ORDER NO. 30145 GROUNDWATER AVAILABILITY MODELING Came to be heard this the 12th day of February, 2007, with a motion made by Commissioner Williams, seconded by Commissioner Oehler. The Court unanimously approved by vote of 4-0-0 to: Approve forwarding the letter, with the list of questions concerning Groundwater Availability Modeling, to Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District Board of Directors, and to meet with Mr. Wilson and the Board of Directors within 60 days to receive answers to these and other questions. COMMISSIONERS' COURT AGENDA REQUEST PLEASE FURNISH ONE ORIGINAL AND NINE COPIES OF TffiS REQUEST AND DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COURT. MADE BY: Commissioner Williams OFFICE: Precinct 2 MEETING DATE: February 12, 2007 TIME PREFERRED: SUBJECT: (Please be specific).Consider, discuss and take appropriate action to approve and forward letter with questions concerning Groundwater Availability Modeling to Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District Board of Directors. EXECUTIVE SESSION REQUESTED: NAME OF PERSON(S) ADDRESSING THE COURT: Commissioners Williams and Letz. --- ESTIMATED LENGTH OF PRESENTATION: IF PERSONNEL MATTER-NAME OF EMPLOYEE: Time for submitting this request for Court to assure that the matter is posted in accordance with Title 5, Chapter 551 and 552, Government Code, is as follows: Meeting scheduled for Mondays: 5:00 P.M. previous Tuesday THIS REQUEST RECEIVED BY: THIS REQUEST RECEIVED All Agenda Requests will be screened by the County Judge's Office to determine if adequate information has been prepared for the Court's formal consideration and action at time of Court meetings. Your cooperation is appreciated and co~ributes towazd your request being addressed at the eazliest opportunity. See Agenda Request Rule adopted by Commissioners Court. February 12, 2007 Board of Directors Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District 125 Lehman Drive, Suite 102 Kerrville, Texas 78028 Members of the Board of Directors: It is always beneficial whenever the public can be enlightened as to the deliberations, decisions and actions of a governmental entity. HGCD is to be commended for conducting its recent forum to which the public was invited to listen and participate, "` and likewise for committing its resources to developing a Groundwater Availability Model (GAM) for Kerr Coumy. Kerr Coumy Commissioners' Court, however, was somewhat surprised at the format of the workshop. Our understanding was to have a joint workshop wherein Commissioners' Court was to be an active participant. We had hoped to review the details of the GAM and be presented with the actual science that leads to many of the conclusions stated. In this regard, we were disappointed that more of our questions could not be asked and answered. Kerr County is charged with setting lot sizes based on water availability. We can only do this importam function based on scientific data. GAM needs to be an important component of our decision making process, but the model used must be based on accurate data and the model must be accepted by other emities that are familiar with groundwater modeling. In this regard, we hope HGCD accepts the offer from TWDB to review and verify the accuracy of your model. Some light was focused on the issue of water availability in Kerr County, and that is good. However, at the conclusion of the afternoon's presentations, more questions remained unanswered than were answered with definitive information. Ken County has developed its current water availability requirements based on the State Water Plan, which was developed through the regional water planning process. This data has been presented to the public and state agencies for review. Umil a similar review and verification process is done on the GAM currently being developed by HGCD, Ken County cannot change public policy based on speculation and incomplete data. Attached hereto is a list of some questions that were raised at the recent workshop. Commissioners' Court would welcome the opportunity to meet with Mr. Wilson and discuss these and other questions about the current model under development. We feel it is very important to continue an open dialogue with HGCD. It is only through an open and public process that we can review Ken County's Water Availability Requirements. Again, our thanks for your efforts in this important azea and we look forward to our continued cooperation. Sincerely, Pat Tinley, County Judge H. A. "Buster" Baldwin, Commissioner, Precinct 1 Wiitiam H. Williams, Commissioner, Precinct 2 Jonathan Letz, Commissioner, Precinct 3 Bruce Oehler, Commissioner, Precinct 4 Attached: List of Questions Questions: • The Upper Glen Rose was identified as an aquifer that "confines" other aquifers below; and that almost all recharge to the lower aquifers comes from Gillespie and Kimble Counties. What proof exists that rechazge does not go