Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name: Walker Creek
Water Body ID: CAR2011201319980928173807
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
17597
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Alkalinity as CaCO3
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of ten samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17597, Alkalinity as CaCO3
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 29283
 
Pollutant: Alkalinity as CaCO3
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 10
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Ten water column samples were assessed. None of the samples exceeded the objectives.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Recommendations for Water Quality Criteria, Gold Book, USEPA,1986. Alakalinity standard at 20000 ug/L (chronic).
Guideline Reference: Quality Criteria for Water 1986. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Regulations and Standards. Washington D.C. EPA 440/5-86-001.
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were taken from four monitoring locations (201WLK030, 201WLK090, 201WLK100, and 201WLK140).
Temporal Representation: Samples were taken from dry, spring and wet seasons.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The QA/QC was in compliance with SWAMP's Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
17598
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Ammonia (Unionized) | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of ten samples exceeded thewater quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17598, Multiple Pollutants
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28054
 
Pollutant: Ammonia (Unionized) | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 10
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Ten water samples were assessed for total ammonia and un-ionized ammonia. None of them exceeded the evaluation criteria.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.

The discharge of wastes shall not cause receiving water to contain concentrations of un-ionized ammonia in excess of 0.025mg/l annual median.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: For Total Ammonia: EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure."
Guideline Reference: 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
 
Spatial Representation: Four monitoring locations (WLK030, WLK090, WLK100, and WLK140) were sampled for ammonia.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from three seasons: dry, spring and wet.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The QA was in compliance with SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
17746
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Anthracene | Benzo(a)anthracene | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | Chlordane | Chrysene (C1-C4) | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Heptachlor epoxide | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Naphthalene | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17746, Multiple Pollutants
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28514
 
Pollutant: Anthracene | Benzo(a)anthracene | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | Chlordane | Chrysene (C1-C4) | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Heptachlor epoxide | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Naphthalene | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Concentrations of anthracene, fluorene, napthalene, phenanthrene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthrene, pyrene, PAH (total), PCB (total), chlordane, dieldrin, DDD/DDE/DDT, endrin, heptachlor epoxide, and HCH, gamma in one sediment sample collected in spring 2005 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) Anthracene - 845 ug/kg; Fluorene - 536 ug/kg; Naphthalene - 561 ug/kg;
Phenanthrene -1170 ug/kg; Benz(a)anthracene - 1050 ug/kg; Benzo(a)pyrene - 1450 ug/kg; Chrysene - 1290 ug/kg; Fluoranthene - 2230 ug/kg; Pyrene - 1520 ug/kg; PAH (total) - 22800 ug/kg; PCB (total) - 676 ug/kg; Chlordane - 17.6 ug/kg; Dieldrin - 61.8 ug/kg; DDD (sum op + pp) - 28 ug/kg; DDE (sum op + pp) - 31.3 ug/kg; DDT (sum op + pp) - 62.9 ug/kg; DDT (total) - 572 ug/kg; Endrin - 207 ug/kg; Heptachlor epoxide - 16 ug/kg; HCH, gamma - 4.99 ug/kg.
Guideline Reference: Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
 
Spatial Representation: One sediment sample was collected from "watershed integrator' site on Walker Creek.
Temporal Representation: Sediment sample was collected in October of 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
17747
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Arsenic | Cadmium | Copper | Lead | Mercury | Zinc
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess these pollutants. Zero samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17747, Multiple Pollutants
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28662
 
Pollutant: Arsenic | Cadmium | Copper | Lead | Mercury | Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury and zinc in one sediment sample collected in October 2001 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) arsenic - 33 mg/kg dw; cadmium - 4.98 mg/kg dw; chromium - 111 mg/kg dw; copper - 149 mg/kg dw; lead - 128 mg/kg dw; mercury - 1.06 mg/kg dw; nickel - 48.6 mg/kg dw; zinc - 459 mg/kg dw.
Guideline Reference: Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
 
Spatial Representation: One sediment sample was collected at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Walker Creek.
Temporal Representation: Sediment sample was collected in October of 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
17750
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Chromium (total)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. One of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17750, Chromium (total)
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28770
 
Pollutant: Chromium (total)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Chromium exceeded the PEC (sediment quality guidelines) with a sample value of 114 mg/kg in one sediment sample collected in October 2001.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) chromium - 111 mg/kg dw.
Guideline Reference: Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
 
