HydroVisions | June 2020 by HydroVisions

VOLUME TWENTY NINE JUNE 2020

V.29

2020 Summer Issue

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

HYDROVISIONS is the official publication of the Groundwater Resources Association of California (GRA). GRAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mailing address is 700 R Street. Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95811. Any questions or comments concerning this publication should be directed to the newsletter editor at editor@grac. org or faxed to (916) 231-2141. The Groundwater Resources Association of California is dedicated to resource management that protects and improves groundwater supply and quality through education and technical leadership Editor John McHugh editor@grac.org Editorial Board Adam Hutchinson David Von Aspern Tim Parker Executive Officers President Abigail Madrone West Yost Associates Tel: 530-756-5905 Vice-President R.T. Van Valer Roscoe Moss Company Tel: 323-263-4111 Secretary John McHugh Consulting Hydrogeologist Tel: 510-459-0474 Treasurer Rodney Fricke GEI Tel: 916-631-4500 Officer in Charge of Special Projects Christy Kennedy Woodward & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122 Immediate Past President Steven Phillips U.S. Geological Survey Tel: 916-278-3002 Administrative Director Sarah Erck GRA Tel: 916-446-3626

Directors Bradley Herrema Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Tel: 310-500-4609 James Strandberg Woodard & Curran Tel: 925-627-4122 Rob Gailey Consulting Hydrogeologist Tel: 415-407-8407 Murray Einarson Haley & Aldrich, Inc. Tel: 530-752-1130 Lisa Porta Montgomery & Associates Tel: 916-661-8389 Bill DeBoer Montgomery & Associates Tel: 925-212-1630 John Xiong Haley & Aldrich, Inc. Tel: 714-371-1800 John Van Vlear Newmeyer & Dillon Tel: 949-271-7127 Lyndsey Bloxom Water Replenishment District of Southern CA Tel: 562-9210-5521 To contact any GRA Officer or Director by email, go to www.grac.org/board-of-directors

The statements and opinions expressed in GRAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s HydroVisions and other publications are those of the authors and/or contributors, and are not necessarily those of the GRA, its Board of Directors, or its members. Further, GRA makes no claims, promises, or guarantees about the absolute accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the contents of this publication and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions in the contents. No warranty of any kind, implied or expressed, or statutory, is given with respect to the contents of this publication or its references to other resources. Reference in this publication to any specific commercial products, processes, or services, or the use of any trade, firm, or corporation name is for the information and convenience of the public, and does not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the GRA, its Board of Directors, or its members.

2 HYDROVISIONS

2020 Summer Issue

V.29

SUMMER 2020

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

PRESIDENTâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S MESSAGE ABIGAIL MADRONE

Abigail Madrone, Business Development Director with West Yost. Throughout her 19-year career, Abigail has served and supported groundwater and water resources management through groundwater monitoring and analysis, project and program management and public outreach and education.

We are stronger together, and we will move GRA forward together. As we continue to experience a myriad of changes in our daily lives, our mission remains the same. We are dedicated to resource management that protects and improves groundwater supply and quality through education and technical leadership. We continue to lead the way in curating informative, timely and inspiring events. We support our members and the dedicated water resource professionals and leaders that are responsible for ensuring the sustainability and resilience of our water system. Our members come first! To maintain our commitment to our members, we became even more agile and flexible; we learned to pivot. Within days we converted a variety of in-person events to fully virtual conferences and meetings. We celebrate our ability as an organization to quickly adapt to disruptions and provide continuity to our members. We applaud our members and affiliates for believing in our vision of sustainable groundwater for all and for supporting GRA.

4 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Message

PFAs Week, held on April 27-29, 2020, our first fully virtual conference, was a success. From the impressive keynote speaker, Robert A. Billot, the attorney who helped inspire the film Dark Waters, to the well moderated sessions, speakers and amazing sponsors, we all gained a heightened understanding and awareness to the broader issues, challenges and opportunities surrounding PFAs. We commend Murray Einarson, event chair and Director, Christy Kennedy, Events, Education and Affiliates Committee Chair and Director, as well as the dedicated planning team for making it happen. We also invite you to join us virtually on June 10-11, 2020 for the Third Annual GSA Summit, to celebrate another significant milestone, the first round of Groundwater Sustainability Plan, GSP, submittals. Our event chair and Director, Lisa Porta, with support from an amazing team organized a unique opportunity and virtual meeting space to exchange information, ideas and best practices for successful GSP development and implementation. As we gear up for our marquee event, the Western Groundwater Congress, WGC 2020, expect a star-studded line-up of innovative and inspirational speakers to keep you on the cutting edge of groundwater management, monitoring, modeling and remediation. Our event chair, R.T. Van Valer, Vice President and Director, with a creative group of volunteers is working around the clock to ensure that GRA brings the glamour back groundwater as GRA Goes Hollywood for our third annual WGC (now virtual), in September 2020. Visit our website grac.org, engage with us on social media or check your inbox for upcoming announcements and details on these and other great events. Stay informed to the latest developments and technology though GRACasts and short courses to help advance your career. We are grateful for you, our members, sponsors, affiliates, volunteers and leaders. We are stronger together, and we will move GRA forward together.

- Abigail Madrone, 2020 GRA President

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

JOHN LAMBIE Mr. John Lambie, PG, CEG, PE, CWRE has been practicing in groundwater hydrology and water resources planning since 1984 and leading E-PUR LLC since 2006. He is a certified water rights examiner in addition to being an expert in conceptual, practical and quantitative geohydrology. By John Lambie, Chair; Panel Moderators, Michael Bombard and Matt Kennedy; and, Session Chairs Anona Dutton, Edwin Lin, and Joe Zilles

MEASUREMENTS, MANAGEMENT, AND APPLICATIONS in Monterey, California, March 2020 The conference program was engaging and educational for technical experts and water managers alike on the needs for, and ways to monitor groundwater and analyze its conditions. By all accounts we were successful in both educating and professional networking and did it in a beautiful setting on the Monterey Bay! The top 5 Goals for the conference were to help attendees with: (1) Better water management decisions (2) Better water management planning (3) Measuring what they Manage, and Managing what they Measure (4) Learning what they actually may want to measure (5) Learning ways to assess what is actually happening based on data and data analysis Roughly 100 attendees were treated to current thinking around these issues: artificial intelligence, water quality standards enforcement, data curation and collaboration, new tools and techniques for measurement, and novel datadriven analysis in the opening plenary session. Opening Panel “Curating Groundwater Data to Make it Accurate, Accessible, Useful and Used” Moderator Mike Bombard, GHD, Inc. This initial panel discussion offered attendees an overview of the importance of curating groundwater data to allow the user greater access and enhance the efficiency of using the data. Jon Turner, ddms Inc., led off the panel with a discussion of the methods employed at ddms, when collecting, storing, maintaining, and managing data and how to access, visualize and analyze the data once integrated. He also discussed the costs associated 6 HYDROVISIONS

