PP KFL Informationalmeeting May9

Northern Kearny and Finney County Local
Enhanced Management Area (KFL)

MAY 9, 2017 INFORMATIONAL MEETING
WWW.KFL2017.WEEBLY.COM
Agenda
I. Welcome and Introductions
II. Summary of Water Right Owner Feedback
III. Groundwater level changes and flow
IV. Flexibilities, Temporary Transfers and Benefits of Proposed LEMAs
V. Review of LEMA Proposal Options for Calculating Allocations
VI. Due Consideration for Past Conservation
VII. Water Conservation Areas (WCAs) Benefits of Pre-Enrollment
VIII. Next Steps Where do we go from here?
IX. Questions, Feedback and Discussion
Welcome and
Introductions
DWANE ROTH KFL STEERING COMMIT TEE MEMBER
KFL Steering Committee Members
Dwane Roth Randy Richmeier
Mike Standley Bob Knoll
Cory Weathered Roger Unruh
Jeff Mai Doug Mai
Clayton Maddox Kyle Maddox
Steven Sterling Monte Miller
Troy Dumler
Groundwater level
changes and flow
BROWNIE WILSON KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Some of the
highest
measured
aquifer declines
in the past five
years have
occurred within
the KFL
boundary
KFL Boundary
and Water Right
Development
KFL Average Water Use Per Year,
2006-2015
Municipal Recreation Stockwater
5% 0% 1%
Thermal
Hydraulic Dredging
0%
Irrigation
94% Industrial
0%
Industrial, Recreation,
Hydraulic Dredging, and
Thermal Exchange each
make up less than 1% of
the total use for the area
Hydraulic Dredging Industrial Irrigation Municipal Recreation Stockwater Thermal Exchange
Water
Level
Changes
(2005-2016)
Average Groundwater Use
= 112,249 AF
Average Water Level

Decline =
3.13 feet
Based on this relationship, using averages, on the short term:
26.3% reduction in average use = Stable Water Levels = Sustainable

20% reduction in average use = 0.76 feet annual decline = decline reduced by 76%
10% reduction in average use = 1.95 feet annual decline = decline reduced by 38%
Water table
elevations and
groundwater flow,
2014 -2016
Water table
elevations and
groundwater flow,
2014 -2016
West to
East
Land
Surface,
Water Table
and
Bedrock
Profiles
Water table
elevations and
groundwater flow,
2014 -2016
North to
South
Land
Surface,
Water
Table and
Bedrock
Profiles
Observation Wells
and Proposed
Index Well Site
Flexibilities, Temporary
Transfers and Benefits of
Proposed LEMAs
MIKE MEYER KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (KDA),
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES (DWR)
Flexibilities, Temporary Transfers and
Benefits of Proposed LEMAs
Extending the usable lifetime of the local aquifer
5-Year Allocation
Temporary Transfers of Allocations
Consolidated Well Unit (connected by pipe)
Within 2-miles (not to exceed annual authorized quantity)
Greater than 2-miles (not to exceed annual average historical use)
Not limited to ownerships agreements can be made with other water right owners
Priority area for cost-share for irrigation technology and soil moisture probes
Portion of unused allocation may be rolled-over after 5-year period if LEMA timeframe is
extended
Annual Authorized Annual Historical KFL Allocation 5 X Authorized 5 X Historic Use
Quantity Use Quantity
Water Right #1 75 70 297.5 375 350
Water Right #2 25 21 89.25 125 105
100 AF 91 AF 386.75 AF
WR #1 WR #2
WR #1 WR #2
375 AF 11.25 AF
375 AF 2 Miles 11.25 AF
Consolidated Well Unit

Up to 2 Miles
Can move allocation from WR#1 to
Can move allocation from WR#1 to WR#2 (or
WR#2 (or Vice Versa) up to 5 X
Vice Versa) up to 5 X Authorized Quantity as
Authorized Quantity as long as 5-year WR #1 WR #2 long as 5-year KFL allocation of the rights is not
KFL allocation of the rights is not 350 AF > 2 Miles 36.75 AF exceed.
exceed.
More than 2 Miles
Can move allocation from WR#1 to WR#2 (or Vice
Versa) up to 5 X Historic Use as long as 5-year KFL
allocation of the rights is not exceeded.
Review of LEMA
Proposal Options for
Calculating Allocations
CHRIS BEIGHTEL KDA, DWR
Four Options Under Evaluation
OPTION A OPTION B OPTION C
Sliding Scale based Sliding Scale based

