B. Description of Proposed Boundary Modification

1. Short Description

   Modify the Chino Subbasin (8-02.01) boundary to align more closely with the 1978 Judgment Boundary.
2. Type of basin boundary revision

   • Jurisdiction Internal
   • Scientific External
3. Provide a narrative overview of the boundary modification request and how the resulting modification would affect likelihood of sustainable management.

   The 1978 Chino Basin Judgment established a physical solution for sustainable groundwater management in the Chino Basin. The 1978 Judgment defined a basin boundary that generally aligns with the hydrologic boundaries of the Chino Basin and defines the area of the Court's continuing jurisdictional authority (Judgment boundary). In many places within the basin, the Judgment boundary differs from the DWR Bulletin 118 boundary, and in some areas it differs significantly. The basin boundary modification proposed herein is entirely to the Bulletin 118 boundary and not the Judgment boundary. The proposed basin boundary modification, in many parts of the basin, will conform the Bulletin 118 boundary closely with the Chino Basin Judgment boundary, and will reflect the ongoing sustainable management pursuant to the Judgment and the Optimum Basin Management Program. The conformity will clearly delineate boundaries between adjudicated basins; eliminate confusion relating to the Court responsible for basin management; ensure consistent and effective groundwater management, and protect the investments of entities using groundwater throughout the Chino Basin. The proposed basin boundary modification will eliminate small areas of the current DWR Bulletin 118 basin, from which economical quantities of groundwater cannot be extracted, which lie along the perimeter of the Chino Basin but are not within the Judgment boundary. Available technical information indicates that these areas do not fit within the definition of an "aquifer" as defined in the California Code of Regulations, section 341(f). These areas do not contain a substantial volume of saturated alluvium, and activities within these areas do not and cannot have a material effect on sustainable groundwater management. As such, designation of a Groundwater Sustainability Agency and development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan for these areas would not benefit sustainable groundwater management in the Chino Basin. In areas where the Judgment boundary does not fully encompass the "aquifer" of the Chino Basin, as defined in the California Code of Regulations section 341(f), the proposed basin boundary follows the most current understanding of the hydrogeologic boundaries of the Chino Basin. Groundwater in these areas is heavily influenced by management of the area pursuant to the Judgment; a plan to comply with the requirements of the SGMA will need to be developed for these areas.

   Attachment(s):
4. List the existing basin(s)/subbasin(s) to be modified by this request

   • 8-002.01 UPPER SANTA ANA VALLEY - CHINO
5. Provide the proposed name for the new basin(s) or subbasin(s)

   N/A

C. Initial Notification and Combination of Requests

1. Was an initial notification submitted to the Department?

   Yes
   List of submitted initial notification for the selected basin(s)/subbasin(s).

   Local Agency	Potential Basin(s)/Subbasin(s)
   Inland Empire Utilities Agency	8-002.01 UPPER SANTA ANA VALLEY - CHINO

2. Does this application include a combination of requests?

   No

D. Required Documents for All Modifications

1. A copy of the statutory or other legal authority under which the requesting agency was created with specific citations to the provisions setting forth the duties and responsibilities of the agency.

Attachment(s):

• D.1_Legal_Authority.pdf (17.2MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:21PM

2. A copy of the signed resolution adopted by the requesting agency formally initiating the boundary modification request process.

Attachment(s):

• D.2 Agency_Resolutions.pdf (1.7MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:21PM

3. A map of adequate scale (no greater than 1:24,000; e.g., 1:10,000 is not acceptable) showing the proposed modified basin boundary in relation to the existing Bulletin-118 basin boundary and the local agencies that are within or bordering the existing and proposed basin.

Attachment(s):

• Plate D_3_20160328.pdf (7.6MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:22PM

4. A GIS shapefile of the proposed modified groundwater basin boundaries. Download Existing B118 basin shape file | DWR Spatial Data Standards

Attachment(s):

• D.4_ChinoSubasins_20160517.zip (73.8kB) Uploaded on 05/17/2016 at 01:35PM

5. A GIS shapefile of the political boundaries of any affected or adjacent local agency. Download water agency shape file

Attachment(s):

• D.5_affected_agencies_Chino.zip (1MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:24PM

6. Any information, if necessary, to enable DWR to satisfy the requirements of a responsible agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