Optimization of Remediation

SUMMARY OF GRA’S CONFERENCE ON GROUNDWATER MONITORING

SUMMER 2020

Groundwater Monitoring 2020 SUMMER

with proper or improper data curation. The on-deck panelist, Dan Berne, Ag Gateway, presented on the use of a data exchange standard for agricultural irrigation. The discussion centered on the Precision Ag Irrigation Language (PAIL) project and its use in bringing together many disparate types of data in the agricultural sector. Gary Darling, California Department of Water Resources, batted cleanup with his presentation on implementation steps around the Open and Transparent Water Data Act (AB 1755). The Act has six required protocols: data sharing, quality control, open source programs, documentation, public access and decision support tools and will lead to accessible and open data communities. The pictures in Gary’s presentation (he took them) were spectacular. The panel concluded with a lively Q&A session led by the moderator and then a Q&A with attendees to the panel. Measurements of Aquifer and Groundwater Conditions Session Chair: Anona Dutton, EKI Environment & Water, Inc. The session covered three different types of groundwater system measurements and their application. Dr. Chin Man Mok, GSI Environmental, first presented Groundwater Flow Measurement Comparisons in Fractured Media, which included a very technical discussion on a variety of methods used to directly and in-directly measure aquifer and groundwater flow rates in fractured media. Michael Milczarek, GeoSystems Analysis then presented on Assessing and Monitoring Groundwater Quality Effects from the Conversion of Agriculture Fields into Managed Aquifer Recharge Areas. He presented data that showed that managed aquifer recharge projects tend to increase constituent concentrations in underlying groundwater in the near-term as the vadose zone is being flushed, but result in improved groundwater quality over the long-term as long as the recharge project is actively managed. Angela Schroeter, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, then presented on the Board’s Domestic Well Program, which provides free well testing for domestic well owners and identified that significant numbers of domestic wells produce unsafe drinking water and the Board’s potential next steps.

HYDROVISIONS

Data Collection, Management, and Curation Session Chair: Edwin Lin, Todd Groundwater This session presented several innovative approaches and technologies used across California to automate data acquisition, provide real-time visualization and analysis, support online data management and access, and facilitate report preparation. Gavin Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Leary, Provost & Pritchard, presented on the approaches used to aggregate, manage, share, and present groundwater information. Mr. Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Leary shared lessons learned and practical solutions from the Delta-Mendota Subbasin to address common issues, including lack of data standardization and documentation across agencies, variability in data management skillsets, and disparate timing and scales of monitoring data. Katherine Heidel, Tetra Tech, presented on the application of a customizable data acquisition and database management system developed by TetraTech called EnDAR (Environmental Database for Acquisition and Reporting). Ms. Heidel described the real-world application of EnDAR at investigation sites to facilitate analysis, reporting, and visualization of monitoring data. Brad Gooch, UC Davis/Larry Walker Associates, presented on his work automating the collection, management, and reporting of field data as part of the GSP development process in Siskiyou County using a telemetered groundwater monitoring network and field app. Mr. Gooch discussed the promising application of an open-source data management system to improve stakeholder outreach, centralize data storage, improve work product reproducibility, and improve GSP update preparation efficiency. Staffan Schorr and Michael Levengood, Montgomery & Associates, discussed the application of their HydroData Database Management system to provide data access to stakeholders and interested parties in the Salinas Valley, where they are assisting the Salinas Valley Basin GSA in development of GSPs for five subbasins.

8 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Groundwater Monitoring 2020 SUMMER

SGMA Panel “Solutions for Monitoring Groundwater Use at Field- or Tract-Scale to Support SGMA Implementation” Moderator: Matt Kennedy, President, AquaShares Inc This panel focused on different solutions to monitor groundwater use at fieldor tract-scale to enable groundwater agencies to better achieve sustainability under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Brent Vanderburgh, a geologist with the SWRCB, led off the discussion by explaining the differences between consumptive use and extracted water measurements and then how a basin’s hydrology and geologic structure can influence or affect the ideal measurement solution. Greg Allen, REDtrac, described their company’s web platform supporting multiple methods for uploading measured groundwater use and level, and in particular emphasized benefits of groundwater flow meters in a range of applications. Forrest Melton, a scientific lead at NASA for OpenET, described that program’s approach of aggregating and comparing other remote sensing data sets to arrive at a best range of consumptive water use values at the field level. Joseph Fillingham, Wellntel, provided an overview of how data aggregation from multiple measurement sources (e.g. meters, ET solutions) can generate useful views of groundwater use and levels for the basin or for more granular regions to aid in assessing performance against measurable objectives and minimum thresholds. After prepared remarks, the group offered more information on selected case studies and debated pros/cons of their different solutions in a lively moderated session led by Matt Kennedy, and the group fielded questions from audience members to address specific issues. Developments for Groundwater Monitoring Networks Session Chair: Joe Zilles, Kleinfelder, Inc. The session was “well” rounded with three great presentations. Chris Hewes, Woodard & Curran presented on a unique and well-developed tiering tool to enable an efficient decision-making process for assessing wells, while Raghavendra Surbhatla, Intera presented on the data collection and integration methods for a high-resolution MAR assessment. Brian Partington of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California, provided the details and nuances for developing and implementing a deep nested monitoring well program. The three presentations came together well (ouch!) to provide the audience a comprehensive roadmap of planning and implementing a groundwater monitoring-well network.

HYDROVISIONS

This curated dialogue provided attendees insights into how to develop groundwater monitoring programs to define groundwater conditions to existing standard(s) on quantity or quality. Dr. Randall Ryti, Neptune & Co. led off by describing statistical thinking and planning on monitoring contaminated groundwater or suspected chemical release sites, and related how his experience with the Interstate Technologies Research Council (ITRC) and in the RCRA/CERCLA realm provides guideposts. Anna Garcia of Mojave Water Agency presented on water quantification monitoring for groundwater in storage and groundwater interacting with ephemeral surface water in the adjudicated Mojave Subbasin(s). Till Angermann, Luhdorff and Scalmanini described the challenges of managing to metrics on the Central Valley RWQCB’s Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) and their General Dairy Order for the Central Valley. He relayed how they evolved from the “expected” cause and effect to assumed management actions and their presumed benefits, to a much more data-driven approach to performance improvement. The collective panel then engaged in a dialogue on: • what constitutes a “sufficient” monitoring network and how to test for it? • how testing sufficiency varies depending on project phase (i.e. “problem” detection vs. “corrective” actions)? • what it takes to define an “effect”? • and, how did monitoring data help with regulatory enforcement issues and the existing standards? A good Q&A session with conference attendees followed.

