COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY

Transcription

1 COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COORDINATION PROCEEDING SPECIAL TITLE (RULE 0(B)) ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER CASES AND RELATED ACTIONS. JUDICIAL COUNCIL COORDINATED PROCEEDING CASE NO. 0 APPEAL FILED: //, //, // & // APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY HONORABLE JACK KOMAR, JUDGE PRESIDING REPORTERS' TRANSCRIPT ON APPEAL SEPTEMBER 0, APPEARANCES: FOR DEFENDANT AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT: ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP BY: JUNE S. AILIN, ESQ. MILES P. HOGAN, ESQ. VON KARMAN AVENUE SUITE 00 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA () - (APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE.) VOLUME OF 0 SANDRA GECO, CSR #0 PAGES 0 TO OFFICIAL REPORTER -00

2 APPEARANCES CONTINUED: FOR REBECCA LEE WILLIS AND DAVID ESTRADA/RESPONDENTS: ES'RADA/RESPONDENTS: NIDDRIE ADDAMS FULLER, LLP BY: DAVID A. NIDDRIE, ESQ. 00 WEST BROADWAY SUITE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 0 () -0 KRAUSE KALFAYAN BENINK & SLAVENS, LLP BY: RALPH B. KALFAYAN, ESQ. 0 WEST C STREET SUITE 0 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 0 () -0 GREGORY I. JAMES, ESQ. SHOSHOiE SHOSHOtE DRIVE BISHOP, CALIFORNIA (0) - FOR MARK RITTER, SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE RITTER FAMILY TRUST AND MARK S. RITTER AND DANA E. RITTER/RESPONDENTS: BRUMFIELD & HAGAN, LLP BY: ROBERT H. BRUMFIELD, III, ESQ. F STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 0 () -0 FOR CHARLES TAPIA; NELLIE TAPIA FAMILY TRUST/RESPONDENTS: BRUMFIELD & HAGAN, LLP BY: ROBERT H. BRUMFIELD, III, ESQ. F STREET BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 0 () -0

3 0 CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: JCCP0 ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER CASES PHASE SIX LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 0, ROOM NO. APPEARANCES: HON. JACK KOMAR, JUDGE AS HERETOFORE MENTIONED REPORTER: AUDREY L. MOLINAR, CSR # TIME: : A.M. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING. BE SEATED, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. WHEN WE RECESSED, I BELIEVE MR. DUNN, YOU HAD HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT EXHIBIT SLIDE. MR. DUNN: YES, YOUR HONOR, AND WE'RE PREPARED TO CONTINUE WITH THE DIRECT EXAMINATION. WE'LL MOVE TO SLIDE. THE COURT: OKAY. DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) BY MR. DUNN: Q. DR. WILLIAMS THIS SLIDE IS UP ON THE SCREEN. SLIDE IS OUR LAND SUBSIDENCE AT SELECTED BENCHMARKS. NOW DR. WILLIAMS, YESTERDAY IN YOUR TESTIMONY WE HEARD ABOUT SELECTED BENCHMARKS. WE ALSO HEARD HOW THEY'RE USED IN DETERMINING OR MEASURING HISTORICAL SUBSIDENCE. WHAT DO WE SEE HERE? WHAT PART OF YOUR TESTIMONY IS ILLUSTRATED BY

4 0 SLIDE? A. THIS IS PART OF THE MODEL CALIBRATION AND PREDICTION PROCESS SIMULATION FOR THE FOUR -- THE FOUR PHYSICAL SOLUTION. AND YOU CAN SEE SCENARIO A, AND A. THE HISTORICAL PERIOD ENDS HERE ON THE SLIDE WHERE YOU SEE THE VERTICAL DASH LINE AND THEN THE PREDICTED PERIOD. AND WHAT THIS BENCHMARK SHOWS IS THAT WITH SCENARIO AND A, THERE STILL WILL BE CONTINUED SUBSIDENCE INTO THE FUTURE. AND WITH SCENARIOS AND A, THEIR SUBSIDENCE WILL STABILIZE AT THIS BENCHMARK. HOWEVER, I'D LIKE TO DRAW TO YOUR ATTENTION ON THE SLIDE TO THE OTHER INSET WHICH -- IT'S NOT BLOWN UP, BUT IT -- IT'S JUST TO THE LEFT OF THIS. YOU'LL SEE THE FOUR SCENARIOS ALSO AND EVEN SCENARIO AND A, WHICH IS THE UPPERMOST CURVES ON THIS CHART, THE INSET STILL SHOW SUBSIDENCE. AND AS I MENTIONED YESTERDAY, IN SOME AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE THICK AQUITARDS OR THICK CLAY LAYERS, IT MAY TAKE 0 YEARS OR MORE FOR THIS SUBSIDENCE TO STOP REGARDLESS OF THE CESSATION OF PUMPING. Q. AND IS THAT TYPE OF SUBSIDENCE COMMONLY CALLED RESIDUAL SUBSIDENCE? A. EXACTLY. IT'S THE RESIDUAL SUBSIDENCE, WHICH -- BECAUSE OF THESE AQUITARDS ARE VERY SLOW DRAINING AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME. Q. SO FOR LACK OF A -- WELL, FOR A LAYPERSON'S EXPLANATION, WOULD IT BE THAT HISTORICAL OVERDRAFT OF THE BASIN CAUSING SUBSIDENCE CAN CONTINUE OUT INTO THE FUTURE FOR SOME TIME? A. THAT'S CORRECT.

5 0 Q. AND JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THE RECORD, THE INSERT BOX THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO IS MARKED BM. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE. NOW, THIS SLIDE IS MARKED ADDITIONAL LAND SUBSIDENCE IN 0 YEARS SC- AND THEN CONTINUES WITH THE DESCRIPTION HERE. WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT, DR. WILLIAMS, ON SLIDE? A. THESE ARE ADDITIONAL LAND SUBSIDENCE WHICH WOULD OCCUR AT THE END OF 0 YEARS COMPARED TO THE START OF THE SIMULATION PERIOD. AND IT'S A --- CALLED A COLOR FLOOD MAP, BUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS -- HERE THAT THIS IS SCENARIO AND -- WHICH IS THE AVERAGE OF, PUMPING WITH IMPORTED WATER UNDER SEVERE DROUGHT, SO 0 YEARS -- THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 0 YEARS AND THE START OF THE PUMPING SIMULATION STILL SHOWS SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDENCE OCCURRING THREE FEET IN THE CENTER PORTION. SO THE DARKER COLORS SHOW HIGHER LEVELS OF SUBSIDENCE. Q. AND IF WE MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE, WHICH IS MARKED ADDITIONAL LAND SUBSIDENCE IN 0 YEARS SC-IA, SC-A, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE, DR. WILLIAMS? A. THIS IS SCENARIO A, WHICH IS STILL THE EXISTING PUMPING, HOWEVER, WITH IMPORTED WATER EQUAL TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD. BUT STILL IT HELPS IT CONSIDERABLY IN SOME PARTS OF THE BASIN, BUT THERE'S STILL GOING TO BE SUBSIDENCE IN THIS CENTRAL AREA SHOWN BY THE DARK RED OR THE RED COLORS SO -- WITH THE NUMBER, SO THAT WOULD BE TWO FEET OF SUBSIDENCE BY THE END OF THE SIMULATION PERIOD. Q. AND AGAIN, SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, BOTH ON THIS

6 0 SLIDE, SLIDE, AND THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, SLIDE, BOTH SCENARIOS SC- AND SC-A, ASSUMED NO RAMP DOWN IN PUMPING, BUT THERE'S PUMPING AT THE, AVERAGE GOING OUT FOR 0 YEARS? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. ALL RIGHT. LET'S THEN LOOK AT THE NEXT SLIDE, SLIDE, PLEASE. A. THIS IS SCENARIO, WHICH IS A RAMP DOWN IN PUMPING BUT WITH IMPORTED WATER UNDER THE SEVERE DROUGHT CONDITIONS,. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THE SLIDE IS MOSTLY GREEN, INDICATING THAT THE SUBSIDENCE HAS STABILIZED EXCEPT FOR THERE'S STILL SOME RESIDUAL AREAS IN THE MIDDLE HERE.,IT SHOWS A, SO THERE'S SOME -- STILL SOME SUBSIDENCE IN THAT AREA. Q. AND FOR THE RECORD, THIS SLIDE IS MARKED "ADDITIONAL LAND SUBSIDENCE IN 0 YEARS SC-" AND CONTINUES. AND DR. WILLIAMS, JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, THIS SLIDE TOGETHER WITH THE TWO PREVIOUS SLIDES, THESE ARE DEPICTIONS OF THE MODEL ANALYSIS TH0.T THAT YOU AND YOUR STAFF DID OR THIS IS INDICATIVE OF YOUR OPINION, CORRECT? A. YES, IT IS. Q. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO THEN TO THE FINAL SLIDE SERIES, SLIDE, AND IT'S MARKED "ADDITIONAL LAND SUBSIDENCE IN 0 YEARS." THIS IS SC-A SCENARIO. A. YES. THIS IS THE SCENARIO WITH A RAMP DOWN PLUS IMPORTED WATERS EQUAL TO SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD. IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE AND THIS -- THIS ONE STILL SHOWS SOME SUBSIDENCE. AND THIS, IN MY OPINION,

