Evaluating MAGs & Pumping,
DFCs & Water Levels
Preparing for Round 2 of Joint Groundwater Planning
Josh Grimes, GM of PGCD...
Prairielands GCD
• Formed in 2009
• Fee based district
• Online registration, reporting, and payment
• Financially support...
Background
• Prairielands was assigned DFCs for 5 aquifers
in 4 counties
• DFCs were defined as feet of water level
declin...
Cross-Section (Updated BEG Structure)

Prairielands GCD
Comparing Pumping and MAGs
1. Estimate formations screened for both
exempt and non-exempt wells
2. Proportion pumping
3. M...
Prairielands GCD
Exempt Well Evaluation

Prairielands GCD
TDLR Driller’s
Logs

2001-2013
Well Count
by Aquifer
and Use

BEG
Structure
Prairielands GCD

Ellis
Domestic
Geothermal
In...
Prairielands GCD

COMPARISON OF DISTRICT METER
DATA AND MAGS
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Big Picture Comparison
• Meter data show yearly variation in pumping
• Explained by drought other factors

• Need to look ...
MORE DETAILED COMPARISON
BY AQUIFER
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Detailed Comparison
• Hosston Aquifer production exceeds MAGs in
3 of 4 counties
• Hensel and Glen Rose also exceed MAG in...
Prairielands GCD

COMPARISON OF DFCS AND
WATER LEVEL CHANGES
Prairielands GCD
DFCs by county and aquifer

Prairielands GCD
Findings from Historical Data
• Limited wells and measurements from TWDB
database to assess 19 DFCs
• Short term data and ...
Available Data

Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Prairielands GCD
Comparison of DFC and
water level decline
Aquifer /
County

Woodbine

Paluxy

Glen Rose

Hensel

Hosston

Ellis

Less than...
Agreement between MAG and DFC?
Aquifer /
County

Woodbine

Paluxy

Glen Rose

Hensel

Hosston

Ellis

Agree

No Data

No D...
Summary
• Pumping data from meters is helpful to compare to
estimated MAGS
• 19 DFCs require a significant number of monit...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Evaluating MAGs & Pumping, DFCs and Waterl Levels: Preparing for Round 2 of Joint Groundwater Planning, Josh Grimes and James Beach

274 views

Published on

TAGD October 2013 Quarterly Meeting

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
274
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Fill in the missing blanks in the meter dataJanuary – May 2011July – December 2013Assign aquifer and formation based on NTGAM stratigraphy Weight pumping by formation based on screen lengthSum data: by county, basin and aquiferBy county and aquifer formationCompare to MAGs
  • Evaluating MAGs & Pumping, DFCs and Waterl Levels: Preparing for Round 2 of Joint Groundwater Planning, Josh Grimes and James Beach

