Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

ALL RIGHT.

[00:00:01]

I'M GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER OF THE SEPTEMBER 14TH MERCED [INAUDIBLE] GSA MEETING.

I WILL CALL FOR THE ROLL.

BOARD MEMBER GALLO HERE.

BOARD MEMBER PEDRETTI HERE.

BOARD MEMBER SWENSON HERE.

VICE CHAIR MARCHINI HERE.

AND, MR. VICE CHAIR. YOU DO HAVE A QUORUM?

[2. CLOSED SESSION]

YEAH. I'M GOING TO ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION.

OKAY, EVERYONE, WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE THE MEETING.

WE RETURN FROM CLOSED SESSION.

THERE'S NO REPORTABLE ACTION, SO WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

MR. SWENSON YOU LIKE TO LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? CERTAINLY, MR. MCKEE.

SALUTE.

OKAY. GET MY ACT TOGETHER.

OKAY, WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

THIS IS THE PUBLIC'S OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON ANY ON ANY MATTER OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST WITHIN THE BOARD'S REJECTION.

NOT ON THE AGENDA.

IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. ANYONE ON ZOOM? NONE ON ZOOM. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

MOVING ON TO ITEM FIVE CONSENT CALENDAR.

[5. CONSENT CALENDAR ]

THE CONSENT CALENDAR INCLUDES MEETINGS MEETING MINUTES FROM AUGUST 10TH, 2023 AND THE APPROVAL OF INVOICES TO PAY.

AND AS A NOTE, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL INVOICES THAT WERE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AS PRESENTED.

WE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY DIRECTOR SWENSON SECOND.

SECOND BY MR. GALLO.

I CAN DO A CONSENSUS VOTE ON THIS.

RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ALL RIGHT.

ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.

MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY. BREEZING THROUGH THIS NUMBER SIX TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP UPDATE.

[6. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP UPDATE]

LACEY MCBRIDE WILL PROVIDE A REPORT.

GREAT. SO YOUR TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CURRENTLY MEETS BI MONTHLY AND HAS A BOARD APPOINTED MEMBERSHIP OF 12 PEOPLE OVER THE PAST YEARS SINCE THE RULE THE PAST YEAR SINCE THE RULES ALLOWING VIRTUAL MEETINGS EXPIRED AND THE TAC HAS NEEDED TO MEET IN PERSON, THEY HAVE HAD SOME CHALLENGES HAVING A QUORUM OF MEMBERS ATTEND THE MEETINGS AND SO WHILE HAVING A QUORUM IS A BROWN ACT REQUIREMENT, MEETINGS AT WHICH THEY HAVEN'T HAD A QUORUM STILL HAVE INCLUDED DISCUSSION, BUT NOT ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE TAC AT THIS TIME.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REMOVING ANY MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT ATTENDED A MEETING IN THE PAST YEAR AND MAKING A CHANGE TO THE CLAYTON WATER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE TAC. THE INTENT OF THESE CHANGES IS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THOSE MEMBERS WHO ARE PARTICIPATING IN THE TAC TO MAKE A QUORUM AND TAKE ACTION TO MAKE OFFICIAL POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD.

THE UPDATED MEMBERSHIP LIST IS HERE AND IT INCLUDES ALL MEMBERS OF THE TAC WHO HAVE BEEN ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN MEETINGS OVER THE PAST YEAR.

AND THE ACTION TODAY IS TO APPROVE THE NEW MEMBERSHIP LIST.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.

SO THERE'S NOT A REQUIREMENT OF HOW MANY PEOPLE NEED TO BE ON THE COMMITTEE, CORRECT? CORRECT. IT COULD BE AS MANY AS YOU WANT, BUT A QUORUM IS A MAJORITY OF MEMBERS.

OKAY. AND THE LARGER THE TAC GETS, THE MORE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO MEET IN PERSON TO MAKE A QUORUM.

AND HOW MANY HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE WE? ARE WE REMOVING PROPOSING TO REMOVE? WE'RE REMOVING TWO AND WE'RE REPLACING ONE VACANT SEAT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE I OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? OKAY. ANYONE ONLINE? NONE ONLINE. OKAY.

WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE UPDATED TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP.

OKAY. WE GET A MOTION.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.

MOTION CARRIES.

OKAY. CONGRATULATIONS TO WHOEVER THE NEW PERSON IS.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE REST OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR SHOWING UP.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.

IT IS VERY BENEFICIAL.

[00:05:02]

SO APPRECIATE THE INPUT.

SO. YEAH, IT'S NICE THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO SOME OFFICIAL BUSINESS.

THAT'S A GOOD THING. THAT OFFICIAL BUSINESS CAN ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE NOW.

YEAH. CAN WE SET UP WHERE THEY CAN KICK OFF THEIR OWN MEMBERS IF THEY WANT? KIND OF LIKE SURVIVOR OR SOMETHING? THAT WOULD BE GREAT, YOU KNOW? ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

WE'RE GOOD. EVERYONE GOOD WITH THAT ONE? MOVING ON TO NUMBER SEVEN, SUSTAINABILITY ZONE REVISIONS.

[7. SUSTAINABILITY ZONE REVISIONS]

THAT RIGHT? I FEEL LIKE I'M ON THE WRONG PAGE.

YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M RIGHT HERE.

YEP. THERE WE GO.

DO WE HAVE CHRIS ON LINE? CHRIS WITH CHI PRESENT OR CHRIS IS ON LINE.

CHRIS, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

OKAY, WELL, I'M SHARING MY SCREEN AND EVERYONE SEE THE SCREEN HERE.

YES. YES.

OKAY, GREAT.

UM, SO, UM, TODAY'S DISCUSSION TOPIC IS TO REVIEW, DISCUSS AND FOR THE BOARD TO TAKE, POTENTIALLY TAKE ACTION TO APPROVE THE MAP OF THE REVISED SUSTAINABILITY ZONES.

SO AS YOU'LL RECALL, THE REVISION OF SUSTAINABILITY ZONES IS TASK ONE OF THE ALLOCATION FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS PROJECT THAT WAS BROUGHT ON FOR EARLIER THIS YEAR.

THE PURPOSE IS TO LOOK AT RELEVANT DATA TO SUPPORT UPDATED SUSTAINABLE EXISTING SUSTAINABILITY ZONES ALLOWING WHICH ALLOW FOR DISTINCT IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE GSA.

RECOGNIZING THAT CONDITIONS DO VARY ACROSS THE GSA, THE SCOPE HAS BEEN TO TAKE DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD ON THE VARIOUS FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN THESE REVISIONS.

REVIEW AND ANALYZE THE DATA ON THOSE FACTORS AND TO DEVELOP DRAFT REVISED SUSTAINABILITY ZONES FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION.

CURRENT STATUS IS SUMMARIZED HERE.

THE INITIAL DRAFT MAP OF REVISED SUSTAINABILITY ZONES WAS PRESENTED AT THE AUGUST BOARD MEETING AND WAS ALSO REVIEWED BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE LATER IN AUGUST AND THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, THE STRATEGIC PLANNING, AD HOC COMMITTEE AND BASED ON INPUT RECEIVED IN THOSE TWO COMMITTEE MEETINGS, THERE WERE SOME REVISIONS TO THE INITIAL DRAFT MAP.

JUST AS A REFRESHER, THE VARIOUS CONSIDERATIONS THAT WERE GIVEN TO US FROM THE BOARD TO CONSIDER INCLUDED KEEPING PARCEL BOUNDARIES AND AGRICULTURAL FIELD BOUNDARIES WHOLE.

NOT SPLITTING THEM BETWEEN DIFFERENT ZONES TO MAINTAIN THE AS AS WHOLE DISTRICTS.

THE THREE LISTED HERE STEVENSON WATER DISTRICT, MARCHINI COUNTY WATER DISTRICT AND LONE TREE MUTUAL WATER COMPANY, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, MAINTAIN CONTIGUOUS ZONES RATHER THAN HAVING SORT OF A PATCHWORK TO GROUP PARCELS AND FIELDS INTO ZONES IN A WAY THAT HONORS THEIR CONDITION RELATIVE TO 2015 GROUNDWATER LEVELS.

THOSE THAT ARE EITHER ABOVE 2015 GROUNDWATER LEVELS OR BELOW 2015 GROUNDWATER LEVELS TO CONSIDER THE DENSITY OF DOMESTIC WELLS, PARTICULARLY FOR AREAS WHERE THE WATER LEVELS ARE BELOW WHERE THEY WERE IN 2015, AND ALSO TO CONSIDER GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS, PARTICULARLY LAND SUBSIDENCE.

OTHER PARTS OF THE GUIDANCE WERE THAT THERE WAS NO NEED TO EXPLICITLY CONSIDER LAND USE BECAUSE THE ALLOCATION PROCESS WILL HAVE SPECIFIC TERMS THAT ADDRESS HOW IRRIGATED VERSUS NON IRRIGATED LAND USES ARE HANDLED IN THE ALLOCATION. THE ZONES COULD CROSS OVER AREAS, YOU KNOW, OF THE OF THE AQUIFER ZONE BOUNDARIES, I.E. THEY COULD INCLUDE AREAS BOTH WITHIN AND OUTSIDE OF THE CORCORAN CLAY.

SURFACE WATER AVAILABILITY OR PROXIMITY TO SURFACE WATER SOURCES IS NOT A SPECIFIC HIGH PRIORITY CONSIDERATION.

AND GOING FROM THE EXISTING SIX ZONE CONFIGURATION TO SOMETHING WITH A GREATER NUMBER OF ZONES IS POSSIBLE.

SO PART OF WHAT I DID IN LOOKING AT THE AND LOOKING INTO REVISING SUSTAINABILITY ZONES IS TO EVALUATE GROUNDWATER LEVEL CHANGES.

WHAT WE SEE HERE ON THIS MAP, ON THIS SLIDE ARE THREE MAPS SHOWING THE CHANGES IN GROUNDWATER LEVELS FROM OVER THE PERIOD FROM FALL 2015 TO FALL

[00:10:04]

2022. FOR EACH OF THE THREE AQUIFERS, THESE GROUNDWATER LEVEL CHANGE MAPS ARE BASED ON THE CONTOUR DATA THAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE GROUNDWATER SUSTAINABILITY PLAN AND SUBSEQUENT ANNUAL REPORTS.