7 0 WOULD BE A RESIDUAL SUBSIDENCE, WHICH EVEN IF YOU TERMINATED ALL PUMPING, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE SOME -- SOME AREAS THAT WOULD STILL SUBSIDE. Q. NOW AGAIN, SO WE'RE CLEAR BECAUSE WE'RE ON THE SECOND DAY HERE OF TRIAL, BOTH SCENARIO SC- AND SCENARIO SC-A, THE RAMP DOWN, YOU TOOK THE NUMBERS THAT ARE IN THE PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION BEFORE THE COURT AND THOSE WERE THE RAMP DOWN NUMBERS; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND WHAT YOU DID IS FOR EACH OF THE ALLOCATIONS YOU INPUT THAT PARTICULAR RAMP DOWN NUMBER FOR EACH OF THE SETTLING PARTIES INTO THE MODEL; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THE TOTAL OF THE RAMP DOWN PUMPING WAS EQUAL TO THE NATIVE SAFE YIELD. Q. AND BECAUSE YESTERDAY YOU TESTIFIED THIS IS NOT WHAT'S CALLED A LUMP SUM MODEL PARAMETER BUT A DISTRIBUTED PARAMETER MODEL, THE KEY HERE IS THAT THE RAMP DOWN NUMBER IS SPECIFIC AS TO EACH PARTY AT THE LOCATION WHERE THEY OWN PROPERTY AND PUMP; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. WE -- WE PUT THE -- THE PUMPING IN THE AREAS WHERE THE WELLS WERE. Q. SO YOU DID NOT TREAT THIS AS A BACKUP AND JUST PUT IN A RAMP DOWN FIGURE AND COMPARE THAT TO THE YIELD? A. NO. THIS IS NOT A LUMPED PARAMETER MODEL, IT'S DISTRIBUTED PARAMETER. Q. SO JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, SO FOR EVERY PARTY THAT'S IN THE PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION WITH AN ALLOCATION OF WATER, THAT FINAL RAMPED DOWN NUMBER WAS INPUT INTO THE

8 0 MODEL AT THE LOCATION WHERE EACH OF THE PARTY USES OR PUMPS THE WATER; IS THAT CORRECT? A. YES. Q. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO THEN TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS SLIDE. A. THIS -- THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SCENARIO AND SCENARIO A. SCENARIO IS -- IS CURRENT PUMPING WITH DROUGHT CONDITIONS SUPPLEMENTAL WATER; SCENARIO A IS THE RAMP DOWN NATIVE SAFE YIELD PUMPING PLUS IMPORTING THE SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD IMPORTED WATER. AND BASICALLY IT SHOWS THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO SCENARIOS WOULD SHOW QUITE A STABILIZATION OF THE SUBSIDENCE IN THE AREA. IT MORE OR LESS REFLECTS THOSE PREVIOUS SLIDES SHOWING THAT THE TWO -- SCENARIOS AND A WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY EITHER STOP ENTIRELY OR MINIMIZE SUBSIDENCE. Q. SO WOULD IT BE A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION OF THIS SLIDE TO INDICATE THAT IF YOU TOOK ESSENTIALLY THE CURRENT SITUATION AND COMPARED IT TO THE PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THIS WOULD BE THE IMPROVEMENT IN LAND SUBSIDENCE? A. THAT'S CORRECT. IT WOULD BE. Q. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS NO. 0. A. THIS IS MY SUMMARY OF THE SIMULATION OF THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, AND ESSENTIALLY, THE MODEL SCENARIOS AND A, THE RAMP DOWN TO NATIVE SAFE YIELD AND THE RAMP DOWN. AND NATIVE SAFE YIELD WITH SUPPLEMENTAL WATER EQUAL TO THE -- THE SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD WILL RESULT IN A PHYSICAL SOLUTION. SPECIFICALLY, SCENARIO WILL STABILIZE

9 0 WATER LEVELS AND SUBSIDENCE AND SCENARIO A WILL ALSO ALLOW WATER LEVELS TO STABILIZE IN SUBSIDENCE. HOWEVER, IT WILL ALLOW WATER LEVELS TO RECOVER AND BASIN STORAGE WOULD BE -- WILL BE INCREASED. SO THEN ALSO REDUCTION IN GROUNDWATER PUMPING TO THE SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS AS WELL AS CONTINUED USE OF IMPORTED WATER WILL RESULT IN A SUSTAINABLE YIELD FOR THE ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN AND BRING THE BASIN BACK INTO BALANCE. Q. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NOW, YOU WERE ALSO ASKED TO EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF PUMPING BY PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ON THEIR WELL THAT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE ADJUDICATION AREA; IS THAT CORRECT? CONCLUSION? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND BEFORE WE -- AND DID YOU REACH A A. I DID. Q. WHAT IS THAT CONCLUSION? A. WELL, THE WELL, WHICH IS WITHIN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY AREA OF ADJUDICATION WOULD -- IF PUMPING AT,0 ACRE FEET A YEAR WILL RESULT IN A DECLINE IN BASIN STORAGE OF 00 ACRE FEET A YEAR. THE COURT: LET'S PAUSE FOR JUST A MOMENT SO THAT WE CAN CONNECT COURT CALL. (PAUSE IN THE PROCEEDINGS.) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED. Q. BY MR. DUNN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

10 0 HOW DID YOU GO ABOUT EVALUATING THE IMPACT OF THE PHELAN HILLS WELL WITHIN THE ADJUDICATION AREA? WHAT WORK DID YOU DO? A. WE SIMULATED THE PUMPING USING THE GROUNDWATER MODEL, THE SAME ONE THAT WE USED FOR PHYSICAL SOLUTION. WE CALLED THE SCENARIO WITH PHELAN PUMPING SCENARIO B. A, YOU REMEMBER, WAS THE RAMP DOWN PLUS IMPORTING SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD. AND THEN WE LOOKED AT WATER BALANCES AND THE RESULTS SHOW THAT THE WELL PUMPING AT,0 ACRE FEET A YEAR AND EXPORTED FROM THE BASIN WITHOUT ANY RETURN FLOW WOULD HAVE A NET LOSS OF 00 ACRE FEET PER YEAR FROM THE ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN. Q. ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S GO NOW FROM SLIDE, WHICH IS LABELED, BASIS FOR OPINION, TO SLIDE. NOW THIS SLIDE IS MARKED "MODEL CELL USED TO SIMULATE PUMPING FROM PPHCSD." WHAT'S DEPICTED HERE, DR. WILLIAMS? A. WELL, THIS SHOWS THE ANTELOPE VALLEY AREA OF ADJUDICATION. THE BROWN SHADED AREA ARE THE MODEL ACTIVE CELLS. I WONDER IF YOU CAN -- WENDY, YOU CAN ZOOM INTO THIS LOWER RIGHT AREA SO WE CAN LOOK CLOSER AT THAT. A LITTLE BIT MORE. THAT'S FINE. THIS LIGHT-SHADED AREA ARE THE MODEL ACTIVE CELLS AND THE GRAY AREA ARE CALLED NO FLOW CELLS. WHEN THIS MODEL WAS CREATED, THE -- THE PHELAN WELL WAS NOT IN ACTIVE SERVICE, IS MY UNDERSTANDING, AND THEREFORE, IN 0 WHEN THE ORIGINAL GRID WAS SET UP, IT DID NOT INCLUDE THIS WELL WHICH IS SLIGHTLY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COUNTY LINE ON THE WEST SIDE WITHIN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY AREA OF ADJUDICATION. WHAT WE DID TO

11 0 SIMULATE THE IMPACT OF THIS IS THAT WE ACTUALLY MOVED THIS WELL TO THE NEAREST ACTIVE CELL WITHIN THE MODEL AND THEN RAN OUR SIMULATIONS ON THAT. AND WE FELT THAT WAS CERTAINLY A DEFENDABLE WAY TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH STORAGE WOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF THE BASIN BY THE,0 ACRE FEET PER YEAR PUMPING. NOW KEEP IN MIND, AND I THINK THE NEXT SLIDE WOULD BE VERY INSTRUCTIVE. Q. THIS IS SLIDE NO I'M SORRY -- A. NO, IT'S THE WATER BALANCE. THAT ONE. YES, THIS IS THE WATER BALANCE FOR THE PHELAN WELL RUN AND BASICALLY WE HAD TWO SCENARIOS. A, OF COURSE WE DISCUSSED -- I'M SORRY. B IS WITHOUT PUMPING AND A WOULD BE WITH PUMPING. SO HERE YOU CAN SEE WITHOUT PUMPING, IT'S OUR SAFE YIELD NUMBER,,00. AND WITH PHELAN PUMPING, IF YOU ADD ANOTHER,0 ACRE FEET ONTO THAT YOU GET THE,00. SO THAT WAS -- THAT'S THE SCENARIO WITH PUMPING. NOW, THE STORAGE CHANGE WITHOUT THE WELL PUMPING IS A PLUS,00, THE BASIN IS REFILLING AT THAT RATE. AND THEN HOWEVER, WITH THE -- WITH THE PUMPING, IT IS REFILLING AT 00 ACRE FEET LESS. AND THE REASON IT'S -- IT'S NOT JUST,0 ACRE FEET IS BECAUSE SOME LOWERING OF THE WATER LEVEL BY THE PHELAN WELL PUMPING ALSO REDUCES THE OUTFLOW. WITHOUT THE WELL PUMPING THERE'S,00 ACRE FEET GOING TO EL MIRAGE VALLEY, BUT WITH THE PUMPING THERE IS A REDUCTION IN OUTFLOW OF 00 ACRE FEET OUTFLOW TO EL MIRAGE. SO IF YOU TAKE,0 MINUS 00, YOU GET 00, WHICH IS SHOWN BY THE REDUCTION HERE BETWEEN A AND B. Q. SO THIS IS SLIDE. IT'S LABELED "GROUNDWATER