10 HYDROVISIONS

Optimization of Remediation

Compliance Panel “Measuring to Metrics for Better Decisions and Outcomes” Moderator: John Lambie, E-PUR LLC

SUMMER 2020

Groundwater Monitoring

S&P

Well Design & Rehab

M&M

Whether it is well redevelopment

R&P

and rehabilitation, or the design of

WDR

new facilities and pump stations, West Yost designs to your needs.

CM ASR

DAVIS • CARLSBAD • IRVINE • PLEASANTON SACRAMENTO • SANTA ROSA • WALNUT CREEK

we are water 2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

THE GEOCHEMISTâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S GALLERY

WILLIAM E. (BILL) MOTZER William E. (Bill) Motzer, PHD, PG, CHG, is a somewhat retired Forensic Geochemist

Perflouoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) continued In my last column (Spring 2020 HydroVisions), I discussed some PFAS chemical characteristics, use history, environmental impacts, and toxicity. GRA recently held an excellent three-day PFAS virtual conference (April 27-29, 2020) moderated by Murry Einarson. There were 15 speakers, with 14 PowerPoint presentations, and almost 100 attendees from California and other states. The speakers focused on issues covering PFAS litigation, regulatory requirements, groundwater analytical data, geographic distributions from California regional and local water districts and agencies, and remediation technologies. Although the presentations were very informative, there wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t anything covering groundwater sample collection protocols. These are extremely important because PFAS contamination is so ubiquitous in the environment and the two U.S. EPA Methods for drinking water (533 and 537.1) measure PFAS in the nanogram per liter (ng/L) or parts per trillion range. Therefore, contamination from sources other than groundwater are likely if care is not taken in sampling. To avoid false positives from outside sources, sampling protocols have been established centering about environmental laboratories who perform these analyses. In my California Section American Chemical Society June 2019 Vortex newsletter (www.calacs.org), I outlined some laboratory recommendations [e.g., no write-inthe-rain notebooks, no sun block or insect repellent, no sharpie markers and even some ball point ink pens (pencils are ok), etc.]. 12 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

The Geochemist’s Gallery 2020 SUMMER

However, last year’s Vortex protocol article is now somewhat dated because of newer published information. Recommended protocols are described in a California State Water Resources Control Board (SWQCB) PFAS sampling document that contains some interesting and beneficial sampling recommendations [Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Sampling Guidelines, March 2019, at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/pfas/]. Note that the emphasis is on recommendations and not requirements, because there are no current U.S. EPA PFAS sampling requirements. Another document, for sampling importance, is the National Ground Water Association’s (NGWA) guidance document on sampling recommendations: Groundwater and PFAS: State of the Knowledge and Practice Field Sampling and Analysis, Section 5. This document can be obtained at: https://www.ngwa.org/what-is-groundwater/ groundwater-issues/Groundwater-and-PFAS. I believe that it’s free for NGWA members but costs $150 for nonmembers. However, there have been many changes and updates since my Vortex article, and I’ve summarized them as follows: Clothing: Avoid waterproof or stain-treated clothing (e.g., rain gear and other field clothing coated with Gore-TexTM and/or linings containing fluoropolymers). Use instead clothing made of synthetic or natural fibers (cotton preferred). Field clothes should be laundered at least six times prior to field use. Avoid liquid fabric softeners and dryer sheets. Gloves: Avoid nitrile gloves specified for use in EPA Method 533. Use instead nitrile powderless gloves as outlined in the Department of Defense (DoD) 2016 Environmental Data Quality Workgroup (EDQW). Equipment Decontamination: Avoid using Decon 90TM detergent. Instead use AlconoxTM or Liquinox®. Other substances/materials to avoid at least 24 hours prior to sampling: 1. Sun blocks and insect repellents: many may contain PFAS. Use instead those with 100 percent natural ingredients. 2. Cosmetics, moisturizers, soaps, and hand creams: many contain surfactants with PFAS. Therefore, avoid using prior to sampling. For bathing/showering use a natural soap that does not contain moisturizers. I recommend reading the label and if there are any included fragrances, avoid using. 3. Food and drink: Fast food and other packaging may contain PFAS as a protectant for oil and grease leakage. This is particularly true for pizza boxes and microwave popcorn bags. Therefore, no food or drink should be allowed on site during sampling. Thoroughly wash hands after consumption of any fast food or pizza.

HYDROVISIONS

1. Use laboratory provided precleaned containers. Labs use ethanol to clean any equipment to ensure that it is PFAS free. Labs should supply a trip blank. 2. Use a separate cooler dedicated only for PFAS samples. 3. No blue ice. Double bag water ice in large Ziplock® (sealable) bags. 4. Ziplock® (sealable) bag all collected PFAS sample containers. 5. Sampling order: PFAS samples should be collected first even before VOCs. 6. If adding an equipment blank make certain that water is PFAS free (e.g., distilled/deionized water from a known source). Some of my own recommendations, based on sampling experience and some recent research papers (e.g., Bartlett, S.A., and Davis, K.L., 2018, Evaluating PFAS Cross Contamination Issues: Remediation, v.28, pp.53-57) while sampling: 1. Avoid using/handling electronics such as I-phones or laptops because their plastics may contain PFAS as a fire retardant. 2. Don’t use duct tape (and I’m beginning to wonder about clear ScotchTM shipping tape) to seal coolers.

The Geochemist

Probably the best source for sampling recommendations is by directly contacting the California ELAP (Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program) PFAS laboratory for their sampling requirements and recommendations (see: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/ certlic/labs/.). These labs have done considerable investigations, including their own sampling and analysis, for many PFAS substances. Additional laboratory recommendations include:

3. Avoid using ski or other (e.g., automobile) waxes prior to sampling as these may contain PFAS to enhance their hydrophobic characteristics. Thoroughly wash hands after use. 4. Don’t sample in the rain. The 24-hour rule for avoiding known PFAS-containing substances prior to sampling is probably prudent. Because PFAS are detected and measured in the ng/L range, are so ubiquitous, and very persistent, they may linger long after PFAS-containing substances have been used. And we still don’t know and/ or understand the transport and fate for many PFAS. Remember that a false analytical positive because of external contamination may require expensive resampling and analyses.