THERE WAS A CALL FOR ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL DATA BY THE GSA, AND DATA WERE RECEIVED FROM A NUMBER OF SOURCES.

IN MOST CASES AND EVALUATED THIS THIS DATA, COMPARING IT TO THE EXISTING CONTOUR LEVEL DATA AND VARIOUS EVALUATIONS OF THE DIFFERENCES.

IN MOST CASES, THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA WERE IN GENERAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CONTOUR DATA.

THE DATA HAS SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL COVERAGE THAT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ZONE REVISION LIMITS ITS DIRECT USE IN THE ZONE REVISION.

ANOTHER WAY TO SAY THAT IS THAT INCORPORATING THAT DATA FOR FOR THIS PURPOSE IS UNLIKELY TO SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT THE POSITION OF PROPOSED PROPOSED ZONE BOUNDARIES.

IN ADDITION TO THE THE OTHER FACTORS THAT THAT PLAY INTO THE REVISED SUSTAINABILITY ZONES, THERE IS A OPEN QUESTION AS TO IF AND HOW THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA MAY BE INCORPORATED FOR PURPOSES OF THE SUBSEQUENT ALLOCATION ANALYSIS.

SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ALSO, YOU KNOW, ON THIS AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION AS PART OF THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.

JUST LOOKING AT THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT WERE MENTIONED SPECIFICALLY.

WELL, GROUNDWATER SUBSIDENCE.

ON THE LEFT, WE SEE THE MAP OF WHERE SUBSIDENCE HAS OCCURRED, SORT OF A LONG TERM AVERAGE RATE OF SUBSIDENCE FOR THE PERIOD 2012 TO 2021.

THE BROWN AND AND ORANGE COLORS NEAR THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE BASIN ARE HIGHER RATES OF SUBSIDENCE.

THE YELLOW IS A MODERATE RATE OF SUBSIDENCE.

GREEN IS THE LOWER RATE OF SUBSIDENCE AND THE GRAY AREAS THAT ARE NOT NOT SHADED ON THAT MAP HAVE NEGLIGIBLE SUBSIDENCE DURING THIS PERIOD. AND THEN ON THE RIGHT, WE SEE THE MAP OF DOMESTIC WELL DENSITY.

YOU CAN SEE A CONCENTRATION OF WELLS MOSTLY WITHIN THE MIDDLE PART OF THE BASIN THAT'S IN THE AREA AND A FEW OTHER AREAS OF HIGHER DENSITY WELLS, NOTABLY IN THE IN THE WEST PORTION NEAR STEVENSON WATER DISTRICT AND MARCHINI WATER DISTRICT, AND A FEW A FEW AREAS OF HIGHER DENSITY WELLS IN THE SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST.

SO BASED ON THE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSIONS AND FEEDBACK RECEIVED FROM THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, UH, WHAT WE SEE HERE IS THE DRAFT REVISED SUSTAINABILITY ZONE MAP.

THERE ARE EIGHT ZONES.

UM, AND WITHIN EACH ZONE YOU'LL SEE SORT OF TWO SHADES OF COLOR.

THE DARKER COLORED AREAS ARE THOSE THAT ARE NOTED AS IRRIGATED LAND USES, AND THE LIGHTER SHADE ARE THOSE THAT ARE NON IRRIGATED LAND USES. THIS IS JUST TO SORT OF HELP HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE DISTRIBUTION OF THOSE IRRIGATED LANDS WITHIN EACH ZONES, WITHIN EACH PROPOSED ZONE.

UM. I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'LL STOP NOW AND HAND IT OVER TO LACEY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

OKAY. QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS? I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I DO HAVE A COMMENT IN THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IS IT'S LIKELY THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES WILL BE REVIEWED POTENTIALLY ON A FIVE YEAR PERIOD AND ADJUSTED IF NEEDED AS ADDITIONAL DATA IS COLLECTED AND EVALUATED.

SO THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY THE EXACT BOUNDARY THAT WILL BE THERE IN 2030 OR 2040, BUT BASED ON THE AVAILABLE DATA TODAY, THIS IS WHAT WAS CALCULATED AND RECOMMENDED.

YEAH. WELL, YEAH, THE AD HOC COMMITTEE, I GUESS WE, YOU KNOW, WENT OVER IS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE DATA IS SHOWING US AS OF THIS TIME.

BUT WE'RE ALSO OPEN TO CHANGES IN THE FUTURE.

THINKS THE BOARD SHOULD BE OPEN TO CHANGES IN THE FUTURE.

[00:15:02]

IF THE DATA SHOWS US THAT THESE LEVELS HAVE CHANGED IN CERTAIN AREAS OR THE CONTOUR LINES ARE CHANGING, THAT IT BE OPEN TO REVIEW IS KIND OF A WAS A CONSENSUS MOVING FORWARD.

NOT NECESSARILY THAT THEY'LL CHANGE BUT JUST WE'LL LOOK AT THE DATA WITH EACH FIVE YEAR UPDATE AND SEE WHAT IT SHOWS US.

CHRIS THIS IS NICK IS IN BETWEEN ZONES FOUR AND FIVE IS THAT FOR THE MOST PART THE CORCORAN CLAY BOUNDARY OR IS IT A LITTLE FURTHER WEST FROM THERE? THE CORCORAN CLAY BOUNDARY IS ACTUALLY CLOSER TO THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN ZONES THREE AND FOUR OVER BY SANTA FE ROAD. IT'S A LITTLE BIT TO THE WEST OF THAT SANTA FE ROAD, BUT NOT QUITE AS FAR WEST AS THE ZONE 4 OR 5 BOUNDARY.

OKAY. UM.

AND THEN WHAT WAS THE REASON, IF OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 1 AND 2, DO YOU RECALL OR ANYONE, ANYONE ON THE COMMITTEE RECALL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 1 AND 2? WHY I END UP GETTING SPLIT LIKE THIS.

SO THAT THAT LINE HERE UP ON THE NORTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE BASIN IS IN PART DRIVEN BY THE CHANGE IN GROUNDWATER LEVELS SINCE 2015 OR ZONE TWO, THE MOST NORTHERN NORTHEASTERN ZONE. THE GROUNDWATER LEVEL CHANGE IN THAT AQUIFER, BASED ON THE AVAILABLE DATA, IS GENERALLY STABLE OR POSITIVE, WHEREAS SOUTH OF THAT LINE IN ZONE ONE HERE, IT WAS MORE TRENDING DOWNWARDS SINCE 2015.

YEAH. IN THE LIGHTER.

WELL, EXPLAIN TO ME THE DIFFERENT SHADES OF THE DIFFERENT COLORS.

YOU SAID ONE WAS. YES.

THE THE LIGHTER COLOR.

FOR EXAMPLE, THIS LIGHT, MY CURSOR OVER HERE, THIS LIGHTER SHADE OF BROWN IN ZONE TWO IS NON-IRRIGATED LAND USES. WHEREAS THE DARKER SHADES IN EACH ZONE ARE THE IRRIGATED LAND USES.

AND THESE ARE CONSISTENT WITH AND BASED ON THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS PER THE MERCED ASSESSOR'S DATA SET AND ARE THE SAME ONES THAT ARE USED IN ASSESSING THE PROPOSITION 218FT. OKAY.

THANK YOU, NICK. THOSE THAT'S ARE FROM THE LIST FROM THE PHASE ONE ASSESSMENT ARE THE DARK COLORS.

OKAY. I THINK IT'S A GOOD TIME TO OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? COME ON UP, LOU. COME ON.

COME ON. PERFECT.

I GUESS THIS IS A PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CAN'T MEET.

SO THANK YOU, GUYS.

YOU'RE WELCOME. THIS WE MET AS A TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM, SO I'M GOING TO DO MY BEST TO RECITE THIS NON RECOMMENDATION.

FIRST, WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY THINK THAT REVISING THE BOUNDARIES EVERY FIVE YEARS THE SAC WAS BOTHERING ME EVERY FIVE YEARS IS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE GSP.

RIGHT NOW WE'RE KIND OF YOU GUYS ARE GOING IN BLIND SO THAT SHOULD BE CODIFIED IN THE GSP.

SECOND, WE THINK THAT THE BOARD'S ALREADY AWARE OF THIS, BUT THE ALLOCATION POLICY POLICY MIGHT WANT TO DISTINGUISH PUMPING BETWEEN ABOVE THE CORCORAN CLAY AND BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY.

THIS IS STUFF THAT YOU GUYS HAVE REFERENCED BEFORE BUT WANTED TO PINPOINT THAT TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION.

THIRD, THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN CORRECTED THROUGH THIS LATEST REVISION OF THIS TO SOME DEGREE, BUT WE FELT THERE WAS AN INCONSISTENCY IN DATA DRIVING THE ZONE BOUNDARIES IN THE LAST ITERATION.

SPECIFICALLY, I THINK IT WAS BETWEEN ZONE THREE AND ZONE FOUR, WHERE THE NEUTRAL RATE, CHRIS, CAN SPEAK TO THIS, BUT THE FALLING WATER RATE, LET ME REPHRASE THAT. THE AREAS WHERE THE GROUNDWATER WAS FALLING CLEARLY LANDED ON THE BORDERS BETWEEN OTHER ZONES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ZONE THREE AND ZONE FOUR. BUT HE MIGHT HAVE DRIVEN MADE THAT ADJUSTMENT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE CORCORAN CLAY HERE.

I CAN'T SPEAK TO THIS MAP.

WE DIDN'T REVIEW THIS MAP IN THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND FINALLY, YOU GUYS HAVE REFERENCED, REFERENCED THIS BEFORE, BUT THE FARMING OPERATIONS BEING SPLIT BY ZONES COULD BE CUMBERSOME.