12 BUDGET-ANNUAL AVERAGE OF MODEL YEARS TO 0." AND DR. WILLIAMS, JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, THE,0 ACRE FOOT ANNUAL NUMBER FOR PHELAN WAS GIVEN TO YOU BY LEGAL COUNSEL AS THEIR ALLOCATED NUMBER FOR PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. THE PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION? A. YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT. Q. LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, SLIDE. A. THIS -- THIS IS A SLIDE FROM -- IF YOU CAN ALSO ZOOM IN ON THAT. THIS IS A SLIDE OF THE SOUTHEAST PORTION. THE BLUE COLOR HERE ARE MODEL CELLS FOR THAT BOUNDARY CONDITION. AS I TESTIFIED IN THE LAST SLIDE, PUMPING THIS WELL WILL ACTUALLY LOWER WATER LEVELS. IF YOU CAN ZOOM IN AGAIN, PLEASE. THAT'S FINE. SO PUMPING THIS WELL WILL LOWER WATER LEVELS RESULTING IN LESS OUTFLOW WITH THIS WELL PUMPING. HOWEVER, THERE COULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 0 ACRE FEET GOING OUT. AND I TESTIFIED EARLIER, I THINK A YEAR AGO, REGARDING THE LOWERING OF WATER LEVELS WITHIN THE EL MIRAGE BASIN OF A HALF A FOOT PER YEAR AS PER WHAT WAS GIVEN TO ME BY PHELAN COMMUNITY SERVICES EXPERT, THAT IF YOU HAVE A HALF A FOOT PER YEAR LOWERING, THAT WOULD CAUSE AN ADDITIONAL 0 FEET PER YEAR OUTFLOW. AND I LOOKED CLOSELY AT THAT BECAUSE YOU MIGHT SAY, WELL, YOU'VE LOWERED THE WATER LEVEL HERE AND YOU HAVE LESS OUTFLOW. THAT'S TRUE, BUT THE CHANGE IN OUTFLOW, ASSUMING THE SAME AREA GOING OUT, IF YOU HAVE A HALF A FOOT OF HYDRAULIC CHANGE HERE, YOU WILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 0 ACRE FEET PER YEAR

13 GOING OUT EVEN WITH PHELAN WELL PUMPING -- PHELAN WELL PUMPING, SO THAT'S MY OPINION. Q. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO THEN TO SLIDE -- I'M SORRY. SLIDE IS LABELED IN THE UPPER RIGHT-HAND CORNER, "PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT WELL LOCATIONS." NEXT SLIDE IS SLIDE. A. YES. AND THIS WAS -- AND YOU CAN SEE THE DATE, OCTOBER, DURING, I BELIEVE, MY DEPOSITION. SO THIS IS WHERE WE WERE LOOKING AT THE COLUMN HERE IS NO LOWERING OF THE -- GHB STANDS.LUR FUR GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY. AND YOU CAN LOOK AT VARIOUS WELLS THAT WE LOOKED AT AND THEN LOWERING OF THE BOUNDARY AT A. FEET PER YEAR, ABOUT A HALF A FOOT PER YEAR. YOU CAN SEE THE OUTFLOW UNDER EACH CONDITION AND THE DIFFERENCE IS APPROXIMATELY, IF YOU AVERAGE THIS, ABOUT 0 ACRE FEET PER YEAR. IF THE -- IF THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY IS BEING LOWERED AT APPROXIMATELY ONE HALF FOOT A YEAR, THEN YOU'LL GET AN ADDITIONAL OUTFLOW OF APPROXIMATELY 0 ACRE FEET PER YEAR. AND THAT'S WHAT THIS SLIDE SHOWS. Q. SO WOULD THAT BE AN ADDITIONAL 0 TO THE 00? A. YES. Q. AND THE LOWERING OF GHB, GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY ELEVATION COLUMN THAT'S THERE, WHERE DID YOU GET THE INFORMATION REGARDING THAT LOWERING OF ELEVATION? WHERE DID THAT INFORMATION COME FROM? A. THAT'S MR. HARDER'S EXPERT REPORT. Q. ALL RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE, NO.. I THINK IS BLANK.. YEAH, IT'S JUST A BLANK IN THE

14 SERIES. IS BLANK. NEXT SLIDE IS, WHICH IS LABELED RETURN FLOWS. SO DR. WILLIAMS, HAVE YOU COMPLETED THEN YOUR OPINION, YOUR TESTIMONY REGARDING PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT IMPACT? A. YES, I HAVE. Q. ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE THE REST OF THE SLIDES THAT WE HAVE PREPARED AND YOU'RE PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT WOULD RELATE TO THE -- TO THE RETURN FLOW COMPONENTS FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL SAFE YIELD AND NATIVE SAFE YIELD; IS THAT CORRECT? A. YES. Q. AND THIS IS -- WOULD THIS BE TO EXPLAIN HOW ON THE NATIVE SIDE A RECHARGE OF 0,000 ACRE FEET COMPUTES TO A TOTAL NATIVE SAFE YIELD OF,00? A. YEAH, THERE'RE MORE EDUCATIONAL SLIDES. THE TESTIMONY WAS ALREADY GIVEN BY MR. SCALMANINI. MR. DUNN: I DON'T THINK WE'LL GO OVER THOSE THEN AT THIS POINT. WE'LL CONCLUDE WITH THE DIRECT EXAMINATION OF DR. WILLIAMS. THANK YOU. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I THINK GIVEN THE LAST TESTIMONY THAT -- MS. AILIN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CROSS EXAMINE THIS WITNESS? MS. AILIN: BEFORE HE TALKS ABOUT RETURN FLOW? THE COURT: I'M SORRY. I CAN'T HEAR YOU. WHAT, QUESTION DID YOU ASK? MS. AILIN: NOT -- NOT RELEVANT. THE COURT: OKAY. MS. AILIN: AT THIS POINT.

15 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. AILIN: Q. COULD WE HAVE SLIDE UP ON THE SCREEN, PLEASE? DR. WILLIAMS, WHERE IS PHELAN'S PUMPING IN THIS ANALYSIS OF NATIVE SAFE YIELD AND ADJUSTED NATIVE SAFE YIELD? A. IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS. Q. BUT YOU DID INCLUDE PHELAN'S PUMPING IN THE REST OF YOUR ANALYSIS FOR YOUR FIRST OPINION, CORRECT? OPINION? A. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE FIRST Q. YOUR OPINION THAT THE PROPOSED PHYSICAL SOLUTION WILL EVENTUALLY BRING THE ADJUDICATION AREA BACK INTO BALANCE. A. THAT'S CORRECT, BUT IT DIDN'T HAVE THE -- THE PHELAN PUMPING IN IT. IT'S NOT PART OF THE RAMP DOWN. Q. NOW, IN YOUR TESTIMONY YESTERDAY ABOUT WHERE THE MODEL THAT YOU'VE BEEN USING CAME FROM -- COULD WE HAVE, I THINK IT'S SLIDE -- SORRY. THAT'S NOT IT. ACTUALLY LET'S HAVE SLIDE. A. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. Q. NOW, YOU TESTIFIED THAT THE MODEL COVERS THAT ENTIRE RECTANGLE ON THE MAP, BUT THAT THE MODEL WAS ONLY TURNED ON IN THE YELLOW CELLS; IS THAT CORRECT? ON? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. WHO DECIDED WHICH CELLS WERE GOING TO BE TURNED A. THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DONE BY U.S. GEOLOGICAL

16 SURVEY IN THEIR ORIGINAL MODEL CELLS. WHICH ONES ARE ACTIVE AND INACTIVE, I BELIEVE WERE DETERMINED IN 0 BY THE ORIGINAL MODEL AUTHOR. Q. AND DID YOU CONSIDER LOOKING INTO HAVING OTHER CELLS TURNED ON? A. WE DID NOT. Q. WHY NOT? A. WE WANTED TO USE THE USGS -- WE STARTED WITH THE MOD MODIFICATION WHICH WAS CALIBRATED. AND THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT WE DID WAS TO UPDATE AND RECALIBRATE ACCORDING TO WHAT WE FELT WAS A MORE ACCURATE PUMPING FIGURE, BUT WE DIDN'T TOUCH ANY OF THE BOUNDARIES, CONDITIONS -- GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARIES, FAULT BOUNDARIES. WE DIDN'T LOOK AT -- WE USED THE SAME NUMBER OF LAYERS, SAME CELL SIZE, STRESS PERIODS AND SO ON. Q. EACH ONE OF THE CELLS IS ABOUT A THIRD OF A SQUARE MILE, RIGHT? A. YEAH, THEY'RE,000 METERS ON A SLIDE SO SQUARED, YEAH. Q. AND THE CELLS IN THE MODEL THAT HAVE BEEN TURNED ON DON'T ACTUALLY COVER THE ENTIRE ADJUDICATION AREA, DO THEY? A. THEY DO NOT. THEY COVER THE -- THE ALLUVIAL BASIN PRIMARILY. Q. AND SOME OF THE WELLS THAT YOU TOOK INTO ACCOUNT IN YOUR OPINION ABOUT HOW THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION WILL RESULT IN THE ADJUDICATION AREA COMING INTO BALANCE, SOME OF THOSE WELLS ARE NOT LOCATED IN AREAS COVERED BY THE