Pursuant to the Inland Empire Utilities Agency Resolution No. 2016-3-3 adopted on March 16, 2016, page 2: WHEREAS, requesting a modification to basin boundaries is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because adoption of these regulations is not a project under CEQA, and, assuming requesting a modification to basin boundaries did constitute a project, it would nonetheless be exempt from CEQA because there is no possibility that the adoption of the proposed modifications to a the Basin Boundary will have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is taken in protection of natural resources, and the activity is taken in protection of the environment. (Pub. Res. Code §21065, 14 CCR §§ 15060, 15061, 15307, 15308, 15378.) Further, SGMA exempts preparation and adoption of Groundwater Sustainability Plans from CEQA review, and the existence of an alternative compliance mechanism would not require CEQA review, for the purposes of both of which (as applicable) this basin boundary modification request is a necessary initial step. (Wat. Code§ 10728.6)

Attachment(s):

• D.2 Agency_Resolutions.pdf (1.7MB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 04:21PM

E. General Information

1. Describe the lateral boundaries of the alluvial aquifer or aquifers that form the groundwater basin and the definable bottom of the basin. The description must be in terms that are clear, definite, and sufficiently detailed to allow an authoritative map of the proposed basin boundaries to be plotted using the given description.

The Chino Subbasin was formed as a result of tectonic activity along major fault zones during the Quaternary Period. It is part of a large, broad, alluvial-filled plain located between the San Gabriel Mountains to the north (Transverse Ranges) and the elevated Perris Block to the south (Peninsular Ranges), which is sometimes referred to as the Chino Plain. The Santa Ana River is the main tributary draining the area along the southern boundary of the Chino Subbasin. The revised Chino Subbasin boundary generally follows either the geologic contact between the Unconsolidated Sediments and the Consolidated Bedrock (geologic contact) or the Chino Basin boundary as defined in the 1978 Judgment (Judgment boundary). This summary description of the lateral boundaries of the revised Chino Subbasin starts at Prado Dam in the south and proceeds clockwise around the subbasin boundary: From Prado Dam, the modified Bulletin 118 boundary follows either the geologic contact or the Judgment boundary along the Chino/Puente Hills until the boundary reaches the Spadra Basin. The Chino Subbasin is separated from the Spadra Basin, the Six Basins, and the Cucamonga Basin by the Judgment boundary. The boundary then follows either the geologic contact or the Judgment boundary along the San Gabriel Mountains until the boundary reaches the Rialto-Colton Subbasin. The Chino Subbasin is separated from the Rialto-Colton Subbasin and the Riverside-Arlington Subbasin by the Judgment boundary until it intersects the Jurupa Mountains. The boundary then follows either the geologic contact or the Judgment boundary along the Jurupa Mountains and Pedley Hills until the boundary reaches the Riverside Narrows where the Santa Ana River enters the Chino Subbasin. The boundary then follows either the geologic contact or the current Bulletin 118 boundary to Prado Dam.

F. Notice and Consultation

1. List all local agencies and public water systems affected by the basin(s) modification request.

Attachment(s):

• F-1_ChinoBasin_BoundMod_AffectedAgencies.xlsx (23.7kB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 05:00PM

2. Explain the methods used to identify interested local agencies and public water systems in the affected basin(s):

A Geographic Information System (GIS) was used to map the extent of the Chino Subbasin and the local agencies and public water supply systems in the region. Affected agencies were identified if their boundaries overlap the current Chino Subbasin boundary. The GIS files for these agency boundaries are provided in D.5 of this submittal.

3. Provide information regarding the nature of consultations with affected or interested agencies. Attach and cite any copies of correspondences with local agencies and public water systems and/or any other persons or entities consulted.

Each affected agency was sent the attached letter on March 4, 2016 notifying them of the requesting agencies' intent to request modification of the boundary of the Chino Subbasin, informing them where to find information on the request, and inviting them to comment in support of, or opposition to, the request. Many of the affected local agencies and public water systems are parties to the Chino Basin Watermaster, and were kept up-to-date on the progress of this basin boundary modification request. Informal meetings and conference calls were held with local agencies and public water systems in bounding basins to inform and collaborate, and to ensure that other basin boundary modification requests are consistent with this request.

Attachment(s):

• F-3_Notice of Request to Agencies.pdf (16.3kB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 05:00PM

4. Provide a summary of all public meetings at which the proposed boundary modification was discussed or considered by the requesting agency. Attach and cite any copies of agendas and notices published.

