be incorporated with water supply, water quality or flood protection projects Number of multi‐benefit projects on IRWMP list that incorporate open space, trails, parks or other recreational benefits ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-8 Environmental Protection and Enhancement (cont’d) Contribute to the long‐term sustainability of agricultural, commercial, industrial and urban land uses and activity in the basin Number of acres of each land use type in the Region Identify opportunities to protect, enhance, or restore habitat to support all watersheds in the Region in conjunction with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects Number of multi‐benefit projects on IRWMP list that include the protection, enhancement, or restoration of watershed habitats Support projects to understand, protect, improve and restore the region’s ecological resources Number of multi‐benefit projects on IRWMP list that include the protection, improvement, or restoration of ecological resources Regional Communication and Cooperation Develop a forum for consensus decision‐making and IRWM Plan implementation by regional entities Develop and implement governance structure that is based on consensus decision‐making; Develop protocols for committee decision‐making based on consensus Build relationships with State and Federal regulatory agencies and other water forums and agencies to facilitate permitting of water‐related projects and ensure continued consistency with state water plans Invite State and Federal regulatory agency representatives to participate in IRWM regional governance; Participate in and/or coordinate with, either formally or informally, with State and Federal regulatory agencies and other water forums Facilitate dialogues between regional and inter‐regional entities to reduce inconsistencies in water management strategies and to maximize benefits from water‐related projects Communicate directly with adjacent IRWM regions; Participate in opportunities for dialogues with other IRWM regions Maintain avenues of communication with the general public and offering opportunities to provide feedback on the IRWM and water‐related projects through the regional websites and other public forums Develop and maintain IRWM website; Provide notice of and conduct public workshops and meetings; Identify opportunities for public education about water supply, water quality, flood management, and environmental protection Number of multi‐benefit projects on IRWMP list that include public education components ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-9 Economic and Social Responsibility Support the participation of disadvantaged communities (DACs) in the development, implementation, monitoring and long‐term maintenance of water resource projects Provide direct outreach to DACs; Provide contextual and technical support to DACs as funding permits Develop cost‐effective multi‐benefit projects Number of multi‐benefit projects on IRWMP list; Evaluation of costs and benefits of projects on IRWMP list Consider disproportionate community impacts to ensure environmental justice Geographical distribution of projects on IRWMP list relative to DAC locations Maximize economies of scale and governmental efficiencies Number of projects on IRWMP list with multiple project proponents; Evaluation of costs and benefits of projects on IRWMP list Protect cultural resources Measurement and monitoring of cultural resources before and after project development Reduce energy use and/or use renewable resources where appropriate Number of projects on IRWMP that include energy‐ reduction or renewable energy components ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-10 During development of the project prioritization process, the SC and PAC applied weighting factors to the scoring criteria which included the categories of Regional Objectives, Statewide Priorities, Other Strategies, and Feasibility. With the Region’s vision in mind, the Regional Objectives account for half of the total weight, as collectively, achieving the region’s goals and objectives are at the forefront of successful IRWM planning. Of that, the goals were then weighted individually as shown below. The committees agreed that water supply, flood protection, and water quality are major issues that need to be addressed, as demonstrated by each category accounting for 10% of a project’s score. Then, environmental protection and enhancement, and regional communication and cooperation each account for 7% of a project’s score, and lastly, but still importantly, economic and social responsibility accounts for 6% of a project’s score. The planning participants also felt that achieving the Statewide Priorities, addressing other project aspects (such as readiness to proceed) and project feasibility also merited consideration in project ranking, and assigned relative weights accordingly. The resulting percentages applied to the various project scoring criteria are summarized below. A sample project scoring sheet, also showing the assigned category weights, is included in Appendix K.  Regional Objectives – 50% o Water Supply – 10% o Flood Protection – 10% o Water Quality – 10% o Environmental Protection and Enhancement Goal – 7% o Regional Communication and Cooperation – 7% o Economic and Social Responsibility – 6%  Statewide Priorities – 25% o Drought Preparedness – 5% o Use and Reuse Water More Efficiently – 5% o Climate Change Response/Adaptation Actions o Expand Environmental Stewardship – 2% o Practice Integrated Flood Management – 3% o Protect Surface Water and Groundwater Quality – 3% o Improve Tribal Water and Natural Resources – 2% o Ensure Equitable Distribution of Benefits; Provide Environmental Justice – 2%  Other Strategies – 16% o Direct Benefit to DAC and/or Native American Communities – 4% o Schedule (i.e. Readiness to Proceed) – 8% o Inter‐regional Project – 2% o Provide Non‐Water Related Benefits – 2%  Feasibility – 9% o Benefit‐Cost Analysis – 6% o Financing/Economic Feasibility – 3% ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 5.3 Re Agricultu Urban C Convey Sy Conjun Gr Precip Recy Surfa Surface S Drinkin Groun Aq The IR docum Resour Strateg to mee and id incorp Plan. ‐ Propo Guideli Page 2 islaus Integrat 2013 esource M RMS ural Water Us n Water Use E onveyance – D yance – Regio ystem Reopera Water Transf nctive Manage oundwater St Desalination pitation Enhan ycled Municipa ace Storage – C Storage – Reg ng Water Trea Distribution ndwater Reme quifer Remedi RWM Plan mu ment the rang rce Managem gies (RMS) co et the IRWM entify which porated into t osition 84 & 1 ines, Novemb 20 ted Regional W Manageme Table 5‐2: R e Efficiency Efficiency Delta nal/Local ation fers ement and orage n ncement al Water CALFED ional/Local atment and n ediation / iation ust ge of ment onsidered objectives RMS were the IRWM 1E IRWM ber 2012, Water Manage ent Strate As describ Resource strategies of each IR considere Stanislaus were dee as shown to the r objectives following RMSs is sh RMS Incorpor Incorporate into IRWMP            ement Plan egies bed in the 2 Managemen s to meet wa RWM region ed all of the s IRWMP an emed approp in Table 5‐2 region, and s through RM sections. T hown in Tab rated into Eas ed P Ma P Salt a Urba Agricu Economi Ec F Land Use Rec Wate Wa Flo 009 Californ nt Strategies ater‐related n (listed in T ese CWP RM nd applicatio priate and ap 2. A summary the ability MS implemen The Regiona ble 5‐3. st Stanislaus RMS atching Qualit Pollution Prev and Salinity Ma an Runoff Man ultural Lands S ic Incentives ( and Water Pr cosystem Rest Forest Manage e Planning and charge Area Pr er‐Dependent atershed Mana ood Risk Mana Other Strate Chap nia Water Pla s (RMSs) are resource ma Table 5‐2). T MSs for inclu on in the re pplicable ha y of the RMS y of achievi ntation are su al Objectives IRWMP ty to Use vention anagement nagement Stewardship (Loans, Grants ricing) toration ement d Managemen rotection Recreation agement agement egies pter 5 Vision, G and Obje an (CWP) Up e a diverse s anagement n The ESRWM usion in the egion; those ve been incl Ss, their relev ing the reg ummarized i s’ relation to Incorpor into IRW      s,    nt       Goals, ectives 5-11 pdate, set of needs P has e East e that luded vancy gional in the o the rated WMP ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-12 Agricultural Water Use Efficiency This strategy aims at reducing net agricultural water use, focusing on improvements in technology and management of water, where appropriate, both on‐farm and at the irrigation district level. This RMS is highly applicable to the East Stanislaus Region. A significant amount of water use in the region is for agricultural uses, and agricultural water use efficiency could be further applied, as is reasonable and cost‐effective, contributing to water savings for the region. Agricultural water use efficiency measures are already being implemented in the region. For example, Modesto Irrigation District (MID) designed and installed a new irrigation control SCADA system providing new water management tools and improved operational efficiency of canals. MID and Turlock Irrigation District (TID) also recently prepared its 2012 Agricultural Water Management Plans, in accordance with the Agricultural Water Management Planning Act in SBx7‐7, and have begun implementing the efficient water management practices as identified. The act requires water suppliers who provide water to 10,000 or more irrigated acres to develop and adopt a plan and implement cost‐effective efficient water management practices. However, it is also important to recognize that agricultural applied water is a source of recharge to the underlying groundwater basins, and reduction in applied irrigation could lead to reductions in groundwater recharge. This irrigation‐recharge connection will have to be considered in any project implementing this RMS. This RMS aligns with the Water Supply objective identified by the Region to implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses. Urban Water Use Efficiency Application of the Urban Water Use Efficiency RMS results in benefits to water supply and water quality through improvements in technology and human behavior to decrease both indoor and outdoor water use. While Agricultural Water Use Efficiency reduces water use on farms and through irrigation districts, Urban Water Use Efficiency applies to residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional water uses. This RMS is already being applied throughout the region through agency conservation programs, and will continue to be used in the future to manage water resources, contribute to drought preparedness, and reduce energy use and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Similar to the Agricultural Water Use Efficiency RMS, application of this RMS would contribute to the objective to implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses. Conveyance – Delta Conveyance provides for the movement of water, and includes natural water courses such as streams, rivers, and groundwater aquifers, as well as constructed facilities such as ditches, canals, and pipelines. The Delta, located at the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, is composed of natural streams and sloughs, as well as artificial channels and constructed islands protected by levees that naturally convey water from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers westward to the Pacific Ocean. Conveyance facilities within the Delta also pump water from it into canals that move water southward to urban and agricultural users. Delta conveyance can maintain or improve water supply reliability, protect water quality, provide water system operational flexibility, and improve the environment. The East Stanislaus Region, while upstream of the Delta, is not in direct proximity to the Delta and would not utilize it for conveyance; therefore, this RMS is not applicable to the region. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-13 Conveyance – Regional/Local Various regional and interregional conveyance facilities exist throughout California and within the East Stanislaus Region. Interregional conveyance facilities, such as the State Water Project (SWP) and the federal Central Valley Project (CVP), move water throughout the state. Regional or local conveyance is when water is distributed to users from locally‐developed sources, usually located within the same watershed or river system. Conveyance facilities can provide benefits to flood management, environmental uses, water quality, recreation, operational flexibility, and can be related to conjunctive use applications as well as urban and agricultural water use efficiency. This RMS would be implemented through the following:  Improve existing conveyance systems, which could consist of improving aging infrastructure, increasing existing capacities, and adding new facilities.  Upgrade distribution systems to improve efficiencies, improve water quality, and reduce energy demands.  Construct new conveyance systems to replace or supplement existing systems.  Maintain channel capacity.  Add system interties to interconnect conveyance systems. Water agencies and irrigation districts in the East Stanislaus Region rely on local conveyance every day and maintain their conveyance facilities to provide water supply reliability and flood control. The region will continue to rely on this RMS in the future. It aligns with the Region’s Water Supply objective to address conveyance infrastructure needs. System Reoperation System reoperation consists of modifying the existing procedures for operation and management of water systems, including reservoirs and conveyance facilities. Oftentimes, system reoperation occurs to address a specific issue. System Reoperation is an RMS that can be applied in the East Stanislaus Region. It will likely become more common in the future as populations continue to grow and climate change impacts are realized. As described in Section 2.3, climate change could alter the amount of snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, the timing of snowmelt, and runoff patterns which could greatly impact existing operations of water systems in the East Stanislaus region. System reoperation is one adaptive management strategy that the region can employ to address climate change impacts. Water Transfers The California Water Code defines a water transfer as a temporary or long‐term change in the point of diversion, place of use, or purpose of use due to transfer or exchange of water rights. Transfers can be between water districts using, in general, one of the following methods to make water available for the transfer:  Transfer water from storage that would be carried over to the next year.  Transfer previously‐banked groundwater by directly pumping and transferring that water or by pumping the banked groundwater for local use and transferring surface water that would have been used locally.  Reduce existing consumptive use of water and transfer the excess.  Reduce seepage from conveyance systems to make additional water available. Water transfers can provide operational flexibility and can be linked to conjunctive management, groundwater banking, conveyance efficiency, agricultural and urban water use efficiency, and water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-14 quality improvement. This RMS will be included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP and considered both now and in the future to meet demands. Conjunctive Management and Groundwater Storage Conjunctive management is the planned use of surface water and groundwater resources to maximize availability and reliability of water supplies. For conjunctive management to be successful, groundwater storage must be feasible. Groundwater aquifers may be “recharged” from natural hydrologic process or water may be introduced to the aquifer through active groundwater management. Water can then be withdrawn through wells or it can discharge naturally, contributing to streamflow. Conjunctive management is already relied upon by water managers in the region. For example, the City of Modesto relies on conjunctive use to meet demands with its water supplies from groundwater and Tuolumne River surface water that is purchased wholesale from MID. Turlock Irrigation District also manages its Turlock Groundwater Subbasin supplies conjunctively with its surface water supplies. Conjunctive management and groundwater will continue to be relied upon in the future. Desalination Desalination consists of the removal of salt from water to allow for the water’s beneficial use. In terms of the desalination RMS, it has typically focused on treating seawater or brackish water (water that has salt levels exceeding those acceptable for domestic, municipal, and irrigation uses).For inland areas, groundwater desalting is technically feasible and could be used in the region to address increasing groundwater salinities; however, as management strategy, it is expensive, energy intensive, and results in a waste brine that may be difficult to manage. As such, desalination will not be considered further for the East Stanislaus Region at this time. Precipitation Enhancement Cloud seeding, or precipitation enhancement, artificially stimulates clouds to precipitate by injecting artificial substances (usually silver iodide) into clouds that enable snowflakes and raindrops to form more easily. Precipitation enhancement has been performed in California since the early 1950s, with most of it occurring along the central and southern Sierra Nevada. A long‐ term precipitation enhancement project is planned for the North Fork of the Stanislaus River, sponsored by the Northern California Power Authority, with a primary goal of increasing hydroelectric power. According to the 2009 CWP Update, the cost of cloud seeding is typically less than $20 per acre‐foot per year. In 2013, TID and MID entered its 25th year of its cloud seeding program. TID studies estimate that cloud seeding produces a 2% annual increase in total precipitation which translates to approximately 40,000 acre‐feet per year (Cantatore, 2010). This is and will continue to be valuable in the future as climate change impacts occur. Recycled Municipal Water One RMS commonly applied throughout California to increase available water supplies and meet current and future water demands is the use of Recycled Municipal Water, consisting of treating and reusing wastewater. Recycled water can offset potable water supplies, diversify a water agency’s water supply portfolio, creating a more drought resistant supply and beneficially reusing wastewater. The East Stanislaus Region recognizes the importance of maximizing use of recycled water, as demonstrated in its Water Supply objective to provide a variety of water supply sources, including recycled water, to meet all current and future demands under various hydrologic conditions, and plans to expand application in and around the region. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-15 Surface Storage – CALFED DWR, the Bureau of Reclamation, and local water interests are investigating five potential reservoirs for surface water storage as part of the CALFED Record of Decision. These include the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, North‐of‐the‐Delta Storage, In‐Delta Storage Project, Los Vaqueros Reservoir Expansion, and the Upper San Joaquin River Basin Storage Investigation. Because none would apply to the East Stanislaus Region, this RMS is not being considered for future application or incorporation into the IRWMP. Surface Storage – Regional/Local Relying on surface storage, consisting of reservoirs to collect water for later release and use, is often necessary throughout California. Surface storage can also be operated in conjunctive with groundwater storage to create conjunctive use opportunities. Modesto Reservoir and Turlock Lake lie within the East Stanislaus Region and are used by MID and TID, respectively, for surface storage. Regional and local surface storage will continue to be used for water management in the East Stanislaus Region. The addition or expansion of reservoirs could be an option for increased water supplies in the future, if deemed necessary. Drinking Water Treatment and Distribution Drinking water treatment and distribution is a key RMS to achieving the region’s Water Supply and Water Quality goals and objectives. Providing a high quality, reliable drinking water supply to users is the primary goal of public water systems. The water agencies in the East Stanislaus Region apply this RMS every day, and will continue doing so through maintenance of existing water treatment and distribution facilities and the addition of new facilities, as necessary to meet demands. Groundwater and Aquifer Remediation Groundwater in aquifers throughout the state has degraded water quality that prevents beneficial use. In some areas, groundwater quality is degraded by naturally occurring constituents while other areas, poor water quality is caused by a variety of human activities. In order to allow for use of the degraded groundwater as a drinking water supply, groundwater and/or aquifer remediation may be required. Groundwater remediation removes contaminants that affect the beneficial use of the groundwater and can consist of the following methods:  Passive groundwater remediation: allowing contaminants to biologically or chemically degrade or disperse in‐situ over time.  Active groundwater remediation: treating contaminated groundwater in‐situ or extracting contaminated groundwater and then treating it. When groundwater is extracted, treated, and then injected back into the aquifer, it is commonly referred to as a ‘pump and treat system’. If groundwater is pumped, treated, and then delivered to users for potable, irrigation or industrial use, it is referred to as wellhead treatment. The East Stanislaus Region’s groundwater quality is variable and has been impacted by overlying land uses in many locations. For this reason, treating the pumped groundwater prior to delivery (i.e. active groundwater remediation) is necessary. Groundwater monitoring for groundwater levels and quality is conducted and will continue to be; if contaminants spread or groundwater quality worsens, or if water quality regulations are modified, additional groundwater and/or aquifer remediation could be required in the future. Matching Quality to Use Not all water uses require the same quality of water. High quality water can be used for potable water supplies while a water of less quality, such as recycled water, may be appropriate for uses ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-16 other than drinking water. The East Stanislaus Region plans on expanding recycled water use, initiating storm water capture and reuse, and expanding the non‐potable use of degraded aquifer supplies. By applying this RMS, the Region will match quality to use in other water resource applications both at present and in the future. Pollution Prevention Pollution prevention is the protection of water quality at its source, oftentimes through land use management practices to prevent sediment and pollutants from entering the source water. It can not only improve water quality for all beneficial uses, but also reduce the cost for other water management and treatment processes. This RMS would help meet the Water Quality goals and objectives for the Region. The Region has and will continue to apply this RMS. Salt and Salinity Management With the exception of freshly fallen snow, salt, or materials originating from dissolution or weathering of rocks and soil, is present in most natural water supplies because soluble salts in rocks and soil begin dissolving as soon as water reaches them. Recycled water applications can increase salinity, and while living organisms benefit from low levels of salt concentrations, salinity can become a problem when consumptive use and evaporation concentrates salts to levels that adversely impact beneficial uses. The Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long‐term Sustainability initiative (CV‐SALTS), a collaborative effort initiated in 2006 by the Central Valley Salinity Coalition, was created to find a solution to the rising salt levels in the Central Valley that have the potential to impact drinking water quality and productive crops throughout the basin. It is the Salt and Nutrient Planning effort in the Central Valley region as indicated by the The City of Modesto has been participating in CV‐SALTS and plan on continuing its membership. The Region continues managing salt and applying this RMS through participation in CV‐SALTS, as well as other methods. This RMS will help achieve the Water Supply and Water Quality goals and objectives identified for the East Stanislaus Region. Urban Runoff Management Urbanization, through increased impervious surfaces, alters flow paths, water storage, pollutant levels, evapotranspiration, groundwater percolation and recharge, surface runoff and many other natural processes. Urban runoff management is the management of stormwater and dry weather runoff (e.g. excess landscape irrigation water flows to the storm drain) typically for flood control and pollution prevention. This RMS focuses on a watershed focused approach for urban runoff management through the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) in which the natural hydrologic cycle can be emulated and preserved. The BMPs are designed to reduce pollutant loading, reduce the volumes of runoff, and reduce velocities of urban runoff discharged to surface waters. LID creates site designs and applies BMPs that maintain the site’s pre‐development runoff rates and volumes. The East Stanislaus Region manages urban runoff in the more traditional sense in which stormwater is collected and conveyed through storm drains and pipes. The Region will continue applying this RMS and in the future, identify opportunities to apply a watershed approach of urban runoff management and to manage stormwater runoff through capture and reuse. Agricultural Lands Stewardship Agricultural lands stewardship consists of conserving natural resources and protecting the environment while improving land for food, fiber and biofuels production, watershed function, soil, air, energy, plant and animal and other conservation purposes. It can help attenuate peak precipitation runoff, conserve water, facilitate groundwater recharge, provide critical habitat, sequester carbon, and also maintain production of food and fiber. The economy of the East ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-17 Stanislaus Region is distinguished by its large agricultural sector. Protection of these lands, and therefore implementation of this RMS is already underway and it will continue to be implemented in the future, helping meet the Environmental Protection and Enhancement goal and objectives. Economic Incentives (Loans, Grants, and Water Pricing) Economic incentives can be provided to influence the amount and timing of water use, wastewater volume generated, and sources of water supplies. Economic incentives generally come in the form of financial assistance such as low interest loans and grants, water pricing (e.g. water rates), and rebates or free services. The most common water rate policy is for water suppliers to recover costs for planning, operation and maintenance, capital, and administration costs for water‐related projects. All of the water suppliers in the East Stanislaus Region use rate structures to fund their capital, water enterprise, and general funds and some offer rebates to encourage the use of water conserving fixtures. Economic pricing can be used to encourage the continued use of surface water, rather than moving to groundwater when implementing advanced irrigation practices. Keeping surface water economically priced can also help to implement conjunctive use, and improve groundwater conditions. This RMS will continue to be relied upon to promote and implement efficient water management practices for both urban and agricultural uses, a Water Supply objective for the region, as well as continue to fund needed projects and offset costs for low‐income and disadvantaged communities. Ecosystem Restoration The Ecosystem Restoration RMS aligns directly with the Environmental Protection and Enhancement goal and objectives for the Region. Ecosystem restoration for the purposes of this RMS includes the restoration of aquatic, riparian, and floodplain ecosystems as they are most directly affected by water and flood management activities. Restoration can be completed as stand‐ alone projects, or aspects of ecosystem restoration can be incorporated into water resources‐ related projects to create multi‐benefit projects. This RMS is incorporated into the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Forest Management The East Stanislaus Region’s water supplies originate from high elevation forests in the Sierra Nevada. Forests in California are used for sustainable production of resources such as water, timber, native vegetation, fish, wildlife, livestock, and recreation opportunities. Forest management can directly impact water quantity and quality. This RMS focuses on forest management activities that improve availability and quality of water for users. A portion of the Stanislaus National Forest lies within the eastern portion of the East Stanislaus Region. The Forest Management RMS can be applied there which will benefit the entire East Stanislaus Region and help contribute to the Water Supply, Water Quality, Flood Protection, and Environmental Protection and Enhancement goals and objectives. Land Use Planning and Management The Land Use Planning and Management RMS focuses on integrating land use and water management to plan for housing and economic development needs while providing for efficient use of water, water quality, energy, and other resources. The way land is used (i.e. land use type) directly affects water supply and quality and flood management. This RMS relates to the Water Supply, Water Quality, Flood Protection, and Environmental Protection and Enhancement goals and objectives. The Region has, and will continue to, apply this RMS, integrating land use with water resource management. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-18 Recharge Area Protection Recharge areas are locations where groundwater is replenished through percolation. Ideal natural recharge areas are those areas that allow for high quality water to percolate through sediments and rocks to the underlying groundwater basins. Protection of recharge areas consists of ensuring recharge areas continue to allow recharge, rather than being covered by urban infrastructure (impervious areas), and preventing pollutants from contaminating the groundwater that has recharged the area. This RMS is required in order to maintain groundwater quantity and quality. The East Stanislaus Region has, and will continue to, apply this RMS in order to achieve its Water Supply and Water Quality goals and objectives. Water‐Dependent Recreation The East Stanislaus Region has many opportunities for water‐dependent recreation such as fishing, swimming, waterfowl hunting and birding, boating, canoeing and kayaking. The upper reaches of the Tuolumne River are known for whitewater rapids for rafting. The lower reaches of the Tuolumne River, Modesto Reservoir, New Don Pedro Reservoir, and Turlock Lake are recreation areas offering opportunities for boating, swimming, birding, and fishing. There are areas throughout the Region, that while they do not depend on water are enhanced by being near water, that allow for hiking, biking, picnicking, camping, and wildlife viewing. Water planners can incorporate water‐dependent recreation opportunities as part of water projects. This RMS has been applied, and will continue to be, in order to help achieve the objective to identify opportunities for open spaces, trails, and parks along creeks and other recreational projects in the watershed to be incorporated with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects. Watershed Management The Watershed Management RMS consists of creating and implementing plans, programs, and projects to restore and enhance watershed functions to meet the diverse needs of communities that depend on it. Using watersheds as organizing units for planning and implementing projects is made possible in the East Stanislaus Region by integrated regional water management planning. The Region’s Regional Communication and Cooperation goals and objectives align with this RMS, which is incorporated into the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Flood Risk Management The Flood Risk Management RMS would help achieve the Flood Protection goal identified by the Region, to ensure flood protection strategies are developed and implemented through a collaborative process, utilizing both local and watershed‐wide approaches designed to maximize opportunities for comprehensive water resource management, and its associated objectives. The East Stanislaus Region is participating in the development of the Central San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan, and through this and other processes, will implement the objectives for achieving its Flood Management goal. Therefore, the Region’s goals and objectives are aligned with this RMS and are therefore incorporated into the IRWMP. Other Strategies Other RMSs such as crop idling, irrigated land retirement, fog collection, rainfed agriculture, dewvaporation, and waterbag transport are identified in the 2009 CWP. While some of the RMSs are feasible (such as crop idling, irrigated land retirement and rainfed agriculture), they would be applied only in the most desperate of circumstances. Most likely, unless all other RMSs have been exhausted, the East Stanislaus Region would not apply these strategies as they could have substantial economic impacts; as such, these strategies will not be considered further at this time. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-19 5.4 Relation to Statewide Priorities A Program Preference identified by DWR in the 2012 IRWM Guidelines is to address statewide priorities, which include:  Drought Preparedness  Use and Reuse Water More Efficiently  Climate Change Response Actions  Expand Environmental Stewardship  Practice Integrated Flood Management  Protect Surface Water and Groundwater Quality  Improve Tribal Water and Natural Resources  Ensure Equitable Distribution of Benefits The goals and objectives identified for the East Stanislaus Region align with DWR’s Statewide Priorities. All Statewide Priorities have been included in the Region’s project prioritization process, and therefore all would be achieved by IRWM projects that contribute to the Region’s objectives. The Regional Objectives’ relation to the Statewide Priorities is shown in Table 5‐4. Achieving objectives, when integrated with the Statewide Priorities and Resource Management Strategies, will result in a multi‐benefit solution meeting the Region’s needs, as well as the State’s priorities and preferences. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-20 Table 5‐3: East Stanislaus Regional Objectives’ Relation to RMSs Goal Objective Resource Management Strategies Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Urban Water Use Efficiency Conveyance‐Delta Conveyance‐Regional/local System Reoperation Water Transfers Flood Risk Management Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives Ecosystem Restoration Forest Management Recharge Area Protection Conjunctive Mgmt /GW Storage Desalination Recycled Municipal Water Surface Storage ‐ CALFED Surface Storage – Regional/local Drinking Water Treatment & Distrib. Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Land Use Planning & Management Matching Quality to Use Pollution Prevention Salt and Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management Water‐Dependent Recreation Watershed Management Other Strategies Water Supply ‐ Protect existing water supplies and water rights, and improve regional water supply reliability Provide a variety of water supply sources, including recycled water, to meet all current and future demands (urban, agricultural and the environment) under various hydrologic conditions.           Promote the use of groundwater storage and conjunctive use options to reduce groundwater overdraft.        Protect existing water rights.          Implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses.    Support monitoring and research to improve understanding of water supplies and needs.     Address conveyance infrastructure needs.       Flood Protection ‐ Ensure flood protection strategies are developed and implemented through a collaborative process, utilizing both local and watershed‐wide approaches designed to maximize opportunities for comprehensive water resource management Develop outlines of regional projects and plans necessary to protect infrastructure from flooding and erosion from the 100‐year event.    Work with stakeholders to preserve existing flood attenuation by implementing land management strategies throughout the watershed.       Develop approaches for adaptive management that minimizes maintenance requirements and protects water quality and availability while preserving and enhancing ecologic and stream functions, as appropriate.     Provide community benefits beyond flood protection, such as public access, open space, recreation, agricultural preservation, and economic development.     Protect, restore, and enhance the natural ecological and hydrologic functions of rivers, creeks, streams and their floodplains.     ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-21 Goal Objective Resource Management Strategies Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Urban Water Use Efficiency Conveyance‐Delta Conveyance‐Regional/local System Reoperation Water Transfers Flood Risk Management Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives Ecosystem Restoration Forest Management Recharge Area Protection Conjunctive Mgmt /GW Storage Desalination Recycled Municipal Water Surface Storage ‐ CALFED Surface Storage – Regional/local Drinking Water Treatment & Distrib. Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Land Use Planning & Management Matching Quality to Use Pollution Prevention Salt and Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management Water‐Dependent Recreation Watershed Management Other Strategies Water Quality ‐ Protect and improve water quality for beneficial uses consistent with regional interests and the Basin Plan in cooperation with local, state and federal agencies and regional stakeholders Meet or exceed all applicable water quality regulatory standards.        Deliver agricultural water to meet water quality guidelines established by stakeholders.        Aid in meeting Total Maximum Daily Loads established, or to be established, for the Tuolumne River watershed.       Protect surface waters and groundwater basins from contamination and threat of contamination.          Manage existing land uses while preserving or enhancing environmental habitats.         Minimize impacts from storm water through implementation of Best Management Practices, Low Impact Development or other similar projects.         Promote programs and projects to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of urban and agricultural runoff.         Promote and support regional monitoring to further understanding of water quality issues.    Environmental Protection and Enhancement ‐ Protect the environmental resources of the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and San Joaquin River watersheds by identifying, promoting and implementing opportunities to assess, restore and enhance natural resources of these watersheds Identify and incorporate (where possible and reasonable) opportunities to assess, protect, enhance, and/or restore natural resources when developing water management strategies.      Minimize adverse effects on biological and cultural resources, including riparian habitats, habitats supporting sensitive plant or animal species, and archaeological sites when implementing strategies and projects.     Identify opportunities for open spaces, trails and parks along creeks and other recreational projects in the watershed to be incorporated with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.     Contribute to the long‐term sustainability of agricultural, commercial, industrial, and urban land uses and activities within the basin.                ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-22 Goal Objective Resource Management Strategies Agricultural Water Use Efficiency Urban Water Use Efficiency Conveyance‐Delta Conveyance‐Regional/local System Reoperation Water Transfers Flood Risk Management Agricultural Lands Stewardship Economic Incentives Ecosystem Restoration Forest Management Recharge Area Protection Conjunctive Mgmt /GW Storage Desalination Recycled Municipal Water Surface Storage ‐ CALFED Surface Storage – Regional/local Drinking Water Treatment & Distrib. Groundwater/Aquifer Remediation Land Use Planning & Management Matching Quality to Use Pollution Prevention Salt and Salinity Management Urban Runoff Management Water‐Dependent Recreation Watershed Management Other Strategies Identify opportunities to protect, enhance, or restore habitat to the support all watersheds in the Region in conjunction with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.      Support projects to understand, protect, improve and restore the region’s ecological resources.    Regional Communication and Cooperation ‐ Implement and promote this IRWM Plan through regional communication, cooperation, and education Develop a forum for consensus decision‐making and IRWM Plan implementation by regional entities.    Build relationships with State and Federal regulatory agencies and other water forums and agencies to facilitate permitting of water‐related projects and ensure continued consistency with state water plans.   Facilitate dialogues between regional and inter‐ regional entities to reduce inconsistencies and conflicts in water management and to maximize benefits from water‐related projects.  Maintain avenues of communication with the general public and offering opportunities to provide feedback on the IRWM and water‐related projects through the regional websites and other public forums. Identify opportunities for public education about water supply, water quality, flood management, and environmental projection.  Economic and Social Responsibility ‐ Promote development and implementation of projects, programs and policies that are socially impartial and economically sound Support the participation of disadvantaged communities in the development, implementation, monitoring and long‐term maintenance of water resource projects. Develop cost‐effective multi‐benefit projects.   Consider disproportionate community impacts to ensure environmental justice. Maximize economies of scale and governmental efficiencies.  Protect cultural resources.  Reduce energy use and/or use of renewable resources where appropriate.    ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-23 Table 5‐4: East Stanislaus Regional Objectives’ Relation to Statewide Priorities Goal Objective Statewide Priority Drought Preparedness Use & Reuse Water More Efficiently Climate Change Response Actions Expand Environmental Stewardship Practice Integrated Flood Protect Surface Water & GW Quality Improve Tribal Water & Natural Resources Ensure Equitable Distrib. of Benefits Water Supply ‐ Protect existing water supplies and water rights, and improve regional water supply reliability Provide a variety of water supply sources, including recycled water, to meet all current and future demands (urban, agricultural and the environment) under various hydrologic conditions.     Promote the use of groundwater storage and conjunctive use options to reduce groundwater overdraft.    Protect existing water rights.      Implement water conservation plans for both urban and agricultural uses.      Support monitoring and research to improve understanding of water supplies and needs.    Address conveyance infrastructure needs.       Flood Protection ‐ Ensure flood protection strategies are developed and implemented through a collaborative process, utilizing both local and watershed‐wide approaches designed to maximize opportunities for comprehensive water resource management Develop outlines of regional projects and plans necessary to protect infrastructure from flooding and erosion from the 100‐year event.      Work with stakeholders to preserve existing flood attenuation by implementing land management strategies throughout the watershed.   Develop approaches for adaptive management that minimizes maintenance requirements and protects water quality and availability while preserving and enhancing ecologic and stream functions, as appropriate.    Provide community benefits beyond flood protection, such as public access, open space, recreation, agricultural preservation, and economic development.    Protect, restore, and enhance the natural ecological and hydrologic functions of rivers, creeks, streams and their floodplains.   Water Quality ‐ Protect and improve water quality for beneficial uses consistent with regional interests and the Basin Plan in cooperation with local, state and federal agencies and regional stakeholders Meet or exceed all applicable water quality regulatory standards.  Deliver agricultural water to meet water quality guidelines established by stakeholders.  Aid in meeting Total Maximum Daily Loads established, or to be established, for the Tuolumne River watershed.  Protect surface waters and groundwater basins from contamination and threat of contamination.  Manage existing land uses while preserving or enhancing environmental habitats.   Minimize impacts from storm water through implementation of Best Management Practices, Low Impact Development or other similar projects.  Promote programs and projects to reduce the quantity and improve the quality of urban and agricultural runoff.  Promote and support regional monitoring to further understanding of water quality issues.  Environmental Protection and Enhancement ‐ Protect the environmental resources of the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced and San Joaquin River watersheds by identifying, promoting and implementing opportunities to assess, restore and enhance natural resources of these watersheds Identify and incorporate (where possible and reasonable) opportunities to assess, protect, enhance, and/or restore natural resources when developing water management strategies.  Minimize adverse effects on biological and cultural resources, including riparian habitats, habitats supporting sensitive plant or animal species, and archaeological sites when implementing strategies and projects.   Identify opportunities for open spaces, trails and parks along creeks and other recreational projects in the watershed to be incorporated with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.         Contribute to the long‐term sustainability of agricultural, commercial, industrial, and urban land uses and activities within the basin.        ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-24 Goal Objective Statewide Priority Drought Preparedness Use & Reuse Water More Efficiently Climate Change Response Actions Expand Environmental Stewardship Practice Integrated Flood Protect Surface Water & GW Quality Improve Tribal Water & Natural Resources Ensure Equitable Distrib. of Benefits Identify opportunities to protect, enhance, or restore habitat to the support all watersheds in the Region in conjunction with water supply, water quality, or flood protection projects.         Support projects to understand, protect, improve and restore the region’s ecological resources.   Regional Communication and Cooperation ‐ Implement and promote this IRWM Plan through regional communication, cooperation, and education Develop a forum for consensus decision‐making and IRWM Plan implementation by regional entities.         Build relationships with State and Federal regulatory agencies and other water forums and agencies to facilitate permitting of water‐related projects and ensure continued consistency with state water plans.         Facilitate dialogues between regional and inter‐regional entities to reduce inconsistencies and conflicts in water management and to maximize benefits from water‐related projects.         Maintain avenues of communication with the general public and offering opportunities to provide feedback on the IRWM and water‐related projects through the regional websites and other public forums.         Identify opportunities for public education about water supply, water quality, flood management, and environmental projection.         Economic and Social Responsibility ‐ Promote development and implementation of projects, programs and policies that are socially impartial and economically sound Support the participation of disadvantaged communities in the development, implementation, monitoring and long‐term maintenance of water resource projects.    Develop cost‐effective multi‐benefit projects.         Consider disproportionate community impacts to ensure environmental justice.    Maximize economies of scale and governmental efficiencies.   Protect cultural resources.   Reduce energy use and/or use of renewable resources where appropriate.    ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 5.5 Re The East (USEPA) (Region California (CDPH), resources Examples (complet water dis to the Sa has been region co basis. 5.6 Re Historica planning entities w together water pr ongoing c managem efforts. efforts ar broader The cities have wor the wate and the provides historical It is anti continue needed, f projects managem Some of Stanislau sections. Technica planning documen programs into othe developm RiverPart preparing islaus Integrat 2013 elation to Stanislaus R Region 9, U 5) Regional a Departmen and the Cali s manageme s of activitie ed using the stribution (co n Joaquin Ri sought by t oordination elation to ally, there h efforts in within the Ea on various ojects over collaborative ment groups Some of the re project‐ba discussion o s and agencie rked togethe er manageme wi an integr l efforts can icipated that independen for developm required to ment needs. the historic us IRWMP an A list of loc l Analysis (s activities is nts was soug s and planni er local and r ment of the tners. Flood g the RFMP, ted Regional W Regulato Region falls U.S. Fish and l Water Qua nt of Water fornia Depar ent activitie s requiring c e guidelines onducted un iver (CDFW the East Stan with these S Local Wa have not be the East S ast Stanislau local water the years an e relationship s, Directors e historical w ased, while o of water re es within the r in the past ent issues a ill continue ated venue continue on t project‐spe nt of the IRW ment, constru meet the re cal local wat d future ESR cal plans us see Table 6 s discussed ht and incor ng develope regional plan e Mid‐San J d‐related info and the ESR Water Manage ory Progra under the p Wildlife Ser ality Control Resources rtment of Fi s fall under coordination issued by D nder the over and nislaus Regio State and Fe ater Plann en any offi Stanislaus R us Region ha r planning e nd have mai p through gr meetings, water‐relate others are r sources‐rela e East Stanisl to develop s and conflicts doing so. Th e under wh n a programm ecific coordi WMP impleme uction and o egion’s wate ter planning RWMP memb ed in the de Coordi in more det rporated into d under the nning docum Joaquin Riv ormation fro RWMP is ant ement Plan ams purview of th rvice (USFW l Board (RW (DWR), the ish and Wild r the oversi n with these DWR); water rsight of CDP Direct and on for partic ederal regula ning cial IRWM Region, but ave worked efforts and intained an roundwater and other d planning related to a ated issues. laus Region solutions to s they face, his IRWMP hich these matic level. nation will entation, as peration of er resource g efforts tha ber agency co evelopment ination amo tail in Chapt o this IRWM IRWM progr ments. An exa ver Regional om the IRWM ticipating inc he U.S. Envir WS) Southwe WQCB), the California D dlife (CDFW) ight of one areas includ r treatment p PH); and disc d indirect re cipation on th atory agenci at have laid oordination a of the IRWM ng the ESRW ter 4. Infor P, and as it m ram will be s ample of this l Flood Ma MP has been corporation The IRWM local wate which it is  A us  A IR pl pr lo  A dy IR pl ‐ Proposit Guidelines Chap ronmental P est Region, th San Joaquin Department Central Re or more o de preparatio plant operat charges of tre gulatory age he SC or PA ies is on a p the foundat are describe MP is includ WMP on wa rmation from matures, it i shared with s ‘give and ta anagement P shared with of planning MP must doc er planning d s based inclu list of local w sed in the IRW discussion o RWM Plan rel lanning docu rograms esta cal agencies. description ynamics betw RWM Plan an lanning docu tion 84 & 1E I s, November pter 5 Vision, G and Obje Protection Ag he Central V n District o of Public H egion. Most w f these agen on of this IR tions and po eated wastew ency particip C; however, project‐by‐pr tion for the ed in the follo ded in Chapt ater manage m other plan s anticipated and incorpo ake’ is the cu Plan (RFMP h the organiz and projects ument the documents o uding: water plans WM Plan. of how the lates to uments and ablished by . of the ween the nd local uments. IRWM 2012, Page 2 Goals, ectives 5-25 gency Valley of the Health water ncies. RWMP otable water pation most roject e East owing ter 6, ement nning d that orated urrent P) by zation s that n 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-26 result from this plan development into future versions of the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Additionally, as local plans are revised and updated in the future, they will be considered and incorporated into IRWM Plan Updates (schedule of these updates is discussed in Chapter 8.4). Because many of the local planning efforts are conducted by many of the same entities participating in preparation of the East Stanislaus IRWMP, communication will be key. IRWM planning participants will relay relevant IRWM‐related information back to their entities for consideration during individual planning efforts. Should inconsistencies between local plans and the IRWMP be identified, meetings will be scheduled to discuss details, reach a consensus, and ensure regional and local plans become consistent. 5.6.1 Groundwater Management Planning The Turlock Groundwater Basin Association (TGBA) was created for cooperative groundwater management activities in the Turlock Groundwater Basin. Agencies in TGBA include the Turlock and Merced Irrigation Districts; the cities of Ceres, Turlock, Modesto and Hughson; the Hilmar and Delhi County Water Districts; the Keyes, Denair and Ballico Community Services Districts; the Eastside and Ballico‐Cortez Water Districts; and Stanislaus and Merced Counties. Since the mid‐ 1990s, the TGBA has coordinated as follows.  Pursuant to State Law, the purpose of the TGBA is to coordinate groundwater management activities within the Turlock Groundwater Basin. The guiding document for the TGBA is the Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP), prepared and adopted pursuant to state legislation (Assembly Bill [AB] 3030) signed into law January 1, 1993. The first GWMP was adopted in 1997; it was updated and re‐adopted in 2008 to reflect current conditions in the basin area. The TGBA will continue to coordinate in the future and update the GWMP, as necessary, in order to successfully coordinate groundwater management activities in the basin.  A water balance study of the Turlock Subbasin was prepared in 2003 and updated in 2007 to estimate the inflows and outflows from the subbasin between 1952 and 2006. Recent groundwater data indicate that the basin may no longer be in a state of equilibrium (that is, outflows have started to exceed inflows). While there is uncertainty about the causes, it is believed to be a combination of increased urbanization, recent dry years, and increased agricultural production (acreage) in the eastern hills (Turlock Lake area) which relies solely on groundwater for irrigation. The water balance study highlighted the importance of studying the issue in more detail and for member agencies to collaborate more closely on groundwater management issues within the entire subbasin area.  