14 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

The Geochemist’s Gallery 2020 SUMMER

Finally, there may also be problems with TeflonTMcontaining dedicated well pumps, tubing, pipe wrap, etc. However, if PFAS have not been detected after such wells and pumps were installed, then they’re probably ok. In his remarks on the PFAS conference Murry Einarson concluded (and I’m paraphrasing) that PFAS in 21st Century California groundwater may be equivalent to the current coronavirus pandemic. As groundwater scientists and engineers who protect groundwater, we must do our best that this does not occur.

HYDROVISIONS

ORANGE COUNTY WATER DISTRICT COMMISSIONS NATION’S LARGEST PFAS PILOT GAC/IX TESTING PROGRAM CHRISTINE PHAM Christine Pham is a Research Scientist with the Orange County Water District who manages projects focused on optimizing groundwater recharge operations at OCWD’s Forebay Recharge Facility in Anaheim

Evaluation of Treatment Technologies to Remove PFAS from Groundwater The Orange County Water District was established in 1933 as a special district responsible for managing and protecting the quantity and quality of the Orange County Groundwater Basin underlying north and central Orange County. This groundwater resource provides approximately 450,000 acre-feet/year of drinking water, which is about 75 percent of the region’s water supply, to 19 municipal and special water districts that serve approximately 2.5 million residents. Recently, per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a family of manmade chemicals commonly used in military and industrial applications, was detected at low concentrations in the groundwater. As the California’s Division of Drinking Water (DDW) just 16 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

PFAS Pilot GAC/IX Testing

established its latest Notification and Response Levels for two per-and polyfluoroalkyl- substances (PFAS) chemicals, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic (PFOS), approximately 70 out of 200 drinking water wells are impacted (i.e., exceed the Response Level for PFOA). Thus, some water retailers in the OCWD service area have transitioned to alternative supplies (imported water) and/or blending strategies to meet the state’s recommended level of PFAS until treatment can be implemented. To help its retail agencies explore long-term solutions to restore the local groundwater supply and meet these new standards, OCWD commissioned a pilot treatment system to test granular activated carbon (GAC), ion exchange (IX) resins, and novel adsorbents. To OCWD’s knowledge this is the nation’s largest pilot program with respect to the number of products tested: 8 GAC, 4 IX, and 2 novel adsorbents. Approximately $1.4 million is being invested by OCWD to conduct this pilot work and related study. OCWD selected Jacobs to review treatment technologies, develop a test plan and conduct laboratory testing, and support the pilot design. The pilot system was constructed at OCWD’s Forebay Recharge Facility in Anaheim. It draws feedwater that has low concentrations of PFAS from an OCWD-well near OCWD’s Warner Basin (recharge basin). The pilot, provided by Evoqua Water Technologies, consists of fourteen columns (ranging 1.0-1.5 meters in length, and inner diameter ranging 5.0-7.6 centimeters), each to test the PFAS-removal performance of a different adsorbent product. The various GAC, IX, or novel adsorbent products are provided by Cabot Corporation, Calgon Carbon Corporation, Evoqua Water Technologies, ECT2, Jacobi Carbons, Purolite, Cetco Minerals Technologies, and CycloPure. The GAC products are bituminous (both virgin and reactivated), lignite, and enhanced coconutshell based products; the IX resins are single-use anion exchange media; and the novel adsorbents include both mined and manufactured products just emerging on the market. Concurrent with and complementary to the pilot testing at the Forebay Recharge Facility, laboratory testing of the same GAC and novel adsorbent products is being completed to address the local groundwater’s potentially diverse water quality and geochemistry. This entails rapid small-scale column testing (RSSCT) using standard methods to evaluate the performance of eight of the same GAC products being evaluated in the pilot. The RSSCT is being conducted for groundwater from each of nine impacted water retailers as well as for the same feed water supplying the pilot system. RSSCT uses benchscale columns to simulate full scale treatment and can be used to model and predict full scale performance. This approach yields relatively fast results (within weeks, compared to months with pilot-scale columns), requires less source water, and produces less waste. The results of the pilot-scale and bench-scale systems will be compared and used together to make treatment product recommendations for each water retailer. Additionally, OCWD selected Carollo for pre-design engineering work to conduct a regional planning study and enable rapid implementation at fullscale. Design of the full-scale treatment systems is now underway for several water retailers with the goal of bringing treatment systems online within two years.

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

TED ASCH RYAN ALWARD Ted Asch, Ph.D., P.Gp. Ted Asch is a Research Geophysicist with Aqua Geo Frameworks, LLC and has conducted geophysical investigations in the air, on land, and at the bottom of oceans around the world for almost 40 years. Ryan Alward, PG, CHG Ryan is a Senior Hydrogeologist/Project Manager with Jacobs and has worked on private- and public- sector water resources projects throughout California for the last 14 years.

Recharge

THE USE OF AIRBORNE GEOPHYSICAL MAPPING FOR WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

The Use of Airborne Geophysical Mapping for Water Resource Management We are experiencing exciting times in the groundwater resource management industry in California. Since the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) passed in 2014, the entire industry in California has accelerated through technological advances and public awareness. It was just a few short years ago that well logs were still private information that required permission from the Department of Water Resources or well owners to access for our hydrogeology projects. Now in 2020, well logs are available whenever we need them as are many robust datasets throughout the state, published for everyone one to use, and the SGMA Data Viewer is brimming with useful multidisciplinary datasets.Â As consultants and water managers, we have to adapt to this new way by embracing the digital age and rapid innovation. The use of geophysics for groundwater resource management is now standing in the spotlight by being able to cost-effectively gather very large and dense datasets relatively quickly using all-terrain vehicles, boats, and aircraft.

