[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6578221,"mediaKeyId","3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee","parentId",3047579,"title","Modeling shows long-term overdraft in Indian Wells Valley; board discusses management scenarios","audioSeconds",1196,"startMs",2958000,"endMs",4154000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee&start=2958&end=4154","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee/thumbnail_2958000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6578221/Ridgecrest/Kern-County/California/Modeling-shows-long-term-overdraft-in-Indian-Wells-Valley-board-discusses-management-scenarios","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6578221-9d15c3a1ab8cb79bcae64bc433ae74fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1771023971&Signature=dOUgAirda5CPeunlMqirEktTe0HdG8R9q504AjSzrZveg1aPsn6CVTzPQq1Shxb~FAatNElbwE45SsRa8WScbD0X2~oM4kQcbIEj2OncQzWUlcW07wPpD-9iDFMTfVUojTh3Kzcn5PdHmWY4E-b4gi2QDC3kLn5rTH6Z4MGMyybCRcg6pla82NUjegA1~gbsrXhTcNywbcWtBf5q~WHXGlaDQ-H8ZpsG7zs7j5l64-QJWH0bUnWvDL7Lk3SF6yLgiDMnbL0ehb5kSf56RD3pgJP9skHLLQD6bCREtRd2ZnMhTNecyuWqeqiUld5G9thA8~eC3HSLFmKPe~np5JXlGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-18T07:06:05.55Z","article","The Groundwater Authority heard technical modeling results showing large historical groundwater losses and options for stabilizing the basin.

A model developed and run by the Desert Research Institute (DRI) and reviewed by a technical advisory group indicates the basin has been losing tens of thousands of acre‑feet per year historically and would continue to decline under a baseline “no‑action” scenario. Jean Moran, a hydrogeologist with DRI, told the board the model’s historical water‑budget runs show average annual reductions in storage in the range of thousands of acre‑feet; shorter dry periods showed larger annual losses. Moran said the model predicts partial recovery of water levels if pumping were reduced to an estimated natural recharge of about 7,650 acre‑feet per year, then levels would asymptote at a new equilibrium over decades.

The model integrates MODFLOW (flow) and MT3D (solute transport) packages and includes six vertical layers, mountain‑front recharge, subsurface inflows and outflows, evapotranspiration, fault behavior and pumping. Moran emphasized the model captures seasonality and variable hydrology, and that DRI calibrated hydraulic conductivity, storage and other parameters against observed water levels and water‑budget data.

Why it matters: the model provides the technical basis for the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) the Authority must prepare under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). Board members, technical advisers and many public commenters said the model will guide decisions on allocations, reductions, and potential augmentation (recycled or imported water).

Key figures and findings
- Historical water‑budget runs (multi‑decadal) show median storage losses measured in the low tens of thousands of acre‑feet per year; a recent 5‑year dry period had larger annual losses.
- A “no‑action” forward projection to 2070 under current pumping schedules showed continued drawdown and localized large drops in water level, with a modeled average change in storage on the order of 30,000 acre‑feet per year for that scenario.
- A test run that reduced pumping across the basin to the modeled recharge (about 7,650 acre‑feet per year) showed partial recovery of water levels and stabilization over decades, indicating the basin can move toward sustainability if pumping is substantially lowered.
- Total dissolved solids (TDS) modeling indicates some parts of the basin would experience modest salinity changes under the baseline; the modelers flagged where TDS concentrations are already higher and noted the role of evapotranspiration and clay layers in concentrating salts.

What the board discussed and directed
Board members and the public pressed modelers and staff on: (a) how shallow domestic wells will be affected, (b) the breadth and assumptions behind the 37,000‑acre‑feet baseline pumping estimate used in the “no‑action” run, and (c) how management options (proportional ramp‑downs, agricultural reductions, leased allocations, recycled water, imported water) were represented.
- Jean Moran and Steve Johnson (Stetson Engineers) said the current flow model's upper layer is represented at roughly 500 feet; because many domestic wells are shallower, the model output must be paired with separate shallow‑well impact analyses. Moran noted the model treats upper layers coarsely and that predicted impacts on shallow wells require an external, well‑level analysis using model water‑level projections.
- The “baseline” pumping number (~37,000 acre‑feet/year) was developed by soliciting projected pumping from major pumpers (municipal, agricultural, industrial, Navy). Board members and staff said the figure reflects what parties reported they would pump absent constraints; it does not establish legal entitlements or allocations.

Public comments and concerns
Public commenters included domestic well owners, representatives of agricultural interests, and legal counsel for large pumpers. Common themes: concern for shallow domestic wells, requests for clarity about how the model’s assumptions were developed, and calls for more modeling scenarios and outreach to affected residents. Several speakers urged that the Authority prioritize analysis of shallow‑well impacts and expand modeling scenarios to inform measurable objectives in the GSP.