Spatial Representation: One sediment sample was collected at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Walker Creek.
Temporal Representation: Sediment sample was collected in October of 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
17749
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Nickel
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. One of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17749, Nickel
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28769
 
Pollutant: Nickel
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Nickel exceeded the PEC (sediment quality guidelines) with a sample value of 73.7 mg/kg in one sediment sample collected in October 2001.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (threshold effect concentration) nickel - 48.6 mg/kg dw.
Guideline Reference: Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
 
Spatial Representation: One sediment sample was collected at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Walker Creek.
Temporal Representation: Sediment sample was collected in October of 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
17599
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of nine samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17599, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 29013
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 9
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Comprehensive water quality assessment was conducted at Walker Creek watershed as part of SWAMP assessment in 2002. Continuous field monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at two or three locations. The 7-day average minimum concentration of dissolved oxygen was computed for 5 out of 9 deployments. The values ranged from 8.08 to 10.75 mg/L and did not fall below the 7.0 mg/L minimum. The length of monitoring in the remaining 4 deployments was shorter that 7 days.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 7.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as cold water habitat. The median dissolved oxygen concentration for any three consecutive months shall not be less than 80 percent of the dissolved oxygen content at saturation.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Dissolved oxygen was measured at two to four sites throughout the watershed.
Temporal Representation: At all locations the SWAMP performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals lasting 5 to 14 days during spring, two dry seasons, and winter wet season throughout 2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17599, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 29012
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 9
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Comprehensive water quality assessment was conducted at Walker Creek watershed as part of SWAMP assessment in 2002. Continuous field monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at two or three locations. The 7-day average minimum concentration of dissolved oxygen was computed for 5 out of 9 deployments. The values ranged from 8.08 to 10.75 mg/L and did not fall below the 5.0 mg/L minimum. The length of monitoring in the remaining 4 deployments was shorter that 7 days.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 5.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as warm water habitat. The median dissolved oxygen concentration for any three consecutive months shall not be less than 80 percent of the dissolved oxygen content at saturation.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Dissolved oxygen was measured at two or three sites per season located throughout the Walker Creek watershed.
Temporal Representation: At all locations the SWAMP performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals lasting 5 to 14 days during spring, two dry seasons, and winter wet season throughout 2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
17748
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Sediment Toxicity
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17748, Sediment Toxicity
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 28835
 
Pollutant: Sediment Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Toxicity testing of sediments
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Data used to evaluate sediment toxicity comprise one sediment sample collected by the SWAMP in 2001. No toxicity or adverse effects were exhibited for Hyallela azteca.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
There shall be no chronic toxicity in ambient waters. Chronic toxicity is a detrimental biological effect on growth rate, reproduction, fertilization success, larval development, population abundance, community composition, or any other relevant measure of the health of an organism, population, or community.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sediment toxicity was evaluated according to the SWAMP methodology. Sample toxicity was determined by comparing mean organism response in samples and in negative controls. Statistical evaluation (alpha = 0.05) and a default threshold of 80% of the control value were used to establish whether the sediment exhibited significant toxicity adversely impacting aquatic organisms.
Guideline Reference: Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 1322–1329
 
Spatial Representation: One sediment sample was collected at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Walker Creek.
Temporal Representation: Sample was collected in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
9432
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this water body.

Based on the readily available data for this water body, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:

1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.

2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.

3. Temperature measurements at 7 continuous deployments exceeded the applicable water quality objectives for waters designated as cold water habitat on only two occasions and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.

4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that there is insufficient information to demonstrate that this water body is not meeting applicable water quality standards for temperature to support the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. Therefore, the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 9432, Temperature, water
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 8768
 
Pollutant: Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 7
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water quality assessment was conducted at the Walker Creek Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in Winter 2001, and Spring 2002. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at 5 locations.