18 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Airborne Geophysical Mapping 2020 SUMMER

This short note is a high-level introduction to the use of Airborne Electromagnetic (AEM) geophysics for water resources projects and provides some considerations that need to be made prior to deciding to conduct an AEM investigation. The California Department of Water Resources in their 2019 Proposition 68 Projects Update (https://water. ca.gov/Programs/Groundwater-Management/ Data-and-Tools) announced funding will be used to perform statewide AEM surveys to generate a coarsegrid subsurface map that will provide informative aquifer data to GSAs and could be the basis for closely spaced flight paths between the coarse grid in the future by local stakeholders. The closely spaced flight lines provide detailed subsurface data that can be used to map aquifers, identify possible recharge areas, estimate ground water in storage, identify Managed Aquifer Recharge sites, site future well locations and much more. Why Use Geophysics? Water resources professionals are involved in interesting and challenging groundwater and surface water projects of which many concern the subsurface. California is full of surprises for those of us that try to gather subsurface data for any number of projects including: well design, monitoring network design, recharge basin siting, groundwater/ surface water relationships or groundwater modeling. The primary methods for gathering subsurface data is the use of one of the many boring techniques that only provide data in one vertical column at a discrete location. Boring investigations provide very high-quality physical data but can be expensive and drilling in the wrong location can lead to very costly projects that are designed on a fairly limited dataset.

HYDROVISIONS

The geophysical method described below allows one to gather an extensive dataset over a large area fairly quickly without trespass using airborne techniques to assist with developing a basin characterization. These datasets can easily be modeled in three-dimensions (3D) and provide a high-definition view of the subsurface. We are not advocating to replace borings with geophysics but are suggesting that these 3D models can be used to inform drilling investigations as to the best locations for siting boreholes. This is an efficient and cost-effective method so the money spent on the borehole investigation is used to gather the most useful data for our subsurface characterization projects. The use of geophysics is just one more tool in the hydrogeologistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s toolbox. Important Information needed prior to doing geophysics Hydrogeology is much more complicated than what can be described solely by borehole information. Densely measured geophysical data do not provide as detailed vertical resolution compared to data from boreholes at a specific location. However, geophysical coverage across an entire basin provides the local water managers with information impossible to achieve by drilling alone such as: the delineation of the aquifers, the connectivity between aquifers, and possible occurrence of saline and brackish water.Â When selecting different geophysical methods, it is important to consider the spatial extent of the project, hydrogeological settings, any features within the project site that can cause interference with the geophysical tools, the desired and achievable depth of investigation, and the resolution of the data that are required. The choice of geophysical methods depends on the desired depth of investigation and the size of the area to be investigated. The use of AEM requires a large area to be surveyed (at least 1 section) in order to bring the costs down to a reasonable range. Project size is typically discussed using the metric of line-kilometers or miles. A minimum-sized-project would be in the range of 450500 line-kilometers (277 to 309 line-miles). Although the cost seems high for Airborne geophysics it is the least expensive option when compared to ground or borehole geophysics over large areas surveyed for a project which often cost ~$10 dollars per acre. The Airborne Electromagnetic method of geophysics provides a virtual bore hole approximately every 25 feet along the flight line depending on system set up. 20 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Airborne Geophysical Mapping 2020 SUMMER

Airborne Electromagnetics The AEM technique for water resources management has been used for years worldwide. Recently there have been several projects in California that have used AEM, most notably the Stanford Groundwater Architecture Project (GAP) led by Dr. Rosemary Knight at Stanford University. The technology has been proven to be a successful method for developing an improved understanding of basin scale hydrogeology when AEM and other data sources such as borehole lithology and geophysical logs, water quality data, and groundwater model information are combined. The Stanford GAP is scheduled to be completed in October 2020 and has been funded by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Danish Environmental Protection Agency (MUDP), and local agencies consisting of Indian Wells Valley Water District, County of San Luis Obispo and Butte County. The Stanford GAP is creating a standard framework for using AEM data and multi-point statistics to develop hydrogeologic conceptual models that can be used by Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in their Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs). Data have already been gathered in the Indian Wells Valley, Kaweah and Marina Coast Water Districts, Butte and Glenn counties, and the Paso Robles basin. The use of AEM allows researchers to gather basin-wide datasets within a couple of days of flying. The geophysical data are then combined with existing geological information and borehole information from driller’s logs. The project results, are the development of a three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework that shows the location, thickness, and distribution of aquifers and less permeable layers. The 2019 Proposition 68 Projects Update indicates that soon, possibly by the end of 2020, that DWR will be selecting a contractor to assist DWR with planning, collecting, and reporting aquifer data for the AEM surveys project.

HYDROVISIONS

GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT IN THE WEST – PART 5: NEW MEXICO DAVID JORDAN David Jordan has over 30 years of experience in water resources management in the western states including water planning, groundwater supply, quantitative hydrogeology, groundwater modeling, basin-scale recharge, conceptual water budgets, and GIS/remote sensing. David leads the Water Resources Line of Business for INTERA Incorporated and is based in Albuquerque, NM.

In this fifth article in our series on water management in the West, we visit New Mexico to learn about water rights law, and its exceptions and limitations. “Beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and the limit of the right to use water.” Article XVI, Section 3, New Mexico Constitution Water in New Mexico belongs to the public and is subject to appropriation for beneficial use. Beneficial use in New Mexico generally means irrigation, municipal, domestic, commercial, or industrial use. It is uncommon for water rights to be used to augment instream flows, but it has occurred. The State has developed the Strategic Water Reserve program, which seeks to acquire surface water rights from willing sellers to create additional environmental flows. PRIOR APPROPRIATION New Mexico subscribes to the doctrine of prior appropriation, which is predicated upon the concept of seniority of the right to use water. “Priority of appropriation shall give the better right” (New Mexico Constitution). That is, the first user to appropriate water from a source has the first right to use water from that 22 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Groundwater Management 2020 SUMMER