17 MODEL, RIGHT? SPECIFICALLY. A. I DON'T KNOW. YOU'D HAVE TO SHOW THEM Q. LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SLIDE. AND I DON'T HAVE A POINTER LASER OR OTHERWISE, BUT ON THE EASTERN SIDE -- ON THE EASTERN SIDE -- YES, YOU'VE HONED RIGHT IN ON THE WELLS THAT I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT. THOSE WELLS ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE WELL -- I GUESS, I SHOULD SAY THERE'S A CLUSTER OF WELLS TO THE WEST OF THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTIES. THOSE WELLS ARE NOT IN THE AREA COVERED B' THE MODEL, ARE THEY? A. YES, THEY ARE. Q. THEY ARE? WOULD YOU TAKE A LOOK BACK AT SLIDE, PLEASE? NOW, THOSE WELLS ARE RIGHT ABOUT -- THANK YOU -- ARE RIGHT ABOUT THIS JOG IN THE COUNTY LINE, AREN'T THEY? A. WELL, THEY'RE RIGHT IN THIS KIND OF BEDROCK AREA RIGHT AT THE BOUNDARY OF THE MODEL, SO THEY WERE PART OF THE PUMPING THAT WAS PUT IN SO THEY WERE MOVED INTO THESE AREAS. Q. SO -- A. THEY'RE ACTUAL WELLS -- EXCUSE ME -- THEY'RE WELLS THAT HAVE PRODUCTION OF VALUES IN THEM. Q. AND SO YOU TOOK THOSE WELLS AND KIND OF MOVED THAT PRODUCTION INTO SOME OTHER PART OF THE MODEL OR SOME PART OF THE MODEL THAT WAS FUNCTIONING? A. YES. Q. AND YOU DID THE SAME THING WITH THE RETURN FLOW

18 FROM THOSE WELLS, RIGHT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND LET'S ALSO TAKE A LOOK AT SLIDE. THESE ARE THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIERS WELLS, AND THESE WELLS OVER HERE THAT BELONG TO WEST VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT THAT ARE SHOWN IN RED ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE ADJUDICATION AREA, IF YOU LOOK AT SLIDE, THOSE AREN'T ACTUALLY LOCATED IN ACTIVE CELLS IN THE MODEL EITHER, ARE THEY? A. WELL, LET ME LOOK AT SLIDE AGAIN. HERE AGAIN THOSE ARE VERY CLOSE TO THE BOUNDARY. AND WE -- AND BECAUSE THEY HAD PRODUCTION THAT WE NEEDED TO ACCOUNT FOR, WE MOVED THEM INTO THE -- THE ACTIVE CELL AREAS. Q. NOW YOU ALSO MOVED THE RETURN FLOW FROM THOSE WELLS, CORRECT? A. YES. Q. NOW, FOR PURPOSES OF THE MODEL, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO'S DOING THE PUMPING, DOEL, DOES IT? A. THE MODEL DOESN'T, NO. Q. BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE MODEL, IT DOES MATTER WHERE THE PUMPING IS OCCURRING, CORRECT? A. IT DOES, YES. Q. AND THAT'S BECAUSE EACH OF THOSE CELLS REFLECTS THE SPECIFIC GEOLOGY IN THAT THIRD OF A SQUARE MILE AREA, CORRECT? A. THE GEOLOGY IS VARIABLE, YES. Q. NOW LET'S TAKE A LOOK A': Al' SLIDE. AND IN YOUR TESTIMONY YESTERDAY, YOU SAID THAT THIS SLIDE SHOWED THE WELLS THAT WERE USED FOR CALIBRATING THE MODEL; IS THAT

19 CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND OVER HERE IN THE WESTERN PART OF THE MODEL AREA, THERE AREN'T ANY -- I'M SORRY, EASTERN -- THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE MODEL AREA, THERE ARE NO CALIBRATION WELLS, CORRECT? A. NO, THESE ARE THE -- YES, THERE'S -- IN THE VERY SOUTH EASTERN PORTION, THERE WAS NO TARGET WELLS, AS WE CALL THEM, THAT WERE USED FOR CALIBRATION. Q. SO THE CLOSEST -- WELL, WHAT -- HOW DOES THE MODEL DEAL WITH AREAS WHERE THERE ARE NO WELLS TO USE FOR CALIBRATION? A. WELL, OBVIOUSLY IT CAN'T MATCH ANYTHING IF THERE'S NO WELLS TO MATCH, BUT THERE ARE WELLS THAT ARE IN THAT SOUTH EASTERN AREA AND THEY WERE USED FOR CALIBRATION. Q. THE -- THE CLOSEST WELL TO PHELAN'S WELL -- LET ME START THAT OVER AGAIN. THE CLOSEST CALIBRATION WELL TO PHELAN'S WELL IS THIS WELL THAT'S NO. P, CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND THAT'S LOCATED ABOUT EIGHT MILES FROM WELL, ISN'T IT? A. I DIDN'T COUNT THAT MILES. Q. WELL, THERE'S A SCALE OVER HERE ON SLIDE. AND BASED ON THAT SCALE, IT LOOKS TO BE ABOUT EIGHT MILES FROM THE CLOSEST CALIBRATION WELL TO WHERE WELL IS LOCATED, CORRECT? A. I THINK THAT WOULD BE ACCURATE, YES. Q. AND NONE OF THE WELLS THAT PHELAN ACTUALLY

20 OPERATES WERE USED IN CALCULATING THE MODEL, CORRECT? A. NO, NONE OF THE WELLS IN -- IN PHELAN. Q. WELL IS LOCATED IN A PART OF THE GROUNDWATER BASIN THAT'S REFERRED TO AS THE BUTTE SUB UNIT. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT? A. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND THIS WELL P, THAT'S NOT LOCATED IN THE BUTTE SUB UNIT, IS IT? BIT SOUTH. A. WELL, IT'S -- IT'S NOT REALLY. IT'S A LITTLE Q. SO IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE PERLIN SUB UNIT? A. YES, I BELIEVE IT IS. Q. AND IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WATER LEVELS IN THE BUTTE SUB UNIT HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN SOMEWHAT MORE STABLE THAN THEY HAVE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE ADJUDICATION AREA? ACCURATELY. A. I'D HAVE TO REVIEW THAT TO ANSWER THAT Q. SO YOU DON'T KNOW THAT, AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY? A. WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HYDROGRAPHS, YEAH, I DON'T -- I DON'T HAVE ALL OF THOSE. WHAT YOU'RE, ASKING I'D HAVE TO REVIEW THE HYDROGRAPHS TO ANSWER THAT CORRECTLY. Q. DID THE DIFFERENCE IN WATER LEVELS AND DIFFERENT SUB UNITS IMPACT YOUR OPINION IN ANY WAY? MR. ZIMMER: OBJECTION; VAGUE AS TO WHICH OPINION. Q. BY MS. AILIN: YOUR OPINION REGARDING THE EFFECT OF THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION.

21 A. WELL, LET ME QUALIFY THAT. THE DIFFERENCE IN WATER LEVELS, YES, IT DID IMPACT MY OPINION BECAUSE WE WERE LOOKING AT CHANGES IN WATER LEVELS HYDROGRAPHS AND CHANGES IN STORAGE OVER THE ENTIRE ANTELOPE VALLEY AREA OF ADJUDICATION WITHIN THE ALLUVIAL, YOU KNOW, THE BOUNDARY OF THE PUMPING. AND SO THE -- THE CHANGE IN STORAGE IN THE -- SPECIFICALLY THE FLATTENING OF THE HYDROGRAPHS, nydrographs, THE STOPPING OF THE OVERDRAFT AND EVEN THE INCREASE IN WATER LEVELS DID AFFECT MY OPINION. Q. LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SLIDE. AND ON SLIDE -- HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO GET TO THAT? A. YES, I GOT IT. Q. IN SLIDE, IN THIS FIRST ROW OF NUMBERS AT THE TOP THERE'S A NUMBER ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE THAT'S IDENTIFIED AS "ET." DOES "ET" STAND FOR EVAPOTRANSPIRATION? THE AIR? A. YES. Q. AND THAT'S WATER THAT'S BASICALLY JUST LOST TO A. WELL, YES. IT'S USUALLY SHALLOW WATER LEVELS AND IT'S EVAPORATING OR TRANSPIRING TO PLANTS. Q. HOW DID YOU DECIDE THAT FOR PURPOSES OF YOUR WATER BALANCE BASED ON THE ANNUAL AVERAGE PUMPING FROM TO 0 THAT EVAPOTRANSPIRATION WAS,00 ACRE FEET PER YEAR? A. WELL, THAT'S AN AVERAGE AND THOSE ARE VALUES THAT THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY USED. Q. NOW, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SLIDE. AND IN