[00:20:06]

AND IF THAT IS YOUR INSTRUCTIONS TO CODIFY THAT AND SAY, HEY, IN THE EVENT THERE'S A FARMING OPERATION THAT IS SPLIT BY A ZONE, ESTABLISH AN APPEAL PROCESS SO THAT THE FARMERS AND THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP OR THIS I WROTE SOMETHING DOWN HERE CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY UNDER THE SAME OR SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR SIMILAR OWNERSHIP THAT NOTIFIES THE GSA MAY MOVE FROM ONE ZONE TO ANOTHER IF IT'S IF IT'S WITHIN MULTIPLE ZONES.

THAT WAS IT. ALL RIGHT.

GOOD. ERIC. SO I JUST WANT TO ANSWER ONE OF YOUR YOUR POINTS IS THAT EKG IS CHARGED TO LOOK AT ABOVE AND BELOW CORCORAN ALLOCATIONS. SO THAT'S ALREADY MOVING FORWARD.

AND THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE DURING THE NEXT MONTH IS PLANNING ON LOOKING AT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODIFICATIONS OF BOUNDARIES BASED ON FARMING UNITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND WHAT THAT PROCESS WOULD BE.

SO WE'RE PLANNING ON ON DOING THAT.

OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS? NONE. OKAY. ANY ONLINE? NOT SEEING ANY ONLINE.

OKAY. SO THIS IS THE LATEST MAP THAT WE HAVE.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR POSSIBLE ACTION.

ARE YOU WAITING FOR A MOTION, MR..

WELL, I'M SURE.

YEAH. WELL, I'M THINKING ABOUT IT.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S PREMATURE. I KNOW EVERYONE JUST GOT A CHANCE TO SEE IT, RIGHT? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU MEAN.

IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKET.

OKAY, SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONE BOUNDARIES AS PRESENTED.

SECOND, THAT. OKAY, WE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.

OH, GO AHEAD.

SORRY. I GOT A QUICK QUESTION ON THAT MOTION.

WOULD WE WANT IN THERE SOMETHING ABOUT HAVING AN APPEAL PROCESS LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT IN THAT MOTION OR STAFF? DO WE NEED SOMETHING IN THERE FOR THAT? IF YOU'D LIKE, IF WE WANT IT, YEAH.

COME BACK TO THE BOARD OR TO THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE WITH A APPEAL PROCESS FOR THOSE CONTIGUOUS LANDS THAT MIGHT BE ON THE BORDER OF TWO DIFFERENT ZONES.

YOU CAN INCLUDE THAT AS PART OF DIRECTION, AS PART OF YOUR MOTION.

UM, MAY I MAKE A SUGGESTION? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS THIS THING GETS DEALT WITH, THIS MEETING, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE NEXT TIME THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS MEETING.

RIGHT. BUT JUST TO GET A LITTLE MORE FEEDBACK ON THIS MAP WOULD BE, I MEAN, TO ME, I FEEL MORE A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE.

BUT I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES HERE IS THE EAC NEEDS TO START WORKING ON THE ALLOCATIONS BY SUSTAINABILITY ZONE.

OKAY? UNTIL WE DEFINE THEM, THEY CAN'T START THAT WORK REALLY.

I MEAN, I MEAN, I DON'T THINK I WOULDN'T IMAGINE THEY'RE GOING TO CHANGE DRASTICALLY, BUT I MEAN, WELL, THESE WERE DRAWN UP, WHICH THEY DON'T HAVE THE CONTOUR LINES IN THIS ZONE TO BE IN THIS MAP TO NOT CLUTTER IT UP.

BUT THEY'RE BASED OFF THE LATEST CONTOUR.

5 OR 6 YEAR.

YEAH. 2 OR 7 YEAR FROM NO, SIX YEAR FROM 2015 TO 2022 CONTOUR LINE.

SO I DON'T SEE AT THIS TIME GOING BACK TO THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE WILL REALLY CHANGE IT MUCH BECAUSE WE'RE JUST BASING IT OFF THE WATER DATA.

OKAY. WELL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH AN AMENDMENT, I SUPPOSE.

OKAY. I'LL AMEND MY MOTION TO REFLECT DIRECTION TO STAFF TO WORK WITH THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE TO BRING TO THE OCTOBER BOARD MEETING RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPEAL PROCESS FOR BOUNDARIES.

OKAY, WE GOT A MOTION IN SECOND BY MR. GALLO. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE.

ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.

MOTION CARRIES.

CONGRATULATIONS, YOU GUYS.

SUSTAINABILITY ZONES.

FANTASTIC. WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT FOR A LONG TIME, I THINK.

WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME WE BROUGHT UP SUSTAINABILITY ZONES? I FEEL LIKE IT WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

2021, 2021.

WAS IT THE CONCEPT? WELL, THAT'S GOOD. SIX YEARS AGO, WE FIRST TALKED ABOUT A LONG TIME, 2021.

YEAH. WOW.

FANTASTIC. I WONDER HOW DIFFERENT THEY ARE FROM WHEN WE STARTED.

I CAN'T IMAGINE. THEY'RE MUCH DIFFERENT.

BUT ANYWAYS, MORE OF THEM.

MORE OF THEM.

YEAH, FOR SURE.

OKAY. MOVING ON TO NUMBER EIGHT DATA GAPS FILLING PROJECT.

[8. DATA GAPS FILLING PROJECT]

CHRIS HEPPNER WITH ECCB WILL PROVIDE A PRESENTATION ON DATA GAPS.

[00:25:01]

ANOTHER THING WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A REALLY LONG TIME, SO GO AHEAD.

OKAY. SO YES, I'LL BE SUMMARIZING THE WORK PERFORMED FOR THE DATA GAPS PROJECT.

I'LL TALK ABOUT THE INITIAL SET OF DATA GAPS, LOCATIONS AND AN INITIAL LIST OF CANDIDATE WELLS THAT WERE REVIEWED AND TALK ABOUT THE UPDATING OF THAT LIST BASED ON INFORMATION YOU RECEIVED EARLIER THIS YEAR ON THOSE ON THOSE INDIVIDUAL WELLS. TALK ABOUT THE TYPE OF INSTRUMENTATION.

THIS IS WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT THAT WAS CONSIDERED AND THEN ULTIMATELY SELECTED.

AND I'LL TALK ABOUT THE FIELD VISITS AND INSTRUMENTATION ACTIVITIES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE.

SO ORIGINALLY, AS PART OF THE DATA GAPS PLAN, A MAP WAS GENERATOR, WHICH IDENTIFIED SOME LOCATIONS WHERE DATA GAPS EXIST WITHIN THE MSA.

THOSE ARE GENERALLY THE CIRCLE AREAS, EACH ONE NOTED WITH AN IDENTIFIER, STARTING WITH EITHER THE LETTER A FOR ABOVE CORCORAN B FOR BELOW CORCORAN AQUIFER AND O FOR OUTSIDE OF CORCORAN.

SO YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE SORT OF SPREAD OUT HERE THROUGHOUT THE BASIN.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS BASED ON WHAT, WHAT WAS IN THE DATA GAPS PLAN AND SOME TENTATIVE OR PRELIMINARY CANDIDATE WELL, LOCATIONS TO BUILD THOSE DATA GAPS.

THERE WERE 11 INITIALLY IDENTIFIED CANDIDATE WELLS, AND THIS WAS BASED ON INFORMATION COLLECTED BY MSG.

MSG STAFF AND WITH THE SUPPORT OF SOME OF THE MEMBER AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES WHO WERE ABLE TO HELP IDENTIFY SOME INITIAL CANDIDATE WELLS.

THE WELLS HAD VARIOUS AMOUNTS OF DATA ASSOCIATED WITH THEM AND SOME MISSING INFORMATION.

SO DEVELOPED A WELL INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE OR FORM THAT WAS THEN CIRCULATED TO THE OWNERS OF EACH WELL OR REPRESENTATIVES ASKING FOR, YOU KNOW, FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT ABOUT THINGS SUCH AS THE WELL, LOCATION, WELL, CONSTRUCTION, THE USE, WHETHER IT'S ACTIVE OR NON-ACTIVE, THE EXISTENCE OF ANY HISTORICAL WATER LEVEL DATA RECORDS THAT WOULD BE USEFUL AND A FEW OTHER ITEMS ABOUT EACH WELL.

THERE WERE NINE NINE FORMS RECEIVED OUT OF THE 11 ADDITIONAL SORRY, INITIALLY IDENTIFIED WELLS, UM, YOU KNOW, TOOK ALL THIS DATA AND WORKED KIND OF THROUGH EACH ONE, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL MONTHS.

SOME WELLS BECAME SORT OF CROSSED OFF THE LIST FOR VARIOUS REASONS.

UM, IN SOME CASES THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WELL OWNER, YOU KNOW, WAS, WAS NOT AVAILABLE OR RESPONSIVE TO OUTREACH AND YOU KNOW, COULDN'T, COULDN'T BE, COULDN'T BE BROUGHT INTO THE FORMALLY INTO THE INTO THE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF AN ACCESS AGREEMENT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. IN OTHER CASES, WELLS WERE DEEMED UNSUITABLE BASED ON SOME OBSERVATIONS, UM, SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, EXCESSIVE WELL OIL IN THE WELL CASING ABOVE THE WATER LEVEL, WHICH WOULD, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT NOT SUITABLE FOR ONGOING MONITORING.

UM, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE WERE A TOTAL OF NINE WELLS THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, DEEMED SUITABLE FOR POTENTIAL INSTRUMENTATION, AND THOSE BECAME THE ONES THAT, YOU KNOW, ENTERED OUR, OUR FIELD FIELD EFFORT.

AND THAT SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR ORDERING OF EQUIPMENT, INSTRUMENTATION, EQUIPMENT, THINKING ABOUT THE INSTRUMENTATION, WE RESEARCHED AND REVIEWED FOUR DIFFERENT BRANDS OF PRESSURE, TRANSDUCER, EQUIPMENT.

WE COMPARED THEIR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND COSTS.

UM, YOU KNOW, ON A PER WELL AND A TOTAL SYSTEM BASIS.