In response to the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) x7‐6, the TGBA submitted an application to DWR to comply with requirements as a Cooperative Groundwater Monitoring Association. This has necessitated the formation of a SBx7‐6 Committee to assist in coordinating compliance activities including, but not limited to: representing the TGBA at meetings regarding SBx7‐6; development of draft submittals to DWR for TGBA’s approval; and coordinating implementation of a monitoring program with DWR and local agencies.  Submitted an application for, and was awarded in 2013, a Local Groundwater Assistance grant to study the geology of the far eastern side of the Turlock Subbasin, to update and refine the local groundwater model and the future needs study, and to identify additional monitoring locations in nearly planted areas to the east. The Cities of Modesto, Oakdale and Riverbank, MID, Oakdale Irrigation District, and Stanislaus County are members of the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association which was formed in 1994. The purpose of the association is to manage the groundwater ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-27 resources within the Modesto Groundwater Basin. The developed and adopted an Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan (IRGMP) in 2005 pursuant to state legislation SB1938. The is working with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) through a contract for developing a numerical groundwater model for the Modesto Groundwater Basin. This effort will characterize the basin and provide modeling capabilities for various groundwater scenarios. To comply with SBx7‐6 State legislation requiring groundwater monitoring, passed in 2009, the submitted an application to the DWR stating its intent as a Cooperative Groundwater Monitoring Association to submit a groundwater monitoring program for the Modesto sub‐basin. The also received a $250,000 grant under the AB303 legislation to develop a Well Field Optimization Program. Phase 1 of this program is to develop and implement the first of the nine IRGMP management actions; more specifically, to operate wells to meet water supply demands, lower pumping power costs and prioritize well usage, maintain groundwater levels to satisfy Basin Management Objectives (BMOs), manage quality of discharge water and, increase effectiveness of shallow groundwater management. This study was completed in June 2007. Phase 2 expands the program to include aspects specific to urban purveyors of groundwater, but with similar goals of facilities inventory and maintaining groundwater levels to satisfy BMOs. More recently, the submitted an application for, and was awarded in 2013, a Local Groundwater Assistance grant to study the eastern side of the Modesto Subbasin to identify areas for potential groundwater recharge and to develop conceptual ideas for possible groundwater augmentation projects to support basin‐wide conjunctive use. 5.6.2 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring/CASGEM Senate Bill x7 6 added provisions for groundwater monitoring to Division 6 of the California Water Code and authorized DWR to establish permanent, locally managed, groundwater elevation monitoring and reporting in all of California’s alluvial groundwater basins. To meet this legislative requirement, DWR developed the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) program to establish a program of regular and systematic monitoring of groundwater elevations and to track seasonal and long‐term trends in groundwater elevations statewide. A core component of CASGEM is the identification of Monitoring Entities in each groundwater basin/subbasin. Monitoring Entities are responsible for coordinating the groundwater elevation monitoring and reporting for their jurisdictional area, with groundwater elevation monitoring beginning in the Fall of 2011, and elevation reporting to DWR by January 1, 2012. TGBA and have respectively registered to become the Monitoring Entities for the Turlock and Modesto Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. 5.6.3 Groundwater Quality Monitoring In 2006, the State Water Resources Control Board conducted an investigation in the Central Eastside study unit, overlying the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins, as part of the Statewide Basin Assessment Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA program was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and was conducted in coordination with the USGS and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The one‐time study was conducted to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw groundwater for comparing water quality. Data collected during the study is available online at the Geotracker GAMA website at This website currently integrates data from the the CDPH, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, DWR, USGS and LLNL. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-28 At present, all water agencies and irrigation districts in the East Stanislaus Region rely partially or wholly on groundwater wells. Active municipal supply wells have to be tested per CDPH regulations on an annual basis. Groundwater quality is reported by water agencies annually to the public as part of their consumer confidence reporting and to CDPH as part of their permit requirements. Further, CASGEM requires some basic water quality testing and reporting in the wells that are monitored as part of the CASGEM program. Finally, the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program and the Dairy Program are also monitoring groundwater quality in the region. The Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program began in 2003 to prevent agricultural runoff from impairing surface waters. Under the program waste discharge requirements were developed to protect both surface and groundwater. The first in a series of waste discharge requirements were adopted by the Central Valley Water Board in December 2012; others are planned to be developed for all regions in the Central Valley by mid‐2014. Additionally, as part of this program, if there are two or more exceedances of the same pollutant at the same site within a three year period, management plans must be prepared and implemented. The Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program provides public access to monitoring reports, management plans, and water quality data collected since 2004. Data collected under the program can be accessed through the California Data Exchange Network (CEDEN). The Dairy Program has a General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies requiring monitoring and reporting in the Central Valley Region. Monitoring of discharges of manure and/or process wastewater, stormwater, or tailwater from dairy production is required to minimize leaching of nutrients and salts to groundwater and nearby surface waters. This program requires dischargers submit annual reports to the Central Valley Water Board. 5.6.4 Salt & Nutrient Management Planning As previously stated, the City of Modesto is a member of the Central Valley Salinity Coalition, a non‐ profit coalition of public agencies, businesses, associations, and other members, formed in July 2008 with the purpose of better managing salts in the Central Valley of California. The Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long‐Term Sustainability (CV‐SALTS) program is being led by the Coalition to find solutions to the Central Valley salt problem, and in February 2010, the organization completed the Salt and Nitrate Sources Pilot Implementation Study. The purpose of the study was to develop a methodology and provide guidance for development of the Central Valley Salt and Nutrient Management Plan (SNMP), including methods for quantifying salt and nutrient (or nitrate) sources. The identified methods were pilot tested to evaluate their appropriateness and effectiveness. Following completion of the pilot study, the Coalition developed a Framework for Salt/Nitrate Source Identification Studies, which has now led to preparation of the Initial Conceptual Model (ICM), currently underway. The ICM is the first phase of a three‐phased effort to develop the technical and regulatory basis for the SNMP. The ICM will consist of a conceptual level analysis of the water balance in the Central Valley and the associated salt and nutrient conditions. The result of the ICM will be an assessment of the salt and nutrient conditions in the Central Valley. Phases 2 and 3 of the ICM will consist of refining the findings from Phase 1, delineating management zones, and developing the SNMP which will include preparation of a salt and nutrient program of implementation and completion of regulatory analyses to support adoption of the SNMP in the Central Valley Basin Plan. Development of the ICM began in September 2012 and is anticipated to be completed in May 2013. The results of Phases 1 through 3 will be incorporated into future East Stanislaus IRWMP updates, and the resulting SNMP will contribute to IRWM planning in the region as the phases are completed. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-29 5.6.5 Water Planning Efforts In addition to the development of agency‐specific Water Master Plans, Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) and Agricultural Water Management Plans (AWMPs) in the Region, agencies within the Region have coordinated on regional and joint‐projects and programs. Some of these are described as follows:  Regional Surface Water Supply Project For the past several years, the Cities of Turlock, Modesto, Ceres and Hughson have been negotiating with TID to receive treated water from the Tuolumne River to supplement current potable water supplies. On September 27, 2011, a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) was executed between the cities of Turlock, Modesto and Ceres to establish the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority (SRWA). The member agencies of the SRWA are all heavily or entirely dependent upon groundwater as their source of water supply and groundwater is a diminishing resource in the region. Each of the Participants is authorized to develop, obtain, and serve a municipal and industrial water supply, pursuant to California law. It is anticipated that the SRWA’s Regional Surface Water Supply Project will result in a safe, dependable, economical and long term municipal and industrial water supply system. The SRWA creates a forum and decision‐making body to collectively discuss, develop and negotiate alternatives regarding the The intent of the Joint Powers Authority is to develop the whereby the SRWA would purchase water from the Turlock Irrigation District, treat such water in an SRWA‐owned and operated water treatment plant, and make the treated water available at cost to the members of the SRWA.  Modesto Regional Water Treatment Plant Phases 1 & 2. This is an on‐going effort between the City of Modesto and the MID to deliver treated Modesto Reservoir surface water to the City of Modesto and other adjacent communities adjacent for which Modesto owns and operates the water systems. In 1992, the City and MID entered into a Treatment and Delivery Agreement to construct Phase 1 of the consisting of fourteen miles of conveyance piping, two terminal reservoir tanks and pumping facilities for the delivery of 30 million gallons per day (mgd) of potable water. Since 1995, Modesto has been receiving these surface water deliveries. In 2005, the City and MID entered into an Amended and Restated Treatment and Delivery Agreement to construct Phase 2 of the which would increase treated surface water deliveries to 60 mgd. The Phase 2 project is currently under construction and is expected to be operational by 2015. 5.6.6 Wastewater Planning Efforts In addition to the development of agency‐specific Wastewater Master Plans, regional coordination for wastewater‐related efforts has been completed by entities within the Region, helping lay the foundation for IRWM planning in the Region. Examples of these efforts include:  The Turlock Regional Water Quality Control Facility The Turlock Regional Water Quality Control provides tertiary treatment of wastewater from the City of Turlock and the community service districts of Keyes and Denair. Furthermore, the Turlock processes one million gallons per day of wastewater from the City of Ceres (approximately 30% of Ceres’ total flow); this wastewater is partially treated before being sent to Turlock. Ceres has purchased the rights to discharge an additional 1 mgd of wastewater to Turlock, and the pipeline from Ceres to Turlock has a total hydraulic capacity of 6.5 mgd to allow for further regionalization efforts. Operation of these facilities requires on‐going communication and coordination. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-30  Wastewater Regionalization. In November 2010, Erler & Kalinowski, Inc. (EKI) completed an evaluation of the feasibility of forming a regional system to provide wastewater services to the Cities of Modesto, Ceres, and/or Turlock. The study area consisted of the Cities of Modesto, Ceres, and Turlock. The study identified and evaluated options for wastewater regionalization in the study area and evaluated the feasibility of these options on a technical, economic, and legal basis. The study found that there are significant operational efficiencies to be realized by combining wastewater treatment and disposal systems in the study area. According to a conceptual‐level cost evaluation, the potential combined savings across all three cities on a 30‐year present worth basis appear to be in the ballpark of $100 million. The cities will continue to coordinate on the potential for wastewater regionalization.  North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program This is a proposed recycled water project to deliver up to 30,930 AFY of tertiary‐treated recycled water to the drought‐ impacted west side of Stanislaus County, primarily the Del Puerto Water District and other potential users. The recycled water will be used for agricultural irrigation. This quantity of water would be available from the combined Cities of Modesto, Turlock, and Ceres effluents and could irrigate 15,600 acres of land per year (at two acre‐feet per acre of applied water). An additional 15,682 acre‐feet per year of recycled water will be made available once the City of Modesto upgrades its secondary‐treated wastewater treatment plant to tertiary levels. At the above‐described build‐out scenario, a total of 46,900 acre‐feet per year of recycled water would be available for unrestricted farmland irrigation. The cities are coordinating with Del Puerto Water District to determine project feasibility.  Recycled Water Expansion. As noted in their 2010 UWMP, the City of Modesto currently recycles some of its effluent for agricultural irrigation and is currently evaluating expansion of recycled water use in the future (West Yost Associates, 2011b). The City of Patterson has expressed interest in participating in Modesto’s program when recycled water becomes available and may also seek to send its wastewater to Modesto for full or tertiary treatment and have the recycled water returned for use in its non‐potable system (The H2O Group, 2012). 5.7 Relation to Local Flood Control Planning There are existing flood management planning activities underway in the East Stanislaus Region that are contributing to development of the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Two significant efforts include the DWR’s Regional Flood Management Planning Initiative’s Central Valley Flood Protection Plan, as well as the Mid‐San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan. The goal of DWR’s Regional Flood Management Planning Program is to build upon flood risk management information developed through, and contained in the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan and to develop a long‐ term vision for “a flood safe region” through the use of detailed regional information and a collaborative local planning process. Integrated Flood Management is an approach to dealing with flood risk that recognizes the:  interconnectedness of flood management actions within broader water resources management and land use planning,  value of coordinating across geographic and agency boundaries,  need to evaluate opportunities and potential impacts from a system perspective, and  importance of environmental stewardship and sustainability. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December The Mid‐ of integr managem Flood Ma agencies IRWMP Managem managem Separatel cooperati Gomes La Lake Pum 1960s to discharge 5.8 Re Land use consist incorpora Oakdale, Agency Stanislau Stanislau of influen Service R public an preservat Metropol Stanislau governm Riverban the Regi Hughson, Army Cor are also conducte plans in w impact w The relat however, always b coordinat Stanislau encourag represen Stanislau Waterfor Region), islaus Integrat 2013 San Joaquin rated multi ment plannin anagement P including th participating ment Plan, p ment in the R ly, the Cities ively on the ake Pumping mping Plant o preventing ed into the Sa elation to planning en of Stanislau ated cities of Riverbank, Formation us Council us County LA nce for cities Reviews (MS nd private a tion and se litan Planni us Region as ents compri nk, Turlock a on include , Oakdale, Riv rps of Engin land use pla ed through co which water water supply o tionship betw , it is recogn e improved; tion among us Region o ged to part tatives has, a us County, a rd, as well as prepared an ted Regional W River Region ‐benefit flo ng regions, an Plan will be d he Reclamati g entities w providing clo egion. of Modesto a operation of g Plant is ap pumps back g stormwater an Joaquin R Local Lan ntities in the us County, f Modesto, Tu Waterford, Commission of Gove AFCo develop s and distric Rs), and wo agencies and ervice deliv ng Organiza designated sed of the C and Waterfor Stanislaus C verbank, MID eers and sta anning entiti ompletion of managers ca or water qua ween the cit nized that co it is the int all water a overlies a si ticipate in and will cont and the Citi s Newman an nd submitted Water Manage n will suppo od manage nd develop a developed fo on District ( will be activ ose coordina and Turlock, f Gomes Lake pproximately ked up water r from drain River (ESA, 20 nd Use Pl East Stanisla Merced Co urlock, Ceres the Stanisl n (LAFCo), ernments ( ps and updat cts, prepares rks cooperat d interests o very. StanCO ation (MPO by the Fed Cities of Cer rd and Stani County, Mer D, TID, and O ate entities. M ies and ther f master plan an provide in ality and vice ties and the oordination b tent of the E and land use ignificant p the IRWM tinue to be, co ies of Ceres nd Patterson d a joint fund ement Plan rt DWR’s Flo ement proje a region‐wid or the Mid‐S (RD) 2092 an ve participa ation and in , Stanislaus C e, a flood con y 3.5 miles e r over levees ning into th 013). anning aus Region ounty, the s, Hughson, laus Local and the (StanCOG). tes spheres Municipal tively with on growth, OG is the O) for the deral govern es, Hughson slaus County rced County, OID, various c Many of the w refore, coord ns, General Pl nput regardi e versa. irrigation di between wat East Stanislau e planning e ortion of S M planning onducted in s, Hughson, (both of wh ding request oodSAFE init ects, coordin de flood man San Joaquin R nd Stanislau ants in the ntegration am County, and t ntrol facility east of the S s that were c he San Joaqu nment. It is n, Modesto, N y. The water , the cities community s water manag dinate intern lans, UWMPs ing project o istricts in Sta ter manager us IRWM pla entities in th Stanislaus Co effort. Tar the future. Modesto, O hich are just to the Califo IRWM Plan  Curre local la water manag Future collabo relatio planne ‐ Propositi Guidelines Chap tiative throug nation with nagement sol River Region s County. Th developmen mong the IR the TID joint on the San Jo an Joaquin R constructed uin River. Th a council of Newman, Oa r manageme of Modesto service distri gement entit nally. Indirec s, and other or land use d anislaus Cou rs and land u anning proc he Region. B ounty, the rgeted outr Oakdale, Riv outside of th ornia Strategi ns must docu nt relationsh and use plan issues, and w gement objec e plans to fur orative, proa onship betwe ers and wate ion 84 & 1E IR s, November pter 5 Vision, G and Obje gh demonstr h adjacent lution. A Reg n by particip he East Stani nt of this F RWMP and tly fund, and oaquin River River. The G in the 1950 he water is f city and co akdale, Patte nt entities w o, Turlock, C icts, as well a ties in the R ct coordinati land use or w decisions that unty is very use entities ess to streng Because the County is b each to Co verbank, Tur he East Stani ic Growth Co ument: hip between nning, regiona water ctives. rther a active een land use er managers. RWM 2012, Page 2 Goals, ectives 5-31 ration flood gional pating islaus Flood flood work r. The Gomes s and then ounty erson, within Ceres, as the egion ion is water t may good, could gthen e East being ounty rlock, islaus ouncil al 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 5 Vision, Goals, and Objectives December 2013 5-32 for the Stanislaus County Regional Sustainability Toolbox. The Toolbox will include the development of multiple planning tools to achieve greenhouse gas reductions in the region, comprised of eleven components. For example, Water Efficient Landscape Guidelines and Standards will be developed, as well as Low Impact Developments Standards and Specifications. Some of these components are related to land use planning and because many of the same entities were involved in development of the Toolbox, this will be an opportunity to coordinate on water planning and land use planning efforts. It is recognized by participating agencies that there are opportunities for improved coordination among water planners and land use planners. Allowing for early water management input and coordination with those responsible for making land use decisions and implementing land use changes will improve not only land use planning, but also water resources planning. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte This chap  T  H  H  H The resul Finally, th and the p 6.1 Pr Project s agencies, the publi inclusion for the IR in sufficie met, infr operated impacts However developm design. submittin IRWMP, i the pote benefits, improvem positionin funding. In order project approved and Publ prepared form). A online p was dev website. informati organized electroni proponen improvin islaus Integrat 2013 er 6 T pter discusse The process u How the proj How the proj How the proj lts of these a his chapter a projects ident roject Soli olicitation is organizatio ic can subm n in the IRW RWMP, proje ent detail to rastructure t , tasks to be and bene r, the project ment, from There are ng a projec including rai ential proje identificatio ments and/ ng the proj to facilitate information d by the Ste lic Advisory d (see Appen Additionally, roject subm veloped and The OPTI ion to be d, and cally by the nts. Access to ng IRWMP tra ted Regional W he Proje es: used to solici ects were re ects were ev ects were pr ctivities are also includes tified within icitation s the proces ns, and/or m mit project co WMP. To be ects must be identify the to be const e implement efits of th ts can be in a conceptua e many b t for inclus ising local aw ct and its on of poten /or integra ect for pote e project so form, rev eering Comm Committee ndix I for a the OPTI mittal and m d posted o system allo submitted, regularly e a o project sum ansparency. Water Manage cts it projects fo viewed for c valuated with rioritized. included in A s the potent it. ss by which members of oncepts for considered e described need being tructed and ted, and the he project. any stage of l to final benefits to sion in the wareness of associated tial project ation, and ential State licitation, a iewed and mittee (SC) (PAC), was copy of the system for management on IRWMP ows project reviewed, updated and project mmaries is a ement Plan The IRWM to select p The selec compone Proc RWM Proc cons Thes cons o o o o o o o o o o o  A ‐ Proposit Pages 19 r the IRWM consistency w h respects to Appendices I tial impact a available to a MP must con projects for i ction process ents: cedures for su MG. cedures for re sidered for in se procedure sider the follo Plan objec RMS Technical DACs & EJ Project co Economic Project sta Strategic c implemen Climate ch Plan adop Reducing Sacramen A list of the se tion 84 & 1E I & 20 Plan; with IRWMP integration; I through P o nd benefits all interested Cha ntain a proce inclusion in t s must includ ubmitting a p eview of pro nclusion in to es must, at a owing factor ctives feasibility J considerati ost/financing c feasibility atus consideratio ntation hange & GHG ption dependence nto‐San Joaqu elected proje IRWM Guide objectives; and of this plan. of implemen d parties wit apter 6 The Pr ss or process the IRWM Pl de the follow project to th ojects o the IRWMP minimum, rs: ons g ns for IRWM G emissions on the uin Delta cts. lines, July 20 nting this IR h the intenti ojects 6-1 ses an. ing e P. MP 012, RWMP ion of ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December A public OPTI and noticed a minimum IRWM ob establish multiple p The proje that proje Projects, of project projects, schedule required) additiona Projects a implemen be includ applicatio The East May 7, 20 of projec should b solicitatio submitte Projects o In order provides used this members projects opportun that fund frequency 6.2 Pr A projec whether the IRWM establish with the confirm i integratio compose Region, b who had inclusion islaus Integrat 2013 meeting wa d the ways and flyers w m, basic infor bjectives, w ed that proj proponents. ect informati ects submitte Preliminary ts that are re research pro information ) completed. al project dev are further d ntation. Conc ded in the IRW ons for fundi Stanislaus I 012. The soli ct proponent be noted tha on form in d, of which or RTP Projec to facilitate the option o s project lis s and other s as well as nities arise, th ding applicat y of project s roject Rev ct review p or not the s M Plan. A sub ed to review IRWM prog independent on and en d of volunte but excluded d submitted n in the ESIRW ted Regional W as held on Ap the project were distrib rmation abo water‐related jects could b ion form (alo ed for consid Design Com eady or close ojects, or stud n available an Concept Pro velopment be developed tha cept Projects WMP, but Co ing through D RWM Region icitation peri ts, stating th at project pr lieu of OPT 10 were Con cts (see Appe review and of printing o st in discuss takeholders. for editing he ion. See Cha solicitation. view and I process was submitted pr bcommittee w the submit gram (as def t utility, and nhancement. eer member d personnel d a project WMP. Water Manage pril 12, 201 proponents uted. Each out their pro benefits, e be submitted ong with subs deration wou plete, and Re to being rea dies, but mus nd most plann ojects are pro efore being i an the Conce s, Preliminary ncept Projec DWRs IRWM n’s first proj iod was subs he need mor roponents a TI submittal. ncept Projec endix J for a s organization r exporting a sions regard . The online p and revision will issue a n apter 8, Plan Integratio s created f rojects would of SC and PA tted projects fined by DW to look for o The subc rs from the who represe t (project p ement Plan 2 to announ s could subm project prop oject, includi estimated co d by anyone sequent disc uld be separa eady‐to‐Proc ady for imple st be develop ning, design ojects that ar mplementat ept Projects, b y Design Com cts would not M Grant Progr ect solicitati sequently ex e time to be also had the During th cts and 17 w summary of n of the proje a detailed lis ding submitt project datab n of curren new “Call for Implementa on for determi d be include AC members s for consiste WR’s Guidelin opportunities committee East Stanis ented an age proponents) The stru prov deve integ ‐ Pro Guid 19 nce the proje mit projects ponent was ing a project osts, project e, and could cussion at the ated into thre ceed (RTP) P ementation. T ped enough t and environ re at a concep tion‐ready. P but may not mplete proje t be consider ram. ion period w xtended until ecome famili e option of his solicitatio were either P projects sub ect submitta st of all proje ted projects base is open ntly submitte r Projects” w ation, for mo ning ed in was ency nes), s for was slaus ency for Cha IRWMP mus cture and pr vide opportu elop and fost gration. oposition 84 & delines, July 2 ect solicitatio . This meeti instructed t description t status and d have a sing e public mee ee categories Projects. RTP They could b to have detai nmental docu ptual level an reliminary D yet ready fo cts, and RTP red for inclus was held from l June 10, 20 iar with the mailing a h on period, 2 Preliminary bmitted). als, the IRWM ects submitt with the S at all times f ed projects. with a deadlin ore informat apter 6 The Pr st contain rocesses that unities to ter & 1E IRWM 2012, Page on and to re ing was for to provide, n, contributi d details. It gle propone ting) explain s: Concept Projects con e constructio iled budget a umentation ( nd require Design Comp r P Projects wo sion in m April 2 20 012 at the re OPTI system hard‐copy pr 27 projects Design Com M project we ted. The ESR C members, for receipt o As new fun ne appropria ion regardin ojects 6-2 t eview mally at a on to t was ent or ned nsist on and if lete ould 12 to quest m. (It roject were mplete ebsite RWMP , PAC f new nding ate for ng the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-3 The Project Review Subcommittee met on July 26, 2012 to review the projects per the previously mentioned objectives. To be considered for inclusion in the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan, a project was required to fulfill five minimum requirements. Specifically, the project had to:  Be located at least partially within the East Stanislaus IRWM region;  Meet at least one Regional objective;  Fulfill at least one Resource Management Strategy;  Fulfill at least one Statewide Strategy; and  Be technically feasible. Based on the subcommittee’s review, all projects submitted during the first call for projects met the minimum requirements. The projects were then evaluated for independent utility and to identify opportunities for integration and/or enhancement. While all projects met the IRWM program’s goals, two projects (“Well No. 9 Arsenic Treatment Facility” and “Well No. 9) had overlapping scopes of work and were considered to be interdependent. Due to this lack of independent utility, the Project Review Subcommittee recommended to the projects’ proponent (the City of Hughson in both cases) that the projects be combined. The Subcommittee also made recommendations for integration and/or enhancements to the projects to increase the degree of benefits provided by the projects. For example, the Subcommittee recommended use of renewable energy sources (e.g. solar panels) to offset energy use at the proposed Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant. Recommendations were transmitted back to project proponents, and the project proponents had an opportunity to update the project information was provided. 