The Requesting Agencies respectively held several meetings to discuss the proposed basin boundary modification request process. The following is a summary of meetings held: IEUA Public, Legislative Affairs, and Water Resources Meeting; Wednesday, February 10, 2016 IEUA Board Meeting; Wednesday February, 17, 2016 IEUA Public, Legislative Affairs, and Water Resources Meeting; Wednesday, March 9, 2016 IEUA Board Meeting; Wednesday, March 16, 2016 TVMWD Regular Board Meeting; Wednesday, February 17, 2016 TVMWD Regular Board Meeting; Wednesday, March 2, 2016 TVMWD Regular Board Meeting; Wednesday, March 16, 2016 WMWD Regular Board Meeting; Wednesday, February 17, 2016 WMWD Regular Board Meeting; Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Attachment(s):

• F_4_agendas_meeting_modification_support.pdf (20.1MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:27PM

5. Attach a copy of all comments regarding the proposed boundary modification received by the requesting agency and a summary of any responses made by the requesting agency.

The attachment below are letters of support received for this basin boundary modification request. The requesting agencies received no letters of opposition. Letters of support were received by the following entities: 1. West End Consolidated Water Co. 2. City of Upland 3. Chino Basin Water Conservation District 4. City of Pomona 5. Monte Vista Water District 6. City of Ontario 7. Walnut Valley Water District 8. San Bernardino County 9. Chino Basin Watermaster 10. Six Basins Watermaster

Attachment(s):

• F.5_Support_Letters_Chino.pdf (5.6MB) Uploaded on 03/30/2016 at 04:12PM
• Chino Boundary Mod Comment Letter - Norco.pdf (285.7kB) Uploaded on 04/01/2016 at 07:41AM
• SARWCo Letter to Local Agencies re BBMR 20160330 (14588057-1).pdf (11.3MB) Uploaded on 04/01/2016 at 07:41AM

G. General Existing Groundwater Management

1. Explain how sustainable groundwater management exists or could likely be achieved in the basin:

Watermaster is the arm of the San Bernardino County Superior Court that oversees implementation of the 1978 Judgment that adjudicated the groundwater rights to the Chino Basin and established a physical solution for the sustainable management of the Basin. One of the key features of the 1978 Judgment is the Court's retention of continuing jurisdiction to ensure that the Basin's resources are utilized in a manner consistent with Article X, Section 2 of the California Constitution -- that its waters be conserved to ensure both that they are put to beneficial use to the fullest extent they are capable and that unreasonable use is avoided. One of the central tasks given to Watermaster under the 1978 Judgment is to implement the 1978 Judgment's physical solution for the Chino Basin. This physical solution takes the form of a comprehensive and integrated, court-approved groundwater management plan called the Optimum Basin Management Program (OBMP). Watermaster and the parties to the 1978 Judgment have invested significant time and hundreds of millions of dollars to develop and implement the OBMP and the OBMP Implementation Plan; the result of which is a successful Basin management structure.

2. Explain how the proposed boundary modification would affect the ability of adjacent groundwater basins to sustainably manage groundwater in those groundwater basins.

For adjacent adjudicated basins, the proposed boundary modification will clearly delineate boundaries between adjudicated basins, largely conforming the Bulletin 118 boundaries to the existing adjudication boundaries, which will eliminate confusion relating to the Court responsible for basin management within the Bulletin 118 boundaries. For adjacent un-adjudicated basins that are required to develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs), the proposed boundary modification will clearly delineate the existing Adjudication boundary of the Chino Basin (the extent of the area in which the 1978 Judgment’s continuing jurisdiction applies) and eliminate confusion over jurisdictional authority as the Groundwater Sustainability Agencies develop their GSPs. The proposed boundary modification should not impair sustainable management of groundwater in any adjacent basin. ¿

3. Provide a historical summary of the sustainable management of groundwater levels in the proposed basin(s) or subbasin(s).

The 1978 Judgment that adjudicated the groundwater rights to the Chino Basin and established a physical solution for the sustainable management of the Basin was stipulated primarily to stop a persistent state of declining groundwater levels that had been occurring throughout the Chino Basin since the early 1900s. The OBMP Implementation Plan, which was approved by the Court in 2000, implements a comprehensive program to sustainably manage basin yield, groundwater levels, and water quality. The OBMP is supported by comprehensive programs for the monitoring and reporting on groundwater production, groundwater levels, and water quality.