source during times of shortage. In theory, others who seek to appropriate from that source must ensure that senior water right holders can take their share first. In practice, at least in New Mexico, the doctrine of prior appropriation leads to many difficulties since municipalities are often junior to irrigators, and it would be untenable to cut off junior municipal water rights which supply drinking water to municipalities. Junior rights are often groundwater rights, and seniors are often surface water rights. Curtailing junior groundwater rights may have little immediate beneficial effect on senior surface water rights. ADMINISTRATION BY THE STATE ENGINEER Water in New Mexico is administered by the State Engineer, who has the power to grant permits to appropriate surface and groundwater. Only someone with a permit, or with a water right that originated prior to State Engineer jurisdiction can use water, and those rights are considered private property. Water-right holders can change the point of diversion (for example the location where groundwater is pumped or the location where surface water is diverted), the place of use, or the purpose of use (for example changing from irrigation to municipal supply) of a water right, but such changes must be approved by the State Engineer after evaluation of the potential impairment of other water rights. Water rights can be forfeited by abandonment, although in practice this rarely occurs. Declaration of Groundwater Subject to Administration The State Engineer gains jurisdiction over groundwater in an area by declaring that area to be part of an Underground Water Basin. All of the lands in New Mexico are now part of one of these Underground Water Basins, but this was not always the case, and thus many basins are characterized by the presence of prebasin water rights, which were developed prior to the declaration of the basin. The State Engineer has less authority over these pre-basin water rights. A declared groundwater basin is an area of the state proclaimed by the State Engineer to be underlying by a groundwater source having reasonably ascertainable boundaries. By such proclamation, the State Engineer assumes jurisdiction over the appropriation and use of groundwater from the source. There is one specific type of groundwater that is not administered by the State Engineer, deep brackish groundwater in aquifers whose top is at least 2,500 feet below ground surface with a salinity of at least 1,000 parts per million total dissolved solids. This legislation was originally enacted to ensure that produced water from oil and gas operations would not be subject to administration by the State Engineer. In more recent times, as fresh water has become scarcer and more expensive to develop, some users have begun to develop deep brackish groundwater. While a State Engineer permit is not required to develop deep brackish groundwater, the user must present a rigorous case to the State Engineer that pumping of the deep brackish groundwater will not impact other freshwater water-right holders. In cases where potential impacts have been shown, typically via numerical modeling, the State Engineer has required offsets to be purchased, if for example it was shown that a small amount of stream depletion may be expected to occur.

HYDROVISIONS

Adjudication of Water Rights Water rights in New Mexico are established through a formal adjudication process. One of the great challenges of water management in New Mexico is that there are many areas that have not been adjudicated yet. For example, the Middle Rio Grande Basin, home to New Mexicoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest city, Albuquerque, and the most densely populated area of the state, remains unadjudicated. Figure 1 presents an overview of basins where adjudication has been completed or is underway. Clearly there is much work to be done with respect to adjudication. PUEBLO WATER RIGHTS A particularly vexing aspect of water management in New Mexico is the lack of quantification of Native American water rights. Water rights of the native Pueblo people were recognized by both Spain and Mexico long before New Mexico was a state. The courts today recognize that the Puebloâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s water rights are independent of New Mexico water law. While there have been several water rights settlements that have quantified Native American water rights, there remains large areas of the State where such Pueblo water rights have not yet been quantified, not the least of which is the Middle Rio Grande Basin referenced above. INTERSTATE COORDINATION New Mexico is a signatory to no less than eight interstate stream compacts, whereby the State is required to deliver a specified amount of flow to the downstream state. These compacts are administered primarily by the Interstate Stream Commission, a sister agency to the Office of the State Engineer. Interstate stream compacts can place significant constraints on water use in a basin. For example, to continue to meet the Pecos River Compact with Texas, the State of New Mexico spent nearly $100 million to purchase and retire irrigated lands, including lands within the Carlsbad Irrigation District, the most downstream senior water-right holder on the stream system in New Mexico. This action was necessary for the State of New Mexico to continue to meet its compact delivery requirements to Texas.

24 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Groundwater Management 2020 SUMMER

CONJUCTIVE WATER MANAGEMENT – COMPARISON TO CALIFORNIA The State Engineer of New Mexico recognizes the importance of surface and groundwater interaction and manages the State’s waters conjunctively. When an application for a new groundwater diversion is made, the State Engineer always considers potential stream depletions that may arise from the new groundwater appropriation. If the State Engineer determines that there will be stream depletions as a result of the new groundwater appropriation, the appropriator may be required to acquire surface water rights to offset the stream depletions. In some cases, for example a municipality who pumps groundwater, some of these offsets may be realized by returning treated wastewater flows back into the stream or river. Unlike New Mexico, California treats surface water and groundwater using separate administrative frameworks. However, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires that groundwater shall be managed to avoid the “Undesirable Result” described as “depletions of interconnected surface water that have significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water.” SGMA also includes specific requirements to identify and consider potential impacts to groundwater dependent ecosystems in managing groundwater. In this manner, California has taken some important first steps towards conjunctive management of its waters.

HYDROVISIONS

Wells and Words DAVID W. ABBOTT Mr. Abbott, P.G., C.Hg., is a Geologist with 45+ years of applied experience in the exploration and development of groundwater supplies; well location services; installation and design of water supply wells; watershed studies; contamination investigations; geotechnical and groundwater problem solving; and protection of groundwater resources.

Paying Tribute to a Water Well or ‘Bragging About Poor Wells’ The initiative for this specific topic for Wells and Words is based on an article written in 2000 by my mentor John B. Noble (JBN), retired owner of Robinson & Noble, Inc. (R&N), Tacoma, WA (www.robinson-noble.com). His original article first appeared in the R&N newsletter Groundwater Reflections under the heading of Nobles Notes (Jan. Feb. Mar., Vol. 1 Issue 2) - A quarterly look at some of the challenges and issues facing the groundwater community. I have borrowed liberally from the original article (identified where appropriate with single quotes to capture the JBN spirit and simplicity). On a more personal note, I owe my professional career to JBN and R&N who taught me (a recent BS Geology graduate ’74) the applied foundations of groundwater and wells between Sept. 1974 and April 1981. Founded in 1947, R&N, a legacy groundwater firm, specializes in hydrogeologic, geotechnical, and environmental consulting services throughout Washington State and the Pacific Northwest. Often times I hear a client or drilling contractor ‘brag’ about how fast a well ‘recovers’ after a pumping (drawdown) test – JBN heard this too. Recovery1 is the rise in water level in a well that occurs when discharge from that well (or a nearby well) is stopped. It is the inverse of drawdown which is the lowering of the water level in a well as a result of withdrawal (i.e., pumping). 1 Italicized words are definitions from the American Geological Institute, 1998, Glossary of Hydrology, AGI, Alexandria, VA, 248p.