6.3 Project Prioritization A project prioritization process developed by PAC, and was subsequently approved by SC, in order to rank and compare the Preliminary Design Complete, and RTP Projects. The project prioritization process was not conducted for Conceptual Projects. The project prioritization process implemented a two‐step approach. The first step considered regional goals and objectives, statewide priorities and other relevant factors such as benefit‐cost (B/C) ratio and multiple benefits. The second step qualitatively considered the relative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the project. 6.3.1 Prioritization Process Development As part of the development of the project solicitation and prioritization process, the PAC developed a process for prioritization the projects submitted for inclusion in the East Stanislaus IRWMP. This process was reviewed by the SC with recommendations made back to the PAC. Following subsequent changes to the prioritization process, both committees approved the prioritization process. The following describes the approved project prioritization process. 6.3.1.1 Project Prioritization Step 1 – Project Ranking with Respect to Regional Goals, Statewide Priorities and other Relevant Factors In discussing various models for project prioritization, a two‐step program was selected for implementation in the ESIRWM region. The first step of project prioritization process considered the projects relative to regional goals and objectives, statewide priorities and other relevant factors such as benefit‐cost (B/C) ratio and multiple benefits. Specifically, the regional IRWM planning participants felt that the Region’s goals, and therefore the associated objectives, should be the ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-4 mostly influential factor in the project prioritization process in order to identify those projects that, when implemented, would best help the Region achieve its vision for regional water resource management. The planning participants also felt the achieving the Statewide Priorities, addressing other project aspects (such as readiness to proceed) and project feasibility also merited consideration in project ranking. The Step 1 project prioritization process as developed thus reflects this thinking. A weighting scoring system was selected as the means of ensuring that the process results reflect the intent of the prioritization. The SC and PAC applied weighting factors to the scoring criteria which included the categories of Regional Objectives, Statewide Priorities, Other Strategies, and Feasibility. This weighting schema allows for flexibility for future changes to the prioritized objectives as regional water resources issues change over time. With the Region’s vision in mind, the Regional Objectives account for half of the total weight applied in the project scoring system. Within that half of the total weight, the goals were then weighted individually. The committees agreed that water supply, flood protection, and water quality are major issues that need to be addressed, as demonstrated by each category accounting for 10% of a project’s score. Environmental protection and enhancement, and regional communication and cooperation were each to account for 7% of a project’s score, and while lastly, but still importantly, economic and social responsibility accounts for 6% of a project’s score. The remaining 50% of the scoring weights were then distributed amongst Statewide Priorities (worth 25% of the remaining weights, with other strategies and project feasibility accounting for 16% and 9% of the weights, respectively. The distributed weights were multiplied by a project score in each category, ranging from 0 to 5 based on its applicability to the project and the magnitude to which the project achieved each objective. A copy of the final project prioritization scoring sheet is included in Appendix K. In developing scoring weights for the Statewide Priorities, the SC and PAC chose to assign greater weights to those priorities that best supported the ‘more important’ Regional goals of water supply, flood protection and water quality. Similarly, the SC and PAC determined that other factors, not directly incorporated into either the Regional goals and objectives or Statewide Priorities, should be considered and weighted as part of the prioritization process. Other Strategies, as defined by the SC and PAC in the context of the project prioritization process, included direct benefits to DACs and tribal communities, schedule (i.e. readiness to proceed), whether a project was an inter‐regional project and therefore taking advantage of a larger scale of benefits, and/or whether a project provided non‐water related benefits such as new jobs in the Region. Finally, the feasibility of a project from the standpoint of costs and benefits was also considered an important factor. Projects were scored based on an indirect benefit‐cost analysis conducted on each project and based on the degree to which project financing was available. The benefit‐cost analysis was conducted on all non‐Concept projects submitted for inclusion in the IRWM process. The analysis was a semi‐numerical analysis designed to rank projects relative to their costs and benefits achieved given, in some cases, relatively gross data. In this analysis, project costs included capital costs, annual O&M costs (assuming 10% of capital costs when O&M costs were not supplied), and the cost of items to be replaced during the life of the project. Project life was assigned either given information provided by the project proponent or selected from a list of pre‐defined life spans for various water infrastructure, as developed from a list of publically‐ available resources. This list of infrastructure life spans is included in Appendix M. The present value cost of the project was then calculated in 2012 dollars, assuming a 6% discount factor (for consistency with DWR guidelines), as follows: ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-5 ܲݎ݁ݏ݁݊ݐ ܥ݋ݏݐൌܥܽ݌݅ݐ݈ܽ ܥ݋ݏݐ൅ܱ&ܯ ܥ݋ݏݐ∗ ܨܽܿݐ݋ݎ ௡ ଴ where n is the project life and the PV factor is defined as: ܨܽܿݐ݋ݎൌ1/ሾሺ1 ൅݅ሻ௡ሻሿ where i is the discount factor. Cost scores were then assigned a measure of ‘high’ or 1 point if the project’s present value cost was less than $2 million, a measure of ‘medium’ or 2 points if the present value cost was between $2 million and $20 million, and a measure of ‘low’ or 3 points if the present value cost was greater than $20 million. Project benefits were similarly given high, medium or low rankings based on the number of objectives achieved. A project received a ranking of ‘high’ or 3 points if it achieved greater than 8 objectives, a ranking of ‘medium’ or 2 points if it achieved between 4 and 8 objectives, and a ranking of ‘low’ or 1 point if it achieved less than 4 objectives. Project scores for benefits and costs were then used to calculate a benefit‐cost (B/C) ratio for each project, and were then ranked either ‘high’ if the B/C ratio was greater than 2, ‘medium’ of the B/C ratio was ranked between 1 and 2, or ‘low’ if the B/C ratio was between 0 and 1. These high, medium, and low rankings were then assumed point scores of 5, 3 and 1, respectively, with the scores entered into the appropriate line on the project prioritization scoring sheet. A summary of the benefit‐cost analyses conducted on the submitted projects is included in Appendix N. The resulting percentages applied to the various project scoring criteria are summarized below. Projects were subsequently ranked as high, medium or low priority based on their score resulting from application of this prioritization process. 6.3.1.2 Project Prioritization Step 2 – Qualitative Comparison of Project GHG Impacts As directed by the Guidelines, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were considered by the IRWM Region in development of the project prioritization process. After discussions, the Region decided to include GHG impacts and emissions as a secondary criteria (or second step) in developing project rankings. As with the primary (Step 1) prioritization process, only non‐Concept projects were evaluated in this Step 2 process. In developing the Step 2 prioritization process, it was acknowledged that a quantitative calculation of each project’s GHG emissions would, most likely, not be available from the project proponent, nor was it in the wherewithal of either the SC or PAC to prepare such calculations. Therefore, a qualitative comparative methodology was developed and applied to the projects. Additionally, it was acknowledged that these quantitative GHG emissions calculations are required as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process and therefore would, for the most part, be available during the grant application process and/or prior to project implementation. A GHG emissions score sheet was developed by the SC and PAC for use in preparing this secondary evaluation (see Appendix Key to the application of this score sheet is the assumption that all projects would require construction and would therefore result in construction‐related GHG emissions. Any project that did not require construction (e.g. a paper study) would receive a ‘benefit’ as a result of no construction. Projects impacts and benefits relative to GHG emissions were then evaluated based on a series of yes/no questions. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-6 Table 6‐1: Project Prioritization Process Weights Prioritization Factor Weighting Comments Regional Objectives 50% Water Supply 10% With the Region’s vision in mind, the Regional Objectives account for half of the total weight. Within that half of the total weight, the goals were then weighted individually with greater importance placed on reaching the Region’s water supply, flood protection, and water quality goals. Flood Protection 10% Water Quality 10% Environmental Protection and Enhancement 7% Regional Communication and Cooperation 7% Economic and Social Responsibility 6% Statewide Priorities 25% Drought Preparedness 5% Achieving Statewide Priorities was considered an achievement only secondary to achieving the Region’s goals and objectives. Statewide priorities that also support the Region’s primary goals with respects to water supply, flood protection and water quality were given greater weights. Use and Reuse Water More Efficiently 5% Climate Change Response/Adaptation Actions 3% Expand Environmental Stewardship 2% Practice Integrated Flood Management 3% Protect Surface Water and Groundwater Quality 3% Improve Tribal Water and Natural Resources 2% Ensure Equitable Distribution of Benefits; Provide Environmental Justice 2% Other Strategies 16% Direct Benefit to DAC and/or Native American Communities 4% Other Strategies were intended to reflect the criteria considered important in project prioritization but not covered/reflected in either Regional goals or objectives or Statewide Priorities. Schedule 8% Inter‐Regional Project 2% Provide Non‐Water Related Benefits 2% Feasibility 9% Benefit‐Cost Analysis 6% The feasibility criteria focused on the cost‐ effectiveness of the projects (relative to the benefits achieved) and the financial ‘security’ of the project. Financing/Economic Feasibility 3% ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December The IRW of poten Plan im must in within t regions DACs, E Americ ‐ Propos July 201 Within ea projects neutrality achieve providing worth no because t water sup 6.3.2 P The proje inclusion against t described the scori prioritiza primary IRWMP a planning managem 6.4 Im requirem PAC. In a member( project p Plan, indi (NEPA), a the proje The pote IRWM Pla sections. included islaus Integrat 2013 WMP must co ntial impacts mplementatio nclude both im the IRWM re s, and those d EJ concerns, a an Tribal com sition 84 & 1E 12, Page 20 ach prioritiz were orde The res the Region’ g a secondar oting that re the East Sta pplies. Prioritizati ect prioritiza n in the East the prioritize d. As previou ng criteria ( ation process and seconda and also com website ( ment website mpacts an ments outline addition, incl to implem proponent. P ividual envir and any othe ct proponen ntial impact an could ach A table cros in Appendix ted Regional W ontain a disc s and benefit on. This discu mpacts and b egion, betwee directly affec and Native mmunities. E IRWM Guid ation catego red/ranked ulting proje s goals and ry prioritizat ducing depe anislaus Regi ion Applic ation proces t Stanislaus ed criteria w usly noted, th (both primar s, including ary scoring mmunicated t (www.eaststa e. d Benefit ed in Sections lusion of a p ment the pro Prior to imp ronmental re er local, state ts. s and benefi hieve are sho ss‐referencin O. Water Manage ussion ts of ussion benefits en ting delines, ory resulting based on ct prioritiza d objectives, tion based o endence on t ion, while up cation and s described IRWMP. Inf were provid he Project Re ry and secon the list of s process, res to stakehold anirwm.org/ ts T r m t T a i o i t I I s 6.2 and 6.3 project in th oject. Imple plementation view, compli e and/or fed its that imple own in Table ng the subm ement Plan from applic their relati tion therefo , Statewide on GHG emis the Delta is n pstream of t d Results above was i formation us ded via the p eview Subco ndary) to th elected proj spectively. ers and the /projects), s The East Sta recognize th multiple reso the greatest Through imp and localized impacts addr of potential b implementat the East Stan It should be IRWM Plan 3, but does n e IRWM Pla ementation, i n and/or con iant with CEQ eral requirem ementing th 6‐2, and are mitted projec ation of the ive impacts ore reflected Priorities o ssions, bene not included the Delta, do implemented sed in evalu project subm mmittee met he projects s jects, are inc Prioritized p public throu specifically anislaus IRW e importanc ource mana and most eq plementation d benefits w ressed. This benefits and tion of proje nislaus IRWM noted that indicates th not necessari an does not c if undertake nstruction of QA, the Natio ments as app e projects in e described i ts with the Cha Step 1 prior or mitigat the ability or importan efits and/or d in the prio oes not rely d on the pro uating the su mittal proce t on July 26, submitted. T cluded in Ap projects are ugh the East the region WM partners ce of pursuin gement stra quitable bene n of this IRW will be realiz section prov impacts tha ects or prog M Plan. inclusion of hat it passe ly reflect end commit the n, is the res f any project onal Environ plicable, will ncluded in th n more deta project type apter 6 The Pr ritization pro tion/benefits of the proje nt criteria, w mitigations. oritization cr y on the Delt jects receive ubmitted pro ess, as previ 2012 and ap he results o ppendix P fo e included in Stanislaus I n’s OPTI pr and stakeho ng and integr ategies to ac efit for the re WM Plan, reg zed and pote vides an over t may result rams includ f a project in ed the scre dorsement b or sponsibility o t included in nmental Polic l be complet he East Stani il in the follo es noted belo ojects 6-7 ocess, s (or ect to while It is riteria ta for ed for ojects iously pplied of this or the n this RWM roject olders rating chieve egion. gional ential rview t from ded in n this ening by the r PAC of the n this cy Act ed by islaus owing ow is ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-8 Table 6‐2: Potential Impacts and Benefits by Project Type Project Type Within the East Stanislaus Region Interregional Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Groundwater Projects Groundwater Supply Development Water quality degradation Reduced groundwater availability and reliability Increased groundwater storage / recharge Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Reduced land subsidence and/or fissuring Local prosperity Water quality degradation Reduced groundwater availability and reliability Increased groundwater storage/recharge Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Local prosperity Conjunctive Use Water quality degradation Reduced groundwater availability and reliability Increased groundwater storage / recharge Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Reduced land subsidence and/or fissuring Improved water management coordination Local prosperity Water quality degradation Reduced groundwater availability and reliability Increased groundwater storage/recharge Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Reduced land subsidence and/or fissuring Improved water management coordination Local prosperity Potable Water Supply Projects Conveyance Facilities Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water supply reliability None None Storage Facilities or Storage Operations Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water quality (through reduced groundwater pumping) Improved water supply reliability None Improved water quality (through reduced groundwater pumping) Treatment Facilities Energy consumption Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Economic benefits None None Salinity Management None Improved water quality Long‐term sustainability of water supplies Local prosperity None Improved water quality Long‐term sustainability of water supplies Local prosperity Conservation Projects Outreach and Education Reduced discharges to Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers Improved water supply reliability Public education and environmental awareness Reduced discharges to Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers Improved water supply reliability Public education and environmental awareness Economic Incentives Reduced discharges to Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers Improved water supply reliability Avoided costs of imported water supply Avoided costs of water supply infrastructure Local prosperity Reduced discharges to Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers Improved water supply reliability Avoided costs of imported water supply Avoided costs of water supply infrastructure Local prosperity Wastewater Projects Conveyance Facilities Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water supply reliability None None Treatment Facilities Energy consumption Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water supply reliability Improved water quality Avoided costs of imported water supply Local prosperity None Improved water quality Septic to Sewer Conversion Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered Improved water quality Local prosperity None None ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-9 Project Type Within the East Stanislaus Region Interregional Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits species Recycled/Non‐Potable Water Projects Conveyance Facilities Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Water quality degradation Improved water supply reliability Increased nutrient levels for landscape irrigation Potable water offsets None Improved water supply reliability Potable water offsets Treatment Facilities Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water supply reliability Potable water offsets Improved water quality Local prosperity None Improved water supply reliability Potable water offsets Improved water quality Salinity Management None Improved water quality Improved water supply reliability Local prosperity None Improved water quality Improved water supply reliability Local prosperity Urban Runoff Management Projects Stormwater Capture and Reuse / Recharge Water quality degradation Increased groundwater storage / recharge Improved water supply reliability Reduced land subsidence and/or fissuring Avoided costs of imported water supply Local prosperity Water quality degradation Increased groundwater storage / recharge Improved water supply reliability Avoided costs of imported water supply Local prosperity Diversion to Sewer Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water quality Flood control enhancement Increased recycled water None None Pollution Prevention None Improved water quality None Improved water quality Flood Management Projects Storm Drains or Channels Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Increased sedimentation and erosion Economic impacts Flood control enhancement Increased groundwater storage / recharge Avoided costs of flood damage Local prosperity None None Ecosystem Restoration and Protection Projects Land Conservation Economic impacts Improved water quality Flood control enhancement Habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement Open space preservation None None Invasive Species Removal Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Increased sedimentation and erosion Improved water quality Flood control enhancement Habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement None None Restoration / Revegetation Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Improved water quality Flood control enhancement Habitat protection, restoration and enhancement Reduced threat of wildfires None None Water‐Based Recreation Projects Reservoir Recreation Water quality degradation Enhanced recreation and public access None None ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-10 Project Type Within the East Stanislaus Region Interregional Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Potential Impacts Potential Benefits Local prosperity Parks, Access and Trails Disturbance of habitat and endangered species Increased sedimentation and erosion Enhanced recreation and public access Local prosperity None None Data Collection/Management Project Data Collection and Management None Improved data accessibility and dissemination Public access to data Facilitation of projects None Improved data accessibility and dissemination Public access to data Facilitation of projects Outreach Project Outreach None Improved intraregional coordination and communication Identification of collaboration opportunities Identification of potential project enhancements None Improved inter‐regional coordination and communication Identification of collaboration opportunities Identification of potential project enhancements Public Education None Increased public awareness and support of IRWM‐related projects Improved consumer response to water resource management requests None Increased public awareness and support of IRWM‐related projects Improved consumer response to water resource management requests DAC Support None Improved accessibility to regional support for project design and implementation Identification and facilitation of projects that directly improve water supply reliability and water quality for DACs None Improved accessibility to regional support for project design and implementation Identification and facilitation of projects that directly improve water supply reliability and water quality for DACs ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-11 6.4.1 Plan Implementation Benefits and Impacts 6.4.1.1 Regional Impacts and Benefits Implementation of East Stanislaus IRWM Plan will lead to numerous benefits including, at a minimum:  A more reliable and high quality water supply. Additional water supplies and conjunctive use lead to enhanced water supply reliability and assist with the improvement of water quality. Water quality projects ensure that existing water quality is sustained and protected. Reliable and high quality water is directly linked to economic and environmental health and well‐being.  Cost‐effective and multi‐beneficial projects. Opportunities for multi‐benefit projects, which can achieve a multitude of goals and objectives for several stakeholders rather than a single entity, provide increased value to stakeholders and the communities they serve. Integrated planning and collaboration can lead to multi‐benefit projects that achieve cost savings through cost‐sharing opportunities, economies of scale, resource sharing, and other mechanisms. Existing resources can be optimized, duplication of efforts avoided, and larger scale efforts developed to provide cost savings to all involved.  Shared experience and resources. Completion of the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan and implementation of the Plan facilitates knowledge sharing and equips agencies to overcome future challenges by coordinating resources, more effectively meeting the needs of the region as a whole. In addition to direct quantitative benefits of Plan implementation, such as new or more reliable water supplies, indirect benefits are expected to result from avoiding the negative impacts of not implementing the projects.  Increased regional understanding. Agencies and stakeholders are working together as a cohesive group to solve water resource problems in a consensus‐based approach, resulting in a deeper understanding of the effects of each individual project on other agencies and stakeholders. This deeper understanding, in turn, reduces interagency conflicts that may prevent projects from gaining the necessary support for successful implementation.  