The 14.8 °C criterion for coho salmon was exceeded in 2 out of 7 continuous temperature deployments during the dry summer season at the downstream reach of the creek. The 17 °C criterion for steelhead was never exceeded.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
  Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Temperature objectives for enclosed bays and estuaries are specified in the "Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays of California" including any revisions to the plan. In addition, the following temperature objectives apply to surface waters: The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
The temperature of any cold or warm freshwater habitat shall not be increased by more than 5°F (2.8°C) above natural receiving water temperature.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sullivan et al. (2000) reviewed a wide range of studies incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches and developed criteria for assessing temperature risk to aquatic life. The 7-day mean temperature (maximum value of the 7-day moving average of the daily mean temperature) of 14.8°C was established as the upper threshold criterion for coho salmon and 17.0°C for steelhead trout. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000) suggests that temperatures exceeding the above thresholds will cause 10% reduction in average growth compared to optimal conditions.
Guideline Reference: An Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Salmonids of the Pacific Northwest with Implications for Selecting Temperature Criteria
 
Spatial Representation: There were 5 locations on Walker Creek ranging from lower to upper watershed regions.
Temporal Representation: Continuous deployments with 15 minute increment sampling in Winter 2001 and Spring 2002.
Environmental Conditions: The Walker Creek watershed has a drainage area of 73 square miles, mostly in northwestern Marin County, with a small portion in Sonoma County. Significant tributaries to Walker Creek include Keys Creek (also known as Keyes), which flows through the gentle hills east of Tomales,
joining Walker Creek near Tomales Bay; Chileno Creek, which flows through Chileno Valley; and, in the upper watershed, Salmon Creek and Arroyo Sausal Creek, which flow through Hicks Valley. Frink and Verde Canyons each support ephemeral streams that join Walker Creek
upstream from Chileno Creek. Soulajule Reservoir impounds the 15 square mile drainage of
Arroyo Sausal.
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
17601
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: pH
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Two of eleven samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17601, pH
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 29008
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 11
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water quality assessment was conducted at the Walker Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2002. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at between two and four sites. Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 11 times at 2 to 4 monitoring locations during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The pH ranged from 6.63 to 9.07. The pH exceeded the threshold of 8.5 in two out of 11 deployments.
Data Reference: Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. This encompasses the pH range usually found in waters within the basin. Controllable water quality factors shall not cause changes greater than 0.5 units in normal ambient pH levels.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: pH was measured at between two and four sites located throughout the Walker Creek watershed.
Temporal Representation: In 2002 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of pH at 15 minute intervals for periods of 5 to 14 days in each of four times: winter (2 sites), spring (3 sites), and two summer dry season (2 and 4 sites).
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
4224
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Mercury
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status Revised
Sources: Mine Tailings | Surface Mining
TMDL Name: Walker Creek Mercury
TMDL Project Code: 69
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: 09/29/2008
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: Walker Creek Mercury TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA (9/29/2008) and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the standard. This provides a sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: Water Board staff conclude that the water body should be placed in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because a TMDL has been approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is in place.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4224, Mercury
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 3714
 
Pollutant: Mercury
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Unspecified
Guideline Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Spatial Representation: Unspecified
Temporal Representation: Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: Unspecified
QAPP Information: Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
4225
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Nutrients
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2013
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable): USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4225, Nutrients
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 3715
 
Pollutant: Nutrients
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Unspecified
Guideline Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Spatial Representation: Unspecified
Temporal Representation: Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: Unspecified
QAPP Information: Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
4226
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Sedimentation/Siltation
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2013
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable): USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4226, Sedimentation/Siltation
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 3716
 
Pollutant: Sedimentation/Siltation
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:
Objective/Criterion Reference:
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Unspecified
Temporal Representation: Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: Unspecified
QAPP Information: Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
6019
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
Pollutant: Pathogens
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
TMDL Name: Tomales Bay Pathogens
TMDL Project Code: 10
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: 01/10/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: USEPA placed this waterbody-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) because the USEPA approved Tomales Bay Pathogen TMDL included this water body segment. The Tomales Bay Pathogen TMDL was approved by USEPA on 1/10/07.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. The water body should remain in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because the TMDL approved by USEPA and the implementation plan are in place.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6019, Pathogens
Region 2     
Walker Creek
 
LOE ID: 1766
 
Pollutant: Pathogens
LOE Subgroup: Narrative Description Data
Matrix: -N/A
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Shellfish Harvesting
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: In the USEPA final decision for the 2006 303(d) list added a Walker Creek-pathogens listing because the USEPA approved Tomales Bay TMDL includes Walker Creek. This is a placeholder LOE for this USEPA addition to the 303(d) list.
Data Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:
Objective/Criterion Reference:
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation:
Temporal Representation:
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):