22 SLIDE, YOUR NUMBER FOR EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN ALL FOUR SCENARIOS IS ZERO, CORRECT? A. YES, IT IS. Q. SO IS THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION GOING TO PREVENT EVAPOTRANSPIRATION FROM HAPPENING? A. IT IS. IT'S -- ACCORDING TO THIS, THE WATER LEVELS ARE LOWERED, THEY'RE ALREADY LOWERED CONSIDERABLY. KEEP IN MIND THAT OTHER FIGURE YOU WERE LOOKING AT WAS THE HISTORICAL PERIOD. SO THERE WAS, IN, A LOT HIGHER WATER LEVELS AND ON AVERAGE THERE WAS MORE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DURING THAT HISTORICAL RUN. WATER LEVELS ARE CONSIDERABLY LOWER STARTING OUT SO WITH SCENARIOS AND A, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY BETTER. AND THEY'RE STILL LOW IN SCENARIO AND A. HOWEVER, A IS REFILLING THE BASIN AT,000 ACRE FEET A YEAR. Q. SO AT SOME POINT IF THE MODEL WORKS THE WAY OR IF THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION WORKS THE WAY YOU THINK IT'S GOING TO, YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO A POINT WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO ONCE AGAIN HAVE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION, AREN'T YOU? A. I COULDN'T ANSWER THAT UNLESS I -- I RAN THE MODEL FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME. Q. BUT THERE ARE PLANTS IN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY, THERE'S A LOT OF AGRICULTURE THAT GOES ON, CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. SO THERE'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE SOME EVAPOTRANSPIRATION OR I SHOULD A TRANSPIRATION FROM THOSE PLANTS, CORRECT? A. WELL, THAT'S PART OF THE -- IN THE IRRIGATION

23 EFFICIENCIES AND SO YES, THERE IS. Q. AND THAT'S NOT REFLECTED IN SLIDE OR IN YOUR OPINION, IS IT? A. NO. Q. AND THE SAME IS TRUE WITH SLIDE, WHAT YOU'VE CALLED SCENARIO B. YOU HAVEN'T ACCOUNTED FOR ANY EVAPOTRANSPIRATION IN THAT SCENARIO EITHER, HAVE YOU? A. GIVE ME A MINUTE. I'LL GO TO THAT. NO, THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION -- THIS IS JUST A COMPARISON OF THE RUN -- THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION RUN WHICH HAD NATIVE SAFE YIELD PLUS SUSTAINABLE SAFE YIELD IMPORTS. THIS IS JUST A COMPARISON BETWEEN THAT RUN AND PHELAN WELL PUMPING. YES, THERE'S NO EVAPOTRANSPIRATION, EITHER SCENARIO. Q. NOW, GOING BACK TO SLIDE, DID YOU EVER CONSIDER RUNNING A SCENARIO A VERSION OF SLIDE THAT PROVIDED FOR SOME EVAPOTRANSPIRATION? A. WELL, THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION HERE AGAIN, I'LL REPEAT IT. WE USED THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, THEIR MOD WHICH WAS DONE IN. AND WE TOOK THEIR VALLEYS OF THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. THE ONLY THING WE CHANGED IN THAT FOR OUR HISTORICAL PERIOD WAS THE PUMPING NUMBERS, WHICH WE FELT ARE OUR PUMPING NUMBERS WERE MORE ACCURATE. WE DIDN'T -- WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. Q. SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE USGS WAS TAKING THE POSITION THAT GOING FORWARD THERE WOULD BE NO EVAPOTRANSPIRATION? CALIBRATED. A. THEY DIDN'T RUN THE MODEL FORWARD, THEY JUST

24 Q. SO BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T RUN THE MODEL FORWARD, YOU CAN'T REALLY TIE THAT ZERO FOR EVAPOTRANSPIRATION TO THE USGS NUMBERS, CAN YOU? A. WELL, THEY ARE THE USGS NUMBERS AND THEY'RE HISTORICAL CALIBRATION. AND THEN WE JUST DID THE SAME HISTORICAL CALIBRATION BUT WITH A REVISED PUMPING FIGURE. SO WHATEVER THE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION CAME OUT WITH THEIR MODEL -- OUR MODEL WAS THE SAME WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PUMPING. Q. NOW, LET'S TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT SLIDE. AND SLIDE SHOWS OVER ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE A SUB SURFACE OUTFLOW TO THE FREMONT VALLEY OF,0 ACRE FEET A YEAR, CORRECT? A. YES. Q. AND IN SLIDE YOU HAVE ZERO OUTFLOW TO FREMONT VALLEY, BUT YOU HAVE SUB SURFACE INFLOW FROM FREMONT VALLEY. WHAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT CHANGE? A. WELL, THESE ARE FUTURE -- FUTURE SCENARIOS, FUTURE MODEL RUNS PREDICTING WITH THE FOUR SCENARIOS THAT WE SUGGESTED, A, AND A. SO WATER LEVEL CONDITIONS CHANGE, OUTFLOW CONDITIONS MAY CHANGE TO INFLOW CONDITIONS AND SO ON. Q. AND YOU'RE PREDICTING THAT OVER TIME, THE AMOUNT OF INFLOW FROM THE FREMONT VALLEY IS GOING TO DROP FROM 00 ACRE FEET A YEAR TO 0 ACRE FEET A YEAR, CORRECT? A. YES, THAT'S WHAT THE SIMULATION SHOWS. Q. BUT OVER HERE ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, YOU SHOW SUB SURFACE OUTFLOW TO EL MIRAGE VALLEY AND THAT NEVER

25 CHANGES, CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. WHY DOES THAT NEVER CHANGE WHEN YOU DO HAVE A CHANGE IN THE INFLOW AND OUTFLOW FROM THE FREMONT VALLEY? A. WELL, THIS IS BASED ON A GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY THAT WE USED FOR THE OUTFLOW. THEY'RE NOT -- THIS IS REFLECTING A LOT OF DIFFERENT GRADIENTS GOING ON, CHANGES IN THE WATER LEVELS THAT YOU DON'T SEE ON THE SOUTH EASTERN SIDE AS MUCH. Q. WELL, YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ON THE SOUTH EASTERN SIDE BECAUSE THERE ARE NO MONITORING WELLS OVER THERE AND THERE ARE NO CELLS OF THE MODEL OVER THERE, CORRECT? A. WE DIDN'T LOOK INTO THE PHELAN WELLS EAST OF THE COUNTY LINE. Q. WELL, ACTUALLY YOU DID LOOK INTO THE PHELAN WELLS EAST OF THE COUNTY LINE, DIDN'T YOU, BECAUSE YOUR CALCULATION OR THE INFORMATION THAT'S SHOWN IN EXHIBIT -- I'M SORRY -- SLIDE, THAT ACTUALLY TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE PUMPING OF ALL OF PHELAN'S WELLS, DOESN'T IT? A. THIS -- THIS WAS A SEPARATE SEPAPATE ANALYSIS APART FROM THE -- THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION RUNS. WELL, WE DID ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE LOWERING OF -- WE LOOKED AT THE ELEVATIONS BASED ON SOME WELLS EAST OF THE COUNTY LINE, A PRIMARILY. AND THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR OUR OUTFLOW CALCULATION IF THE WATER LEVEL EAST OF THE COUNTY LINE WAS LOWERED APPROXIMATELY HALF A FOOT A YEAR. Q. WELL, WHEN YOUR DEPOSITION WAS TAKEN ON JANUARY

26 ,, YOU TESTIFIED ABOUT WHAT'S SHOWN IN SLIDE, DIDN'T YOU? A. YES. Q. AND YOU WERE ASKED WHICH OF THE PHELAN WELLS WERE LOOKED AT FOR PURPOSES OF THE MODEL AND YOU -- YOU RESPONDED, "I THINK LEVEL,,, A AND B." NOW, THAT'S ALL OF PHELAN'S WELLS, ISN'T IT? A THAT'S CORRECT. Q. SO WITH ALL OF PHELAN'S WELLS PUMPING, YOU HAVE 0 ACRE FEET A YEAR GOING OUT TO THE EL MIRAGE VALLEY, RUT IF YOU ONLY LOOK AT WELL, YOU HAVE 00 ACRE FEET STAYING IN THE ADJUDICATION AREA THAT WOULDN'T OTHERWISE BE THERE, CORRECT? MR. ZIMMER: ARGUMENTATIVE AND COMPOUND. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I'M SORRY. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT AGAIN, PLEASE? MS. AILIN: COULD I HAVE THE QUESTION READ BACK? THE WITNESS: IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION WAS -- THE COURT: LET HER READ THE QUESTION BACK. (THE PREVIOUS QUESTION WAS READ BACK.) THE WITNESS: THE OPINION I GAVE IN OCTOBER OF LAST YEAR WAS MORE THAN JUST THE ISSUE OF THE HALF A FOOT LOWERING THE 0 ACRE FEET THAT WE ESTIMATED. IT WAS ALSO OTHER ISSUES REGARDING RETURN FLOWS BEING COMPLETELY UTILIZED WITHIN PHELAN PINON HILLS COMMUNITY SERVICES