    1. 1. Evaluating MAGs & Pumping, DFCs & Water Levels Preparing for Round 2 of Joint Groundwater Planning Josh Grimes, GM of PGCD James Beach, PG Prairielands GCD
    2. 2. Prairielands GCD • Formed in 2009 • Fee based district • Online registration, reporting, and payment • Financially supporting the Update of NTGAM • Not meaningfully involved in Initial Round of Joint Groundwater Planning (DFCs) Prairielands GCD
    3. 3. Background • Prairielands was assigned DFCs for 5 aquifers in 4 counties • DFCs were defined as feet of water level decline in 2060 Prairielands GCD
    4. 4. Cross-Section (Updated BEG Structure) Prairielands GCD
    5. 5. Comparing Pumping and MAGs 1. Estimate formations screened for both exempt and non-exempt wells 2. Proportion pumping 3. Move all pumping to a MAG formation Prairielands GCD
    6. 6. Prairielands GCD
    7. 7. Exempt Well Evaluation Prairielands GCD
    8. 8. TDLR Driller’s Logs 2001-2013 Well Count by Aquifer and Use BEG Structure Prairielands GCD Ellis Domestic Geothermal Industrial Injection Irrigation Public Supply Stock (blank) Hill Domestic Geothermal Industrial Injection Irrigation Public Supply Stock (blank) Johnson De-watering Domestic Geothermal Industrial Injection Irrigation Public Supply Stock (blank) Somervell De-watering Domestic Industrial Injection Irrigation Public Supply Stock (blank) Grand Total Above Fredericksbur Woodbine Woodbine g/Washita Paluxy 45 118 8 11 72 6 18 1 5 5 6 20 7 1 3 14 1 1 12 55 40 41 9 41 23 23 1 1 5 2 4 1 8 3 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 241 127 2 1 78 1 15 17 1 4 254 2 150 17 4 4 49 2 15 11 1 14 295 1 229 9 11 11 7 27 15 12 1 60 414 302 1 1 351 Glen Below Grand Rose Hensel Pearsall Hosston Hosston Total 7 178 89 18 1 7 5 26 5 13 17 1 3 11 7 1 28 195 3 2 4 105 7 2 4 15 4 4 1 5 8 5 1 19 53 76 99 2 179 3 1152 3 50 11 23 591 19 6 3 1 9 32 1 6 1 4 17 1 161 2 7 23 3 2 42 16 79 1 120 2 275 30 171 5 177 9 407 1 1 28 152 5 159 7 363 3 1 4 1 1 1 3 2 1 8 4 3 7 7 8 11 3 15 117 277 8 391 12 1932
    9. 9. Prairielands GCD COMPARISON OF DISTRICT METER DATA AND MAGS Prairielands GCD
    10. 10. Prairielands GCD
    11. 11. Prairielands GCD
    12. 12. Prairielands GCD
    13. 13. Prairielands GCD
    14. 14. Prairielands GCD
    15. 15. Big Picture Comparison • Meter data show yearly variation in pumping • Explained by drought other factors • Need to look at long term trends • Pumping generally less than MAGs on County basis Prairielands GCD
    16. 16. MORE DETAILED COMPARISON BY AQUIFER Prairielands GCD
    17. 17. Prairielands GCD
    18. 18. Prairielands GCD
    19. 19. Prairielands GCD
    20. 20. Prairielands GCD
    21. 21. Detailed Comparison • Hosston Aquifer production exceeds MAGs in 3 of 4 counties • Hensel and Glen Rose also exceed MAG in 2 counties Prairielands GCD
    22. 22. Prairielands GCD COMPARISON OF DFCS AND WATER LEVEL CHANGES Prairielands GCD
    23. 23. DFCs by county and aquifer Prairielands GCD
    24. 24. Findings from Historical Data • Limited wells and measurements from TWDB database to assess 19 DFCs • Short term data and long term data can result in different trends • Need to use long-term trends (10-20 years) • Need more wells and more measurements Prairielands GCD
    25. 25. Available Data Prairielands GCD
    26. 26. Prairielands GCD
    27. 27. Prairielands GCD
    28. 28. Prairielands GCD
    29. 29. Prairielands GCD
    30. 30. Prairielands GCD
    31. 31. Prairielands GCD
    32. 32. Prairielands GCD
    33. 33. Prairielands GCD
    34. 34. Prairielands GCD
    35. 35. Prairielands GCD
    36. 36. Comparison of DFC and water level decline Aquifer / County Woodbine Paluxy Glen Rose Hensel Hosston Ellis Less than DFC No Data No Data No Data Less than DFC Hill exceeds DFC Old data only (1941-1991) No Data Less than DFC exceeds DFC Johnson exceeds DFC exceeds DFC Less than DFC No Data Less than DFC Somervell NO DFC Less than DFC Old data only (1950-1986) exceeds DFC Less than DFC Fine Print 1. 2. 3. 4. Preliminary data and analysis Based on arithmetic averages of wells by county Summary based on limited information Evaluation not meant to imply any particular regulatory response Prairielands GCD
    37. 37. Agreement between MAG and DFC? Aquifer / County Woodbine Paluxy Glen Rose Hensel Hosston Ellis Agree No Data No Data No Data Disagree Hill Disagree No Data No Data Agree Agree Johnson Disagree Disagree Disagree No Data Disagree Somervell NO DFC Agree No Data Agree Agree Agree Water level decline > DFC and Pumping > MAG OR Water level decline < DFC and Pumping < MAG Disagree Water level decline > DFC and Pumping < MAG or Water level decline < DFC and Pumping > MAG Prairielands GCD
    38. 38. Summary • Pumping data from meters is helpful to compare to estimated MAGS • 19 DFCs require a significant number of monitoring wells • County/aquifer “disagreements” need a closer look, more data, better data, better model, etc. • Prairielands GCD: – – – – developing and improving monitoring network improving meter data supporting GAM update Focusing on long-term goals Prairielands GCD

    ×