Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. Includes Basin Report
Notice of a Meeting of the Beaumont Basin Watermaster
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
at 10:00 a.m.
WATER LEVELS PER WELL: http://documents.yvwd.dst.ca.u…
Bonita Vista No. 2 Well: Water levels have declined by 3’ over the last 16 months
Banning M-9: Water levels increased 9’ between October 2015 and May 22, 2016 to 2,148 ft. However, in the last 4 months a decline of 14’ to 2,134 has been recorded.
Noble Creek Observation Well 4S (shallow) and 4D (deep). Water levels in the shallow aquifer are generally 100 to 120 feet higher than in the deeper aquifer and subject to higher water level fluctuations. Over the last 14 months the water level in 4S declined by 22 feet with a minor recovery over the last few months while at 4D a 10’ decline was recorded.
Summit Cemetery: Water level is highly influenced by the intermittent operations of a nearby local product well. A 7’ rise in water level was recorded between July 2015 and april 2015. However, over the last five summer months the water level at this well declined by several feet as a result of increased summer pumping from Well No. 2.
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS AND NITRATE IN BEAUMONT BASIN AND SURROUNDING AREAS.
North-West Area: TDS is generally below 300 mg/l and Nitrate is below 4mg/l with occasional spikes to 8 mg/l.
Central Area: TDS is generally between 200 and 300 mg/l and Nitrate is below 2.5 mg/l.
Singleton Basin: TDS is generally above 300 mg/l and up to 700 mg/l and Nitrate from low single digits up to 22 mg/l.
Canyon Area Above Basin: TDS is generally below 300 mg/l with spikes up to 400 mg/l and Nitrate is generally below 4 mg/s with spikes up to 7mg/l.
South-East of Noble Creek Spreading Grounds: TDS is generally below 300 mg/l and Nitrate is below 3mg/l with occasional spikes to 9 mg/l at BCVWD No. 21.
Banning Area: TDS is generally between 200 and 300 mg/l and Nitrate generally below 2 mg/l.
Beaumont South Basin: TDS varies significantly depending upon location from 200 mg/l to 800 mg/l while Nitrate ranges from 4 mg/l to 13 mg/l.
BEAUMONT BASIN 2015 ANNUAL REPORT: http://documents.yvwd.dst.ca.u…
2.2.4 Redetermination of Safe Yield : The Beaumont Basin Watermaster re-determined the Safe yield of the Beaumont Basin to be 6,700 ac-ft per year.
2.3 Storage Applications and Agreements: As of December 31, 2015, the total storage allowed stands at 280,000 ac-ft; storage limits by participant are as follows:
City of Banning 80,000 ac-ft
City of Beaumont 30,000 ac-ft
BCVWD 80,000 ac-ft
So Mesa Water Co. 20,000 ac-ft
YVWD 50,000 ac-ft
Morongo Tribe 20,000 ac-ft
3.2.2.Overlying Party Production: The remaining wells, operated by smaller producers, did not have meters for some or most of 2015 and their product is estimated using the water duty method. This method was initially proposed by Wildermuth (WEI) during the preparation of the 2005-2006 annual report. After being accepted by the Watermaster, an updated duty method was develoed by WEI and it has been used since. the estimated unmetered projection for the CY 2015 annual report uses the updated method developed by WEI as detailed in Appendix C.
3.3.2. Recycled Water Recharge: Prior to March 2010, Beaumont’s recycled water from Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 1 was discharged at Discharge Point No. 1 in Cooper’s Creek where it infiltrates into the San Timoteo Management Zone and outside the Beaumont Basin. In March 2010, Beaumont began deliveries of recycled water to Discharge Point No. 7, located along an unnamed tributary of Marshall Creek. It is believed that a portion of the recycled water discharged at this location reaches and recharges the Beaumont Basin; in which case, this would be considered a new source of supplemental water for which Beaumont should receive credit pursuant to the storage agreement with the Watermaster and Section 5.3 of the Rules and Regulations. Technical documentation of the amount of recycled water that reaches and recharges the Beaumont Basin would need to be prepared by Beaumont and considered and accepted by Watermaster.