through the Upper Glen Rose through fractwes or by other means? • What percentage of rainfall rechazge has been incorporated into your model for each aquifer ? • What aquifers are included in the GAM being built for HGCD? Are all aquifers that produce potable water in Ken County included? • Twenty-two monitoring wells scattered throughout 1,100 squaze miles of Kerr County seems to be a vastly insufficient number of monitoring wells from which to glean data upon which conclusions aze reached about the sufficiency of water in Kerr County. Further, no information was provided as to the locations of the monitor wells, and exact aquifers being monitored. • There are numerous shallow wells throughout Kerr County, especially along our streams and river. What aquifers are these wells producing from, and aze they incorporated into your model? • How many of the existing wells in Kerr County aze in your well database? How many wells have been drilled in the past ten yeazs? How many of these wells are in the Middle Trinity, Lawer Trinity or other aquifers? Are all wells drilled in Kerr County within the previous ten years included in -- your GAM? • How many deep wells has HGCD logged to date? For how many wells in total does HGCD have recent logs? • Why was 101ayers selected as the basis for your GAM? Exactly what is included in each layer? How do you deternune what data goes into a cell, if there are no wells in a particular cell? Do all cells get the same data, and is each weighted similarly or differently? How many ofthe 12,000 cells in your GAM will actually contain data from existing wells? • How does your GAM reconcile the differences in cell data when working with multiple aquifers, each with different characteristics? • How many assumptions are made when filling each well with data? How do you distinguish cells with assumptive data vs. cells with actual data extracted from a well? • Explain what is meant by yow statement that "subsurface geometry and flow dynamics" are finished. How many wells, their locations, and from what formations was data extracted to be used to create this information? • You acknowledge that the subsurface geology in Kerr County is very complex and changes rapidly from point to point. How do you propose to factor this fact into your model? Mr. Wilson referred to a well that had a 300' draw down in the Hensel, where is this well and how have other wells reacted in this area. • What is the proper density of well data, by aquifer, to develop an accurate "` factual model ? • Many of the maps and data presented were very similar to maps we have seen in other presentations. What specific data and maps are a result of the new GAM effort as opposed to revising existing data ? • How much new data is being incorporated into your current effort; or are you merely incorporating data developed by others for your GAM? • How many cross sections have been developed and where are they located? How many of the aquifers aze included in these cross sections? • How can the Kerr County model be accurately conclusive when aquifers in the eastern and western parts of the county are from different aquifers? • When will the model be completed? S~P~ 6 ~p T x CoooN oS Ket` THE COUNTY COURT CouNTVJuDCE PAT TINLEY COMMISSIONERS COURT H.A. "BUSTER BALDWIN, PCT. 1 WILLIAM H. WILLIAMS, Pcr. 2 JONATHAN LETTy Pcr. 3 BRUCE OENLER, Pcr. 4 OF KERB COUNTY, TEXAS 700 Main, Kemille, Texas 78028 Tel: (830) 792-2211 Fax: (830) 792-2218 E-mail: commissioners@co.kercDC.us CLERA JANNETT REPER COURT COORDINATOR JODV GRINSTEAD February 12, 2007 HAND DELIVERED Board of Directors Headwaters Groundwater Conservation District 125 Lehman Drive, Suite 102 Kerrville, Texas 78028 Members of the Board of Directors: It is always beneficial whenever the public can be enlightened as to the deliberations, decisions and actions of a governmental entity. HGCD is to be commended for conducting its recent forum to which the public was invited to listen and participate, and likewise for committing its resowces to developing a Groundwater Availability Model (GAM) for Kerr Coucrty. Ken County Commissioners' Court, however, was somewhat surprised at the format of the workshop. Our understanding was to have a joint workshop wherein Commissioners' Court was to be an active participant. We had hoped to review the details of the GAM and be presented with the actual science that leads to many of the conclusions stated. In this regard, we were disappointed that more of our questions could not be asked and answered. Ken County is chazged with setting lot sizes based on water availability. We can only do this important function based on scientific data. GAM needs to be an important component of our decision making process, but the model used must be based on accurate data and the model must be accepted by other entities that aze familiar with groundwater modeling. In this regard, we hope HGCD accepts the offer from TWDB to review and