27 DISTRICT. THE CURRENT ANALYSIS USING THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THE SLIDE, WHICH SHOWS A LOWERING OR A LESSENING OF OUTFLOW IS STRICTLY A CALCULATION THAT THE MODEL DOES IN FACT THE LOWERING. WE'RE STILL USING THE SAME GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY, BUT IT -- THE WATER LEVEL IS BEING LOWERED IN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY SIDE SUCH THAT THERE'S LESS OUTFLOW GOING. THERE'S,00 ACRE FEET RATHER THAN THE,00 WITHOUT PUMPING. SO THERE'S A BENEFIT TO THE BASIN OF 00. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THERE'S,0 GOING OUT AND BEING EXPORTED FROM ANTELOPE VALLEY AND SO THAT'S THE 00. THIS IS A TOTALLY SEPARATE ISSUE FROM THE DECLINE IN HEAD, WHICH WOULD BE A CHANGE IN HYDRAULIC HEAD UNDER ANY SCENARIO ASSUMING THE OUTFLOW AREA IS THE SAME. Q. BY MS. AILIN: AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY, THAT GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY IS IN AN AREA WHERE THERE ARE NO CALIBRATION WELLS, CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUT IN AS THE VALUE. Q. AND THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY IS IN AN AREA WHERE THERE ARE NO WORKING CELLS IN THE MODEL, CORRECT? A. THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY IS A -- THEY ARE INACTIVE CELLS. Q. THEY ARE INACTIVE CELLS? A. YES, THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY ARE INACTIVE CELLS. Q. BUT IT'S NOT WHERE WELL IS LOCATED? A. NO. WELL IS NOT LOCATED IN THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY CELLS.

28 Q. NOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OUTFLOW TO EL MIRAGE VALLEY, EXACTLY WHERE ARE YOU PUTTING THAT BOUNDARY OF EL MIRAGE VALLEY? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE EASTERN BOUNDARY OF THE ADJUDICATION AREA, IN OTHER WORDS, THE COUNTY LINE? OR ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT SOMEPLACE FURTHER EAST? MR. KUHS: OBJECTION; COMPOUND. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, IT SHOWS EXACTLY WHERE THE OUTFLOW IS GOING. IT'S GOING OUT THROUGH THE GENERAL HEAD BOUNDARY CELLS. Q. BY MS. AILIN: SO THAT'S NOT RIGHT WHERE THE EL MIRAGE VALLEY BEGINS, IS IT? A. WELL, THERE -- I'M SAYING IT IS. TECHNICALLY, THE ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN GOES IN THAT AREA A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE AREA OF ADJUDICATION STOPS AT THE L.A. COUNTY LINE. Q. SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT OUTFLOW TO THE EL MIRAGE VALLEY, WHAT YOU'RE REALLY SAYING IS OUTFLOW FROM THE ADJUDICATION AREA? A. THAT'S CORRECT. YOU'RE CORRECT. Q. BUT THAT OUTFLOW IS ACTUALLY TO ANOTHER PART OF THE ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN AS DEFINED BY BULLETIN? A. TECHNICALLY YOU'RE CORRECT, BUT IT'S OUTSIDE OF THE ANTELOPE VALLEY AREA OF ADJUDICATION. Q. AND THERE'S HYDRAULIC CONTINUITY ACROSS THE COUNTY LINE, CORRECT? A. IN THIS AREA, YES.

29 Q. DOES PHELAN'S PUMPING MEAN THAT THE ANTELOPE VALLEY ADJUDICATION AREA IS NOT GOING TO STABILIZE IN TERMS OF GROUNDWATER LEVELS? MR. KUHS: OBJECTION -- WITHDRAWN. THE WITNESS: IT WILL STABILIZE. IT -- IT JUST SHOWS THERE WILL BE A LOSS OF STORAGE OF ABOUT 00 ACRE FEET A YEAR. Q. BY MS. AILIN: THERE'S ACTUALLY A LOSS OF STORAGE THAT HAPPENS FROM EVERYBODY'S PUMPING, CORRECT? EVERYBODY'S PUMPING TAKES WATER OUT OF THE ADJUDICATION AREA, CORRECT? MR. ZIMMER: VAGUE AS TO EVERYBODY. Q. BY MS. AILIN: EVERYONE WHO'S PUMPING. A. YES, THE WHOLE -- THE WHOLE MODELING, YEAH, HAS EXTRACTION. SOME OF THAT GOES BACK FROM RETURN FLOWS, SO WHEN YOU PUMP A WELL, OBVIOUSLY YOU LOWER STORAGE IN THE VICINITY OF THAT WELL. YES, IT'S THE WAY GROUNDWATER WORKS. Q. AND IN YOUR OPINION, PHELAN'S PUMPING IS NOT GOING TO PREVENT THE ADJUDICATION AREA FROM RECOVERING, CORRECT? A. IT IS -- IT'S STILL SCENARIO AND A WILL STILL BE RECOVERING WITH OR WITHOUT PHELAN'S WELL PUMPING. Q. DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION REGARDING WHETHER PHELAN SHOULD PAY A REPLENISHMENT ASSESSMENT FOR PUMPING WATER THAT WOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE ADJUDICATION AREA IF PHELAN WERE NOT PUMPING? MR. KUHS: OBJECTION; BEYOND THE SCOPE.

30 THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MS. AILIN: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION? MR. KALFAYAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: GO AHEAD. MR. KALFAYAN: MAY I DO IT FROM OUR SEAT? THE COURT: WELL I -- MR. KALFAYAN: I'LL MOVE TO THE PODIUM. MR. ZIMMER: I HAVE ONE HOUSEKEEPING MATTER THAT RELATES TO EXHIBITS THAT DR. WILLIAMS RELIED UPON WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE. JUST LIKE TO MARK AS THE STIPULATING LAND OWNER EXHIBIT NO., PREVIOUSLY ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE EXHIBITS -- FROM MR. SCALMANINI,, 0,,,,,,,, AND. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WITH THOSE NUMBERS? MR. ZIMMER: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO ORDERED. (MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION, STIPULATING LAND OWNER EXHIBIT NO., DOCUMENTS.) CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. KALFAYAN: Q. MAY WE GO TO SLIDE, PLEASE? GOOD MORNING, DR. WILLIAMS. A. GOOD MORNING. Q. DR. WILLIAMS, I'M SHOWING YOU SLIDE NO. AND I

31 WANTED TO ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT OPINION NO.. YOU USED THE WORDS THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION. WHEN YOU USE THE WORD PHYSICAL SOLUTION, YOU'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE HYDROLOGY OF THE BASIN; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. THE WATER BALANCE. Q. OKAY. AND YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ALLOCATION OF THAT HYDROLOGY TO ANY OF THE PARTIES IN THIS ADJUDICATION; IS THAT CORRECT? TESTIMONY. MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; MISCHARACTERIZES THE THE WITNESS: THE HYDROLOGY TS THE HYDROLOGY WITHIN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY. MR. KALFAYAN: AGAIN. THERE'S NO -- THE COURT: WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. I THINK YOU NEED TO CLARIFY IT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT HYDROLOGY. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: SURE. ARE YOU GIVING ANY OPINION REGARDING HOW THE WATER IN THE BASIN, THE HYDROLOGY, SHOULD BE ALLOCATED? OPINION. THE COURT: YOU MEAN AMONG PARTIES? MR. KALFAYAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; HE'S NOT OFFERING THAT THE COURT: WELL, HE CAN SAY THAT. THE WITNESS: NO, I HAVEN'T -- I HAVE NO OPINION ON ALLOCATION OF HYDROLOGY. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: SIMILARLY, YOU HAVE NO OPINION REGARDING HOW THE HYDROLOGY SHOULD BE -- STRIKE

32 0 THAT. SIMILARLY, YOU HAVE NO OPINION REGARDING THE PRODUCTION RIGHTS THAT ARE ALLOCATED IN THIS PROPOSED JUDGMENT? THE COURT: SAME QUESTION, DIFFERENT WORDS. MR. ZIMMER: CALLS FOR LEGAL OPINION. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: IS THAT CORRECT, DR. WILLIAMS? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. IF YOU READ ON, IT SAYS THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT IN OPINION. ISN'T IT MORE CORRECT TO SAY THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPOSED JUDGMENT AND PHYSICAL SOLUTION? A. CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT, PLEASE? Q. SURE. YOU USE THE WORDS, "THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION AS OUTLINED IN THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT." THAT'S NOT THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, IS IT? A. WELL, IT'S THE ONE THAT HAS THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT. Q. RIGHT. AND IT'S REALLY THE PROPOSED JUDGMENT OF PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THAT'S WHAT YOU MEANT, CORRECT? A. WELL, YES. YES, IT IS. Q. DID SOMEBODY TELL YOU TO PUT THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT IN THERE? A. I WROTE THAT IN THERE. I WAS LOOKING AT THAT DOCUMENT AND I THOUGHT IT HAD DESCRIPTION PHYSICAL SOLUTION. Q. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE OPINION.