WE LOOKED AT TWO DIFFERENT SORT OF DATA RETRIEVAL CONFIGURATIONS, ONE WHERE THE PRESSURE TRANSDUCERS ARE LOGGING THE DATA BUT NOT TRANSMITTING THEM REMOTELY TO ANY, YOU KNOW, SORT OF CLOUD SYSTEM.

AND SO THAT WOULD REQUIRE MANUAL VISITS PERIODICALLY TO TO DOWNLOAD THAT DATA.

[00:30:01]

THE OTHER CONFIGURATION IS THE SORT OF TELEMETRY BASED SYSTEM WHERE INSTRUMENTS ARE CONNECTED VIA THE CLOUD AND REPORT THEIR DATA REGULARLY.

UM, THE TELEMETRY BASED SYSTEMS WERE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE COSTLY.

UM, GENERALLY ABOUT TWICE AS MUCH AS THE MANUAL SYSTEMS. SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND YOU KNOW, FOR VERY, YOU KNOW, FOR COST CONSIDERATIONS AS A LARGE AS A LARGE FACTOR, THE SELECTION WAS FOR SOLINST BRAND DATA TRANSDUCERS.

AND SO THOSE WERE ORDERED ALONG WITH THE SUPPORTING EQUIPMENT CABLES AND, YOU KNOW, DATA CONNECTION EQUIPMENT. AND THAT WAS WITH THE MANUAL DATA RETRIEVAL OPTION.

I WILL NOTE THAT THIS EQUIPMENT IS UPGRADABLE TO A TELEMETRY BASED CONFIGURATION IF DESIRED IN THE FUTURE.

UM, AT ADDITIONAL COST.

BUT FOR NOW THE MANUAL DATA SYSTEMS ARE SUFFICIENT AT THIS POINT.

SO FIELD VISITS WERE CONDUCTED IN JUNE AND JULY OF THIS YEAR.

UM, STAFF WENT TO EACH WELL.

UM, YOU KNOW, ASSESS THE CONDITION OF THE WELL HEAD AND, YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL CONDITION AND HOW THEY COULD BE INSTRUMENTED.

GROUNDWATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS WERE COLLECTED WHEN POSSIBLE.

THERE WAS SERVICES OF A OF A PUMP SERVICE CONTRACTOR TO DO VIDEO LOGGING AND PUMP REMOVAL.

SELECTED WELLS WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE WELL OWNER IN CERTAIN CASES.

IN ALL CASES WHERE THAT HAPPENED.

IN SOME CASES, THE PUMP REMOVAL WAS NOT NOT POSSIBLE AND THE WELLS WERE INSTRUMENTED WITH THE WITH THE EQUIPMENT THAT WE HAD PURCHASED.

A TOTAL OF SEVEN WELLS OUT OF THE NINE WERE ULTIMATELY VIABLE FOR INSTRUMENTATION, AND THAT INCLUDES TWO WELLS BELOW THE CORK AND THREE ABOVE THE CORK AND CLAY AND TWO OUTSIDE THE CORK AND CLAY.

OUT OF THESE SEVEN WELLS, WE DO HAVE TOTAL DEPTH INFORMATION FOR ALL OF THEM, WHICH ALLOWS US TO, YOU KNOW, PRETTY, PRETTY WELL UNDERSTAND THE AQUIFER SYSTEM THAT THEY ARE SCREENED IN.

BUT WE HAVE SCREEN DEPTH.

SCREEN DEPTH INFORMATION AT FOUR OF THE WELLS WITH WITH THAT INFORMATION LACKING AT THREE WELLS.

SO HERE'S THE MAP SHOWING THE CURRENTLY INSTRUMENTED WELLS WITH BLACK SYMBOLS.

THE RED SYMBOLS ARE, YOU KNOW, CANDIDATE WELLS THAT WERE, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE OVERALL ASSESSMENT.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A TOTAL OF 14 WELLS SHOWN HERE.

SO SEVEN OF THEM ULTIMATELY WERE VIABLE FOR INSTRUMENTATION AND THE OTHERS WERE WERE NOT VIABLE FOR VARIOUS REASONS.

AND SO THIS IS THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE DATA GAPS PROJECT.

THE WELLS THAT ARE INSTRUMENTED ARE CURRENTLY RECORDING WATER LEVEL DATA SINCE THEY WERE INSTRUMENTED IN EITHER JUNE OR JULY, AND THAT IS THE UPDATE ON THIS PROJECT.

HEY, CHRIS. NICK, SO THE RED ONES, ARE THEY GOING TO BE JUST MANUALLY CHECKED OR ARE THEY DISQUALIFIED? THE RED IN A COUPLE OF CASES, THE WELLS WERE, YOU KNOW, TOTALLY PHYSICALLY EITHER DESTROYED OR, YOU KNOW, ENCASED IN CONCRETE.

WHAT WAS ONE OF THE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT'S EFFECTIVELY DESTROYED? UM, ANOTHER ONE WAS, YOU KNOW, HAD THE OIL IN THE CASING.

AND SO IT JUST ISN'T REALLY SUITABLE.

UM, AND IN A COUPLE OF CASES, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW THEIR FULL VIABILITY BECAUSE THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, THE OWNER WAS, WAS NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT RESPONSIVE TO THE ADDITIONAL OUTREACH TO, TO ALLOW US TO GET OUT THERE SO THEY COULD POTENTIALLY BE, YOU KNOW, VIABLE IN THE FUTURE IF THE OWNER WERE CONTACTED AND AGREED TO ALLOW ACCESS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR NOW THEY'RE NOT NOT AVAILABLE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY ANY QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? WELL, I'LL MAKE A COMMENT.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROCESS OF FILLING DATA GAPS AND THESE WELLS,

[00:35:04]

BECAUSE THEY EXIST, ALTHOUGH, AS WAS POINTED OUT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE SOME ISSUES.

I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK IN EACH CASE AND SEE WHAT IT WOULD COST TO MITIGATE THOSE ISSUES AND MAKE THE WELL SUITABLE FOR THESE PURPOSES.

I THINK THAT THE IDEA THAT WE'RE GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM THEM AND INSTEAD GO OUT AND DRILL NEW WELLS AT A TREMENDOUS COST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.

IT MAKES SENSE TO ME TO STUDY EACH OF THE WELLS THAT WAS SUBMITTED AND THEN SEE IF WE CAN'T MITIGATE THE ISSUES.

YEAH. THANK YOU, ERIC.

SO IN ADDITION TO THE WELLS INDICATED ON THIS MAP, THERE ARE QUITE A FEW WELLS FROM WHICH SUPPLEMENTAL DATA WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE REQUEST WENT OUT TO SUBMIT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA.

WE ARE COMING UP TO WHAT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT TASKS THAT THIS BOARD HAS DONE, WHICH IS SETTING PUMPING ALLOCATIONS FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT SUSTAINABILITY ZONES WITHIN THE DISTRICT.

AND I THINK TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO INCORPORATE AS MUCH REASONABLE DATA AS POSSIBLE, INCLUDING THE FALL 2023 SAMPLING. SO I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE GSA TO INCLUDE ALL OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA THAT'S RECEIVED IN THAT EVALUATION OF CALCULATION OF PUMPING ALLOCATIONS.

AND I DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE STANDARD PROTOCOLS ALREADY ESTABLISHED FOR CORRECTING FOR ELEVATIONS FOR OIL IN WELLS, AND I HAVE DONE THOSE CORRECTIONS BEFORE.

SO THAT IS NOT A SHOWSTOPPER IN USING THOSE WELLS FOR GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA, ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE BEING MANUALLY SAMPLED.

SO I THINK WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'VE GONE THE EXTRA MILE IN COMING UP WITH THE PUMPING ALLOCATIONS THAT WE ARE USING ALL REASONABLY AVAILABLE DATA IN THOSE CALCULATIONS.

AND WE STILL HAVE DATA GAPS THAT THOSE THAT THOSE WELLS HELP FILL.

I KNOW THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED SOME DATA FROM OLAM, WHICH ON THEIR NEVADA WELL NEVADA RANCH, WHICH IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE AND I THINK REPRESENTS PROBABLY SOME OF THE THE DEEPEST GROUNDWATER WE'VE SEEN SO FAR IN DATA FROM THE SUB BASIN.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT PLAYS INTO THE PICTURE.

THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION THAT, WELL, SHOULDN'T BE USED, THAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SCREEN INTERVAL OR THE TOTAL DEPTH.

BUT I REVIEWED THE DATA FROM THE CHOWCHILLA GSA, AND MOST OF THE WELLS THAT ARE USING FOR DATA DON'T HAVE SCREENED INFORMATION ON THOSE WELLS YET.

THEY'RE STILL USING THAT DATA IN THEIR GSA EVALUATIONS OF GROUNDWATER TRENDS.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO USE ALL REASONABLE DATA AS WE MOVE INTO THIS PUMPING ALLOCATION CALCULATION.

OKAY. LACEY.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A NOTE THAT I.

I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT IDEA TO USE ALL THE ALL THE DATA AND THE ALLOCATIONS.

AND I THINK THE IN A SPIRIT OF BEING TRANSPARENT WITH ALL OF OUR DATA, ALL THAT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA SHOULD ALSO BE SUBMITTED TO WOODARD AND CURRAN.

SO WOODARD AND CURRAN WILL ACCEPT FALL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION READINGS THAT ARE TAKEN IN NOVEMBER AND THE MERCED SIGMA.ORG WEBSITE DOES HAVE THE GUIDELINES FOR HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR FALL OR SPRING.

BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FALL YOUR FALL GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA TO WOODARD AND CURRAN SO THEY CAN REVIEW THAT DATA AND INCLUDE IT IN THEIR WORK IN LOOKING AT GROUNDWATER LEVELS IN THE ANNUAL REPORT THAT'S GOING TO BE SUBMITTED TO DWR IN 2023 OR 2024.

AND SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT ALL THE INFORMATION THAT THIS GSA IS USING IN THEIR ALLOCATION IS ALSO THE SAME INFORMATION THAT WE'RE SUBMITTING TO DWR, AND THAT IS PUBLICLY AVAILABLE AS WELL, AND THAT IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE.