verify the accuracy of your model. Some light was focused on the issue of water availability in Ken County, and that is good. However, at the conclusion of the afternoon's presentations, more questions remained unanswered than were answered with definitive information. Kerr County has developed its current water availability requirements based on the State Water Plan, which was developed through the regional water planning process. This data has been presented to the public and state agencies for review. Until a similar review and verification process is done on the GAM currently being developed by HGCD, Kerr County cannot change public policy based on speculation and incomplete data. Attached hereto is a list of some questions that were raised at the recent workshop. Commissioners' Court would welcome the opportunity to meet with Mr. Wilson and the Board of Directors within the next sixty days to receive answers to these and other questions about the current model under development. We feel it is very important to continue an open dialogue with HGCD. It is only through an open and public process that we can review Kerr County's Water Availability Requirements. Again, our thanks for your efforts in this important area and we look forward to our continued cooperation. Sincerely, / y--°' ~ C~ Pat Tinley, County Judge ~- •~ A. `Bu aldwin, ommissioner, Precinct 1 i._ •. >; H. Williams, Commissioner, Precinct 2 Jong a Letz, Commissioner, Precinct 3 1 ~ Z~~ ~t~~-. Bruce Oehler, Commissioner, Precinct 4 Attached: List of Questions Questions: • The Upper Glen Rose was identified as an aquifer that "confines" other aquifers below; and that almost all rechazge to the lower aquifers comes from Gillespie and Kimble Counties. What proof exists that rechazge does not go through the Upper Glen Rose through fractwes or by other means? What percentage of rainfall rechazge has been incorporated into yow model for each aquifer ? • What aquifers are included in the GAM being built for HGCD? Are all aquifers that produce potable water in Kerr County included? • Twemy-two monitoring wells scattered throughout 1,100 square miles of Kerr County seems to be a vastly insufficient number of monitoring wells from which to glean data upon which conclusions aze reached about the sufficiency of water in Ken County. Further, no information was provided as to the locations of the monitor wells, and exact aquifers being monitored. • There are numerous shallow wells throughout Kerr County, especially along ow streams and river. What aquifers aze these wells producing from, and are they incorporated into your model? • How many of the existing wells in Ken County aze in yow well database? How many wells have been drilled in the past ten years? How many of these wells are in the Middle Trinity, Lower Trinity or other aquifers? Are all wells drilled in Ken County within the previous ten years included in your GAM? • How many deep wells has HGCD logged to date? For how many wells in total does HGCD have recent logs? Why was 10 layers selected as the basis for yow GAM? Exactly what is included in each layer? How do you deternvne what data goes into a cell, if there are no wells in a particulaz cell? Do all cells get the same data, and is each weighted similarly or differently? How many of the 12,000 cells in yow GAM will actually comaln data from existing wells? • How does yow GAM reconcile the differences in cell data when working with multiple aquifers, each with different chazacteristics? • How many assumptions are made when filling each well with data? How do you distinguish cells with assumptive data vs. cells with actual data extracted from a well? • Explain what is meant by yow statement that "subsurface geometry and flow dynamics" are finished. How many wells, their locations, and from what formations was data extracted to be used to create this information? • You acknowledge that the subsurface geology in Kerr County is very complex and changes rapidly from point to point. How do you propose to factor this fact into yow model? • Mr. Wilson referred to a well that had a 300' draw down in the Hensel, where is this well and how have other wells reacted in this area. • What is the proper density of well data, by aquifer, to develop an accwate factual model ? • Many of the maps and data presented were very similar to neaps we have seen in other presentations. What specific data and maps are a result of the new GAM effort as opposed to revising existing data ? • How much new data is being incorporated into your current effort; or are you merely incorporating data developed by others for your GAM? • How many cross sections have been developed and where are they located? How many of the aquifers are included in these cross sections? • How can the Kerr County model be accurately conclusive when aquifers in the eastern and western parts of the county are from different aquifers? • When will the model be completed?