Improved local understanding of water resources issues. Through consistent and coordinated public outreach and education programs, local understanding of regional water resources issues, conflicts, and solutions will improve. Maintaining a consistent message will improve public understanding of water resource management issues and encourage the acceptance and understanding of integrated projects. Potential impacts of implementation of the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan could include a variety of temporary construction‐related impacts during project construction, including dust, noise, and traffic generation. Other impacts may include increased costs associated with water infrastructure financing. Additional impacts may be identified on a project‐by‐project basis during CEQA or NEPA analyses. Conversely, should the East Stanislaus IRWMP not be implemented, the impacts to the region, water and wastewater agencies, and residents within it would be vast. The same issues the region is currently experiencing would not be resolved and while individual, localized planning efforts and projects would likely continue, they would not achieve the same magnitude and multitude of benefits delivered from regional planning and implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-12 6.4.1.2 Interregional Benefits and Impacts Interregional projects such as the North Valley Regional Recycled Water Project stand to provide benefits that extend beyond regional boundaries. The projects included in this Plan benefit not only the local agencies and residents of the East Stanislaus Region, but multiple watersheds (Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced River watersheds), the Delta, and members of the public throughout California. Specific ways in which the projects contained in the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan provide benefits beyond the East Stanislaus region include the following:  Reduced effluent discharges (and associated pollutant loadings) into the Tuolumne River due to increased recycled water use, promoting improved water quality both in the Tuolumne and San Joaquin Rivers and in the Delta.  Improved regional water supply and reliability for Stanislaus County, achieved through several water storage projects, will reduce pressure on the Delta and on the Modesto and Turlock Groundwater Subbasins to serve the region in times of significant drought. Additional wastewater reuse projects will also reduce the demand for potable water, potentially increasing supplies.  Conjunctive use projects will increase water supply reliability within the region, resulting in increased surface water supply availability in dry years and reduced pressure on the San Joaquin River as a water supply. Most likely, project‐dependent construction‐related impacts would not impact other IRWM regions, as project and program facilities would be implemented within the East Stanislaus Region. These construction impacts would be temporary in nature and will result in predominantly local impacts, if any. The East Stanislaus IRWM Plan also has the potential to benefit resources beyond local and regional water resources. Improved surface water quality will benefit local ecosystems. Enhanced tree cover, while viewed as a habitat enhancement, may also directly benefit regional air quality through the creation of microclimates and the filtering capacity provided by trees. By optimizing water supply operations and implementing conjunctive use, additional surface water supplies may be available for hydropower generation to benefit statewide energy resources and for the proposed San Joaquin River Wildlife Refuge expansion. 6.4.1.3 Benefits and Impacts to DACs and EJ‐Related Concerns Protection of the people and economy of disadvantaged communities (DACs) and correction of environmental justice concerns are priorities for the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan. (Please note, there are no federally‐ or state‐recognized Native American communities in the East Stanislaus Region.) Environmental justice is addressed by ensuring that all stakeholders have access to the IRWM planning decision‐making process and that minority and/or low‐income populations do not bear disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts. Working on a regional basis aids in protecting the economy of the East Stanislaus Region and Stanislaus County, and minimizes direct monetary impacts felt by DACs in the region through the stabilization of water and wastewater utility rates. Implementation of the Region’s flood control projects will protect the local communities from disastrous flood damage. Regional coordination has been, and will continue to be, achieved through the noticing of public meetings, to be held as needed to address public and stakeholder concerns, conducting routine reviews to ensure that DACs are not being ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-13 adversely affected by project and Plan implementation, and by using grant monies receive to help offset project implementation costs. Impacts to DACs will be kept to a minimum, and ongoing coordination and public involvement will aid in preventing possible impacts. Construction of project facilities will create short‐term environmental impacts (noise, dust, traffic disruption) at neighboring communities. A preliminary analysis of the areas affected by construction of project facilities will ensure that these construction nuisance impacts will not be borne predominantly by any minority population or low‐income group. 6.4.2 Project/Program Impacts and Benefits The potential benefits and impacts summarized in Table 6‐2 are described in more detail in the following sections. Additionally, the projects included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP, by project type, are summarized in the table included in Appendix J. For each project, potential benefits and impacts are assumed to be similar to those identified for the specific project type. During updates to the Plan, impacts and benefits of projects and Plan implementation will be reevaluated and assessed based on project performance and changes in water resource conditions in the region. 6.4.2.1 Benefits Increased groundwater storage / recharge The Modesto and Turlock Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin underlie most of Stanislaus County. Use of groundwater for irrigation and municipal purposes has resulted in historical declines of available groundwater in previous years. In past years, both subbasins have experienced overdraft conditions, with groundwater depressions underlying the cities of Modesto and Turlock. A cone of depression has also formed on the eastern side of the Turlock Subbasin where groundwater is the only available water supply. Groundwater recharge could help improve the state of the subbasins and their long‐term sustainability. Groundwater improvement programs may include projects to:  Enhance conjunctive management and groundwater storage  Aquifer storage and recovery  Stormwater capture and recharge  Construction of new and/or rehabilitation of spreading grounds/recharge basins  Improvement to groundwater monitoring  Hydrogeologic investigations and groundwater modeling Improved water supply reliability Improving water supply reliability in the East Stanislaus Region is a key objective of the Region’s water supply goal. Projects that diversify the Region’s water supply portfolio, create new supplies, improve efficiencies of existing supplies, or offset potable water supplies will improve the Region’s water supply reliability. Projects that would achieve this benefit include:  Water use efficiency and water management projects  New water supply pipelines and/or rehabilitation/repair projects  Water system tie‐ins, interconnections, and diversion structures  Water transfer projects ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-14  Groundwater extraction and/or treatment projects  Surface water diversion and treatment projects  Water storage and treatment projects  Upgrading wastewater treatment facilities to produce recycled water  Water quality protection projects Improved water quality As described in Chapter 5, Vision, Goals, and Objectives, protecting and improving water quality for beneficial uses consistent with regional interests and the Basin Plan is a key regional goal. Different types of projects contribute to different types of water quality improvements. For example, groundwater recharge projects can improve groundwater quality in the Modesto groundwater subbasin, while treatment improvement projects will improve potable water quality. Projects that improve water quality include, but are not limited to:  Stormwater projects (e.g. stormwater capture and recharge or stormwater management to reduce volume of urban runoff discharged to surface waters)  Upgrading wastewater treatment plants  Groundwater monitoring and assessment  Conversion of septic systems to municipal sewers  Conjunctive management and groundwater storage  Sewer collection improvements  Water treatment projects  Ecosystem restoration and revegetation projects  Land conservation  Salinity management Reduced land subsidence and/or fissuring Land subsidence occurs when groundwater is excessively pumped from a groundwater basin; the clay layers in the aquifer settle and the ground surface in the area lowers. While subsidence has historically not been a concern in the region, projects that will reduce groundwater pumping or increase groundwater recharge will help reduce the potential for land subsidence and fissuring. These projects include:  Enhanced conjunctive management and groundwater storage  Stormwater capture and recharge  Construction of new and/or rehabilitation of spreading grounds/recharge basins  Improvement to groundwater monitoring  Hydrogeologic investigations and groundwater modeling ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-15 Local prosperity Local prosperity and economic benefits can be achieved by:  Avoiding costs of water supply infrastructure with the implementation of water management and water use efficiency projects  Avoiding flood damage costs  Avoiding impacts to the economy (e.g. businesses and agriculture) associated with water supply interruption  Increased tourism with enhanced recreational opportunities and improved water quality and ecosystems  Benefits to the regional economy associated with constructing and maintaining proposed IRWM projects Additionally, as previously stated, working on a regional basis aids in protecting the economy of the East Stanislaus Region and minimizing direct monetary impacts felt by DACs in the region through the stabilization of water and wastewater utility rates. IRWM planning and collaboration can lead to multi‐benefit projects that achieve cost savings through cost‐sharing opportunities, economies of scale, resource sharing, and other mechanisms. Existing resources can be optimized, duplication of efforts avoided, and larger scale efforts developed to provide cost savings to all involved. Long‐term sustainability of water supplies Some groundwater basins throughout California contain salts and nutrient levels exceeding water quality objectives established in Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans). The high salt and nutrients concentrations could be from natural or man‐made. Salinity management is key to ensuring the long‐term sustainability of groundwater supplies. Groundwater quality varies throughout the East Stanislaus Region. As new water supplies are developed, recycled water use increases, and groundwater recharge projects are implemented, the importance of salinity management and other water quality management programs will increase. Public education and environmental awareness Many water conservation, water quality protection, and water supply projects include public education and environmental awareness components, creating multi‐benefit projects or programs. Public outreach programs and components can help promote and increase water efficient management practices, educate about habitat stewardship which can improve water resources, discourage illegal dumping of trash and litter in watercourses, and encourage appropriate water management practices, including appropriate collection and disposal of hazardous liquid wastes and pharmaceuticals. Increased nutrient levels for landscape irrigation Depending on the nutrients supplied by the recycled water available, increasing the use of recycled water for landscape irrigation through construction of additional conveyance facilities could significantly reduce the amount of fertilizer required for irrigated areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-16 Potable water offsets Potable water offsets can be achieved through stormwater and recycled water projects. New non‐ potable water supplies may be used for irrigation or other beneficial uses, helping to increase the region’s water supplies. Projects that would provide potable water offsets include:  Recycled water treatment and conveyance projects  Stormwater capture and reuse/recharge  Conversion of septic systems to centralized sewer collection systems to increase the amount of recycled water available Flood control enhancement Flooding is a concern for some areas within the East Stanislaus IRWM planning region, especially along the San Joaquin River and the lower Tuolumne River. Flooding can occur from heavy rainfall, rapid snow melt, saturated soils, or a combination of these conditions. In some cases, flooding is due to inadequate storm drainage systems, unable to handle heavy storms during winter and spring seasons, and from increasing development leading to increases in impervious surface areas and decreases in natural vegetative cover, which reduces the detention and attenuation characteristics of the overland areas. To reduce potential property and structure damage, and economic impacts, flood control enhancement may be provided by projects that:  Capture and divert stormwater  Improve levee systems (e.g. floodwalls or setback levees)  Install pervious pavement  Protection and manage floodplains  Construct regional flood control infrastructure Increased recycled water By centralizing sewer collection systems in areas that may still be on septic, a greater volume of wastewater will be treated at existing and new wastewater treatment facilities, creating more recycled water for beneficial uses. Increasing the amount of recycled water available for farmland, landscape, golf course, and school irrigation, industrial uses, and other uses, will lead to other benefits such as potable water offsets and increased nutrient levels for landscape, as previously discussed. Habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement Projects that contribute to habitat protection and restoration have the ability to enhance the Region’s ecosystems and protect threatened, endangered, and sensitive species. The following types of projects would provide this benefit:  Land conservation  Water quality protection projects that would result in surface water quality improvement  Invasive species removal  Restoration and enhancement of special aquatic features (e.g. wetlands, springs, bogs, riverine environments) ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-17  Stormwater management and pollution prevention  Debris cleanup and habitat restoration  Meadow restoration  Forest fuels reduction  Road management activities to reduce runoff to streams Reduced threat of wildfire Wildfires threaten property, lives, and ecosystems, and can adversely impact flood management and erosion. Ecosystem protection and enhancement activities such as forest restoration can help reduce the threat of wildfire. There is already evidence that wildfires are becoming more frequent, longer, and more widespread, and they are expected to increase in frequency and severity due to climate change (CDM, 2011). Open space preservation Open space preservation is a benefit that can be achieved through implementation of land conservation projects. Preserving open space contributes to other benefits such as environmental and recreational benefits, as well as stormwater control, reduced runoff, and flood management benefits. Enhanced recreation and public access Reservoirs, parks, wildlife refuges and the wilderness within the East Stanislaus Region are used by outdoor recreation enthusiasts throughout the year. Enhancing recreation and public access in the region will be achieved by projects that:  Conserve and preserve open space and access to public land.  Remove and control invasive species.  Improve water quality.  Provide appropriate sanitation facilities at recreation sites.  Road management activities to reduce runoff to streams.  Improve opportunities for public outreach and environmental education. 6.4.2.2 Impacts Implementation of the projects described in this plan may also have quantitative and/or qualitative impacts if the East Stanislaus IRWM Plan and/or its component projects are not managed or implemented properly. These impacts may include increased project costs to agencies and ratepayers, delayed construction and/or operation of planned facilities leading to delayed water supply and other benefits, negative impacts to surface water and/or groundwater quality, and increasingly limited operational flexibility, especially in times of drought, leading to increased water rationing and associated pressure on water users and the environment. Project‐specific environmental compliance processes will be completed by project proponents prior to project implementation. These processes will determine the significance of project‐related impacts. Each project will comply with the CEQA and NEPA requirements, if applicable, prior to and throughout implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-18 Negative impacts that could be associated with the implementation of projects and programs included in this IRWM Plan are similar to those of other water infrastructure projects. In general, temporary, site‐specific impacts related to construction and potential long‐term impacts associated with project operation are anticipated. Short‐term, site‐specific construction impacts from implementing physical project facilities may include increased traffic and/or congestion; noise; and impacts to public services, utilities, and aesthetics. Other potential, longer‐term impacts are described in more detail below. Water quality degradation Groundwater‐related projects, such as projects that increase groundwater pumping or implement conjunctive use, could degrade water quality if not operated appropriately for the groundwater basin and conditions. In addition, projects that involve the implementation of potentially contaminating activities in groundwater recharge areas could result in negative impacts to groundwater quality. Surface water quality could be similarly impacted by projects that encourage recreation and/or intensive development by increasing loading of nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants to adjacent surface water bodies, negatively impacting water quality for water supply and environmental needs. Recreation‐related projects also have the potential to increase erosion and sedimentation. Increased motor vehicle traffic and foot traffic can increase erosion and sedimentation to adjacent water bodies, negatively affecting water quality for water supply and the environment/habitat purposes. Water quality issues associated with increased erosion and sedimentation can be detrimental to aquatic communities. Additionally, storm drains and channel modifications that are implemented to manage flood flows can contribute to erosion and sedimentation. Projects that allow use of motorized watercraft may introduce organic contaminants to water bodies. Reduced groundwater availability and reliability There are groundwater quality issues in many areas within the Modesto and Turlock groundwater subbasins. Projects that impact water quality and/or yield could reduce overall groundwater availability and water supply reliability to users depending on the source. Increased groundwater pumping in the subbasins could create overdraft conditions, potentially degrading water quality and further decreasing overall reliability. Land use compatibility (rights‐of‐way) A potential impact of any project that includes construction of physical facilities is land use compatibility. The types of projects that could potentially have land use compatibility or rights‐of‐ way issues include:  Water conveyance facilities  Storage tanks or reservoirs  Treatment plants  Wastewater collection  Recycled water distribution facilities Construction of new facilities outside of disturbed areas, such as roads, could result in disturbance of otherwise undisturbed areas and may result in loss of open space and habitat. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 6 The Projects December 2013 6-19 Disturbance of habitat and endangered species The East Stanislaus Region contains portions of a large wildlife refuge in addition to many riparian habitats. These areas provide habitat for numerous species, including special‐status species (i.e. endangered, threatened, sensitive, or candidate). Projects that involve facility construction have the ability to disturb surrounding habitat and endangered species, depending on the location, type of construction, and facilities. All projects implemented will comply with CEQA and NEPA, as applicable, and as part of the process, will identify and implement mitigation measures for potential environmental impacts as necessary. Energy consumption The water sector plays a significant role in California’s energy consumption. Implementing certain projects may increase energy use. Water and wastewater treatment projects that require significant amounts of power may result in increased energy consumption in the region. Increased energy consumption can increase greenhouse gas emissions, further exacerbating projected climate change impacts. Reduced discharges to the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers Agricultural and urban water use efficiency projects and water recycling projects could reduce the quantity of water discharged to the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers, effectively reducing streamflows and potentially impacting aquatic habitat. Economic impacts Implementation of certain projects may have associated long‐term economic impacts to agencies and ratepayers. Project financing has historically provided a challenge in areas of the East Stanislaus Region. Even when grants and/or low‐interest loans are available to subsidize project capital costs, agency rate revenues are sometimes insufficient to properly operate and maintain the project. . Because funds available to implementing agencies are generally limited, it will be important to evaluate financing methods and avenues for potential projects prior to implementation such that potential economic impacts on ratepayers and agencies in the Region can be minimized. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte The Tech effective as descri activities 7.1 Te The East technical documen including Central V County, Multiple reviewed include U Master Reports/ Plans an potential specific p process a extracted reviewed Docu Modesto District Ag Water Ma Plan fo Oakdale District A Water Ma Pl islaus Integrat 2013 er 7 T hnical Analy use of availa ibe stakehold can be integ echnical A t Stanislaus informatio nts, and stu g the cities o Valley Regio and the Ca local water d and used t Urban Water Plans (W Environmen nd feasibility for future plan section are summari d as appropr d and used in Tab ument Irrigation gricultural anagement or 2012 Irrigation Agricultural anagement lan ted Regional W echnical ysis and Dat able data in d der access t grated into ex Analysis IRWMP ha on, analyses udies were of Modesto, T nal Water Q alifornia De r planning to prepare th r Managemen pr ntal Impact y studies. A climate chan s. Some of t ized in Table riate. All doc n developmen le 7‐1: Key D Year A 2012 M Ir 2012 En Water Manage Analysis ta Managem developing a to data, and xisting State as been dev s, and met collected fr Turlock, Cer Quality Cont epartment o and land u he East Stan nt Plans (UW roject Env Statements Additionally, nge in the C the key doc e 7‐1; these cuments cite nt of the East Documents Us Author Modesto rrigation District C e m i Davids ngineering C e m i ement Plan s and Dat ent section and impleme how that d databases. veloped usin thods. Info rom various res, and Hug trol Board, S of Water R use docume nislaus IRWM WMPs), Wate vironmental (EIRs/EISs) , specialized Central Valle uments used documents ed in the Ref t Stanislaus I sed to Prepar Results/In Der Current and p efficient wate management implemented Current and p efficient wate management implemented ta Manag is intended enting the Ea data generate ng sound formation, s sources ghson, the Stanislaus Resources. nts were MP. These er Supply Impact , General d studies, su ey, were rev d in the Eas were review ferences sect IRWMP. re East Stanis nformation ived planned er practices by MID. planned er practices by OID. C gement d to ensure ast Stanislau ed by IRWM uch as thos viewed and st Stanislaus wed and rele tion of this I slaus IRWMP Use in IR Used to ev efficient w practices u additional conserve w incorporat into Resou Strategies Used to ev efficient w practices u additional conserve w incorporat into Resou Strategies The IRWMP document t technical an develop the ‐ Propositio IRWM Guid November Chapter 7 Tec Analysis and Manage the efficient us IRWMP, as M implement se evaluating used to pre s IRWM plan evant inform IRWMP were P East Stanisla RWM Plan valuate curren water managem underway, l practices tha water, and te opportuniti urce Managem and projects. valuate curren water managem underway, l practices tha water, and te opportuniti urce Managem and projects. P must the data and nalyses used e IRWMP. on 84 & 1E delines, 2012, Page 2 hnical d Data ement 7-1 t and s well tation g the epare nning mation e also aus nt ment at may ies ment nt ment at may ies ment d to 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-2 Document Year Author Results/Information Derived Use in East Stanislaus IRWM Plan Turlock Irrigation District 2012 Agricultural Water Management Plan. 2012 Turlock Irrigation District Current and planned efficient water management practices implemented by TID. Used to evaluate current efficient water management practices underway, additional practices that may conserve water, and incorporate opportunities into Resource Management Strategies and projects. Climate Ready Water Utilities Adaptation Strategies Guide for Water Utilities 2012 United States Environmental Protection Agency Strategies to provide water and wastewater utilities with a basic understanding of how climate change can impact utility operations and missions, and examples of actions utilities can take (i.e. adaptive actions) to prepare for these impacts. Used to evaluate climate change impacts in the East Stanislaus Region and development of adaptive management strategies. Ceres 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2011 West Yost Associates Current and future water use, sources of supply and associated reliability, and existing and planned conservation measures for the City of Ceres. Used to evaluate current water supply system and basis for future water supply needs. DWR Disadvantaged Communities GIS data 2011 DWR DWR derived GIS data at the census block, census tract, and census designated place levels from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. Included median household income information for 2006 through 2010. Used to identify disadvantaged communities in the East Stanislaus IRWM region. City of Modesto and Modesto Irrigation District 2010 Joint Urban Water Management Plan 2011 West Yost Associates Current and future water use, sources of supply and associated reliability, and existing and planned conservation measures for the City of Modesto and MID. Used to evaluate current water supply system and basis for future water supply needs. City of Turlock 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2011 City of Turlock Current and future water use, sources of supply and associated reliability, and existing and planned conservation measures for the City of Turlock. Used to evaluate current water supply system and basis for future water supply needs. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-3 Document Year Author Results/Information Derived Use in East Stanislaus IRWM Plan Hydrologic Response and Watershed Sensitivity to Climate Warming in California’s Sierra Nevada 2010 Null, Sarah Joshua H. Viers, and Jeffery F. Mount Potential climate change impacts on individual watersheds within the Sierra Nevada mountains of California (including Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne River watersheds). Used to assess climate change impacts anticipated in the East Stanislaus Region. 2010 Census Data 2010 U.S. Census Bureau Population and basic information regarding residents, collected every 10 years by the U.S. Census, as mandated by the U.S. Constitution. Used to understand demographic of the East Stanislaus Region. Modesto 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report 2010 West Yost Associates Comparison of the City of Modesto’s existing water supplies with projected water demands to determine if an overall system supply shortage will exist in the future. Used to evaluate future water supply needs for the City of Modesto. City of Modesto Municipal Stormwater Program, Stormwater Management Plan 2009 City of Modesto Approach to addressing pollutants in stormwater discharges and monitoring program for assessing the health of local water bodies. Used to understand current impacts to water bodies from stormwater discharges and need for future measures / projects to reduce impacts. Turlock Groundwater Basin Groundwater Management Plan 2008 Turlock Groundwater Basin Association Status of groundwater resources in the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin, its basin management objectives and the goal of ensuring a safe, reliable, cost‐effective groundwater supply for the area and basin. Used to evaluate current condition of the Turlock Groundwater Subbasin and measures, studies, or projects required in the future. Modesto Draft Storm Drainage Master Plan 2008 Stantec Storm drainage infrastructure improvements needed to effectively accommodate stormwater runoff under existing and future conditions within the City of Modesto’s sphere of influence. Used to evaluate current storm drainage in the City of Modesto and basis for future improvements. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-4 Document Year Author Results/Information Derived Use in East Stanislaus IRWM Plan Modesto Wastewater Treatment Master Plan and Supplement 2007 and 2008 Carollo Engineers Improvements to the City of Modesto’s wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal facilities and operation with the goal of accommodating the wastewater service needs of the population and land uses as described in the City’s General Plan. Used to evaluate the City of Modesto’s existing wastewater treatment system and basis for future improvements. City of Modesto Wastewater Collection System Master Plan 2007 Carollo Engineers Recommended improvements to mitigate deficiencies of Modesto’s wastewater collection system and accommodate growth. Used to evaluate the City of Modesto’s existing wastewater collection system and basis for future improvements. Hughson Wastewater Treatment Master Plan 2007 Carollo Engineers A plan for the Hughson Wastewater Treatment Plant based on projected flows and loadings through the year 2025, including evaluations of treatment, effluent, disposal, and biosolids disposal alternatives. Used to identify projects required in the future to improve the Hughson Wastewater Treatment Plant. Hughson Sewer System Master Plan 2007 Carollo Engineers Recommended facility improvements to Hughson’s existing sewer system. Used to assess existing condition of Hughson’s sewer system and improvements required through the planning horizon through 2025. Hughson Water System Master Plan 2007 Carollo Engineers Proposed improvements to mitigate existing capacity deficiencies and expansion improvements in Hughson’s water system. Used to assess Hughson’s existing water system and basis for future improvements and projects. Hughson Storm Drain Master Plan 2007 Carollo Engineers Hydraulic modeling results of the Hughson storm drainage system and proposed improvements to enhance system reliability. Used to understand Hughson’s existing storm drainage system and basis for future needs. City of Hughson Urban Water Management Plan 2006 Carollo Engineers Current and future water use, sources of supply and associated reliability, and existing and planned conservation measures for the City of Hughson. Used to evaluate current water supply system and basis for future water supply needs. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-5 Document Year Author Results/Information Derived Use in East Stanislaus IRWM Plan Oakdale Irrigation District Water Resources Plan 2005 CH2M Hill Land use trends, existing water resources, and delivery operations for OID. Specific, prioritized recommendations for OID facility improvements that will comply with CEQA and accommodate available financial resources. Used to evaluate OID’s water resources, delivery system and operations, to determine how future changes in these areas will impact water supply and demand during the next two decades. Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan for the Modesto Subbasin – Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association 2005 Bookman‐ Edmonston Basin Management Objectives for the Modesto Subbasin, as well as groundwater management area objectives, and groundwater monitoring activities. Used to assess condition of the Modesto Subbasin and potential impacts to Region since the area relies on groundwater for water needs. City of Hughson Storm Water Management Program, Report of Waste Discharge 2004 Tulloch Engineering Stormwater quality management activities proposed by the City of Hughson in compliance with the federal stormwater quality regulations. Used to understand current impacts to water bodies from stormwater discharges and need for future measures / projects to reduce impacts. Turlock Stormwater Management Plan 2003 City of Turlock Stormwater management actions for the City of Turlock, Best Management Practices for six control measures, and the efforts the City will take to comply with all necessary requirements. Used to understand current impacts to water bodies from stormwater discharges and need for future measures / projects to reduce impacts. San Joaquin River Management Plan 1995 Advisory Council to DWR Description of specific projects, studies, and acquisitions that will help revive the San Joaquin River system. Used to describe issues relating to the San Joaquin River. The upcoming Mid‐San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan will be used to identify specific projects to be incorporated into later updates of this plan. General Plans (Stanislaus County, Turlock, Modesto, Ceres, Hughson, Waterford, Riverbank, Oakdale) Various Various Long‐term visions for the County and cities (15 to 25 years in the future) with respect to land use and development. Used to understand current and future demographic and cultural makeup of the East Stanislaus Region. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-6 The technical information included in these plans and studies is ideal for use in developing the East Stanislaus IRWMP. While some of these documents are project‐specific, others address water and/or land management issues on a local or regional basis. This allows for an understanding of regional issues shared by multiple entities in the Region, as well as more specific, localized issues, and potential solutions. Furthermore, these documents have been developed by the local and regional entities to address and plan for future growth and development, as well as anticipated changes in climate, economic conditions, and land use. They have been performed with a technical level of care that justifies their use in the IRWMP development. Beyond the analyses required to prepare this IRWMP, no additional focused models or studies were performed in support of this IRWMP. Although several such studies have been identified as a result of the IRWMP preparation, a lack of funding has, to date, prevented their implementation. These focused studies include preparation of a regional water needs assessment, a county island sewer connection study, and an integrated stormwater resources plan. These studies, once implemented, will help the fill identified data gaps in regional understanding, including projected future demands (on a regional level), areas where sanitary practices may be contributing to groundwater contamination, and opportunities for integrating stormwater management with other regional water supply management. Furthermore, two additional studies are presently underway that cover the IRWM region and will, once completed, be integrated into the East Stanislaus IRWMP. These studies are the Regional Flood Management Plan, which will evaluate flood management risks in the region and propose projects for addressing those risks, and CV‐SALTS, a coalition of Central Valley stakeholders working to develop a workable, comprehensive plan to address salinity, including nitrates, throughout the region in a comprehensive, consistent, and sustainable manner. The results of the CV‐SALT effort will include programs and management strategies to help manage salt and nutrient loadings to the Modesto and Turlock Subbasins. The projects included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP have also been found to be technically feasible based on similar projects, pilot studies, technical analyses, benefit analyses, cost estimating, modeling and simulation efforts and data assessments by the project proponents, local planners, and the IRWM planning participating entities. As the projects move closer to design and implementation, technical analyses will be conducted to confirm project feasibility and to provide any necessary feedback to modify the project’s plan to improve its likelihood of success. The following table summarizes project‐specific documentation that supports the technical feasibility of the East Stanislaus IRWMP projects and the associated technical feasibility of IRWMP implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-7 Table 7‐2: East Stanislaus IRWMP Project Technical Feasibility Project Documents Completed or Project Status Description Hughson Non‐Potable Water System Notice of Exemption (NOE) for the non‐potable water distribution system for the City of Hughson (May 2012). Design and Phase 1 Implemented (December 2012). A NOE was filed since the project is categorically exempt. Additionally, the project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Hughson Water Blending Facility Design started February 2013. Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible Monterey Park Tract Community Safe Drinking Water Project Water Supply Study for the Monterey Park Tract Community Services District (September 2011) The Study was prepared for the California Department of Public Health (Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program) and Stanislaus County Redevelopment Agency. SRWA Regional Surface Water Supply Project CEQA and 2013 CEQA Gap Analysis complete. Preliminary Design Report (PDR) complete. Re‐ evaluation of PDR currently underway for current project needs. The project is a collaboration between the cities of Turlock, Modesto, and Ceres under the Stanislaus Regional Water Authority JPA. Studies and CEQA documentation completed and on‐going. North Valley Regional Recycled Water Program Del Puerto Water District Recycled Water Feasibility Study, November 2010 Feasibility study reviews and evaluates recycled water delivery alternatives to provide DPWD with recycled water from Modesto and Turlock Modesto Area 2 Stormwater to Sanitary Sewer Cross‐ Connection Removal Project City of Modesto Area 2 Storm Drain to Sanitary Sewer Cross Connections Removal Final Design (2013) The project is ready to proceed. Phase 1 of the project is underway as a result of funding through a State Stormwater Grant. Hughson Water Well No. 9 Test Well is complete. Design of production well started February 2013. Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible Hughson 7th Street Low Impact Development (LID) Storm Drainage Improvements Program standards and specifications underway (started March 2013). Project will be constructed using techniques developed by the City of Portland and the City of Seattle. Since both cities have working projects on the ground, this project is technically feasible. Municipal Well #41 Turlock Water Master Plan Update, Carollo Engineers, 2009 Project plans and specifications Master Plan identifies need for project. Plans and specifications provide detailed information required for project implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-8 Project Documents Completed or Project Status Description Water Storage Reservoir NW Turlock Water Master Plan Update, Carollo Engineers, 2009 Project plans and specifications Master Plan identifies need for project. Plans and specifications provide detailed information required for project implementation. Hughson Well No. 9 Arsenic Treatment Facility Test Well Complete. Design of production facility started in February 2013. Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Canal Drive Stormwater Trunk Line City of Turlock, Storm Drain Master Plan Shows alternate means of conveying wastewater – construction of stormwater trunk line parallel to TID Lateral #4 Hughson Regional Surface Water Treatment Plant Pipeline Turnout Hughson Water Master Plan, Carollo Engineers, 2007 Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Arsenic Mitigation Project Assessment of Arsenic Treatment Technologies An evaluation of the City water system was conducted to determine if the City is required to install an arsenic removal system to meet the new standard and what current arsenic treatment technologies were best applied to the existing system. In determining preferred technologies, both capital and O&M costs were evaluated, along with site‐specific concerns of waste disposal, size and location of treatment units, and staffing requirements for O&M. The assessment report provided the City with a planning level evaluation of currently used arsenic treatment technologies appropriate for the existing City wells and preliminary cost estimates for implementation. DAC and Native American Outreach and Technical Assistance Builds upon existing and ongoing IRWM‐related outreach. On‐going outreach has been conducted as part of the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process. A more targeted approach will be taken with the implementation of this project. Sound technical assistance will be provided using common outreach techniques to contact DACs and Native American communities in the Region. Online Data Management System OPTI was developed as an IRWM project solicitation / tracking tool. This will build upon the existing OPTI system. OPTI is being used by other IRWM regions throughout California and has proven successful in tracking project and IRWM‐ related information. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-9 Project Documents Completed or Project Status Description Regional County Island Sewer Connection Study Will build upon existing data. No work completed to date. Project would identify areas within the IRWM Region that rely on septic sewer systems, evaluate potential impacts on groundwater, determine whether positive conveyance systems could be extended to serve them or if other non‐septic means could be developed to protect groundwater quality. Study will rely on existing, available data, and collect more data if necessary. Regional Water Needs Assessment No documents prepared to date; would build upon existing UWMPs and county population projections. Project would develop a region‐wide demand projection to increase the understanding and better management of local water supplies. Integrated Stormwater Resources Management and Groundwater Augmentation Plan No work completed to date. Project will evaluate and describe stormwater management in the region and identify opportunities and projects that will provide flood protection, water supply augmentation, and other benefits including potential groundwater recharge opportunities. Dennett Dam Removal Dennett Dam Removal – Concept Level Basis of Design Report The Report provides detailed information about the dam construction, site conditions, and considerations for the removal of the dam, including a comparison of alternatives and a recommended approach. Northeast Storm Drainage Interceptor Project Northeast Area Offsite Watershed Storm Drainage Evaluation (2005). Project is at conceptual level. Project evaluated assessed stormwater management and runoff impacts from areas northeast of Modesto’s General Plan Area. Hughson Water Well No. 10 Hughson Water Master Plan, Carollo Engineers, 2007 Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Hughson Water Well No. 11 Hughson Water Master Plan, Carollo Engineers, 2007 Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Hughson Well No. 5 Depth Extension Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Hughson Well No. 3 Depth Extension Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Dos Rios Floodplain and Riparian Habitat Restoration CEQA, permit acquisition, and earthwork design are complete for some phases of the project. Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-10 Project Documents Completed or Project Status Description La Grange Floodplain Restoration and Spawning Gravel Augmentation Conceptual planning complete. Design, CEQA documentation and permits still required. Project is similar to existing facilities currently in operation and is therefore technically feasible. Tuolumne River Trail Project Tuolumne River Regional Park Master Plan and Master EIR (2001) The Joint Powers Authority of the Cities of Modesto and Ceres, and Stanislaus County adopted the Master Plan and a Master EIR for the Plan. The Tuolumne River Trail Project is included in both of these documents which provide a vision for the future of the Tuolumne River Regional Park. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 7.3 Da performa is ideal to Data rela informati or progr efforts. D  G  G  G  W  Su  L  St  W  W  W  L At presen managem procedur order to data that Statewide encourag througho data to be below. The IRW collecti IRWM p and the Data is feasibil for a sp develop constru ‐ Propo Decemb islaus Integrat 2013 ata Manag ance monitor o promote th ated to the ion, such as am developm ata that may roundwater roundwater roundwater Water deman urface water ocation of se tream flows Wastewater tr Water quality Weather data and use data nt, the East ment proced res may occu ensure cons t is meant to e databases ged to follow out the region e collected a WMP must d on, storage, a participants, e State. technical inf lity studies), pecific projec pment includ uction, opera sition 84 & 1 ber 2012, Pa ted Regional W gement ring data. As he efficient an East Stanis feasibility st ment, imple y be collected elevations quality data pumping vo d r diversions ensitive speci and/or stage reatment pla y data (precipitatio a Stanislaus R ures for im ur as a result istency with o be publical . Projects i w similar pro n, and to imp nd anticipate escribe the p and dissemin stakeholder formation (e and informa ct in any phas ding planning ation and mo E IRWM Guid age 21 Water Manage such, develo nd effective u slaus IRWM tudies or des ementation, d includes, bu lumes ies es ant flow data on, evapotra Region will u plementation t of the devel h this new re ly available mplemented tocols to ma prove potent ed collection process of da nation to rs, the public designs, ation gathere se of g, design, nitoring. delines, ement Plan Data IRWM encom agenc politi provi resou are m mana and a proce IRWM signif proje the opment of a use of data. P includes sign documen or operation ut is not limit a nspiration, t utilize existin n of IRWMP lopment of a egional datab is uploaded d outside of aximize usefu tial integrati n and storage ata ed managemen M plannin mpasses mu cy service ical areas, a ides the fo urce manage made. On agement inc a variety of essing and m M planning ficant amou ect review pr IRWMP, su comprehens project‐ and nts, and any n or as a re ted to: emperature) ng, industry‐ P‐related pr a region‐wide base once it to entities’ f the Regio ulness and c ion into state e procedures C nt is an imp g because ultiple water areas, vari and groundw oundation o ement and p a regional cludes multi methods fo management. g process unts of data rocess and im uch as pr sive data ma d program‐s y data collect esult of requ ) ‐standard da rojects. Modi e data manag is establishe websites an on’s IRWM compatibility ewide databa s are present Chapter 7 Tec Analysis and Manage portant aspe e the pr r and wastew ious waters water basins on which w lanning deci basis, this ple data so or data colle Additionall itself gene a related to mplementati roject and nagement sy specific tech ted during pr uired monit ata collection ification to gement syste ed. Typically, d/or upload Program wi y of data coll ases. The typ ted in the sec hnical d Data ement 7-11 ect to rocess water sheds, s, and water isions data urces ction, y, the erates o the ion of Plan ystem hnical roject toring n and these em in , only ded to ill be ected pes of ctions ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-12 7.3.1 Data Needs within the Region While there has been significant progress in the last decade in characterizing the Region’s water supplies, demands, groundwater and surface water availabilities and quality, wastewater treatment and collection needs, and potential for recycled water use, there remain data needs within the East Stanislaus Region. For the most part, these data needs center around the portions of Stanislaus County not found within urbanized areas (such as Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, Hughson, Waterford, Patterson and Oakdale), and are required to fill data gaps in knowledge necessary for the effective management of regional water supplies. Additional data needs include information regarding local hydrogeology and opportunities for groundwater banking, data pertaining to localized flooding and storm water management, and region‐wide information to promote the reuse of storm water management. Many of the data gaps identified as a result of this IRWMP developed are addressed through inclusion of a project in this IRWMP. For example, there are many areas in rural Stanislaus County that are not connected to municipal sewer systems and instead rely on stand‐alone septic tanks/systems for wastewater disposal. These areas, referred to as County “islands”, are often the same areas that rely on private groundwater wells for water supply. Septic systems are, however, a key source of contamination to shallow groundwater aquifers and as such, pose a continuing source of groundwater quality problems for these rural communities and for the groundwater basins as a whole. Groundwater is a critical water supply for the East Stanislaus Region, and understanding and managing potential sources of contamination to the underlying groundwater basins is needed to sustain this important supply. The Regional County Island Sewer Connection Study, included in this Plan, would help identify County “islands” within the region that are on septic systems, determine potential groundwater impacts (current and future) from the septic systems, analyze the feasibility of connecting these areas to centralized or satellite collection and treatment systems, and perform an associated preliminary financial analysis of the most feasible and reasonable alternatives. The Study would build upon existing data and information gathered by the County. Other projects included in the Plan that would help fill data gaps include the following:  Regional Water Needs Assessment ‐ The purpose of this study is to complete a comprehensive assessment of current and future potable water demands within the entire East Stanislaus Region. This information is critical to managing water supplies under various hydrologic conditions to ensure water supply reliability and to prepare for droughts and potential climate change impacts. In essence, one must know the demands in order to be able to ensure the supply. UWMPs have been prepared by many entities within the Region (for example, by the Cities of Modesto, Turlock and Ceres), but not all areas and water users are included in the urban water management planning jurisdictions as required by the State (e.g. Hughson), and these areas are typically dependent on groundwater as their primary supply. This task will help fill the information gap and assess the current and future demands from those parts of the region where UWMPs are not required and, as needed, update the information where UWMPs are required so as to provide the region with essential information regarding projected future demands in order to effectively manage their water supplies to meet demands in a sustainable fashion. As water demands within the Region continue to increase and as groundwater quality continues to be a major factor threatening the sustainability of regional supplies, it is critical that a complete understanding of regional demands be prepared; that new, supplemental supply sources be identified, obtained, and integrated into the Region’s water supply portfolio; and that effective programs be established to protect and sustain existing regional water supplies for all users, including the environment. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-13  North Valley Regional Recycled Water Feasibility Study ‐ Del Puerto Water District, in cooperation with the cities of Modesto and Turlock, are currently preparing the North Valley Regional Recycled Water Feasibility Study to evaluate the potential for regionalizing recycled water use in Stanislaus County. As presently envisioned, the project could produce and deliver up to 30,000 acre‐feet per year (AFY) of disinfected tertiary treated recycled water to western Stanislaus County. The source of recycled water includes treated water from the Cities of Turlock and Modesto. Another related feasibility study will be completed to analyze options for conveying the recycled water to the west side of the county, to Del Puerto Water District and other potential users, where it could be used for irrigating food crops, public and privately owned landscaping, and for industrial uses. The feasibility study will further the understanding of how recycled water could be transported via the Delta‐ Mendota Canal (DMC), which is typically used to transport raw water. It will provide data and information to both the East Stanislaus Region and the Westside‐San Joaquin Region. Regulatory and permitting requirements would be evaluated, as well as water rights and a DMC water quality mixing evaluation. For the mixing evaluation, field testing and numerical simulation of expected mechanical and chemical interactions between recycled water and raw water would be completed.  Integrated Stormwater Resource Management Plan and Groundwater Augmentation Plan – The East Stanislaus Region will prepare an Integrated Stormwater Resources Plan to develop a comprehensive understanding of stormwater resource management in the region, including identification of areas where stormwater runoff is currently causing problems and where stormwater runoff is critical to maintaining habitats. It will also conduct a groundwater quality study of the Modesto and Turlock Groundwater Subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin to aid in understanding regional groundwater quality and the role that stormwater percolation has on groundwater quantity and quality. Lastly, it will analyze the feasibility of managed groundwater recharge in the East Stanislaus Region using stormwater runoff as potential source water. The Plan will contribute to better understanding of the underlying groundwater subbasins, the impacts of land use planning and stormwater management activities on the subbasins, and to developing possible, multi‐benefit solutions for managing the Region’s water resources and improving stormwater management. While other projects included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP are not studies or plans, many of them will have data collection as an aspect of project development and completion. Additionally, some of the projects are not yet ready for construction; some require preparation of plans, design documents, and other technical reports. The methods for collection and storage of these documents and their associated data are described in the following sections. 