AND ANYBODY CAN, IF THEY WANT TO SHARE THEIR FALL LEVELS WITH THE GSA, WHICH WHICH MAKES MORE DATA, MAKES A BETTER PRODUCT, YOU CAN DO THAT THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF THE GUIDELINES ON THE MERCED SIGMA.ORG WEBSITE.

LACEY. OKAY. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE WEBSITE, BUT IT'S NOT PULLED UP RIGHT NOW FOR US TO SEE DOES ON THE WEBSITE FOR WOODWARD AND CURRAN TO BE ACCEPTED, CAN IT BE INDIVIDUAL OWNERS TAKING THOSE GROUNDWATER LEVELS OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE A THIRD PARTY?

[00:40:02]

NO, THEY'LL ASK WHO TOOK WHO TOOK THE LEVELS? OKAY. AND THEY'RE STILL ACCEPTABLE IF THE OWNER OPERATOR SAYS IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.

BUT THEY NEED TO KNOW CERTAIN INFORMATION, RIGHT? YEAH, THERE'S AN EXCEL DOCUMENT.

AND SO THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION AND THERE'S GUIDELINES ON ON WHAT TO FILL OUT AND HOW TO FILL IT OUT.

BUT YOU CAN SUBMIT THAT.

WELL, I THINK AS AS A BOARD THAT WE NEED TO GIVE STAFF, I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ERIC'S TALKING ABOUT AND WE ALL HAVE ABOUT ADDING MORE DATA, BUT YOU GUYS MORE DIRECTION OF HOW WHAT THOSE RULES ARE.

I MEAN, YOU GO BACK AND SAY HERE WHAT WOULD IN AND THESE ARE THE RULES BUT WE HAVEN'T I KNOW IT'S BEEN A WHILE.

WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THEM RECENTLY.

THEY'RE NOT PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.

AND MAYBE WE NEED TO TALK TO WOODWARD AND KERN ABOUT BEING MORE OPEN.

WHY DOES WOODWARD AND KERN HAVE THAT SET OF RULES? YOU KNOW, IS THERE A WAY OF US GETTING MORE DATA IN THAT WOODWARD AND KERN USES IT FOR THE GSP WITH MAYBE A RULE DOESN'T REALLY FIT FOR OUR AREA.

WHY IS MADERA ABLE TO DO THAT? I MEAN, WHO ARE THEY USING? WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE GOING TO SWITCH FROM WOODWARD AND KERN, BUT ARE THEY USING WOODWARD AND KERN TO AND THEY'RE ACCEPTING DIFFERENT DATA OR.

THESE ARE QUESTIONS I THINK I WAS HOPING TO GET ANSWERED TODAY, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE ENOUGH INFO FROM THIS PRESENTATION TO ANSWER IT TO GIVE YOU GUYS MORE DIRECTION OF WHAT WE WANT TO SEE BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET THIS FIGURED OUT AND PUT IT MOVE PAST THIS TO KEEP ON WORKING TOWARDS THE ALLOCATION.

BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT WELLS EVERY MEETING AND WHICH ONES ARE ACCEPTED, IT'S NOT WORKING FOR US.

SO THE GUIDELINES THAT WOODARD AND KERN HAS POSTED ON THE SIGMA ORG WEBSITE, THEY HAVE BEEN ON THERE SINCE 2019, PROBABLY 2018.

THESE ARE GUIDELINES BASED ON THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FROM DWR, AND THEY WERE AGREED TO BY ALL THE GSA'S IN THE BASIN BACK DURING GSP DEVELOPMENT.

BUT WE CAN WORK WITH ICAI TO BRING THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THAT ARE THAT ARE IN THE GSP FOR MONITORING AND THE GUIDELINES THAT WOODARD AND KERN HAS BACK TO THE BOARD.

SO YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THE GSP SAYS AND WHAT WE'VE AGREED TO IN THE GSP ABOUT MONITORING.

AND JUST A QUICK NOTE ABOUT THE CHOWCHILLA GSP, I KNOW FOR CERTAIN THAT THE STATE WATER BOARD HAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED THEM WHY THEY DON'T HAVE SCREENING INTERVALS AND WHAT THEY CAN DO TO GET THE SCREENING INTERVALS AND THE DEPTH FOR THEIR MONITORING NETWORK.

AND SO WHILE IT MAY BE IN THEIR GSP, THEIR GSP WAS NOT CONSIDERED ADEQUATE.

AND THAT'S ONE PARTICULAR QUESTION THE STATE WATER BOARD HAD TO THEM.

OKAY. GO AHEAD, ERIC.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE WOODARD AND CURRENT UPLOAD, CAN YOU UPLOAD PAST HISTORICAL DATA AS WELL AS CURRENT FALL 2023 DATA? WE CAN TALK TO WOODARD AND KERN ABOUT THAT.

I THINK THE FALL 2023 DATA IS THE DATA THAT THEY USE GOING FORWARD FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT.

I WOULD TALK TO WOODARD AND KERN AND I WOULD ALSO TALK TO ICAI REGARDING OUR ALLOCATION PROCESS, ON WHAT SORT OF HISTORICAL DATA WOULD BE MOST USEFUL.

OKAY. SORRY.

THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS I KNOW SOME OF THIS DATA IS NOT TIED INTO MEAN SEA LEVEL, WHICH IS GOING TO MAKE IT MORE USABLE WITH THE OTHER DATA WE ALREADY HAVE.

SO DO WE HAVE MONEY IN OUR BUDGET SO WE CAN TIE SOME OF THESE POINTS IN, SURVEY THEM TO GET THEM REFERENCED TO MEAN SEA LEVEL? WE WOULD HAVE TO TALK TO ICAI AND WHAT THAT WHAT THAT WOULD COST AND IF THAT WOULD FIT IN THEIR EXISTING BUDGET OR THEN WE WOULD LOOK AT OUR BUDGET.

RIGHT. BUT IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK AT BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT BOARD MEETING IF THE BOARD DIRECTS THAT? WHAT? OH, NO, GO AHEAD.

WELL, YOU GOT.

WELL, I WAS JUST READING THE AGENDA ITEM.

RIGHT. AND IS THERE ANOTHER PART TO THIS THING THAT WE'RE ON? OKAY, SO WE JUMPED THE GUN.

THIS IS PART TWO.

YOU'RE ON. YEAH, YEAH.

THERE'S A PART TWO. I'M GOING TO OPEN PART ONE UP TO THE PUBLIC REAL FAST.

TELL THEM WHAT IT IS.

THE PART ONE IS WHAT WE JUST HEARD FROM CHRIS, I GUESS.

RIGHT. ABOUT THESE 14 WELLS.

AND WHICH ONES? GO AHEAD.

COME ON. COME ON UP. OH, YOUR MIC IS ON.

SO THAT'S REALLY JUST THE STATUS UPDATE ON THOSE CANDIDATE WELLS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, REGARDING THE DISCUSSION ABOUT INCORPORATION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA AS PART OF THE ALLOCATION ANALYSIS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A FOLLOW ON PART OF THIS AGENDA ITEM.

AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S DEFINITELY WORTHWHILE CONVERSATION BECAUSE WE WANT TO LEVERAGE ADDITIONAL DATA TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE AND APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF OR AS PART OF THE ALLOCATION.

[00:45:05]

AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN SOME CASES THERE'S DATA THAT WAS NOT, YOU KNOW, USABLE FOR WHAT WE'VE DONE TO DATE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONE ANALYSIS, FOR EXAMPLE, BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE IT DIDN'T HAVE DATA RECORDS, YOU KNOW, IN THE FOR FALL 2022, FOR EXAMPLE, OR FOR FALL 2015.

SO IT COULDN'T BE USED TO ESTABLISH WHAT THAT CHANGE IS.

OR IN OTHER IN OTHER CASES, YOU KNOW, THE DATA WAS COLLECTED OUTSIDE OF THE SEASONAL, YOU KNOW, TIME PERIODS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A DATA POINT IN JUNE OR JULY THAT DOESN'T FALL INTO THE SPRING OR FALL CATEGORIES. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS USED OR COULD BE USED FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES AS THOSE WERE DEFINED.

HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, THERE'S POTENTIALLY USEFULNESS IN THAT DATA AS WE LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THE AS WE GET INTO THE ALLOCATION ANALYSIS DISCUSSION.

SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S THE.

THANK YOU, CHRIS. THAT'S WHAT WE HEARD AT THE AD HOC IS, YOU KNOW, A DESIRE TO TRY AND WORK OUT SOME PROTOCOLS FOR FOR HOW THAT DATA CAN BE USED APPROPRIATELY.

YEAH. THANK YOU, CHRIS. PUBLIC COMMENT.

COME ON UP. LARKIN HARMAN WITH CLAYTON WATER DISTRICT.

AND I'M ALSO A FARMER.

I'M THE BOTTOM OF THE MAP THERE ON ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MERCED COUNTY.

AND I JUST WANTED TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA.

OUR DISTRICT IS GOING TO TURN IN ALL OF OUR DATA FOR THE GSA.

SO HOPEFULLY GOING FORWARD, WE'LL HAVE GOOD ON A LESS OF A DATA GAP IN OUR AREA.

WE ARE ALL GOOD WITH THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES AS FAR AS THAT GOES.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO SOME OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA, I THINK THAT SOME OF OUR WELL DATA GOT KICKED OUT BECAUSE OF, WELL, OIL ON THE TOP OR ON.

FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE NOTES THERE WAS WATER AROUND THE CASING.

SO KIND OF GETTING TO MR. SWENSON'S POINT, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS.

LIKE, YOU KNOW, OUR WELLS ARE DECADES OLD AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE DRIPPING A LITTLE BIT IN ALL THE TIME, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME OIL IN THERE.

AND THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.

SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO KICK ALL THAT DATA OUT, YOU'RE MISSING A LOT, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE WELLS HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR DECADES.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORICAL DATA THERE.

SO IN OUR LITTLE AREA DOWN THERE ON THE BOTTOM LEFT, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY OUR NEAREST DATA POINT WAS ABOUT FIVE MILES AWAY AFTER THEY SUBTRACTED ALL OF OUR DATA SAYING THAT OUR WELL DATA WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH.