3.5.1 Annual Storage Consolidation: At the end of 2014, an overall total of 96,575 ac-ft of water were stored in the Basin for future use; this total was reduced in CY 2015 by 946 ac-ft to a cumulative total of 95,629 ac-ft. The amount of water in storage has decreased over the last two years due to the expiration of the Temporary Surplus allocation at the end of FY 2013. As of the end of CY 2015 the amount of water in storage for each party with a storage account is as follows:
City of Banning 47,887,48 ac-ft
BCVWD 25,567.57 ac-ft
City of Beaumont 0.00 ac-ft
So Mesa Water Co. 8,198.43 ac-ft
YVWD 13,976.43 ac-ft
Morongo Tribe 0.00 ac-ft
Total in Storage 95,628.92 ac-ft
3.7 Operating Safe Yield: For the purposes of this report, the annual operating safe yield (OSY) describes the new infiltration to the adjudicated groundwater basin for any given year. Note that the OSY is different that the Operating Yield, which is a function of the unused overlyer product and Temporary Surplus.
OSY is calculated by adding the sum of groundwater production plus the change is groundwater storage, minus the sum of groundwater recharge divided by estimated number of years. The Operating Safe Yield based on one year of data is 7,771 ac-ft.
It is also noted that there are a number of data limitations that could impact the OSY estimate including:
Accuracy of Overlyer Production Data: Production data from many of the Overlying Parties is not metered by is estimated based on a water duty method (Wildermuth Environmental, 2012). In addition to inherent limitation in this methodology, there are, in some cases, discrepancies between groundwater production estimated using the water duty method and production reported by individual parties to the Cali State Water Resources Control Board. Resolution of Overlyer Production is anticipated to affect the OSY (plus or minus) on the order of hundreds of acre-feet.
Change in Storage Calculation: Although groundwater storage change estimates will always have inherent uncertainty, it is possible to develop more representative results through collection and analysis of additional data.
Section 4 Water Quality Conditions:
4.1.1 Total Dissolved Solids:
The maximum TDS concentrations for domestic wells ranged from 190 to 415 mg/L and averaged 277 mg/L; this average valus is 22 mg/L higher than the average Maximum TDS concentration reported in 2008-11. Of the 29 potable wells, four wells had a maximum concentration below the anti-degradation objective of 230 mg/L ; 23 wells were between the anti-degradation and maximum benefit objective of 330 mg/L; and three exceeded the secondary Federal and State drinking water standard for TDS (500 mg/L)
Maximum TDS concentrations for the non-domestic wells had a much wider range from 203 to 1,200 mg/L and averaged 435 mg/L, just below the maximum benefit objection. Average concentrations were approximately 110 mg/L higher than those previously reported in the 2008-2011 Engineering Report. Of the 26 non-domestic wells, 3 had a maximum TDS concentration below the anti-degradation objective, 13 wells were between the anti degradation and maximum benefit objectives, and 13 exceeded the maximum benefit objective; nine of these wells also exceeded the secondary drinking standard of 500 mg/L.
Most of the wells with the highest TDS concentrations, include those that exceeded drinking water standards are located within the BMZ, but outside the Beaumont Basin.
4.1.2 Nitrate-Nitrogen:
The maximum Nitrate-N concentrations measured at Basin wells during the 2011-2015 reporting period for 62 wells including 30 domestic wells owned by Appropriators or by Overlying Parties. The maximum Nitrate-N concentrations for domestic wells ranged from 1.04 to 8.65 mg/L and averaged 2.83 mg/L. Of these wells, seven had a maximum concentration below the anti-degradation objective of 1.5 mg/L, 20 wells had a maximum concentration between the anti-degradation objective and the maximum benefit of 5.0 mg/L, and ten (10) wells exceeded the maximum benefit objective for the BMZ. Only one of the wells, (BCVWD 21) also exceeded the 80% MCL for Nitrate-N, which is considered as a threshold level that CDPH used to begin considering potential blending and/or treatment alternatives to address high nitrate concentrations in drinking water. None of the potable wells exceeded the primary federal and state drinking water standards for nitrate-nitrogen of 10 mg/L.