7.3.2 Data Collection and Storage To date, data collection and storage is primarily managed on an individual basis by the members of the and local stakeholders. At present, each entity collects and manages data using its own protocols and methodologies. The four member agencies house data on their respective servers and use software such as Microsoft Excel, ArcGIS, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA), New World Systems, and Wonderware. Some of the data collection completed by the member agencies is summarized in the following table. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-14 Table 7‐3: Data Collection for the Member Agencies Data Type Frequency of Data Collection Method for Data Collection Turlock groundwater quality Well sampling Turlock groundwater elevations Electronic water level indicator Turlock water demand Daily Meter readings Modesto groundwater quality quarterly Well sampling Modesto groundwater elevations Sounding cable Modesto water demand Daily SCADA, meter readings Ceres groundwater quality Annual Well sampling Ceres groundwater elevations Quarterly Sounding cable Ceres water demand Meter readings Hughson groundwater quality Weekly, quarterly, annually Well sampling Hughson water demand Daily SCADA Hughson wastewater treatment plan groundwater monitoring Quarterly Monitoring well sampling The is also implementing the Well Field Optimization Project in order to improve understanding of the Modesto Subbasin groundwater system and its infrastructure, and to develop tools for optimizing operations of well fields in the subbasin in conjunction with surface water resources. Phases 1 and 2 of the project have been partially funded by Local Groundwater Assistance grants from DWR. A key component of the project is an inventory of all the wells operated by the member agencies (i.e. MID, OID, Stanislaus County and the cities of Modesto, Riverbank, and Oakdale) and development of a web‐based data management system (DMS) where well data can be accessed, queried, plotted and shared amongst the member agencies. The DMS is a Microsoft Access database with a customized interface and customized Decision Support System tool to automate the decision process for system operators in selecting wells to meet deliveries. A regional data management system proposed by the and referred to as the Online Data Management System is also included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP as a project; implementation of this data management system is pending funding. The Online Data Management System would create a consolidated web‐based data management system to facilitate the collection and analysis of various data types, monitoring and reporting, and provide stakeholder access to data. This data management system would be developed to facilitate the sharing of data with existing State databases and the DMS created as part of the Well Field Optimization Project. The East Stanislaus Online DMS would connect with the East Stanislaus IRWMP website, located at http://www.eaststanirwm.org/. Presently, data and documents specific to the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process are uploaded to the website and made available for public review ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-15 (including proposed projects through the Region’s OPTI project solicitation website). The East Stanislaus Regional Water Management Partnership is responsible for maintaining the website and documents available there. Stakeholders participating in the IRWM planning process and project proponents are responsible for collecting, storing, and maintaining project‐specific data in the individual entity’s existing data management system and are tasked with uploading necessary, publically available data to applicable statewide databases, discussed in more detail in Chapter 7, Technical Analysis and Data Management. Any required monitoring after project implementation will be implemented consistent with applicable standards and reported to the State. Each entity that uploads data to its DMS, the East Stanislaus IRWMP website, and/or applicable statewide databases performs quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures to validate the data. These measures include third‐party reviews of data collected, laboratory quality control measures such as blind duplicates and matrix spike samples, and model calibration and sensitivity analyses. While each entity is responsible for QA/QC and maintenance of their individual data and databases, the or its designee will oversee any data compilation related to IRWMP implementation (including the implementation of projects contained within the IRWMP) for presentation on the region’s website. By making data available by request and available online through the member agencies’ websites, project proponents’ websites, and the East Stanislaus IRWMP website, data transfer and sharing among the participating entities, and interested parties including local, State and federal agencies is made possible. 7.3.3 Data Dissemination During preparation of the East Stanislaus IRWMP, data has been disseminated primarily via project‐specific documentation and associated meetings, inter‐agency collaboration on issues and projects of mutual interest, discussion at PAC, SC, and meetings, and through website postings on the East Stanislaus IRWM Region’s website. Project proponents, PAC members, and IRWM planning participants are all jointly responsible for data dissemination. As previously mentioned, project‐specific data is shared by and between participating agencies during project development and made available to the public at various milestones. Environmental documentation processes completed to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) have also allowed for dissemination of data developed for review by interested stakeholders and the public. These methods will continue to be employed. As described previously, all data specific to the East Stanislaus IRWM planning process will be housed on the East Stanislaus IRWM website and/or maintained by implementing agencies. Project‐ and program‐specific data will be housed on the project proponent’s individual data management systems. Hard copies and CDs may be available to interested parties without internet access. Future East Stanislaus IRWMP updates will be distributed in a similar manner to that employed for this IRWMP. As described in Section 7.3, Plan Performance and Monitoring, East Stanislaus IRWMP project proponents implementing projects through the IRWM Program will be required to prepare project‐ specific monitoring plans that adhere to the data collection techniques and procedures established by existing statewide programs. This will ensure compatibility of data among projects implemented through the IRWM Program, as well as compatibility with relevant statewide databases. Individual project proponents will be responsible for collecting data in accordance with the approved project‐ specific monitoring plan, which will clearly identify monitoring and analytical techniques and QA/QC procedures to be implemented, and will describe how those techniques are compatible with the requirements of appropriate statewide database(s). The individual project sponsor will be ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 7 Technical Analysis and Data Management December 2013 7-16 responsible for implementing and reviewing the data collection and QA/QC protocols to validate that data were collected in accordance with the QA/QC procedures required as part of the project monitoring program. In addition, project proponents will be responsible for reviewing the data for accuracy at the time of entry to the database to identify any errors. Once data collection and QA/QC has been completed in accordance with provisions of the approved project‐specific monitoring plan, the project sponsor will submit the compatible data to the appropriate statewide database and provide the with confirmation that the data has been submitted to the appropriate statewide databases. Dissemination of data to statewide programs administered by the State Water Resources Control Board the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and other entities will support statewide data needs and allow for another method for public access. The current methods used to disseminate data to the State for programs such as CASGEM will continue in their present form, pending the development of a regional database. East Stanislaus IRWM planning participants have supported statewide data needs in the past through voluntary participation, and will continue to do so in the future by making collected data available to programs such as the California Environmental Resources Evaluation System (CERES), Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), Groundwater Ambient Monitoring Assessment (GAMA) program, and the California Environmental Information Catalog (CEIC) when appropriate and feasible. Data will also be disseminated to DWR for inclusion in its databases, such as the Water Data Library (WDL), which contains groundwater level and water quality data. Finally, stakeholders, agencies, and the public may request all publicly available IRWMP data non‐proprietary and non‐confidential) from any of the MOU signatories for this IRWMP. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December Chapte For the E move for ultimatel the Regio address i IRWMP Section 8 continued implemen 8.1 Im Implemen consists o  Imple includ  Monit includ imple their contr regio  Regu IRWM been objec neces Plan g Implemen participa (ESRWM Advisory Hughson, planning, Upon com coordinat 8.4). Co process, IRWMP a by outsid Keyes Co funding a Stanislau adequate design, a project s implemen islaus Integrat 2013 er 8 P East Stanisla rward with p y operation. on achieve it issues and c implementa 8.1. Potentia d IRWMP ntation is sum mplement nting the E of: ementing pro ded in the IR toring projec ded in the Pl emented to e goals and ob ributing to th nal objective ularly evaluat MP to determ made in ach ctives, and m ssary, to ensu goals. ntation of th ting entities the regio Committee, , Turlock a , forming the mpletion an te implemen ordination w even after P are projects t de entities a ommunity Se and staff is a us IRWMP ar e funding to and project status, fundi ntation. Fina ted Regional W lan Impl aus IRWMP t planning, des Implementa ts identified conflicts in th ation is de al financing P developm mmarized in tation Pro East Stanisla ojects and pr RWMP; cts and progr an that are ensure they a bjectives and he East Stanis es. te the East St mine if movem ieving the re odifying the ure that Plan he East Stani s, including onal water m project pro nd Modesto e a nd adoption ntation of the with the pro Plan adoptio to be implem and stakehol ervices Distr available, and e considered construct. Ot developmen ng must be ancing is disc Water Manage ementat to be succes sign, permitt ation of proj regional goa he region. T escribed in options for ment and n Section 8.2. ocess aus IRWMP rograms rams are meeting d slaus tanislaus ment has egional IRWMP, as n (and the pro islaus IRWM the East St management oponents, an o signed a and agreeing of the East e Plan and pe oject propon on. While so mented by th ders such a ict. Individu d as appropr d ready to pr thers are at nt prior to c e available i cussed in mor ement Plan ion ssful, project ting, environ jects and pr als and obje The process t ojects it cont MP will be co tanislaus Re group for th d stakeholde Memorandu g to develop t Stanislaus erform future nents will be ome of the he present E s the Tuolum al project pr riate. For exa roceed, that i the conceptu construction n order to re detail in th The IRW impleme Plan itsel minimum  List o devel IRWM  List o imple  An ex of kn and p  An ex that i and t ‐ Proposi 2012, Pa ts included i nmental docu ograms inclu ctives and w the East Sta tains) are on ompleted thr egional Wat he region, th ers. In Augu um of Unde the East Sta IRWMP, th e IRWMP up e necessary projects inc mem mne River T roponents w ample, some is, ready for ual level and and implem proceed wi he following WMP must inc entation and lf. The financ m, include th of possible fu lopment and MP. of funding m ement the IR xplanation o nown or pote projects. xplanation o implement th the certainty ition 84 & 1E age 21 in the Plan umentation, uded in the will contribu anislaus Regi track to ach rough coope ter Managem he Steering C ust 2011, th rstanding (M nislaus Regi e dates (as dis through the cluded in th mber agenci Trust, City o will move pro e projects inc construction d require ad mentation. R ith project d sections. clude a plan f financing of cing discussi e following: unding sourc d ongoing fun echanisms fo RWMP. f the certaint ential funding f how O&M c he IRWMP w y of funding. E IRWM Guide Chapter 8 Implemen must contin construction IRWMP will te to solutio ion will appl hieve the over ration amon ment Partne Committee, P he Cities of C MOU) for I on’s first IRW will continu scussed in Se e IRWM plan e East Stani ies, others ar of Waterford ojects forwa cluded in the n, but do not ditional plan Regardless o development for projects and on must, at a ces for nding for the or projects th ty and longev g for the IRW costs for proj would be cove elines, Decem 8 Plan ntation 8-1 nue to n and l help ons to ly for rall ng the ership Public Ceres, RWM WMP. ue to ection nning islaus re led d, and ard as e East t have nning, of the t and d the a e hat vity WMP jects ered mber ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-2 Implementation of the East Stanislaus IRWMP also involves monitoring performance of the IRWM program as a whole. Regular assessment of IRWMP performance and updates is described in Section 8.4, below. 8.2 Financing Plan Because the East Stanislaus IRWMP is a living document and will require implementation and updates in the future, and because there are projects included in the Plan that will be implemented to achieve the region’s goals and objectives, a financing plan is necessary to help ensure funding sources are available to do so. Additionally, as projects are implemented, not only is funding necessary for capital costs, but also for ongoing operation and maintenance (O&M) of the projects. The following sections discuss the potential funding sources that may be available for developing, maintaining, and updating the East Stanislaus IRWMP, the potential funding sources for projects that implement the IRWMP, and the certainty and longevity of the funding sources. 8.2.1 Funding for Development of IRWMP Thus far, the cost of developing and maintaining the East Stanislaus IRWMP has been borne by the local entities involved in the which includes the Cities of Modesto, Turlock, Ceres, and Hughson. In June 2010, the four cities entered into a cost‐sharing agreement to prepare the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Additionally, city staff has contributed significant time and resources to completing the IRWMP, coordinating and participating on the Steering and Public Advisory Committees, and organizing stakeholder outreach efforts. The East Stanislaus region is committed to developing a useful and implementable IRWMP, which includes Plan performance monitoring and updating the Plan in the future to help ensure that Plan implementation addresses the conflicts and issues currently present in the region. Many of the same potential funding sources available to local entities involved in the East Stanislaus IRWMP may be used for developing and updating the IRWMP, implementing projects and programs (i.e. funding capital costs of projects included in the IRWMP), as well as funding project O&M costs. An overview of potential funding sources is provided in Table 8‐1. The primary sources of funding for developing, maintaining, and updating the East Stanislaus IRWMP are the cities’ General Funds (or Capital Improvement Funds), utility rates, or local, state, or federal grants. According to the City of Modesto’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011, primary revenue sources of the City have been directly impacted by economic influences, causing a reduction in the City’s General Fund budget. The City of Turlock also continues to weather through the protracted economic downturn, but Turlock’s General Fund revenues seem to have stabilized over the decline of the last five years. The City of Ceres is also seeing decreases in sales and use tax revenues, property tax revenues, and investment revenues. Over the last three years, the General Funds have faced significant deficits due to increased costs and declining revenues, and local entities are still struggling to fund major infrastructure projects without assistance of other funding avenues. It is likely the same declines in general funding budgets are being experienced in cities throughout the East Stanislaus Region. While funding for future IRWMP updates has not yet been secured by the member agencies, it is possible that funding will be available as the participating agencies and other regional stakeholders understand the critical nature of updating the IRWMP and addressing the region’s changing issues and conflicts as conditions change, and will coordinate these updates with other required planning studies, such as the five‐year Urban Water Management Plans. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-3 Table 8‐1: Potential Funding Sources Available for IRWMP Development, Project Implementation, and O&M Costs Potential Funding Source Description Certainty / Longevity Capacity Fees  Used by water agencies as a means to achieve and maintain equity among its past, present and future customers.  Typically charged per connection, measured in equivalent dwelling units (EDUs). A single connection may encompass more than one EDU. In addition to the connection fee aspect of capacity fees, water agencies may also assess other fees Commercial Acreage Fee [per acre] and Other Service Fee [per acre]). Dependent upon rate structure adopted by project proponents and Proposition 218 process User Fees  user fees are assessed by some water agencies where an argument can be made that new facilities directly benefit existing customers.  In many cases, income from this revenue source is used to pay debt service on debt financed assets. Dependent upon rate structure adopted by project proponents and Proposition 218 process User Rates  User rates (also referred to as rate recovery) pay for O&M of a water agency or public utility’s system. Within a water agency user rate, there is a fixed cost component that covers costs that do not vary with the amount of supplied water, such as labor and overhead expenses, and a variable cost component that covers costs that are based on the amount of pumping and applied chemicals to meet the water demands of the customers and vary with the amount of supplied water, such as the electrical and chemical costs.  A water agency customer pays a fixed rate and a variable rate based on the metered usage. In cases in which billing is not based on a metered usage, a single rate is assessed that combines the average of the fixed and variable rates. Dependent upon rate structure adopted by project proponents and Proposition 218 process General Funds  General or capital improvement funds are monies that an agency sets aside to fund general operations and/or facility improvements, upgrades and, sometimes, development. These funds are usually part of their overall revenue stream and may or may not be project‐specific.  The general fund budget is supported by revenues generated from a variety of taxes including sales tax, property tax, franchise fees, and a variety of permit fees. Dependent upon annual budgets adopted by project proponents and participating agencies Bonded Debt Service  In cases in which a large facility is needed to support current services and future growth, revenue bonds are issued to pay for new capital. This allows for payment of the facility by bonded debt service at the time of construction with repayment of the debt service over a 20‐ to 30‐year timeframe.  Preferred approach to paying for high cost facilities because it avoids the perceived over‐collection of fees from past customers that go toward facilities that serve present and future customers. The downside to bonded debt is that it cannot be accomplished with capacity fees alone due to the variability and uncertainty of new development over time. A user rate is needed as a bond document covenant in the event that development fees are not adequate to make the required annual payment for the debt service. Dependent upon bond market and existing debt of project proponents ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-4 Potential Funding Source Description Certainty / Longevity Grants  Typically require local matching funds. The matching requirement shows a local commitment to promoting and completing the study, plan, or project.  Typically administered and contracted by a single agency within the region that works directly with the state or federal agency administering the grant.  Grants typically carry relatively high administration cost because extensive grant reporting may be required, and typically only a small portion of the grant may be used to cover grant administration. Grant programs at the local, state, or federal levels are periodically available. Some projects have secured grants as shown in the table in Appendix Q. Low‐ interest loans  Several funding agencies administer low‐interest loans for implementation of water‐ and wastewater‐ related projects. Low‐interest loans can save the implementing agency significant amounts of money by reducing interest payments as compared with traditional bonds.  offers low‐interest loans for wastewater and recycled water projects through its Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program. Approximately $200 million to $300 million available annually. The interest rate is half of the most recent General Obligation (GO) Bond Rate at the time of the funding commitment. Over the last five years, the Clean Water SRF loan interest rate has ranged from 1.8% to 3.0%.  CDPH administers a similar SRF loan program (Safe Drinking Water SRF loan program) for drinking water‐related projects. Amounts available through the CDPH Safe Drinking Water SRF loan program vary, but approximately $100 to $200 million is available annually.  The California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I‐Bank) administers the Infrastructure SRF loan program for financing implementation projects such as sewage collection and treatment, water treatment and distribution, and water supply projects. Dependent upon the specific program and federal appropriations to each ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stani December 8.2.2 F Agencies and impl Reclamat loan prog municipa With reg capital an additiona organizat Ongoing from man Table 8‐1 fees and agencies, multi‐par projects typically facilities O&M cos particula considera and proje accept an included should th 8.3 Pla Plan perf implemen The IRW measure ensure th This Plan section s evaluatin ability to impleme ‐ Proposi Decembe islaus Integrat 2013 Funding fo within the r lementation tion’s Title XV grams, in add al revenue so gard to proje nd O&M cost al local, state tion has a un support and ny of the sam 1. Support an assessment the range o rtner project typically ad described an is typically d sts of propos r project e ation must in ect benefits. ny increased in this analy he new sourc an Perfor formance an ntation of i WMP must con es and monito he Plan Obje n Performan shall describe ng and monit o meet the ob ent the projec ition 84 & 1E er 2012, Pag ted Regional W r Projects region have funding veh VI Reclamati dition to rate ources. ects and pro ts are shown e or federal nique set of re d financing o me sources t nd financing ts. Since r of local sourc ts are typical here to stan nd codified i developed as sed impleme ffort is det nclude an an The annual d cost of se ysis. The nee ce not be avai rmance an nd monitorin ts IRWMP i ntain perform oring method ctives are me ce and Monit e the method toring the RW bjectives and cts in the IRW E IRWM Guide e 21 Water Manage s that Impl explored a v hicles includ ion and Recy e revenues, b ograms whic n in Appendi grant fundin evenue and f of the O&M o that were id will likely co egional proj ces available lly worked o ndard cost a in the agreem part of a pro entation pro termined. A alysis to det l fiscal impa ervice as ma ed for water ilable, may a nd Monito ng is vital in is contribut mance ds to et. toring d of WMG’s d WMP. elines, ement Plan lement the variety of po ding the Stat ycling Progra bond financin ch implemen ix J, along wi ng. It shoul financing me of projects in entified to fu ome primaril jects and pr e is broadene ut on a proje accounting a ments for ow oject financin ojects must b Any project ermine the a ct on user ra ay be requir and the econ also be consid oring n IRWM pla ing to meet Measuring directly rela and therefor East Stanisla both project goals, in a implementa objectives. As describe proponents Stanislaus I data in acc monitoring statewide d information performance e IRWMP otential regio te Revolving am, and othe ng, assessme nt the East S ith potential ld be recogn ethods and so n this IRWM fund project ly from local rograms oft ed. The det ect‐by‐projec and cost of wnership. O ng package. be evaluated t that is ad ability to ope ates, and the red for proj nomic hards dered as part anning as it ting its iden the success ated to IRW re, the moni aus IRWMP t‐specific pe addition to ation is mee ed in Sectio implementi RWMP will cordance wi plans and su databases. T n necessary fo e. Projects onal water r g Fund (SRF er State and F ents, and pot Stanislaus IR funding sou nized that ea ources. MP are expect implementa l sources, inc ten involve tails of finan ct basis. Lar service prin Operation an d as the ove dvanced for erate and ma e willingness ect impleme hip impacts t of the analy helps a reg ntified goals s of Plan im WMP project toring requi implementa rformance in how the eting the Re on 6.2.4, in ing projects be responsi ith approved ubmitting da These data or monitorin that affect Chapter 8 Implemen resource plan U.S. Bure Federal gran tential county RWMP, estim urces, exclusi ach impleme ted to be de ation, as show cluding user multiple pa cing these la rge multi‐pur nciples which d maintenan erall viability r implement aintain the pr s of ratepaye entation mu that would o ysis. gion determ s and objec mplementatio t implementa red as part o tion will eva n meeting pr overall IR egion’s goals ndividual pr through the ible for colle d project‐sp ata to approp will include ng project‐sp t surface w 8 Plan ntation 8-5 nning au of nt and y and mated ive of enting erived wn in rates, artner arger, rpose h are nce of y of a tation roject ers to ust be occur, ine if ctives. on is ation, of the aluate roject RWMP s and roject e East ecting pecific priate e the pecific water ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-6 quality shall include a monitoring component that allows the integration of data into the California Environmental Data Exchange Network (CEDEN). Similarly, groundwater‐related project, must monitor and report groundwater elevation data, as required by CWC §10920 et seq. and may be required to monitor groundwater quality, depending on the project’s nature. Monitoring the East Stanislaus Plan performance will be based on the results of project‐specific performance monitoring, and cumulatively will help ensure:  The Region is making progress towards meeting the goals and objectives as specified in the IRWM Plan.  Projects included in the East Stanislaus IRWMP are being implemented.  