4. Discuss potential impacts to state programs resulting from the proposed boundary modification, including, but not limited to, the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM), Groundwater Management Plans developed pursuant to AB 3030, Groundwater Sustainability Plans developed pursuant to the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, any applicable state or regional board plans, and other water management and land use programs.

The proposed boundary modification will have no impact on any state programs.

H. Local Support

1. Provide any evidence that sufficient information was provided to affected agencies and systems regarding the proposed boundary modification.

Attachment(s):

• F-3_Notice of Request to Agencies.pdf (16.3kB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 05:00PM
• F_4_agendas_meeting_modification_support.pdf (20.1MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:27PM

2. Provide a list of all affected agencies and affected systems that submitted comments and/or documents in support or opposition to the proposed boundary. The agency submitting their support or opposition for a boundary modification must provide a copy of a resolution formally adopted by the decision-making body of the affected agency or system or a letter signed by an executive officer or other official with appropriate delegated authority who represents the agency or system. Attach copies of the resolution and/or signed letter detailing the support or opposition submitted.

Attachment(s):

• F.5_Support_Letters_Chino.pdf (1.5MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 12:29PM
• SARWCo Letter to Local Agencies re BBMR 20160330 (14588057-1).pdf (11.3MB) Uploaded on 03/31/2016 at 02:52PM
• Chino Boundary Mod Comment Letter - Norco.pdf (285.7kB) Uploaded on 03/31/2016 at 03:32PM
• F-1_ChinoBasin_BoundMod_AffectedAgencies.xlsx (23.7kB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 05:00PM

3. Provide any evidence that rebuts any opposition to the proposed boundary modification.

The requesting agencies received no letters of opposition.

I. Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model

1. Principal aquifer units within requested basin.
2. Lateral boundaries of the proposed basin, including:
   1. Geologic features that significantly impede or impact groundwater flow.
   2. Aquifer characteristics that significantly impede or impact groundwater flow.
   3. Significant geologic and hydrologic features and conditions of the principle aquifer units, as appropriate, including information regarding the confined or unconfined nature of the aquifer, facies changes, truncation of units, the presence of faults or folds that impede groundwater flow, or other groundwater flow restricting features.
   4. Key surface water bodies, groundwater divides and significant recharge sources.
3. Recharge and discharge areas within the basin.
4. Definable bottom of the basin or subbasin.

The department may waive this requirement for an internal boundary modification if the requesting agency is able to demonstrate that the proposed boundary modification is unlikely to affect sustainable groundwater management.

Attachment(s):

• Chino Conceptual Model TM 20160309.pdf (71MB) Uploaded on 03/28/2016 at 05:08PM

J. Technical Studies for External Scientific Modifications

1. A qualified map that depicts the lateral boundaries of the aquifers that define the basin or subbasin.

Attachment(s):

• Figure 1_20160412.pdf (1MB) Uploaded on 04/13/2016 at 12:37PM

2. A technical study that provides subsurface data that demonstrates the vertical thickness and relevant physical properties of the alluvial aquifer or stacked series of alluvial aquifers.

Attachment(s):

• Chino Technical Justification TM_reduced.pdf (33.5MB) Uploaded on 05/17/2016 at 12:05PM

L. Technical Studies for All Jurisdictional Modifications

1. A water management plan that covers or is in the immediate vicinity of the proposed basin or portion of the proposed basin and satisfies the requirement of Water Code sections 10753.7(a) or 10727 by attaching one of the following:
   1. An adopted groundwater management plan, a basin wide management plan, or other integrated regional water management program or plan.
   2. Management pursuant to an adjudication action.
   3. One or more technical studies that cover the relevant portion of a basin or subbasin and adjacent areas.

Attachment(s):

• L.1 CBWM Documents.zip (7.3MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 03:55PM
• L.1_OBMP_Implementation_Plan.pdf (2.7MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 03:56PM
• L.1_OBMP_Ph1_Report.pdf (1.2MB) Uploaded on 03/29/2016 at 03:56PM

2. A statement of the existing and planned coordination of sustainable groundwater management activities and responsibilities where required.

The Chino Subbasin will continue to be sustainably managed pursuant to the Judgment and the OBMP, including all areas outside of the Judgment boundary.