Flat 15% off on Comparison of on Maximum Use
Historical Use Historical Use to to Authorized
(2006-2015) Authorized Quantity or Pump
Quantity Test
Option A Flat 15% off Historical Water
Use (2006-2015)
Year Reported
Water Use
Authorized Quantity = 258
2006 184
2007 119
Average reported water use (2006-2015) = 164
2008 168
2009 143
LEMA Allocation =
2010 164
164 x 0.85 (applies 15% conservation factor) =
2011 177 140 acre-feet per year x 5 =
2012 235 699 acre-feet
2013 165
2014 174
2015 115
Option B Sliding Scale based on Comparison of
Historical Use to Authorized Quantity
Year Reported
Water Use Authorized Quantity = 258
2006 184
Average reported water use (2006-2015) = 164
2007 119
2008 168 Average reported water use compared to Authorized Quantity = 164/258 =
63.5%
2009 143
2010 164 Conservation Factor = 63.5% of 24% or 15.24%
2011 177
2012 235 LEMA Allocation =
164 x 0.847 (applies 15.24% conservation factor) =
2013 165 139 acre-feet per year x 5 =
2014 174 695 acre-feet
2015 115
Option C Sliding Scale based on Comparison of
Maximum Use to Authorized Quantity or Pump Test
Year Reported Authorized Quantity = 258
Water Use
Maximum Annual Quantity Pumped = 235
2006 184
2007 119 Maximum annual reported water use compared to
Authorized Quantity = 235/258 = 91%
2008 168
2009 143 Conservation Factor = 91% of 40.5% or 36.9%
2010 164 LEMA Allocation =
2011 177 235 x 0.63 (applies 36.9% conservation factor) =
2012 235 148 acre-feet x 5 =
741 acre-feet
2013 165
OR
2014 174 Pump Test = 250gpm
2015 115 250 x 1440 x 120 days/325,861 x 5 = 665 acre-feet
How do these options compare for
various water rights?
Average Historical Use (2006-2015) = Average Historical Use (2006-2015) = Average Historical Use (2006-2015) =
290 acre-feet 197 acre-feet 85 acre-feet
Authorized Quantity = Authorized Quantity = Authorized Quantity =
320 300 312
Average Acre/Inches = 27 Average Acre/Inches = 16 Average Acre/Inches = 7.3
Option % LEMA LEMA 5- Option % LEMA LEMA 5- Option % LEMA LEMA 5-

Reduction Annual Year Reduction Annual Year Reduction Annual Year
Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation
A 15 246 1231 A 15 167 836 A 15 72.4 362

B 21.7 227 1135 B 15.7 166 830 B 7 80 400
C 16.6 232 1160 C 12.8 171.3 857 C 0 94 470
Option A Flat 15% Option B Sliding Scale of Historical Use Option C Sliding Scale of Max Use
meeting conservation goal?
Maximum Overall
Percent Effective
Reduction Reduction
Option A Flat 15% 15% 11.15%
Option B Sliding Scale Historical Use 24% 11.06%
Option C Sliding Scale Max Use 25% 10.99%
meeting conservation goal?
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Number of Number of Number of Number of
Reductions over 30% Reductions 20%-30% Reductions 10%-20% Reductions <10%
Flat 15% Sliding Scale from Historical Use Sliding Scale from Max Use
Due Consideration for
Past Conservation
CHRIS BEIGHTEL KDA, DWR
Due Consideration for Past Conservation
Can be used to account for years without use or with limited use due
to situations such as equipment breakdowns, voluntary
conservation, or years of Ditch water use
Replace years of non-use or limited use with:
Average use without zeros
Pump Test
50% Net Irrigation Requirement (NIR) for Corn
Year Reported Water Average Use w/o Pump Test (350gpm) 50% NIR
Use Zeros (130 Acres, KE County)
2006 0 185 161
2007 0 185 161
2008 0 185 161
2009 143 143 143 143
2010 164 164 164 164
2011 25 25 185 161
2012 20 20 185 161
2013 165 165 165 165
2014 174 174 174 174
2015 115 115 115 115
Average 81 115 175 157
Water Conservation
Areas (WCAs) Benefits
of Pre-Enrollment
SUSAN METZGER - KDA
What is a Water Conservation Area
(WCA)?
Voluntary agreement by a water right owner or a group of water
right owners to reduce water withdrawals
Provides benefits of flexibilities such as multi-year allocations,
movement of allocations, and allowing for new uses of the water
WCAs do not make a permanent change in the water right
Can be limited in duration to allow water right owners to try out
control
Pre-LEMA Water Conservation Area Example (Using Option A Flat 15% off Historical Use)
Water rights to be enrolled in WCA total annual authorized quantity 980 AF

Annual average historical use 513 AF
Applying 15% conservation factor, WCA annual allocation 436 AF
WCA 5-year allocation 2180 AF
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annualized WCA Allocation 436 AF 436 AF 436 AF 436 AF 436 AF
Actual Use 400 AF 405AF
LEMA Implemented in 2019
Rollover Quantity
10% Annualized WCA Quantity (436 * .10) = 43.6 AF
10% Unused Annualized WCA Quantity ((36 + 31) * 0.1) = 6.7 AF
Total Quantity Rolled Over into LEMA (43.6 + 6.7) = 50.3 AF
Next Steps Where do
we go from here?
NORTHERN KEARNY AND FINNEY COUNTY LOCAL ENHANCED
MANAGEMENT AREA (KFL)
Questions, Feedback
and Discussion
NORTHERN KEARNY AND FINNEY COUNTY LOCAL ENHANCED
MANAGEMENT AREA (KFL)
Water Right Owner Survey
https://fs22.formsite.com/KansasDeptAg/form48/index.html

PP KFL Informationalmeeting May9

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PP KFL Informationalmeeting May9

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Northern Kearny and Finney County Local

Enhanced Management Area (KFL)

Average Water Level

Based on this relationship, using averages, on the short term:

26.3% reduction in average use = Stable Water Levels = Sustainable

Consolidated Well Unit

Sliding Scale based Sliding Scale based

Option % LEMA LEMA 5- Option % LEMA LEMA 5- Option % LEMA LEMA 5-

A 15 246 1231 A 15 167 836 A 15 72.4 362

Water rights to be enrolled in WCA total annual authorized quantity 980 AF

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

LEMA Implemented in 2019

You might also like