33 MR. ZIMMER: YOUR HONOR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE WITNESS'S STANDPOINT, THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE OF WHAT MR. KALFAYAN JUST ARGUED. IT IS IN FACT CONTAINED IN THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS STIPULATION. IT IS THE STIPULATED JUDGMENT PHYSICAL SOLUTION THAT IS INCORPORATED INTO THE THE SMALL CLASS STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT SO -- MR. KALFAYAN: YOUR HONOR, MY POINT IS THAT THERE WAS A SMALL PUMPER CLASS STIPULATION THAT WAS FILED, IT DID CONTAIN AS AN EXHIBIT, BUT THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIERS POSTED IT AS A SEPARATE DOCUMENT AND IT'S THE DOCUMENT THAT -- THAT THEY -- THAT HE USED. HOWEVER, YOUR HONOR, I CAN GO ON. THIS IS NOT REALLY THAT IMPORTANT. THE COURT: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IT OR THE DIFFERENCE UNLESS YOU'RE TRYING TO ARGUE SOMETHING. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: THANK YOU. LET'S GO DOWN TO THE THREE COMPONENTS THAT YOU HAVE IN THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION. LET'S LOOK AT THE RAMP DOWN. THAT'S JUST A REDUCTION IN PUMPING, CORRECT? A. YES, TO NATIVE SAFE YIELD. Q. AND THE RAMP DOWN THAT YOU LOOKED AT WAS -- IT HAD A TWO-YEAR COMPONENT AND A FIVE-YEAR COMPONENT. THE TWO-YEAR COMPONENT WHERE THE PUMPING STAYED AT THE SAME LEVEL; IS THAT CORRECT? A. YES, CURRENT PUMPING FOR TWO YEARS, THREE RAMP DOWN. Q. AND THEN FIVE YEARS PUMPING WOULD BE REDUCED EQUALLY OVER THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD; IS THAT CORRECT?

34 A. YES, IT WOULD BE -- NOT EVENLY, BUT A LINEAR REDUCTION TO THE AGREED UPON NUMBER FOR SAFE YIELD. Q. DO YOU HAVE ANY OPINION REGARDING THE LENGTH, THE TERM OF THAT RAMP DOWN? A. WELL, THE RAMP DOWN, THE TWO-YEAR PRE RAMP DOWN, THE FIVE-YEAR RAMP DOWN FROM EXISTING PUMPING TO THE NATIVE SAFE YIELD NUMBERS. Q. BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY OPINION REGARDING WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE SEVEN YEARS OR IT SHOULD BE THREE YEARS OR FIVE YEARS? THAT NUMBER WAS GIVEN TO YOU BY COUNSEL; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A. YES, I JUST -- MR. LEMIEUX: I'M OBJECTING TO THE QUESTION. I THINK IS ASKING ABOUT OTHER FORMS OF PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THAT PARTY LACKS STANDING TO MAKE THAT -- TO INQUIRE ABOUT THOSE TOPICS. THE COURT: I'M GOING TO OVERRULE THE OBJECTION AT THIS POINT. I THINK IT'S PRELIMINARY TO SOMETHING ELSE. MR. KALFAYAN: IT IS, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS: I -- I JUST USED THE FIVE-YEAR RAMP DOWN PERIOD AS IN THE SETTLEMENT. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: FOR EXAMPLE, IF THE RAMP DOWN PERIOD WAS SHORTER, WOULD MORE WATER BE AVAILABLE IN THE BASIN? SOLUTION. MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; INCOMPLETE HYPOTHETICAL. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. LEMIEUX: WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PHYSICAL

35 THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. LEMIEUX: THANK YOU. MR. KALFAYAN: LET'S GO TO THE NEXT ITEM. THE COURT: LET'S BEAR IN MIND HERE THIS WITNESS IS TESTIFYING AS TO THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND THAT'S ALL HIS TESTIMONY IS, SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOUR QUESTIONS NEED TO BE LIMITED TO THAI. MR. KALFAYAN: YES, I -- YOUR HONOR, YES THERE'S THE HYDROLOGY COMPONENT AND I THINK THAT'S THE SCOPE OF THIS EXPERT'S TESTIMONY, WHICH IS IN THE HYDROLOGY COMPONENT OF THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION AND I'M GOING TO TRY TO ADDRESS MY QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT. THE COURT: IT ONLY FOCUSES ON THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT, THAT'S WHAT'S HE'S EVALUATING. MR. KALFAYAN: I WILL FOCUS MY QUESTIONS ON THAT, YOUR HONOR. SO MAY I PROCEED? THE COURT: YES. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: THE IMPORTED SUPPLEMENTAL WATER, YOU'D AGREE THAT THERE'S A -- THAT PROVIDES AN UPPER LIMIT OF WATER IN THE BASIN; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. ZIMMER: THAT'S VAGUE. MR. KUNEY: OBJECTION; VAGUE AND AMBIGUOUS. THE COURT: IF ANYBODY'S GOING TO OBJECT, YOU NEED TO STAND UP, STATE YOUR NAME AND STATE YOUR OBJECTION SO THE RECORD'S VERY CLEAR THANK YOU. AND THE OBJECTION IS OVERRULED. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS, YOU USED AN AVERAGE FOR DELIVERIES OF THE STATE WATER PROJECT

36 OF -AND-A-HALF PERCENT; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; THAT MISCHARACTERIZES THE WITNESS'S TESTIMONY. HE TESTIFIED THAT HE USED THE AVERAGE OF AND. MR. KALFAYAN: LET ME RESTATE, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: RESTATE. REPHRASE. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: REPHRASE. IN CALENDAR YEAR AND FOR THE IMPORTED WATER DELIVERIES, ISN'T IT CORRECT YOU USED -AND-A-HALF PERCENT OF THE TABLE "A" AMOUNT AS IMPORTED WATER DELIVERIES IN THIS ADJUDICATION? A. THAT'S CORRECT. I USED THAT FOR SCENARIO AND SCENARIO BASED ON THE TABLE "A" CONTRACT AMOUNT, THE,, -AND-A-HALF PERCENT OF TEAT WAS ASSUMED BE THE DROUGHT CONDITIONS THAT WE USED FOR SUPPLEMENTAL IMPORT FOR SCENARIO AND. Q. SO IN AND (SIC), YOU -- YOU LOOKED AT THE DROUGHT CONDITION AND THE DELIVERIES THAT WERE MADE AND IT WAS LIMITED ON AVERAGE TO -AND-A-HALF PERCENT OF THE TABLE A AMOUNT, CORRECT? A. CORRECT. Q. MR. DUNN ASKED YOU YESTERDAY IF THERE WAS A WORST CASE SCENARIO REGARDING DELIVERIES FROM THE STATE WATER PROJECT. MR. DUNN: NO. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: CAN YOU THINK OF THE WORST SCENARIO POSSIBLE IN TERMS OF DELIVERIES FROM THE STATE WATER PROJECT? MR. DUNN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR; MISCHARACTERIZES

37 MY QUESTION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: IS IT CONCEIVABLE IN THAT THERE MAY BE ZERO WATER DELIVERIES FROM THE STATE WATER PROJECT? MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE WITNESS: THE PURPOSE OF SCENARIO AND -- MR. KUHS: IS THERE A QUESTION? THE WITNESS: -- PRIMARILY WAS USE EXISTING PUMPING AND THEN TRY TO COME UP WITH AN IMPORT OF SUPPLEMENTAL WATER THAT WAS NOT ZERO AND SO WE CONCLUDED, MYSELF, THAT LET'S USE THE DROUGHT CONDITIONS WHICH IS CERTAINLY -- WE ARE IN -- IN A DROUGHT. AND SO THAT'S WHEN I SELECTED -- DIRECTED MY STAFF TO USE, WHICH IS -AND-A-HALF PERCENT. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: AND YOU DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A DROUGHT CONDITION NEXT YEAR OR NOT, CORRECT? MR. ZIMMER: OBJECTION; CALLS FOR SPECULATION; IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE WITNESS'S TESTIMONY. IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO -- THE COURT: OKAY. NOW AGAIN, THE COURT REPORTER BY NOW KNOWS WHO SOME OF YOU ARE -- MR. ZIMMER: MR. ZIMMER. MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: THE THIRD COMPONENT OF YOUR OPINION, AND THAT'S OPINION NO., IS THE MONITOR AND

38 MANAGE THE BASIN. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT METERING IS A GOOD WAY TO MONITOR THE PRODUCTION OF WATER FROM GROUNDWATER WELLS IN THE BASIN? DIRECT. MR. DUNN: OBJECTION; BEYOND THE SCOPE OF HIS THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T LOOK -- THE COURT: THE OBJECTION'S SUSTAINED. THE WITNESS: I'M SORRY. MR. ZIMMER: THAT WAS MR. DUNN THAT OBJECTED, JUST FOR THE RECORD. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: COULD WE GO TO SLIDE NO., PLEASE? DR. WILLIAMS, I BELIEVE YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY THAT THIS SHOWS SUBSIDENCE IN THE ANTELOPE VALLEY; IS THAT CORRECT? A. YES, IT SHOWS THE HISTORICAL SUBSIDENCE BETWEEN 0 AND. Q. AND YOU ALSO, I BELIEVE, TESTIFIED THAT THE SUBSIDENCE SHOWED APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET OF SUBSIDENCE? MR. KUHS: OBJECTION; VAGUE AS TO LOCATION. THE WITNESS: YES, IT SHOWS SIX FEET OF SUBSIDENCE IN THE VICINITY OF LANCASTER. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT THE CAUSE OF SUBSIDENCE WAS EXCESSIVE PUMPING? A. YES. Q IF WE CAN GO TO SLIDE NO., LANCASTER SLIDE NO. IS ADJUSTMENT OF PUMPING IN MOD-. DOES THAT SHOW THE LEVEL OF PUMPING IN THE USGS MODEL AND -- IN BLUE AND