26 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Wells and Words

For an ideal aquifer-system, the time-recovery period and time-drawdown period2 curves should be mirror images of each other. If the well is pumped X-hours (hrs.) then the water level should return to essentially the pre-pumping static water level (SWL) in X-hrs. if no aquifer boundaries were encountered by the cone of depression. The cone of depression is a depression in the potentiometric surface of a body of groundwater that has the shape of an inverted cone and develops around a well from which water is being withdrawn. There are many hydrogeologic and legitimate situations in which the curves don’t match when the cone of depression intercepts a boundary. For example: a recharge boundary - an aquifer-system boundary (i.e., a lake or stream) that contributes water to a pumped aquifer - recovery time is less than pumping time; and a barrier boundary – an aquifer system boundary represented by a rock mass that is not a source of water – recovery time is greater than pumping time (also referred to as groundwater “mining”) (See Figure 1 on next page). A special recharge boundary is referred to as the leaky aquifer-system where the confining beds of the artesian-system conduct significant quantities of water into (or out of) the aquifer as the radius of the cone of depression expands. A particularly unusual recovery response is caused not by the aquifer-system but by the well itself. This type of recovery ‘signals that the well is inefficient and requires additional development time’ and, possibly, more aggressive development methods. This type of well behavior is too rapid to account for common and efficient well hydraulics. For example3, if a well was pumped at 100 gallons per minute (gpm) with a net drawdown (dd) of 80 feet (ft) after 2 hrs of pumping and recovery took 2 minutes (min) to return to the SWL; the recovery well performance would be described as ‘instant’ or ‘back to static in 2 minutes’ or the ‘water level snapped right back’. Something is amiss here. The computed specific capacity4 (SC) of this particular well is 1.25 gpm per ft of dd at 2 hrs. (100 gpm ÷ 80 ft @ 2 hrs). ‘This well produced all that the client needed’ at 50 gpm. However, upon further examination, the well was deemed inefficient because recovery was too fast; Why? Assume that the well is 8-inch diameter with a volume of about 2.6 gallons (gal) of water per linear ft of casing; having a volume of water removed/stored in the casing of about 200 gal (80 ft × 2.6 gal/ft). This means that the recovery rate was 100 gpm (200 gal ÷ 2 min); the same rate that the well was pumped. During recovery the rate of recovery should be less than 100 gpm because there is a decrease in hydraulic gradient (head difference or pressure) between the outside and inside of the casing; another way of saying this is ‘a decreasing pressure drive between water in the formation (fm) and water in the well’. Darcy’s law describes the flow of water through a porous media; the velocity of the flow through a unit area is directly proportional to the hydraulic gradient normal to that area. ‘The water level should have risen less than 80 ft in the 2 min after pumping stopped if the water level in the fm outside the well had been keeping pace with the water level in the well. This observation points to well inefficiency’. 2 Abbott, David W., Winter 2006, Pumping Tests: Drawdown/recovery data in the pumping well, GRA HydroVisions, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 4 and 15. 3 This hypothetical example is from the original JBN text; I have added the parenthetical equations. 4 Abbott, David W., Summer 2005, How is the yield or productivity of a well judged?, GRA HydroVisions, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 5 and 26.

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

If the water level in the fm immediately outside the well casing was only depressed 10 ft rather than 80 ft. The 70 ft head difference between the inside and outside of the casing was needed to ‘squeeze water’ into the well during pumping according to Darcy’s law. ‘In the simplest terms, the well was only 12.5% efficient’ (10 ft of dd in the fm ÷ 80 ft of dd in the well). ‘If this had been recognized, the well contractor (or the owner) would not be bragging about a great well; but, instead, the well would be a candidate for a lot more work’. The improved well, if brought to 80% efficiency (like 10 ft of dd in fm ÷ 12.5 ft of dd in well), might have a specific SC of 8 gpm/ft (100 ÷ 12.5 ft of dd in the well) and a potential yield of as much as 640 gpm when subjected to 80 ft of dd. Todd5 (1980; see page 159) offers a general comment: “if a pump is shut off after 1 hr. of pumping and 90% or more of the dd is recovered after 5 min, it can be concluded that the well is unacceptably inefficient.” 5

Todd, David K., 1980, Groundwater Hydrology (second Edition), John Wiley & Sons, NY, 535p.

Figure 1: 24-hour Pumping Test on Well A 0 5 10

Incomplete recovery ≈ 2.69 feet

Drawdown in feet

15 20

Drawdown Period

Recovery Period

25 30 35

Well A (March 2020) Q ≈ 0.82 gpm SWL = 25.43 feet TOC Geology: Gneiss overlying granite

40 45 50

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Elapsed Time since pumping began in minutes

28 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

Wells and Words 2020 SUMMER

The ‘trick to determining well efficiency is to calculate (determine) what the water level immediately outside the well casing’ which is unaffected by near-well flow fields. This is done usually by ‘measuring water levels in an array of nearby observation wells’. These observation wells rarely exist and hydrogeologists are usually stuck with measuring water levels only in the pumping well. Improving well efficiency with re-development can be a very ‘subjective choice but can be further weighed against the savings in extra energy costs to lift the water from 50 ft’ rather than from 12.5 ft6. JBN once explained to me that when you ask a client “How much water is needed?”; the commonest answer is ‘all you can get’. Which begs the question and the must followup: “How much do you actually need?” or “What is the purpose and planned use of the well?” This allows a better refinement of the first question to avoid ‘giving the client more than he wished for’ and features for a cost-efficient well design so that the correct and resourceful drilling program for the project can be presented to the client. 6 Abbott, David W., Summer 2016, The nexus between energy and water wells – Why well development matters, GRA HydroVisions, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 12 and 13.

HYDROVISIONS

The Groundwater Resources Association is comprised of a diverse group of experts in the groundwater industry and related fields. GRA unites these experts through collaboration, education and networking in an effort toward ensuring sustainable groundwater for all. WE ARE GRA!