AND SO IT'S A IT'S A WHOLE NOTHER ANIMAL OVER THERE ON 59 AND 152 COMPARED TO WHERE WE ARE ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, ALL OF OUR WELLS.

I SUBMITTED FOUR MORE PIECES OF INFORMATION TO LACEY TODAY ON, YOU KNOW, THERE'S FOUR WELLS JUST RIGHT OFF THE TOP THAT ARE 27FT HIGHER, 22FT HIGHER THAN THEY WERE IN 2015.

YET THE GRAPH THAT THEY HAVE FOR THE AND I'M ONLY SPEAKING ABOVE KIRKLAND CLAY YET, YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING LIKE WE'RE DEPLETING THE GROUNDWATER WE'RE HIGHLY RED AND REALLY I MEAN IF WE COME UP 27.

WE SHOULD BE BLUE ON THE MAP THERE THAT YOU KNOW, AND WE'RE NOT DEPLETING.

BUT IF ALL THOSE WELLS ARE NOT INCLUDED AND THE ONLY WELL IS FIVE MILES AWAY, AND THAT IS DEFINITELY A DEPLETED AREA, YOU KNOW, OUR DATA IS NOT BEING REPRESENTED. SO WE'RE A LITTLE BIT APPREHENSIVE ABOUT NOT INCLUDING THAT STUFF.

AND BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO ALLOCATION TIME, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT COULD REALLY BE MISREPRESENTED AND THEREFORE HAVE A MUCH STRONGER ALLOCATION WHEN WE'RE WHEN WE'RE SUSTAINABLE. SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE JUST A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE FOR THE OIL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

YEAH, I THINK THIS POINT, A LOT OF THE BOARD FEELS THAT SENTIMENT.

SO YEAH. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? COME ON DOWN, GEORGE.

GEORGE PARK LONE TREE MUTUAL WATER COMPANY.

WE SUBMITTED A SUPPLEMENTAL DATA FOR SIX WELLS DOWN IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT, ALL OF WHICH HAD 2015 DATA THROUGH 2021 AND 2022.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BEING THAT WE TRADITIONALLY DO A JANUARY OFF SEASON READING INSTEAD OF A FALL READING.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT DATA INCLUDED.

IT WAS, I THINK, GIVE A VERY GOOD PICTURE OF WHAT THE GROUNDWATER GROUNDWATER THIS IS ALL SUB CORCORAN WAS DOING DURING ALL THAT TIME.

YOU CAN SEE THE RECOVERIES, YOU CAN SEE THE DRAWDOWNS AND WE WILL ALL ALL THIS DATA HAS BEEN COLLECTED BY PROFESSIONAL PUMP TESTER

[00:50:02]

EVERY YEAR.

WE'RE WILLING TO GO GET NOVEMBER READINGS THIS YEAR AND THEN FOLLOW UP WITH OUR TRADITIONAL JANUARY READINGS ON THE SAME WELLS, WHICH MIGHT GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF, YOU KNOW, A FEEL FOR HOW CORRECT THE JANUARY READINGS THAT WE PRESENTED AND FOR THE HISTORICAL HAVE BEEN.

SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE BOARD TO COLLECT ALL THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA THAT THEY CAN TO FLUSH OUT THE VERY SCANT AMOUNT OF INFORMATION WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.

SO THAT'S. THANK YOU.

GEORGE. CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF OFF OF THAT, PLEASE? VICE CHAIR OKAY.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT YOU GUYS MENTIONED WOODWARD AND KEARNS NOVEMBER READINGS.

IS THAT THAT SET IN STONE IN THE GSP? THE FALL READING DWR DETERMINES WHEN THE FALL READINGS ARE.

DWR SAYS IT HAS TO BE NOVEMBER.

I I'M SAYING CAN WE CHECK INTO THAT? BECAUSE JUST FROM I CAN CHECK IN FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT AND AFTER GEORGE SPEAKING, MOST PEOPLE I WOULD TAKE IF I WAS TAKING WINTER READINGS PROBABLY DO IT IN JANUARY WHEN YOU SLOW UP A LITTLE BIT TO AND YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD, IF WE CAN SEE IF THERE'S A WAY WE CAN GET THAT DATA IN WITH WOODWARD AND KERN WITH I CAN CHECK IF THERE'S FLEXIBILITY.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S THREE MONTHS OF FLEXIBILITY.

IF THEY'RE ACCEPTING NOVEMBER READINGS FOR FALL, IF THEY ARE TWO MONTHS, IF THEY WOULD ACCEPT A JANUARY READING AS A FALL READING.

BUT I'LL ASK THESE JUST FROM I THINK FROM A PRACTICALITY STANDPOINT, THERE'S A LOT OF FARMERS.

DECEMBER, JANUARY, THEY SLOW UP.

THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, HAVE TIME TO DO THAT STUFF.

AND IT'S PROBABLY.

ERIC, YOU LOOKED AT GROUNDWATER LEVELS MORE THAN ME, BUT IS THERE THAT MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NOVEMBER AND JANUARY READINGS HISTORICALLY? WELL, I WAS GOING TO I WAS GOING TO SAY TWO THINGS.

NUMBER ONE, HISHAM EL TAL WITH ME, GUZA HAS A COUPLE OF TIMES HE IS PUSHING FOR ACTUALLY MOVING EVERYTHING TO DECEMBER BECAUSE OF THE LATE PUMPING NOW DUE TO DRY CONDITIONS.

OCTOBER. NOVEMBER USED TO BE NON PUMPING SEASONS, BUT OCTOBER NOW IS OFTEN STILL IN YOUR PUMPING SEASON, SO IT'S UNDESIRABLE TO HAVE THE DATA THEN.

SO HISHAM HAS BEEN PUSHING FOR US TO MOVE IT TO DECEMBER.

NOW ONE THING WE DO HAVE IS WE HAVE TWO SETS OF WELLS ABOVE AND BELOW THE CORCORAN IN THAT GENERAL AREA OF LONE TREE THAT MID HAS BEEN COLLECTING, I THINK, HOURLY DATA FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS.

SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE EXCELLENT DATA TO KIND OF OFFSET THE JANUARY DATA BACK TO OCTOBER, NOVEMBER AND HAVE SOME IDEA WHAT THAT DIFFERENCE IS, EVEN WITHOUT TAKING DATA THIS YEAR.

OKAY. YEAH.

I JUST FEEL WE NEED TO MAKE THIS WORK FOR US AND NOT, YOU KNOW, UNLESS IT'S SET IN STONE.

I MEAN, WORK FOR US, BUT WHERE IT'S PRACTICAL.

BUT, I MEAN, WE NEED MORE DATA IN HERE BECAUSE FIVE MILES APART, EVEN WHAT ERIC WAS SAYING, THE FROM LONE TREE TO WHERE THE MID WELL IS THAT STILL A COUPLE MILES AWAY. TWO AND A HALF.

THREE FROM THE NEAREST ONE.

AND SO IF WE CAN GET THIS DATA IN, WE GOT TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT A WAY OF GETTING THIS DATA IN WHERE IT'S STILL USABLE IN OUR GSP PLAN.

SO IF I UNDERSTAND THIS WHOLE THING AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE SECOND PART OF THIS AGENDA ITEM.

BUT SO THE THE ISSUE IS INDIVIDUALS HAVE WELL, DATA, BUT THE WELL DATA NEEDS TO GO TO WOODWARD AND CURRAN TO BE PUT IN THE MODEL TO TO BE USABLE.

YEAH. IT'S NOT PUT IN THE MODEL WOODARD AND CURRAN I GUESS THEY USE A SOFTWARE PROGRAM TO CREATE THE CONTOURS FOR SPRING MEASUREMENTS AND FALL MEASUREMENTS FOR THE ANNUAL REPORT.

OKAY. AND THEY USE WHAT THEY HAVE DATA FOR THAT.

YOU KNOW, THE JIM WELLS WHAT'S OUR MONITORING NETWORK? OTHER WELLS THAT THE STATE MAY MONITOR AND POST THOSE MEASUREMENTS ON THE SIGMA MAPPING INFORMATION.

BUT IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FROM GROWERS, IT IT WOULD BE USEFUL TO HAVE THAT.

LIKE I SAID, THERE ARE GUIDELINES THAT WE ALSO WANT TO MEET TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DATA THAT WE'RE COLLECTING IS OF THE SAME STANDARDS AND THE SAME QUALITY AS WHAT WE HAVE IN A MONITORING WELL.

SO YOU WANT TO COLLECT YOUR DATA MAYBE WHEN THE PUMP IS NOT RUNNING AND WHEN IT HAS BEEN OFF IT.

OUR GSP IS 48 HOURS HAS BEEN OFF FOR 48 HOURS.

AND SO THERE YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME THAT THOSE ARE THE RESTRICTIONS THAT MAKE IT HARD TO USE PRODUCTION WELLS IN OUR MONITORING NETWORK, WHICH WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

AND IT'S WHY WE'RE LOOKING FOR EXISTING WELLS THAT THAT AREN'T PRODUCTION WELLS.

SO WE'RE NOT ASKING GROWERS TO TURN OFF THEIR WELLS FOR 48 HOURS TO TAKE SOME OF THESE READINGS.

[00:55:03]

OKAY. BUT YEAH, ALL RIGHT.

WITH EVERYONE'S PERMISSION, I'M GOING TO MOVE MY SPEEDY MEETING ALONG AND MOVE TO THE SECOND HALF OF EIGHT.

WELL, WE'LL GET THERE.

WE'LL KNOW WE'LL GET THERE.

AND LACEY. YOU'LL BE DOING THE SECOND HALF? YES. OKAY. OH, THANK YOU, CHRIS.

AND IF YOU CAN STOP SHARING.

EXCELLENT. AND WHILE LACEY IS BRINGING UP THE SHARING DEAL, I THINK ONE THING WE'RE HAVING A GOOD DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS TODAY, BUT WE HAVE TO REMEMBER IS WE SIX MONTHS, A YEAR AGO DID PUT A CALL OUT FOR ALL THIS DATA AND NOT EVERYBODY WAS OPEN TO SHARING IT UNTIL WE CAME THROUGH WITH THIS STUFF.