39 THE ANTELOPE VALLEY SUMMARY EXPERT REPORT IN RED; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. COULD YOU TELL FROM THAT SLIDE IF THE LAND OWNER'S PUMPING EXCEEDED THE NATIVE SAFE YIELD FROM TO 0? A. WE WEREN'T ASKED DO THAT ANALYSIS AND DID I NOT DO THAT ANALYSIS. Q. BUT THE COMBINED PUMPING FROM TO 0, YOU'D AGREE WITH ME EXCEEDED THE NATIVE SAFE YIELD? THE COURT: DIDN'T THE COURT MAKE FINDINGS ABOUT THAT? THAT'S A FACT. NOBODY DISPUTES THAT FACT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. MR. KALFAYAN: YOUR HONOR, I WAS JUST LAYING THE FOUNDATION TO THE NEXT SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE. OR TRYING TO. THE COURT: WELL, I THINK YOU'RE ARGUING YOUR CASE, Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: LET'S MOVE ON. CAN WE GO TO SLIDE? AM I CORRECT WHEN I -- WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THIS CHART, I SEE INFLOWS IN YELLOW AND OUTFLOWS IN BLUE. BLUE? A. NO, IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Q. I'M SORRY. OUTFLOWS IN YELLOW, INFLOWS IN A. THAT'S CORRECT. Q. AND THE -- THE CONSEQUENCE OF THE PUMPING -- OF THE EXCESSIVE PUMPING, WAS IT CHANGE OF STORAGE OF NEGATIVE,00? A. THAT'S CORRECT.

40 Q. NEXT SLIDE NO., PLEASE. AND THE PUMPING THAT WE LOOKED AT IN PRIOR -- IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, WAS THAT THE PUMPING BY THE BASIN BY THESE PARTIES REFLECTED ON THIS SLIDE, THE PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIERS, LANDS OWNERS, THE SMALL PUMPERS, CENTRAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CITY OF LANCASTER AND PPHCSD? MR. DUNN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR; BEYOND THE SCOPE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE ONLY ISSUE HERE IS HIS OPINION AND WHAT IT'S BASED ON. AND THAT DEALS WITH, OBVIOUSLY, HIS USE OF THE MODEL AND THE FACTS THAT ARE PUT INTO IT. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT YOU -- YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION THUS FAR HAS IGNORED THAT PRINCIPLE ISSUE. MR. KALFAYAN: YOUR HONOR, I WASN'T GOING TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE MODEL, BUT THERE WERE SLIDES THAT CAME IN THAT I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT BECAUSE THEY DEAL SPECIFICALLY WITH SOME ISSUES IN THIS CASE. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE LOOK AT SLIDE -- YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO SKIP -- I'M JUST GOING TO GO STRAIGHT TO SOME -- DR. WILLIAMS, YOU'D AGREE THAT THE SUPPLY OF WATER COMES FROM NATIVE RECHARGE, CORRECT? THE WITNESS: YES. Q. BY MR. KALFAYAN: RETURN FLOWS FROM NATIVE RECHARGE, CORRECT? A. YES. Q. AND THE TOTAL OF THE NATIVE RECHARGE AND RETURN FLOW FROM NATIVE RECHARGE IS,00; IS THAT CORRECT? A. THAT'S CORRECT.

41 Q. AND IN ORDER AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF WATER IS RETURN FLOWS FROM IMPORTED WATER, CORRECT? A. YES. Q. AND THE RETURN FLOWS FROM IMPORTED WATER IS,00, CORRECT? RIGHT? A. YES. Q. THAT GIVES YOU THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD, A. YES, 0,000 ACRE FEET A YEAR. Q. ANY PUMPING IN EXCESS OF THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD WOULD CAUSE AN OUT OF BALANCE EVENT? A. THAT'S CORRECT. MR. DUNN: YOUR HONOR, I'M SORRY. GIVEN COUNSEL'S STATEMENT ON THE RECORD THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MODEL, MAY WE HAVE SOME I POSE AN EVIDENCE CODE SECTION AS TO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONING AT THIS POINT. THE COUNSEL -- THE COURT: WOULD YOU TELL US WHERE YOU'RE GOING? MR. KALFAYAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. YOUR HONOR, THERE IS A SOURCE OF WATER THAT'S AVAILABLE AND THE SOURCES ARE THE -- WHAT DR. WILLIAMS TESTIFIED TO. THEY ARE THE NATIVE SAFE YIELD, THE RETURN FLOWS AND THAT'S THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD. AND SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO SHOW IS THAT THAT'S THE ONLY SOURCE OF WATER THAT'S AVAILABLE AND THERE'S NO OTHER OPINION REGARDING HOW -- HOW -- HOW THAT WATER IS ALLOCATED AMONG THE PARTIES. SO THERE'S ALSO ISSUES REGARDING THE DROUGHT PROVISIONS AND THE ALLOCATION TO THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS. AND THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE

42 0 PHYSICAL SOLUTION AND I'D LIKE TO ASK HIM ABOUT THOSE, WHERE THERE'S AN ALLOCATION OF WATER UNDER DROUGHT PROVISIONS AND THE SMALL PUMPER CLASS ALLOCATION THAT MAY NOT BE FACTORED INTO THE OPINIONS REGARDING THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD. THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD WAS DETERMINED TO BE 0,000 AND THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, DROUGHT PROVISIONS SPECIFICALLY, THAT GO BEYOND THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD. AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THE WITNESS HAS TAKEN THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. THE COURT: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BEYOND THE SUSTAINABLE -- MR. KALFAYAN: WELL, I DON'T KNOW. THE COURT: WELL, YOU'RE USING A WORD. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT WORD? MR. KALFAYAN: WELL, IS IT ABOVE THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD? YIELD? THE COURT: IS WHAT ABOVE THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE MR. KALFAYAN: THE DROUGHT PROVISIONS -- THE ALLOCATIONS UNDER THE DROUGHT PROVISIONS, ARE THEY ABOVE THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD? THE COURT: YOU MEAN THE PRODUCTION. MR. KALFAYAN: NO. THERE ARE ALLOCATIONS IN THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION THAT EXCEED THE TOTAL SUSTAINABLE YIELD AND I DON'T KNOW IF DR. WILLIAMS HAS ACCOUNTED FOR THOSE IN HIS MODEL. THE COURT: MR. DUNN. MR. DUNN: YES, IT'S AN EVIDENCE CODE SECTION

43 OBJECTION. IT CONSISTS OF TWO PARTS. FIRST OF ALL, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS WITNESS'S TESTIMONY OR THE USE OF THE MODEL. COUNSEL IS ESSENTIALLY ARGUING HIS CASE. HE'S TAKING THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, AND HE'S CREATING LEGAL ARGUMENTS OR OTHER TYPE OF ARGUMENTS, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE. THIS IS UNRELATED TO THIS WITNESS'S TESTIMONY. COUNSEL HAS DISAGREEMENTS WITH THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION DOCUMENT, NOT THE MODEL. THE COURT: WELL, THE -- THE QUESTION THAT I JUST HEARD PHRASED DOES GO TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT DID HE USE TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF THE GLOBAL SOLUTION BY DETERMINING WHAT HE PUT INTO THE MODEL. AND I THINK HE CAN ASK THAT QUESTION. GO AHEAD. OH, MR. ZIMMER, YOU WANTED -- MR. ZIMMER: YES, YOUR HONOR. MR. ZIMMER. ALL I WOULD SIMPLY SAY IS I THINK MR. KALFAYAN IS GETTING A LITTLE TWISTED AROUND ON TERMS. THERE'S ALREADY BEEN DETERMINATION BY THE COURT THAT THE SAFE YIELD IS 0,000 ACRE FEET, WHICH IS MADE UP OF,00 NATIVE SUPPLY INCLUDING THE RETURN FLOWS FROM THAT NATIVE SUPPLY PLUS THE RETURN FLOWS FROM IMPORTED WATER. I AGREE WITH MR. DUNN THAT ALL OF THAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY THE COURT AND THERE IS A ISSUE THERE FOR PLOWING BACK INTO THAT. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT MR. KALFAYAN IS SAYING THAT IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERS PUT INTO THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION, THAT SOMEHOW THAT'S INCORRECT. MR. KALFAYAN: YOUR HONOR, YES, THERE'S A -- THERE'S ALLOCATIONS IN THE -- THERE ARE ALLOCATIONS IN THE PHYSICAL SOLUTION AND I DON'T KNOW IF DR. WILLIAMS HAS ACCOUNTED FOR