Maximum Nitrate-N concentrations in the 32 non-domestic wells ranged from 0.49 to 47 mg/L. Average maximum concentration for these wells (8.47 mg/L) exceeded the maximum benefit objective for the BMA. Of these wells, five (5) had maximum concentrations below the anti-degradation objective, nine (9) had maximum concentrations between the anti-degradation and the maximum benefit objective, and the remaining 18 about the maximum benefit objective. In addition, 11 of the wells had a maximum concentrations equal to or higher than the primary Federal and State Drinking Water Standard.
The highest Nitrate-N concentration within the Beaumont Basin was observed at a private well with a concentration of 47 mg/L. This well is located a little more than 1/2 mile north of BCVWD Well No. 29 in the Singleton Basin. Other wells exceeding the current MCL are mainly located south of the basin in the South Beaumont Basin.
4.1.3 Nitrate Studies in the Beaumont Management Zone:
Talks about the Sewering of Cherry Valley Scam and Wildermuth’s phony report.
4.2 Comparison with Federal and State Drinking Water Standards
A total of 2,679 quality results were analyzed to determine if the water quality tat the monitoring wells exceeded drinking water standards. Drinking standards were exceeded for a limited number of constituents as follows:
Nitrate-N: 8 of 17 Monitoring Wells exceeded the Federal and State primary MCL of 10 mg/L in 52 readings. All of the wells are located outside of the Beaumont Basin.
pH: 9 of 16 Monitoring Wells exceeded the Federal MCL of 8.5 in 22 readings. One of the wells is located in the Beaumont Basin.
Total Dissolved Solids: 8 of 16 Monitoring Wells exceeded the Federal and State secondary MCL of 500 mg/L in 49 readings. The wells are located outside of the Beaumont Basin.
Turbidity: 8 of the Monitoring Wells exceeded the California MCL of 5 NTU in 28 readings.
4.2.1 Trace Metals:
Aluminum: All wells were below 50 mg/L
Arsenic: Highest concentration was at SMWC’s Well No. 4 which had increased from 4.2 mg/L in 2009, to 4.6 mg/L in 2012, to 5.2 mg/L in April, 2013. Last recorded concentration was 4.4 mg/L in April, 2016. One well exceeded MCL during FY 2004-2008 reporting period.
Iron: In most cases iron concentrations were below 100 mg/L. However BCVWD Well No. 11 was at 800 mg/L and BCVWD Well No. 20 was at 450 mg/L in December, 2012. Iron concentrations at BCVWD Well No. 11 decreased to 340 mg/L in August, 2013.
Lead: Highest concentrations reported were .0065 mg/L at BCVWD Well No. 25 and .0058 mg/L at Rancho Calimesa Mobile Home Park Well No. 1. Both are below current primary MCL for Lead of .015 mg/L.
Manganese: All wells were below 20 mg/L.
Total Chromium: Highest concentrations were observed in February, 20111 at Sharondale Mesa HOA Well No. 2 at 9.1 mg/L and in October 2013, at BCVWD Well No. 3 at 11 mg/L. Both are below State primary MCL of 50 mg/L
Vanadium: Increased at SMWC well from 17 mg/L in March, 2010 to 84 mg/L in April 2013 and to 100 mg/L in April, 2016, which exceeds State Levels of 50 mg/L.
Copper: Rancho Calimesa Well No. 2 exceeded the detection level at 62 mg/L in February 2013, which is below State Primary MCL of 1,000 mg/L.
pH: There are two secondary standards for pH, a lower limite of 6.5 and an upper limit of 8.5. All wells except on were within the limits.
4.2.4 Turbidity: None exceeded the primary Federal and State MCL of 5 NTU.