SO, I MEAN, SOME OF THIS WE ARE BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL BECAUSE PEOPLE DID NOT UNDERSTAND OR WANT TO REALIZE HOW SERIOUS THIS DATA IS.

SO WE ARE ASKING STAFF TO DO A LOT RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY'VE ALREADY ASKED FOR THIS.

AND WE AS A GSA PROBABLY DIDN'T COME THROUGH WITH AS WELL AS WE SHOULD HAVE.

SO THAT IS PUTTING STAFF BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL ON THIS.

AND I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT NOW THAT SOME OF THESE MAPS ARE BECOMING PUBLIC, I THINK STAKEHOLDERS, LANDOWNERS ARE SEEING THE VALUE OF SHARING THEIR INFORMATION WHEN THEY SEE THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE TO RELY ON IS NOT AS ADEQUATE AS AS THEY WOULD LIKE.

SO ALONG VERY SIMILAR LINES, THERE.

SO ONCE THE EKG COMPLETED THAT INSTRUMENTATION THAT CHRIS JUST TALKED ABOUT, OF THE SEVEN WELLS, WE SHARED THAT DATA WITH WOODARD AND CURRAN, WHO DRAFTED OUR DATA GAPS PLAN.

AND REMEMBER, IN ONE OF THE EARLIER SLIDES THAT CHRIS SHOWED, IT SHOWED THE DATA GAPS WHEN WE WERE IDENTIFYING THESE CANDIDATE WELLS.

SO WE REQUESTED THAT WOODARD AND CURRAN RUN A NEW SCENARIO SPECIFICALLY FOR THE MERCED SUBBASIN GSA TO SEE WHERE THE DATA GAPS WOULD SHIFT.

SHOULD THESE ALL OF THESE SEVEN WELLS BECOME PART OF THE MONITORING NETWORK? WE AREN'T AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDING THEM INTO THE MONITORING NETWORK TODAY UNTIL WE START MONITORING THEM FOR SOME TIME.

AND WE'RE ASSURED THAT THE DATA WE GET FROM THESE WELLS IS ACCURATE.

SO THERE ARE SEVERAL ASSUMPTIONS THAT WOODARD AND CURRAN MADE WHILE RUNNING THE NEW DATA GAPS ANALYSIS SCENARIO.

AND THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY AN OFFICIAL RERUN OF THE DATA GAPS PLAN.

THIS IS JUST A SCENARIO FOR THE MERCED SUBBASIN GSA.

MAINLY, THEY TAKE MANY OF THE WELLS THAT ARE IN THE NETWORK RECENTLY INSTRUMENTED OR POTENTIAL NETWORK WELLS OR EVEN SOME OF THAT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA THAT WE HAD ALSO SHARED WITH WOODARD AND CURRAN.

WE TAKE A LOT OF THAT AND ASSUME THAT THEY'RE ALL PART OF THE NETWORK FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ANALYSIS.

A CAVEAT HERE IS THAT ANY ACTIONS THAT MUSA OR TURNER ISLAND WATER DISTRICT GSA HAD TAKEN TO FILL THEIR DATA GAPS ARE NOT REFLECTED IN OUR SCENARIO.

SO THE DATA GAPS COULD SHIFT WHEN INCORPORATING ANY OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORING GSA'S ACTIVITIES AS WELL.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE THREE MAPS HERE, THE DATA GAPS DO SHIFT IN THE BELOW AND THE BELOW ABOVE.

CORCORAN CLAY AND IN THE OUTSIDE OF THE CORCORAN CLAY, THEY ARE REDUCED, WHICH DECREASES THE AREA OF UNCERTAINTY THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED OUTSIDE OF THE CORCORAN CLAY. IN THESE MAPS, THE COLORS SHOW THE PRIORITIZED ACTION FOR FILLING DATA GAPS.

THE DARK BLUE IS THE LOWEST PRIORITY AND OTHER COLORS INCREASE IN PRIORITY.

SOME OF THE AREAS THAT SHOW A HIGH PRIORITY ARE BECAUSE THE ANALYSIS RECOGNIZES THAT FILLING AND ABOVE THE CORCORAN CLAY DATA GAP ALSO COINCIDES WITH FILLING A BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY DATA GAP, WHICH INCREASES THAT PRIORITY BECAUSE TWO DATA GAPS CAN BE FILLED WITH ONE MULTI COMPLETION WELL.

SO YOU'LL SEE IN THE ABOVE CORCORAN CLAY MAP WE HAVE HERE SOME OF THESE CIRCLES THAT SHOW A HIGHER PRIORITY IF WE JUST JUMP DOWN TO BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY, THOSE ARE DATA GAPS BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY AS WELL.

SO THEY'RE A HIGHER PRIORITY BECAUSE IF YOU PUT A WELL IN THERE, YOU CAN HIT TWO OF YOUR DATA GAPS AT ONCE.

SO HERE'S YOUR BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY AND THEN OF COURSE YOU'RE OUTSIDE OF THE CORCORAN CLAY AT THIS TIME THE MERCED BASIN HAS GRANT FUNDING TO INSTALL FOUR MONITORING WELLS AND WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES TO DWR FOR ADDITIONAL WELL INSTALLATIONS.

THE TSF SUPPORT IS WHERE DWR COMES IN AND INSTALLS THE WELL.

IT'S NOT GRANT FUNDING, IT'S THEM ACTUALLY DOING THE INSTALLATIONS.

WE'RE EAGER TO START INSTALLING WELLS AND FILLING THESE DATA GAPS.

AND SO THE REQUEST HERE IS FOR BOARD TO DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE OTHER GSA'S IN THE BASIN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH INSTALLING WELLS AND SUBMITTING THE

[01:00:01]

APPLICATION FOR NEW WELL INSTALLATIONS TO FILL THESE GAPS.

ALSO KNOWING THAT THE EXACT LOCATIONS COULD SHIFT DUE TO ACTIVITIES TAKEN BY THE OTHER GSA'S AVAILABLE LOCATION AND WILLING LANDOWNERS FOR WELL INSTALLATIONS AND THE PRIORITIZATION OF SURFACE WATER, GROUNDWATER INTERACTION MONITORING THAT IS ALSO GOING TO BE REQUIRED IN THE FIVE YEAR UPDATE.

AND THEN I ALSO. I'M AWARE OF CONVERSATIONS THAT THIS BOARD HAS HAD AND THAT OTHER COMMITTEES HAVE HAD IDENTIFYING HIGHER PRIORITIES SUCH AS THE BELOW THE CORCORAN CLAY UP HERE IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE BASIN AND THEN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BASIN OUTSIDE OF THE CORCORAN CLAY, THAT THOSE IN THE PAST AT THE BOARD HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS HIGH PRIORITIES FOR THE BOARD.

AND SO THE REQUEST HERE IS FOR THE BOARD TO GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD WITH TRYING TO SPEND OUR GRANT FUNDING AND SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION IN ORDER TO GET OUR DATA GAPS FILLED.

OF COURSE, THE GRANT FUNDING AND THE APPLICATION, WE WILL SUBMIT ALL OUR DATA GAPS TO DWR, BUT WITHOUT THEM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WILL FILL ALL OF THE DATA GAPS.

AND SO WE'RE ALSO VERY OPEN TO CONTINUING TO IDENTIFY EXISTING WELLS, WHICH COULD SAVE THE GSA THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO FILL IN SOME OF THESE DATA GAPS.

AND THEN BEYOND THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD ON DRILLING NEW WELLS THEMSELVES AND USING GSA DOLLARS TO DRILL NEW WELLS IN THE FUTURE.

BUT AT THIS TIME, STAFF'S RECOMMENDING WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR GRANT FUNDING, WE MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES, AND WE CONTINUE LOOKING FOR EXISTING WELLS.

OKAY, SO WHERE EXACTLY ON THE MAP ARE THE FOUR WELLS YOU'RE PROPOSING? WE REQUEST FUNDING TO DRILL.

SO THOSE FOUR WELLS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALL THREE GSA'S IN THE BASIN.

AND SO I DON'T I DON'T HAVE AN IDENTIFICATION RIGHT NOW OF WHERE THOSE FOUR WELLS ARE.

LIKE I MENTIONED BEFORE, I HAVE HEARD CLEARLY FROM THE BOARD THAT THAT THIS DATA GAP DOWN HERE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER IS A HIGH PRIORITY, THAT THE NORTHWEST CORNER IS A HIGH PRIORITY.

AND THEN WE DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE THERE IS MORE PUMPING HERE IN THESE AREAS THAT I THINK ARE A HIGH PRIORITY.

ALSO, THE GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER INTERACTION ALONG THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER HERE IS GOING TO BE A HIGH PRIORITY FOR THE FIVE YEAR UPDATE DATA. I'M SORRY, THE DELTA-MENDOTA BASIN HAS ALREADY CONTACTED THE MERCED BASIN AND WE'VE MET WITH THEM SHARING THE WELLS THAT THEY ARE INSTALLING ALONG THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER FOR GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER INTERACTION.

AND SO THERE'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE AN INTEREST BETWEEN THE THREE GSA'S ON HAVING SOME SORT OF MONITORING ALONG THAT RIVER AS WELL. SO I'M STILL A LITTLE CONFUSED.

SO DO WE GET TO PICK FOUR OR MIA GUZA, TURNER ISLAND AND THE MERCED SUBBASIN ALL THREE SHARING THOSE FOUR SITES? ALL THREE ARE SHARING THOSE FOUR SITES.

IT'S BASIN WIDE GRANT FUNDING AND IT SHOULD BE A TOPIC THAT THE COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING THAT IS SCHEDULED FOR MONDAY.

OKAY. IS THERE ANY GRANT FUNDING AVAILABLE TO UPGRADE THE SUPPLEMENTAL? WELL, INFORMATION TO MAKE IT MEET THE STANDARD.

SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT GRANT FUNDING.

I DO KNOW THAT THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES OFFERED BY DWR, THERE IS A A BACKLOG OF DRILLING WELLS, BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S A BACKLOG QUITE AS MUCH OF VIDEO LOGGING WELLS.