Next steps
Modelers and staff said they will finish additional scenario runs, including brackish‑water and imported‑water simulations, and expected to complete the set of scenario results and supportive documentation for April–May drafting of GSP sections. The technical advisory committee and an ad‑hoc modeling subgroup will continue review; the Authority also asked staff to present additional shallow‑well impact analyses derived from the model outputs.

Ending note
Board members repeatedly framed the modeling work as a planning tool rather than a definitive forecast: the model identifies trends, data gaps and likely outcomes under different management assumptions, and it will be used to craft the GSP’s sustainability criteria and management actions.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","IWV GSA Meeting - 02/21/2019","oneSentenceSummary","The Groundwater Authority heard technical modeling results showing large historical groundwater losses and options for stabilizing the basin.","taxTitle","Ridgecrest, Kern County, California","taxId",52022,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6578211,"Votes at a glance: minutes, expenditures, pump‑fee enforcement, outreach and consultant direction",11783,2234000,14017000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee&start=2234&end=14017","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee/thumbnail_2234000.jpg","/articles/6578211/Ridgecrest/Kern-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-minutes-expenditures-pumpfee-enforcement-outreach-and-consultant-direction","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6578211-bdeda29e149526aa9b9c1219192e9d17/orig.mp4?Expires=1771023971&Signature=Kz-b1YMK5x4K47MXRcAvu1aUAXYLr3oYmiczU08koXJImNyqGUkThIZwD3EkryFESQDkXqfxt~yNgnuzH15ZHoIp3DuV~AISIL0i-4fNM37CjXmWRQ1KIv1ACYLIQxQP9wTLjF9qMQQsV4dJVUSQgLSsi5M4q~67GBOtBTED18hr9u0~v5e4rxtEsYzMiSk-BjhxNHzz9ksRUKzsdeZ2cmjauAvf2C6P2oHWLtnPUsIzVT3ct-54wy4nS96pUwkraNIGLMOuPl9mPciGN06XGfRiGwANbxrvYX-r3bOmFJJnKyYzn8x5-jgaKn~jpM6nKWfnymgza52TONg0W9X7eQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Indian Wells Valley Groundwater Authority took several formal actions during the meeting, including approving minutes and expenditures, authorizing legal follow‑up on pump‑fee noncompliance, and asking staff to work toward a consultant agreement to evaluate imported water options.

What the board approved
- Approval of minutes and consent agenda: The board approved the January 17 minutes and the consent agenda, including the expenditures on the packet. The roll‑call vote was unanimous: Director Vallejo — Aye; Director Hayman — Aye; Chairman Kosinski — Aye; Director Snoke — Aye; Vice Chair Gleeson — Aye.

- Direction on pump‑fee noncompliance and outreach: The board authorized staff to send final notices to non‑compliant pumpers and directed staff to begin the process that could lead to legal remedies for persistent noncompliance with well registration and the pumping‑fee ordinance. Staff reported there are 46 registered accounts and 24 known unregistered non‑de minimis pumpers under investigation. The board authorized the enforcement path and also asked staff to review the Authority’s outreach for domestic/de minimis pumpers. Roll‑call vote on the authorization to pursue enforcement was recorded as: Director Vallejo — Aye; Director Hayman — Aye; Chairman Kosinski — Aye; Director Snoke — Aye; Vice Chair Gleeson — Aye.

- Consultant engagement (imported water evaluation): The board voted to direct staff to advance a proposed consulting agreement with the top‑ranked firm recommended by an ad‑hoc evaluation committee (Capital Core Group) and to return a draft consulting agreement to the board for approval at a future meeting. The recorded vote on that direction was: Director Vallejo — No; Director Hayman — Yes; Chairman Kosinski — Yes; Director Snoke — Yes; Vice Chair Gleeson — Yes (motion passed).

- Outreach mailer concept: The board agreed conceptually to proceed with an outreach/postcard mailing to all parcel owners and water users to explain SGMA, the Authority’s role, and how affected residents can get information. Several board members and many public commenters asked for stronger language about potential impacts and clear steps for domestic well owners. The board asked staff and the Indian Wells Valley Water District to coordinate the final text and cost and to return with budget details; the motion passed unanimously.

Why it matters
These votes move the Authority from planning to active administration: they maintain the Authority’s revenue collection process (pump fees), advance work to determine whether imported water is a feasible augmentation option, and prioritize outreach to small and disadvantaged water users. Several speakers urged the board to pair enforcement with improved outreach so that residents understand obligations and options.