Erik Cadaret is a Hydrogeologist at Water Systems Consulting, Inc. in Laguna Hills, CA. I am Erik Cadaret and I am GRA! I landed up at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF) for my undergraduate studies by a recommendation from a friend’s father who owns a local environmental consulting firm. He suggested I work with Dr. W Richard Laton and Dr. John Foster. I had the privilege to work with these two wonderful people academically and professionally while at CSUF. In 2013, I obtained my bachelor’s degree in Geological Sciences from CSUF and immediately transitioned to the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) where I pursued a master’s degree in Hydrogeology working with top-notch researchers at UNR, Desert Research Institute, the United States Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service, and the Bureau of Land Management. At UNR, I discovered how vast the field of hydrological sciences and the geological sciences truly is, how much potential this career path can provide if you seize the opportunities that come your way, and you can make a tangible positive impact on others in almost everything you do. While in graduate school, I helped establish relationships and a class that provides students at UNR with a direct connection with the Washoe County School District so that these students may volunteer their time in the classroom as tutors and teaching aids while also fulfilling their desire to give back to the next generation. In addition, with the support of my thesis advisors, friends, and family, I was able to also publish two papers as lead author on my research while finishing up my thesis and recently as a professional, co-author a third. Seize the opportunities that come your way and there are people in your corner who want to support you! If you would have asked me if I knew much about GRA back in 2018, I would have told you no, but I was curious to learn more. If you ask me now, I will tell you that I was truly missing out on what GRA has to offer, especially for students and young professionals and I wish I had been more involved earlier. I was at the Groundwater Week Conference hosted by the National Ground Water Association in December of 2018. I met Joe Fillingham with WelIntel, Inc. and he invited me to learn more about their online dashboard and a networking opportunity with free drinks and snacks in their hotel suite. While there, I happened to meet GRA Board Member Christy Kennedy. I started blabbing on about all kinds of things and GRA came up. I mentioned that I just recently rejoined GRA and I will be a part of the southern California branch leadership team. We clicked and next thing I know, I was invited to be a part of the GRA Funzies Committee (i.e. Western Groundwater Congress Planning Committee). My level of involvement with GRA since then continues to grow and I have enjoyed every minute of it. I have been to a lot of different conferences where I had a lot of fun networking and learning, but when I attended the GRA WGC for the first time in 2019, I flew back with a BIG smile on my face and I tell people to this day that GRA WGC was the most fun and energizing conference I have attended. Why? Simple, GRA is special. GRA has something to offer everyone. GRA opens doors and presents opportunities that are fulfilling and rewarding. GRA is full of great people who support each other. I am GRA means…seize the opportunities that come your way and GRA is there to support you! Cheers! 30 HYDROVISIONS

SUMMER 2020

2020 SUMMER

HYDROVISIONS

R.T. VAN VALER R.T. Van Valer is the Director of Human Resources for Roscoe Moss Company, was the 2018 WGC Chair and also coaches basketball at his alma mater La Canada High School

LIGHTS, WEB-CAMERA, ACTION! For the last 10 years, I have loved attending GRA events! In addition to the incredible educational experience GRA has provided, I enjoy spending time with my friends in the groundwater community as well as meeting new industry leaders and up-and-comers. However, the current health and safety issues of our GRA community are much too important to be overlooked. So, with mixed emotions we must announce our plan to transition the 2020 Western Groundwater Congress from an in-person event to a virtual conference. So, what can you expect?

32 HYDROVISIONS

Recharge Project

THE WGC GOES TO HOLLYWOOD â&#x20AC;ŚVIRTUALLY!

SUMMER 2020

WGC Goes to Hollywood 2020 SUMMER

This will not be another Zoom Call with a bunch of talking heads. I wonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t let that happen! Our starstudded line-up of innovative and inspirational speakers will be found in multiple virtual ballrooms, which you can easily transition in and out of, so you can stay on the cutting edge of groundwater management, monitoring, modeling, and remediation throughout the conference. I envision a virtual tradeshow/exhibit hall for our incredible sponsors and exhibitors to prominently display and promote their outstanding companies. Without you none of this would be possible. The WGC has always tried to provide great networking opportunities and virtually, we will make that a reality. Using virtual bars and reception areas, the possibilities are endless for networking with attendees from all over the world! And that is just the beginning. What do you think? I know we have some of the smartest and most innovative members anywhere, so if you have some ideas to make this the best virtual conference EVER, send them my wayâ&#x20AC;Ś rtvanvaler@roscoemoss.com. I would love to hear from you. You can also stay up to date on all the great things we will be doing with the 2020 WGC by checking out our website. Finally, as the event chair and Vice President of GRA you have my word I will work tirelessly with our amazing team of volunteers to ensure we provide an incredible 2020 Western Groundwater Congress! Thank you for everything you do and your continued support of The Groundwater Resources Association of California.

HYDROVISIONS

GRA BRANCH UPDATES SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA BRANCH BILL DEBOER, BRANCH PRESIDENT

Branch Highlights

The San Francisco Bay Area branch, like the rest of GRA, has been forced to cancel recent events due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We had a successful February meeting with a wonderful presentation by Lawrence Livermore Lab Isotope Hydrologist Amanda Deinhart, titled ‘New Approaches to Sustainable Water Management’. Sadly, our March meeting with Julie Haas from the Department of Water Resources and our April GRA/AEG student night were both canceled, and we are not making immediate plans for future in-person events. We hope our branch members are well and encourage you to continue supporting GRA through online conferences and GRACast events.

34 HYDROVISIONS

As many of our regulars know, Scott’s Seafood in Jack London Square (https://scottsjls.com/) has been our exclusive venue for the past few years. I am delighted to report that your Bay Area branch officers and our affiliates at Northern California PEMA (http://ncalpema.org/index.html) have unanimously approved and submitted a cash donation to Scott’s Catering Services to support their catering staff. We are proud to support our venue in their time of need and look forward to hosting events there again when it is appropriate to do so. Until then, please contact branch President Bill DeBoer at bdeboer@elmontgomery.com with any questions. Stay safe and continue to watch for GRA updates. We’re still here!

SUMMER 2020

HYDROVISIONS ADVERTISING & ARTICLE SPECIFICATIONS

Logo & Ad Specs: Your ad must be in the requested dimensions (no rotating) and sent as a 300dpi PDF. You must send your logo in an EPS or AI vector format with outlined fonts. If you do not have an EPS version of your logo, please ensure what you send is a high-resolution transparent PDF. Logos pulled from websites are not suitable for printing. Design or logo questions? Contact David Garrison, GRA Creative Director at dgarrison@smithmooreassoc.com Vertical Ad: 4.25w X 11h Full Page Ad: 8.5w X 11h Do you need help designing your ad? GRA is happy to help in designing a simple ad for you using your company logo for a nominal fee. Please email dgarrison@smithmooreassoc.com for more information. Sponsored Article Sponsored Articles in HydroVisions are an ad in article-form. They are clearly marked to readers as sponsored. In these articles you can broadcast the message of your organization’s mission or product.

RATES

Authors (Both Sponsored and Non-Sponsored): • Please provide an unformatted Word document of your story without embedded images. You can signify where you’d like a submitted image using brackets. • Images you wish to be included with your article must not be embedded in the Word document; send them separately and labeled with names corresponding to where you’d like them used in the Word document. • Articles must have a brief title and a byline. • Supply a 300dpi headshot of the author. • Article length must be between 500 - 1000 words. • Please include an “About the Author” post script, to provide our audience with the context of your perspectives. • Avoid using diagrams or graphs in your article, words are preferable.

HALF PAGE AD:

1= $250 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off

FULL PAGE AD:

ARTWORK FILE IS DUE THREE WEEKS BEFORE PUBLISHING

1= $400 | 2= 15% Off | 4= 20% Off