SO IF WE NEED TO COLLECT SOME OF THAT SCREENING INFORMATION AND DO A VIDEO THAT WE PROBABLY COULD CUT A LITTLE BIT EARLIER IN LINE AND GET THAT DONE IN WELLS THAT THAT WE IDENTIFY THAT AS A NEED FOR AND WE COULD USE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THAT.

OKAY. OKAY, GREAT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE I OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? OKAY. WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? I'M PREDICTING A COUPLE OF MOTIONS HERE, SO I'M LOOKING FOR A COUPLE OF MOTIONS.

I MOVE THAT WE SUPPORT THE DECISION TO MOVE AHEAD WITH REQUESTING FOR SUPPLEMENTAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS BE

[01:05:02]

REQUESTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH TURNER ISLAND, GSA AND MEDUSA.

GSA. SECOND, THAT MOTION DIRECTOR SWENSON SECOND BY GALLO.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE? AYE. AYE.

ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN.

MOTION CARRIES.

THAT MOTION INCLUDED THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES, RIGHT? YEAH, THAT'S FINE.

SO, OKAY, ANYTHING ELSE YOU GUYS WANT TO TALK ABOUT IN REGARDS TO THIS? WELL, I THINK GOING FORWARD, WHETHER IT'S AT THE STRATEGIC AD HOC, THE NEXT ONE OR AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING, I'D LIKE TO SEE FROM STAFF THOSE WELLS THAT WERE PRESENTED FOR ADDITIONAL DATA, LIKE WE MENTIONED IN PUBLIC ABOUT GEORGE'S.

THEY WERE JANUARY WHY THEY'RE NOT ACCEPTED OR STAFF FEELS THAT WOODWARD AND KERN WOULD NOT ACCEPT THEM.

AND IF THEY'RE TO GO OVER THEN A PLAN WHAT WE CAN DO TO MITIGATE THAT.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY REQUIREMENT THAT WE MEET.

WOODARD AND CURRENT STANDARD FOR WORK THAT'S ONLY WITHIN THE MERCED SUBBASIN GSA.

I THINK WE CAN FOR ALLOCATION PURPOSES.

THE OTHER GSA'S ARE NOT PROVIDING INPUT ON WHETHER OR NOT OUR ALLOCATION SCHEDULE IS IS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

SO I THINK WE CAN HAVE A DIFFERENT DATA STANDARD JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF CALCULATING GROUNDWATER ALLOCATIONS THAN THE STANDARD THAT WOODARD AND CURRAN APPLIES TO DATA THEY WANT TO USE FOR THE CONTOUR PRESENTATION IN THE REPORTS AND FORWARD TO DWR.

I'M NOT EVEN TOTALLY CLEAR THAT THE CONTOUR DATA IS WHAT WOULD REALLY BE USED TO GENERATE ALLOCATIONS WITHIN EACH OF THE STAINLESS SUSTAINABILITY ZONES. SO IT MIGHT HELP IF WOODARD I MEAN, IF EQI WOULD PRESENT TO THE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE, THE GENERAL STRATEGY AND APPROACH TO DEVELOPING THE ALLOCATION LEVELS AND WHAT DATA WILL BE USED TO MAKE THOSE CALCULATIONS.

WELL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF AND ECI TO DEVELOP, TO GO OVER WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT, DEVELOP THE PROTOCOLS FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA, AND TO GO OVER WITH THE STRATEGIC AD HOC, THE WELLS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, SUBMITTED FOR SUPPLEMENTAL DATA, AND TO HAVE IT BROUGHT BACK TO OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING WITH AN ACTION ITEM FOR THE BOARD, HOPEFULLY TO APPROVE WHAT THE PROTOCOLS WILL BE MOVING FORWARD AND WITH DIRECTION THIS.

KENWORTHY BUT DIRECTION FROM STAFF EXACTLY.

WOODWARD AND KERN NEEDS TO SEE AND WHETHER WE NEED TO FOLLOW THAT OR WE CAN HAVE OUR OWN SET OF RULES.

I THINK WE NEED TO TALK TO LEGAL COUNSEL ABOUT THAT, TOO.

COMING UP, OUR OWN PERSONAL SET OF RULES VERSUS THE GSA.

WHAT'S IN THE GSP FOR THE ALLOCATION? TO SUMMARIZE THE MOTION TO GIVE STAFF DIRECTION TO GO OVER THIS, DEVELOP PROTOCOLS, TO DEVELOP PROTOCOLS, TO INCORPORATE SUPPLEMENTAL DATA, AND TO HAVE IT AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING COME UP AS AN ACTION ITEM AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING SO WE CAN GET THIS SOLVED BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH AN ALLOCATION PROCESS.

YEAH. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. WE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION AND A SECOND.

DIRECTOR SWENSON.

ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED.

SAY NAY. OKAY.

MOTION CARRIES.

UM, IS THERE ANY ELSE WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN THAT AGENDA? ITEM? LACEY. OKAY, VERY GOOD.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO NUMBER NINE STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT.

[9. STRATEGIC PLANNING AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT]

WHO HAS THE PLEASURE? ALL RIGHT. I GOT NOMINATED TO DO THIS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS WANT ME TO DO IT AFTER THAT MOTION TOOK TWO MINUTES, BUT BASICALLY WE WENT OVER EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN SEVEN AND EIGHT.

SO THERE REALLY IS NOT MUCH MORE TO REPORT ON THAT BECAUSE THAT TOOK UP THE WHOLE MEETING.

WE DID.

AD IF EVERYBODY IS PART OF THE PACKET FROM OUR JANUARY AND MARCH DEAL, SORRY, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY WE SHOULD JUST SINCE PEOPLE ARE HAVING QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY ZONES AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THEM, WE DID GAVE THE GUIDELINES THAT WE HAD MOVING.

OH, SORRY, LACEY GO AHEAD.

I DON'T WANT TO INTERRUPT YOU.

JUST WANT TO FOR YOU AND THE PUBLIC, THE GUIDELINES THAT YOU INCLUDED IN THE PACKET WERE FROM JANUARY AND WE MADE PAPER COPIES AVAILABLE FOR YOU AND THE PUBLIC OF THE MARCH GUIDELINES, WHICH IS THE MORE UPDATED VERSION.

BUT THE MARCH GUIDELINES THEN ARE THE ONES WE WENT OVER LAST BUT JUST NATIVE VERSUS OPTING IN, NATIVE JUST KIND OF AND OTHER STUFF ABOUT IRRIGATED LANDS AND THE FIVE YEAR ROLLING BUCKETS JUST SO PEOPLE HAVE A REMINDER WHEN THEY'VE ASKED SOME PEOPLE HAVE ASKED ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY ZONES, WHAT IS WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR ALLOCATION AND STUFF AND WHAT LAND THEY HAVE GOING, WHERE.

[01:10:04]

THIS IS JUST KIND OF THE GUIDELINES THAT WE'VE HAD ARE THE GUIDELINES WE HAVE THAT WE'RE WORKING PRINCIPLES RIGHT NOW.

SO WE JUST PUT THAT IN THE PACKET.

SO IF PEOPLE HAD ANY QUESTIONS, THEY CAN REFRESH THEIR MEMORY ABOUT WHAT WE WENT OVER IN MARCH AND THAT'S IT.

GREAT. ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMITTEE? NOPE. OKAY.

STAFF REPORTS.

[10. STAFF REPORT]

JUST ONE BIT OF GOOD NEWS FOR YOU GUYS.

EARLIER THIS WEEK, THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES RELEASED THE FINAL AWARDS FOR THE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION.

ROUND TWO GRANT AND THE MERCED SUBBASIN HAD SUBMITTED AN $18 MILLION APPLICATION TO THIS ROUND, AND WE WERE AWARDED 3.419 MILLION FOR THE G RANCH GROUNDWATER RECHARGE, HABITAT ENHANCEMENT AND FLOODPLAIN EXPANSION PROJECT AND THE BEAR CREEK RANCH, GROUNDWATER RECHARGE AND LAND REPURPOSING PROJECT.

THESE PROJECTS ARE BOTH LOCATED WITHIN THE MERCED SUBBASIN, GSA AND THE MERCED BASIN IS THE ONLY CRITICALLY OVERDRAFT BASIN TO RECEIVE ANY FUNDING DURING THIS ROUND, WHICH I THINK WAS GREAT NEWS FOR THE GSA.

FANTASTIC. YEAH.

[11. BOARD REPORTS]

BOARD REPORTS START TO MY LEFT, MR. GALLO. WELL, IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT. THAT THE TEMPORARY PERMITS THAT WE APPLIED FOR TO PUMP WATER DURING THE WINTER.

DURING FLOOD STAGES.

EITHER DON'T SEEM TO BE MOVING FORWARD OR THERE I GUESS YOU'D SAY RED TAPE THAT THAT CAN'T THAT WE CAN'T SEEM TO GET BY ACCORDING TO MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT WHO'S KIND OF LEADING THIS EFFORT.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S THERE ARE TWO BILLS WHICH ARE MEANT TO FIX THIS PROBLEM SO THAT WE CAN RECEIVE SOME OF THOSE FLOOD WATERS.

AND ONE OF THEM IS BY MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT, AND ONE OF THEM IS BY THE GOVERNOR GOVERNOR'S OFFICE.

SO I GUESS IT'S MY SUGGESTION THAT WE SHOULD INVITE SOMEONE FROM MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT TO COME IN AND INFORM US AS TO WHAT WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE AND WHAT THE BILLS SAY SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE TO PUT OUR SUPPORT BEHIND ONE OF THEM.

OTHERWISE, IT LOOKS AS THOUGH WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY OF THOSE FLOOD WATERS.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MIKE.

GINO, ANY UPDATE? ANY REPORT? NO, THANK YOU. I'VE ALREADY TALKED ENOUGH TODAY.

ALL RIGHT. MR. SWENSON.

SAME. THANK YOU.

YEAH, VERY GOOD.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS OCTOBER 12TH, AND I'M GOING TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.