Each project in the IRWM Plan is monitored to comply with all applicable rules, laws, and permit requirements. Project‐specific monitoring plans will be prepared and implemented by the project proponents for projects that are implemented as part of the East Stanislaus IRWMP (i.e. projects funded through the IRWM grant program). The project proponent will also be responsible for all project‐specific monitoring activities and for reporting the results of the monitoring program to the designated agent. While projects that are not implemented through the East Stanislaus IRWMP will not be required to have project‐specific monitoring completed, project proponents and participating entities will be encouraged to prepare and implement performance monitoring plans as part of their project implementation. Performance data for non‐IRWMP projects will be collected and evaluated as made available. In general, project‐specific monitoring plans will include the following information:  The project name and a brief description  List of the project goals and objectives  Identified targets to be achieved over the life of the project (e.g. reduce water loss from the tank by  Description of what is being monitored for, in table format (see example below), including the location of monitoring, monitoring frequency, methods used to collect data, and procedure for data collection/storage  Measures to remedy or react to problems encountered during monitoring. An example would be to coordinate with the Department of Fish and Game if a species or its habitat is adversely impacted during construction or after implementation of a project. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-7 Table 8‐2: Example of Monitoring Table included in Project‐Specific Monitoring Plan Parameter Location of Monitoring Frequency Monitoring Protocol / Methodology Data Collection, Storage, and Dissemination Procedures Surface water diversion Water meter at San Joaquin River mile X Weekly Use meter data to monitor surface water diversions Store data on City of Modesto existing DMS, upload project monitoring report to East Stanislaus IRWMP website, and submit groundwater level data to SWAMP Groundwater recharge Water meter on discharge pipe to percolation pond Daily Use meter data to monitor daily discharges to percolation ponds Store data on City of Modesto existing DMS, upload quarterly reports to East Stanislaus IRWMP website Water levels (staff gauge) in percolation pond Daily Use gauge data to estimate weekly volume of percolated water Store data on City of Modesto existing DMS, upload quarterly reports to East Stanislaus IRWMP website Project‐specific monitoring plans may be prepared at different stages of project development, but all will be prepared prior to the start of construction and will be submitted to the for review and consideration. Each monitoring plan will specify monitoring protocols and methodologies to ensure consistency and accountability by the project proponent collecting the data and performing monitoring activities. The will act as the overseeing entity, making sure each project proponent prepares its project‐specific monitoring plan and implements the plan accordingly, and ensuring that the required reporting and data uploads occur. The monitoring plans will include monitoring schedules, dictating an estimated timeline of monitoring activities which the will use as a guideline to ensure a monitoring schedule is maintained. Prior to project implementation, the project proponent must be able to ensure that adequate funding will be available to complete the necessary project monitoring. Data collected and analyses performed as part of the performance monitoring plans will be reported to the on a semi‐annual basis, at a minimum, providing required documentation and proof of project performance. Data and information collected as part of the project‐specific monitoring plan will be summarized in a project‐specific monitoring report, in table format, and submitted to the for review. Necessary backup information will be attached to the report. An example of the monitoring report table is provided in Table 8‐3. This will help ensure the projects meet the goals and objectives as originally conceived for the projects and the East Stanislaus IRWMP. Where possible, ongoing data collection efforts will be relied upon, at a minimum, to provide necessary baselines to measure project and Plan success. In some cases, monitoring and data collection currently underway will be adequate for project performance monitoring. For example, with respect to surface water rights, an entity diverting surface water must submit data to The data is housed on eWRIMS – the Electronic Water Rights Information Management System. This data, which is already collected for certain water bodies, could help gauge effectiveness of a project meant to increase or decrease flows in a portion of a river. Similar to eWRIMS, ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-8 administers Groundwater Ambient Monitoring Assessment (GAMA) program. Groundwater production wells are monitored by the well owners and volumes pumped are reported to CDPH, who puts that information on GAMA. Additionally, GAMA has data from DWR, USGS and the Department of Pesticide Regulation. The data that exists on GAMA could be used to develop baseline conditions of a groundwater basin and could potentially be relied upon to track conditions and measure project effectiveness. Table 8‐3: Example Project‐Specific Monitoring Report Project Name: Insert name Project Description: Briefly describe the project Identified Project Goals and Objectives: Insert goals and objectives as identified in project specific monitoring plan Project Targets: List specific, measurable targets, as described in the project specific monitoring plan Data Collected: Describe the data collected (including collection location) and how often it was collected Measurement tools and methods: Describe the tools and methods used to collect data, as described in the project specific monitoring plan, and how that data is being managed and/or uploaded to existing databases Goals and Objectives Results Summary: Describe how the project is meeting its identified goals and objectives Project Targets Results Summary: Describe if the project is on track to meet its identified targets based on the data collected, including schedule and fiscal targets Recommended Modifications or Adjustments Describe any remedy or recommended actions that should be implemented (if any) to counter problems identified through implementation of the monitoring plan As described in Section 6.2.2, project proponents will be responsible for collecting, storing, and maintaining project‐specific data on the individual entity’s existing DMS and are tasked with uploading necessary data to applicable statewide databases. Any required monitoring after project implementation will be collected consistent with applicable standards and reported to the State. Each entity that uploads data to its DMS, the East Stanislaus IRWMP website, and/or applicable statewide databases will perform quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures to validate the data. While each entity is responsible for QA/QC and maintenance of data, the will oversee any data compilation for the region’s website. By making data available online through the various websites and online DMSs, data transfer and sharing among the participating entities, and interested parties including local, State and federal agencies is made possible. The information and data collected as part of the project‐specific monitoring plans will be fed back to the individual project’s management structure to adapt the project to better meet its overall objectives. Only by consistent monitoring and analysis of project performance feedback data can projects successfully achieve the objectives set for the project. Monitoring will also provide a clear reporting mechanism for the public, decision makers, and regional planners to determine the planned versus actual value of the project. Results from project‐specific monitoring will also be used to improve the ability to identify and implement future projects in the East Stanislaus IRWMP and identify revisions to the IRWMP itself. As previously mentioned, the project proponents will submit project‐specific monitoring reports to the on a semi‐annual basis. Annually, the will evaluate how the projects implemented as part of the East Stanislaus IRWMP are not only addressing the identified project‐specific goals and objectives, but how overall ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 8 Plan Implementation December 2013 8-9 Plan implementation is contributing the identified regional goals and objectives included in the most recent adopted IRWMP. If adequate progress is not being made in addressing the Plan objectives, the region may choose to implement other projects in the future or re‐evaluate the projects currently in the Plan. This will help the region as it updates its project list, the IRWMP, and applies for grant funding. 8.4 Plan Updates The East Stanislaus IRWMP is meant to be a living document and will therefore periodically be updated to reflect changing conditions such as population growth and climate change, as well as project implementation in the Region. The Region’s needs will undoubtedly change in the future, and as they do, regional objectives must be re‐evaluated and new, applicable regional solutions identified. On an annual basis, the Plan implementation will be assessed as to its performance in achieving the identified regional objectives and a memorandum prepared summarizing that assessment. Further, the will update the East Stanislaus IRWMP when deemed appropriate; this could be when one or more of the following criteria are met:  Five years since the last Plan adoption.  DWR updates its IRWM Plan Guidelines and associated Plan Standards.  DWR releases a Proposal Solicitation Package (PSP) for IRWM implementation grants.  Project and plan monitoring have occurred leading to the identification of needed revisions to the East Stanislaus IRWMP or projects included in the Plan. The prioritized project list, contained in the appendices of the IRWMP, will be revised, at a minimum, on an annual basis, for the first 5 years. After 5 years, the project list will be updated on a bi‐annual (every 2 years) basis. The revised project list will be vetted by the among regional stakeholders following updating, and upon receiving consensus, will substitute the updated project list for the one currently contained herein. No formal plan adoption or re‐adoption will be required for project list updating. Similarly, should administrative revisions be made to the IRWMP (e.g. based on DWR recommendations during completeness review), the Plan may not require re‐adoption. Table 8‐4 summarizes the long‐term maintenance activities to be conducted for the East Stanislaus IRWMP; the frequencies identified for each activity are minimum frequencies. Table 8‐4: Summary of Long‐Term East Stanislaus IRWMP Maintenance Activities Activity Frequency Meetings (financing, regional water resources issues, other) Quarterly Project Solicitation, Review, Integration and Prioritization Annually Plan and Project Monitoring and Performance Annually IRWM Plan Review and Update Every 5 years Outreach Quarterly ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-1 Chapter 9 References Ackerman, Frank and Elizabeth A. Stanton. 2011. The Last Drop: Climate Change and the Southwest Water Crisis. Stockholm Environmental Institute – U.S. Center. February. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). 2011. SECURE Water Act Section 9503(c) – Reclamation Climate Change and Water, 2011. April. Bookman-Edmonston. 2005. Integrated Regional Groundwater Management Plan for the Modesto Subbasin – Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers Groundwater Basin Association. April 2005. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for change. December 2008. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2011. Attachment D, Final Supplement to the AB 32 Scoping Plan Functional Equivalent Document. August 19. California Climate Action Team (CAT), Water-Energy Sector Sub Group. 2009. Water-Energy Sector Summary, AB 32 Scoping Plan, GHG Emissions Reduction Strategies. March 4. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 1995. Stanislaus River Basin and Calaveras River Water Use Program, Threatened and Endangered Species Report. Bay Delta and Special Water Projects Division. March. California Department of Public Health (CDPH). 2013. Small Community Water Systems with Known Violations. January. California Department of Water Resources (DWR). 2006. Progress on Incorporating Climate Change into Management of California’s Water Resources. Technical Memorandum Report. Accessed April 24, 2011. DWR. 2008. Managing an Uncertain Future: Climate Change Adaptation Strategies for California’s Water. October. DWR. 2009. California Water Plan Update 2009 - Integrated Water Management. DWR Bulletin 160-09. DWR. 2010a. Proposition 84 & 1E Integrated Regional Water Management Guidelines. August. DWR 2010b. 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. February. DWR. 2010c. State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2009. DWR. 2012a. Draft Climate Action Plan. March. DWR. 2012b. State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2011. June. California Energy Commission (CEC) Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER). 2008. The Future Is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science, Impacts, and Response Options for California. Publication # CEC-500-2008-077. California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) and the California Emergency Management Agency (CEMA). 2012. Draft California Climate Change Adaptation Policy Guide. April. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-2 CNRA. 2009. 2009 California Climate Change Adaptation Strategy: A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to Executive Order S-13-2008. As viewed at http://www.climatechnage.ca.gov/adaptation/ California State Assembly. 2006. Assembly Bill No. 32 (Chapter 488). California State Senate. 2007. Senate Bill No. 97 (Chapter 185). California State Senate. 2008. Senate Bill No. 375 (Chapter 728). California State Water Resources Control Board 2012. Public Draft, Substitute Environmental Document in Support of Potential Changes to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay‐Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta Estuary: San Joaquin River Flows and Southern Delta Water Quality. December. California Urban Water Agencies (CUWA). 2007. Climate Change and Urban Water Resources. Camp Dresser McKee (CDM). 2011. Climate Change Handbook for Regional Water Planning. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 and the California Department of Water Resources. November. Cantatore, Alex. 2010. Pilots Brave Winter Storms in Cloud Seeding Program. Posted December 10, 2012. Accessed here http://www.turlockjournal.com/section/12/article/17895/ on April 10, 2013. Carollo Engineers. 2006. City of Hughson 2005 Urban Water Management Plan. November 2006. Carollo Engineers. 2007a. City of Hughson Water System Master Plan. January 2007. Carollo Engineers. 2007b. City of Hughson Storm Drainage System Master Plan. February 2007. Carollo Engineers. 2007c. City of Hughson Sewer System Master Plan. June 2007. Carollo Engineers. 2007d. City of Hughson Wastewater Treatment Plan Master Plan. June 2007. Carollo Engineers. 2007e. Final City of Modesto Wastewater Master Plan, Phase 2 Update, Master Plan Report. March 2007. Carollo Engineers. 2007f. Final City of Modesto Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. March 2007. Carollo. 2008. City of Modesto Wastewater Treatment Master Plan Supplement. September. Cayan, Dan, Mary Tyree, Mike Dettinger, Hugo Hidalgo, Tapash Das, Ed Maurer, Peter Bromirski, Nicholas Graham and Reinhard Flick. 2009. Climate Change Scenarios and Sea Level Rise Estimates for the California 2009 Climate Change Scenarios Assessment. CED-500-2009-014-F. California Climate Change Center. As viewed at www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-500-2009-014/CEC-500-2009- 014-D.pdf Cayan, Dan. Amy Lynd Luers, Michael Hanemann, Guido Franco, Bart Croes. 2006. Scenarios of Climate Change in California: An Overview. California Energy Commission Publication CEC-500-2005- 186-SF. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2004. Watershed Management Initiative Chapter. December 1, 2002 with revision as of October 2004. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-3 2011. The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, Fourth Edition, for the Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin. Revised October 2011 (with Approved Amendments). Chung, J. Anderson, S. Arora, M. Ejeta, J. Galef, T. Kadir, K. Kao, A. Olson, C. Quan, E. Reyes, M. Roos, S. Seneviratne, J. Wang, H. Yin. 2009. Using Future Climate Projections to Support Water Decision Making in California. California Energy Commission publication CEC-500-2009-52-F. Congressional Budget Office (CBO). 2009. Potential Impacts of Climate Change in the United States. May. Davids Engineering. 2012. Oakdale Irrigation District, Agricultural Water Management Plan, December 2012. December. Design, Community & Environment. 2005. Hughson General Plan. December 12, 2005. Dettinger, Michael and Sam Earman. 2007. Western Ground Water and Climate change – Pivotal to Supply sustainability or Vulnerable in its Own Right? National Groundwater Association, Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers, Ground Water News & Views, Volume 4, No. 1. June. Epke, Gerhard, Mandi Finger, Robert Lusardi, Naomi Marks, Jeffery Mount, Andrew Nichols, Sarah Null, Teejay O’Rear, Sabra Purdy, Anne Senter, and Joshua Viers. 2010. Confluence: A Natural and Human History of the Tuolumne River Watershed. Summer. ESA. 2013. Mid San Joaquin River Regional Flood Management Plan, Administrative Draft. July 2013. Galloway, Devin L. and Francis S. Riley. 1999. San Joaquin Valley, California - Largest human alteration of the Earth’s surface. In Land Subsidence in the United States. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1182, pp. 23-34, http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/circ1182/, accessed Feb. 13, 2009. Hayhoe, Katharine, Daniel Cayan, Christopher B. Field, Peter C. Frumhoff, Edwin P. Maurer, Norman L. Miller, Susanne C. Moser, Stephen H. Schneider, Kimberly Nicholas Cahill, Elsa E. Cleland, Larry Dale, Ray Drapek, R. Michael Hanemann, Laurence S. Kalkstein, James Lenihan, Claire K. Lunch, Ronald P. Neilson, Scott C. Sheridan and Julia H. Verville. 2004. Emissions Pathways, Climate Change and Impacts on California. Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Volume 101, Number 34. August 24. pp 12422-12427. Hopmans, Jan, Gerrit Schoups, and Ed Maurer. 2008. Global Warming and its Impacts on Irrigated Agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV). As viewed at August 22. Howatt, Ian M. and Slawek Tulaczyk. 2005. Climate sensitivity of spring snowpack in the Sierra Nevada. As seen in the Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 110, F04021, 9 pp. December 8. Howitt, Richard, Josué Medellin-Azuara, and Duncan MacEwan. 2009. Estimating the Economic Impacts of Agricultural Yield Related Changes for California. CED-500-2009-042-F. California Climate Change Center, as viewed at http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CED-500-2009-042/CED-500-2009- 042-F.pdf Hydrocomp, Inc. 2012. Sensitivity of Upper Tuolumne River Flow to Climate Change Scenarios. January. ICF. 2012. Evaluation of San Joaquin River Flow and Southern Delta Water Quality Objectives and Implementation. December. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-4 ICF Jones & Stokes. 2009. 2010 Water System Engineer’s Report Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, SCH # [PHONE REDACTED]. December 2009. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Report. Kahrl, Fredrich and David Roland-Holst. 2008. California Climate Risk and Response. November. Letter from Katy Sanchez, Program Analyst at the Native American Heritage Commission to Michael Cooke, Regulatory Affairs Manager of the City of Turlock, dated September 29, 2009 Regarding Proposed Turlock Regional Water Quality Control Facility Upgrade and Expansion. Leung, L. Ruby, and William I. Jr. Gustafson. 2005. Potential Regional Climate Change and Implications to U.S. Air Quality. As published in the Geophysical Research Letters, 32:L16711. Loáiciga, Hugo A. 2003. Climate Change and Groundwater. As published in the Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 93(1), pp 30-41. Lobell, David Kimberly Nicholas Cahill, and Christopher B. Field. 2006. Weather-based yield forecasts developed for 12 California Crops. As published in California Agriculture, 60:4, pp211-15. As viewed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s1-10584-006-9141-3 Lobell, David Kimberly Nicholas Cahill, and Christopher B. Field. 2007. Historical effects of temperature and precipitation on California Crop Yields. As published in Climate Change, 81:2, pp187- 203. As viewed at http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/3d53x9mc Lundquist, Jessica D. and Daniel R. Cayan. 2002. Seasonal and Spatial Patters in Diurnal Cycles in Streamflow in the Western United States. As published in Journal of Hydrometeorology, by the American Meteorological Society, Volume 3, pp. 591-603. October. Lundquist, Jessica Michael D. Dettinger, and Daniel R. Cayan. 2005. Snow-fed streamflow timing at different basin scales: Case study of the Tuolumne River above Hetch Hetchy, Yosemite, California. As published in Water Resources Research, Volume 41, July 7. Merced River Watershed Portal. http://mercedriverwatershed.org/ Modesto, City of. 2008. Final Urban Area General Plan. October 14, 2008. Modesto Irrigation District (MID). 2012. Modesto Irrigation District Agricultural Water Management Plan for 2012. December. Moser, Susanne, Julia Ekstrom and Guido Franco. 2012. Our Changing Climate 2012, Vulnerability & Adaptation to the Increasing Risks from Climate Change in California. A Summary Report on the Third Assessment from the California Climate Change Center. CEC-500-2012-007. July. National Marine Fisheries Service. 2009. Public Draft Recovery Plan for the Evolutionarily Significant Units of Sacramento River Winter-Run Chinook Salmon and Central Valley Spring-Run Chinook Salmon and the District Population Segment of Central Valley Steelhead. October. Null, Sarah Joshua H. Viers, and Jeffery F. Mount. 2010. Hydrologic Response and Watershed Sensitivity to Climate Warming in California’s Sierra Nevada. April 1. Perazzo, Peggy B. 2011. Stone Quarries and Beyond. Retrieved December 29, 2011 from http://quarriesandbeyond.org/states/ca/quarry_photo/ca-stanislaus_photos.html. Last updated 6/23/2011. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-5 Public Policy Institute of California. 2008. Adapting California’s Water Management to Climate Change. November 2008. Quad Knopf. 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Hughson Wastewater Treatment Plant, SCH # [PHONE REDACTED]. June 2007. RMC Water and Environment. 2011. California Department of Water Resources Integrated Regional Water Management Program, East Stanislaus IRWM Region Acceptance Process. April 2011. RRM Design Group. 2001. North Turlock Master Plan. October 2001. San Joaquin River Group Authority. 1999. San Joaquin River Agreement Final EIS/EIR. January 28. Schlenker, Wolfram, W. Michael Hanemann, and A. C. Fisher. 2007. Water availability, degree days and the potential impact of climate change on irrigated agriculture in California. As viewed in Climate Change, 81:1, pp 19-38. As viewed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-005-9008-z Schoups, E.P. Maurer and J.W. Hopmans. 2005. Climate change impacts on water demand and salinity in California’s irrigated agriculture. Schoups, Gerrit, Ed Maurer, and Jan Hopmans, et al. 2009. Climate Change Impacts on Subsurface Hydrology, Crop Production, Water Use and Salinity in the San Joaquin Valley, CA. As presented at the DWR-UC Workshop on Climate Change Impacts, January 26. Stanislaus County. 2004. Storm Water Management Program for Stanislaus County, Report of Waste Discharge. Submitted February 23, 2004, revised May 18, 2004. Stanislaus County. General Plan. As viewed at http://www.stancounty.com/planning/pl/general- plan.shtm on February 15, 2013. Stanislaus County Agricultural Commissioner’s Office. 2011. 2011 Annual Crop Report. Stanislaus River Watershed Data. As view at http://hydra.ucdavis.edu/watershed/stanislaus in February 2013. Stantec. 2008. City of Modesto 2008 Storm Drainage Master Plan, Draft. March 2008. State Water Resources Control Board. 2012. Public Draft, Substitute Environmental Document in Support of Potential Changes to the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta Estuary: San Joaquin River Flows and Southern Delta Water Quality, Executive Summary. December. Stene, Eric A. 1994. Delta Diversion, Central Valley Project. The H2O Group. 2012. City of Patterson 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. July. Timothy J. Durbin, Inc. 2008. Assessment of Future Groundwater Impacts Due to Assumed Water-Use Changes Turlock Groundwater Basin, California. September 11. Treidel, Holger, Jose Luis Martin-Bordes, and Jason J. Gurdak 2012. Climate Change Effects on Groundwater Resources, A Global of Findings and Recommendations. CRC Press. Tulloch Engineering. 2004. Stormwater Management Program for the Cities of Ceres, Oakdale, Patterson, Riverbank, Report of Waste Discharge. March 10, 2003. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-6 Tuolumne River Trust. 2009. Retrieved December 19, 2011 from http://www.tuolumne.org. Turlock, City of. 2003. City of Turlock Water Resources Division, NPDES Phase II Storm Water Management Plan. Turlock, City of. 2004. Northeast Turlock Master Plan. February 10, 2004. Turlock, City of. 2011. City of Turlock 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Public Draft. July 2011. Turlock Groundwater Basin Association. 2008. Turlock Groundwater Basin Draft Groundwater Management Plan. January 17, 2008. Turlock Irrigation District (TID). 2012. Turlock Irrigation District 2012 Agricultural Water Management Plan. December. United States Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). 2008. Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate. Regions of Focus: North American, Hawaii, Caribbean and U.S. Pacific Islands. and Assessment Product 3.3. June. CCSP. 2009. Best Practice Approaches for Characterizing, Communicating, and Incorporating Scientific Uncertainty in Decision Making. and Assessment Product 5.2. January. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2012. Tribal Leaders Directory. Fall 2012. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs. 2013. Pacific Region – Tribes Served. Accessed here: http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/RegionalOffices/Pacific/WeAre/Tribes/index.htm on January 14, 2013. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2012a. Climate Ready Water Utilities Adaptation Strategies Guide for Water Utilities. EPA 817-K-11-003. January. USEPA. 2012b. Planning for Sustainability, A Handbook for Water and Wastewater Utilities. EPA-832- R-12-001. February. USEPA. 2012c. National Water Program 2012 Strategy: Response to Climate Change, Public Comment Draft. March. United States Geological Survey (USGS), Office of Global Change. 2009. Effects of Climate Variability and Change on Groundwater Resources of the United States. Fact Sheet 2009-3074. September. United States Global Change Research Program 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. June 2009. University of California, Davis. 2012. Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change in California Agriculture. A White Paper from the California Energy Commission’s California Climate Change Center. CEC-500-2012-031. July. Valtorta, Silvia. 2002. Animal production in a changing climate: impacts and mitigation. October. Water Utility Climate Alliance. 2010. Decision Support Planning Methods: Incorporating Climate Change Uncertainties into Water Planning. January 2010. ---PAGE BREAK--- East Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Chapter 9 References December 2013 9-7 West Yost Associates. 2011a. City of Ceres 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Update, Draft. April 2011. West Yost Associates. 2011b. City of Modesto and Modesto Irrigation District 2010 Joint Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011.