Meeting evidence
Staff and counsel said final notices will be sent to identified noncompliant pumpers and that the board’s vote authorizes starting legal remedies if registration and payment do not follow. Staff reported that 909 wells are in the basin database, with about 46 registered accounts and roughly 24 non‑registered non‑de minimis entities being investigated for compliance.

Ending note
Board members asked staff to return proposed consultant agreement language and a clearer outreach budget estimate at the next meeting before executing either a consultant contract or major mailings.","The Authority approved consent items (minutes and expenditures), authorized staff to pursue enforcement against non‑compliant pumpers, agreed to pursue a consulting agreement to evaluate imported‑water options, and approved an outreach mailer concept and follow‑up.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6578216,"Inyo‑Mono IRWM group offers outreach, disadvantaged‑community support to Indian Wells Valley",1105,401000,1506000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee&start=401&end=1506","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3047579-0daa01dc465f1b1504a44cf6ff3e3dee/thumbnail_401000.jpg","/articles/6578216/Ridgecrest/Kern-County/California/InyoMono-IRWM-group-offers-outreach-disadvantagedcommunity-support-to-Indian-Wells-Valley","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6578216-15df3bb5ef1501b828431783d01d8c17/orig.mp4?Expires=1771023971&Signature=kVCDG-IgqJPZ8i728aH18uwP1ZxWS0IxUQKlayQp4Zg46b30N443qehjqqkowCV0AS5msbhPYgvBaBZ94NnDmoitfXyhXSwLjhe0VWKsYQVvljrG~5ZTzXb0Ro5zCWOgiQs6yd2vgbF9mTK5ey91zxedbSmUsFKMIMk06Nhetv97zwuZ0i-6pMdDRaNw-FrnyJ~9fAs6zLRC7fDqjw2vfXEtB2Qi-nqMPN32Je8A9m1t0TM69Njz7YIcNkWe9aHiU29kWT~jaacbEb-5udyCnr8axOsBoCnwiAkSHjADg05SDTQAFBSQzC-Bzjd1mcqHr9e3G79aapvEmJmro8~AmQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A representative of the Inyo‑Mono Integrated Regional Water Management program reviewed the region’s IRWM history, funding and project work and offered to help Indian Wells Valley with outreach, technical assistance and grant support.

Holly, representing the Inyo‑Mono IRWM (introduced by staff as the IRWM presenter), told the board the program is administered by the California Department of Water Resources and grew from Proposition 50 and Proposition 84 efforts; the regional group has received multiple planning and implementation grants and now has a Prop. 1 disadvantaged‑community grant that is funding outreach and technical needs assessments. Holly said the IRWM regions are self‑formed and that the Inyo‑Mono region includes stakeholders from Inyo and Mono counties plus some participating communities to the south, including representatives from Ridgecrest who asked to join earlier.

What she offered
Holly said the IRWM program can: (a) help with outreach and engagement in disadvantaged communities, (b) offer technical needs assessments and operator training tied to continuing education credits, (c) provide limited project development funds for planning (engineering, CEQA) and (d) help with SGMA (GSA) support. She described a current disadvantaged‑community grant (roughly a three‑year grant under Prop. 1) that prioritizes outreach to low‑income communities and technical assistance to small water systems.

Board reaction and next steps
Board members asked whether the Owens Valley Groundwater Authority or local GSAs are signatories to the IRWM memorandum of understanding; Holly said the Owens Valley Groundwater Authority has signed the MOU and that becoming a signatory does not carry a financial obligation but does represent a voluntary commitment to participate. Board members asked whether the IRWM could perform grant management. Holly said the IRWM presently manages IRWM grants and state grants and is familiar with state grant administration challenges; she offered to talk further with staff about whether the IRWM could take on grant management for particular projects and provide a cost estimate.

Local follow‑up
The board agreed to have Holly exchange contact information with the Authority’s staff and the District’s project leads to discuss outreach coordination and potential grant administration. Holly confirmed she would provide an electronic copy of the presentation for posting on the Authority website.

Ending note
Holly emphasized that IRWM has prioritized disadvantaged communities and tribes in the region’s project selection and that IRWM members have repeatedly found direct, on‑site outreach and repeated contact to be important in building trust and delivering projects for small water systems.","A representative of the Inyo‑Mono Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) program briefed the Authority on IRWM structure, Prop. 1 funding and a disadvantaged‑community grant; she offered technical assistance, outreach support and, potentially, grant administration help for local projects.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Modeling shows long-term overdraft in Indian Wells Valley; board discusses management scenarios

Votes at a glance: minutes, expenditures, pump‑fee enforcement, outreach and consultant direction

Inyo‑Mono IRWM group offers outreach, disadvantaged‑community support to Indian Wells Valley